Is this the O's hitting philosophy in this quote?

[NashLumber]

"Searching for positives, Showalter talked about free-swinging outfielder Dariel Alvarez drawing a walk with one out in the ninth inning. Alvarez also had two hits.

"I thought Dariel handled himself well. I thought the walk was impressive," Showalter said.

"You don't want guys to take until they hit. That's been thrown out the window with moneyball and all that stuff. You can't play the game that way. He did a good job of hitting until he took tonight and that's really hard to do because you've got a very small window there in order to do it. We'll see what (today) brings, but it was a good night for him.""

http://www.masnsports.com/school-of-roch/2015/08/steve-pearce-we-know-we-can-turn-this-thing-around.html

What is he really saying there? I'm trying to read it literally and it means one thing. And within the context, it seems to mean something, but not sure what.

[mdbdotcom]

I think it means two things:

1) You have to swing at the first good pitch you see, because it might be the only one you get.

2) It doesn't make sense to work up the pitch count any more like it used to, because today's relievers are just as effective, if not more so, as the starters.

Earlier this year the Red Sox abandoned their philosophy of driving up pitch counts. Hit when you have a good shot at it seems to be the philosophy emerging throughout baseball.

[Superbee83]

"Searching for positives, Showalter talked about free-swinging outfielder Dariel Alvarez drawing a walk with one out in the ninth inning. Alvarez also had two hits.

"I thought Dariel handled himself well. I thought the walk was impressive," Showalter said.

"You don't want guys to take until they hit. That's been thrown out the window with moneyball and all that stuff. You can't play the game that way. He did a good job of hitting until he took tonight and that's really hard to do because you've got a very small window there in order to do it. We'll see what (today) brings, but it was a good night for him.""

http://www.masnsports.com/school-of-roch/2015/08/steve-pearce-we-know-we-can-turn-this-thing-around.html

What is he really saying there? I'm trying to read it literally and it means one thing. And within the context, it seems to mean something, but not sure what.

I agree that his quote is difficult to decipher. It would have been nice if one of the reporters would have asked him to clarify his statement. My guess on the taking until you hit statement might refer to taking pitches until you have a strike on you. The orioles may have employed the strategy to try to get a base runner in the ninth. If nothing else, he was complimenting Alvarez for his patience at the plate after he had a couple of hits. Just my take on it,

[Can_of_corn]

Might got ourselves a disciple here Weams.

[Superbee83]

I think it means two things:

1) You have to swing at the first good pitch you see, because it might be the only one you get.

2) It doesn't make sense to work up the pitch count any more like it used to, because today's relievers are just as effective, if not more so, as the starters.

Earlier this year the Red Sox abandoned their philosophy of driving up pitch counts. Hit when you have a good shot at it seems to be the philosophy emerging throughout baseball.

I think that you are on to something.

[NashLumber]

I think it means two things:

1) You have to swing at the first good pitch you see, because it might be the only one you get.

2) It doesn't make sense to work up the pitch count any more like it used to, because today's relievers are just as effective, if not more so, as the starters.

Earlier this year the Red Sox abandoned their philosophy of driving up pitch counts. Hit when you have a good shot at it seems to be the philosophy emerging throughout baseball.

Thanks for this. The first point you made seems to be what Ted Williams used to espouse. Get a good pitch to hit. So it follows that if it's the first one, then let it rip. I've noticed some teams hitting the first pitch (and tearing the cover off the ball) off of some of our pitchers.

I will add that the philosophies seem to change over time and I'm still not sure what's the best. It seemed that everyone envied the Yankee and Red Sox plate discipline over the last decade or so. When I used to play (35 years ago), I was a student of the Williams "get a good pitch to hit" view. For me, that translated into if it's anywhere in my "happy zone", I'm going for it. I just wasn't aware the trend in MLB was in transition.

[Can_of_corn]

I think it means two things:

1) You have to swing at the first good pitch you see, because it might be the only one you get.

2) It doesn't make sense to work up the pitch count any more like it used to, because today's relievers are just as effective, if not more so, as the starters.

Earlier this year the Red Sox abandoned their philosophy of driving up pitch counts. Hit when you have a good shot at it seems to be the philosophy emerging throughout baseball.

You are right but you missed a few things.

3- With a lowered overall offense walks are slightly less valuable then previously, as they are less likely to score.

4- With the expanded strike zone a hitter is more likely to find himself behind in the count then he would have a decade ago.

5- The TTTOP isn't noticeably effected by pitches thrown, just times faced.

[mdbdotcom]

You are right but you missed a few things.

3- With a lowered overall offense walks are slightly less valuable then previously, as they are less likely to score.

4- With the expanded strike zone a hitter is more likely to find himself behind in the count then he would have a decade ago.

5- The TTTOP isn't noticeably effected by pitches thrown, just times faced.

Thanks for augmenting.

[weams]

"Searching for positives, Showalter talked about free-swinging outfielder Dariel Alvarez drawing a walk with one out in the ninth inning. Alvarez also had two hits.

"I thought Dariel handled himself well. I thought the walk was impressive," Showalter said.

"You don't want guys to take until they hit. That's been thrown out the window with moneyball and all that stuff. You can't play the game that way. He did a good job of hitting until he took tonight and that's really hard to do because you've got a very small window there in order to do it. We'll see what (today) brings, but it was a good night for him.""

http://www.masnsports.com/school-of-roch/2015/08/steve-pearce-we-know-we-can-turn-this-thing-around.html

What is he really saying there? I'm trying to read it literally and it means one thing. And within the context, it seems to mean something, but not sure what.

It means you will never get a pitch that you can possibly hit in today's game if you allow the pitcher to control the at bat by getting ahead by taking first. We belong to the "ambush a get me over pitch" school.

[Can_of_corn]

It means you will never get a pitch that you can possibly hit in today's game if you allow the pitcher to control the at bat by getting ahead by taking first. We belong to the "ambush a get me over pitch" school.

On a more simplistic level I think he also means that until you can prove you can hit there is no reason for a pitcher not to challenge you.

[Superbee83]

It means you will never get a pitch that you can possibly hit in today's game if you allow the pitcher to control the at bat by getting ahead by taking first. We belong to the "ambush a get me over pitch" school.

It makes sense.

The points made by mdbdotcom and COC are valid IMO.

With the expanded strike zone and more emphasis on relief pitching hitters are definitely at a disadvantage.

I'd rather have a more aggressive approach at the plate from my hitters anyway.

Besides, these guys hit their way into the big leagues, they generally don't walk their way onto a major league roster.

[weams]

On a more simplistic level I think he also means that until you can prove you can hit there is no reason for a pitcher not to challenge you.

Absolutely. They will never nibble on you if you do not crush a lot.

[weams]

It makes sense.

The points made by mdbdotcom and COC are valid IMO.

With the expanded strike zone and more emphasis on relief pitching hitters are definitely at a disadvantage.

I'd rather have a more aggressive approach at the plate from my hitters anyway.

Besides, these guys hit their way into the big leagues, they generally don't walk their way onto a major league roster.

There was a time, that the strike zone was thin, and a walk before your steroid abusers was a definitive style point. Those days are gone. Now, the only ones they walk are your steroid abusers. If you can't hit 30 bombs, you won't draw a walk.

[Can_of_corn]

There was a time, that the strike zone was thin, and a walk before your steroid abusers was a definitive style point. Those days are gone. Now, the only ones they walk are your steroid abusers. If you can't hit 30 bombs, you won't draw a walk.

If you want to pump up the OBP in your walk year you need to do it Choo style and get HBP 26 times.

[NashLumber]

Thanks for all the thoughts on this. Am a passenger in a car now on a road trip and not able to reply as fully or rep. But very enlightening. Makes a lot of sense now.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk