Diagnostics for Leadoff Hitters II Topic

Whether or not the guy behind you is better than you is irrelevant. Or did you bat 8th?
At any rate: had you only struck out, they would have had a chance. Which they didn't.
Chance for them to drive in runs after you K > Chance for them to drive in runs aver you GIDP.
I'd say the batter's job isn't to "get a hit" - it's to "help score runs." After all, batters will often intentionally NOT get a hit, in the belief that, by giving themselves up, they're helping their team score runs.
So some of your preference just sounds like ego. Except that I can't square that with your claim that you wouldn't have liked for them to K and give you a chance to pick them up. Along with, potentially, runs. That's just bizarre.
The rest is just "old fashioned" thinking, which COULD be wrong (it's not like you don't have anything to learn about the game of baseball, right? I know that's not true for me. I doubt Mikey would say the same, though).
The only question, IF it's wrong, is: can people ever be convinced otherwise? That has been the REAL point of this thread for about 80 pages, now: the battle against the old, rusty ironsides of the "conventional baseball wisdom."
Are we religious zealots, immune to reasoning and new facts, or are we students of the game, trying to learn as much as possible about the game we have a passion for?
2/23/2008 5:53 PM
I hit 2nd or 3rd my entire career. I can honestly say that no one ever told me they thought it would have been a good idea if I had struck out at any point in my career, nor did I ever feel that way myself. I never once thought it would have been a good idea for one of my teammates to strike out, either. Is the first part ego? Absolutely. You have to have that to excel at anything. But, while a double play is a catastrophic failure for your team, a strikeout in a key situation is a catastrophic failure for your teammate. I can't imagine wishing that on someone I'm playing an entire season with.
And the batters job is always to get a hit, it's just that sometimes situational hitting puts restraints on that. If you're asked to lay down a sac bunt, you should still try push it up the right side of the mound if a y is throwing (since he falls off to the other side), or vice-versa, to try to move the runner up without giving up an out. If you're hitting behind a runner to move him up, you should still be trying to punch it through the hole for a hit. If you're trying to lift the ball to score a runner from third, you should still be trying to drive it into a gap somewhere.
I think my disconnect is that there's a difference between new statistics and new facts. You can find statistics to support just about any position you'd like to take on any issue.
But yes, there's always something new to be learned. Conventional baseball wisdom isn't infallible, but neither are the newer ideas either. The prevalence of catastrophic arm injuries since pitch counts and non-throwing days were implemented immediately springs to mind.
2/23/2008 6:45 PM
Quote: Originally Posted By examinerebb on 2/23/2008
I think my disconnect is that there's a difference between new statistics and new facts. You can find statistics to support just about any position you'd like to take on any issue
While this is true, this is usually bad or limited statistics, cited by those with an agenda, in service of persuading the ignorant.

Things can also be PROVEN using statistics. It would be silly, for instance, to scoff at the statistical link (practically lock-step) between OBP and scoring. Or between cigarette use and lung cancer. Etc.
2/23/2008 6:56 PM
Quote: Originally Posted By examinerebb on 2/23/2008

And the batters job is always to get a hit, it's just that sometimes situational hitting puts restraints on that.
Sac flies? I KNOW I've seen batters approach an AB trying only to loft one, caring not (or at least very little) whether it lands. Not you?
2/23/2008 6:57 PM
Quote: Originally Posted By examinerebb on 2/23/2008
But yes, there's always something new to be learned. Conventional baseball wisdom isn't infallible, but neither are the newer ideas either. The prevalence of catastrophic arm injuries since pitch counts and non-throwing days were implemented immediately springs to mind.
And of course new ideas aren't infallible, they're just newer.

What's the better approach? What's the more humble? What's the more reverant of the game?

"Numbers ain't got nothing to teach ME!"

or

"Hey, isn't this an unusual finding? Can it teach us anything? Does it hold up?"

And which have been used in this thread, and by who?
2/23/2008 7:00 PM
My Leadoff Hitter


Through 22 games, I'm leading the league in almost every important offensive category. I'm at .500 because of my horrible pitching.
2/24/2008 11:58 AM
why do we care?
2/24/2008 12:23 PM
2/25/2008 10:56 AM
I think outs can lead to runs.
2/25/2008 9:28 PM
I think k's are good.
2/26/2008 3:06 AM
Quote: Originally Posted By a3morey on 2/26/2008
I think k's are good.
You're the only one.
2/26/2008 9:54 AM
I agree - he's the only one.
Ks are a total disaster... only preferable to other, worser disasters, like the total explosion of the planet, double plays, etc.
2/26/2008 11:41 AM
bump
3/22/2008 10:44 AM
i like my leadoff hitters to make contact.
4/24/2008 4:37 PM
Quote: Originally Posted By dmurphy104 on 4/24/2008i like my leadoff hitters to make contact
I like my leadoff hitters to get on base.

4/24/2008 4:52 PM
◂ Prev 1...44|45|46|47|48 Next ▸
Diagnostics for Leadoff Hitters II Topic

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2026 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.