Where do Kjerstad/Westburg fit on the 2023/24 team

[Philip]

4 hours ago, DrungoHazewood said:

You'd have to think through it, experiment in the minors.  My pet idea is to make pickoff throws count as a pitch, just 90' off the plate so it's a ball.  Unless you actually pick off the runner, then it doesn't count on the batter.  So pitchers won't throw over, runners will get bigger and bigger leads, until the pitcher really thinks he has him.  I think that increases baserunning, without making steals automatic.

That’s an excellent idea. Also think the batters should be allowed to steal first: Break for first on a passed ball at any point in the count. That would be exciting, and it would also be an incentive For the pitchers to throw strikes Instead of playing around the corners. I’ve mentioned this before, but I would also like to turn foul balls into weapon. For me the most boring pitch in the game is a foul ball. Why not award first base to a player who fouls off a certain number of pitches? That would Put some drama into a long at bat.

[Frobby]

1 hour ago, Philip said:

That’s an excellent idea. Also think the batters should be allowed to steal first: Break for first on a passed ball at any point in the count. That would be exciting, and it would also be an incentive For the pitchers to throw strikes Instead of playing around the corners. I’ve mentioned this before, but I would also like to turn foul balls into weapon. For me the most boring pitch in the game is a foul ball. Why not award first base to a player who fouls off a certain number of pitches? That would Put some drama into a long at bat.

Skilled hitters would have a field day with that.     

Did you ever read “The Kid Who Batted 1.000?”    It’s about a kid who can’t hit a ball into fair territory but he can foul off any pitch, so he gets to the majors and gets on base every time.     Great read if you’re a 12 year old baseball fan.   I won’t spoil the ending.   
https://www.amazon.com/Kid-Who-Batted-000/dp/B0007DWCHE

[Philip]

21 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Skilled hitters would have a field day with that.     

Did you ever read “The Kid Who Batted 1.000?”    It’s about a kid who can’t hit a ball into fair territory but he can foul off any pitch, so he gets to the majors and gets on base every time.     Great read if you’re a 12 year old baseball fan.   I won’t spoil the ending.   
https://www.amazon.com/Kid-Who-Batted-000/dp/B0007DWCHE

Thank you, I will look up the story. I think the point remains valid. It’s hard to fall off a pitch, And when you’re trying to, you never know what’s gonna happen. You might end up popping it up or looping it to the pitcher or some thing like that.

It is a skill, but like all advanced skills, not everybody can do it well. Most foul balls are swings that mostly missed.

And if a good hitter is trying to get a hit anyway. 

I think it is definitely worth investigating.

You could also have the flipside, which is if a player fouls off a certain number of pitches, he’s out. There are some advantages to that idea as well, although they favor the pitcher of course.

[Philip]

@Frobby

 I read tons of baseball books as a kid, I can’t remember the name of when I read that dealt with racism, but at the time I was so colorblind I didn’t notice. I thought it was just two guys becoming friends. One book I do remember that I read a dozen times it’s called “a heart for baseball“ I don’t remember the story at all, which is odd because I read it so many times, but I remember I enjoyed it immensely and I loved Throwing tennis balls at the wall and catching them on the rebound.

[Frobby]

3 hours ago, Philip said:

Thank you, I will look up the story. I think the point remains valid. It’s hard to fall off a pitch, And when you’re trying to, you never know what’s gonna happen. You might end up popping it up or looping it to the pitcher or some thing like that.

It is a skill, but like all advanced skills, not everybody can do it well. Most foul balls are swings that mostly missed.

And if a good hitter is trying to get a hit anyway. 

I think it is definitely worth investigating.

You could also have the flipside, which is if a player fouls off a certain number of pitches, he’s out. There are some advantages to that idea as well, although they favor the pitcher of course.

I’d be interested in the opinions of some professional players as to how big the impact would be.    Obviously, it depends on what you set as the limit on foul balls before the at bat becomes either a walk or a strikeout.    Here’s a few stats to think about:

- The average major league hitter makes contact with pitches in the strike zone 85% of the time.   The best contact hitters can do it more than 95% of the time.    

- The ratio of foul balls to balls in play is close to 1:1.    (This is for all balls hit, not pitches in the strike zone.)

Sometime in the last year or two I looked at a day’s slate of games and counted how many long at bats there were per game.    I’ll have to see if I can find where I posted that.   
 

[Philip]

3 hours ago, Frobby said:

I’d be interested in the opinions of some professional players as to how big the impact would be.    Obviously, it depends on what you set as the limit on foul balls before the at bat becomes either a walk or a strikeout.    Here’s a few stats to think about:

- The average major league hitter makes contact with pitches in the strike zone 85% of the time.   The best contact hitters can do it more than 95% of the time.    

- The ratio of foul balls to balls in play is close to 1:1.    (This is for all balls hit, not pitches in the strike zone.)

Sometime in the last year or two I looked at a day’s slate of games and counted how many long at bats there were per game.    I’ll have to see if I can find where I posted that.   
 

Well, one way would favor the pitcher, the other way would favor the batter, and one-way would tend to tire the pitcher out more quickly, which would require more stamina from the starter or more relievers.

The other way would increase base runners, and I think that would be best at the moment. I think it would be very interesting to consider, far better than banning the shift or other bs. I swear Manfred can only be counted on to come up with the dumbest ideas, that solve no problems and answer no questions.

Edited June 14, 2020 by Philip
Many voice-text problems

[OriolesMagic83]

On 6/11/2020 at 7:55 AM, andrewochs615 said:

If only there were some nice SS free agents coming up soon

If only there were an international draft.

[OriolesMagic83]

On 6/11/2020 at 3:03 PM, DrungoHazewood said:

Yep.  As I've often said, any reasonably high draft pick who doesn't have a 90th percentile career is a disappointment.  Matt Wieters is both the 9th-best #5 pick of all time (out of 55), and a bitter tragedy to many.  Nick Markakis is the 4th-best #7 of all time, and it's not even close, he's 11 wins ahead of the 5th-best (Prince Fielder).  Markakis in no way lived up to his early career projections.

I remembered someone compared Markakis' early career trajectory to Stan Musial. 

[Frobby]

2 hours ago, OriolesMagic83 said:

I remembered someone compared Markakis' early career trajectory to Stan Musial. 

I was about to say that I doubt that happened.  The best season Nick ever had was 136 OPS+ in his third major league season.    Musial’s first three major league seasons (at a younger age than Nick) were all over 151 OPS+ and he’d already topped 170 and won a league MVP award.   So  I doubtEd anyone was making Musial comparisons.   

But then I looked it up:

Ouch!

[Roll Tide]

On 6/11/2020 at 11:40 AM, Can_of_corn said:

We'll see.

Folks thought the same when Hobgood was picked and it turned out they spent a lot that year.

Yeah ....but wasted the premium pick by going cheap. For starters they passed on Minor, Crow, Pollack, S Miller, and Trout. They got M Givens in round 2, the r3st of the draft produced nothing. This is evidence that they should take BPA. I remember most here were disappointed with Hobgoods selection or MEH at very worst.
 

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/197975-orioles-recapping-the-2009-baltimore-orioles-draft-class

[Beef Supreme]

On 6/13/2020 at 12:58 PM, Frobby said:

Skilled hitters would have a field day with that.     

Did you ever read “The Kid Who Batted 1.000?”    It’s about a kid who can’t hit a ball into fair territory but he can foul off any pitch, so he gets to the majors and gets on base every time.     Great read if you’re a 12 year old baseball fan.   I won’t spoil the ending.   
https://www.amazon.com/Kid-Who-Batted-000/dp/B0007DWCHE

This book is fiction, Frobby. Not even the most skilled batsmen could foul off every pitch.

I would be open to something like third foul after two strikes is an out. I went to that Tillman game against the Pirates. Can't think of a sporting event that was less enjoyable.

And it doesn't need to be a passed ball -- go ahead and try to steal first at any time. All you have to do is start from the batter's box and you can "go" whenever you feel. You'll likely be thrown out 99% of the time on non-passed balls. But greater lee-way makes the rule simpler. And it could result in legendary plays.

As for what it would look like if failed pickoff throws were called "balls," imagine you are watching a Jon Lester game. It's not that he never tries to pick off runners, he just rarely sees a sure thing. By comparison, I doubt that most pitchers would take a couple of years between attempts. For people who want to maintain tempo of the game, implementing a rule that would drastically lower the number of pickoff throws would be a step in the right direction. There's no guarantee this would shorten the length of games, mind you.

@Frobby 

[Frobby]

2 minutes ago, Beef Supreme said:

This book is fiction, Frobby. Not even the most skilled batsmen could foul off every pitch.

I would be open to something like third foul after two strikes is an out. I went to that Tillman game against the Pirates. Can't think of a sporting event that was less enjoyable.

And it doesn't need to be a passed ball -- go ahead and try to steal first at any time. All you have to do is start from the batter's box and you can "go" whenever you feel. You'll likely be thrown out 99% of the time on non-passed balls. But greater lee-way makes the rule simpler. And it could result in legendary plays.

As for what it would look like if failed pickoff throws were called "balls," imagine you are watching a Jon Lester game. It's not that he never tries to pick off runners, he just rarely sees a sure thing. By comparison, I doubt that most pitchers would take a couple of years between attempts. For people who want to maintain tempo of the game, implementing a rule that would drastically lower the number of pickoff throws would be a step in the right direction. There's no guarantee this would shorten the length of games, mind you.

@Frobby 

Yes, I’m aware the book is fiction.   Not only that, it’s children’s fiction.    But clearly I must have enjoyed reading it because I remember it 50+ years later.    

I believe they allowed batters to run on any pitch in the Atlantic League last year.    I never heard much about what the results were.  I know at least one guy was successful, and that’s all I know.  
 

[Can_of_corn]

2 hours ago, Roll Tide said:

Yeah ....but wasted the premium pick by going cheap. For starters they passed on Minor, Crow, Pollack, S Miller, and Trout. They got M Givens in round 2, the r3st of the draft produced nothing. This is evidence that they should take BPA. I remember most here were disappointed with Hobgoods selection or MEH at very worst.
 

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/197975-orioles-recapping-the-2009-baltimore-orioles-draft-class

I'm pretty sure I was the most vocal about being disappointed with the selection. 

That being said I loved the Coffey pick and we know how that turned out.

[Roll Tide]

14 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

I'm pretty sure I was the most vocal about being disappointed with the selection. 

That being said I loved the Coffey pick and we know how that turned out.

Yes .... they gave up a legitimate shot at a first round hit for a long shot that lasted only three seasons.

 

As I mentioned before with much criticism. The approach is idiotic! 

[Can_of_corn]

13 minutes ago, Roll Tide said:

Yes .... they gave up a legitimate shot at a first round hit for a long shot that lasted only three seasons.

 

As I mentioned before with much criticism. The approach is idiotic! 

Just because it failed in this one instance doesn't mean the approach won't work in other situations.  Astros had good luck with it. 

It isn't something I would do much, if at all, but it can work.