BeyondTheBoxScore: Pitching, Fundamentals, and Declining OPS

[weams]

http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2015/3/19/8231297/baseball-decline-in-obp

the importance of OBP goes back at least to Earl Weaver and his famous dictate "The key to winning baseball games is pitching, fundamentals, and three run homers," which recognized the importance of baserunners for power hitters like Boog Powell and Frank Robinson to drive in..

Walks have decreased by around one per game just since 2000. Lower batting averages coupled with the decreased tendency to take walks will definitely yield fewer runs scored. This is happening at the same time that hitters are taking more pitches per at-bat, so plate discipline isn't an issue.

What!!! It's not all about ...

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/_-dZNzXylVE" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[Redskins Rick]

What?

Walks are declining, but they are so critical to the offense, more important than Home runs!

[weams]

For some reason, hitters are having a more difficult time getting hits and taking a walk, and that's not a good combination going forward

It's harder to get a hit or take a walk when the threat of the home run is not present.

[Babypowder]

What?

Walks are declining, but they are so critical to the offense, more important than Home runs!

Maybe we read a different article, but I'm fairly certain the article is suggesting runs are way down partially because walks are way down. Less walks = less runs, so yeah they are still important.

It's the larger strike zone, IMO.

[Frobby]

I think the increase in the size of the called strike zone is the main issue. Here's a really good discussion of it: http://www.hardballtimes.com/the-strike-zone-expansion-is-out-of-control/

It stands to reason that a bigger strike zone leads to fewer walks, fewer hits, weaker contact and more strikeouts.

[Redskins Rick]

Maybe we read a different article, but I'm fairly certain the article is suggesting runs are way down partially because walks are way down. Less walks = less runs, so yeah they are still important.

It's the larger strike zone, IMO.

Sorry, was snarking on this concept.

Geeze, what are you a rookie in here?

[Beef Supreme]

Frobby expressed it well. It's complicated.

Fewer walks = fewer runs is too simplistic. And it's not accurate historically. Look at the '20s and '30s -- runs rose sharply from the teens while walks remained rather steady. If we check the stats for the 1880's and 1890's, we find a much higher rate of runs scored with a much, much lower walk rate.

[Redskins Rick]

Frobby expressed it well. It's complicated.

Fewer walks = fewer runs is too simplistic. And it's not accurate historically. Look at the '20s and '30s -- runs rose sharply from the teens while walks remained rather steady. If we check the stats for the 1880's and 1890's, we find a much higher rate of runs scored with a much, much lower walk rate.

Quoting information from the late 1800s and early 1900s.

Are your related to Drungo?

[Ohfan67]

"For some reason, hitters are having a more difficult time getting hits and taking a walk," I strongly suspect it's in the hitters' court to fix, since until they show patience and a willingness to take a walk"

Some interesting information in the article, but I found the focus on "willingness to take a walk" part almost comical. He even said this quote about patience near the end of the article, even though he clearly demonstrated that hitters are taking a lot of pitches (what more could hitters do to be more "patient". It seems obvious it's about the pitching more than "patience". As Weams pointed out, it's a lot easier for a pitcher to throw strikes when only one team hits more than 190 homers. If you look back at say 2000 you will find that almost half the teams in the majors hit >190 homers and the leading teams hit almost 250. I think the lack of steroids has had a greater influence than changes in the strike zone. The zone may be a little bigger, but it's definitely not the huge strike zone of decades past and the relatively small change in the zone seems unlikely to explain the more substantial decrease in offense.

[Ohfan67]

p.s. it would be neat to see an attempt to actually parse out the effect of all the recent changes in baseball. For example, the dreaded shift and other defensive changes have also probably had an effect.

[weams]

As Weams pointed out, it's a lot easier for a pitcher to throw strikes when only one team hits more than 190 homers. If you look back at say 2000 you will find that almost half the teams in the majors hit >190 homers and the leading teams hit almost 250. I think the lack of steroids has had a greater influence than changes in the strike zone. The zone may be a little bigger, but it's definitely not the huge strike zone of decades past.

It's all about that bass.

[Babypowder]

"For some reason, hitters are having a more difficult time getting hits and taking a walk," I strongly suspect it's in the hitters' court to fix, since until they show patience and a willingness to take a walk"

Some interesting information in the article, but I found the focus on "willingness to take a walk" part almost comical. He even said this quote about patience near the end of the article, even though he clearly demonstrated that hitters are taking a lot of pitches (what more could hitters do to be more "patient". It seems obvious it's about the pitching more than "patience". As Weams pointed out, it's a lot easier for a pitcher to throw strikes when only one team hits more than 190 homers. If you look back at say 2000 you will find that almost half the teams in the majors hit >190 homers and the leading teams hit almost 250. I think the lack of steroids has had a greater influence than changes in the strike zone. The zone may be a little bigger, but it's definitely not the huge strike zone of decades past and the relatively small change in the zone seems unlikely to explain the more substantial decrease in offense.

It's also a lot easier to throw strikes when the zone is bigger. The changes to the zone are not insignificant, as has been shown in several studies. That can affect hitters greatly, especially when it is sudden and without warning. PED testing isn't working, Biogenesis was proof of that if you ask me. There is still use. The shifts and the zone have had significant impacts as well.

[Ohfan67]

It's also a lot easier to throw strikes when the zone is bigger. The changes to the zone are not insignificant, as has been shown in several studies. That can affect hitters greatly, especially when it is sudden and without warning. PED testing isn't working, Biogenesis was proof of that if you ask me. There is still use. The shifts and the zone have had significant impacts as well.

Really? You don't think the very dramatic decrease in home runs has anything to do with testing? I'm sure some players are cheating, but I think there's a lot of correlative evidence that PED testing has had a tremendous effect.

[Babypowder]

Really? You don't think the very dramatic decrease in home runs has anything to do with testing? I'm sure some players are cheating, but I think there's a lot of correlative evidence that PED testing has had a tremendous effect.

To me, basing the entire run scoring change on it implies too much. It implies PEDs were not helping pitchers. If that were true, why were they doing them? It also implies that any guys who have seen their numbers dwindle in the last few years are PED users. If you really believe that PEDs are the reason for the downturn in offense, then was Nick Markakis a PED user? It would seem the logical conclusion. I think it's more complex than PEDs. All those Biogenesis guys got suspended and not a one of them failed a test. The details from that story showed that getting around the testing was child's play for the designers and dealers. I'm definitely not ready to chalk the whole thing up to drugs.

Adam Jones has seen his OPS fall from .834 to .780 in the last 3 years. Was he on PEDs? There's tons of examples and if you're blaming the entire shift on PEDs at some point you have to start looking at individual cases, of which there are many.

[Can_of_corn]

I think the increase in the size of the called strike zone is the main issue. Here's a really good discussion of it: http://www.hardballtimes.com/the-strike-zone-expansion-is-out-of-control/

It stands to reason that a bigger strike zone leads to fewer walks, fewer hits, weaker contact and more strikeouts.

Exactly, you have to look at the strike zone first.