What's exceptional about Neal Cotts Chicago White Sox 2004 ?
Seasons:
faced fewer batters; wild pitcher; season
In 2004, only Neal Cotts of the Chicago White Sox had both as many wild pitches (8) and as few batters faced (281).
closest were Luis Vizcaino of the Milwaukee Brewers (9, 298), Shawn Chacon of the Colorado Rockies (9, 316), Kevin Gregg of the Anaheim Angels (13, 377), and Jim Brower of the San Francisco Giants (10, 401), ending with Chris Carpenter of the St. Louis Cardinals (4, 746).
closest were Luis Vizcaino of the Milwaukee Brewers (9, 298), Shawn Chacon of the Colorado Rockies (9, 316), Kevin Gregg of the Anaheim Angels (13, 377), and Jim Brower of the San Francisco Giants (10, 401), ending with Chris Carpenter of the St. Louis Cardinals (4, 746).
-
Batting, pitching, fielding, personal, team, and awards data come from the archive at seanlahman.com. This database is copyright 1996-2014 by Sean Lahman. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. For details see: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/
Neal Cotts of the 2004 Chicago White Sox threw left-handed, played on a winning team, attended Illinois State University, played in U.S. Cellular Field, and was born in Illinois.
Sources
- salary ($301K)
- achievement score (.000 see References)
- assists (8)
- complete games (0)
- double plays (1)
- games finished (12)
- games played (56)
- games started (1)
- innings pitched (65.3)
- putouts (1)
- saves (0)
- shutouts (0)
- strikeouts (58)
- strikeouts per nine innings (8.0)
- wins (4)
- balks (0)
- earned run average (5.65)
- earned runs (41)
- errors (1)
- hit by pitch (3)
- hits (61)
- hits per nine innings (8.4)
- homers given up (13)
- homers per nine innings (1.8)
- intentional walks (2)
- losses (4)
- runs allowed (45)
- walks (30)
- walks per nine innings (4.1)
- wild pitches (8)
- age (24 yrs)
- batters faced (281)
- height (6'2")
- innings pitched per game (1.2)
- weight (200 lbs)
Sources
© Copyright 2016 OnlyBoth | Terms of Use | Markets | Solutions | Benchmarking

ambivalent (1)
bad (2)