PDA

View Full Version : Strange hitting stats


Disantinon
06-30-2005, 05:11 PM
After seeing Frank's insane stat of 8 homeruns out of 12 hits, I decided to look at the team's stats.

Despite being 3rd in the AL in HRs, the Sox are dead last by a good margin in doubles (111, next worse 123). They are tied for last with the Yankees in triples, both having barely half of the next team (6 to 11).

Any explanation of why the Sox seem to be relatively unable to hit anything other than homeruns? Usually doubles go right along with HRs as "power numbers." Is this a Comiskey effect? Is it due to the strong AL Central pitching (4 of top 6 in AL OPS - but this is obviously a chicken-egg problem)?

maurice
06-30-2005, 05:14 PM
Any explanation of why the Sox seem to be relatively unable to hit anything other than homeruns? Usually doubles go right along with HRs as "power numbers."

Not when your name is Paul Konerko.

MIgrenade
06-30-2005, 05:26 PM
The Sox have small guys like Pods and Iguchi who hit a lot of singles, then they have HR guys like Thomas and Konerko who can't run so doubles aren't as easy to come by. Where do guys like Rowand and Dye rank in doubles. They seem like they should be on par with the league, but something tells me they aren't.

ode to veeck
06-30-2005, 05:27 PM
welcome to WSI by the way. Lack of 2b and 3b doesn't point to only HRs, could also be pointing to lots of singles

ondafarm
06-30-2005, 06:36 PM
The Sox have small guys like Pods and Iguchi who hit a lot of singles, then they have HR guys like Thomas and Konerko who can't run so doubles aren't as easy to come by. Where do guys like Rowand and Dye rank in doubles. They seem like they should be on par with the league, but something tells me they aren't.

Rowand has 16, tied for 29nth in the league. Certain parks are very friendly for doubles, Petco Park comes to mind, but others, like USCF does not seem like a double friendly park.

I think Rowand, Dye, Iguchi and Podsednik should all be solid doubles hitters.

SOXfnNlansing
06-30-2005, 06:38 PM
welcome to WSI

Chicago83
06-30-2005, 09:49 PM
I think it is a "comiskey effect" like you said. I checked the park factors on ESPN for 2004 and US Celluar was in the middle of the pack for hitting doubles and at the bottow for triples. It was by far the most HR friendly park. So I think a lot of the would be doubles turn into homers. Overall this team does not get many hits and has a very low average, yet somehow they score enough runs, I guess that's smallball.

Chicago83
06-30-2005, 09:52 PM
Certain parks are very friendly for doubles, Petco Park comes to mind, but others, like USCF does not seem like a double friendly park.

This is true, Fenway is the most friendly. Petco actually isn't very double friendly, but then again it's not really hitter friendly at all.

balke
06-30-2005, 09:55 PM
At times it almost seems like Pods isn't allowed to hit the ball hard enough for a double. He gets liners occasionally, but not gappers. Frank is normally our gapper guy (So was El Caballo) but apparently he found a new gap in the bleachers.

jabrch
06-30-2005, 09:58 PM
At times it almost seems like Pods isn't allowed to hit the ball hard enough for a double. He gets liners occasionally, but not gappers. Frank is normally our gapper guy (So was El Caballo) but apparently he found a new gap in the bleachers.

That's a good thing. Last year, Pods had a bunch more HRs, and was swinging for power. They think that's why his avg and obp were so low compared to the year before. If Pods hits about .290 with an obp about .350, and he steals 75+ bases, we will be just fine. I don't care what his slg% is.

Having a leadoff hitter who hits a lot of HRs or even doubles is by no means a recipie for success. Having a leadoff hitter who gets on base and scores a lot of runs - that's a much better move.

balke
06-30-2005, 10:01 PM
Yeah, I don't like him swinging hard either. He bunts on all the time, and when he walks he gets to 3rd occasionally. What more could you want out of a leadoff guy? I'd rather have him at 1st 2nd or 3rd with no outs, then have him hit a solo shot.

Charno
06-30-2005, 10:11 PM
I'd rather have him at 1st 2nd or 3rd with no outs, then have him hit a solo shot.
That doesn't really make any sense. But whatever. :cool:

Meixner007
06-30-2005, 10:18 PM
That doesn't really make any sense. But whatever. :cool:

I understand what he's trying to say. Your leadoff hitters aren't supposed to hit it out of the park, they're supposed to get on base. Obviously one run in is better than zero with a man on, but once the leadoff hitter starts swinging for the fences he, as well as the team, can have some problems...see corey patterson.

gobears1987
06-30-2005, 10:52 PM
That's a good thing. Last year, Pods had a bunch more HRs, and was swinging for power. They think that's why his avg and obp were so low compared to the year before. If Pods hits about .290 with an obp about .350, and he steals 75+ bases, we will be just fine. I don't care what his slg% is.

Having a leadoff hitter who hits a lot of HRs or even doubles is by no means a recipie for success. Having a leadoff hitter who gets on base and scores a lot of runs - that's a much better move.

Not to mention a leadoff batter who screws up the pitcher's mindset with his leadoffs.

Fake Chet Lemon
06-30-2005, 11:20 PM
Our doubles guys, Rowand and especially Dye started really slow. Look for us to move up a little in the ranks.

GregoryEtc
07-01-2005, 01:04 AM
Not to mention a leadoff batter who screws up the pitcher's mindset with his leadoffs.

exactly. Its a lot harder to pitch to guys with on base than with the bases empty. Home runs are rally killers. I'd take a string of singles over a solo shot any day. Baserunners force pitchers to throw more pitches and it gets us into their bullpens faster. And I've noticed that when we have come up against quality pitching (not that its happened too often...and is it me or does it always seem like the no-names know how to beat us), its usually because we're trying to bash our way back into the game instead of working the pitchers for a couple of base-knocks.

Steakpita
07-01-2005, 11:56 AM
exactly. Its a lot harder to pitch to guys with on base than with the bases empty. Home runs are rally killers. I'd take a string of singles over a solo shot any day. Baserunners force pitchers to throw more pitches and it gets us into their bullpens faster. And I've noticed that when we have come up against quality pitching (not that its happened too often...and is it me or does it always seem like the no-names know how to beat us), its usually because we're trying to bash our way back into the game instead of working the pitchers for a couple of base-knocks.


Whaaaa.....? :?:

I mean, it's true that baserunners (especially Podsednik!) can rattle pitchers, good or bad. But HR's aren't exactly rally-killers. Also, we've faced and beat a LOT of great pitching this year, and we haven't lost to many great or "no-name" pitchers. Maybe this post somehow jumped a timewarp from last year?

whtsx1959
07-01-2005, 01:11 PM
HRs are usually rally killers. With someone on, there is motivation to knock him in a get an rbi or move him to third. After a home run, there's no one on and its like starting from scratch.

You could say the pitcher is rattled, but after the HR, some pressure has been lifted because no one is on.

wildcat
07-01-2005, 01:15 PM
...we haven't lost to many great or "no-name" pitchers. Maybe this post somehow jumped a timewarp from last year?

Except for Ervin (nee Johan) Santana, who's now 2-3 with a 6.06 ERA.

And I agree that HR is a rally killer. I have to think it's easier to pitch strikes if you aren't worried that any hit could be an RBI. I tend to shake my head after an multi-run HR and say, "at least now there's no one on the bases." :smile:

Steakpita
07-01-2005, 01:28 PM
yeah but at the same time, what is the point of a rally if not to score runs? I see your point but I still say HR's work just fine.

Steakpita
07-01-2005, 01:29 PM
One Ervin Santana does not a trend make. I knew someone would bring that up...

Didn't we go on to beat Bartolo Colon and one other good Angels starter that series?

balke
07-01-2005, 01:43 PM
Yeah, I wouldn't like Pods hitting a Solo shot is all I'm saying. He's more valuable on the bases for the hitters behind him, that are either walked, or have the opportunity to score him from second with a hit (or HR) or sacrifice.

Frank hitting a Solo shot is always welcomed, but at times I'm just nearly as satisfied with a leadoff walk. Solo shots just aren't worth much, I'd always take a multi-run HR to start a rally though.

soxruleEP
07-01-2005, 09:49 PM
yeah but at the same time, what is the point of a rally if not to score runs? I see your point but I still say HR's work just fine.

It's not really a question of whether a home run is a good thing or not, it's a question of what style of baseball do you want to play.

There is no doubt that a three-run homer is a good thing. But if you are trying to get into a team's bullpen, you are more likely to do it with the starter going out of the stretch. I am sure we all happy when the Sox score three runs on four hits or three runs on a walk, a single, and a homer.