"Take more pitches"??

sluggers said:

I watched the movie Moneyball. The players were encouraged to take more pitches and to get deeper into the count. I saw similar advice give to HS baseball players by way of a big sign in the practice area.

What do you think about that philosophy?

Click to expand...

As a ''philosophy,'' it's not a good idea. For a specific player, it might be a great idea.

Didn't see the movie, but I understand it gets into the belief that players with high walk numbers have been underrated (up until that time) and that it's a good thing to have a lot of walks. And that is true.

But the problem with adopting this as a ''philosophy'' of taking more pitches is that getting walks is largely a skill, not a choice. It's not like a major league baseball player can just decide to walk 100 times a season. Barry Bonds walked an astronomical number of times, partly because he had a great eye for the strike zone, partly because he was so dangerous that nobody wanted to pitch to him. MLB pitchers aren't going to risk free passes to just anybody.

Vlad Guerrero was the classic example of great hitter who was very aggressive (ie, low walks). Should he have been more patient? If he could've walked 100 times/year, he'd be a Hall of Famer. He might be anyway. But that approach might've backfired and caused his power/average numbers to topple. Maybe he should've been smarter, or maybe his skill set wouldn't allow him to be more patient and still produce like he did.

Each hitter has to decide for himself/herself. Everybody has different talents at reading the strike zone and at hitting a good pitcher's pitch. And every hitter (at least at the highest levels, when they're familiarity and scouting) is pitched differently. There's no team philosophy that accounts for all that.

I think Game Changer considers any 7+ pitch at bat as a "quality" at bat...

Most pitchers start to loose velocity @ 100 pitches, so if batters can get the pitches/inning to 15+, chances of success increase.

As usual, riseball kinda hit the nail on the head on this one...

Not that my opinion matters all that much but one thing that seems to be dismissed or overlooked here is the level of play that we are talking about... If it is a 10U player, where most pitchers are still struggling to find the zone and most batters are still learning to hit a non-juice ball laid over the middle of the plate, then I would argue that the batter needs to be patient and see more pitches (of course, the quality of the pitches comes into play)... Early on, I believe it benefits the batters to see as many pitches as possible - not really looking for walks but learning to read the ball and the pitcher... As they develop and their confidence builds, then I believe they can become an aggressive hitter and should be aggressive at the plate...

One of my favorite softball stories is DD Pitching, 2 pitches 2 outs.

3rd base coach yelled to batter, don't swing make her work.

DD has ears too, prettiest pitch you ever saw right down the middle of plate. Batter was staring daggers at 3rd base couch. Next pitch was about a foot outside for an easy out.

For some reason DD refuses to swing at 1st pitch, not sure when it started.

Those 3 pitch innings suck when you are on offense. I am not a fan of taking a pitch just for the sake of it.

For LL were there are pitching limits, I could see this being a strategy.

Our leaque has inning limits, I think this is right.

8U, 2 innings
10U, 3 innings
12U, 4 innings
14U+, do what you want

LL I think has a pitch count. Required rest and a bunch of rules I am not familiar with just know they exist.

JMO knowing the pitcher and the umps strike zone and going into each at bat with a plan. IMO the ump, the pitcher and game plan dictates the batters plan to take pitches or be aggressive.

IMO I like the aggressive approach.

If you watch Moneyball one of the reasons taking pitches was advocated was to drive up pitch counts to work through starters and bullpens and get to second-tier pitchers not only late in the game but in the second and third games of a series....that's in a league where they play every day, starting pitchers pitch every fourth day and closers can get burned through...

That's not exactly the same scenario as travel ball, right?

Like others, I agree with Riseball. Depends on the hitter whether patience hurts or harms.

What I've been strongly advocating with my team of late is to HIT on hitting counts -- first pitch (if they see a pitcher trying to get ahead), 1-0, 2-0, 2-1, 3-1....that's when you HIT, not take a pitch down the middle with the idea of milking a walk. Our hitters have been too patient, getting into too many negative counts and getting owned by pitchers that can throw inside spin, outside spin, high in zone/rise and change, with pitches generally ending up out of the hitting zone but too good to take and almost all not good hitting pitches (unless a clear mistake).

I think aggressiveness generally wins at the plate.

I am not a fan of just arbitrarily telling kids to take pitches. Much like the "don't swing at a first pitch change up." If I hear that, my pitchers first pitch to every batter is going to be a change up right down the heart. I think sometimes coaches tend to overthink things and try to impose their will on the game, instead of just letting the girls play.

Dominican baseball players have been known as free swingers who don’t take walks. Dominican-born shortstop Rafael Ramirez explained in 1986:

You have to swing like a man. A walk won’t get you off the island.”

Click to expand...

riseball said:

If you can truly hit, it is great advice. If you cannot hit, it is a really bad idea.

Click to expand...

Along these lines, I look at the difference in skill between a particular hitter and a particular pitcher. If you are not an above average hitter, but you are facing a very good pitcher, taking pitches can place you in a hole you will never recover from. But if you are an above average hitter facing a below average pitcher, don't do anything to help them out.