Lincecum's Ks - A Very Basic Question on Judgement of Pitching Savvy
by Tycho on Nov 23, 2009 9:48 AM PST
Email
PrintSo in the aftermath of the Cy Young announcement, with everyone analyzing and re-analyzing every single stat, I'm left wondering why everyone seems to care about strikeouts.
That said...
go Timmy! I'm just trying to get a better handle on his awesomeness.
Now, I don't in any way claim to understand even a fraction of the super Sabermetric stats Baseball Prospectus throws around, any more than the few I learned from Moneyball and from the McCoven, but it seems like the overarching theme to the new stats is simply to care about individual results, not affected (or less affected) by other the rest of the team.
That said, everyone is citing Lincecum's fantastic K-rate, either total Ks, K/9IP, K/BB, etc., as one of the top reasons why he's the best pitcher in the league, but this doesn't quite make sense to me. A strikeout is a means to an end, but it seems like valuing a batter based on the number of doubles he hits rather than his overall slugging. Sure, a strikeout means that the pitcher did it himself (if you completely count out pitch-calling as an important factor), but why is a strikeout pitcher better than someone who can produce "routine" grounders and pop-ups? He got the out, and without substantial or extraordinary defensive contributions, so what does it matter?
I would appreciate it if you can explain this. I'm a big fan of McC, even if I don't post often, so keep up the great work.
This FanPost is reader-generated, and it does not necessarily reflect the views of McCovey Chronicles. If the author uses filler to achieve the minimum word requirement, a moderator may edit the FanPost for his or her own amusement.
98 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
You answered your own question
Sure, a strikeout means that the pitcher did it himself
This is what it boils down to. An out that relies on nothing but the pitcher’s skill. No chance of a Velezian route causing the ball to drop or a Cody Ransom type of ball through the legs.
WHY IS BOCOCK?!
by Lars The Wanderer on Nov 23, 2009 9:54 AM PST reply actions
Yes. The strikeout is an out 100 of the time. The ball that is hit, however consistently weakly, is not. There is no way to guarantee an out on a ball this is put in play. There is a 100 chance of guaranteeing an out with a strikeout. Therefore, strikeouts are better.
Also, I’d like to cite some of the evidence that zenbits cites.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Nov 23, 2009 10:14 AM PST up reply actions
100 of the time. That’s math.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Nov 23, 2009 10:14 AM PST up reply actions
Hold the phone. I definitely used a percent sign on both of those. What the hell, man?
%
100%
God dammit! Stop fucking with me, SBN!
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Nov 23, 2009 10:15 AM PST up reply actions
Well Actually...
It’s almost 100% of the time. You do have the occasional occurences of the WP/PB that gets to the backstop allowing the strikeout victim to get to first and eventually score the winning run……
But strikeouts are the bomb, and chicks dig the K.
My two favorite teams are the Giants, and whomever is playing the Dodgers!
by World Series or Bust on Nov 23, 2009 10:20 AM PST up reply actions
strike - em - out - throw - em - outs and DPs are more bombulous.
"I don’t know why people feel the need to come up with reasons 'why' for everything..." - Missing Barry
by victor frankenstein on Nov 23, 2009 1:49 PM PST up reply actions
I have nothing more to add.
Adopted brother of Jason Jarvis. To pass the time during the offseason I decided to try my hand at blogging about photography and music.
HE PULLED A XANTHAN
/sicker burn
Aaron King is still my homeboy... iffy mechanics and all
McFAQ for all you newcomers out there.
GET THAT VORP AND WHIP SH!T OUTTA HERE!!!
XANTHAN ENJOYED THE PULL!
WHY IS BOCOCK?!
by Lars The Wanderer on Nov 23, 2009 11:05 AM PST up reply actions
BORK BORK BORK RBI’S!!
Aaron King is still my homeboy... iffy mechanics and all
McFAQ for all you newcomers out there.
GET THAT VORP AND WHIP SH!T OUTTA HERE!!!
Unless it’s a wild pitch.
I know you nerds know NOTHING about the real game of baseball, or any other athletic endeavor requiring teamwork under physical stress.
Mr. F! | comics | art | New Nattowear | Unofficial McImage Directory
THE GIANTS PREFERRED METHOD OF SCORING!
WHY IS BOCOCK?!
by Lars The Wanderer on Nov 23, 2009 10:25 AM PST up reply actions
And just importantly, no chance of a brilliant team defense making a pitcher look better than he is by consistently turning non-routine outs into outs.
My Bucardo is better than yours.
A hot August weekday, before a small crowd, when the only thing at stake is the tissue-thin difference between a thing done well and a thing done ill. Insofar as the clutch hitter is not a sportswriter's myth, it is a vulgarity, like a writer who writes only for money.
Well, the question is just how much you can actually expect a pitcher to consistently produce weak pop-outs and ground-outs. Plus, the fact is that even weak ground-outs and pop-outs sometimes turn into baserunners, probably (I would imagine) at a greater rate than strikeouts turn into baserunners.
Matt Cain: He'll save children, but not the Dodger children.
"AT LAST I AM A PARENTS." - Buster
Good question
For the TEAM, A K is no better than than a regular old out (that no one advances on).
However, when measuring a pitcher’s contribution to the out, he gets “100%” for a K and some smaller fraction (70-99%) for a ball-in-play that becomes an out – depending on how hard the “play” is. How “hard” the play is “can” be measured (in principal) but is not measured very well by current technology. To some extent, this is what “advanced” defensive metrics (like UZR and plus/minus) try to measure.
Furthermore, “studies have shown” that a pitchers K/9 (and BB/9) are a better, more robust determinant of FUTURE ERA than current ERA.
FIRE BRIAN SABEAN... UNLESS HE KEEPS DRAFTING WELL. .. AND SIGNS UNDERRATED PLAYERS LIKE AFFELDT OR PHELPS. .. OR ALRIGHT WHO'S PLAYING WITH THE ALIEN MIND-SWITCHING RAY?
-------
PARPG- Indy post-apocalyptic roleplaying game currently in early planning stages.
btw
ERA is really the wrong number – although it feebly tries to account for defense. But I used it instead of “RA” (runs allowed) which might be a little confusing.
FIRE BRIAN SABEAN... UNLESS HE KEEPS DRAFTING WELL. .. AND SIGNS UNDERRATED PLAYERS LIKE AFFELDT OR PHELPS. .. OR ALRIGHT WHO'S PLAYING WITH THE ALIEN MIND-SWITCHING RAY?
-------
PARPG- Indy post-apocalyptic roleplaying game currently in early planning stages.
70-99%? That’s insanely high. It is generally accepted that pitching/defense split for run preventing is 70%/30%, and that includes all the plays that don’t involve the defense (K’s, BB’s, HR’s). Even saying that pitchers control 50% of what happens to a ball in play would be generous. The real number is probably closer to 15-20%. That’s why the vast, vast majority of pitchers have career BABIP’s right around .300, and even the exceptions are never off by more than 20 points.
HA HA HA LOOK AT ME I'M ALL HAPPY AND STUFF NO REALLY CAN WE STOP WITH THE COOKYMAN IS SAD JOKES?
:-) :-) :-)
Sure, a strikeout means that the pitcher did it himself (if you completely count out pitch-calling as an important factor), but why is a strikeout pitcher better than someone who can produce “routine” grounders and pop-ups?
Don’t downplay the first part, it’s very important. Basically, pitchers don’t tend to produce “routine” grounders or popups at a level you’d think they do. In general pitchers don’t have very much control in this aspect – most pitchers induce “routine” outs on balls the batter hits at pretty much the same rate. Some pitchers do induce more groundballs than other pitchers, like Carpenter and Wainwright – and that is an ability and does result in worse batting results, so it’s fair to credit that…but the truth is, the difference still isn’t that big.
Striking guys out has a much bigger impact on getting outs than a pitchers ability to induce easy outs on balls put in play, and that’s what it comes down to.
Aren’t predominantly groundball pitchers perceived to be superior to flyball pitchers, though? On the basis that 0% of groundballs turn into homeruns while 8% of flyballs do. That’s another window into Timmy’s awesomeness – he doesn’t give up many HRs.
If you can get 3:2 on a headline of "Giants Pitcher Assaults General Manager" at some point this year, take it.
In fact, the only way he could be more dominant is if he cut down on his walks. But I feel like even that is nitpicking at this point.
If you can get 3:2 on a headline of "Giants Pitcher Assaults General Manager" at some point this year, take it.
I believe Tim will once again cut both his hit and walk rates next season, which will make him more dominant than ever.
Tim’s improvement from 2008 to 2009 is much better illustrated by his drop in OPS allowed from .613 to just .561 than merely his ERA drop from 2.62 to 2.48.
Expect a bigger ERA drop in 2010 as Tim continues to live up to the nickname The Ace off Diamonds.
Yeah, higher GB% in generally is a good thing. GB’s actually turn into hits more often than FB’s, but the important difference is the one you noted – power. A GB is basically a single every time, a FB that turns into a hit can often lead to HR’s, doubles, or triples.
by Missing Barry on Nov 23, 2009 10:49 AM PST up reply actions
the other advantage that groundball pitchers enjoy are the double plays.
Please hit better, Randy Winn.
“Double plays” – in the days of Kent, Snow and Aurilia, I quite liked those. Now I get ill when I hear that term, along with “pitchers’ duel” in the context of a Giants game. :(
If you can get 3:2 on a headline of "Giants Pitcher Assaults General Manager" at some point this year, take it.
Exception noted. :)
If you can get 3:2 on a headline of "Giants Pitcher Assaults General Manager" at some point this year, take it.
Yes!
/ignores Fangraphs FIP chart
If you can get 3:2 on a headline of "Giants Pitcher Assaults General Manager" at some point this year, take it.
he's yelling so loud
he scared Jesus
FIRE BRIAN SABEAN... UNLESS HE KEEPS DRAFTING WELL. .. AND SIGNS UNDERRATED PLAYERS LIKE AFFELDT OR PHELPS. .. OR ALRIGHT WHO'S PLAYING WITH THE ALIEN MIND-SWITCHING RAY?
-------
PARPG- Indy post-apocalyptic roleplaying game currently in early planning stages.
he's yelling so loud
his cross defies gravity
Joe Martinez: You are cool.
When it's all said and done, America will be remembered for three things: The Bill of Rights, jazz, and baseball.
Aurilia can still help turn hit into a double play! He wants to play again next year you know!
Giant Dirtbags: John Bowker, Steve Hammond. MIA List: Todd Jennings, Brian Anderson
Jeremy Affeldt induces DP's
by Giant among Angels on Nov 23, 2009 6:34 PM PST up reply actions
When..I mean. if Sabean re-signs Aurilia, at least we could still use that picture with the caption “And Aurilia promptly hits into a double play”.
"All I know is right now, you comeback and do you dwell on that? I think you're man enough to take it, you're man enough to chew on it, to spit it out and you learn from it. ... I think winners let it go. I think losers dwell on it and talk about it all week and that screws you up for the next opportunity going forward." - Mike Singletary after the 49ers loss to the Vikings
but it seems like valuing a batter based on the number of doubles he hits rather than his overall slugging.
But if that batter had the most 2b and the 2nd best SLG in the league he would still be valuable.
say hey nation is the Ralph Nader of McC.-Xanthan
by say hey nation on Nov 23, 2009 10:38 AM PST reply actions
I don’t think it’s been mentioned yet, but balls in play often advance baserunners even if they’re outs. A strikeout will not (unless it’s a WP/PB third strike and the runner makes it to first). Even a GiDP can knock in a run, as anyone who’s watched Rich Aurilia’s career will attest to.
Osiris, Lord of the Dead, and relief pitcher for the San Francisco Giants.
actually
if a runner is on first, the batter can’t reach on a WP/PB 3rd strike.
Sharlon Schoop - de favoriete Nederlandse honkbalspeler van McCovey Chronicles.
You always have to be one step ahead of your drunk friends
--Daisy Owl
I think the batter could if there are 2 outs.
Brian says a lot of things. Brian only does one thing, though. Get low OBP hacking suckholes who’s best years are in the past. - Missing Barry
Found it 10.15 Strikeouts
“…is put out by a third strike not caught when there is a runner on first before two are out”
Brian says a lot of things. Brian only does one thing, though. Get low OBP hacking suckholes who’s best years are in the past. - Missing Barry
aha
makes sense
Sharlon Schoop - de favoriete Nederlandse honkbalspeler van McCovey Chronicles.
You always have to be one step ahead of your drunk friends
--Daisy Owl
http://www.stltoday.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=678178
say hey nation is the Ralph Nader of McC.-Xanthan
by say hey nation on Nov 23, 2009 10:43 AM PST reply actions
right but if his stuff is so good then why wasn’t his era and whip lower than carp’s? Carp’s stuff is filfthy too but he doesn’t gameplan around the k.
I know you nerds know NOTHING about the real game of baseball, or any other athletic endeavor requiring teamwork under physical stress.
Mr. F! | comics | art | New Nattowear | Unofficial McImage Directory
That is why I hope we never get to use image tags in signatures.
I know you nerds know NOTHING about the real game of baseball, or any other athletic endeavor requiring teamwork under physical stress.
Mr. F! | comics | art | New Nattowear | Unofficial McImage Directory
D:
I know you nerds know NOTHING about the real game of baseball, or any other athletic endeavor requiring teamwork under physical stress.
Mr. F! | comics | art | New Nattowear | Unofficial McImage Directory
I think we should make a distinction between team and individual stats.
When you watch a game, you almost always root for a team-orientated result. You want the out, the DP, the RBI, the R or the W. When it comes time to evaluate a player, that’s when you focus on the stats that isolate the player from the “noise” of his teammates.
Please hit better, Randy Winn.
I think the clearest and most concise way to say it is basically this:
The difference between a good pitcher at inducing easy outs and a bad pitcher at inducing easy outs will only result in a small handful of extra outs over the course of the season. The difference between Lincecum and Wainwright was 49 strikeouts, and Wainwright finished 8th in all of baseball in K’s. The difference between Lincecum and Carpenter was 117. That’s 117 extra outs! Whatever the difference in “easy groundouts/popups” was, it was nowhere near 117. I doubt it was even near half that, or even a quarter of that. So when you tally up the outs a pitcher caused….strikeouts are the biggest difference between pitchers.
Aaron Rowand had wished he K'd and who digs the ground out?
1. When Rowand blew a rally by grounding into a triple play, he had wished he K’d again. But if the giants had more guys on base this year. Rowand with his sharp grounders to third probably would have hit into a bunch of triple plays.
Secondly, who hangs up a sign after a ground out, that Says GO. But after each K, Lincecum has a nice following out in the stands posting a K. Should Webb of Arizona have his legions in the stands posting a GO everytime someone grounds out on the guy? K is more valuable, unless Aaron Rowand is up. But is more valuable with a runner on third and less than 2 outs.
Timmy lets too many guys steal a base on him, so he has to get the K’s. Giants catchers allowed plenty of guys to get on base after a K with a WP or a PB, also most of the time when the giants had the chance to get on base in a similar situation, they just stood in the batters box as if they were a deer in the headlights.
by bradleybear on Nov 23, 2009 12:39 PM PST up reply actions
I’m not sure what the overall point you’re trying to make is…
Rowand with his sharp grounders to third probably would have hit into a bunch of triple plays.
What I do know, is this not true. There were 4 triple plays in all of baseball last year. 2 the year before. 4 the year before that, 5 the year before that, and 1 the year before that…
by Missing Barry on Nov 23, 2009 1:29 PM PST up reply actions
Here in AZ we don't have legions...
…we have lesions.
"I don’t know why people feel the need to come up with reasons 'why' for everything..." - Missing Barry
by victor frankenstein on Nov 23, 2009 1:53 PM PST up reply actions
Only because the giants low obp
If Rowand were on a team where he had more AB’s with runners on first and second and no outs, I profer the theory that there would have been several more triple plays this year vs. the giants and in particular Rowand. How many times did he try to pull a low outside pitch and hit a sharp grounder to third? Frequently! At least when he was not striking out on a low slider in the clutch. Luckily for Aaron and the Giants, that they had a low OBP in front of him, as it takes him an extra second to get out of the batters box with his toilet seat squat stance. He is a gamer! Sometimes I just wonder if he is drying to air out his dorsal underpinnings.
Dude, those numbers don’t make you realize how rare triple plays are. There haven’t more than 5 triple plays in baseball as far back as I cared to look! The chances of anyone hitting into one triple play are tiny, much less two.
by Missing Barry on Nov 23, 2009 4:15 PM PST up reply actions
Umm . . . ?
Joe Martinez: You are cool.
When it's all said and done, America will be remembered for three things: The Bill of Rights, jazz, and baseball.
strikeouts can make you throw more pitches
Unless the pitcher strikes guys out routinely on 3 pitches, K’s lead many pitchers to shorter stints, as they toss more pitches, and tire earlier, thus more bullpen use. Tim is a bit of an exception, but my guess is, that if he could get a few more outs by way of contact and last a tad longer in his games, and he might still end up with as many K’s but he would throw maybe 240 innings, instead of 226, and not throw any more pitches, or even cut down on his pitches. Also with Timmy, his changeup has enormous sink and if guys could hit it, many of the hits would be ground balls, he gives up very few homers. Compare his dinger allowed totals to some other power pitchers! Timmy is Awesome, I just wonder if he gets his strength from growing his hair, and if it gets cut will he lose 5 MPH on his fastball?
But that’s a fallacy because even if you get guys to hit the ball in play within 3 or fewer pitches, a lot more of those are going to turn into baserunners than the Ks are, which means you have to end up throwing more pitches to get 3 outs anyway.
Matt Cain: He'll save children, but not the Dodger children.
"AT LAST I AM A PARENTS." - Buster
Hmm well
Let’s look at some real arguments here.
Aaron King is still my homeboy... iffy mechanics and all
McFAQ for all you newcomers out there.
GET THAT VORP AND WHIP SH!T OUTTA HERE!!!
Especially with bradleybear.
I know you nerds know NOTHING about the real game of baseball, or any other athletic endeavor requiring teamwork under physical stress.
Mr. F! | comics | art | New Nattowear | Unofficial McImage Directory
You are wrong.
Joe Martinez: You are cool.
When it's all said and done, America will be remembered for three things: The Bill of Rights, jazz, and baseball.
Timmy is Awesome, I just wonder if he gets his strength from growing his hair, and if it gets cut will he lose 5 MPH on his fastball?
Can’t argue with any of that…
by Missing Barry on Nov 23, 2009 1:30 PM PST up reply actions
There's something I've recently wondered about...
This doesn’t directly relate to the main point of the thread, but is does connect to the idea of strikeouts and their utility for a pitcher. It’s been mentioned before (and in this very discussion!) that strikeouts lead to worse pitch efficiency. It seems like there would be an easy way to test pitch efficiency – just divide total pitches in a season or career by outs made (i.e., innings pitched * 3).
I tried doing that once, but got bored after a bit and stopped. Before I stopped it looked like the really effective pitchers were throwing around 5 pitches per out, and there didn’t seem to be a substantial difference between a high K pitcher like Lincecum, and an elite groundballer like Halladay. With so many people here more knowledgeable in things like this than I am, could you tell me if this sounds right? Is this even a good method of comparison?
I'm as tall as Mel - why can't I hit 500 home runs?
I tried doing that once, but got bored after a bit and stopped.
This is the story of every stat-wallow I have ever attempted. Your method seems reasonable; the only problem would be variables like quality of competition, defense, park factors, etc.
Yeah – I was thinking that this would only be useful with pretty large sample sizes. In that case, variables like competition, defense, etc. would average out over time (in theory).
I don’t know that it would be especially useful in most cases, and certainly not as a predictive measure of any kind. It seems like it would be influenced by a lot of things that are obviously bad (walks, for example), or things that involve context, as you mentioned.
But it would be nice if, the next time somebody trotted out the “strikeout pitchers are less efficient” argument, I could respond with something like “But strikeout pitcher X, whom you say is inefficient, only used 5.16 pitches on average to get an out, whereas pitcher Y, whom you are defending as a more efficient pitcher, actually took 5.82 pitches for each out he recorded.”
I'm as tall as Mel - why can't I hit 500 home runs?
MATH IS FOR HOMOS
I know you nerds know NOTHING about the real game of baseball, or any other athletic endeavor requiring teamwork under physical stress.
Mr. F! | comics | art | New Nattowear | Unofficial McImage Directory
lets do some math here comparing 2 elite pitchers for 2009
Pitches per plate appearance, Lincecum 3.80 Carpenter 3.56
Pitches per inning Lincecum 15.3 Carpenter 13.9
Its not fair to compare a strike out pitcher who is great against an average pitcher and the same is true in reverse.
Is that part of the new healthcare plan?
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Nov 23, 2009 4:55 PM PST up reply actions
So, over nine innings, the difference is not even fifteen pitches. That’s miniscule. This may shorten Timmy’s start a by an inning, but LaRussa rides his bull-pen and Bochy doesn’t, so it probably doesn’t matter in the context of innings per outing. Plus, there is no proven link between innings pitched and pitcher injuries. On top of that, GROUND BALLS BECOME HITS AT AN APPRECIABLE RATE and can also drive in runners without becoming hits. Strike-outs cannot do that.
Joe Martinez: You are cool.
When it's all said and done, America will be remembered for three things: The Bill of Rights, jazz, and baseball.
Hah, yes. I think that part of the argument was inevitable from the beginning.
So, I decided if it was interesting enough for me to bring up, it was interesting enough to actually do. I’m lame at this, because I could’ve used a spreadsheet but didn’t because it would mean I’d have to know offhand how to do it. So, I did it the slow way.
Whatever the means, this is what I came up with:
I tallied up the number of pitches per out for a number of modern era pitchers (defined as “pitches that had pitch totals for their whole career on Baseball Reference”), and used pitchers that were of Giants-related or recent interest (Lincecum, Cain, Carpenter, Halladay, and Grienke), and pitchers famed for either longevity in games (presumably the purpose of being efficient with pitches) or historically high K rates. Thus, I included Maddux, Glavine, Livan Hernandez (not necessarily efficient, but completed a lot of games), and Tim Wakefield (just because) as possible “efficient” pitchers. I also included big strikeout guys like Randy Johnson, Pedro Martinez, and Oliver Perez (one of the higher K rates out there – I included him as an example of high Ks plus high walk rate).
The results:
Pitcher PE(pitch efficiency)
Grienke 5.34
Halladay 4.88
Lincecum 5.29
Carpenter 5.05
Maddux 4.23
Johnson 5.39
Martinez 5.00
Perez 5.82
Wakefield 5.07
Hernandez 5.36
Glavine 4.95
Cain 5.47
I'm as tall as Mel - why can't I hit 500 home runs?
Now that I look at it, I think it probably isn’t very useful without a knowledge of respective walk rates. I have a suspicion that much of those results are more a result of walks than strikeouts.
I'm as tall as Mel - why can't I hit 500 home runs?
As was noted above
I think the big thing here is going to be getting outs efficiency rather than # of pitches per plate appearance. So an PA that results in a non-out is going to drive up the number of pitches per out much more than the difference between average number of pitches per PA. If the range is between around 1 pitch per PA but the average number of pitches per PA is around 4, allowing that one extra non-out is going to count for 4 “inefficient” batters.
How do explain the discrepancy between Bradley Bear and Ott’s numbers? Otts is #pitches/out and Bradleybear’s is #pitches/PA, right?
I’d guess that Lincecum had a higher pitch/inning than Carpenter through a mix of his slightly worse WHIP and slightly higher pitches per AB.
co-dad of IshikaBOOM w/AfDC.
FIRE BOCHY FIRE MOLINA
Most sabermetric folks these days (at least in my experience) agree that pitchers don’t have a lot of control over how many hits they give up – they have some effect based on their ground ball rates and a few of the better ones seem to do a little more to repress them, but beyond that it’s all hitters and defense. Once you stop crediting pitchers for their hit rates on a season-to-season basis the only logical categories to judge a pitcher by individually are strikeouts, walks, and homers. To answer your question a little more specifically, it’s because we don’t believe in “pitchers who produce routine grounders and pop ups.”
Barry Zito: Mike Hampton with a guitar
This is also contingent on the desire to isolate the performance of the individual player as much as possible, hence ignoring win/loss records and runs allowed rates because the huge team component. I’m personally not so obsessed with taking all luck out of the equation not to take RA/9 into account a bit when it comes to awards voting.
Barry Zito: Mike Hampton with a guitar
Also, I do know that there is some debate on this even amongst the sabermetric community, and am personally not up-to-date on DIPS enough to speak to it, but I still think that most agree that the abilities of ball-in-play pitchers to avoid hits are at the very least pretty exaggerated.
Barry Zito: Mike Hampton with a guitar
Actually, at this point, most seem to agree that pitchers (especially the really good ones) do have some control over the types of BIP they allow.
Matt Cain: He'll save children, but not the Dodger children.
"AT LAST I AM A PARENTS." - Buster
Well I think the important point is the differences between pitchers is pretty small overall.
by Missing Barry on Nov 24, 2009 12:50 PM PST up reply actions
Most sabermetric folks these days (at least in my experience) agree that pitchers don’t have a lot of control over how many hits they give up – they have some effect based on their ground ball rates and a few of the better ones seem to do a little more to repress them, but beyond that it’s all hitters and defense.
This is the opposite of the truth. Pitchers have huge control over how many hits they give up. Limiting hits is the most important aspect of pitching. How do you limit hits? By preventing balls in play. It’s as simple that. If you don’t want to allow hits, strike people out. If you can’t strike people out, you will allow a lot of hits. In modern baseball, this is true 99.999% of the time. If you’re sure you can name an exception – check out his stats . You’re almost definitely wrong.
This is the only reason we care about strikeouts so much. The difference between a strikeout and an in-play out is negligible (yes, strikeouts don’t advance runners. Neither do the vast majority of in play outs, and in-play outs also cause double plays). It’s also why you should never look at H/9 when looking up minor league stats, only at K/9.
HA HA HA LOOK AT ME I'M ALL HAPPY AND STUFF NO REALLY CAN WE STOP WITH THE COOKYMAN IS SAD JOKES?
:-) :-) :-)
Timmy's K's matter
in two years he’s had 526 and donated $210,400 to charity because of that
"My friend once told me a story about San Francisco Giants pitcher Tim Lincecum. He said his cousin went out to a bar in San Francisco and saw Lincecum there. He went up to him to give him a handshake.
Lincecum refused. He didn’t want to give him a handshake. He wanted to give him a chest bump."
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Photo: Padres fan regrets letting mother capture moment with Trevor Hoffman
- Marlins agree to unretire No. 5 for Logan Morrison, who will honor his father’s favorite player
- Weatherman Derek Holland does Dallas TV
- Ask Alex: Will Julio Teheran or Matt Moore win rookie of the year?
- Ku Klux Klan, umpires and bowling: Why the minor leagues tossed out Jim Evans academy
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
