Pickles

That's fascinating to me, and I'm not sure I buy it. Now you have to watch the replay because the live stream is not focused on the fielder for the first second or so, but Santander made a direct beeline to that ball on Monday. He's not fast, but he takes very good, direct routes and that was a great example of that. Cowser's catch yesterday he does not take a direct route to the ball. He goes back first (which is the right thing to do, other than making a direct beeline to where the ball is going to land) and and then he went east-west to the ball. Not to take away anything from him, that was a fine catch, but I don't buy the 60% probability. I have little doubt Hays would have caught it, and Hays is not the rangiest LFer.

Again, I'm not the one who is "upset" or "crying." I'm defending my original position, quite well, thank you very much. I shouldn't have used the word "atrocious." Other than that, you basically agree with me.

Who said I was upset? I made a fairly milquetoast original post and had 5 people take great offense that I used the word "atrocious" instead of "poor" or "less than ideal."

Again, if people want to dispute the semantics, ok, whatever.

Hitting is extraordinarily difficult. That's beyond dispute.

Right, but I'd be criticizing him if he'd swung at the first pitch he thought he could weakly ground to 2b to get the runner over. That's not good desicion making either, at least not in that game situation.

What am I wrong about? Be specific. The only thing I've been "wrong" about is a silly semantic point.

Not all strikes are equal. We should all acknowledge this was a "pitcher's pitch." And he was in a "hitter's count." He didn't need to swing at all. I'm sure part of their discussions about this involves the idea of not swinging at pitcher's pitches until the count dictates that you must.

He was in a hitter's count (and yes 1-0 isn't as good as 2-0 and 3-0 but it's literally better than the other 6 possible iterations ((someone check my math))) and he swung at a pitcher's pitch, and he made very weak contact. The results were great; the process decidedly less so. It's as simple as that.

BTW, as an aside to all, I enjoy these discussions and debates infinitely more than all the off-season bs. It's much better to have actual baseball to discuss.

If he had hit the ball hard and at someone, I'd have been fine with it. Remember, I'm the one arguing process here, not results.

Well, let's say his intentions were to hit the ball hard and to the right side. Would you agree that was likely his intention as he's waiting for the pitch to come in? Is that batshit crazy to assume? Because if we assume that, then he swung at about the worst pitch imaginable (that's still a strike) in order to accomplish that, while being in a count where he didn't need to swing at all.

You can watch the swing and you can tell he is not trying to hit the ball to the opposite field. He clearly pulls off of it. That's isn't reading his mind. That's watching his swing mechanics. What's bat shit crazy is watching that hit, and going, "Yup. That's what he meant to do. Just how he drew it up. 55 mph cue ball 3 inches out of the reach of the 3rd baseman."

No, because it was clearly a ball he could drive, as evidenced by him hitting it 410 feet. I actually think the reason I might be on an island here is I don't think he intentionally hit that ball the other way. I think he pulled off it and quibbed it. If I thought he'd had gone with the pitch intentionally, hitting against the shift, as some seem to, then I'd be a lot better with the swing.

Well, I don't think he meant to hit it to the left side either. That was not intentional imo.

If he can handle it so well, why'd he quib a dribbler down the line at about 55 mph?

He swung at a breaking ball that was a borderline strike. That's the definition of a pitcher's pitch. He was ahead in the count and had no strikes. Why was he swinging at a pitcher's pitch with no strikes? That's not a good decision. I don't think I'm being dramatic. I've stated over and over again it was a borderline strike. @RZNJ If this is just about semantics, then yeah, ok, atrocious is too strong of a word. It was a poor at bat and a poor decision, but it worked out well for him.

I agree they want him to be more aggressive this year, and that's going to include attacking strikes earlier in the count. I do not agree they want him swinging at borderline breaking balls ahead in the count with no strikes. There is a fine line between passive and aggressive. I would really like access to their swing decisions app. That would be fascinating to me. I'd like it if a reporter asked this kind of question of Cowser and management, but I don't expect any to because this is of little interest except to baseball autists.

Borderline breaking balls are not a pitch you should be swinging at with no strikes. This is literally the exact thing they're talking about when they talk about swing decisions. I know they rank every swing decision and then have some app to share them with the players after the game. Sure would like to have that available right now.

What's bat shit crazy about what I've said? Be specific.

That's probably true, but that doesn't forgive this individual bad decision.

They want him to swing at borderline breaking balls when he's up in the count? I guarantee you that's not true.

What's difficult to understand? They are specifically taught to not swing at balls they cannot drive until they get down in the count. This often involves hunting pitches, particularly fastballs. He instead swings at a breaking ball, which is a borderline strike, low and away, when he's up in the count. Yes, if he hits it 450 feet, you say, "Great job." Here's the thing though: He swung at a low and away borderline breaking ball. That drastically reduces his abiltity to hit it 450 feet. He instead did what happens a lot when you swing at low and away borderline breaking balls: He hit a weak ground ball to the other side. I assure you this is the exact conversation they have with these guys. "What's your thoughts process on that swing, Colton?" "That's probably not a pitch you want to swing at in that game situation."

I'm saying if he couldn't hit it better than that, yeah, he shouldn't have swung. He should have been looking for a pitch he could 1) Hit hard and 2) Hit to the right side of the field. In that order. Instead, he swings at a breaking ball, low and away, that's a borderline strike, and hits a weak ground ball. Bad decision. If he doesn't swing, it's at worst 1-1 and he still has a chance to do 1 and/or 2 above. Perhaps he gets the call and it's 2-0, and then he's in a better position to do either 1 or 2.

Because he was in a hitter's count and he swung at a ball he didn't drive. When they're talking about swing decisions this is the exact kind of thing they're talking about.