Posted by tecwrg on 10/23/2017 10:59:00 AM (view original):

Posted by edsortails on 10/23/2017 10:29:00 AM (view original):
How do you get 40+ pages out of this nonsense?

BL likes to argue.

He could have just agreed that strikeouts are counterproductive to run scoring.

All outs are counterproductive to run scoring.

One other minor tweak to the numbers. The average fielding percentage for teams is .984, meaning that roughly 1/60 of balls in play will result in an error by the defense.

Not a huge number, but it's always nice to give the opponents a chance to kick it around....

Posted by toddcommish on 10/23/2017 11:17:00 AM (view original):
One other minor tweak to the numbers. The average fielding percentage for teams is .984, meaning that roughly 1/60 of balls in play will result in an error by the defense.

Not a huge number, but it's always nice to give the opponents a chance to kick it around....

Well, that’s a great point. Not being out is probably better than being out.

What would we do without you?

Posted by bad_luck on 10/23/2017 11:16:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 10/23/2017 10:59:00 AM (view original):

Posted by edsortails on 10/23/2017 10:29:00 AM (view original):
How do you get 40+ pages out of this nonsense?

BL likes to argue.

He could have just agreed that strikeouts are counterproductive to run scoring.

All outs are counterproductive to run scoring.

No. No they're not.

Idiot.

Posted by bad_luck on 10/23/2017 11:16:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 10/23/2017 10:59:00 AM (view original):

Posted by edsortails on 10/23/2017 10:29:00 AM (view original):
How do you get 40+ pages out of this nonsense?

BL likes to argue.

He could have just agreed that strikeouts are counterproductive to run scoring.

All outs are counterproductive to run scoring.

Some are more, some are less.

Contrary to popular belief by the local idiot, all outs are not the same.

Posted by Jtpsops on 10/23/2017 11:41:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 10/23/2017 11:16:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 10/23/2017 10:59:00 AM (view original):

Posted by edsortails on 10/23/2017 10:29:00 AM (view original):
How do you get 40+ pages out of this nonsense?

BL likes to argue.

He could have just agreed that strikeouts are counterproductive to run scoring.

All outs are counterproductive to run scoring.

No. No they're not.

Idiot.

Very true.

BL, please explain to the group how sac flies are counterproductive to run scoring.

Use small words so that we can understand.

Posted by tecwrg on 10/23/2017 11:42:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 10/23/2017 11:16:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 10/23/2017 10:59:00 AM (view original):

Posted by edsortails on 10/23/2017 10:29:00 AM (view original):
How do you get 40+ pages out of this nonsense?

BL likes to argue.

He could have just agreed that strikeouts are counterproductive to run scoring.

All outs are counterproductive to run scoring.

Some are more, some are less.

Contrary to popular belief by the local idiot, all outs are not the same.

Of course not. In individual situations, certain outs in play are preferred to other outs. In other situations, certain outs in play are worse than other outs.

As whole, on a full season team or player basis, how you made your outs doesn’t matter.

Except when they do.

Have you ever seen a game where the type of outs made mattered?

Posted by tecwrg on 10/23/2017 11:50:00 AM (view original):
Except when they do.

Have you ever seen a game where the type of outs made mattered?

Sure. Example:

The Dodgers were playing the Cubs in April. LA was down by a run in the 7th with one out and the bases loaded. 4-6-3, inning over.

Obviously, a hit/walk/roe is preferred there. Following by a sac fly. Then any other out (K, pop-out, shallow fly out, non-RBI/non-DP ground out).

But the ground out DP was a disaster and probably cost them the game.

Posted by bad_luck on 10/23/2017 11:48:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 10/23/2017 11:42:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 10/23/2017 11:16:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 10/23/2017 10:59:00 AM (view original):

Posted by edsortails on 10/23/2017 10:29:00 AM (view original):
How do you get 40+ pages out of this nonsense?

BL likes to argue.

He could have just agreed that strikeouts are counterproductive to run scoring.

All outs are counterproductive to run scoring.

Some are more, some are less.

Contrary to popular belief by the local idiot, all outs are not the same.

Of course not. In individual situations, certain outs in play are preferred to other outs. In other situations, certain outs in play are worse than other outs.

As whole, on a full season team or player basis, how you made your outs doesn’t matter.

once again, they play the games for a reason. Who cares if when you look at overall stats for the season, the way outs are made doesn't matter? Each game and at bat is an individual event and how outs are made can matter.

Posted by wylie715 on 10/23/2017 12:06:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 10/23/2017 11:48:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 10/23/2017 11:42:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 10/23/2017 11:16:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 10/23/2017 10:59:00 AM (view original):

Posted by edsortails on 10/23/2017 10:29:00 AM (view original):
How do you get 40+ pages out of this nonsense?

BL likes to argue.

He could have just agreed that strikeouts are counterproductive to run scoring.

All outs are counterproductive to run scoring.

Some are more, some are less.

Contrary to popular belief by the local idiot, all outs are not the same.

Of course not. In individual situations, certain outs in play are preferred to other outs. In other situations, certain outs in play are worse than other outs.

As whole, on a full season team or player basis, how you made your outs doesn’t matter.

once again, they play the games for a reason. Who cares if when you look at overall stats for the season, the way outs are made doesn't matter? Each game and at bat is an individual event and how outs are made can matter.

But in the context of:

- that player struck out too much this season

or:

- that team was better because they made more productive outs this year

which is what this thread has, for the most part, been about, we're looking at the cumulative numbers. We aren't analyzing individual plays. When you look at cumulative numbers, how you made your outs doesn't matter for the reasons I've been repeating forever:

1) productive out situations are relatively rare...teams average 2-3 per game. Most outs aren't made in productive out situations.
2) Teams/players that do make a higher percentage of their outs in play do so in both productive out situations and GIDP situations. Because the GIDP situations are more common and GIDP are more costly, the "benefit" of productive outs is washed away.

Posted by bad_luck on 10/23/2017 11:26:00 AM (view original):

Posted by toddcommish on 10/23/2017 11:17:00 AM (view original):
One other minor tweak to the numbers. The average fielding percentage for teams is .984, meaning that roughly 1/60 of balls in play will result in an error by the defense.

Not a huge number, but it's always nice to give the opponents a chance to kick it around....

Well, that’s a great point. Not being out is probably better than being out.

What would we do without you?

I was merely pointing out that a player that had 180 ABs and struck out 180 times would never reach base, whereas a player that put a ball in play, whether a grounder or a pop-up or a fly-ball (even if it went right at a defender every single time) would be on-base three times simply because defenders make errors.

That's not even counting the times players miss catchable pop-ups or have Jeter-esque range when (what should be) routine plays don't get made by the defense and the hitter gets credited with a hit.

Posted by toddcommish on 10/23/2017 12:25:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 10/23/2017 11:26:00 AM (view original):

Posted by toddcommish on 10/23/2017 11:17:00 AM (view original):
One other minor tweak to the numbers. The average fielding percentage for teams is .984, meaning that roughly 1/60 of balls in play will result in an error by the defense.

Not a huge number, but it's always nice to give the opponents a chance to kick it around....

Well, that’s a great point. Not being out is probably better than being out.

What would we do without you?

I was merely pointing out that a player that had 180 ABs and struck out 180 times would never reach base, whereas a player that put a ball in play, whether a grounder or a pop-up or a fly-ball (even if it went right at a defender every single time) would be on-base three times simply because defenders make errors.

That's not even counting the times players miss catchable pop-ups or have Jeter-esque range when (what should be) routine plays don't get made by the defense and the hitter gets credited with a hit.

Look, I know this thread has reach 40+ pages and there have been other, very, very, long threads on the topic so there is a lot of bullshit to sort through, but I feel like you've been around long enough to have, at some point, seen me say obviously a non-out is better than an out.

A player who has 180 PAs and makes 180 outs is ****** no matter how they made the outs. That same player is just as ****** if they have 180 PAs and make 177 outs.

The fact that you keep dismissing strikeouts as "just a different kind of out" is why there had literally hundreds of pages across multiple threads of you arguing with the world.

Nobody, and I mean NOBODY, agrees with you because it's an utterly stupid and indefensible statement. Yet you attempt to argue and defend it because you refuse to back off it.

Do you ever stop for even a second and think to yourself "maybe I'm missing something very basic here"?

What if all of his outs were sac flies?