No but apparently YOU dismiss them if they occur during the other 75% of the season
Obviously you didn't read all of my posts.
Like I said, outside of two weeks in May and August, Zimm is hitting .240 this year.
But I'll humor you anyway. His stats since the hitting streak ended? .262/.346/.475/.821
But the hitting streak COUNTS, and it occurred over a very long span of time. You cannot simply dismiss those numbers. That is such a ridiculous, cherry-picking argument that I don't even know how you can possibly take yourself seriously.
"Well, if you take out OVER A MONTH of his hitting, he's the same as he was in 2006, so he hasn't improved!"
Lunacy.
He's only 11 Ks away from (and just about on pace for) his 162-game average
He's already passed his 162-gm average GIDP
He's got a few more walks and a bit better pitch selection, but so what? I never said parts of his game hadn't improved. They have. But overall, his overall offensive value has not improved over his previous best season (2006).
I love how you say "only 11 K's." 11 K's is very statistically significant if you're evaluating K/BB, especially when BB have gone up.
Your last statement is demonstrably false. His OVERALL value has improved, which is exactly why you've been reduced to these oddball, cherry-picking arguments.
It's not even that the gist of what you're saying isn't true - that Zimmerman has been abnormally streaky this year and would've been more valuable had his numbers been more homogenized ala 2006.
The problem is that you're acting as if he has zero value during these so-called "cold streaks" and boiling his value down to a low batting average, which is a very poor stat.
During July, for instance, when Z had his lowest batting average, he still posted a respectable .765 OPS, and more importantly,
had 23 RBI's.