Posted by tecwrg on 10/22/2017 4:22:00 PM (view original):
"But those situations are, in the context of all outs, rare."

Proving that you don't watch baseball.

What is your definition of "rare"? Because I would guess if you actually watched baseball games, you would have noticed that there are probably 8 to 10 instances (or more) per game where a productive out would leave a team in a better scoring position than a non productive out (i.e. strikeout).

There aren’t 8-10 of those situations in an average game. Unless you’re counting runner on 1st, less than two outs, which are the most common of the “certain type of out really hurts here” situations. And in that case, it’s not the K that hurts you.

For ****'s sake. What is better?

A) runner on 1st, 1 out
B) runner on 2nd, 1 out

Like, a team doesn’t get a runner to second or third with less than two outs at an average rate of 1 per inning (8-10 a game). That would be insane.

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/22/2017 4:29:00 PM (view original):
For ****'s sake. What is better?

A) runner on 1st, 1 out
B) runner on 2nd, 1 out

We aren’t talking about sac bunts, dummy.

Posted by sjpoker on 10/20/2017 8:28:00 PM (view original):
I'm here for the entertainment of watching BL make an *** of himself. And not one person agrees with him. Not a single person.

o

Posted by bad_luck on 10/22/2017 4:33:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/22/2017 4:29:00 PM (view original):
For ****'s sake. What is better?

A) runner on 1st, 1 out
B) runner on 2nd, 1 out

We aren’t talking about sac bunts, dummy.

Can you be a bigger retard? Rhetorical question.

Your words: Unless you’re counting runner on 1st, less than two outs, which are the most common of the “certain type of out really hurts here” situations. And in that case, it’s not the K that hurts you.

A happens when you whiff. B happens when you move the runner via productive out.

Posted by bad_luck on 10/22/2017 4:31:00 PM (view original):
Like, a team doesn’t get a runner to second or third with less than two outs at an average rate of 1 per inning (8-10 a game). That would be insane.

Both teams, dumbass.

I picked a game from this season completely at random. Phillies @ Rangers, May 16.

https://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/TEX/TEX201705160.shtml

I counted 11 instances where a productive out (advancing a runner) would have put the hitting team in a better offensive position than the non-productive out that actually took place. Those non-productive outs cost each team a run. Granted, only a handful of those non-productive outs were K's. But it shows that the 8-10 number I just guessed at is certainly reasonable.

Posted by bad_luck on 10/22/2017 4:33:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/22/2017 4:29:00 PM (view original):
For ****'s sake. What is better?

A) runner on 1st, 1 out
B) runner on 2nd, 1 out

We aren’t talking about sac bunts, dummy.

No, we're not. Why are you?

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/22/2017 4:58:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 10/22/2017 4:33:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/22/2017 4:29:00 PM (view original):
For ****'s sake. What is better?

A) runner on 1st, 1 out
B) runner on 2nd, 1 out

We aren’t talking about sac bunts, dummy.

Can you be a bigger retard? Rhetorical question.

Your words: Unless you’re counting runner on 1st, less than two outs, which are the most common of the “certain type of out really hurts here” situations. And in that case, it’s not the K that hurts you.

A happens when you whiff. B happens when you move the runner via productive out.

You know that rhetorical questions aren’t meant to be answered, right? They are a rhetorical device.

I stand by my words. Non-sac bunt outs in play that move a runner from first to second are exceptionally rare. Miss-hit dribblers, super deep flyouts, and maybe a ground-out to first, that’s about it.

Much, much more frequently, an out in play with a runner on first and less than two outs hurts you a lot more than a K.

Is "productive out" another way of saying "Sac bunt"?

I can think of other ways to move runners over. Can you?

It is a “productive out” but it’s different because it’s intentional. Like, you’d be furious if the Yankees best offensive player this season went up to the plate and sac bunted anytime there was a runner on first.

Moving a runner from first to second with an out in play just doesn’t happen much. But erasing that runner with an out in play happens a whole hell of a lot.

LOL!!!

Posted by bad_luck on 10/22/2017 4:28:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 10/22/2017 4:22:00 PM (view original):
"But those situations are, in the context of all outs, rare."

Proving that you don't watch baseball.

What is your definition of "rare"? Because I would guess if you actually watched baseball games, you would have noticed that there are probably 8 to 10 instances (or more) per game where a productive out would leave a team in a better scoring position than a non productive out (i.e. strikeout).

There aren’t 8-10 of those situations in an average game. Unless you’re counting runner on 1st, less than two outs, which are the most common of the “certain type of out really hurts here” situations. And in that case, it’s not the K that hurts you.

BL?

Posted by bad_luck on 10/22/2017 9:40:00 AM (view original):

Posted by wylie715 on 10/22/2017 1:02:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 10/20/2017 7:43:00 PM (view original):

Posted by wylie715 on 10/20/2017 7:16:00 PM (view original):
what does that even mean? Yes, it would have been better if on some of those 200+ strikeouts he put the ball in play. Many of them may have been turned into outs anyway, but surely some of them would not. Like you've said many times a hit is better than an out.

So your argument is that he made outs too frequently?

So you're arguing that you wouldn't want him to make outs less frequently?

Well, I’m certainly not complaining about his OBP. My point is that “he should have made less outs,” is a different argument than “the types of outs he made mattered.”

I'm not complaining about his OBP either. If he even took a quarter of those 200+ strikeouts and made contact instead of striking out he likely have an even better OBP. Even if they were all a different kind of out, the odds are at least a few of them would have been productive outs (moving a runner, or even scoring a runner).

Posted by tecwrg on 10/22/2017 6:47:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 10/22/2017 4:28:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 10/22/2017 4:22:00 PM (view original):
"But those situations are, in the context of all outs, rare."

Proving that you don't watch baseball.

What is your definition of "rare"? Because I would guess if you actually watched baseball games, you would have noticed that there are probably 8 to 10 instances (or more) per game where a productive out would leave a team in a better scoring position than a non productive out (i.e. strikeout).

There aren’t 8-10 of those situations in an average game. Unless you’re counting runner on 1st, less than two outs, which are the most common of the “certain type of out really hurts here” situations. And in that case, it’s not the K that hurts you.

BL?

???

You quoted my response, idiot.