5 ms·

There's been a trend recently to put high OBP bats at leadoff regardless of their speed (see Kyle Schwarber)

by pgodzin 9y ago

jjuel 9y ago
And Schwarber as leadoff was a horrendous failure. See his .162 avg and .289 obp this year.
- pgodzin 9y ago
  Sure this year he has been terrible. But he was also the leadoff hitter much of the year he was healthy on the WS-winning Cubs last year. Other examples are Carlos Santana, George Springer, etc http://www.espn.com/blog/sweetspot/post/_/id/79308/leadoff-hitter-revolution-is-bringing-slow-power-guys-up-front http://www.espn.com/blog/sweetspot/post/_/id/79308/leadoff-h...
- spike021 9y ago
  Yet he's still in the top 5 for the All Star pick; meh.
  - pgodzin 9y ago
    All Star voting doesn't mean anything other than popularity
    - spike021 9y ago
      Exactly. That then means actual performance doesn't matter to many fans, which is unfortunate considering how interesting this kind of data is and how players use it to improve their game.
      - pgodzin 9y ago
        Of course performance matters, just not for voting for a meaningless game (that was stupidly given meaning). Schwarber isn't going to be suddenly become thrilled with how well his season is going just because he finishes fifth in ASG voting.
        spike021 9y ago
        > That then means actual performance doesn't matter to many fans of course performance matters, but you missed my point: a large amount of fans completely ignore statistical performance. This is most evident with Giants fans in particular this season who absolutely despise Hunter Strickland and say he should be kicked from the team when he's been pitching at least league average, if not better, and has been the best relief pitcher on the team. Not to mention they call him a "home run vending machine" when he's only given up 4 in the past 1.5 seasons.
        pgodzin 9y ago
        I think Giants fans would treat their players better if the team was 11 games over .500 instead of under and if their best reliever wasn't league average. I'm not saying all fans are rational, many are emotional/ignorant and act on perceived performance rather than real performance. Don't know much about Strickland's career, but if he was perfect with a 3 run lead but awful with a 1 run lead, it makes sense why fans wouldn't be thrilled despite the underlying stats. But most do care about performance, and they won't pretend like Schwarber has been good this year. His popularity is heavily reliant on his past performance, including the World Series.
        spike021 9y ago
        Nah, their complaints about Strickland happened last year as well, even into the NLDS, when he had only given up 4 home runs all year. He does well in most situations. If anything when he was still a rookie he needed to improve because he only had one pitch, but now he has a few.
        saghm 9y ago
        > a meaningless game (that was stupidly given meaning) "This time it counts!"
spike021 9y ago
I mean, it's not a terrible idea to put someone like Votto or Belt even at the top spot. These guys have very high OBPs who can work the count and coax out tons of walks. If they can get on base, that's really all that matters so the next guy in line can try to get them in.
- pgodzin 9y ago
  The theory has always been that those sluggers would be the ones driving people in, rather than counting on the guys behind to drive them in. So it's an interesting tradeoff - more people on base with worse hitters behind them who may not get them in or great hitters who are great at driving people in, but there might not be anyone on.
  - saghm 9y ago
    I remember earlier last year when the Red Sox were batting Betts, Pedroia, Bogaerts, and Ortiz as their first four and Betts was hitting a ton of home runs, my father and I thought that they go Pedroia, Bogaerts, Betts, Ortiz since Bogaerts had little power and Pedroia kept hitting into a lot of double plays. A few weeks later, they started doing Pedroia, Bogaerts, Ortiz, Betts, which was actually even better since then opposing pitchers couldn't safely walk Ortiz.

There's been a trend recently to put high OBP bats at leadoff regardless of their speed (see Kyle Schwarber)

jjuel 9y ago

And Schwarber as leadoff was a horrendous failure. See his .162 avg and .289 obp this year.

pgodzin 9y ago
Sure this year he has been terrible. But he was also the leadoff hitter much of the year he was healthy on the WS-winning Cubs last year. Other examples are Carlos Santana, George Springer, etc http://www.espn.com/blog/sweetspot/post/_/id/79308/leadoff-hitter-revolution-is-bringing-slow-power-guys-up-front http://www.espn.com/blog/sweetspot/post/_/id/79308/leadoff-h...
spike021 9y ago
Yet he's still in the top 5 for the All Star pick; meh.
- pgodzin 9y ago
  All Star voting doesn't mean anything other than popularity
  - spike021 9y ago
    Exactly. That then means actual performance doesn't matter to many fans, which is unfortunate considering how interesting this kind of data is and how players use it to improve their game.
    - pgodzin 9y ago
      Of course performance matters, just not for voting for a meaningless game (that was stupidly given meaning). Schwarber isn't going to be suddenly become thrilled with how well his season is going just because he finishes fifth in ASG voting.
      - spike021 9y ago
        > That then means actual performance doesn't matter to many fans of course performance matters, but you missed my point: a large amount of fans completely ignore statistical performance. This is most evident with Giants fans in particular this season who absolutely despise Hunter Strickland and say he should be kicked from the team when he's been pitching at least league average, if not better, and has been the best relief pitcher on the team. Not to mention they call him a "home run vending machine" when he's only given up 4 in the past 1.5 seasons.
        pgodzin 9y ago
        I think Giants fans would treat their players better if the team was 11 games over .500 instead of under and if their best reliever wasn't league average. I'm not saying all fans are rational, many are emotional/ignorant and act on perceived performance rather than real performance. Don't know much about Strickland's career, but if he was perfect with a 3 run lead but awful with a 1 run lead, it makes sense why fans wouldn't be thrilled despite the underlying stats. But most do care about performance, and they won't pretend like Schwarber has been good this year. His popularity is heavily reliant on his past performance, including the World Series.
        spike021 9y ago
        Nah, their complaints about Strickland happened last year as well, even into the NLDS, when he had only given up 4 home runs all year. He does well in most situations. If anything when he was still a rookie he needed to improve because he only had one pitch, but now he has a few.
      - saghm 9y ago
        > a meaningless game (that was stupidly given meaning) "This time it counts!"

spike021 9y ago

I mean, it's not a terrible idea to put someone like Votto or Belt even at the top spot. These guys have very high OBPs who can work the count and coax out tons of walks. If they can get on base, that's really all that matters so the next guy in line can try to get them in.

pgodzin 9y ago
The theory has always been that those sluggers would be the ones driving people in, rather than counting on the guys behind to drive them in. So it's an interesting tradeoff - more people on base with worse hitters behind them who may not get them in or great hitters who are great at driving people in, but there might not be anyone on.
- saghm 9y ago
  I remember earlier last year when the Red Sox were batting Betts, Pedroia, Bogaerts, and Ortiz as their first four and Betts was hitting a ton of home runs, my father and I thought that they go Pedroia, Bogaerts, Betts, Ortiz since Bogaerts had little power and Pedroia kept hitting into a lot of double plays. A few weeks later, they started doing Pedroia, Bogaerts, Ortiz, Betts, which was actually even better since then opposing pitchers couldn't safely walk Ortiz.