AN OUT IS AN OUT???

[MadBandit22]

You have a lot of emotion in your post. That’s not a bad thing but sometimes the emotion takes a little intelligence away.

Yes, there have been a good number of errors but there have been WAY more putouts on ground balls than errors. Errors stand out so we notice them. Putout are the norm so they don’t stand out. I would bet there are not enough errors against offenses to win a game as a game plan.

I’ll ignore the ignorant intelligence dig. The game plan is to WIN by playing hard and making the most of your players talents and taking what the other team gives you. Good teams take advantage of miscues and make it hurt as far as errors leading to extra outs and so forth.

 

[4 girl's dad]

It wasn’t a dig. I am not saying you’re dumb, I’m saying when your emotions are high, intelligence is low. Nothing personal. Trust me, I make the same mistakes, frequently.

 

[CoachJD]

I don’t care about numbers. Baseball/softball is a game of feel. Making the defense work gives you a better chance of getting on base.
Here’s a stat for you. If you swing you have a better chance of making contact than if you don’t swing.
How many rings did Mr Money ball help his team get? Correct me if I’m mistaken but I believe it was ZERO. Strikeouts suck!!!

I guess my only question is why did you reply to my post when it's clear you didn't actually read it?

 

[texasheat]

It wasn’t a dig. I am not saying you’re dumb, I’m saying when your emotions are high, intelligence is low. Nothing personal. Trust me, I make the same mistakes, frequently.

 

[chinamigarden]

Explain to me how a pop out to the pitcher is better than a strike out.

What people don't really seem to get is that the result is what's virtually the same (it's true a ground out that moves the runner is marginally better than a strike out, but not so much better as to be something we should be teaching or trying to do). The point is that the outs are worth about the same, not that hitting the ball is somehow not better than not hitting the ball. Does that make sense?

There's a reason why those who understand analytics put so much stock into a pitcher's strike out rate. Striking batters out is objectively better than letting them hit the ball (because it's been proven that pitchers tend to have little control over balls in play). HOWEVER, and this is where everybody in this thread isn't quite understanding, the outs are basically the same. A strike out is exactly as bad for the offense as a weak infield pop out.

Here's a somewhat unrealistic example that illustrates the point. Take two hitters. Every single stat they have is identical, except one hitter struck out 100 times and hit 0 pop outs. The other struck out 50 times and popped out to the infield 50 times. If you're arguing that the second hitter is better/more valuable because of 50 more balls in play, I'm going to take issue with that.

Also, a walk is, again, objectively, not as valuable (which means "does not increase run expectancy as much") as a hit, though in certain instances it has the same practical value (a lead-off single and a lead-off walk increase run expectancy by virtually the same amount).

tl;dr version - It's important to learn what those who do the analytics are actually saying, because most of the "disagreement" is based on a misunderstanding.

Explain to me how a pop out to the pitcher is better than a strike out.

What people don't really seem to get is that the result is what's virtually the same (it's true a ground out that moves the runner is marginally better than a strike out, but not so much better as to be something we should be teaching or trying to do). The point is that the outs are worth about the same, not that hitting the ball is somehow not better than not hitting the ball. Does that make sense?

There's a reason why those who understand analytics put so much stock into a pitcher's strike out rate. Striking batters out is objectively better than letting them hit the ball (because it's been proven that pitchers tend to have little control over balls in play). HOWEVER, and this is where everybody in this thread isn't quite understanding, the outs are basically the same. A strike out is exactly as bad for the offense as a weak infield pop out.

Here's a somewhat unrealistic example that illustrates the point. Take two hitters. Every single stat they have is identical, except one hitter struck out 100 times and hit 0 pop outs. The other struck out 50 times and popped out to the infield 50 times. If you're arguing that the second hitter is better/more valuable because of 50 more balls in play, I'm going to take issue with that.

Also, a walk is, again, objectively, not as valuable (which means "does not increase run expectancy as much") as a hit, though in certain instances it has the same practical value (a lead-off single and a lead-off walk increase run expectancy by virtually the same amount).

tl;dr version - It's important to learn what those who do the analytics are actually saying, because most of the "disagreement" is based on a misunderstanding.

Any ball hit into play has the opportunity to become an error or a misplay and give the offense an opportunity a strike out won't give you. So that pop up that is caught 995 times out of 1000 is better then the strikeout that is a strikeout 1000 out of 1000 times. And that is why, as you pointed out, a pitchers strike out rate is so highly regarded.

 

[MadBandit22]

I guess my only question is why didn't you reply to my post when it's clear you didn't actually read it?

Don’t know what your talking about.

 

[MadBandit22]

It wasn’t a dig. I am not saying you’re dumb, I’m saying when your emotions are high, intelligence is low. Nothing personal. Trust me, I make the same mistakes, frequently.

Only emotional during the game my good man. Before/after cool as a cucumber.
I like to see emotion out of players shows me they care. You know like Bo Jackson, Albert Belle snapping a bat walking back to the dugout after a K. Not like that fake ARod smiling and blowing bubbles back to the dugout.
My favorite Yankees Paul O’Neill expecting to get a hit every at bat. Practicing his swing out in RF during the game. You gotta care and want to compete!!!

 

[Chris8]

Oh me too, MANY errors, lol.

So do you agree with Billy Beane about OBP or not?

And you said in post #9 you don’t like to bunt- think Billy might agree with you there too. Pretty sure he was also against giving up outs. I think you may agree with saber metrics more than you realize.

In post #7 you said you hate bunting. Isn’t bunting putting a ball in play? Making the defense work and all? After all, they might make an error.

So help me with this. Should a player’s goal be to put balls in play and “not strike out”? Or should hitters be predators looking to do damage? I ask because the difference in those two attitudes sets a path for a player.

This^^^ us so key IMHO....AND AS LONG AS YOU HAVE A SWING you have a chance....

 

[CoachJD]

Any ball hit into play has the opportunity to become an error or a misplay and give the offense an opportunity a strike out won't give you. So that pop up that is caught 995 times out of 1000 is better then the strikeout that is a strikeout 1000 out of 1000 times. And that is why, as you pointed out, a pitchers strike out rate is so highly regarded.

No no no... you're doing it wrong.

You're talking about the "before." But I made it abundantly clear we're talking about the result.

A strike out is no different than a pop out. You're talking about a pop up, which absolutely could drop.

This is what I mean when I say people need to actually take the time to understand what the analytics folks are actually saying before jumping to the opposite conclusion.

 

[CoachJD]

Don’t know what your talking about.

I had a stupid typo. I meant to say "I guess my only question is why did you reply to my post when it's clear you didn't actually read it?"

Because your response indicated you didn't actually read what I wrote.