This sort of brings up a good point, however. Players that hit a lot of triples might luck out into making one an inside-the-park home run regardless of their actual power. Players today also might hit the sweet spot of the bat and combine it with a quirky ballpark to knock one over the wall. Coupling smaller ballparks and less triples (I suppose they're likely linked already) means that it's harder for someone to rack up triples without at least one home run.
On the other extreme, back in the deadball era, triples were much more prevalent. Anyone who has read about the 1903 World Series knows that overflow crowds on the field led to a bizarre ground rule triple rule, leading to seventeen triples in that series alone. This was the exception, not the norm, but consider that from 1876 to 1919 hitters in the National League rapped out 25,974 triples in 50,342 games. By contrast, you have to go all the way back to 1949 to equal that number for hitters in the NL: since then there have been 25,855 triples in 109,694 games. In the same periods, 10,387 home runs were hit in the first era versus 93,524 in the second. Put another way, the "break-even point" (roughly equal for all seasons before and after) for triples in NL history was 1930; for home runs, the break-even point was 1975. For games played, it's 1958 so that's kind of quirky, right between the triples and home runs seasons, but I digress.
In any case, it'd presumably be a lot easier for a hitter in the deadball era to get a bunch of triples without any home runs. That's why I've broken down this record into two lists: pre-1920 and post-1920.
|1||"Wee" Willie Keeler||1897||19|
|18||17 tied with||12|
A lot of players on the second list played in the 1920's, but I'm kind of surprised by the number of hitters in the years after that. I guess the 1970's were a short-lived revival of the homer-less triples hitter.