Contact Hitters versus Strikeout Pitchers

[nsacpi]

This is not about the silly proposition advanced by some at the start of the season that baseball had entered a new era where power was not important and that contact was the wave of the future.

But in recent years data analysis has revealed all sorts of matchup considerations that go beyond the traditional lefty-righty platoons. One has been the discovery that fly ball hitters do relatively well against ground ball pitchers.

It seems natural to ask whether hitters with low strikeout rates negate some of the effectiveness of high strikeout pitchers. I'm not aware of any such studies. We'll see a mini experiment in the WS with the Royals hitters against the Mets pitchers.

[50PoundHead]

This is not about the silly proposition advanced by some at the start of the season that baseball had entered a new era where power was not important and that contact was the wave of the future.

But in recent years data analysis has revealed all sorts of matchup considerations that go beyond the traditional lefty-righty platoons. One has been the discovery that fly ball hitters do relatively well against ground pitchers.

It seems natural to ask whether hitters with low strikeout rates negate some of the effectiveness of high strikeout pitchers. I'm not aware of any such studies. We'll see a mini experiment in the WS with the Royals hitters against the Mets pitchers.

That's not all that recent. Bill James did some rudimentary analysis about 20 years ago and found there was a correlation (published it in one the annual Baseball Scoreboards he used to put together). I imagine the honing of the statistical analysis has solidified his impression.

From someone who was a pretty lousy baseball player, here's my take. When a groundball pitcher misses, the pitch is usually going to be up a few inches and a fly ball hitter (they usually have an uppercut swing to some extent) will launch those pitches. When a flyball pitcher misses, it will usually be up out of the zone. I think heavy groundball pitchers tend to be more ball-in-play guys as well, so there stuff isn't going to be overpowering, which can make it more hittable. I've oversimplified things and while the overall assertion may seem counter-intuitive, when you think about it, it makes sense.

On the contact hitter v. strikeout pitcher, I think it all depends on what kind of contact (duh). Contact is better than non-contact, but at the same time outs are outs and a weak ground ball to the second baseman will usually result in an out.

It will be an interesting series. The Royals don't fit the narrative to some extent, but they are a pretty good baseball team.

[nsacpi]

Whether by design or not, I think the Royals have a lineup that is more effective than most against power arms. They put the ball in play and are pretty aggressive on the base paths.

I do agree with the distinction between good contact hitters and weak ones. The bottom line is that you want to have good hitters and good hitters exist across a very broad spectrum as far as strikeout and walk rates go. But I also think the trend toward more power arms, increasing average fastball velocities and higher strikeout rates does shade valuation a bit in the direction of contact hitters (good contact hitters of course).

[bravesfanMatt]

This is not about the silly proposition advanced by some at the start of the season that baseball had entered a new era where power was not important and that contact was the wave of the future.

But in recent years data analysis has revealed all sorts of matchup considerations that go beyond the traditional lefty-righty platoons. One has been the discovery that fly ball hitters do relatively well against ground pitchers.

It seems natural to ask whether hitters with low strikeout rates negate some of the effectiveness of high strikeout pitchers. I'm not aware of any such studies. We'll see a mini experiment in the WS with the Royals hitters against the Mets pitchers.

Low strikeout hitters, to me, seems like they would run deeper counts. That, if nothing else was different, would drive pitch counts up.

[nsacpi]

Low strikeout hitters, to me, seems like they would run deeper counts. That, if nothing else was different, would drive pitch counts up.

Actually I don't think there is that high a correlation between low strikeout rates and pitch counts. Andrelton Simmons for example has a low strikeout rate but is hardly a patient hitter.

[bravesfanMatt]

Whether by design or not, I think the Royals have a lineup that is more effective than most against power arms. They put the ball in play and are pretty aggressive on the base paths.

I do agree with the distinction between good contact hitters and weak ones. The bottom line is that you want to have good hitters and good hitters exist across a very broad spectrum as far as strikeout and walk rates go. But I also think the trend toward more power arms, increasing average fastball velocities and higher strikeout rates does shade valuation a bit in the direction of contact hitters (good contact hitters of course).

of course it all depends on the hitters. it reminds me of the old Yankees that would always beat us in the Series. They had those hitters who you couldn't get out. They fouled pitcher pitches off, and would run deep counts. You had guys like Bernie, Jorge, O'neal, Jeter who could not only take you deep, but wouldn't strike out a ton like most power hitters today, so they worked a pitcher. That eventually gets to you.

[50PoundHead]

Actually I don't think there is that high a correlation between low strikeout rates and pitch counts. Andrelton Simmons for example has a low strikeout rate but is hardly a patient hitter.

Same with a guy like Martin Prado. There are still classic ball-in-play hitters who can get decent contact on pitches well out of the zone. It's rare that those guys have done as well as Prado has. Growing up in a different era, there used to be a ton of guys like Simmons, but that's when the average fastball sat around 85 mph. Power pitching has changed the game a lot.

[bravesfanMatt]

Actually I don't think there is that high a correlation between low strikeout rates and pitch counts. Andrelton Simmons for example has a low strikeout rate but is hardly a patient hitter.

maybe not, but again it depends on the hitter. Simmons is an aggressive swinger. He attacks earlier in the count. He has incredible hand eye coordination. you would think if he could learn pitch recognition, he would be dangerous at the plate.

[bravesfanMatt]

Actually I don't think there is that high a correlation between low strikeout rates and pitch counts. Andrelton Simmons for example has a low strikeout rate but is hardly a patient hitter.

I was looking at Simmons splits this year... have you ever looked at them. he is hitting .367 on the first pitch. if he is ahead 3-0 he is hitting .150 ish I think. He hits better when he is behind than when he is ahead. insane!! didn't mean to thread jack.

[sturg33]

Low strikeout hitters, to me, seems like they would run deeper counts. That, if nothing else was different, would drive pitch counts up.

Actually, higher strikeout hitters run deeper counts. If you strikeout, you guaranteed to see at least 3 pitches, and often much more.

[The Chosen One]

Actually, higher strikeout hitters run deeper counts. If you strikeout, you guaranteed to see at least 3 pitches, and often much more.

Unless you're BJ Upton. Then you usually see 3-4 pitches max.

[gilesfan]

Low strikeout hitters, to me, seems like they would run deeper counts. That, if nothing else was different, would drive pitch counts up.

Without even thinnking about it, I would venture to get low strikeout guys swing more often and do not run deeper counts. I could be wrong, but typically guys don't strike out because they swing a lot and are good at making contact when they swing.

[gilesfan]

The Royals are interesting because they really aren't that good of an offense; a little above average (8th best in AL in wRC+). They have zero hitters that you would consider great hitters. But, they do have 6 guys that are good hitters that range in wRC+ between 122 and 131. It's really just a lineup where it doesn't matter who is up, there are good hitters at the plate except Perez, Rios, and Escobar.

Which, of course means that Escobar is your leadoff hitter (lol) and MVP (WTF).

[gilesfan]

What are the odds that Escobar and Murphy do anything in the world series?

[bravesfanMatt]

Without even thinnking about it, I would venture to get low strikeout guys swing more often and do not run deeper counts. I could be wrong, but typically guys don't strike out because they swing a lot and are good at making contact when they swing.

I was looking at some stats regarding p/pa and SO%.. there seems to be a few extremes on both ends. Guys like Simmons, aybar, and Altuve who don't K much but see the fewest pitches in the league. Then guys like Granderson, Ian Kinsler, Beltre, Josh Reddick, and Ben Zobrist who are in the top 20 in fewest K% but see a lot compared to league average. They are in the higher 3s and Zobrist is in the 4 pitches per. The guys who seem to see a lot of pitches are the big power hitters, who get walked, or pitched around a lot. GRanderson was the highest p/pa at 4.37 or something like that. Altuve and Simmons were 1/2 with 3.23/3.27 respectively.

[JohnAdcox]

Unless you're BJ Upton. Then you usually see 3-4 pitches max.

He might not have actually seen that last one. What with the turning to glare at the umpire and all.

[gilesfan]

I was looking at some stats regarding p/pa and SO%.. there seems to be a few extremes on both ends. Guys like Simmons, aybar, and Altuve who don't K much but see the fewest pitches in the league. Then guys like Granderson, Ian Kinsler, Beltre, Josh Reddick, and Ben Zobrist who are in the top 20 in fewest K% but see a lot compared to league average. They are in the higher 3s and Zobrist is in the 4 pitches per. The guys who seem to see a lot of pitches are the big power hitters, who get walked, or pitched around a lot. GRanderson was the highest p/pa at 4.37 or something like that. Altuve and Simmons were 1/2 with 3.23/3.27 respectively.

I would venture to guess there have been studies done and more pitches seen = more strikeouts.

[clvclv]

I would venture to guess there have been studies done and more pitches seen = more strikeouts.

I would expect this winter's free-agent crop to be a good test case...

From MLBTR's J-Up free-agent profile (http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2015/1...ree-agent.html)...


"Strikeouts are part of Upton’s game. He has whiffed in 25.8% of his plate appearances since 2013; only seven qualified hitters struck out more often. Oddly enough, all of them are either free agents or non-tender candidates."

[gilesfan]

I would expect this winter's free-agent crop to be a good test case...

From MLBTR's J-Up free-agent profile (http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2015/1...ree-agent.html)...


"Strikeouts are part of Upton’s game. He has whiffed in 25.8% of his plate appearances since 2013; only seven qualified hitters struck out more often. Oddly enough, all of them are either free agents or non-tender candidates."

I see:

Desmond
Morse
JD Martinez
Stanton
Alvarez
Napoli
Howard
Reynolds
BJ
Chris Davis
Avila
Rolby Rasmus
Zunino
STubbs
Tyler FLowers
Chris Carter

[50PoundHead]

The Royals are interesting because they really aren't that good of an offense; a little above average (8th best in AL in wRC+). They have zero hitters that you would consider great hitters. But, they do have 6 guys that are good hitters that range in wRC+ between 122 and 131. It's really just a lineup where it doesn't matter who is up, there are good hitters at the plate except Perez, Rios, and Escobar.

Which, of course means that Escobar is your leadoff hitter (lol) and MVP (WTF).

For a team next-to-last in the AL in HRs, they have 7 guys who hit double-figure in HRs. They are a team that can fool you.

Hosmer looks like he may be ready to take it to the next level, but he's been really inconsistent thus far in his career so 2015 could be a mirage.