Posted by burnsy483 on 2/26/2015 4:23:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/26/2015 4:17:00 PM (view original):
Well, he felt the need to announce that he wants to strike out less.    So doesn't he know that it's not such a good thing if he only hits 20 homers and 20 doubles while cutting his strikeouts to 75?



Or I can stop playing this silly game and point out that most of this boils down to the situation.   I'm sure he struck out quite a few times when he, or his team, would have been better served if he cut back his swing and put the ball in play. 

Yea, your first two sentences aren't related. He said he wanted to convert some of the strikeouts he had to hits.

He struck out a lot more than he did the first two years, and his BA and OBP suffered. He thinks they're interconnected, I tend to agree. If he can figure out how to get back to where he was, great. He may need to make some adjustments to the fact that he's getting a lot of high fastballs. 

Every player would LOVE to convert strikeouts to hits.  Why does Trout need to announce that?   But the only way to do that is to put the ball in play.  That's goal #1.

I seriously don't know if I'm ******* with you or you're ******* with me.

Posted by tecwrg on 2/26/2015 4:18:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 2/26/2015 4:05:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/26/2015 3:54:00 PM (view original):
Does wanting to strike out less and convert those AB into hits only apply to Trout?

Nope and it also doesn't apply to, "an out is an out."

No one has ever argued that strikeouts are the same as balls in play or that players shouldn't try to get hits. Just that, once you're out, how you made that out doesn't matter.

And that's where your basic ignorance about baseball displays itself for all the world to see.

Is a ground out that advances a runner from second to third the same as a strikeout?

Is a fly out that scores a runner from third the same as a strikeout?

For God's sake, even a ground ball force-out that "replaces" a slow runner at first with a faster runner at first is a marginal improvement, and is better than a strikeout.

You're vastly overestimating the value of an out advancing a runner.

Here's how it works.

Most outs are equally ******. All outs leading off an inning, all third outs, all strikeouts, all pop ups, all shallow flies, all comebackers, all infield lineouts, all outs with no one on base.

Some outs are slightly less worse. You've listed some.

Some outs are catastrophically worse than the ones listed in the first group: double plays.

The reason that K's don't correlate to runs scored is that those three groups (specifically 2 and 3) tend to balance out over the course of the year. Any small benefit gained from making several less ****** outs is wiped out by a double play or two.

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/26/2015 4:25:00 PM (view original):

Posted by burnsy483 on 2/26/2015 4:23:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/26/2015 4:17:00 PM (view original):
Well, he felt the need to announce that he wants to strike out less.    So doesn't he know that it's not such a good thing if he only hits 20 homers and 20 doubles while cutting his strikeouts to 75?



Or I can stop playing this silly game and point out that most of this boils down to the situation.   I'm sure he struck out quite a few times when he, or his team, would have been better served if he cut back his swing and put the ball in play. 

Yea, your first two sentences aren't related. He said he wanted to convert some of the strikeouts he had to hits.

He struck out a lot more than he did the first two years, and his BA and OBP suffered. He thinks they're interconnected, I tend to agree. If he can figure out how to get back to where he was, great. He may need to make some adjustments to the fact that he's getting a lot of high fastballs. 

Every player would LOVE to convert strikeouts to hits.  Why does Trout need to announce that?   But the only way to do that is to put the ball in play.  That's goal #1.

I seriously don't know if I'm ******* with you or you're ******* with me.

I have no idea why it was a story. It seemed to intrigue tec for some reason. 

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/26/2015 4:25:00 PM (view original):

Posted by burnsy483 on 2/26/2015 4:23:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/26/2015 4:17:00 PM (view original):
Well, he felt the need to announce that he wants to strike out less.    So doesn't he know that it's not such a good thing if he only hits 20 homers and 20 doubles while cutting his strikeouts to 75?



Or I can stop playing this silly game and point out that most of this boils down to the situation.   I'm sure he struck out quite a few times when he, or his team, would have been better served if he cut back his swing and put the ball in play. 

Yea, your first two sentences aren't related. He said he wanted to convert some of the strikeouts he had to hits.

He struck out a lot more than he did the first two years, and his BA and OBP suffered. He thinks they're interconnected, I tend to agree. If he can figure out how to get back to where he was, great. He may need to make some adjustments to the fact that he's getting a lot of high fastballs. 

Every player would LOVE to convert strikeouts to hits.  Why does Trout need to announce that?   But the only way to do that is to put the ball in play.  That's goal #1.

I seriously don't know if I'm ******* with you or you're ******* with me.

No one is arguing that he shouldn't try to put the ball in play.

sez the guy who's been here for 11 pages.

I don't know why it's hard to grasp the idea that Trout likes the idea of converting Ks to hits. But it's taking 11 pages for some people to understand that that's all he said, really.

Oh, he wants to steal more bases too.

And to be fair, I missed what happened overnight. I didn't read everything. You're right, dahs is long-winded.

I think all hitters would like to convert Ks to hits.  

I think the point is that Trout believes he'll be more valuable if he puts more balls in play.   Sort of the anti-Edgar Martinez.    He has no way of knowing if they'll be hits(some will, it's inevitable, but he can't guarantee it).

In the same way you think all hitters would like to convert Ks to hits, all hitters would obviously like to convert Ks to balls in play. 

Not at the expense of other things.   Balls in play aren't necessarily hits.    I think around 36% of them, for Trout, become hits.    I'm sure he's looking at his 180 whiffs and thinking "If I put 75 of those in play, I'll have another 25 hits.  At least!!!"

Might be less than that, because if he's adjusting his approach to make contact on a high fastball with 2 strikes that he'd normally strike out on, for example, you can't be sure that BABIP is the same. Or maybe he fights it off and gets another chance at a pitch he could handle. But you have the right idea, yes. And then his batting average is back to where it's been.

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/26/2015 4:39:00 PM (view original):
Not at the expense of other things.   Balls in play aren't necessarily hits.    I think around 36% of them, for Trout, become hits.    I'm sure he's looking at his 180 whiffs and thinking "If I put 75 of those in play, I'll have another 25 hits.  At least!!!"

And in order to put more balls in play, Trout, as pointed out by dahs several pages ago, will have to change his approach. That may not be a good idea.

Posted by burnsy483 on 2/26/2015 4:42:00 PM (view original):
Might be less than that, because if he's adjusting his approach to make contact on a high fastball with 2 strikes that he'd normally strike out on, for example, you can't be sure that BABIP is the same. Or maybe he fights it off and gets another chance at a pitch he could handle. But you have the right idea, yes. And then his batting average is back to where it's been.

Yep. You can't just alter your approach on the PAs where you struck out. You have to always alter your approach. There has to be a trade off.

Posted by bad_luck on 2/26/2015 4:26:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 2/26/2015 4:18:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 2/26/2015 4:05:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/26/2015 3:54:00 PM (view original):
Does wanting to strike out less and convert those AB into hits only apply to Trout?

Nope and it also doesn't apply to, "an out is an out."

No one has ever argued that strikeouts are the same as balls in play or that players shouldn't try to get hits. Just that, once you're out, how you made that out doesn't matter.

And that's where your basic ignorance about baseball displays itself for all the world to see.

Is a ground out that advances a runner from second to third the same as a strikeout?

Is a fly out that scores a runner from third the same as a strikeout?

For God's sake, even a ground ball force-out that "replaces" a slow runner at first with a faster runner at first is a marginal improvement, and is better than a strikeout.

You're vastly overestimating the value of an out advancing a runner.

Here's how it works.

Most outs are equally ******. All outs leading off an inning, all third outs, all strikeouts, all pop ups, all shallow flies, all comebackers, all infield lineouts, all outs with no one on base.

Some outs are slightly less worse. You've listed some.

Some outs are catastrophically worse than the ones listed in the first group: double plays.

The reason that K's don't correlate to runs scored is that those three groups (specifically 2 and 3) tend to balance out over the course of the year. Any small benefit gained from making several less ****** outs is wiped out by a double play or two.

LOL @ the irony of somebody who doesn't understand baseball saying "here's how it works . . . ".

The funny thing is that you dont grasp this enough to even disagree. You just laugh and hope nobody notices that you're dumb.