O's .300 hitters

[Can_of_corn]

10 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

I wonder what Cowser would be like as a hitter if he only struck out 26 times a year. 

He'd probably be making weak contact putting up a 109 OPS+.

I don't know, maybe there is a unicorn somewhere that can pull a Ted Williams and hit the ball stupid hard and not strike out.

I'd love to see it, haven't seen a version of it since Frank Thomas.

[Sports Guy]

2 hours ago, Frobby said:

Is it?  I think there are modern stats like wOBA that weight very accurately what BA is worth.   BA was absurdly over-valued for most of baseball history.  

I don’t disagree with this but we have gone from overrating BA to thinking hitting 230 is fine.

Thats not good for me either. I’m fine with 260-280 and not saying you need to hit 320 to be valuable.

But this strikeout 150-200 times, hit 230 stuff isn’t good imo.  Don’t get me wrong, if you can walk a bunch and get on base 33-35% of the time, that’s great but I would rather have a 270/340 guy vs a 230/340 guy. (Just throwing out numbers)

I think all the stats we regularly discuss are better but I think putting the ball in play and getting hits has gotten too devalued.

 

[Can_of_corn]

4 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

I don’t disagree with this but we have gone from overrating BA to thinking hitting 230 is fine.

Thats not good for me either. I’m fine with 260-280 and not saying you need to hit 320 to be valuable.

But this strikeout 150-200 times, hit 230 stuff isn’t good imo.  Don’t get me wrong, if you can walk a bunch and get on base 33-35% of the time, that’s great but I would rather have a 270/340 guy vs a 230/340 guy. (Just throwing out numbers)

I think all the stats we regularly discuss are better but I think putting the ball in play and getting hits has gotten too devalued.

 

But that's your aesthetic preference as a fan.

Which is fine, you are welcome to it but it doesn't point to what is actually valuable.

 

[Sports Guy]

2 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

But that's your aesthetic preference as a fan.

Which is fine, you are welcome to it but it doesn't point to what is actually valuable.

 

Thanks for sharing. I think you are wrong but I also don’t care to have this (or really any) conversation with you.

[Frobby]

26 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

I don’t disagree with this but we have gone from overrating BA to thinking hitting 230 is fine.

Thats not good for me either. I’m fine with 260-280 and not saying you need to hit 320 to be valuable.

But this strikeout 150-200 times, hit 230 stuff isn’t good imo.  Don’t get me wrong, if you can walk a bunch and get on base 33-35% of the time, that’s great but I would rather have a 270/340 guy vs a 230/340 guy. (Just throwing out numbers)

I think all the stats we regularly discuss are better but I think putting the ball in play and getting hits has gotten too devalued.

 

Has it gotten devalued, or just harder to do?   I would far prefer a .260-.280 average BA to today’s .244.   I do think that one reason BAs are lower is that batters are emphasizing swinging for power.  But the bigger reason is, pitchers have just gotten bettter.  They throw harder, with more spin, and have a wider array of pitches than ever before.  It’s harder and harder to make solid contact, so if you do, be sure to hit it hard.   

By the way, I have a simple way to raise batting averages by 10+ points: bring in the robo-umps and eliminate the 12% of called strikes that are actually balls.  Yes, the 4% of called strikes that are actually balls also will go away, but the net advantage to the hitters will be significant.  And the beauty is, you’re not changing the rules of the game or the strike zone.   You’re improving enforcement of the actual strike zone.  Do it!
 

[Sports Guy]

14 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Has it gotten devalued, or just harder to do?   I would far prefer a .260-.280 average BA to today’s .244.   I do think that one reason BAs are lower is that batters are emphasizing swinging for power.  But the bigger reason is, pitchers have just gotten bettter.  They throw harder, with more spin, and have a wider array of pitches than ever before.  It’s harder and harder to make solid contact, so if you do, be sure to hit it hard.   

By the way, I have a simple way to raise batting averages by 10+ points: bring in the robo-umps and eliminate the 12% of called strikes that are actually balls.  Yes, the 4% of called strikes that are actually balls also will go away, but the net advantage to the hitters will be significant.  And the beauty is, you’re not changing the rules of the game or the strike zone.   You’re improving enforcement of the actual strike zone.  Do it!
 

Oh it’s definitely harder but I think teams are de-emphasizing it. Again, not saying they shouldn’t but I believe it has gone too far.