White Sox Interactive Forums
Sox Clubhouse
 Soxogram: 
Congratulations on the Rookie records for HR and RBI in April, Jose!

Welcome
Go Back   White Sox Interactive Forums > Baseball Discussions > Sox Clubhouse
Home Chat Stats Register Blogs FAQ Calendar Mark Forums Read


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #61  
Old 05-24-2013, 05:58 PM
DSpivack DSpivack is offline
WSI Guru
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Evanston
Posts: 28,951
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MISoxfan View Post
2012
AL Strikeouts
1: Oakland Athletics (94-68) Runs Scored: 8th
2: Tampa Bay Rayes (90-72) Runs Scored: 11th
3: Baltimore Orioles (93-69) Runs Scored: 9th

14: Kansas City Royals (72-90) Runs Scored: 12th
13: Minnesota Twins (66-96) Runs Scored: 10th
12: Cleveland Indians (68-94) Runs Scored: 13th

I'm not going to continue doing that for every single season, but you can look through every single season and see if you can find a strong correlation between strikeouts and runs scored if you want. I don't think you'll find one. As far as the 2011 World Series, the White Sox had the second fewest strikeouts with 989 and scored a whopping 654 runs.
Perhaps there is no correlation between an offense's K rate and runs scored (I don't know either way), but in a recent Grantland article on the Royals continued lack of success Jonah Keri and Rany Jazayerli argue that there is one between BB rate and runs scored.

The White Sox, FWIW, are 4th from the bottom in BB rate and 6th from the bottom in runs/game.
__________________
Attendance records:
09 : 3-2.
10 : 2-3.
11: 0-1.
12: 2-1.
14: 2-3.
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 05-24-2013, 06:28 PM
TDog TDog is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Modesto, California
Posts: 16,253
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MISoxfan View Post
2012
AL Strikeouts
1: Oakland Athletics (94-68) Runs Scored: 8th
2: Tampa Bay Rayes (90-72) Runs Scored: 11th
3: Baltimore Orioles (93-69) Runs Scored: 9th

14: Kansas City Royals (72-90) Runs Scored: 12th
13: Minnesota Twins (66-96) Runs Scored: 10th
12: Cleveland Indians (68-94) Runs Scored: 13th

I'm not going to continue doing that for every single season, but you can look through every single season and see if you can find a strong correlation between strikeouts and runs scored if you want. I don't think you'll find one. As far as the 2011 World Series, the White Sox had the second fewest strikeouts with 989 and scored a whopping 654 runs.
You continue to miss the point. It's not about total runs scored out of context. It's about not giving up outs. Giving up outs is something you don't want to do if you want to win.

When the Rangers were at their best offensively and went to the World Series, they were striking out less than any other team in the league. When the Giants won the World Series last year after running away with their division, they had the second fewest strikeouts in the majors despite having a couple of starting pitchers who struck out in about half of their plate appearances. If you don't have a great offense, and the Giants hit fewer than 100 home runs, not striking out allows you to do more things to score runs. If you lead the league in batting average, as the Rangers and Cardinals did with the fewest NL strikeouts in 2011, striking out less means more means you have more productive outs and you manufacture more runs. Not striking out is something that improves your offense.

Regardless of what statisticians who never played the game might conclude, the reality is about not giving up outs when you have two strikes on you. The more you strike out, the harder our offense has to work to score. Really, that should be obvious when you watch baseball.

Even if you look at baseball as rolls of the dice and percentages, I don't see how anyone can defend players who intentionally decrease their chances of some level of success with two strikes by refusing to shorten their swings to make contact, to focus on making contact, when even a foul tip can put them out with only the catcher tested defensively.
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 05-25-2013, 04:13 PM
TheVulture TheVulture is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 3,126
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MISoxfan View Post
2012
AL Strikeouts
1: Oakland Athletics (94-68) Runs Scored: 8th
2: Tampa Bay Rayes (90-72) Runs Scored: 11th
3: Baltimore Orioles (93-69) Runs Scored: 9th

14: Kansas City Royals (72-90) Runs Scored: 12th
13: Minnesota Twins (66-96) Runs Scored: 10th
12: Cleveland Indians (68-94) Runs Scored: 13th

I'm not going to continue doing that for every single season, but you can look through every single season and see if you can find a strong correlation between strikeouts and runs scored if you want. I don't think you'll find one. As far as the 2011 World Series, the White Sox had the second fewest strikeouts with 989 and scored a whopping 654 runs.
How many of those teams hit .180?

If you look at the teams that scored the most runs, you will find they are all in the lower half of the league in strikeouts, btw. Yanks, LA and Tex all K'd less than 1200 times, compared to average of about 1350 of the top 3 teams. Same with 2011, Texas had the lowest K rate, all top three teams in runs in lower half.
__________________
A bad idea is better than no idea at all- Hawk
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 05-26-2013, 10:52 AM
MISoxfan MISoxfan is offline
WSI Personality
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 896
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TDog View Post
You continue to miss the point. It's not about total runs scored out of context. It's about not giving up outs. Giving up outs is something you don't want to do if you want to win.

When the Rangers were at their best offensively and went to the World Series, they were striking out less than any other team in the league. When the Giants won the World Series last year after running away with their division, they had the second fewest strikeouts in the majors despite having a couple of starting pitchers who struck out in about half of their plate appearances. If you don't have a great offense, and the Giants hit fewer than 100 home runs, not striking out allows you to do more things to score runs. If you lead the league in batting average, as the Rangers and Cardinals did with the fewest NL strikeouts in 2011, striking out less means more means you have more productive outs and you manufacture more runs. Not striking out is something that improves your offense.

Regardless of what statisticians who never played the game might conclude, the reality is about not giving up outs when you have two strikes on you. The more you strike out, the harder our offense has to work to score. Really, that should be obvious when you watch baseball.

Even if you look at baseball as rolls of the dice and percentages, I don't see how anyone can defend players who intentionally decrease their chances of some level of success with two strikes by refusing to shorten their swings to make contact, to focus on making contact, when even a foul tip can put them out with only the catcher tested defensively.
I am not missing any point. You continue to indicate that not striking out is a better indicator of a good offense than scoring runs. Also, could you go one or two posts without indicating that anyone who doesn't agree with you doesn't watch the game?
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 05-26-2013, 01:01 PM
Frater Perdurabo Frater Perdurabo is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Plano, Texas
Posts: 18,221
Blog Entries: 1
Default

The best - the only - indicator of the "best offense" is that which scores the most runs the most consistently.

Teams that score the most runs the most consistently almost always have the ability to score runs in multiple ways: power, speed, batting average, plate discipline to take walks and drive up pitch counts, manufacturing runs, smart base running, etc.
__________________
The universe is the practical joke of the General at the expense of the Particular, quoth Frater Perdurabo, and laughed. The disciples nearest him wept, seeing the Universal Sorrow. Others laughed, seeing the Universal Joke. Others wept. Others laughed. Others wept because they couldn't see the Joke, and others laughed lest they should be thought not to see the Joke. But though FRATER laughed openly, he wept secretly; and really he neither laughed nor wept. Nor did he mean what he said.
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 05-26-2013, 01:58 PM
TDog TDog is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Modesto, California
Posts: 16,253
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MISoxfan View Post
I am not missing any point. You continue to indicate that not striking out is a better indicator of a good offense than scoring runs. Also, could you go one or two posts without indicating that anyone who doesn't agree with you doesn't watch the game?
If that is what you believe I am indicating, you indeed are missing the point.

Strikeouts are not an indicator of whether an offense is good or bad. The only one statistic that indicates that is runs scored, and even that doesn't tell you how good an offense might be against a given team or pitcher in a given setting. Strikeouts do indicate a level of vulnerability that hold your team back.

Striking out less improves your offense. It allows you to manufacture more runs. Teams that are successful tend to manufacture a lot of runs whether or not their run totals indicate they have a good offense.

If you are a hitter that strikes out a lot and has a low batting average, you have been an easy out against pitchers who throw strikes. It is rare when you are not hurting your offense.

We aren't talking about hitters changing their hitting styles and taking away from their strengths. We are talking about enhancing their weaknesses. We are talking about hitters focusing on putting the ball in play when they are faced with two strike counts, improving their chances of not making an out.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



Forum Jump




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:53 AM.




Design by: Michelle

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Site-specific editorial/photos Copyright ©2001 - 2008 White Sox Interactive. All rights reserved.