Solving the lack of offense Topic

MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
At the end of the day, I'm probably going to have a problem with the "Data says this is what we should do so it's what we do" and the "I don't even look at stats.  I know what I know" guy.   There's a spot in the middle where the data shouldn't dictate your next move and you don't ignore it completely.    IOW, you "manage". 
4/20/2015 1:37 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Anyway, somewhat back on point, "the data suggests" that striking out isn't all that bad.   Yet, as strikeouts go up, scoring goes down.   Maybe the "data" should suggest putting the ball in play more frequently.   I think the "data" shows that BABIP is in the range of .300 and while striking out produces about zero hits. 
4/20/2015 1:51 PM
bad_luck
Posts: 21761 (0)
Hall of Famer
48 1 10
Prospect
Posted by MikeT23 on 4/20/2015 1:51:00 PM (view original):
Anyway, somewhat back on point, "the data suggests" that striking out isn't all that bad.   Yet, as strikeouts go up, scoring goes down.   Maybe the "data" should suggest putting the ball in play more frequently.   I think the "data" shows that BABIP is in the range of .300 and while striking out produces about zero hits. 
No one has ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever argued that a strikeout was the same as a ball in play.

Stop being so stupid.
4/20/2015 1:56 PM
tecwrg
Posts: 18996 (0)
Hall of Famer
4 1 154 32 129
Prospect
Posted by bad_luck on 4/20/2015 1:56:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 4/20/2015 1:51:00 PM (view original):
Anyway, somewhat back on point, "the data suggests" that striking out isn't all that bad.   Yet, as strikeouts go up, scoring goes down.   Maybe the "data" should suggest putting the ball in play more frequently.   I think the "data" shows that BABIP is in the range of .300 and while striking out produces about zero hits. 
No one has ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever argued that a strikeout was the same as a ball in play.

Stop being so stupid.
Stop posting, and the level of stupidity in this thread will drop significantly.
4/20/2015 3:05 PM
bad_luck
Posts: 21761 (0)
Hall of Famer
48 1 10
Prospect
It's my thread. Feel free to **** off.
4/20/2015 3:08 PM
tecwrg
Posts: 18996 (0)
Hall of Famer
4 1 154 32 129
Prospect
Well, you're the one who keeps insisting that "an out is an out", even after I pointed out how three non-strikeout outs decided who won or lost a game yesterday.

It seems pretty stupid to keep making that argument.



4/20/2015 3:30 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
You seem to think that strikeouts are "OK".    An out's an out, right?     Well, a ball in play has a 30% chance of becoming a hit.  A strikeout has 0% chance.   It's been suggested, over and over and over and over and over again, that maybe players should shorten up their swing and put the ball in play with two strikes rather than swing from the heels for yet another whiff. 

So, to me, you seem fine with strikeouts.   I suggest they're one of the big reasons scoring is down.   
4/20/2015 3:32 PM (edited)
bad_luck
Posts: 21761 (0)
Hall of Famer
48 1 10
Prospect
Posted by tecwrg on 4/20/2015 3:30:00 PM (view original):
Well, you're the one who keeps insisting that "an out is an out", even after I pointed out how three non-strikeout outs decided who won or lost a game yesterday.

It seems pretty stupid to keep making that argument.



So, according to you, showing how X helped a team win one game proves that X is always better?
4/20/2015 4:09 PM
bad_luck
Posts: 21761 (0)
Hall of Famer
48 1 10
Prospect
Posted by MikeT23 on 4/20/2015 3:32:00 PM (view original):
You seem to think that strikeouts are "OK".    An out's an out, right?     Well, a ball in play has a 30% chance of becoming a hit.  A strikeout has 0% chance.   It's been suggested, over and over and over and over and over again, that maybe players should shorten up their swing and put the ball in play with two strikes rather than swing from the heels for yet another whiff. 

So, to me, you seem fine with strikeouts.   I suggest they're one of the big reasons scoring is down.   
Who are you talking to?

A ball in play isn't an out, therefore it isn't applicable to the saying, "an out is an out."


4/20/2015 4:11 PM
tecwrg
Posts: 18996 (0)
Hall of Famer
4 1 154 32 129
Prospect
Posted by bad_luck on 4/20/2015 4:11:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 4/20/2015 3:32:00 PM (view original):
You seem to think that strikeouts are "OK".    An out's an out, right?     Well, a ball in play has a 30% chance of becoming a hit.  A strikeout has 0% chance.   It's been suggested, over and over and over and over and over again, that maybe players should shorten up their swing and put the ball in play with two strikes rather than swing from the heels for yet another whiff. 

So, to me, you seem fine with strikeouts.   I suggest they're one of the big reasons scoring is down.   
Who are you talking to?

A ball in play isn't an out, therefore it isn't applicable to the saying, "an out is an out."


It's not?

Then wouldn't BABIP always be 1.000?

4/20/2015 4:14 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
LOL, ******* retard.

Batting Average on Balls In Play.    WTF do you think that means?  


Just when I thought he couldn't know less than I thought he could, he proves he does know less than I give him credit for.   ******* idiot.
4/20/2015 4:15 PM
tecwrg
Posts: 18996 (0)
Hall of Famer
4 1 154 32 129
Prospect
Posted by bad_luck on 4/20/2015 4:09:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 4/20/2015 3:30:00 PM (view original):
Well, you're the one who keeps insisting that "an out is an out", even after I pointed out how three non-strikeout outs decided who won or lost a game yesterday.

It seems pretty stupid to keep making that argument.



So, according to you, showing how X helped a team win one game proves that X is always better?
It makes more sense that repeating "an out is an out" when clearly it's not.

But never mind.  Go back to your stats.  Pay no attention to the game on the field.  That's ****'s not important.

4/20/2015 4:16 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect

Here you go, BL!!

4/20/2015 4:17 PM
bad_luck
Posts: 21761 (0)
Hall of Famer
48 1 10
Prospect
Posted by tecwrg on 4/20/2015 4:14:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 4/20/2015 4:11:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 4/20/2015 3:32:00 PM (view original):
You seem to think that strikeouts are "OK".    An out's an out, right?     Well, a ball in play has a 30% chance of becoming a hit.  A strikeout has 0% chance.   It's been suggested, over and over and over and over and over again, that maybe players should shorten up their swing and put the ball in play with two strikes rather than swing from the heels for yet another whiff. 

So, to me, you seem fine with strikeouts.   I suggest they're one of the big reasons scoring is down.   
Who are you talking to?

A ball in play isn't an out, therefore it isn't applicable to the saying, "an out is an out."


It's not?

Then wouldn't BABIP always be 1.000?

It's not. Otherwise BABIP would be .000.

A ball in play has a chance of becoming an out. Or a hit. But it's not an out, not yet.

Which is why no one has ever said, "a strikeout is the same as a ball in play."


4/20/2015 4:27 PM
themergerguy
Posts: 172 (0)
Newbie
Rookie
What percent of strikeouts have a chance of becoming an out?
4/20/2015 4:29 PM
◂ Prev 1...3|4|5|6|7...19 Next ▸
Solving the lack of offense Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2024 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.