The first thing I learned to admire in a hitter was a .300 batting average, but even as little kid reading the backs of baseball cards, no one used batting average all by itself. In my experience, it never was a standalone stat, even before analytics we knew that Tom Brunansky was a more impactful hitter at .245 than Greg Gagne was at .254
Batting average never was a stat indicative of true performance in and of itself -but it is a useful measure.
The arguments from analytics enthusiasts seem to be based on a perception that users of old school stats don't understand this. Not true. We do. I like to use classic and modern, advanced stats.
Somehow though, there is a romantic nostalgia for describing a player's performance with the measures I learned as a young fan and I still admire a batting champion. I want Luis to stay strong and productive so we're still having this conversation at the end of the year.