Posted by bad_luck on 2/11/2014 10:42:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/11/2014 10:12:00 PM (view original):

Fortunately, you don't have to.  It's right there on the screen.   Unlike the half a dozen times I've said "Would you like to quote the post where i said that?" after he made some **** up.

Just so we can be clear (and I don't make anything up), do you (mike and/or tec) think Martinez's high OBP is a good thing or a bad thing?

Who had the better game?

3 for 4, 2 singles, a double and a pop-out
0 for 1, 3 walks and a pop-out

Posted by The Taint on 2/11/2014 10:40:00 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?

Was he better at 3-1 than 1-1 or at 1-0?

No idea, I didn't bother to look it up.    As a general rule, when the pitcher is "ahead" on the count, the hitter does worse.   One would think that EM did better at 3-1 since the pitcher would be more likely to groove a pitch to avoid the walk and the ever patient EM would take a pitch if he didn't think he could smoke it.   3-2 is still a hitter's count.

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/12/2014 8:42:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 2/11/2014 10:42:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/11/2014 10:12:00 PM (view original):

Fortunately, you don't have to.  It's right there on the screen.   Unlike the half a dozen times I've said "Would you like to quote the post where i said that?" after he made some **** up.

Just so we can be clear (and I don't make anything up), do you (mike and/or tec) think Martinez's high OBP is a good thing or a bad thing?

Who had the better game?

3 for 4, 2 singles, a double and a pop-out
0 for 1, 3 walks and a pop-out

The first guy.

I answered your question. Now answer mine.

Is Martinez's high OBP a good thing or a bad thing?

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.

Posted by tecwrg on 2/12/2014 5:20:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 2/11/2014 10:42:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/11/2014 10:12:00 PM (view original):

Fortunately, you don't have to.  It's right there on the screen.   Unlike the half a dozen times I've said "Would you like to quote the post where i said that?" after he made some **** up.

Just so we can be clear (and I don't make anything up), do you (mike and/or tec) think Martinez's high OBP is a good thing or a bad thing?

It's a good thing.  Why wouldn't it be?

Ask mike. He's the one arguing that Martinez walked too much.

Sounds like exactly what Ted Williams preached in his book. Including staying within your approach no matter what the situation dictated. Believe it or not, he faced the exact same criticism that Edgar's getting here.

Here you go.   He didn't get better by taking that "unhittable" first strike.

First Pitch	591	0.384	0.389	0.664	1.053
1-0 Count	586	0.406	0.409	0.691	1.100
2-0 Count	294	0.441	0.439	0.888	1.327
3-0 Count	349	0.409	0.963	0.682	1.645
0-1 Count	612	0.337	0.346	0.552	0.898
1-1 Count	699	0.350	0.358	0.543	0.901
2-1 Count	639	0.383	0.387	0.647	1.034
3-1 Count	747	0.407	0.736	0.707	1.443
0-2 Count	460	0.202	0.209	0.300	0.509
1-2 Count	984	0.219	0.225	0.339	0.563
2-2 Count	1171	0.252	0.256	0.396	0.653
Full Count	1454	0.262	0.533	0.433	0.966

Posted by burnsy483 on 2/12/2014 9:17:00 AM (view original):

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.

What do you think of guys like Roberto Clemente, Vlad Guerrero, Manny Sanguillen, etc, etc?   Were they great hitters?   Would you like to discuss their plate discipline?  Or pitch recognition?

You understand that hitters, on average, get better pitches to hit on 1-0 counts than 1-1 counts, right?  Do you understand why that happens?  Also, the proper thing to post would be his splits "after 1-0" and "after 1-1", not on those specific pitches.

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.

Posted by bad_luck on 2/12/2014 9:13:00 AM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/12/2014 8:42:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 2/11/2014 10:42:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/11/2014 10:12:00 PM (view original):

Fortunately, you don't have to.  It's right there on the screen.   Unlike the half a dozen times I've said "Would you like to quote the post where i said that?" after he made some **** up.

Just so we can be clear (and I don't make anything up), do you (mike and/or tec) think Martinez's high OBP is a good thing or a bad thing?

Who had the better game?

3 for 4, 2 singles, a double and a pop-out
0 for 1, 3 walks and a pop-out

The first guy.

I answered your question. Now answer mine.

Is Martinez's high OBP a good thing or a bad thing?

So is it too much to ask the great EM to have a few more of the first and a few less of the 2nd?

Posted by burnsy483 on 2/12/2014 9:24:00 AM (view original):
You understand that hitters, on average, get better pitches to hit on 1-0 counts than 1-1 counts, right?  Do you understand why that happens?  Also, the proper thing to post would be his splits "after 1-0" and "after 1-1", not on those specific pitches.

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.

Didn't you say he was taking that "unhittable" first strike in order to increase his chances of getting on base?   The stats indicate otherwise.   Was EM dumb?

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/12/2014 9:24:00 AM (view original):

Posted by burnsy483 on 2/12/2014 9:17:00 AM (view original):

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.

What do you think of guys like Roberto Clemente, Vlad Guerrero, Manny Sanguillen, etc, etc?   Were they great hitters?   Would you like to discuss their plate discipline?  Or pitch recognition?

Manny Sanguillen?  Maybe he would have been a great hitter like Edgar if he didn't swing at every pitch that was close to the strike zone.

I didn't see Clemente and Sanguillen play.  As far as Vlad goes, the reach he had on his swing is ridiculous, and is more an exception than anything.  Don't overlook the word "generally."  

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/12/2014 9:26:00 AM (view original):

Posted by burnsy483 on 2/12/2014 9:24:00 AM (view original):
You understand that hitters, on average, get better pitches to hit on 1-0 counts than 1-1 counts, right?  Do you understand why that happens?  Also, the proper thing to post would be his splits "after 1-0" and "after 1-1", not on those specific pitches.

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.

Didn't you say he was taking that "unhittable" first strike in order to increase his chances of getting on base?   The stats indicate otherwise.   Was EM dumb?

Why are you quoting unhittable?  Did I say that?

If Edgar takes a pitch he doesn't think he can hit hard on 1-0, it's because he's hoping he'll get a better pitch to get.  You understand why he's more likely to swing at that same pitch on 1-1, right?  If Edgar swung at those 1-0 pitches like you want him to, his stats would look much more similar to the 1-1 count.  But he doesn't, and it's one of the reasons why his stats after 1-0 counts are better than his stats after 1-1 counts.

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.

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/12/2014 9:25:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 2/12/2014 9:13:00 AM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/12/2014 8:42:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 2/11/2014 10:42:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/11/2014 10:12:00 PM (view original):

Fortunately, you don't have to.  It's right there on the screen.   Unlike the half a dozen times I've said "Would you like to quote the post where i said that?" after he made some **** up.

Just so we can be clear (and I don't make anything up), do you (mike and/or tec) think Martinez's high OBP is a good thing or a bad thing?

Who had the better game?

3 for 4, 2 singles, a double and a pop-out
0 for 1, 3 walks and a pop-out

The first guy.

I answered your question. Now answer mine.

Is Martinez's high OBP a good thing or a bad thing?

So is it too much to ask the great EM to have a few more of the first and a few less of the 2nd?

What makes you think he could have?

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/12/2014 9:20:00 AM (view original):

Here you go.   He didn't get better by taking that "unhittable" first strike.

First Pitch	591	0.384	0.389	0.664	1.053
1-0 Count	586	0.406	0.409	0.691	1.100
2-0 Count	294	0.441	0.439	0.888	1.327
3-0 Count	349	0.409	0.963	0.682	1.645
0-1 Count	612	0.337	0.346	0.552	0.898
1-1 Count	699	0.350	0.358	0.543	0.901
2-1 Count	639	0.383	0.387	0.647	1.034
3-1 Count	747	0.407	0.736	0.707	1.443
0-2 Count	460	0.202	0.209	0.300	0.509
1-2 Count	984	0.219	0.225	0.339	0.563
2-2 Count	1171	0.252	0.256	0.396	0.653
Full Count	1454	0.262	0.533	0.433	0.966

His slugging is way better after 3-1. Would you rather have 1-0 or 3-1 Edgar based on what you posted here?