Can someone explain to me why strikeouts are worse than other outs?
| Author | Comment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
 Astro Annie |
An out is an out |
Lead | |
|
|
|||
|
andyroo25 |
Re: An out is an out | ||
|
Astros Fan
Posts: 166 (01/04/2006 11:45 AM) Astros Fan |
They don't move runners over.
|
||
|
JHyman |
Re: An out is an out | ||
|
Posts: 264 (01/04/2006 11:45 AM) Astros Fan |
I think a sabermetrics guru could probably answer this better, but I'll throw in my 2 cents.
One way to think of outs is productive versus unproductive. A sacrifce fly or bunt, or ground ball that advances a runner would all be productive outs because they advance or score a runner. A strikeout is generally an unproductive out because it does not advance a runner and usually leaves you in the same situation with one less out available in the inning. |
||
|
Astro Annie |
Re: An out is an out | ||
|
In that case, someone should keep track of productive vs unproductive outs. IMO. A K is better than hitting into a DP for instance.
|
|||
|
barzilla |
Re: An out is an out | ||
|
Astros Fan
Posts: 4693 (01/04/2006 12:06 PM) Astros Fan |
Good point Annie, the other point is spot on. It depends on the situation. Someone should track that, but it certainly won't be me.
|
||
|
neatgw |
Re: An out is an out | ||
|
Posts: 271 (01/04/2006 12:19 PM) Astros Fan |
Strikeouts can be productive in one sense. In today's game everyone is a slave to pitch count and no one has any real pitching depth. Therefore running up the pitch count gets you to a worse pitcher quicker. So a strikeout after seeing a lot of pitches can be productive in that sense. It is better than a weak, first pitch groundout with nobody on.
|
||
 Clack |
Re: An out is an out | ||
|
Astros Fan
Posts: 14830 (01/04/2006 12:20 PM) Astros Fan |
You will get arguments from both sides of the question as to whether a strike out is worse than any other out. Are foregone productive outs offset by the lower risk of hitting in a DP? I don't know, but there are proponents of both views. I am sure there is a middle ground. My perception is that excessive strike outs may signal a batter who is still swinging for the fences with 2 strikes when he should be shortening the stroke to try and get a hit in particular situations. But if the guy is still very productive with RISP (e.g., Ensberg), then it seems like there really isn't much to complain about. IMO, ideally you want to have a mix of contact hitters and power hitters (who are naturally more likely to strike out) in the lineup.
|
||
|
FredUD |
Re: An out is an out | ||
|
Posts: 356 (01/04/2006 12:20 PM) |
Quote: Stats, Inc. and Elias do, but you have to pay to get them. |
||
|
Astro Annie |
Re: An out is an out | ||
|
No thank you. They wanted to charge me $250-$300 to tell me whether it was easier to steal second or third (based on CS%).
|
|||
|
allredk |
Re: An out is an out | ||
|
Posts: 2411 (01/04/2006 2:03 PM) Astros Fan |
A hitter can work the count to 3-2 and then ground out weakly to second, advancing a runner to third. That bursts the theory that strikeouts are beneficial because they run up the pitch count.
Occasionally, it might seem a relief to see someone like, say, Ausmus strike out rather than ground out with a runner on first. You can just as easily have Ausmus bunt (even with two strikes), with the possibility of advancing the runner. Generally speaking, strikeouts are worthless. |
||
|
JHyman |
Re: An out is an out | ||
|
Posts: 264 (01/04/2006 2:30 PM) Astros Fan |
You can also argue that any ball put in play gives the defense a chance to make an error, where reaching base on a dropped strikeout happens much less frequently.
However, the question was about outs, so I'm not sure if it's relevant to the discussion. For what it's worth, a double-play is two outs, so clearly it's worse than one out from a strike out. |
||
|
Scott Hockenberry |
Re: An out is an out | ||
|
Astros Fan
Posts: 2822 (01/04/2006 2:37 PM) Astros Fan |
GIDP's are not always necessarily worse then strikeouts.
If you have guys on 1st and 3rd and nobody out and the hitter GIDP's and the defense concedes the run to get 2 outs... then you are better off than having the batter K and having the next batter GIDP. All depends on the situation. |
||
|
danno |
Re: An out is an out | ||
|
Astros Fan
Posts: 111 (01/04/2006 3:28 PM) Astros Fan |
I agree as most have responded: strike outs are a little worse than contact outs, since runners cannot advance and the defense doesnt get a chance to make an error. This is somewhat offset by the advantage of less GIDPs. Of course a hitter could strike out and still reach first base safely. Overall strikeouts dont bother me much. Actually what I hate the most are first pitch pop-ups or groundouts. But in general any out is bad.
Strikeouts are produced by a combination of eye-hand coordination and physics of the swing. The eye-hand coordination part is obvious. If a hitter lacks these skills, then he will have more strikeouts. The physics part has to do with the players type of swing. Power hitters have an upper cut to increase loft. Contact hitters have more of a horizontal swing. The power swing makes contact less, since the bat head spends less time coinciding with the ball path. Bat speed works the same way. The faster the bat the less time the bat head spends in the hitting zone. Its just a trade-off. more power = more strikeouts. If you want to cut down on strikeouts then youre going to give up power. Personally Id rather have the obvious advantages of power than the arguable advantages of contact outs. |
||
|
sturt |
... | ||
|
Astros Fan
Posts: 1617 (01/04/2006 4:22 PM) Astros Fan |
(Interesting... we keep coming back to these things long after the Great Dunn Debates.
 )How about this as a starting point: Continnum of Productive to Unproductive Outs "PRODUCTIVE" 1. Any out that allows a base runner to score (sac fly, sac, fielder's choice, DP, or -- rare though it may be -- K on WP or PB) 2. Any out that allows a base runner to advance (fly, sac, or fielder's choice) 3. Any fly out or ground out made after at least 6(?) pitches 4. Any strike out made after at least 8(?) pitches "NEUTRAL" 5. Any fly out or ground out "UNPRODUCTIVE" 6. Any strike out except where runners score 7. Any double play except where runners score ... so, what adjustments would you make? |
||
|
barzilla |
Re: ... | ||
|
Astros Fan
Posts: 4693 (01/04/2006 4:27 PM) Astros Fan |
I wouldn't argue any adjustment except to say we are arguing minitua. I like details as everyone knows, but the increased value of one out of the other is very miniscule. The key is what you do in your other plate appearances. High K guys get a bad rap because the assumption is that they are free swingers. Ergo, the free swinging gets them in trouble in the other plate appearances. Simply put, the Ks are used proof of the free swinging.
We get into conumdrums with guys like Dunn, Berkman, and Ensberg. I would tend to put Wilson in the free swinger category. |
||
|
sturt |
... | ||
|
Astros Fan
Posts: 1617 (01/04/2006 4:37 PM) Astros Fan |
Barz, I can appreciate the minimalistic notion, but you won't be surprised that I don't agree with it.
This is another place I don't have a stat, but my guess is the number of runs scored as a result of players either moved over by an out at some point, OR scoring on an out is fairly SUBSTANTIAL, compared to those that come purely through hits and walks. So, if one could see that stat (ie, the norm), it would be interesting then to compare certain hitters' propensity for productive outs versus non-productive ones. |
||
|
astros98(d) |
Re: ... | ||
|
Posts: 1074 (01/04/2006 4:40 PM) |
"
""UNPRODUCTIVE" 7. Any double play except where runners score " I wish Carl Everett would have had an UNPRODUCTIVE out such as that in the Bottom of the 10th inning of Game 3 of the 1999 NLDS. |
||
|
Skalz |
Re: ... | ||
|
Astros Fan
Posts: 647 (01/04/2006 4:52 PM) Astros Fan |
You are forgetting about lining into a double play.
|
||
|
TheRedSon |
Re: ... | ||
|
Astros Fan
Posts: 1773 (01/04/2006 4:56 PM) |
There is no such thing as a productive doubleplay. You may get a run in if there's a runner on third and no outs, but you've killed the rally. Any inning in which you get runners on the corners or the bases loaded with no outs that ends in only one run is a bad inning.
Strikeouts are worse than other outs, but not by very much. As has already been mentioned, most of the negatives involved in striking out are made up for because you can't strikeout into a doubleplay unless Jimy Williams is your manager. I don't know the overall numbers, but I'm guessing the number or runs scored on "productive outs" isn't all that substantial. I would also argue that intentionally sacrificing a runner over usually decreases a team's chance of scoring a run and is therefore usually not a productive strategy. Obviously you want to avoid a doubleplay and there are hitters, mostly pitchers and Adam Everett, that are so bad the only way anything positive can happen is to give up the out in a way that a baserunner can still do something with it. |
||
|
TheRedSon |
Re: ... | ||
|
Astros Fan
Posts: 1773 (07/19/2010 1:36 PM) |
"You are forgetting about lining into a double play. "
Yeah, but that's just bad luck. Really bad luck. |
||
|
astros98(d) |
Re: ... | ||
|
Posts: 1074 (01/04/2006 5:04 PM) |
Quote: Tell that to the Astros in the bottom of the 10th inning of Game 3 of the 1999 NLDS. |
||
|
Clack |
Re: ...Productive vs. Unproductive Outs | ||
|
Astros Fan
Posts: 14830 (01/04/2006 5:07 PM) Astros Fan |
This is very difficult to generalize because it all situation-specific. It also depends upon the batter's role with the team. Contact hitters on the team should be expected to try and move runners over. But if you are expected to be a run producer (such as 3, 4, 5 slots), I don't know that you should be expected to make "moving the runner over" your priority...just as you aren't expected to bunt in situations which would be bunting situations for other hitters on the team. If runners are on base, then the clean up type hitters have to take their shot to drive them in with an extra base hit or HR. Now, what does bug me is striking out with the runner on third and less than 2 out in a close game. Raw strike out numbers don't tell you much about how a hitter performed in those situations.
|
||
|
barzilla |
Re: ... | ||
|
Astros Fan
Posts: 4693 (01/04/2006 5:07 PM) Astros Fan |
Quote: Ah, the zero sum argument. Even if someone strikes out 150 times he is still advancing runners with some of his outs. There are also outs that don't advance runners. Someone can pop up with a runner on third or sharply ground to the infielder and prevent a runner from advancing. My suggestion would be to tabulate a statistic called "bases advanced on outs (or BAO)" and add it to the ledger. The effect of high Ks is still too indirect to draw an accurate inference from its existence on its own. We can assume a low strikeout guy will advance more runners and be right most of the time, but I'd rather cut to the chase. |
||
|
TheRedSon |
Re: ... | ||
|
Astros Fan
Posts: 1773 (01/04/2006 5:23 PM) |
"Tell that to the Astros in the bottom of the 10th inning of Game 3 of the 1999 NLDS."
I remember one VERY unproductive doubleplay in that game... Not that it was a bad at bat... Walt Weiss was just trying to ruin my life. There are very few situations in which a home team would even have a chance to score a run on a doubleplay in extra innings. With runners on the corners and no outs the defense isn't even going to try for a doubleplay in a tie game. If the home team is down a run the doubleplay still kills the rally and more the likely forces another inning. Same thing with the bases juiced in a tie game. The defense may attempt a doubleplay but the ball is going home first. If the home team is down a run and the defense sacrifices a run for a doubleplay then you're still faced with the prospect of needing a hit to score the runner from third (or second). I stand by my statement. There is no such thing as a productive doubleplay. There are, of course, some doubleplays that hurt more than others. |
||
|
sturt |
... | ||
|
Astros Fan
Posts: 1617 (01/04/2006 5:44 PM) Astros Fan |
Phil Garner, baseball philosopher, on the intricacies and complexities of the game:
"It's about getting 'em on, moving 'em over, and getting 'em home." Thank you, Phil.  So, perhaps we could judge all of the above as "productive," ie, leading to the object of the game, ie, scoring, and on the other hand, preventing your opponent from doing the same (ie, attempting to make them "unproductive" as possible). Quote: It may not be as productive as a single that gets a run home, but it is, after all and nonetheless, productive because it is a run scored. And certainly, a run scored on a DP is more productive than a SO where no run scores. |
||
|
sturt |
... | ||
|
Astros Fan
Posts: 1617 (01/04/2006 5:49 PM) Astros Fan |
Quote: You lost me, Barz. Am I missing something obvious? If he strikes out 150 times, how does anyone advance? But I do like your thought about BAOs, but only as much as I like RBIs... both would seem to be opportunity stats that need some standardization. Beyond that, the batter does his job whether he's moving one runner from 1st to 2nd, or if he's moving two runners over from 1st and 2nd to 2nd and 3rd... so I'm less excited about getting at the idea from that angle, but nonetheless appreciate that you, too, are trying to capture the idea. |
||
|
TheRedSon |
Re: ... | ||
|
Astros Fan
Posts: 1773 (01/04/2006 5:56 PM) |
In the case of a runner scoring from third (or second) on a doubleplay is it the doubleplay that's productive or is it the ability of the previous hitters to get a runner to third in the first place that's productive (in the case of a runner scoring from second I'd say the production lies entirly with his saavy baserunning)?
|
||
|
Clack |
Re: ...Productive vs. Unproductive Outs | ||
|
Astros Fan
Posts: 14830 (01/04/2006 6:08 PM) Astros Fan |
Having said that I really hate strikeouts with runners on 3d and less than 2 out, I figured I should look at Preston Wilson's performance in that situation. In 2005:
With runner on 3d, less than 2 out... 32 at bats, producing 26 RBIs .325, .378, .500, or an OPS of .878, which is nearly 100 points higher than his average. His strike out rate was almost identical to his strike out rate in all other at bats. |
||
|
Astro Annie |
Re: ... | ||
|
Not typing for barzilla, but 150 strikeouts aren't the only outs the guy is making. Some of those other outs are going to be productive.
|
|||
|
sturt |
... | ||
|
Astros Fan
Posts: 1617 (01/04/2006 7:13 PM) Astros Fan |
Quote: Oh. I thought he was suggesting that some runners were advancing on some of those strikeouts... which left me scratching my head. But if that's what he meant, I'm not sure how that changes anything I'd stated (?). 150 strikeouts where no runner advances or scores represents no production whatsover. In contrast and for the sake of making the point, 150 double plays where the runner on third gets home every time represents 150 runs that scored. Sure, both are "evils," but indeed, one evil actually has some productive outcome, where the other has none-zilch-nada. |
||
|
sturt |
... | ||
