Sox hitting??

[Maxbialystock]

Of course the managers aren't stupid and I have never even hinted at such.

 

Baseball managers have done certain things certain ways because that's the way it's always been done, with no proof whatsoever that it was the correct or the best way to do those things. Those decisions are now being challenged. I understand completely that those who have been around the game for a long time do not like it.

 

As far as OBP goes, the 'out' is the most precious commodity in baseball. Avoiding making outs, therefore, is a valuable skill. No one said that a batter has to do that by taking strike 1 down the middle of the plate.

 

Actually, I was mostly agreeing with you. I had always thought the 3d hitter was the best one because of the examples I cited, but stats seem to be telling us otherwise--just as they tell us you can really go after pull hitters with bold shifts, which today everyone uses--a lot.

 

But my other point is that sometimes your use of stats can become slavish. Thus when Sox hitters take too many pitches hoping for a walk or to just up the pitch count, they can be counterproductive.

Edited July 6, 2017 by Maxbialystock

[Slasher9]

i'm twitching right now. does this apply to 11U? we have a pretty big tournament in Branchburg NJ this weekend. right now i'm unsure if i should bat Stoy (my best hitter) in his usual #3 spot or if i should switch him to leadoff.... I'm not trolling, i'm honestly doubting myself.

[moonslav59]

Naw, just numbers wise, who hits the most w/ two outs? Doesn't have to be clutch, it wld include 2-out hits that don't amount to anything.

 

Eck said I think Monday? That Pedroia has been the most "clutch" hitter in baseball (believe it or not) , but I can't remember if he said going back august of '16 or august of '15. I don't want to open pandora's clutch hitting box here. Lol

 

I like the late & close stat to show who has done the best when needed. Some prefer High Leverage. Some prefer the 2 out RISP stat. Here are the Sox numbers in recent years:

 

2017:

Late & Close (almost exactly the same as 2016)

(Team: .729)

.954 Betts

.838 Bogey

.817 JBJ

.816 HRam

.801 Beni

.762 Pedey

.708 Moreland

.697 Young

.670 Leon

.426 Vaz

 

High Leverage (again, way better than 2016)

(Team: .768)

1.102 Betts

.957 Moreland

.953 JBJ

.930 Pedey

.918 Bogey

.764 Leon

.612 Beni

.571 HRam

.348 Vaz

 

2 out RISP (some awesome numbers here)

(Team: .806)

1.178 Leon

1.133 beni

1.052 Pedey

1.000 Bogey

.996 Betts

.971 Pablo

.895 marrero

.804 Vaz

.748 JBJ

.611 HRam

.603 Moreland

 

2016

Late & Close (Team .730)

.981 Vaz

.903 Ortiz

.820 Betts

.804 Pedey

.781 HRam

.768 Bogey

.749 Shaw

.705 JBJ

.695 Young

.421 Leon

.368 Holt

 

High Leverage (Team .774)

1.024 Ortiz

.979 Beni

.969 Pedey

.916 Shaw

.896 Bogey

.812 betts

.782 HRam

.629 JBJ

 

2 Outs RISP (team: .826)

1.264 Betts

1.046 Shaw

1.016 Ortiz

.988 HRam

.978 Beni

.890 Young

.834 JBJ

.719 Pedey

.655 Bogey

.578 Holt

 

2015 (I guess this is all Ben's fault)

 

Late & Close (.654 team)

1.311 JBJ

.871 Bogey

.825 Betts

.759 Ortiz (Ben must have told Papi to slump here)

 

High Leverage (.686 team)

.988 JBJ

.928 Bogey

.832 Betts

.767 Ortiz

.623 Pedey

 

2 outs RISP (.788 team)

1.317 Castillo

1.289 JBJ

1.027 Bogey

.900 Holt

.894 Ortiz

.804 Betts

.780 Pedey

.628 Pablo

.572 HRam

[Maxbialystock]

I like the late & close stat to show who has done the best when needed. Some prefer High Leverage. Some prefer the 2 out RISP stat. Here are the Sox numbers in recent years:

 

2017:

Late & Close (almost exactly the same as 2016)

(Team: .729)

.954 Betts

.838 Bogey

.817 JBJ

.816 HRam

.801 Beni

.762 Pedey

.708 Moreland

.697 Young

.670 Leon

.426 Vaz

 

High Leverage (again, way better than 2016)

(Team: .768)

1.102 Betts

.957 Moreland

.953 JBJ

.930 Pedey

.918 Bogey

.764 Leon

.612 Beni

.571 HRam

.348 Vaz

 

2 out RISP (some awesome numbers here)

(Team: .806)

1.178 Leon

1.133 beni

1.052 Pedey

1.000 Bogey

.996 Betts

.971 Pablo

.895 marrero

.804 Vaz

.748 JBJ

.611 HRam

.603 Moreland

 

2016

Late & Close (Team .730)

.981 Vaz

.903 Ortiz

.820 Betts

.804 Pedey

.781 HRam

.768 Bogey

.749 Shaw

.705 JBJ

.695 Young

.421 Leon

.368 Holt

 

High Leverage (Team .774)

1.024 Ortiz

.979 Beni

.969 Pedey

.916 Shaw

.896 Bogey

.812 betts

.782 HRam

.629 JBJ

 

2 Outs RISP (team: .826)

1.264 Betts

1.046 Shaw

1.016 Ortiz

.988 HRam

.978 Beni

.890 Young

.834 JBJ

.719 Pedey

.655 Bogey

.578 Holt

 

2015 (I guess this is all Ben's fault)

 

Late & Close (.654 team)

1.311 JBJ

.871 Bogey

.825 Betts

.759 Ortiz (Ben must have told Papi to slump here)

 

High Leverage (.686 team)

.988 JBJ

.928 Bogey

.832 Betts

.767 Ortiz

.623 Pedey

 

2 outs RISP (.788 team)

1.317 Castillo

1.289 JBJ

1.027 Bogey

.900 Holt

.894 Ortiz

.804 Betts

.780 Pedey

.628 Pablo

.572 HRam

 

Some really interesting numbers in there. Thanks.

[Kimmi]

Okay, this hints at any other position in the top 5--not all positions as you stated earlier.

 

I am pretty sure it's all positions. I'll look for the quote.

[moonslav59]

I am pretty sure it's all positions. I'll look for the quote.

 

I'm still not sure why the 2 outs thing is so important.

 

To me, what slot comes up the most with men on base or men in scoring positions matters more than just with 2 outs.

 

My guess is the one slot comes up a lot more times with no men on base or just a man on 1st base over a full season as compared to the 3 slot.

[Kimmi]

You're taking this far too personally. Back on the old BDC thread I had a tag line of "We don't see things as they are. We see things as we are", and that applies here.

 

There are several of us here who have had a lot of experience in playing and coaching and we are all about intangibles - hunches and experience, if you will - because sometimes the intangibles work.

OTOH you are all about the numbers and what they prove.

 

What you hear from us is no less disrespectful and condescending than what we hear from you when we are "corrected' by being told that 'statistics show...'.

 

I'd guess that there are over 200 years of collective experience here and we expect to be respected for the knowledge we have, and that's something we don't seem to be getting.

 

As I've said before, if baseball were all about statistics we wouldn't have to have playoffs. We could just plug each player and situation into a computer and the computer would give us the winner of each game, right up through the WS.

 

It's possible that the Sox with their offense would have won the WS last year if we'd gone that route, but we didn't and look where that got us! :-(

 

Sorry, but my disagreeing with you and/or my posting stats that go against your opinion is not being disrespectful. If you interpret it that way, that's on you, not me. I am allowed to voice my opinions and post stats to back them up, which is all I'm doing, regardless of how much others disagree with it. I may voice my opinions strongly, but I am doing so respectfully. There is no disrespect in my posts, only conviction.

 

OTOH, there really is only one intent behind mockery, and it's rather clear what that intent is.

 

As I've told you many times before, but you choose to conveniently ignore because it serves your purpose, is that I'm not all about the stats.

 

When you guys can debate and discuss baseball with me on an adult level, bring it on. But I have no use or time for these 3rd grade antics and won't comment or respond to them again.

[Bellhorn04]

I'm still not sure why the 2 outs thing is so important.

 

To me, what slot comes up the most with men on base or men in scoring positions matters more than just with 2 outs.

 

My guess is the one slot comes up a lot more times with no men on base or just a man on 1st base over a full season as compared to the 3 slot.

 

Because you're only looking at RBI rather than total runs produced.

[Kimmi]

I'm still not sure why the 2 outs thing is so important.

 

To me, what slot comes up the most with men on base or men in scoring positions matters more than just with 2 outs.

 

My guess is the one slot comes up a lot more times with no men on base or just a man on 1st base over a full season as compared to the 3 slot.

 

The two out thing matters because a runner is a lot less likely to score if he gets on base with 2 outs then when he gets on base with 0 outs or 1 out. If there are already 2 outs in the inning, the run expectancy is much lower.

 

The one spot probably does come up to bat the most with 0 men on, but he also probably comes up the most with 0 outs. If he can get on with 0 outs, there's a far better chance of him scoring.

[S5Dewey]

Sorry, but my disagreeing with you and/or my posting stats that go against your opinion is not being disrespectful. If you interpret it that way, that's on you, not me. I am allowed to voice my opinions and post stats to back them up, which is all I'm doing, regardless of how much others disagree with it. I may voice my opinions strongly, but I am doing so respectfully. There is no disrespect in my posts, only conviction.

 

OTOH, there really is only one intent behind mockery, and it's rather clear what that intent is.

 

As I've told you many times before, but you choose to conveniently ignore because it serves your purpose, is that I'm not all about the stats.

 

When you guys can debate and discuss baseball with me on an adult level, bring it on. But I have no use or time for these 3rd grade antics and won't comment or respond to them again.

 

That sounds fair. Respect goes both ways.

[Emp9]

Sorry, but my disagreeing with you and/or my posting stats that go against your opinion is not being disrespectful. If you interpret it that way, that's on you, not me. I am allowed to voice my opinions and post stats to back them up, which is all I'm doing, regardless of how much others disagree with it. I may voice my opinions strongly, but I am doing so respectfully. There is no disrespect in my posts, only conviction.

 

OTOH, there really is only one intent behind mockery, and it's rather clear what that intent is.

 

As I've told you many times before, but you choose to conveniently ignore because it serves your purpose, is that I'm not all about the stats.

 

When you guys can debate and discuss baseball with me on an adult level, bring it on. But I have no use or time for these 3rd grade antics and won't comment or respond to them again.

 

I think you're assuming too much and I don't remember making any comment I wouldn't normally make. If offense was taken, I apologize. You're a good poster and time & time again exhibit a much needed sense of calm in a storm so to speak. But let's move on. I know we can agree on this: 4th is where Betts should be batting in the lineup. Your numbers show it. Moon's numbers show it. So hopefully we see that happen soon.

[a700hitter]

Like I said before, statheads are just humorless.

[cp176]

You (and that is the collective you) are mocking me and my opinions in a feeble attempt to discredit what I'm saying. I find it disrespectful and condescending. I get it, it's what people resort to when that's all they have. Excuse me if I expect better from you guys.

 

Don't worry, I'm not losing any sleep over it. Carry on.

 

Believe it or not - i respond to you.

[Maxbialystock]

Maybe the movie Moneyball poisoned my mind, but I have to say I think the stats guys have come up with some pretty good numbers to mostly refute those hunches, etc based on experience.

 

What I do think is sometimes ignored is a phrase Clausewitz used--"the enemy reacts." That means that for every new really great stat and with it a great new tactic, there will inevitably be a reaction by thoughtful managers to counter that tactic.

 

My favorite--it's becoming a hobby horse I ride incessantly--is the propensity of Sox hitters to take the first pitch because Bill James--and Billy Beane in Moneyball--says that a walk is as good as a hit, to say nothing of the benefit of increasing the opposing starter's pitch count. The problem is that opposing pitchers, managers, and pitching coaches all know this propensity and consequently like to throw strikes on the first pitch to get ahead in the count. This do this with great regularity against Sox hitters.

 

Another example is those bold shifts all managers now use with some regularity. Other managers, however, still have the opportunity to tell their hitters to bunt more or just to hit more to the opposite side of the infield. What I have read,however, is that hitters have decided to hit over those shifts by getting more loft into their swings.

 

I think Kimmi makes a good case for taking a hard look at which hitter goes where in the lineup and that statistical analysis can inform that thought process. Just maybe, for example, our best hitters should bat 1st and 2d and 4th and 5th. On the other hand, I think it is also true that some players are more comfortable and hence more effective in unusual parts of the lineup. That said, however, I suspect this particular lineup, which no longer has a huge bat (like Ortiz's), could probably benefit from moving a couple or so players around.

[Bellhorn04]

What I do think is sometimes ignored is a phrase Clausewitz used--"the enemy reacts." That means that for every new really great stat and with it a great new tactic, there will inevitably be a reaction by thoughtful managers to counter that tactic.

 

My favorite--it's becoming a hobby horse I ride incessantly--is the propensity of Sox hitters to take the first pitch because Bill James--and Billy Beane in Moneyball--says that a walk is as good as a hit, to say nothing of the benefit of increasing the opposing starter's pitch count. The problem is that opposing pitchers, managers, and pitching coaches all know this propensity and consequently like to throw strikes on the first pitch to get ahead in the count. This do this with great regularity against Sox hitters.

 

Another example is those bold shifts all managers now use with some regularity. Other managers, however, still have the opportunity to tell their hitters to bunt more or just to hit more to the opposite side of the infield. What I have read,however, is that hitters have decided to hit over those shifts by getting more loft into their swings.

 

All good points Max. Baseball is indeed a game of enemies reacting.

[bosoxmal]

I guess we have won close games this year when Mookie wasn't in the mix---but I can't remember them.

[oldtimer]

Over the last four games we have had 3 where we garnered 5 hits, 3 hits and 3 hits. It is possible to face exceptional pitching from time to time, but it wasn't really that solid in all of these games. Is it our approach? Is it a lack of talent? Something is very wrong when we squander good pitching performances in this way. I know I am frustrated after watching the game today. Our options are primarily to do with 3rd base. Devers or in trade. That won't solve the other weaknesses though. At least it would be a step in the right direction.

[moonslav59]

Over the last four games we have had 3 where we garnered 5 hits, 3 hits and 3 hits. It is possible to face exceptional pitching from time to time, but it wasn't really that solid in all of these games. Is it our approach? Is it a lack of talent? Something is very wrong when we squander good pitching performances in this way. I know I am frustrated after watching the game today. Our options are primarily to do with 3rd base. Devers or in trade. That won't solve the other weaknesses though. At least it would be a step in the right direction.

 

There's not always an answer to every game we fail to muster enough offense.

 

Baseball is a game that is not easily explained. Terrible teams can beat excellent teams on any given day.

 

Good hitter look awful at times. Bad hitters look good at times.

 

We lost a tight low-scoring game today. Tomorrow we may win or lose 12-11.

 

That's baseball. It can be maddening, but it is the best game in the world.

 

[oldtimer]

There's not always an answer to every game we fail to muster enough offense.

 

Baseball is a game that is not easily explained. Terrible teams can beat excellent teams on any given day.

 

Good hitter look awful at times. Bad hitters look good at times.

 

We lost a tight low-scoring game today. Tomorrow we may win or lose 12-11.

 

That's baseball. It can be maddening, but it is the best game in the world.

 

 

Any one game can go the way of poor hitting and scoring. When it starts to be a defining situation for a team, then you have to ask yourself why. Earlier in the season, we had that trend. Thats to some extent why this thread was put together. That is also why when we start to go back into that MO that it becomes a concern.

[OH FOY]

Give the Rays credit, and I think they are going to be tough going forward. If Cobb, gets back into form, if this kid Faria is for real, Ordorizzi, and Archer, along with Snell. That's not a bad staff. After us best in AL East. I know a lot of if's.

Boxberger coming back is a huge asset, even as a Set-up guy.

Their young nothing to lose.

Don't count them out, if their Pitching improves.

[moonslav59]

Any one game can go the way of poor hitting and scoring. When it starts to be a defining situation for a team, then you have to ask yourself why. Earlier in the season, we had that trend. Thats to some extent why this thread was put together. That is also why when we start to go back into that MO that it becomes a concern.

 

Every team, even the Astros have bad games and bad stretches.

 

I don't ask myself why after every 2-3 bad game stretch. I chalk it up to being just what happens in baseball.

 

We have never lost 4 games in a row. That's one great MO to continue.

 

I could be wrong, but I get the feeling you'll never be happy unless we score 5 runs 9 out of 10 games and allow 0-3 runs 9 out of 10 games. That ain't ever going to happen with any team in MLB.

 

We have a damn good team on paper, and we're doing fine so far this year. I'm not going to freak out over 3 low scoring games out of our last 4 games. I'm not going to look for some hidden trend or message I need to learn to better understand this team and try and gauge where we're going to end up this year based on a few tiny sample sizes where we did poorly.

 

 

 

[oldtimer]

Every team, even the Astros have bad games and bad stretches.

 

I don't ask myself why after every 2-3 bad game stretch. I chalk it up to being just what happens in baseball.

 

We have never lost 4 games in a row. That's one great MO to continue.

 

I could be wrong, but I get the feeling you'll never be happy unless we score 5 runs 9 out of 10 games and allow 0-3 runs 9 out of 10 games. That ain't ever going to happen with any team in MLB.

 

We have a damn good team on paper, and we're doing fine so far this year. I'm not going to freak out over 3 low scoring games out of our last 4 games. I'm not going to look for some hidden trend or message I need to learn to better understand this team and try and gauge where we're going to end up this year based on a few tiny sample sizes where we did poorly.

 

 

 

 

We have very good pitching that keeps us in games but we also have flaws in the hitting department. As I said before, one game doesn't bother me, but 3 games in 4 days with 5 hits or less signals a weakness and is something to be concerned about. We have seen this same weakness earlier in the year and have been concerned then as well. The plate approach where we took a first strike, many right down the miiddle, on batter after batter, gave Cobb a leg up. When he got ahead our hitters didn't do much.

 

You talk about not being satisfied if we don't score 5 to 9 runs. Think about it again. We scored no runs and got 3 hits on a day when our pitcher held them to 1. I am for making adjustments at the plate and perhaps using pinch hitters when they are called for.

[S5Dewey]

If I live to be 100 I will never understand why JBJ wasn't swinging a bat in the ninth inning. I know they wanted to give the guy the day off and I understand about how sometimes a manager sometimes looks at the longer view and doesn't try to win every game but really.. now much does one AB detract from a player's rest?

[Nick]

If I live to be 100 I will never understand why JBJ wasn't swinging a bat in the ninth inning. I know they wanted to give the guy the day off and I understand about how sometimes a manager sometimes looks at the longer view and doesn't try to win every game but really.. now much does one AB detract from a player's rest?

 

JF didn't have an issue inserting Xander the other day in an extra inning game. JBJ one of the guys that can hit the ball out of park. Puzzling to say the least.

[Maxbialystock]

JF didn't have an issue inserting Xander the other day in an extra inning game. JBJ one of the guys that can hit the ball out of park. Puzzling to say the least.

 

Meh. I thought Young had a pretty good at bat but was screwed by the first pitch strike on one that was below the zone and below at least five that Porcello threw down there that were called balls. Colome was helped by the ump on that bat and by HanRam--who else?--on his at bat, swinging at balls in the dirt.

 

Season to date, as I said in the game thread, Young has hit righties better than JBJ and has hit Tampa pitching better than JBJ. And we did not need a home run in that situation. A walk would have tied the game and a single would have likely won it.

[OH FOY]

If I live to be 100 I will never understand why JBJ wasn't swinging a bat in the ninth inning. I know they wanted to give the guy the day off and I understand about how sometimes a manager sometimes looks at the longer view and doesn't try to win every game but really.. now much does one AB detract from a player's rest?

Agree, Farrell said after the game that RHB are hitting .300 against Colome, but that's not how it works. Moreland's hit showed me that LHB might have been the answer THAT day. You need to watch the game, how Pitcher is throwing, what Catcher is calling.

I would have batted JBJ in a heartbeat. We didn't get 1 hard hit by any Right handed bats yesterday, against him. Betts had 3-0 count and hit a weak fly ball.

What's Bill Belichick say about stats?

Edited July 9, 2017 by OH FOY!

[Maxbialystock]

We have very good pitching that keeps us in games but we also have flaws in the hitting department. As I said before, one game doesn't bother me, but 3 games in 4 days with 5 hits or less signals a weakness and is something to be concerned about. We have seen this same weakness earlier in the year and have been concerned then as well. The plate approach where we took a first strike, many right down the miiddle, on batter after batter, gave Cobb a leg up. When he got ahead our hitters didn't do much.

 

You talk about not being satisfied if we don't score 5 to 9 runs. Think about it again. We scored no runs and got 3 hits on a day when our pitcher held them to 1. I am for making adjustments at the plate and perhaps using pinch hitters when they are called for.

 

I'm frustrated too and was way, way frustrated yesterday and took out most of it on HanRam who had one of the most wretched at bats--totally mindless--at bats I can remember. Just stupid.

 

I am also the first person--I think--to point out that our hitters refuse to swing at first pitch fastballs down the middle, game after game.

 

And I have pointed out ad nauseum that the Sox are something like 43-10 when scoring 4 runs (or more).

 

All that said, I am inclined to agree with moonslav to the extent that right now I do think we have a pretty good team. 3b is no longer the liability it was for at least two months--fielding is way better and hitting is somewhat better especially with Lin hitting from the left side.

 

I still despise HanRam for being so oblivious to what is going on during the game--on the basepaths and by opposing pitchers. Is the exact opposite of what used to be termed "a student of the game." Granted, you can think to much at bat, but you need to be aware of the pitcher's trends in that particular game and, before the game, of that particular starter. Funny thing is, I think he does have good hand-eye coordination at bat, but he seems to make no effort to make himself a smarter hitter.

 

The hitting this year is not nearly as good as the hitting last year with Ortiz, but it is still decent, and the pitching overall is way better and maybe the best of any Sox team in the John Henry era. With Marrero/Lin at 3b, the infield defense is decent if not great, and the outfield defense is excellent. Catching is good at throwing runners out, less good at blocking pitches.

 

In other words, the fact--not surmise, fact--that the Sox currently have the 2d best record in AL and are leading the AL East by 3.5 games is no fluke. So, yes, it's fun whine about the hitting--as I myself like to do--but my suspicion is that it is good enough. Remember the miracle of 2013? That team's ERA in the postseason was 2.00 and this pitching staff is capable of that.

[S5Dewey]

 

In other words, the fact--not surmise, fact--that the Sox currently have the 2d best record in AL and are leading the AL East by 3.5 games is no fluke. So, yes, it's fun whine about the hitting--as I myself like to do--but my suspicion is that it is good enough. Remember the miracle of 2013? That team's ERA in the postseason was 2.00 and this pitching staff is capable of that.

I don't want to be accused of nit-picking because you've thrown up some really good posts lately, but I wouldn't want to go into the playoffs depending on a 2.00 ERA from my pitching staff. I can remember when DD & the Tigers (Shouldn't that have been a rock group from the 80's?) had the CY winners from the past three years on their staff entering the playoffs and that didn't turn out all that well. Baseball is a funny game.

 

OTOH, I do think that our pitching staff & defense should be able to post a combined ERA of

[Larry Cook]

I have a couple observations about Red Sox hitting this season.

 

1.) Nearly every batter on this team struggles to hit sliders. It is why mediocre pitchers can look like Cy Young against us.

2.) This lineup lacks home run power. We continue to rank near the bottom of baseball in home runs. There are games against good pitching when you can not hope to continually put together three hits per inning to create one run.

3.) Several guys, Hanley, Moreland Pedroia, Bogey are clearly playing hurt.

4.) We have a line up full of sheep. Not one veteran leader in the bunch. Our guys also appear to be waiting for someone else to step up. Our offense scores two or three runs, then goes to sleep for the rest of the game. Maybe a veteran leader with a killer instinct is needed to keep pushing the sheep.

5.) In game adjustments or lack thereof. Our guys are very rigid in their approach at the plate. Going into a game they expect to be pitched a certain way. If a pitcher pitches them differently, they are cooked for the game because our guys do not make in game adjustments. After the game they review the tape and then make adjustments for the next game, but in game, our guys are rigid as stone.

[moonslav59]

Despite all the gobbledeegoop, we've inched our way up to 9th in scoring.

 

We may end up 4th or 5th by season's end.

 

We clearly have our weaknesses. We're not going to magically turn into a top HR team. Our approach, especially to first pitches, is too predictable. Like all teams, we have moments of inconsistency and futility, but we can win without having a top 3 offense.

 

If Porcello can keep up the improvement and ERod returns and stays healthy, I love our chances come October.