Yeah, Sorry, More Baseball

The purpose of this post is to shed some light on a few more baseball points. Sorry about all the sports, but I think I need to get my points across. Besides, now that I'm working, I don't really have as much time to get into any kooky situations. Az please bear with me whilst I bombard you with some more baseball chit-chat. Let's get started.

Firstly, I want to discuss strikeouts. At the beginning of this season, the cover story on espn.com one day was about Ryan Howard, the reigning National League MVP. Here's the text of the blurb: "So, how did Ryan Howard go from 151 Ks in 2003 to 58 HRs in 2006?" Our colleagues over at firejoemorgan.com hastily provided us with an answer: "By striking out even more. Howard struck out 181 times last year. And was awesome." Another words, a player who strikes out a lot is not necessarily a poor hitter. Obviously, it is bad when a hitter strikes out, however, there is much to be said about a hitter with many strikeouts:
-He tends to see a lot of pitches. The only way a batter strikes out is if he first has two strikes against him. It's usually the most patient hitters who run deep counts that strike out a lot because they often find themselves in two strike counts. These hitters, while they tend to have low batting averages, also tend to walk a lot. Let's look at the top five strikeout hitters in the league this year: Adam Dunn: 103 Ks, .260 AVG, and 43 BBs. Ryan Howard: 95 Ks, .256 AVG, 52 BBs. Dan Uggla: 94 Ks, .249 AVG, 35 BBs. Grady Sizemore: 90 Ks, .283 AVG, 54 BBs. And Andruw Jones: 87 Ks, .204 AVG, 42 BBs. Four of those guys (not Uggla) are in the top 30 in the league in walks, and two of them are in the top ten.
-The other good thing about seeing a lot of pitches is that the hitter gets to see everything the pitcher has in his arsenal. He can transmit a lot of information to his teammates.
-Also, the more pitches the pitcher throws, the faster he is likely to tire and exit the game, leaving the outcome in the hands of the bullpen.
-Finally, when players see a lot of pitches and are patient, they are usually waiting for the best pitch to hit. This is demonstrated by the fact that each of those five guys are in the top 25 in the league in Home Runs.
Az yes, a strikeout is not a good thing to do, but one certainly cannot determine that a player is a poor hitter because he strikes out a lot. In fact, it appears that some of the best hitters in the league strike out a lot. Now I want to look at the other side of the coin. Obviously, the best thing a pitcher can do is strike a hitter out. Striking out a hitter is very safe, because there's no chance for a fielding error, and base runners don't get an opportunity to advance. I would say that it's rare for a pitcher to be highly successful without striking out his fair share of hitters. Let's take a look at this stat: the top eight strikeout pitchers in the league all have ERAs under 4.00, and they are all at least two games over .500.
Here's the point: Hitters who strike out a lot are usually not poor hitters and often are very good hitters. Pitchers who strike out a lot of batters are usually the best pitchers in the league. Again: Strikeouts: for pitchers = great, for hitters = not that bad.

Moving right along, over Shabbat, one of my new readers approached me and asked what I thought was the most beautiful play in baseball. He posits that a well executed squeeze play is the most beautiful. Now, I still have to think about it some more, but here's a few I came up with:
-I love seeing a textbook 4-6-3 double play. Even more so than a 6-4-3 or a 5-4-3.
-I think a nice cutoff from the outfield to home plate can be really awesome. Watching the infielder receive the ball and quickly turn around and throw home is really cool.

Since my last post, two National League all-star pitchers had to withdraw from the game, az Tony LaRussa, the manager of the NL team, had to select two replacements. Did he read my article to help him decide whom to pick? Certainly not; he went with two famous guys, Roy Oswalt and Brandon Webb. Who the hell ever heard of John Maine? (Btw, as my brother so astutely reminded me. Maine is NOT in fact the only player ever with the same name as a state. However, excluding Maryland Dykes Potter, who only pitched two innings, Maine is the only pitcher with the same name as a state.) Just for fun, and because I hate Tony LaRussa, let's decide how much of a moron he is and compare the stats.
Oswalt: 3.52 ERA, 89 Ks, 6.26 K/9, 2.07 K/BB, 1.39 WHIP, .328 OBP against, .400 SLG against, and .728 OPS against. Also, Oswalt has given up the 3rd most hits and the 18th most walks in all of baseball.
Webb: 3.37 ERA, 112 Ks, 7.70 K/9, 2.38 K/BB, 1.27 WHIP, .312 OBP against, .354 SLG against, .663 OPS against.
Maine: 2.71 ERA, 93 Ks, 7.63 K/9, 2.33 K/BB, 1.14 WHIP, .285 OBP against, .343 SLG against, .622 OPS against.
This looks quite clear to me; John Maine is getting royally shafted. There are those who might argue that since the All-Star Game "counts," in that the winning league gets home field advantage in the World Series, the manager should select the pitchers who will give them the best chance to win. But if that's the case, then why should fans be allowed to vote at all. What if all the Yankees and Red Sox fans got together and decided to vote for all the worst players in the National League? How does this make any sense. Either it should be a game just for the fans and it shouldn't count for anything, or if they want it to count, they should take the voting out of the fans' hands. The worst thing is that a lot of sports writers and analysts will use all-star appearances as a statistic for determining Hall of Fame status. They'll say like "oh, this guy was a 13 time all-star, az he should be in the Hall of Fame." How can that be a valid statement? Why don't they just let the fans vote on who should get enshrined in Cooperstown. The whole thing doesn't make any sense.
Okay people. Thanks for bearing with me through another long post. I could use an all-star break myself.