Was the offense just in a run of bad luck on this road trip?

[phxosfan]

It seems to me like many of the hitters are not aggressive at all on the first pitch. They take those pitches which frequently catch more of the plate than any others they see during the at bat. Frequently this is followed by fouling off a pitch to get behind in the count and eventually flailing away a terrible pitch that wasn't even close to being a strike. It would be great if Cowser and O'Hearn and Adley could start driving the ball again instead of the lazy opposite field pop outs or K's. Maybe swinging away on the first pitch at actual strikes could make a difference.

 

[Frobby]

7 hours ago, phxosfan said:

It seems to me like many of the hitters are not aggressive at all on the first pitch. They take those pitches which frequently catch more of the plate than any others they see during the at bat. Frequently this is followed by fouling off a pitch to get behind in the count and eventually flailing away a terrible pitch that wasn't even close to being a strike. It would be great if Cowser and O'Hearn and Adley could start driving the ball again instead of the lazy opposite field pop outs or K's. Maybe swinging away on the first pitch at actual strikes could make a difference.

 

Hard to say.  The O’s have the 6th-lowest number of one-pitch at bats in MLB.  They have the 6th-highest OPS when they do have a one pitch at bat.   So, are they very good in those situations because they’re more selective than most teams, or does the fact that they’re good at it mean they should be doing more of it? 

The O’s have swung at the first pitch 1,707 times.  They’ve had a one-pitch at bat 609 times.   That means that 1,098 times they were down in the count 0-1 because they swung and missed or fouled the pitch off.  By the same token, they’ve been down in the count 0-1 2,842 times, meaning they’ve taken strike one 1,744 times    They’ve taken ball one 2,247 times.  So, 56% of the time when they take the first pitch, it’s a ball.  They are in a 1-0 count the third-most of any team in MLB and their .827 OPS after getting a 1-0 count is 9th-best.  The O’s find themselves in an 0-1 hole the 11th-least of any team in baseball.  So, I’m inclined to think that their very good track record when swinging at the first pitch, plus their tendency to get into favorable counts after the first pitch more than most teams, means that their swing decisions on the first pitch have generally been very sound.  Whether that’s been true over the last month or so, I don’t know.  

[Hallas]

On 9/16/2024 at 5:33 AM, JR Oriole said:

I am very admittedly old school, so the xBA, exit velocities, barrels, and all of those other stats make my eyes water. I really only care about actual base hits and actual success rather than predictors of success. The 2014 Royals spent the entire ALCS dinking and dunking us to death, making productive outs, and running all over us. It started with that broken bat bloop Alex Gordon double that somehow cleared the bases and then they spent the rest of that series mosquito biting us to death.  

So in this past week when Rafaela for Boston and Torkelson for Detroit were able to poke run scoring singles to the right side with what had to be really low exit velocities to drive in runs with 2 outs, it made me think.....why can't we do this?  What is so bad about a bloop single, or a bunt with the third baseman a mile back, or hitting balls where they are pitched without trying to square up or hammer every pitch?  

I am sure there is merit to trying to hit the ball really hard all the time.  But it doesn't seem to work that well for us since if we don't homer, we have real trouble scoring runs. Maybe we should just watch Arizona and try to do what they do.  They seem to have no problem scoring runs.

Even in old-school pre-analytics ball it was well understood that hitting the ball hard and on a line was generally beneficial to your results.  There has never been a time when hitting a blooper was considered a favorable outcome even if it frequently resulted in a hit.  Are these frustrating to fans watching, and opposing teams that are the victims of these outcomes?  Sure.  But these outcomes have pretty much universally been considered luck.  On the other hand expected stats clearly show that hitters with different profiles can (and do) succeed.  Luis Arraez has an expected batting average of .319, 99th percentile, and an expected woba of .334, well above average, despite having one of the worst exit velocities in baseball.  He can do this because he slaps line drives everywhere, and that is reflected in his squared-up rate and his rate of hitting balls in the launch angle sweet spot.

 

The additional data has clearly (to me) shown that while there is an optimal value for everything, it's not absolute, and you can be a legit MLB player with a decently wide range of batting skills.  Which is something that we already knew from watching baseball over the years.