Red Sox To Sign J.D. Martinez

[Kimmi]

I just don’t see how a batter’s average could tell us anything about any particular game. Much less how an opponent handled a particular situation.

 

It's not just batting average, it's overall offensive production.

 

Either way, yes, there are going to be particular games or particular situations in which the 'protected' batter comes through. There are going to be times when the 'protected' batter does not come through. That is the case even without protection in the line up, isn't it?

[Emp9]

It's not just batting average, it's overall offensive production.

 

Either way, yes, there are going to be particular games or particular situations in which the 'protected' batter comes through. There are going to be times when the 'protected' batter does not come through. That is the case even without protection in the line up, isn't it?

 

Yes. But I’ve said all along it’s not a guarantee.

[Bellhorn04]

Yes. But I’ve said all along it’s not a guarantee.

 

The protection thing has been studied pretty extensively, I think, and the benefit just doesn't show up in the numbers, no matter how much logic might seem to cry out for it to.

[S5Dewey]

The protection thing has been studied pretty extensively, I think, and the benefit just doesn't show up in the numbers, no matter how much logic might seem to cry out for it to.

 

All one has to believe to dismiss that logic is that the players, FO folks and strategists are really stupid - that it doesn't matter to them who a pitcher is pitching to, and that they're not going to make an effort to manipulate the order to their advantage.

[Bellhorn04]

All one has to believe to dismiss that logic is that the players, FO folks and strategists are really stupid - that it doesn't matter to them who a pitcher is pitching to, and that they're not going to make an effort to manipulate the order to their advantage.

 

I don't get where anybody is saying anybody is stupid.

[S5Dewey]

I don't get where anybody is saying anybody is stupid.

 

Has it occurred to anyone else that maybe one of the reasons JBJ is hitting as well as he is might be because pitchers would rather give him a pitch to put in play rather than risk facing Mookie?

[Bellhorn04]

Has it occurred to anyone else that maybe one of the reasons JBJ is hitting as well as he is might be because pitchers would rather give him a pitch to put in play rather than risk facing Mookie?

 

In theory that's possible. But then you have to consider some other things. Such as why it wasn't working like that the first part of the season when JBJ looked so lost.

 

Also you have to look at from the pitcher's side. He knows JBJ has been hitting the ball a lot better lately. How much does he want to give JBJ good pitches to hit with that in mind? Especially when a single or double by JBJ puts a runner on for Mookie? Maybe if anything he has more incentive than ever to go after JBJ hard.

 

There's just so much little stuff that goes on in baseball.

[S5Dewey]

In theory that's possible. But then you have to consider some other things. Such as why it wasn't working like that the first part of the season when JBJ looked so lost.

 

Also you have to look at from the pitcher's side. He knows JBJ has been hitting the ball a lot better lately. How much does he want to give JBJ good pitches to hit with that in mind? Especially when a single or double by JBJ puts a runner on for Mookie? Maybe if anything he has more incentive than ever to go after JBJ hard.

 

There's just so much little stuff that goes on in baseball.

 

And why does JBJ hit better in the 9-spot than anyplace else?

 

I've come to the conclusion that nothing that's controllable happens by accident in baseball. Pitchers have hot zones and cold zones they try to throw to, there are pre-game meetings with players where they discuss pitcher's tendencies, the defense has different shifts they use depending on who's at bat, outfielders are now carrying file cards telling them where to play each hitter.

 

Given all of that - and much more that I didn't touch on - I find it hard to believe that there hasn't been statistical research done by every team that tells them who should (or shouldn't) be hitting before or after each hitter to optimize the batting order. IOW, who can protect who in the order.

[notin]

And why does JBJ hit better in the 9-spot than anyplace else?

 

I've come to the conclusion that nothing that's controllable happens by accident in baseball. Pitchers have hot zones and cold zones they try to throw to, there are pre-game meetings with players where they discuss pitcher's tendencies, the defense has different shifts they use depending on who's at bat, outfielders are now carrying file cards telling them where to play each hitter.

 

Given all of that - and much more that I didn't touch on - I find it hard to believe that there hasn't been statistical research done by every team that tells them who should (or shouldn't) be hitting before or after each hitter to optimize the batting order. IOW, who can protect who in the order.

 

 

That doesn't lead to one inevitable conclusion. It could be as simple as the fact hat he has at least 3 times as many plate appearances in that spot as anywhere else in the order, and therefore was not given ample opportunity to succeed elsewhere.

 

He batted in front of Betts for about half the games least season and had better success elsewhere in the lineup...

[S5Dewey]

That doesn't lead to one inevitable conclusion. It could be as simple as the fact hat he has at least 3 times as many plate appearances in that spot as anywhere else in the order, and therefore was not given ample opportunity to succeed elsewhere.

 

He batted in front of Betts for about half the games least season and had better success elsewhere in the lineup...

 

It could be that. And it could be that I'm right and he's "protected" by Mookie.

 

I think there's a reason why JBJ continues to hit 9th while he's now up to almost .700 OPS and that reason is not "coincidence".

[Bellhorn04]

Given all of that - and much more that I didn't touch on - I find it hard to believe that there hasn't been statistical research done by every team that tells them who should (or shouldn't) be hitting before or after each hitter to optimize the batting order. IOW, who can protect who in the order.

 

Sure there's research about optimizing the order. Kimmi has posted some of the findings many times. I don't think the research mentions protection anywhere. It recommends a high OBP guy at the top of the order to create more RBI opportunities for hitters behind him, not to protect the #9 hitter.

[vegasbob]

If there wasn't either statistical information or innate sense ("conventional wisdom" or "hitting psychology") to maximize the production of a given batting order, then the simple solution would be to arrange your hitters , with sufficient sample size, in descending order of OB% because the guys who are better at getting on base will bat more often, up to 150-170 times more than the lesser OBP'ers, over the course of the season. Yet no one does this .

 

I think S5Dewey's note above regarding the numerous variables, particularly the pitcher's reactions and defensive decisions, to situations affects outcomes as much as any one thing the hitter/runner tries to do. And if you don't think perception (psychological factors) come into play by both the hitter and pitcher, you haven't been on the mound and seen Big Papi in the on deck circle .

[notin]

It could be that. And it could be that I'm right and he's "protected" by Mookie.

 

I think there's a reason why JBJ continues to hit 9th while he's now up to almost .700 OPS and that reason is not "coincidence".

 

He also had a significant stretch of a 1.400 OPS with no help from Betts once.

 

He had a better OPS last year ina couple other batting order spots.

 

I think you might be undervaluing Bradley as a hitter...

[S5Dewey]

He also had a significant stretch of a 1.400 OPS with no help from Betts once.

 

He had a better OPS last year ina couple other batting order spots.

 

I think you might be undervaluing Bradley as a hitter...

 

I'm not assuming anything. All I did was ask a question.

 

"Has it occurred to anyone else that maybe one of the reasons JBJ is hitting as well as he is might be because pitchers would rather give him a pitch to put in play rather than risk facing Mookie?"

 

I guess the answer is no.

[Bellhorn04]

I'm not assuming anything. All I did was ask a question.

 

"Has it occurred to anyone else that maybe one of the reasons JBJ is hitting as well as he is might be because pitchers would rather give him a pitch to put in play rather than risk facing Mookie?"

 

I guess the answer is no.

 

I said it was possible. Maybe it's one of the reasons, sure.

[OH FOY]

At .236 Dave Kingman must have been the best overall Production hitter ever. Should be in the HOF, haha. Bradley a .236 career hitter at this point. Growing up, a .236 hitter was not a very good hitter. One stat says your good, the other says your not. Better just watch and judge for yourself.

[notin]

I'm not assuming anything. All I did was ask a question.

 

"Has it occurred to anyone else that maybe one of the reasons JBJ is hitting as well as he is might be because pitchers would rather give him a pitch to put in play rather than risk facing Mookie?"

 

I guess the answer is no.

 

Well you did say “ it could be that I’m right and he's protected by Mookie.”

 

None of us is positive why he is hitting now over whenever. But there is little evidence or even logic supporting the idea of protection making a difference...

[Dojji]

At .236 Dave Kingman must have been the best overall Production hitter ever. Should be in the HOF, haha. Bradley a .236 career hitter at this point. Growing up, a .236 hitter was not a very good hitter. One stat says your good, the other says your not. Better just watch and judge for yourself.

 

Batting average is useless without context. There's a lot of low average hitters who made very good careers for themselves. Guys like Gene Tenace, Jason Giambi, Ryan Howard, Adam Dunn, Vince Coleman, those guys hit to a pretty poor average, but they were good hitters. Heck, Dwight Evans tended in that direction more years than not, and he was at least good enough to be a Hall of Fame candidate, even if he didn't get in.

 

The problem with JBJ isn't the low batting average. It's the complete package that lacks power or top end speed. Singling out the AVG component as *the* problem isn't any more useful than singling out the lack of HRs.

 

That, and if the problem were simply "make more contact," I'm sure that JBJ would have figured it out by now.

[S5Dewey]

Well you did say “ it could be that I’m right and he's protected by Mookie.”

 

None of us is positive why he is hitting now over whenever. But there is little evidence or even logic supporting the idea of protection making a difference...

 

So are you saying I couldn't be right?

 

The rest of your post is entirely your opinion and I'll give it the weight I think it deserves.

Edited August 18, 2018 by S5Dewey

[cp176]

So are you saying I couldn't be right?

 

The rest of your post is entirely your opinion and I'll give it the weight I think it deserves.

 

You cannot take the human element out of the game. At least I hope they don't. There have been numerous articles written over the course of this season about what a difference having real bats in the lineup can make directly quoting players who play the game. I think that there is of course real relevance to using available statistical data to help a team but it never trumps what is going on in the minds of men who actually are on the field playing the game. In many cases the guys who don't care what the data says in fact.

[notin]

So are you saying I couldn't be right?

 

The rest of your post is entirely your opinion and I'll give it the weight I think it deserves.

 

That's not what I said at all. Not even close.

 

You said you were not assuming anything, I tried to remind you that you did insinuate strongly ("it could be that I'm right...") that you attributed his improvement to protection.

Edited August 19, 2018 by notin

[notin]

You cannot take the human element out of the game. At least I hope they don't. There have been numerous articles written over the course of this season about what a difference having real bats in the lineup can make directly quoting players who play the game. I think that there is of course real relevance to using available statistical data to help a team but it never trumps what is going on in the minds of men who actually are on the field playing the game. In many cases the guys who don't care what the data says in fact.

 

There will always be players who doubt the relevance, like Jayson WErth. But for every Jayson Werth, there are numerous Josh Redddick's and Joey Votto's and Todd Frasier's who do buy into a lot of the new data and use it to improve their game...

[Emp9]

The protection thing has been studied pretty extensively, I think, and the benefit just doesn't show up in the numbers, no matter how much logic might seem to cry out for it to.

 

I agree, it won’t show up in the numbers. Just like most subtleties of the game won’t.

[S5Dewey]

That's not what I said at all. Not even close.

 

You said you were not assuming anything, I tried to remind you that you did insinuate strongly ("it could be that I'm right...") that you attributed his improvement to protection.

 

This started when I asked if it had occurred to anyone else that JBJ could be benefiting from having Mookie hitting behind him. I asked a simple question and you apparently inferred from that question that I was making a statement. ("I think you might be undervaluing Bradley as a hitter..").

 

I'm not. I've always been a huge fan of JBJ and my personal belief is that both things are true. I can plainly see that his approach is different but at the same time I do think he's getting some benefit from having Mookie behind him in the order.

Once again, "It could be that I'm right". And as before,it also follows that it could be that I'm not right.

 

Sheesh. A poster asks a simple question trying to introduce a new thought and somebody goes 'all off the rails' over it.

[Kimmi]

There will always be players who doubt the relevance, like Jayson WErth. But for every Jayson Werth, there are numerous Josh Redddick's and Joey Votto's and Todd Frasier's who do buy into a lot of the new data and use it to improve their game...

 

I understand where the players are coming from. Concepts like clutch, protection, etc. are very powerful ideas and are easy to buy into. Then confirmation bias all but seals the deal. As a softball player, I believed in those things myself. I experienced clutch and protection, among other intangibles, as many here have.

 

Eck is 100% sure that fastballs rise, and he should know better than any of us because he was a major league pitcher. Right?

[Kimmi]

I agree, it won’t show up in the numbers. Just like most subtleties of the game won’t.

 

If hitters become better hitters when they have someone protecting them, it would show up in the numbers.

[notin]

Eck is 100% sure that fastballs rise, and he should know better than any of us because he was a major league pitcher. Right?

 

And Amos Otis was 100% convinced corking bats helped him hit home runs, despite all the laws of physics that state otherwise. And Jack McDowell is 100% convinced pitch counts don’t matter, despite all the evidence to the contrary. But, hey, these guys played in MLB so they must be right...

[notin]

This started when I asked if it had occurred to anyone else that JBJ could be benefiting from having Mookie hitting behind him. I asked a simple question and you apparently inferred from that question that I was making a statement. ("I think you might be undervaluing Bradley as a hitter..").

 

I'm not. I've always been a huge fan of JBJ and my personal belief is that both things are true. I can plainly see that his approach is different but at the same time I do think he's getting some benefit from having Mookie behind him in the order.

Once again, "It could be that I'm right". And as before,it also follows that it could be that I'm not right.

 

Sheesh. A poster asks a simple question trying to introduce a new thought and somebody goes 'all off the rails' over it.

 

No one went off the rails. I just am very, very hesitant to attribute Bradley’s improvement to protection in the lineup. Moonslav has been very diligent most of the year reminding us Bradley is hitting the ball well and the hot streak is coming...

[Bellhorn04]

I agree, it won’t show up in the numbers. Just like most subtleties of the game won’t.

 

But protection is not really that subtle of a concept. The premise is pretty simple - the better the hitter behind you, the better the pitches you see, the better your numbers should be. It should show up.

[Emp9]

If hitters become better hitters when they have someone protecting them, it would show up in the numbers.

 

Not really. One could argue it could help a batter keep up with his career norms. But you’re talking over the course of the entire season, and I’m not. I’m talking about the occasional, individual game.