Is it easier....????

cabbagedad posted: geeezuss

 Why does it illicit such contempt when someone doesn’t simply take something someone else says at face value without ever questioning it? When someone says batter “A” is aggressive and batter “B” is patient, I want to know what makes that true other than someone says it so I can test it and show our HC.

 The attached shows those things I understood Stafford to say show a hitter to be aggressive or patient. What I don’t understand is how % of total pitches swung at, pitches per PA, and PAs per walk get combined to show aggression or passivity. From what I can see there, they don’t seem to show anything together.

 Please see attached.

http://www.espn.com/mlb/stats/...arance/type/expanded

PGStaff posted:

http://www.espn.com/mlb/stats/...arance/type/expanded

That was interesting. Thanx for posting the link.

Was it supposed to show aggressive vs. patient hitters using P/PA as the measuring stick?

Pitches per PA and walks also at the pro level is also very dependent on pitchers fear.

For example miguel cabrera chased more pitches outside the zone than ichiro but he still walked more because pitchers avoided the zone more against him because miggy hits bombs.

Dominik85 posteditches per PA and walks also at the pro level is also very dependent on pitchers fear.

For example miguel cabrera chased more pitches outside the zone than ichiro but he still walked more because pitchers avoided the zone more against him because miggy hits bombs.

I get that. But Stafford didn’t just use PPPA as a metric useful in showing patience or aggression. That’s why I asked PG why he posted that link because it only shows PPPA.

In my mind it take a lot more than any one metric to show much of anything, and the trick isn’t just finding those things. A way has to be found to put them together. PPPA is definitely an “indication” of aggression and/or patience, but with some other metrics to give better context PPPA really doesn’t mean much. You mentioned walks as did Stafford. How would you incorporate walks into the algorithm to show patience/aggression?

Again this is not applicable to the amateur level but at fangraphs there was an article in that showed that swing percentage on pitches inside the zone minus swings percentage on pitches outside the zone is a good indicator of performance.

Basically the old swing at strikes, take balls. That means if you do not chase outside the zone you can be more selective within the zone but if your chase rate is high you better not take pitches inside the zone because that means your differential of o swing and z swing gets too small.

 That means hitters without a good pitch recognition are better off swinging more and batters with a good pitch recognition can be better off swinging less.

In coaching practice often the opposite happens, the free swinger is told to work the count and the patient guy is told to swing more.

But again this is not so applicable to levels without pitch fx which is basically any level except pro ball.

Dominik85 posted:

Again this is not applicable to the amateur level but at fangraphs there was an article in that showed that swing percentage on pitches inside the zone minus swings percentage on pitches outside the zone is a good indicator of performance.

Basically the old swing at strikes, take balls. That means if you do not chase outside the zone you can be more selective within the zone but if your chase rate is high you better not take pitches inside the zone because that means your differential of o swing and z swing gets too small.

 That means hitters without a good pitch recognition are better off swinging more and batters with a good pitch recognition can be better off swinging less.

In coaching practice often the opposite happens, the free swinger is told to work the count and the patient guy is told to swing more.

But again this is not so applicable to levels without pitch fx which is basically any level except pro ball.

Well Dom, this is a HS forum. What good does it do someone at that level to have that performance indicator if they can’t use it?

Sounds to me like it’s an unsolvable problem. Coaches are telling players to do exactly opposite of what they should do because there’s no valid way to prove they should change.

Maybe it is somewhat applicable. If we know from the pro level that a large difference between zone and out of zone swings is important we could tell a patient hitter to look for certain pitches within the zone to get better pitches to hit. The same applies to very good contact hitters who tend to put too many balls in play.

But if we have a guy with pitch recognition issues you first try to improve pitch recognition but if a limit there is reached don't tell him to sit too much on certain pitches but have more a see the ball hit the ball approach and let lose if he thinks it will be close to the zone. That is because even if he sits on lets say up and in pitches he will chase pitches way up out of the zone and then take hittable pitches in the lower part of the zone.

So to keep the zone swing minus outside swing differential high tell him to look for a pitch over the plate and drive it instead of being too picky.

You prefer him swinging at the pitch an inch off the plate to avoid him taking the pitch down the pipe and then swing at the pitch a foot outside.

But if you have the guy with a good eye you can tell him to take the pitch on the black to wait for a better one because you can be sure that he won't miss his pitch or panick and chase the pitch way outside after falling behind when taking early.

A good example of this was javier baez first pro year. Javier is a free swinger and the cubs are known for preaching working the count and making the pitcher work. That is not a bad approach but for javy it did clearly mess him up because he chased a lot outside but at the same time took a lot of pitches because he was taught to work the count. That works for guys like rizzo or bryant but not So much for him.every hitter is different.

Dominik85 posted:

Maybe it is somewhat applicable. If we know from the pro level that a large difference between zone and out of zone swings is important we could tell a patient hitter to look for certain pitches within the zone to get better pitches to hit. The same applies to very good contact hitters who tend to put too many balls in play.

You’re making the same mistake so many others do. You’re “cure” may or may not work, but who do you try it on? How is a “patient” hitter identified?

Contact hitters? How did they get brought into the discussion? I thought it was about “patient” and “aggressive” hitters. I’m pretty sure there are both patient and aggressive hitters who are very good contact hitters.

But if we have a guy with pitch recognition issues you first try to improve pitch recognition but if a limit there is reached don't tell him to sit too much on certain pitches but have more a see the ball hit the ball approach and let lose if he thinks it will be close to the zone. That is because even if he sits on lets say up and in pitches he will chase pitches way up out of the zone and then take hittable pitches in the lower part of the zone.

So to keep the zone swing minus outside swing differential high tell him to look for a pitch over the plate and drive it instead of being too picky.

You prefer him swinging at the pitch an inch off the plate to avoid him taking the pitch down the pipe and then swing at the pitch a foot outside.

But if you have the guy with a good eye you can tell him to take the pitch on the black to wait for a better one because you can be sure that he won't miss his pitch or panick and chase the pitch way outside after falling behind when taking early.

So how does a HS player on a “normal” HS team who has pitch recognition issues get identified? Remember, at that level there’s no Pitch f/x.

A good example of this was javier baez first pro year. Javier is a free swinger and the cubs are known for preaching working the count and making the pitcher work. That is not a bad approach but for javy it did clearly mess him up because he chased a lot outside but at the same time took a lot of pitches because he was taught to work the count. That works for guys like rizzo or bryant but not So much for him.every hitter is different.

I’m not saying that what you’re saying is incorrect. I’m saying you’re not offering anything for any level below MLB. If we were discussing Hot Stove or fantasy baseball where there was access to all the ML data, what you’re saying may well prove to be valid. But in the world of amateur baseball it doesn’t seem to have a place.

Well you don't need pitch fx to see when a player swings at pitches that bounce or come in above the shoulders. Outside and inside is harder to see but if a player chases pitches that are extremely far off the zone you might be able to see it.

Dominik85 posted:Well you don't need pitch fx to see when a player swings at pitches that bounce or come in above the shoulders. Outside and inside is harder to see but if a player chases pitches that are extremely far off the zone you might be able to see it.

 True, pitches at the extremes are fairly easy to see, but those aren’t the only pitches missing the strike zone that are swung at. Then too, if someone isn’t tracking them some way, chances are who did what when and how often will be misinterpreted.

 Here’s a couple for instances. #1 Team’s ahead by 6 in the late innings and their batter swings at a pitch above the shoulders and another one in the dirt then gets a double. #2 Team’s down a run in the bottom of the last inning with 2 outs and the bases loaded in a championship game. Their batter works the count to 3-2 then fouls off 5 pitches, and finally swings and misses a great hook that just touches the dirt in front of the C. Unless those things are marked down some way, which kid is gonna be remembered at the next practice?

 My point is not that you are wrong in what you say, but rather that there has to be a lot more done. And even if they are marked down and tracked, when does it become a problem? When the player makes 20 of those swings, when 20% of his swings are at pitches like that, or does something else trigger the idea that some coaching is needed because something’s wrong?