Posted by MikeT23 on 2/11/2014 5:51:00 PM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 2/11/2014 5:46:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 2/11/2014 5:38:00 PM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 2/11/2014 5:21:00 PM (view original):
Yes, if the pitcher makes a great pitch at 1-0, the odds of Martinez doing something good at the plate decreases. That's what happens when pitchers make good pitches.
Tell me about how Edgar Martinez shouldn't be a HOFer partly because he was too patient relative to other elite hitters. What evidence do you have?
So you looked it up and EM was a lesser hitter after working that 1-0 count to 1-1?
And is it still your contention that every pitch he took was a "great" pitch?
Yea, the vast majority of pitches he took, I'm assuming were good pitches. If they were pitches he thought he could hit hard, he would have swung at them.
I'm confused what your point is.
Also, tell me about how Edgar Martinez shouldn't be a HOFer partly because he was too patient relative to other elite hitters. What evidence do you have?
What evidence do you have that he would have swung at them? Aren't you simply making the same assumptions that I am about pitches he took?
I think you're more confused as to what your point is.
The hitters behind EM were not effective. It's a pretty simple fact that's been discussed ad nauseum in this thread. If you want to compare every hitter that hit behind a HOFer with a similar walk rate, feel free to list them. I'd enjoy that discussion but I'm not putting in the work.
Edgar Martinez was a great hitter. Great hitters generally have superior plate discipline and pitch recognition. Based on that, I'm assuming he swung at pitches he could hit hard and avoided the ones he couldn't more often than the average player. To assume otherwise, without any evidence, is moronic.
Can you explain how Edgar Martinez was too patient in spots where he should have been looking to drive in runs above all else, relative to other elite sluggers? You haven't shown any evidence of that.