Christian Vazquez

[Kimmi]

Where does this all this leave the corrections of the BABip gods that we know are coming, such as with Leon last year?

 

I think that BABIP kind of makes the point of streaks being due to randomness or 'luck'. And we know that regression back to overall talent level is coming.

[a700hitter]

I can live with that. If there is an identifiable reason for the slump, then until it is corrected, the slump is likely to continue.

 

Again, I was thinking in terms of hot or cold streaks that seem to come out of nowhere.

 

Why does a player have an 8 for 10 streak with no identifiable reason? A lot of randomness. Therefore, there is little predictive value.

If slumps were so easily identifiable, they would not be so vexing and players would straighten themselves out pretty quickly. Slumps and hot streaks are not solely the result of finding holes or finding gloves. Slumps occur when a player is squaring up the ball less often than usual. If a hitter goes 0-3 but squares up 3 at'em balls, he goes to the ballpark feeling good about himself the next day. If he gets his pitch and hits a dribbler and two foul pop ups, he knows that he is having a problem getting the barrel on the ball, and he needs to figure out why. Randomness will not break him out of it.

[Kimmi]

They may seem to come out of nowhere to you, but it is more likely the result of an adjustment and work.

 

Strat-o-matic was designed to simulate past baseball statistics. Baseball doesn't follow the laws of strat-o-matic. Talent, adjustments and effort define the outcomes.

 

I disagree. Many streaks are random streaks, especially the hot streaks. Or does an adjustment and hard work only make a player better for a week?

[a700hitter]

I can live with that. If there is an identifiable reason for the slump, then until it is corrected, the slump is likely to continue.

 

Again, I was thinking in terms of hot or cold streaks that seem to come out of nowhere.

 

Why does a player have an 8 for 10 streak with no identifiable reason? A lot of randomness. Therefore, there is little predictive value.

Just because the streaks seem to you to come out of nowhere is not proof that there is no reason. It is a game of constant adjustments. If a hitter goes on a prolonged streak, it is the result of him finding a successful mechanical approach and mental approach to his ABs. Some of it can be embellished by luck of finding more grass than gloves, but often a guy in a hot streak is even making hard hit outs. Sooner or later the pitchers figure out a weakness, whether it is a location or a sequence and the streak ends.

[a700hitter]

I disagree. Many streaks are random streaks, especially the hot streaks. Or does an adjustment and hard work only make a player better for a week?

Yep, that can happen. The pitchers can adjust that quickly. If they notice that a guy has moved up on the plate by a couple of inches and is making good contact to the pull side, the pitchers will adjust very quickly. Pedro would adjust to the batter within an AB. He would notice the slightest adjustment to foot position, hand position and bat angle, and he would adjust to counter.

 

Anyway, you have exploded your whole premise that there is no such thing as a hot hand.

[S5Dewey]

If slumps were so easily identifiable, they would not be so vexing and players would straighten themselves out pretty quickly. Slumps and hot streaks are not solely the result of finding holes or finding gloves. Slumps occur when a player is squaring up the ball less often than usual. If a hitter goes 0-3 but squares up 3 at'em balls, he goes to the ballpark feeling good about himself the next day. If he gets his pitch and hits a dribbler and two foul pop ups, he knows that he is having a problem getting the barrel on the ball, and he needs to figure out why. Randomness will not break him out of it.

 

That's exactly how I handled slumps. When I had two or three 0'fer days I would tell myself to stop trying to hit the ball where they ain't - just hit it hard *someplace*. And within a day or two I was hitting solidly again.

 

Then when I was coaching I told players the same thing - when you're in a slump and can't figure out what's causing it the first thing to try is hitting the ball hard *someplace*. If that doesn't work we'll dig into your swing a bit. And it worked.

Edited December 30, 2016 by S5Dewey

[notin]

If slumps were so easily identifiable, they would not be so vexing and players would straighten themselves out pretty quickly. Slumps and hot streaks are not solely the result of finding holes or finding gloves. Slumps occur when a player is squaring up the ball less often than usual. If a hitter goes 0-3 but squares up 3 at'em balls, he goes to the ballpark feeling good about himself the next day. If he gets his pitch and hits a dribbler and two foul pop ups, he knows that he is having a problem getting the barrel on the ball, and he needs to figure out why. Randomness will not break him out of it.

 

Randomness is a huge factor plenty of times. When I used to coach, I'd remind the kids that you can do everything right and still not have it work out. Next time you're watching MLB Tonight and they do the Web Gems highlighting the fielders, sometime try and take note of the hitters. I remember one year being shocked at how many times Mark Kotsay was featured on Web Gems as the hitter being "gemmed". What adjustment was he supposed to make? Hit balls even tougher to make a play on?

[notin]

Just because the streaks seem to you to come out of nowhere is not proof that there is no reason. It is a game of constant adjustments. If a hitter goes on a prolonged streak, it is the result of him finding a successful mechanical approach and mental approach to his ABs.

 

The mental approach I agree with. Baseball players might be the most superstitious people on the planet.

 

But sometimes guys are lucky or unlucky. And sometimes it is blatantly noticeable and should be very obvious. On BDC I noticed a couple players whose stats clearly were not living up to their play. And while many were deriding these guys (Nava and Buchholz), I predicted bold turnarounds with startling accuracy and tried not to pat myself on the back for how incredibly I nailed them both. (I failed then and clearly still am.)

 

That was all done with noticing good at bats that should have produced more hits and crunching BABIP numbers. Or less hits, when I did the same thing for Buchholz...

[a700hitter]

Randomness is a huge factor plenty of times. When I used to coach, I'd remind the kids that you can do everything right and still not have it work out. Next time you're watching MLB Tonight and they do the Web Gems highlighting the fielders, sometime try and take note of the hitters. I remember one year being shocked at how many times Mark Kotsay was featured on Web Gems as the hitter being "gemmed". What adjustment was he supposed to make? Hit balls even tougher to make a play on?

I never said that randomness had nothing to do with outcomes, but randomness is not the explanation for all hot or cold streaks. It probably is not the primary reason for most hot or cold streaks.

[notin]

I never said that randomness had nothing to do with outcomes, but randomness is not the explanation for all hot or cold streaks. It probably is not the primary reason for most hot or cold streaks.

 

While I don't know if is provable, I think randomness plays a larger part than you realize. Sure players make adjustments, and sometimes these work. Of course some of them are nonsensical. ("These batting gloves have NO HITS LEFT IN THEM.") With a lot of players, superstition and routines are big factors. But really, if Wade Boggs switched to beef and it got him out of a slump, would we really credit the beef? Or just realize the slump was probably bad luck?

[a700hitter]

While I don't know if is provable, I think randomness plays a larger part than you realize. Sure players make adjustments, and sometimes these work. Of course some of them are nonsensical. ("These batting gloves have NO HITS LEFT IN THEM.") With a lot of players, superstition and routines are big factors. But really, if Wade Boggs switched to beef and it got him out of a slump, would we really credit the beef? Or just realize the slump was probably bad luck?

Some hot streaks are definitely the result of adjustments significant or not, and some slumps are due to falling into bad habits or just fatigue. The premise that the hot hand doesn't exist is just not true. Edited December 30, 2016 by a700hitter

[notin]

Some hot streaks are definitely the result of adjustments significant or not, and some slumps are due to falling into bad habits or just fatigue. The premise that the hot hand doesn't exist is just not true.

 

What were your thoughts on the season Sandy Leon had last year?

[Beantowne]

I disagree. Many streaks are random streaks, especially the hot streaks. Or does an adjustment and hard work only make a player better for a week?

 

what separates the 300 hitter from the 200 hitter is the ability to square the ball up more frequently...which is a god given talent..Teddy Ballgame said it best...the most difficult thing to do in sports is to hit a round ball with a round bat, squarely.

 

i would also contend that the amount of work it takes for a .300 hitter to maintain his swing does not differ from that of a 200 hitter. BP is where they work on honing mechanics of their swing. During the season both will have peaks and valley and the cause of both is likely the same. When they're hot they're likely seeing the ball better, barreling up balls and hitting line drives with greater frequency...when they're in a slump it's likely due to them not seeing the ball which in most cases leads to them swinging at balls out of the zone, which then leads to mechanical flaw in their swings. As such there's no way to predict when either will go into a funk or get "hot"...the reality is it's part of the game.

[oldtimer]

What were your thoughts on the season Sandy Leon had last year?

 

He struck out 23 of his last 75 PA's, many times not swinging at balls down the middle with runners on base and taking a called third strike. That is not bad luck, it is bad hitting. It drove me crazy to watch him. The thing is earlier in the year he was hitting hard most times to the plate and seemed to lose confidence. Was he physically or mentally exhausted? Has he reverted to a 220 hitter? Due to his weight and lack of speed, will he hit into a lot of DP's? Hard to guess as the Sox have him as the primary catcher now, he seems like a high risk and I would keep my options open by not trading either of the other possibilities.

[Beantowne]

What were your thoughts on the season Sandy Leon had last year?

 

if you look back in time how many Sandy Leon's have there been in baseball history...As such there's no explanation...the kid got hot, stayed hot then returned to his norm...all the while posting his career year.

[Bellhorn04]

if you look back in time how many Sandy Leon's have there been in baseball history...As such there's no explanation...the kid got hot, stayed hot then returned to his norm...all the while posting his career year.

 

How about Iglesias in 2013 - he hit only .202 in 33 games in Pawtucket - then called up to Boston where he hit .403 in his first 44 games.

[Bellhorn04]

With a baseball hitter you've got a lot of factors that can affect their performance - mechanics, how they feel physically and mentally, and luck.

[mvp 78]

I think luck is the smallest part of the equation. If a guy is squaring up the ball and hitting line drives, he's more likely to get on a hot streak or pull himself out of a cold one.

[Kimmi]

If slumps were so easily identifiable, they would not be so vexing and players would straighten themselves out pretty quickly. Slumps and hot streaks are not solely the result of finding holes or finding gloves. Slumps occur when a player is squaring up the ball less often than usual. If a hitter goes 0-3 but squares up 3 at'em balls, he goes to the ballpark feeling good about himself the next day. If he gets his pitch and hits a dribbler and two foul pop ups, he knows that he is having a problem getting the barrel on the ball, and he needs to figure out why. Randomness will not break him out of it.

 

I didn't say that slumps were easily identifiable. I'm the one saying that more often than not, slumps are the result of mere randomness. In other words, there is no identifiable reason for the slump other than flukiness.

 

There is enough video and data available to realize this. A player's mechanics have not changed. A player's line drive rates, swings outside the zone, strike outs rates, etc. have not changed. Nothing has changed outside of balls not falling in for hits.

 

I was recently reading about Bryce Harper's slump last year. The largest reason for his slump is that the opposing pitchers he faced had an uncanny streak of making excellent pitches against him. They weren't even necessarily great pitchers, or weren't even necessarily pitching great games. That is randomness.

[Hugh2]

Truly there are many who are "fooled by randomness"

[Kimmi]

Randomness is a huge factor plenty of times. When I used to coach, I'd remind the kids that you can do everything right and still not have it work out. Next time you're watching MLB Tonight and they do the Web Gems highlighting the fielders, sometime try and take note of the hitters. I remember one year being shocked at how many times Mark Kotsay was featured on Web Gems as the hitter being "gemmed". What adjustment was he supposed to make? Hit balls even tougher to make a play on?

 

Randomness is a much larger factor in baseball than most people realize. It may be an unlucky bounce. It may be an umpire having a larger zone than normal. It might be a fly ball out to the deepest part of Petco Park that would have been a HR anywhere else. It might be wind blowing in. It might be a lefty hitter facing an unusual amount of tough lefty pitchers. It might be the batter missing his pitch by one centimeter. I could go on and on.

 

Most streaks are due to randomness over a way too small sample size.

 

If a streak becomes prolonged, then I would agree that other factors are probably playing into it, like an injury or a batter altering his approach at the plate because he's pressing.

[Kimmi]

I never said that randomness had nothing to do with outcomes, but randomness is not the explanation for all hot or cold streaks. It probably is not the primary reason for most hot or cold streaks.

 

Nobody ever said that randomness is the explanation for all hot or cold streaks.

 

I would say that it is the primary reason for most hot or cold streaks of the 0-20 nature.

[mvp 78]

Nobody ever said that randomness is the explanation for all hot or cold streaks.

 

I would say that it is the primary reason for most hot or cold streaks of the 0-20 nature.

 

To me, an 0-20 streak is barely a blip on the radar. That's just a 4-5 game sample. I don't consider streaks to be anything of note until the batter is about two weeks in. I would agree that randomness would cause a bad homestand. However, it's more likely due to something else once you're 10 games in.

[Kimmi]

Some hot streaks are definitely the result of adjustments significant or not, and some slumps are due to falling into bad habits or just fatigue. The premise that the hot hand doesn't exist is just not true.

 

The premise of the hot hand fallacy is that if someone has success in a random event, then that success is likely to continue. If a player makes an adjustment, then his success is not random. If a player is injured, then his slump is not random. Again, my argument was not about those types of identifiable streaks.

 

The hot or cold streaks that are random, which most are, are the ones that fall into the hot hand fallacy. If a player is streaking for no reason other than luck, then his chances of getting a hit in his next at bat are based overwhelmingly on his overall talent and the talent of the opposing pitcher, not on what he has done in his last 20 at bats.

[Kimmi]

what separates the 300 hitter from the 200 hitter is the ability to square the ball up more frequently...which is a god given talent..Teddy Ballgame said it best...the most difficult thing to do in sports is to hit a round ball with a round bat, squarely.

 

i would also contend that the amount of work it takes for a .300 hitter to maintain his swing does not differ from that of a 200 hitter. BP is where they work on honing mechanics of their swing. During the season both will have peaks and valley and the cause of both is likely the same. When they're hot they're likely seeing the ball better, barreling up balls and hitting line drives with greater frequency...when they're in a slump it's likely due to them not seeing the ball which in most cases leads to them swinging at balls out of the zone, which then leads to mechanical flaw in their swings. As such there's no way to predict when either will go into a funk or get "hot"...the reality is it's part of the game.

 

I don't disagree with most of what you're saying.

 

The statement I bolded is kind of my point. There's no way to predict when a streak will begin, and there is also no way to predict when a streak will end, or more to the point, that the streak will continue for another at bat.

 

That said, there are ways to predict that someone is having good or bad luck, and that they will regress to their norm.

[Kimmi]

To me, an 0-20 streak is barely a blip on the radar. That's just a 4-5 game sample. I don't consider streaks to be anything of note until the batter is about two weeks in. I would agree that randomness would cause a bad homestand. However, it's more likely due to something else once you're 10 games in.

 

The original question posed was about an 0-20 streak. The exact type that is largely due to randomness over a much too small sample size. I would venture to say that an 2-30 or 5-40 streak is also due to randomness. If the streak extends beyond that, at some point, I would agree that other factors, such as falling into a bad habit in an attempt to end the streak, start to take over.

[notin]

He struck out 23 of his last 75 PA's, many times not swinging at balls down the middle with runners on base and taking a called third strike. That is not bad luck, it is bad hitting. It drove me crazy to watch him. The thing is earlier in the year he was hitting hard most times to the plate and seemed to lose confidence. Was he physically or mentally exhausted? Has he reverted to a 220 hitter? Due to his weight and lack of speed, will he hit into a lot of DP's? Hard to guess as the Sox have him as the primary catcher now, he seems like a high risk and I would keep my options open by not trading either of the other possibilities.

 

It's really not hard to contend Leon is a bad hitter who spent a big chunk of last year just being very lucky. At the time he was hit, his BABIP was an absurdly high. .440. No one gets hits on 44% of the balls they put in play based on skill...

[Emp9]

I didn't say that slumps were easily identifiable. I'm the one saying that more often than not, slumps are the result of mere randomness. In other words, there is no identifiable reason for the slump other than flukiness.

 

There is enough video and data available to realize this. A player's mechanics have not changed. A player's line drive rates, swings outside the zone, strike outs rates, etc. have not changed. Nothing has changed outside of balls not falling in for hits.

 

I was recently reading about Bryce Harper's slump last year. The largest reason for his slump is that the opposing pitchers he faced had an uncanny streak of making excellent pitches against him. They weren't even necessarily great pitchers, or weren't even necessarily pitching great games. That is randomness.

 

The beginning of Harper's slump started when he faced the Cubs in May. They walked him 13 times that series (even one game 6 times). Harper had very little protection in the batting order. Cubbies swept them. Other teams followed suite. He could barely get a pitch to hit, and if he did I think he was just pressing to make something happen.

[S5Dewey]

I agree that streaks are random in that it's impossible to predict their start or finish. However, once they start they do tend to perpetuate themselves. Why does a basketball player suddenly go on a hot streak where the rim looks to him like it's the size of a 55-gallon drum? Why does Tom Brady go 0'fur his first six passes and then go 12-12? What happened to Leon that make him go on that streak last year? We don't know, but that doesn't mean we should attribute it to "randomness", which is just another way of saying that we don't know. It's not voodoo. SOMETHING happened. The fact that we can't quantify that 'something' doesn't mean it has no cause.

 

It's ok to say that we can't explain it or quantify it, but it sure does happen!

[a700hitter]

The premise of the hot hand fallacy is that if someone has success in a random event, then that success is likely to continue. If a player makes an adjustment, then his success is not random. If a player is injured, then his slump is not random. Again, my argument was not about those types of identifiable streaks.

 

The hot or cold streaks that are random, which most are, are the ones that fall into the hot hand fallacy. If a player is streaking for no reason other than luck, then his chances of getting a hit in his next at bat are based overwhelmingly on his overall talent and the talent of the opposing pitcher, not on what he has done in his last 20 at bats.

Your theory that there is no such thing as a hot hand becomes a tautology when you add if it is random. It is a fallacy, because you have no idea which streaks are due to randomness and which are due physical reasons whether they be physical or mental approach. Saying that there is no such thing as the "hot hand" is pure nonsense. Thankfully, Matheny apparently followed that theory as Papi continued to torch his team at a .700 clip while no one else on the team was squaring up the ball. Thankfully AL pitchers continued to pitch to Yaz in 1967, but I don't think they though he was randoming them to death.