Productive out

before you call me out on being an ace pitcher at least know the basics of baseball

Tr, the game defines a few productive outs as sac bunts, move overs, sac flys. But I think only a sac fly that scores an important run, go ahead or tie, can be a real productive out. Some managers hate to sac bunt because they know they have hitters who can get the job done.
All in all, its productiveness can only be weighed in the outcome. What may look like a good bunt to get a runner in scoring position may end up as nothing if the next hitters don't produce.
A lot will have to do with the make up of your team.

It's easier to define a non-productive out. K, double play, Pop to IF/C , GB to Pitcher......pretty much all of which happened last season when I had a runner on 3B, with less than 2 outs.

I would have forgotten them by now, but I take responsibility for ALL non-productive outs. Even Ks. I figure I should have known better than to let the kid swing in that situation and/or I did not prepare him well.

How about none out, runner on second and batter grounds out to second moving the runner to third?


Isn't that a productive out?

A productive out is one where the situation changes to possibly help your team later in the same inning. So yes hitting behind the runner to move him to third is a productive out. A flyball to move a runner from second to third is productive out. While it's nice to sit and wait for the homerun or 3 or 4 double/singles strung together there are sometimes you have got to do everything in your power to score a run even if it means giving up an at bat. That is the team concept of baseball - Johnny lays down a sac bunt to move the runner over so Billy can hit him home. Johnny has a job to do to help his team and he better do it.

quote:

Originally posted by TRhit:
How about none out, runner on second and batter grounds out to second moving the runner to third?


Isn't that a productive out?

In my opinion, that would be a productive out, but not necessarily by design. I wouldn't want a hitter giving away an at bat in order to get the runner to third (if that was my goal, why not just bunt him over?) In that situation, I would want the hitter looking for a pitch he could drive (in 99.9% of situations, I would want my hitters looking for something to drive rather than looking to simply advance the runner).

It wouldn't bother me if the hitter had the correct approach and ended up hitting a ball to second and advancing the runner. But, like I said, I wouldn't want the hitter giving away an at bat to advance the runner. As usual, it's a risk-reward situation....there is a risk that the player will pop up/K and you're left with a runner at 2nd and one out. But the potential reward is a base hit or even an extra base hit and now we're possibly talking about multiple runs rather than a single run. Although, I will grant you that the equation may change somewhat the later you get in a tight game when you may be playing for a single run. But in general, hit the ball hard somewhere and I'm happy.

There is no such thing as a productive out. Outs are sacred as you only have 27 of them therefore never give them up.

Billy Beane

quote:

Originally posted by TRhit:
How about none out, runner on second and batter grounds out to second moving the runner to third?


Isn't that a productive out?

I prefer a line drive double to score the run.

BOF

The topic is "productive outs and I think that your thinking is off base

Emanski

I am talking about this being a plan---the batter is swinging away , he grounds to second but the runner moves to third---if we wanted to give up the out we would have had him bunting-- we hate giving up outs but if you make an out make it be productive by moving a runner up

Hey there are lots of productive outs. A hitter that goes up there and grinds a pitcher; really makes him work to get him out by fouling pitches off and being disciplined (not swinging at balls). That hitter is giving everyone else a good look at every pitch that guy has. That hitter is running up his pitch count. That hitter is making fielders antsy or impatient, possibly making them drop focus. The next time up, that hitter has seen the whole package and is in a very favorable postion to hit a rocket.
There are plenty of good at-bats .... that do not always lead to a hit or walk.

A productive out like a sqeeze play can win a ball game.
If the out accomplishes what you want it is productive.

quote:

I figure I should have known better than to let the kid swing in that situation.....

Coach Labeots, you would tell a player when to swing?

Blue Dog

In your mind what is a productive out?

Well I call them quality ab's vs non quality ab's. I do believe you can have a quality ab and get out. With a runner on 2b and no outs a ground ball to the right side which moves the runner to 3b with less than 2 outs is a quality ab. If your players are not taught this is a quality ab and do not understand the importance of doing these kind of things then you end up with selfish non quality ab's and you hurt your team.

This is only one example of a quality ab and you get out. An example of a non quality ab would be a hitter not understanding the importance or refusing to understand the importance of hitting behind a runner in this situation and pulling an outside pitch that results in a force and not advancing the runner.

This is only one example of a non quality ab.

I believe there are productive outs. A player that understands the difference in a quality ab and a non quality ab has a clue whats going on and a game plan.

A line drive seed hit right at the SS is an out. But it could be a very productive out. Maybe the pitcher now tries to be a litte fine with his pitches to the next batter and walks him? Or misses over the plate and gives up a bomb?

Getting out can be productive for the team. If your team has consistent quality ab's your going to be in good shape that game. If they dont then you have to get a great performance on the hill , play outstanding defense and maximize your scoing opportunities ie drop a couple of bombs with runners on etc. Teams that have players that understand the importance of having quality ab's will pressure the other team throughout the game and will score more runs on average with fewer hits.

I do not advocate hitting behind a runner on a pitch that can be or should be pulled just like I dont believe in going backside on an inside pitch when the hit and run is on. Teach players situational hitting but allow them to get in the box and hit. IMO you dont want them thinking too much. You want them focused on driving the pitch where it is pitched. But they need to understand with no outs and a runner on second base an outside fastball is a good pitch to get.

Coach May

I think you and I are saying the same thing but with different terms.


Make an out but move a baserunner up if you make an out

I think Reggie Jackson said it best when asked about all his strikeouts--"Better I strike out than hit into a doubleplay. With strikeout I only make one out."

I think there is a difference between a "productive out" and a "quality at-bat." I believe in both - but I think they are different.

A productive out, I would think, is an out that measurably improves the offensive situation in the scorebook. That's pretty self explanatory.

A quality at bat just in and of itself can certainly improve the offensive situation in ways such as Coach May describes, by increasing the pitch count, or putting doubt in the pitcher's mind, etc., but maybe not in the scorebook.

And there are lots of at bats that I would deem quality at bats that turn into outs. For my son, that is always the goal: have a quality at bat. Don't focus on the result as much as the process, because the result is in some ways beyond his control (such as a hard shot caught by a great play by the outfielder.)

Swing at pitches only with a purpose. That purpose changes depending on the situation and the count.

I agree with Coach May - the goal is to have quality at-bats. The rest takes care of itself.

Productive Outs would be moving a runner from 2nd to 3rd or by scoring him in the process of making an out. This could be done via all types of bunts, sac. fly, or ground outs.

Non productive outs would be a hitter making an out without advancing or scoring the runner.

I to like referring to them as Productive AB's as opposed to productive outs.

Socalhscoach,

I realize this thread has been around a long time...if you're still willing to share, I'd love to have an electronic copy of your chart.

If any other coaches have a productive at bat or quality at bat chart - I'd love to take a look.

Thanks in advance for your time and for sharing your knowledge of the game!

The Rangers Productive AB List:
Productive At Bats
1) Hit
2) BB
3) HBP/C Int
4) Sac Bunt
5) Sac Fly
6) Move runner with an out
7) Move runner on an error
8) 8 or more pitch AB

The Rangers goal each game is 17 Productive at bats. I believe it was Clint Hurdle, but I may be wrong. Anyway, this is when they started winning.

BOF, when Beane gets to the WS, he'll be worth listening to...

Great One,

I don’t have a chart of what a QAB or productive out is because they change with the person, the team, and the situation. What I do is track MRUs(Moved Runners Up). An MRO(Moved Runner Opportunity) happens when there a runner(s) on any base. An MRU happens when after the PA, the lead runner has moved up for any reason directly attributed to the batter.

There are a couple of exceptions. FI, if there’s no one on and the batter hits a HR or even scores on a series of misplays by the defense, that becomes an MRU. Another would be on a strikeout a lead runner steals or moves up on an error, PB, or WP. Those things have nothing to do with the batter, so there’s no MRO or MRU. Other than that, the MRUs are divided by the MROs to get a percentage of success.

If you want to see an example of what I generate, take a look at http://www.infosports.com/scor...per/images/mru01.pdf

Thanks for the responses thus far. Appreciate the time and help!