The value of a #3 or #4 hitter taking a walk...is it a bad thing?
Skinpinch
Posts: 1,531
in Sports Talk
You hear it all the time...it is his job to drive in runs. Yes, it is the job of a hitter to make runs without a doubt. Many people are under the impression that middle of the order hitters taking walks is bad for the team, and that passing the buck is not a good idea. What exactly is better for the team?
Your number three man comes up with nobody out and a man on second base...AND HE WALKS! Is that hurting the team's chances at scoring runs? Is it passing the buck to the next guy? Passing the buck to the next guy ain't a bad idea, as he is most likely nearly as good a hitter, or extremely competant. But lets look at what happened in MLB from 1999-2002.
With a man on second base and nobody out, the average team went on to score 1.1 runs in that inning. What if the guy now walks and passes the buck, is that hurting their chance at scoring more runs. Is passing the buck bad?
If that guy walks, it is now 1st & 2nd with nobody out. In that situation the average team went on to score 1.57 runs in that inning. What he did was increase his team's run expectancy by a half a run...hardly bad for the team.
The first thing people will say is that not all lineups are equal. True. The better the hitter who is up with first and second the greater the chance at those runs scoring. These figures represent the AVERAGE hitter. When measuring a player, you want to measure him, and not his lineup's ability, so that really shouldn't even be a bother in individual player comparisons. If a guy had an AWFUL hitter behind him, he will be forced to swing at some very borderline pitches if he was bent on swinging...thus rendering him no longer the hitter he would be anyway. Taking the walk would then be an even smarter play if the hitter behind you is bad. These figures above count all the situations where awful hitters are in, so it is already incorporated.
But did you know that even if the pitcher is the following batter in that situation that the run expectancy will still increase with a guy taking a walk to make it first and second?
How about the flipside? What if you make an out in that situation?
Run expectancy with runner on Second Nobody out == 1.1 runs.
Run expectancy with runner on Second and ONE out= .72 runs.
Run expectancy with runner on Second and TWO out= .34 runs.
Run expectancy with runner on Second and THREE out = zero runs
This type of information is one of the components in situational batter runs.
Your number three man comes up with nobody out and a man on second base...AND HE WALKS! Is that hurting the team's chances at scoring runs? Is it passing the buck to the next guy? Passing the buck to the next guy ain't a bad idea, as he is most likely nearly as good a hitter, or extremely competant. But lets look at what happened in MLB from 1999-2002.
With a man on second base and nobody out, the average team went on to score 1.1 runs in that inning. What if the guy now walks and passes the buck, is that hurting their chance at scoring more runs. Is passing the buck bad?
If that guy walks, it is now 1st & 2nd with nobody out. In that situation the average team went on to score 1.57 runs in that inning. What he did was increase his team's run expectancy by a half a run...hardly bad for the team.
The first thing people will say is that not all lineups are equal. True. The better the hitter who is up with first and second the greater the chance at those runs scoring. These figures represent the AVERAGE hitter. When measuring a player, you want to measure him, and not his lineup's ability, so that really shouldn't even be a bother in individual player comparisons. If a guy had an AWFUL hitter behind him, he will be forced to swing at some very borderline pitches if he was bent on swinging...thus rendering him no longer the hitter he would be anyway. Taking the walk would then be an even smarter play if the hitter behind you is bad. These figures above count all the situations where awful hitters are in, so it is already incorporated.
But did you know that even if the pitcher is the following batter in that situation that the run expectancy will still increase with a guy taking a walk to make it first and second?
How about the flipside? What if you make an out in that situation?
Run expectancy with runner on Second Nobody out == 1.1 runs.
Run expectancy with runner on Second and ONE out= .72 runs.
Run expectancy with runner on Second and TWO out= .34 runs.
Run expectancy with runner on Second and THREE out = zero runs
This type of information is one of the components in situational batter runs.
0
Comments
Steve
The walk would be a good thing.
In the case noted, a sacrificed bunt would be good as well.
Mark
Raw: Tony Gonzalez (low #'d cards, and especially 1/1's) and Steve Young.
<< <i>"With a man on second base and nobody out, the average team went on to score 1.1 runs in that inning. What if the guy now walks and passes the buck, is that hurting their chance at scoring more runs. Is passing the buck bad?"
The walk would be a good thing.
In the case noted, a sacrificed bunt would be good as well.
Not to Earl Weaver (or me).
<< <i>I think of Frank Thomas as a good example of when walking can be extreme. He got alot of criticisim for walking with runners on in his Whitesox days. I think if the pitcher is nibbling and trying to make you swing at bad pitches then you should walk but I have seen Frank take pitches that you could of at least hit to the outfield for a sacrifice fly and he would lay off. I read were he said that he can't change his approach based on the situation or it would mess him up. I think you should change your approach to win games. >>
Maybe if his Aunt Edna was coming up next Thomas should have swung at borderline pitches. But with a major league cleanup hitter coming up next? Taking a sure walk is the way to go.
Bill James did a rather complex analysis of the value of a walk. One of his findings was that if the opposition had walked Babe Ruth every time he came up that the Yankees would have scored even more runs; the walk is easily the most undervalued event in baseball - as this thread demonstrates.