Dunn continues streak of walks

[CincyRedsFan30]

If someone tries to get Dunn to raise his average, he's going to start swinging at pitches he shouldn't, and as a result, making more Outs. He just doesn't get enough pitches to hit where he's at in the lineup, so this strategy would be especially bad. He would be driving in those runs if he were actually higher up in the order. He just draws the BB where he's at because he doesn't get enough to hit. I'd rather him BB than record an Out.

[missionhockey21]

in fact, guys like dunn and sexson (that k and walk a lot, the thing you are saying is the same thing) are actually quite rare. Most people who walk a lot don't swing and miss much, and don't strike out often.

That is an interesting point Wally, one I really haven't considered. I think since a guy like Dunn is well, a statistical anomaly, it is much harder to find a clear cut straight forward answer on him that everyone agrees with. Thus why this debate is so frustrating.

[Fishercat]

I can only think of one situation where a 6-4-3/4-6-3/5-4-3 (basically, any DP that doesn't have an out at home) would be anywhere near preferable to a strikeout, that being a team going up by one in the Top of the 9th (10th, 11th, etc.). The bottom would have a throw home anyway, and I'd only consider teams with lights-out closers for that situation.

According to studies (using Felber's "The Book on the Book"), in a random situation with bases loaded and zero outs, a team will score approximately 2.4 runs. In a 2 out with a runner on third situation, they would score .4 runs. Essentially, by the averages, you're giving up a full run even if you score a run on a bases-loaded DP.

The difference between CRF is that he posted articles with statistics that show that typically, strikeouts are just another out for a hitter (we could get into productive outs, but that's another discussion), and you're going based on opinion alone.

A single is more valuable than a walk since it can provide zero to two extra bases per runner compared to a walk (zero if it's a single with runner 1 just advancing to second base, two if it's a single with a guy going from second to home, which is an extra base produced by the base runner rather than the hitter, but I digress). However, if you have Adam Dunn swinging at pitches he is not comfortable swinging at simply to make contact, I have doubts that it is worth it. No hitter can magically turns walks to hits at a 1:1 ratio. Every hitter would if he could. Odds are, if you force Dunn to swing more, his BA will go up. However, his OBP will drop. In that case, it depends if the quantity and quality of the hits outweighs (in run producing power) the walks. That's the question, and with a guy like Dunn who has to be comfortable, I have my doubts that a 20 point increase in BA wouldn't cause a massive drop in OBP and a rise in DPs, which are almost twice as bad as a K to me.

As for the lineup order, for Dunn's sake, I think a great point is made. I refer to J.T. Snow if only because I remember an ESPN report. I remember Snow saying that when he hit in front of Bonds last year, he almost always saw fastballs and strikes, the value of a good hitter on the hitters surrounding him. Sure, Dunn might help Casey or Griffey hitting in front of him, but who's helping Dunn? BTW, J.T. Snow's BA jumped by over 50 points in 2004 from 2003. Such a phenomenon relates to me well, since I have Ortiz and Ramirez. Ramirez is the Adam Dunn of the situation. Manny's reputation and ability are REALLY helping even a star like David Ortiz, but Manny is struggling bad for him. He's hitting around .260-.345-.485, which is decent, but not Manny like. Should Manny start swinging at more pitches? Or conversely, should he be more patient for better pitches? Or should we let arguably the best RHB in the AL work out his funk?

As for the value of a walk, consider the intentional walk. There is not a single situation, where on the average, an IBB (or a BB in the situation) reduces run potential. It can reduce the possibility of winning (say, if you have the Sox lineup in the NL where you go from Bellhorn to a PH or the pitcher), but on the whole, having less guys on base is a good thing. The walk has value, and even with the worst MLB lineup ever, if a guy is walked every time, his team will score more runs then if the player was pitched to.

As for the topic, both sides of the argument have merit, but one has to consider that you're giving up a guaranteed base (but no more than a base) for the potential HR, 3B, 2B, 1B, Sacrifice, Out, DP, TP. If Dunn can turn that potential into a 1B/2B/3B/HR enough or to the best degree to make the amount of times it turns into SAC/Out/DP/TP, then maybe he should swing more often. If not, then it's not worth changing.

[Sea Ray]

If someone tries to get Dunn to raise his average, he's going to start swinging at pitches he shouldn't, and as a result, making more Outs. He just doesn't get enough pitches to hit where he's at in the lineup, so this strategy would be especially bad. He would be driving in those runs if he were actually higher up in the order. He just draws the BB where he's at because he doesn't get enough to hit. I'd rather him BB than record an Out.

It doesn't have to be one or the other. I want him to make more contact in those 200 ABs that he's striking out. I don't want him to change his walk ABs. If he adds a few hits by shortening his swing or whatever instead of whiffing then we've got something.

[Sea Ray]

As for the topic, both sides of the argument have merit, but one has to consider that you're giving up a guaranteed base (but no more than a base) for the potential HR, 3B, 2B, 1B, Sacrifice, Out, DP, TP. If Dunn can turn that potential into a 1B/2B/3B/HR enough or to the best degree to make the amount of times it turns into SAC/Out/DP/TP, then maybe he should swing more often. If not, then it's not worth changing.

Nobody's asking him to swing more often. His walks are fine and a positive part of his game. It's those ABs where he's striking out that need improvement.

[Fishercat]

It doesn't have to be one or the other. I want him to make more contact in those 200 ABs that he's striking out. I don't want him to change his walk ABs. If he adds a few hits by shortening his swing or whatever instead of whiffing then we've got something.

Changing an approach will affect your entire repotoire if only because the world isn't perfect. Ideally, if Dunn had superhuman eyesight and the umps were perfect, then sure, he could swing at those borderline pitches and avoid called K's and lay off the 0-2 breaking pitch. However, those borderline pitches will be balls half the time, and swinging at those will lower walks in a nice portion of his ABs. If he's more aggressive, he may swing at a 1-1 strike (that's bad for him) and get an out on a PA that could have been a walk. Conversely, he could swing at a 1-2 strike and get a single, a K into a base, but it's difficult to know.

[CincyRedsFan30]

It doesn't have to be one or the other. I want him to make more contact in those 200 ABs that he's striking out. I don't want him to change his walk ABs. If he adds a few hits by shortening his swing or whatever instead of whiffing then we've got something.

But that can also lead to a reduction in his HR and more DPs. A strikeout counts as only one Out, unless a runner is thrown out stealing.

You can't isolate those 200 AB where he K's and say that he needs to hit the ball, because it will affect everything about his hitting negatively.(Fewer BB, less of a chance at hitting HR(as an overall thing, being his swings in general wouldn't be going for the "power" approach as much)

[Wally Mo Pena]

That is an interesting point Wally, one I really haven't considered. I think since a guy like Dunn is well, a statistical anomaly, it is much harder to find a clear cut straight forward answer on him that everyone agrees with. Thus why this debate is so frustrating.

right on the money, dunn is an anomaly. Most guys with high OPS are more rbi and run productive, most guys with that many k's don't have a high OBP, most guys who hit .230 don't have an OPS of .970. It's a tough call to make, but i think there is enough that he doesn't have right now, that i wouldn't say he is the best player on this team, despite having some high numbers.

[Sea Ray]

Changing an approach will affect your entire repotoire if only because the world isn't perfect. Ideally, if Dunn had superhuman eyesight and the umps were perfect, then sure, he could swing at those borderline pitches and avoid called K's and lay off the 0-2 breaking pitch. However, those borderline pitches will be balls half the time, and swinging at those will lower walks in a nice portion of his ABs. If he's more aggressive, he may swing at a 1-1 strike (that's bad for him) and get an out on a PA that could have been a walk. Conversely, he could swing at a 1-2 strike and get a single, a K into a base, but it's difficult to know.

All he needs to do is bring those strike outs below 180 or so and that's a feat just about every major leaguer in history has accomplished. It ain't that tough

[Saber]

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/ar...articleid=4085



Lies, Damned Lies
Strikeouts and Hitter Projections

by Nate Silver

Here's a secret: strikeouts are a good thing for a young power hitter.

That quote is mine, from a chat session about four weeks ago. It's pretty tempting to come up with punchy, ill-considered one-liners like that when in the midst of a chat, and indeed the comment triggered plenty of e-mails, as well as a persuasive counter-argument by Rich Lederer. So let me try and explain myself a little bit more thoroughly.

My comment was based on something I discovered when revising PECOTA a couple of years ago. Specifically, I found that when everything else is held equal, higher strikeout rates have a somewhat positive predictive effect on power output. For example, the regression equations I use for PECOTA suggest that--all else being equal--45 extra strikeouts in the previous year are "worth" about one additional home run in the upcoming year. The effect is not enormous, but it's there, and it's one reason why folks like Adam Dunn and Hee Seop Choi and Wily Mo Pena tend to get such favorable PECOTA projections.

Strikeout rates also have an inverse predictive effect on base hits, and consequently on batting average (to be a bit more specific, a player who strikes out more can be expected to have somewhat fewer singles; there is no discernable impact on his predicted rate of doubles or triples). This is to be expected. While hitters' batting averages on balls in play do not exhibit the same strong regression to the mean that pitchers' BABIPs do, hitter BABIP is at least somewhat a matter of luck, and you can't get lucky if you don't put the ball in play.

Finally, all else being equal, strikeouts have a positive predictive effect on walk rate, as both strikeouts and walks tend to result from going deep into the count.

Further complicating things is that these general principles can also have some quirky effects depending on the particular characteristics of the player. For example, PECOTA predicted Albert Pujols, a hitter who does not strike out very much, to have a batting line this year of .334/.419/.633. If we go back in the system and double Pujols' previous strikeout rates, PECOTA instead comes up with a projection of .325/.411/.633. Pujols' expected BA has declined by about 10 points; he makes up for some of this with a 10-point increase in his expected isolated power and a slight increase in his "isolated walk rate," but the overall effect on his value is negative. PECOTA is happy, in other words, that Pujols does not strike out very much.

On the other hand, if we perform a similar exercise for Adam Dunn, we get the opposite result. Dunn, with his actual strikeout rate, had a PECOTA projection of .270/.395/.562. If we cut Dunn's historic strikeout rate in half, PECOTA instead retrieves a projection of .276/.390/.539. The slight increase is batting average is not worth the significant declines in walk rate and isolated power, and Dunn's overall projection is notably worse. PECOTA is happy that Dunn does strikeout often.

This stuff is complex. PECOTA is not just using the regression equations I've discussed above, but also a complicated system of adjustments based on comparable players. In fact, the whole motivation for PECOTA is to identify certain player typologies, and to understand how these player typologies progress over time. A player with the Pujols typology…


High batting average

Moderate walk rate
…will develop better with a lower strikeout rate, but a player with the Dunn typology …


Low batting average

High walk rate
…would prefer a higher strikeout rate.

What in the hell is going on here?

What I think is going on--bear with me here--is that all great hitters can be categorized more or less into one of two typologies:

[Saber]

Early-Count Hitters: These hitters have extremely quick bats, excellent plate coverage, and will not take many pitches, especially for strikes. They tend to have very high batting averages, moderate-to-strong isolated power, moderate walk rates and low strikeout rates. They also tend to be reasonably good athletes, often playing premium defensive positions. Examples include Vladimir Guerrero, Joe DiMaggio, Derek Jeter and George Brett.

Late-Count Hitters: These hitters have outstanding-pitch recognition skills. Rather than force the issue, they wait for the pitcher to make a mistake with the pitch type or location they find most favorable. These hitters hit for moderate batting averages, strong or very strong isolated power, high walk rates and high strikeout rates. They tend to be big and bulky and slow. Examples include Jim Thome, Mark McGwire and Reggie Jackson.

To summarize:


Typology------------BA----------ISO--------------BB Rate----K Rate
Early-Count Hitters--Very High----Moderate-High---Moderate---Low
Late-Count Hitters---Moderate----Very High--------High-------High

Speed
Low-Moderate
Moderate-High

What I think is going on is that the closer a hitter is to one of these idealized typologies, the better he is likely to do. Vladimir Guerrero, for example, doesn't make any "sense" with a high strikeout rate, since his hitting approach involves swinging at pitches that lesser hitters wouldn't dare dream of attacking. If Guerrero wasn't phenomenally good at actually making contact with these pitches, his approach would not work nearly as well. Conversely, a hitter like Jim Thome wouldn't make any sense with a lower strikeout rate. Because Thome does have some holes in his swing, he needs to work the pitcher and the count, until he gets a pitch to his liking, which he will then hit very, very far. High strikeout rates and high walk rates are a necessary consequence of this approach, since he will go deep into so many counts. (I think it's important to note that under this theory, a hitter like Thome isn't "choosing" to take a lot of walks. The walks, rather, are a beneficial side effect of the way in which he finds it most natural to go about getting base hits and home runs).
We might think of Guerrero as a "generalist", who hits lots of pitches pretty well, and Thome as a "specialist", who hits certain pitches extremely well. Of course, there are a very few hitters, like Barry Bonds and perhaps Pujols, who hit lots of pitches extremely well. Most everyone else has to settle.

The reason that I say that high strikeout rates may be a favorable sign for certain types of young hitters is because strikeout rates are an indicator of "count-working" ability. If we had more detailed data on things like called versus swinging strikes, and a hitter's performance on different counts, then we would not need to look at strikeout rates, and it seems unlikely that they would show up as a positive developmental sign in any way, shape, or form. But because we do not have this information on a wide-scale basis, we must use strikeout rate and walk rate as proxies.

One of the perverse consequences of this is that a specialist hitter, who may not hit certain types of pitches or pitches in certain parts of the strike zone especially well (e.g., a hitter "with some holes in his swing") will appear to benefit more from a higher strikeout rate than a generalist type of hitter. Hee Seop Choi must work the count and wait for his pitch because he can't hit certain pitches very well. That he's striking out a lot is an indicator that he is in fact going deep into many counts, which is helpful for him on balance, even though the strikeouts themselves are not favorable outcomes.

One thing it would be fascinating to study is how sensitive these different hitter typologies are to different pitcher typologies. My guess is that a hitter like Guererro will do relatively better against "good" pitchers, but relatively less well against "bad" pitchers, than a hitter like Thome, since Thome excels at hitting mistakes, and Gurerrero excels at hitting non-mistakes.

In any event, this is just the tip of the iceberg, and I hope that it inspires further research, either on my part or someone else's.

Nate Silver is an author of Baseball Prospectus. You can contact Nate by clicking here or click here to see Nate's other articles.

[Sea Ray]

Changing an approach will affect your entire repotoire if only because the world isn't perfect. Ideally, if Dunn had superhuman eyesight and the umps were perfect, then sure, he could swing at those borderline pitches and avoid called K's and lay off the 0-2 breaking pitch. However, those borderline pitches will be balls half the time, and swinging at those will lower walks in a nice portion of his ABs. If he's more aggressive, he may swing at a 1-1 strike (that's bad for him) and get an out on a PA that could have been a walk. Conversely, he could swing at a 1-2 strike and get a single, a K into a base, but it's difficult to know.

He needs to change his approach after he gets two strikes on him and I'll tell you what, I think he will. I don't think he'll continue to strike out 200 times and have only a little over 2 RBIs per HR. I think he'll do it and it will not adversely affect his game as your opinion above suggests. He's only what 25? But he's not there yet. Right now he's still a HR, walk or nothing guy. He's not even an All Star player at this point.

[Wally Mo Pena]

It all comes back to OBP and OPS. Those players who single more instead of BB don't usually avoid as many Outs, which is the overall goal. When you're not as patient, you may hit more singles, but you also will record Outs more often. It's all about making Outs.

It is not true that people who get more singles make more outs, because singles aren't a predictor of outs. Look at the comparison i posted earlier between anderson and millar. Millar walks more and makes more outs, anderson singles more and avoids more outs. patience doesn't necessarily mean that you don't hit singles either. Ryan freel is a patient hitter and he hits lots of sinlges. you are confusing yourself with all these associations, and making too many assumptions.

Also, dunn gets lots of pitches to hit. By saying that he doesn't because he bats fifth is ridiculous and you are just letting him off the hook because you like Dunn. Bill Mueller won the batting title batting 8th and 9th. Yes he may see more pitches to hit if he batted third, but he still gets plenty. Look at how many times he takes fastballs down the middle in AB's where he walks. Look at how many times he k's looking. Those are all pitches to hit, and he's not hitting them. I would like to see dunn become a player who can be patient, and not swing at the pitches out of the zone, but who understands that he is a big strong power hitter and that when he gets a pitch to hit, he should hit it because good things happen.

Adam Dunn should not be going to the plate looking to walk, that's preposterous. It's a waste of his biggest asset.

Maybe a guy like freel should be looking to take a bunch of pitches and take as many walks as he can, because a) he's the leadoff htter and he just needs to get on, and b) he can get around the bases with steals.

Dunn should not swing at bad pitches, but he should swing at pitches he can hit, like fastballs down the middle, and called third strikes.

[CincyRedsFan30]

I'm telling you, overall Dunn doesn't get many good pitches to hit where he's at in the order. And if he started to swing at the pitches that are "close" that he K's on, he would have more of a chance of hitting into DPs, and wouldn't walk on many of the close pitches either. He would make more contact, but he would also make more Outs on those AB where he walks on pretty close pitches now.

[Wally Mo Pena]

he's batting in the heart of the order for gods sake! when did fifth become a bad spot to hit!?