Situational Hitting

[AgentOrange]

Consider the information contained here =1&orderBy=gbPcnt&direction=ASC&page=1"]Info on batted balls

That means nothing to me. That is under the assumption that the hitter is up there with none on and none out.

Each situation is different and hitters will act accordingly. You can't tell me a hitter doesn't change his approach every time at bat.

Do the stats tell what the score was in each at bat? Where the runners were? How many outs?

I want to only see runner on 3rd, less than two outs where the runner would be the tying or go ahead / winning run late in a game, 8th inning or later.

That is what I am talking about, nothing more, nothing less.

Because in the 3rd inning of a 0-0 game, do you honestly think all the hitter is trying to do is get a sac fly? No chance.

[Baltimoron]

That means nothing to me. That is under the assumption that the hitter is up there with none on and none out.

Each situation is different and hitters will act accordingly. You can't tell me a hitter doesn't change his approach every time at bat.

Do the stats tell what the score was in each at bat? Where the runners were? How many outs?

I want to only see runner on 3rd, less than two outs where the runner would be the tying or go ahead / winning run late in a game, 8th inning or later.

That is what I am talking about, nothing more, nothing less.

Because in the 3rd inning of a 0-0 game, do you honestly think all the hitter is trying to do is get a sac fly? No chance.

You have completely missed the point. I'll spell it out for you. The most extreme flyball hitters in baseball only average a fly ball in 40% of their plate appearances. There are also more flyballs that aren't deep enough to be sac flies than line drives that are deep enough to be sac flies, so this may understate the idea a bit. In looking at the numbers, please be aware that many plate appearances end without the ball being batted.

The situation you describe has nothing your stated thesis (because we can't assume every hitter was trying to hit a flyball, among other problems), which is:

If your sole purpose that one AB is to hit a sac fly, I would say the chances of that happening would be 70%.

Somebody like Jonny Gomes, Jason Giambi or Frank Thomas might be able to approach this number, but I am not sure they could get there, and they are amongst the most extreme flyball hitters in baseball.

[AgentOrange]

You have completely missed the point and built another meaningless strawman argument. I'll spell it out for you. The most extreme flyball hitters in baseball only average a fly ball every 4 or so plate appearances. There are also more flyballs that aren't deep enough to be sac flies than line drives that are deep enough to be sac flies, so this may understae the idea a bit. In looking at the numbers, please be aware that many at bats end without the ball being batted.

The situation you describe has nothing your stated thesis (because we can't assume every hitter was trying to hit a flyball, among other problems), which is:

If your sole purpose that one AB is to hit a sac fly, I would say the chances of that happening would be 70%.

Strawman argument...

Here is the conclusion I have come up with, maybe you were not paying attention.

I said that if a hitter wanted to hit a Sac fly, there should be no problem in doing so. It should happen a lot more than not.

Yet, you are bringing in data that has no relevance to what I am trying to say.

Who cares if they only hit fly balls under 40 percent of the time? What were they trying to do in that AB? Prob not hit a fly ball to an OF.

What is a Sac Fly? A Fly ball to an OF.

Your stats are not proving any points.

If you can find statistics that show only statistics where they were trying to hit a sac fly and were unsuccessful, then that would be proving your point.

Yet, RZ and I both said it would be too hard to find a statistic to show this so we agree to disagree. Maybe we should do the same.

[Baltimoron]

Who cares if they only hit fly balls under 40 percent of the time? What were they trying to do in that AB? Prob not hit a fly ball to an OF.

Have you seen Frank Thomas, Jason Giambi or Jonny Gomes swing a bat? Do you suspect their vicious cuts are more aimed at generating a baltimore chop, or a hard ground ball up the middle? These guys are swinging to drive the ball as far as they can.

If you can find statistics that show only statistics where they were trying to hit a sac fly and were unsuccessful, then that would be proving your point.

If we could delve into the hitters mind and have a large enough sample size, that would prove or disprove your point. I'm not the one who has a point to prove, I'm merely presenting evidence which calls into question your stated thesis that:

If your sole purpose that one AB is to hit a sac fly, I would say the chances of that happening would be 70%.

While you may certainly foRm your own opinion and choose to ignore or explain away the statistics I have presented, I wonder why you haven't presented anything other than your own subjective opinion in support of your thesis.

[AgentOrange]

Have you seen Frank Thomas, Jason Giambi or Jonny Gomes swing a bat? Do you suspect their vicious cuts are more aimed at generating a baltimore chop, or a hard ground ball up the middle? These guys are swinging to drive the ball as far as they can.

If we could delve into the hitters mind and have a large enough sample size, that would prove or disprove your point. I'm not the one who has a point to prove, I'm merely presenting evidence which calls into question your stated thesis that:

If your sole purpose that one AB is to hit a sac fly, I would say the chances of that happening would be 70%.

While you may certainly foRm your own opinion and choose to ignore or explain away the statistics I have presented, I wonder why you haven't presented anything other than your own subjective opinion in support of your thesis.

I have already told you there are no statistics that can measure this. You can look at a statistic that shows runners on 3rd, less than 2 down and see the percentage of times they get the runner home, but there is more than 1 way to skin a cat.

You threw out statistics, I have shown you how they are not valid to this arguement. You have not explained how the statistics are meaningful to this discussion either. We are talking about "situational hitting" and sac flys. You just pulled the average of all ABs, which is not situational at all.

[osfan83]

I can not comment on how easy or hard it is to hit a sac fly, but I do beleive the art of situational hitting, and playing small ball has been lost.

I understand the thought process of playing for the big inning, but give me 5 innings with 1 run scored in each, and some good pitching and I'll take my chances.

In my oppinion anytime a team gets a lead off double, they should be able to score that run, and I have seen plenty of innings this year where the O's have left the lead off double on base.

[MP]

Yeah, what are these Rotisserie geeks thinking? If you play for one run every inning, you'll score 8 or 9 runs a game! It's a sure thing, because small-ball strategies never, ever fail. Giving outs to the other team is great strategy, especially early in the game, and especially when they're having trouble getting them on their own. There is something beautiful and dignified and even moral in winning 2-1 against Casey Fossum or Mark Hendrickson.

I think I've been outsarcasmed!

[AgentOrange]

I can not comment on how easy or hard it is to hit a sac fly, but I do beleive the art of situational hitting, and playing small ball has been lost.

I understand the thought process of playing for the big inning, but give me 5 innings with 1 run scored in each, and some good pitching and I'll take my chances.

In my oppinion anytime a team gets a lead off double, they should be able to score that run, and I have seen plenty of innings this year where the O's have left the lead off double on base.

Can't agree with you more...

It is a lost art. Yet, there is a new school approach that doesn't believe in giving another team outs. I understand why they say it, just don't agree with it.

[CrimsonTribe]

Have you seen Frank Thomas, Jason Giambi or Jonny Gomes swing a bat? Do you suspect their vicious cuts are more aimed at generating a baltimore chop, or a hard ground ball up the middle? These guys are swinging to drive the ball as far as they can.

If we could delve into the hitters mind and have a large enough sample size, that would prove or disprove your point. I'm not the one who has a point to prove, I'm merely presenting evidence which calls into question your stated thesis that:

If your sole purpose that one AB is to hit a sac fly, I would say the chances of that happening would be 70%.

While you may certainly foRm your own opinion and choose to ignore or explain away the statistics I have presented, I wonder why you haven't presented anything other than your own subjective opinion in support of your thesis.

I don't think the stats you've presented really prove anything in relation to his statement to tell the truth. I'm all about stats, but all AO is saying is that if a ML quality hitter goes up there with the sole purpose to hit a fly ball to the outfield, he can do this 70% of the time. Whether this is right or wrong clearly is not measured by the stats you've presented.

[33rdst]

I have been reading this thread all day but I have not been able to reply. The issue for me isn't what Tejada and others do with their hits, it's what they do with their outs. Have they been productive? That doesn't necessarily mean a sacriifce of some kind. They bottom line is, at the conclusion of their at bat, have they caused a runner to score or increased his chances to score. IF they have done neither then their at bat hasn't accomplished squat. It's as simple as that.

In genereral our team has very unproductive outs. Case in point, yesterday with Corey Patterson on third we have to ground outs to corner infielders. It doesn't matter whether the ball was hit in the air or on the ground.

Now it has been argued in this thread that Tejada shouldn't waste an at bat in trying to move runners. Well my response to that is it depends. It depends on the score, how many outs we have left in the game, how difficult it has been for the team to score runs recently, who the opposing pitcher is, who we have pitching and on and on.

In his book "Men at Work" George Will interviewed Tony La Russa and Larussa's approach is score as quickly and as often as possible. His idea is to put as much pressure on the opposing teams pitching staff as possible.

If our approach is to win with pitching and defense then we need to play to that strategy. Our hitters must move runners and drive runners in by any means possible. They must have "productive" at bats.

[Baltimoron]

I don't think the stats you've presented really prove anything in relation to his statement to tell the truth. I'm all about stats, but all AO is saying is that if a ML quality hitter goes up there with the sole purpose to hit a fly ball to the outfield, he can do this 70% of the time. Whether this is right or wrong clearly is not measured by the stats you've presented.

Thanks for stating the obvious.:002_sdrool:

He assumes a major league hitter could hit a sacrifice fly (read: medium - long fly ball) 70% of the time if they wanted to. My point is the most extreme flyball hitters in the league, who are certainly trying to hit long fly balls the majority if not all times they come to the plate, are only able to do so 40% of the time.

I have never suggested these stats are conclusive as to what a major league hitter does at the plate when they have the sole intention of hitting a scarifice fly.

What I am suggesting is that hitting a sacrifice flyball (read: medium - long fly ball) is a difficult thing to do, as evidenced by the fact that the most extreme flyball hitters in the league, who are certainly trying to hit long fly balls when they come to bat and are amongst the best at producing flyballs, can only do so about 40% of the time.

These results seem inconsistent with the idea that the average major league hitter can hit a medium to long fly ball at will almost twice as often. Perhaps this isn't inconsistent to you. If so, why?

Do you believe hitters like Thomas, Giambi and Gomes are trying to do something other than hit the ball hard and far the majority of the time?

If not, what else?

Another related idea to consider: If the average major leaguer could hit a medium to long flyball 70% of the time if they wanted to, and we know on average 11-12% of flyballs are home runs (this is closer to 15-20% for big time power hitters), why aren't the best flyball/power hitters (remember, 70% is supposedly average) in the league hitting flyballs at 80-90%, as more flyballs = more home runs?

[AgentOrange]

Thanks for stating the obvious.:002_sdrool:

He assumes a major league hitter could hit a sac fly (read: medium - long fly ball) 70% of the time if they wanted to. My point is the most extreme flyball hitters in the league, who are certainly trying to hit long fly balls the majority if not all times they come to the plate, are only able to do so 40% of the time.

I have never suggested these stats are conclusive as to what a major league hitter does at the plate when they have the sole intention of hitting a scarifice fly.

What I am suggesting is that hitting a sacrifice flyball (read: medium - long fly ball) is a difficult thing to do, as evidenced by the fact that the most extreme flyball hitters in the league, who are certainly trying to hit long fly balls when they come to bat and are amongst the best at producing flyballs, can only do so about 40% of the time.

These results seem inconsistent with the idea that the average major league hitter can hit a medium to long fly ball at will almost twice as often. Perhaps this isn't inconsistent to you. If so, why?

Do you believe hitters like Thomas, Giambi and Gomes are trying to do something other than hit the ball hard and far the majority of the time?

If not, what else?

You are assuming these guys are only trying to hit home runs when they are up at bat. This is how the stats are inconsistant to me.

None of your stats disprove the point I am trying to make. Unfortunatley, I can not provide stats myself to prove the point. It is my opinion that if a player has the mind set to hit a Sac fly that they have enough skill with the bat to do it.

You can no assume that Giambi, Thomas, Gomes type players are trying to hit a "long fly ball" or Sac Fly type of hit every time they are up to bat. That idea is flawed, IMO.

[33rdst]

Thanks for stating the obvious.:002_sdrool:

He assumes a major league hitter could hit a sac fly (read: medium - long fly ball) 70% of the time if they wanted to. My point is the most extreme flyball hitters in the league, who are certainly trying to hit long fly balls the majority if not all times they come to the plate, are only able to do so 40% of the time.

I have never suggested these stats are conclusive as to what a major league hitter does at the plate when they have the sole intention of hitting a scarifice fly.

What I am suggesting is that hitting a sacrifice flyball (read: medium - long fly ball) is a difficult thing to do, as evidenced by the fact that the most extreme flyball hitters in the league, who are certainly trying to hit long fly balls when they come to bat and are amongst the best at producing flyballs, can only do so about 40% of the time.

These results seem inconsistent with the idea that the average major league hitter can hit a medium to long fly ball at will almost twice as often. Perhaps this isn't inconsistent to you. If so, why?

Do you believe hitters like Thomas, Giambi and Gomes are trying to do something other than hit the ball hard and far the majority of the time?

If not, what else?

Sometimes situations do not require you to hit the ball hard. They require you to simply put the ball in play. Professional hitters are paid to have productive at bats. They neeed to accomplish what the game dictates.

[Baltimoron]

The issue for me isn't what Tejada and others do with their hits, it's what they do with their outs. Have they been productive? That doesn't necessarily mean a sacriifce of some kind. They bottom line is, at the conclusion of their at bat have they caused a runner to score or increased his chances to score. IF they have done neither then their at bat hasn't accomplished squat. It's as simple as that.

You can't view them seperately. By changing what you normally do to increase the chance of a "productive" out, a hitter is reducing the liklihood of a hit or extra base hit. In the long run, is it worth this tradeoff?

There are certainly times where a strategy that attempts to maximize the chances of "productive" is called for.

[Baltimoron]

You can no assume that Giambi, Thomas, Gomes type players are trying to hit a "long fly ball" or Sac Fly type of hit every time they are up to bat. That idea is flawed, IMO.

Ok, this is a good point. How often do you think a hitter like Giambi, Thomas or Gomes is not trying to hit a long flyball?