Chicks Dig the Long Ball?

I don't like putting huge stock in stats, which might sound weird when talking about a game like baseball that is ALL ABOUT stats.  I prefer to judge performance out on the field using an "eye-test"  and right now my eyes are telling me that the too many Nat's are going up to the plate looking to hit a home run.  Is that true?  If so, is that such a bad thing?  I guess we'll take a quick look at the numbers:

So what's wrong with this picture...

The Nat's almost have two less homeruns than the Braves and way more homers than the Mets.  So why are the Nats the team with the fewest Runs and RBIs on this chart?   The answer seems to be fairly simple, batting average.  Now this might not be ground breaking news...you hit more, you score more, but there it is in black-and-white.

Now I'm not claiming to have a quick fix for the National's offensive woes.  I am going to say that when you have players like Danny Espinosa who is hitting .219 it probably isn't helping.  If only we had a guy who was hitting .321 or heck even a guy hitting .255 who could play 2B.  Oh hey Lombardozzi and Tracy I didn't see you guys there.

Odds are Espinosa will begin to knock a few more balls over the fence and guys like Zimmerman will start to pick up the batting average slack and everything will be right with the world.  However, if things don't get better, just remember...chicks dig the long ball, but the scoreboard does not.

No really...scoreboards HATE homers.