Everybody who understands baseball knows that. Context and game situations matter.

BL seems to struggle with the concept, because he's too locked in to his stats and tables.

Seeing things from the 40,000 level is OK as long as you keep it in the proper perspective. But you can't ignore what happens at ground level, because that's where the games are played.

BL gets bit when he looks at the big picture only, and then tries to apply it to all situations. "All outs are the same". And that's why he gets seriously mocked here.

Posted by tecwrg on 7/1/2016 7:00:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 6/30/2016 10:46:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Jtpsops on 6/30/2016 10:39:00 PM (view original):
He didn't ask about the result, dumbass. He was asking if you want both those hitters approaching the situations the same, or if one is more preferable to the other. It's about context.

You're so unbelievably thick.

Um...ok I would like Trout to try to get a hit.

Would you also like Mendoza, in that situation, also "try" to get a hit, or would you prefer a walk to bring up Trout?

A hit from Mendoza would still be the best outcome but a walk would be fine too. Same with Trout.

Posted by tecwrg on 7/1/2016 7:23:00 AM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 7/1/2016 7:06:00 AM (view original):
What if it was Edgar Martinez instead of Mike Trout? Would you want him to try to get a hit or just take his walk?

This is where it gets really uncomfortable for BL. I expect him to either avoid the question, or try to divert the discussion.

Why would that uncomfortable? All hitters are at the plate trying to get a hit.

Posted by bad_luck on 7/1/2016 8:40:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 7/1/2016 7:23:00 AM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 7/1/2016 7:06:00 AM (view original):
What if it was Edgar Martinez instead of Mike Trout? Would you want him to try to get a hit or just take his walk?

This is where it gets really uncomfortable for BL. I expect him to either avoid the question, or try to divert the discussion.

Why would that uncomfortable? All hitters are at the plate trying to get a hit.

Are they?

Have you ever seen a hitter take a called third strike on a pitch around the edge of the strike zone? Was he trying to get a hit by not swinging?

Wait, are you saying that anytime a hitter is walked or K'd looking, they weren't at the plate trying to get a hit?

Posted by bad_luck on 7/1/2016 9:46:00 AM (view original):
Wait, are you saying that anytime a hitter is walked or K'd looking, they weren't at the plate trying to get a hit?

If they're taking strike three on a pitch that's around the edge of the strike zone, I would say no.

That's an interesting theory.

Have you ever seen a hitter get a hit by not swinging at pitches in or near the strike zone?

Can you post a video if you have?

This is obviously going to degrade into a semantics argument, but every major league hitter (save for some pitchers) goes up to the plate with the intention of getting a hit.

A large part of that plan is swinging at the right pitch.

And we've gone down this rathole before.

Selectivity, i.e. "waiting for the right pitch" is a good thing to do with 0 or 1 strikes.

Not so much with two strikes.

If a hitter thinks a pitch is a ball, even with two strikes, he should let it go.

Posted by bad_luck on 7/1/2016 10:27:00 AM (view original):
If a hitter thinks a pitch is a ball, even with two strikes, he should let it go.

OK.

Strike three.

How'd that work out?

Yep. Sometimes it will be strike three. Pitchers live in big houses too.

Do you understand the concept that a hitter needs to expand his strike zone with two strikes, i.e. include the edges of the zone where he might normally take pitches with 0 or 1 strikes?

Sure. But if he thinks the pitch is a ball, he should let it go.