White Sox Interactive Forums
Sox Clubhouse
 Soxogram: 
Congratulations on winning the Sporting News ROTY award, Jose!

Welcome
Go Back   White Sox Interactive Forums > Baseball Discussions > Sox Clubhouse
Home Chat Stats Register Blogs FAQ Calendar Mark Forums Read


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #76  
Old 01-29-2013, 07:31 PM
WhiteSox5187 WhiteSox5187 is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Southside
Posts: 14,359
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blandman View Post
Haha...yeah I don't get why people hate strikeouts so much. Usually it's the same people who claim it isn't a big deal when pitchers rack up a ton of them.

Strikeouts aren't a big deal if you're still productive. In some instances, they are the better option (instead of going up there just trying to poke the ball in play, which can lead to a double play). Sure, they're also the worst option in some cases, but really how bad a strikeout is versus any other out is at least situation specific.
Strikeouts are a big deal because they are the least productive out. Groundouts and fly outs can be productive, if you're putting the ball in play you are least opening the door to the possibility of an error. A strikeout doesn't allow that. Now, obviously you can have a guy who can strikeout a ton and still be productive (Jim Thome struck out a lot but he was still productive). But Thome was at least hitting about .240 while striking out a lot, when you have a line up of low average, high strike out guys you are giving up a lot of very unproductive outs and are going to wind up struggling to score runs because of that.

My thinking is a bit jumbled right now and I can lay out a better argument later about why I dislike strikeouts so much and I will do that later.
__________________

Go Sox!!!
Reply With Quote
  #77  
Old 01-29-2013, 07:44 PM
Mohoney Mohoney is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Palos Hills, IL
Posts: 5,295
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mzh
I don't necessarily disagree with you, but given that Dunn and Flowers (as far as we know) don't offer much of anything other than some pop (which, as we've seen, is far from a sure thing), them striking out 400 times is a bit of an issue.
If Tyler Flowers hits the 40+ homers that Adam Dunn will hit, then I'll be more than fine with the 200+ strikeouts.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Horsemaster Fred
This is the major leagues so get it how you live and letís fight tomorrow.
Reply With Quote
  #78  
Old 01-29-2013, 07:45 PM
Mohoney Mohoney is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Palos Hills, IL
Posts: 5,295
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiteSox5187
Strikeouts are a big deal because they are the least productive out.
They're not the least productive out for a middle of the order hitter. GIDPs are.
Reply With Quote
  #79  
Old 01-29-2013, 07:47 PM
DSpivack DSpivack is offline
WSI Guru
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Evanston
Posts: 28,973
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mohoney View Post
They're not the least productive out for a middle of the order hitter. GIDPs are.
I've been around here long enough to remember what was once Paulie's nickname, GIDPK.
__________________
Attendance records:
09 : 3-2.
10 : 2-3.
11: 0-1.
12: 2-1.
14: 2-3.
Reply With Quote
  #80  
Old 01-29-2013, 07:49 PM
Mohoney Mohoney is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Palos Hills, IL
Posts: 5,295
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DSpivack
I've been around here long enough to remember what was once Paulie's nickname, GIDPK.
Ah the magical summer of 2003.
Reply With Quote
  #81  
Old 01-29-2013, 09:57 PM
blandman blandman is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,482
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiteSox5187 View Post
Strikeouts are a big deal because they are the least productive out. Groundouts and fly outs can be productive, if you're putting the ball in play you are least opening the door to the possibility of an error. A strikeout doesn't allow that. Now, obviously you can have a guy who can strikeout a ton and still be productive (Jim Thome struck out a lot but he was still productive). But Thome was at least hitting about .240 while striking out a lot, when you have a line up of low average, high strike out guys you are giving up a lot of very unproductive outs and are going to wind up struggling to score runs because of that.

My thinking is a bit jumbled right now and I can lay out a better argument later about why I dislike strikeouts so much and I will do that later.
Not true.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mohoney View Post
They're not the least productive out for a middle of the order hitter. GIDPs are.
Yes.
Reply With Quote
  #82  
Old 01-29-2013, 10:02 PM
DumpJerry's Avatar
DumpJerry DumpJerry is offline
Tom Feargal Hagen
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: The hearts and minds of Sox fans on 10-26-05
Posts: 26,017
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DSpivack View Post
I've been around here long enough to remember what was once Paulie's nickname, GIDPK.
A guy in my office called him 6-4-3.
__________________

All hail The Rick
Reply With Quote
  #83  
Old 01-29-2013, 11:17 PM
tstrike2000 tstrike2000 is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: 'Burbs
Posts: 6,083
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carolina Kenny View Post
Hopefully, Dunn will not be angry if he is moved to 7th or 8th in the order.
Or to another team.
Reply With Quote
  #84  
Old 01-29-2013, 11:54 PM
Nellie_Fox's Avatar
Nellie_Fox Nellie_Fox is offline
Official Professor
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: North Mankato, MN
Posts: 16,285
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blandman View Post
...really how bad a strikeout is versus any other out is at least situation specific.
I will continue to point out that this is a false dichotomy. The alternative to a strikeout isn't some other out. The alternative to a strikeout is "not a strikeout." That means either a walk or the ball in play. A walk is obviously better. A ball in play will result in an outcome better than a strikeout (a hit, error, advance a runner) far more often than it will result in an outcome worse than a strikeout (double play.)
__________________

"Nellie Fox, that little son of a gun, was always on base and was a great hit-and-run man. He sprayed hits all over."
Yogi Berra in the New York Sunday News (July 12, 1970)
Reply With Quote
  #85  
Old 01-30-2013, 03:07 AM
sullythered sullythered is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Oak Lawn, IL
Posts: 4,338
Default

Over the courses of their careers, these guys have had WAY more success with Rios 2nd,
iPaulie cleanup, and Dunn 5th. It aint even close.
__________________
And on the 8th day, God created churros.
Reply With Quote
  #86  
Old 01-30-2013, 07:27 AM
blandman blandman is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,482
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nellie_Fox View Post
I will continue to point out that this is a false dichotomy. The alternative to a strikeout isn't some other out. The alternative to a strikeout is "not a strikeout." That means either a walk or the ball in play. A walk is obviously better. A ball in play will result in an outcome better than a strikeout (a hit, error, advance a runner) far more often than it will result in an outcome worse than a strikeout (double play.)
Do you have stats to back that up?

Also, framing it as strikeout versus every other option (including non-outs) is a little unfair. Isn't a walk also an alternative to every other out then?
Reply With Quote
  #87  
Old 01-30-2013, 08:56 AM
asindc's Avatar
asindc asindc is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Washington, DC area
Posts: 7,569
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nellie_Fox View Post
I will continue to point out that this is a false dichotomy. The alternative to a strikeout isn't some other out. The alternative to a strikeout is "not a strikeout." That means either a walk or the ball in play. A walk is obviously better. A ball in play will result in an outcome better than a strikeout (a hit, error, advance a runner) far more often than it will result in an outcome worse than a strikeout (double play.)
A very succinct explanation of the obvious.

Quote:
Originally Posted by blandman View Post
Do you have stats to back that up?

Also, framing it as strikeout versus every other option (including non-outs) is a little unfair. Isn't a walk also an alternative to every other out then?
No, it is not unfair. And yes, a walk is preferable to most outs, with the exception of walks vs. outs that score a run. A consistent observation of the game is enough to know that a ball in play results in far more positive outcomes than a strikeout does, even with noted exceptions.
__________________
"I have the ultimate respect for White Sox fans. They were as miserable as the Cubs and Red Sox fans ever were but always had the good decency to keep it to themselves. And when they finally won the World Series, they celebrated without annoying every other fan in the country." Jim Caple, ESPN (January 12, 2011)


"We have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the (bleeding) obvious is the first duty of intelligent men." ó George Orwell
Reply With Quote
  #88  
Old 01-30-2013, 09:06 AM
doublem23's Avatar
doublem23 doublem23 is online now
MMXXIII
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Roscoe Village
Posts: 54,197
Blog Entries: 5
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by asindc View Post
A very succinct explanation of the obvious.
Not neccessarily as evidenced by the fact that there is almost no correlation between the amount of times a team strikes out and how well or poorly its offense performs. Frankly speaking, teams that hit for high power and have high strike outs almost always outscore teams that hit for low power with low strikeouts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by asindc View Post
No, it is not unfair. And yes, a walk is preferable to most outs, with the exception of walks vs. outs that score a run.
Except in the most dire of circumstances (trailing by a run in the 9th inning, for example) any play that results in an out is less desirable than one that doesn't, regardless if a run scores or not. Outs are the most precious commodity in baseball.

Quote:
Originally Posted by asindc View Post
A consistent observation of the game is enough to know that a ball in play results in far more positive outcomes than a strikeout does, even with noted exceptions.
Observation with a bias. Any rudimentary numerical analysis of baseball CLEARLY reveals that what's important is that teams make outs more infrequently (i.e. have a high OBP) and not how they are made.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #89  
Old 01-30-2013, 09:32 AM
asindc's Avatar
asindc asindc is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Washington, DC area
Posts: 7,569
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by doublem23 View Post
Not neccessarily as evidenced by the fact that there is almost no correlation between the amount of times a team strikes out and how well or poorly its offense performs. Frankly speaking, teams that hit for high power and have high strike outs almost always outscore teams that hit for low power with low strikeouts.



Except in the most dire of circumstances (trailing by a run in the 9th inning, for example) any play that results in an out is less desirable than one that doesn't, regardless if a run scores or not. Outs are the most precious commodity in baseball.


Observation with a bias. Any rudimentary numerical analysis of baseball CLEARLY reveals that what's important is that teams make outs more infrequently (i.e. have a high OBP) and not how they are made.
1) Teams that hit for average power with low strikeouts are preferable to teams that hit for average power with high strikeouts, which is a more apples-to-apples comparison. Hitting for average or high power is not mutually exclusive to average-to-low strikeout rates.

2) That is absolutely not true. Trading an out for a run is always, always preferable to not making an out when a run does not score. RUNS are the most precious commodity in baseball.

3) Making outs infrequently is not incompatible with low stikeout rates.

Team A: 6000 PAs, 1000 SOs.

Team B: 6000 PAs, 850 SOs.

Assume that the two teams played the same number of times in the same park against the same teams and faced the same pitchers. Except for run-scoring outs and total runs, all other stats (Avg, hits, 2B, SB, HR, other teams' errors made, etc.) are the same. There is no statistical model that can be produced that will show that Team A outscored or even scored the same number of runs as Team B. Team B will have scored more runs and advanced more runners via an out or walk than Team A, resulting in more runs scored total, all else being equal.
Reply With Quote
  #90  
Old 01-30-2013, 09:40 AM
doublem23's Avatar
doublem23 doublem23 is online now
MMXXIII
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Roscoe Village
Posts: 54,197
Blog Entries: 5
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by asindc View Post
1) Teams that hit for average power with low strikeouts are preferable to teams that hit for average power with high strikeouts, which is a more apples-to-apples comparison. Hitting for average or high power is not mutually exclusive to average-to-low strikeout rates.
That's not the argument, obviously good offensive teams are better than bad offensive teams, it's just that how often a team K's is not indicative of either.

Quote:
Originally Posted by asindc View Post
2) That is absolutely not true. Trading an out for a run is always, always preferable to not making an out when a run does not score. RUNS are the most precious commodity in baseball.
No, a team's WPA (the probability that they will win based on in-game situation and historical data) will generally drop on plays that result in an out made and a run scored. Again, there are times when this is not true, such as in late game situations when a team is trailing, but generally speaking, for most of innings 1-8 it is never beneficial to make an out. That is a fact backed up numbers, you can choose to accept or deny it all you like. I suppose your WPA may increase on plays when you make an out and score two or three runs, but those are extremely rare. Generally speaking, in terms of win probability, it is beneficial to walk over hitting a sacrifice fly. It is better to walk than it is to ground out and score a runner from third. Outs are more precious because you only get 27 of them. Once they are gone, they are gone.

Quote:
Originally Posted by asindc View Post
3) Making outs infrequently is not incompatible with low stikeout rates.

Team A: 6000 PAs, 1000 SOs.

Team B: 6000 PAs, 850 SOs.

Assume that the two teams played the same number of times in the same park against the same teams and faced the same pitchers. Except for run-scoring outs and total runs, all other stats (Avg, hits, 2B, SB, HR, other teams' errors made, etc.) are the same. There is no statistical model that can be produced that will show that Team A outscored or even scored the same number of runs as Team B. Team B will have scored more runs and advanced more runners via an out or walk than Team A, resulting in more runs scored total, all else being equal.
Well OBVIOUSLY if you're going to stack the deck with your little fantasy you will prevail, but over here in reality (where I am trying to steer the conversation) you will notice that K rate is a very poor way to evaluate an offense. Generally speaking, it doesn't matter how a team makes their outs. I know you guys can harp on how you can advance runners or you can hit into an error over and over and over again, but there just isn't any evidence to suggest any of that really matters in the long run. Over the course of 162 games, outs are simply outs. Teams that make them more frequently are generally worse offensively than teams that don't. It doesn't matter how they are accrued.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



Forum Jump




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:06 PM.




Design by: Michelle

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Site-specific editorial/photos Copyright ©2001 - 2008 White Sox Interactive. All rights reserved.