A few days ago Rob Neyer pointed out how three true outcomes (TTO) are increasing and wonders if something should be done about it. For those who don't know, the TTO is a walk, strikeout or home run. It's most of the plays that don't require the involvement of any fielder. Everyone knows that strikeouts have increased over the years. Walks may have too, but I'm not really sure.
Neyer wonders if something should be done to force more action in the field. Tangotiger wonders the same thing. Here's Tango:
Suppose you have 39 PA, regardless of style. Would you prefer 12 K+BB+HR+HB and 27 BIP, or 9 non-BIP and 30 BIP? That is, an increase of 33% more non-BIP at the expense of 10% fewer BIP. Is that a good tradeoff?
I’m old school, and I prefer non-BIP to be closer to 20% than 30% of all PA. I prefer runs per game to be in the high 3s or low 4s, and to be able to have a run environment where I can’t tell if the base-stealer or the power-hitter is the better overall player.
I was going to comment in that thread, but I'm actually curious about your opinions so figured I'd post it here.
This is something I've not given a lot of thought to other than the ideal run scoring environment for me. I like offense. I feel like I wasted my time better if I watched a 6-5 game than a 2-1 game. There's a point at which offense is too high and for me that's probably anything above 11 runs per game. A 6-5 game is the ideal game for me. During the regular season anyway.
In the playoffs you have two good teams playing one another so offense should be down in those October games.
Regarding balls in play, I'm not sure I really care. I like runs being scored. I like to watch the offense hit doubles, triples, home runs and I even like to see good baserunning. A fast guy who can steal a lot of bases is exciting to watch. On the other side of the ball I like to see strikeouts more than anything else. It's batter vs pitcher and one man wins and the other loses. I like to see great defensive plays too so I'd definitely not like a game in which all 27 outs were strikeouts.
They're at a little over 7 per game right now and that's just fine with me. If there's a starter on the mound who strikes out 6 per 9 I'm usually not too excited to watch the guy pitch. Put one on there who strikes out 9 and I'm a lot more excited.
The fear some have about a 6-5 run environment is that stolen bases would become extinct. That's not true. Teams would have to attempt to stolen bases in the same ways that batters have to attempt bunts. If you never bunt the defense plays back and makes it a lot easier to get the next batter out. If a team never tries to steal a base, the pitcher isn't the least bit concerned about the runner.
There would be fewer stolen base attempts, which I think is a good thing anyway. There would be fewer bunts too. This is another good thing. Starting pitchers would be throwing more pitches per inning, which would lead to them coming out of the game sooner than they do. This is also a good thing.
You may be thinking that fewer innings for the starter means more relievers on the roster. I don't think so. The 1975 Yankees 40-man roster included only 12 pitchers. A decade later it had 17. In 1995 they had 20.
Teams won't suddenly start carrying 15 pitchers on their active roster. They'll stick with the 12 they currently use and the relievers they have will just pitch more than they currently do. This is a good thing too. I can actually see this leading to fewer relievers on the active roster once teams see that relievers can be as effective over 95 or 100 innings as they are over 65 innings.
There is one thing that can be done to slightly reduce the number of strikeouts. Add the DH to the National League. This year the DH has struck out 148 times while the pitchers have struck out 168 times. The DH's have 808 plate appearances to 486 for the pitcher. This won't make much of a dent in the overall strikeout rate, but it's one simple thing that can be done.
Seriously, how much longer do we have to watch a batter hit .114/.146/.133? That's what pitchers are hitting this season. Would you rather watch that, along with pitch hitters who have hit .230/.305/.326 or the DH who has hit .280/.343/.471? Pitchers have a BABIP below .190 this season. It was under .230 last year. Either pitchers can't even hit the ball hard enough or they don't even bother to run. Either way, it's freaking ridiculous at this point that we have to watch pitchers bat. They have a .277 OPS this year.
If we divide the pitchers OPS by the league OPS and multiply by 100 we get 39. The league ERA is 3.85. Pitchers batting is the equivalent of a pitcher with an ERA of 10. Imagine one inning per game was pitched by a reliever who had an average ERA of 10. That's what the pitcher batting is. We'd never stand for such nonsense on the mound. You know who can have an ERA of 10? Every person on the field. You could put Tony Campana on the mound and over time he'd have an ERA less than 10. Position players are more qualified to pitch than pitchers are to hit. I don't see anyone begging to see more position players pitch.
Bubbs really liked SK’s post on last page. Nut is too dumb to quote it here.
bubblesdachimpQuote Reply
I have a silly question regarding the three true outcomes…
On a strikeout, if the third strike is dropped, the catcher still has to make the tag or throw to first and is therefore involved. Would that still be counted as a “true outcome” since a fielder is involved?
What about a fielder-assisted home run, i.e. the one that bounced off Bobby Scales a couple seasons ago? It was also involving a fielder. Still a true outcome because it counts as a home run?
Or let’s say ball four is called but is a wild pitch, and the guy who was in motion from first base attempts to make it to third, throw gets away, guy who took the BB makes it to second on a walk. The true outcome in that case would probably end when the BB reaches first base and then the rest is up to the gods, right?
Just wondering.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
To get to your post though, I have said on many occasions that I despise the DH but I hate shitty-hitting pitchers more. If they really hate the DH that much, they need to teach their pitchers to hit. There’s an entire strategy geared around defending a weak-hitting pitcher because they know he’s going to bunt and that ruins the game for me. The 1% of the time you’re surprised because he reaches on an infield single or error, or when he pulls the bat back and slaps a liner into CF isn’t worth it to me. Those two to four outs per game are conceded and I don’t think you should ever have to concede an out (except late in the game when you want to do anything to scratch across one run, I guess).
The occasional home run is fun, but I want to see gap doubles and triples, people flying around the bases and defenders freaking out because of the increased urgency of that play.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
I am all for the DH…
We used to have the best hitting squad ever with Kerry, Mark, Z, Maddux and Clement i think hit one out too…
Now its just brutal
bubblesdachimpQuote Reply
I guess you couldn’t take 20 seconds to look it up? 🙂
http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/NL/bat.shtml
Walks are higher than they were in the distant past, but they plateaued roughly in the 1940’s.
ACTQuote Reply
Also interesting to note that walks spiked from around 1889-1896, to a height of roughly what they are now. Strikeouts, on the other hand, have been increasing since the beginning of time, almost linearly.
ACTQuote Reply
@ ACT:
Was that before or after they dropped the “balls” to issue a walk from nine to four? I think they were all pitching to contact back then because that was the strategy-du-epoch.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
Dave van Dyck @davandyck Reply Retweet Favorite · Open
Cubs DL Dempster with quad strain, bring up o.f. Campana. Wells to start Sunday.
bubblesdachimpQuote Reply
I like runs, but I don’t necessarily want to lessen the impact of speed in the game. I’d bring the DH to the NL yesterday.
MishQuote Reply
@ Rice Cube:
Here is the rule change history: http://www.baseballlibrary.com/chronology/rules1.php
1879: 9 balls/walk
1884: 6 balls/walk
1886: 5 balls/walk
1889: 4 balls/walk
So, yes, the spike does seem to have been caused by the new walk rule. Good catch.
ACTQuote Reply
The funny thing about TTO is that they weren’t originally meant to be a major part of baseball. Baseball started out as a contest between fielders and runners. Called strikes were rarely if ever called, balls/walks didn’t exist, and in some variations balls hit over the outfield fence were sometimes ruled as out of play, rather than home runs. The pitcher’s job was to lob the ball wherever that batsman wanted it (he could call high or low), and the batsman would let it sail by if he found it unsatisfactory. Then people like Jim Creighton came along and tried to strike out batters, which yielded a ton of complaints that he was cheating. Balls and walks were invented as a way to keep pitchers in line. But pitchers kept fighting for more power, and eventually earned the right to throw overhand.
ACTQuote Reply
49 wins is the goal.. Try not to be worse then the 2003 tigers
bubblesdachimpQuote Reply
I guess what I find funny is that the duel of wits between batter and pitcher, which is now such a fundamental part of the game, was not something that came along due to any public demand for it. Rather, pitchers came in and started “ruining” the game and the audience decided they enjoyed it. Sort of like how Babe Ruth discovered a “glitch” in the game where if you hit the ball over the outfield fence you get a free trip around the bases. The public loved it, and other hitters followed suit, and the power hitter was born virtually overnight.
ACTQuote Reply
Anyway, back to the OP:
This is the part I most disagree with. Who wants to see Halladay, Verlander, et al taken out for some no-name reliever? Complete games are more fun.
ACTQuote Reply
ChicagoCubsOnline @TheCCO Reply Retweet Favorite · Open
RT @nickcafardo Source:Red Sox closing in on deal for Cubs OF Marlon Byrd.
bubblesdachimpQuote Reply
Honestly i would take back Aaron Kurcz
bubblesdachimpQuote Reply
bubblesdachimp wrote:
NO WAI
Rice in limboQuote Reply
@ bubblesdachimp:
Wouldn’t Wells be the one who was brought up so he could start? Or is someone else being sent down?
Recalcitrant Blogger NateQuote Reply
@ bubblesdachimp:
That would explain the Campana thing then
Recalcitrant Blogger NateQuote Reply
@ Recalcitrant Blogger Nate:
Yeah, because Campana is the best CF the Cubs have in AAA right now.
ACTQuote Reply
Nothing like trading players at peak value..
Thanks Marlon it was fun.
You know he might be the frist african american cub that didnt complain about racism in a long time. (or hasnt yet)
That is a good development
bubblesdachimpQuote Reply
@ Recalcitrant Blogger Nate:
I think with both Kerry Wood and Dempster going to the DL they don’t have to do any more roster shuffling for the time being.
Rice in limboQuote Reply
Nick Cardafo is still the best Cubs writer out there
dylanjQuote Reply
@ ACT:
Don’t get me wrong, i think Campana is the 3rd best CF in Iowa. I was just commenting that if Campana is the roster move for Dempster’s DL, how the hell can Randy Wells start sunday’s game when he’s not on the Cubs 25 man roster. I’d rather see Sappelt get a shot. Obviously Byrd is gone, and I hope he rebounds and gets a chance at the playoffs with Boston. I like Byrd as a player. I guess the Cubs want to give Campana some PA’s to see what they’ve got. If he can play excellent defense and get on base at all, who the hell knows. I don’t understand why the Cubs have Reed Johnson on the team. I’d rather them have had Sappelt/Campana on the roster.
Recalcitrant Blogger NateQuote Reply
I like Campana so I’m all for him getting some starts.
dylanjQuote Reply
Sahadev Sharma @sahadevsharma Reply Retweet Favorite · Open
Sitting w/ @ESPNBruceLevine in press box, he says that Byrd deal will likely happen today, apparently for a LH reliever & minor leaguer
bubblesdachimpQuote Reply
@ Recalcitrant Blogger Nate:
I’m guessing the deal is already done in theory and Wells is there for when Byrd is finally shipped out. Forgot about Scott Maine as the move for Wood’s DL.
Rice in limboQuote Reply
@ bubblesdachimp:
Byrd was the only African American Cubs player so far this year. Now they have none, unless they acquire one from the BoSox
Recalcitrant Blogger NateQuote Reply
@ bubblesdachimp:
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2012-04-15/sports/ct-spt-0416-bits-cubs-cardinals-chicago–20120416_1_black-lawyers-cubs-job-african-american
http://sports.espn.go.com/chicago/mlb/news/story?id=4952014
I also have it on excellent authority that Byrd even confronted Wittenmyer in the locker room very angry over the racial overtones of Wittenmyer calling him the “anti-Bradley.”
bubbles needs to read a fucking book or two.
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
ChicagoCubsOnline @TheCCO Reply Retweet Favorite · Open
#Cubs According to Bruce Levine, #Cubs could receive a LHP and a minor league OF for Byrd. Levine is hearing Justin Thomas is the LHP.
bubblesdachimpQuote Reply
@ Mercurial Outfielder:
Interesting I didnt see that. I was more referring to the fans behavior. He never once (as far i remember complained about the fans)
bubblesdachimpQuote Reply
Byrd for Chris Carpenter and Aaron Kurcz
dylanjQuote Reply
I really liked Marlon Byrd. He wasn’t an especially good player, but he seemed to have a really good head on his shoulders and the guy went out and did his job every day. Hope the return is decent.
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
@ dylanj:
I would be ok with that.
(dying laughing)
(dying laughing)
bubblesdachimpQuote Reply
@ bubblesdachimp:
As it was told to me, Wittenmyer tried to goad him into saying something about it, which was what set Byrd off.
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
@ Mercurial Outfielder:
I think the only complaint people have these days is with his playing ability rather than his personality, which is strangely refreshing.
Rice in limboQuote Reply
Byrd was a nice guy but I don’t think we will get shit in return. Justin Thomas is a run of the mill LOOGY/AAA guy and I doubt we get much upside from the minor league OF. This might be one of the cases where small sample size really does matter as Byrd couldn’t have done more to kill his value.
dylanjQuote Reply
@ Mercurial Outfielder:
I liked marlon as well. Played hard. Just had no use on this team.
bubblesdachimpQuote Reply
@ dylanj:
That would solidify my thesis that LArry Lucchino will quickly ruin the Red Sox.
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
but i dont give a single fuck if the Cubs have a black player or not. They could field a team of Albino Nationalists and if they played better than this squad I would be all for it
dylanjQuote Reply
dylanj wrote:
/shrug
Rice in limboQuote Reply
@ dylanj:
I think it’s more that Marlon Byrd just isn’t an especially good player. There’s a lot guys like Marlon Byrd around. The Red Sox just happened to want the Cubs’ version.
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
oh I think the Sox are fucked. Bobby fucking Valentine says it all. BTW Mayo I sent you a song on Spotify since I love you so much. Maybe I’ll make you a mixtape next
dylanjQuote Reply
@ Mercurial Outfielder:
Interesting. I wasnt saying at all that Byrd never had anything happen to him (i am sure he did)
But i jsut never remember him complaining (and he damn well should complain) about the fans doing racist shit.
It figures it would be the chicago media.
I like Byrd. I wish him nothing but the best.
bubblesdachimpQuote Reply
I thought maybe Campana was up to replace Dempster, then when Wells came up on Sunday, either Campana or Mather would get sent down. But the Byrd thing makes sense too.
Suburban kidQuote Reply
@ dylanj:
Not having to pay him 6.5 million dollars is a good enough reason to trade him and get more AB’s for youngsters
bubblesdachimpQuote Reply
To my mind, the chief benefit of this move is that it clears the decks for Jackson when he’s ready. It would have been hard to sit a vet like Byrd to let a kid play, but you can do whatever ever you want with scrubs like Reed and Campana when you decide Jackson is ready.
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
Apropos to nothing, here are Zack Grienke’s ERA and FIP the last 3 years:
2010: 4.17, 3.34
2011: 3.83, 2.98
2012: 5.12, 1.98
What I find funny is that Zack said FIP was his favorite stat and that his goal as a pitcher is to maximize it. It’s as if the baseball gods said, “Here! Have all the FIP you want! Hope you don’t mind mediocre traditional stats.”
ACTQuote Reply
@ Mercurial Outfielder:
This is an excellent point as well. There are zero roadblocks to Brett Jackson but his 30% K rate right now and the super two deadline. I think we see him by June
bubblesdachimpQuote Reply
@ dylanj:
My FB inbox is acting really weird, so I haven’t been able to open your message, but I did see it and you can expect your personalized Build-A-Bear in the mail soon.
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
is justin thomas better than belbivdeveau?
GWQuote Reply
thecubreporter @thecubreporter Reply Retweet Favorite · Open
Byrd played hard for #Cubs, seemed to be a positive force, worked to come back from a horrible injury. Best to him.
I really like that opinion a lot
bubblesdachimpQuote Reply
@ ACT:
I hope he signs a contract with the Cubs this offseason
Recalcitrant Blogger NateQuote Reply
@ Mercurial Outfielder:
http://penny-arcade.com/comic/2005/06/29
BerseliusQuote Reply
My new favorite band name:
.
.
.
Suburban kidQuote Reply
Anyway, free Strasburg game on mlb.tv. Sounds more fun than watching the Cubs trying to end their 6-game skid.
ACTQuote Reply
And… it’s dog day at the park! Puppies!
ACTQuote Reply
3 ex-Cubs playing: DeRosa, Tracy, Nady
ACTQuote Reply
Recalcitrant Blogger Nate wrote:
I actually wouldn’t be surprised Campana was the best, and Jackson the 3rd best. Strictly defensively speaking, of course.
GWQuote Reply
I’ve never been impressed with Campana’s defense. His arm is laughable, and he has to use his speed to make up for some really goofy routes.
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
I see J. Hamilton has joined the ranks of players with more longballs than the Cubs.
ACTQuote Reply
@ Mercurial Outfielder:
FWIW, his arm looked pretty good in Round Rock this week
BerseliusQuote Reply
@ Berselius:
There was some noise in ST that he’d been working on it.
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
@ Mercurial Outfielder:
He must be transformed
BerseliusQuote Reply
Nice to see a Cub take an extra base
BerseliusQuote Reply
@ Berselius:
It’s undeniable. I forgot to ignore all the shitty throws he’s made, because transformation introduces a new sample.
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
Rangers are once again scoring like a football team. Wow.
ACTQuote Reply
So the Cubs still haven’t been shut out this season.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
@ Rice Cube:
Moral victory!
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
@ ACT:
Detroit’s offense is solid enough that an 8 run lead is relatively unsafe (dying laughing)
BerseliusQuote Reply
Also, holy crap I had no idea the Rangers were 11-2
BerseliusQuote Reply
ACT wrote:
Those guys are still going to throw complete games. For the most part though, the complete game is a thing of the past so I don’t particularly care if any rule makes it more unlikely one is thrown. The complete games will still be thrown by those who are economical with their pitches.
I don’t think we’d see no-name relievers, but I could be wrong. Teams will either have to go with 13 or 14 pitchers with such a change or admit they’re idiots for not pitching their best relievers more than they currently do. I’m not betting they admit that, but I am betting they figure this one out on their own.
mb21Quote Reply
@ Mercurial Outfielder:
Rice CubeQuote Reply
mb21 wrote:
And those who can shoulder workloads. Guys like Verlander, Halladay, and somewhat recent vintage Z are pitchers who would succeed in any era.
BerseliusQuote Reply
@ Rice Cube:
Don’t tell me what to do
Herald SunQuote Reply
dylanj wrote:
At least he would add something exciting to this team so I’m all for it too. The bad thing is that I won’t care unless it’s a game started by Garza or Dempster. And even then I probably won’t care. (dying laughing)
mb21Quote Reply
Texas is fucking unreal
bubblesdachimpQuote Reply
@ mb21:
I wonder if he’ll bounce Barney from the second spot in the order.
BerseliusQuote Reply
bubblesdachimp wrote:
You don’t have to tell me, I live here.
BerseliusQuote Reply
Solid hit from Mather
BerseliusQuote Reply
@ mb21:
Here’s a question that I don’t think I’ve ever found a good answer to, but was there a philosophy in not allowing players to re-enter games after a substitution? I’m not sure how the layoff in-game would hurt the pitchers but it would reduce the number of pitchers you would have to carry if you could allow guys to come back in given a situation…
Rice CubeQuote Reply
Joe mather is great!!!!
bubblesdachimpQuote Reply
@ bubblesdachimp:
And their first baseman is batting nineth! Think what they would be if they got a real first baseman.
ACTQuote Reply
MO, are you enjoying watching Spurs piss away their Champions league spot?
BerseliusQuote Reply
@ Berselius:
Yes. So angry. So, so angry.
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
@ Rice Cube:
Eh, it sort of makes sense. Though it might all cancel out if both pitchers and batters were allowed to re-sub. It would certainly make games last a lot longer (dying laughing)
BerseliusQuote Reply
bubblesdachimpQuote Reply
@ Mercurial Outfielder:
What happened? I haven’t been watching as much this season. I don’t think there was a particular injury or anything. Seemed like all the strikers just stopped scoring. In other words, Spurs being Spurs.
BerseliusQuote Reply
Berselius wrote:
(dying laughing)
mb21Quote Reply
@ ACT:
We should trade them LaHair.
However Beltre left with quad issues
bubblesdachimpQuote Reply
Cubs are scoring!
ACTQuote Reply
@ bubblesdachimp:
Hopefully the Cubs eat as much salary as possible. They need players, not money.
BerseliusQuote Reply
@ mb21:
It’s not like they can elbow them
BerseliusQuote Reply
(dying laughing)udwick
BerseliusQuote Reply
@ Rice Cube:
I’ve never read anything about it, but I think the obvious reason is that it would essentially have created a DH position. I don’t know though.
mb21Quote Reply
Man, I chose not to watch the Cubs play for a change, and they decided to start playing well?
ACTQuote Reply
@ mb21:
It would basically turn baseball into football. You’d have a different package of guys out there for each PA/play
BerseliusQuote Reply
Rice Cube wrote:
That should be pretty obvious. It would break the game. Let’s say you have Pujols. You bat him leadoff. After he gets out, you take him out and substitute him for the no. 2 hitter. If he gets on, you pinch run for him and substitute him for the no. three hitter. You’d never bat anyone but Pujols. And all the fielders would be like Ozzie Smith. You’d pinch hit for them every time they come to the plate and put them back in on defense.
ACTQuote Reply
@ Berselius:
I can see how that would be annoying.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
new shit: http://obstructedview.net/news-and-rumors/marlon-byrd-to-be-traded-to-the-red-sox.html
mb21Quote Reply
These games feel even better after the long losing streaks. Wins are going to feel even better. It’s the slow buildup that makes it good.
I was going to do a comic where the Hope Monster is dying, but this win will definitely give him smoe fuel to come back to life. MAYBE JOE MATHER WILL SAVE US!
joshQuote Reply
@ Berselius:
We’ve lost discipline in the midfield and across the back. Totally disorganized. Modric and Bale have vanished, due to selfish, positionally inept play from both. They’re both trying to be the star of the show and are only succeeding in removing themselves from play.
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply