southsider2k5 Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 QUOTE (Tex @ Nov 2, 2011 -> 05:02 AM) Just a reminder this was off southsidesox another internet message board. We're accepting it as correct. It's the same as taking a post from anyone here that includes a old quote from somebody which may or may not be accurate. I know it's the off season and we ware looking for anything to discuss, but this stuff becomes legend and pretty soon we all "know" what Manto is trying to do when in reality it's just some guy posting on an message board writing a feature post on what he believes Manto is trying to do. If you plug the result into Google, there are 156 results that pop up with this quote. They didn't just make it up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 QUOTE (zirc @ Nov 2, 2011 -> 03:33 AM) It's a false equivalency. If you take ball four you have a 100% chance of getting on base and not making an out, but if you swing (and managed to make contact) you've only got around a 30% chance of getting on base and not making an out. But you're forgetting the fact that while there is a 100% that batter will reach base if he takes ball 4, there may be a significant drop off from him (Jayson Bay in 2006) to the next hitter. Once the next hitter comes up, he has the same s***ty odds of getting on base as any other hitter, and what are the odds the pitcher is going to walk two batters in a row? You guys can espouse the OBP all you want, but the question is not just about taking a walk versus swinging away...obviously if you knew every batter had an equal chance of reaching base or driving in runs, the question is answered much more easily, but it simply is not. I'd like to see someone actually account for that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 (edited) QUOTE (chw42 @ Nov 2, 2011 -> 12:16 AM) Runs produced...oh god. He's right in that you don't always look to take a walk, but come on... See, this condescending attitude is what pisses me off about sabr advocates. It's always thumbing your nose at anything that doesn't abide strictly by some incredibly general set of data, despite the fact that there are always scenarios that the data is simply not specific enough to address. Edited November 2, 2011 by iamshack Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 Not going to read all the posts, but...good job Manto. Think of all the times when Dunn/Rios would walk with that man on third and two outs, or something equally useless when we needed a hit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 QUOTE (Jake @ Nov 2, 2011 -> 10:36 AM) Not going to read all the posts, but...good job Manto. Think of all the times when Dunn/Rios would walk with that man on third and two outs, or something equally useless when we needed a hit. Dunn had 12 walks last year with RISP and 2 outs, out of 51 plate appearances. He hit .103 in those circumstances. I'd rather have him walk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan4life_2007 Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 QUOTE (Jake @ Nov 2, 2011 -> 08:36 AM) Not going to read all the posts, but...good job Manto. Think of all the times when Dunn/Rios would walk with that man on third and two outs, or something equally useless when we needed a hit. Under no circumstance is a walk "useless." That's ridiculous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Nov 2, 2011 -> 10:11 AM) Under no circumstance is a walk "useless." That's ridiculous. If it doesn't lead to a run? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan4life_2007 Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 2, 2011 -> 09:12 AM) If it doesn't lead to a run? Yes. Getting on base is never useless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cerbaho-WG Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 2, 2011 -> 10:12 AM) If it doesn't lead to a run? Another runner on base is going to lead to a higher probability of more runs scored regardless of the situation. As for Manto's quote, I think he's spot on. With a runner on 3rd and less than one out the marginal increase in the probability of runs scored due to a walk is going to be small. If the ball is an inch outside, get the f***ing run in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Nov 2, 2011 -> 10:15 AM) Yes. Getting on base is never useless. I get what Manto is trying to say. I really think people are oversimplifying it to demonize him. The object of a baseball game is to get more runs than the other team. More hits or walks doesn't win a game. It helps, but it doesn't determine it alone. Wanting a guy to concentrate on driving in runs versus the most passive attempt of just getting on base is two different mentalities. I agree I would rather have the guy trying to drive the runner in from third, versus just getting on base. I honestly believe with that mentality would benefit a team that has struggled for years to bring home runners from third with less than two outs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan4life_2007 Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 (edited) QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 2, 2011 -> 09:20 AM) I get what Manto is trying to say. I really think people are oversimplifying it to demonize him. The object of a baseball game is to get more runs than the other team. More hits or walks doesn't win a game. It helps, but it doesn't determine it alone. Wanting a guy to concentrate on driving in runs versus the most passive attempt of just getting on base is two different mentalities. I agree I would rather have the guy trying to drive the runner in from third, versus just getting on base. I honestly believe with that mentality would benefit a team that has struggled for years to bring home runners from third with less than two outs. Yes, we're all in agreement that you'd rather have the guy knock in the run. Jake said a walk with RISP and two outs is useless. No. A K or a popup is useless. Edited November 2, 2011 by Jordan4life Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonard Zelig Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Nov 2, 2011 -> 10:11 AM) Under no circumstance is a walk "useless." That's ridiculous. Then why did so many people complain when Ozzie called for a sac bunt in front of Konerko? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milkman delivers Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 QUOTE (Leonard Zelig @ Nov 2, 2011 -> 10:34 AM) Then why did so many people complain when Ozzie called for a sac bunt in front of Konerko? The person was probably a terrible bunter? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan4life_2007 Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 QUOTE (Leonard Zelig @ Nov 2, 2011 -> 09:34 AM) Then why did so many people complain when Ozzie called for a sac bunt in front of Konerko? A team full of bad bunters outside of Pierre? Situations that didn't really call for a bunt? It's the AL? There's a lot of reasons. I don't see what this has to do with a walk ever being useless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonard Zelig Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Nov 2, 2011 -> 10:38 AM) A team full of bad bunters outside of Pierre? Situations that didn't really call for a bunt? It's the AL? There's a lot of reasons. I don't see what this has to do with a walk ever being useless. When it opened first base and the team walked Konerko, you know that half the board went nuts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Nov 2, 2011 -> 09:26 AM) Yes, we're all in agreement that you'd rather have the guy knock in the run. Jake said a walk with RISP and two outs is useless. No. A K or a popup is useless. But what we're not all in agreement on is why a most-likely walk is necessarily better than your best hitter taking a walk and bringing up your next hitter, who in all likelihood, creates a significant dropoff in expected results... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan4life_2007 Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 QUOTE (Leonard Zelig @ Nov 2, 2011 -> 09:39 AM) When it opened first base and the team walked Konerko, you know that half the board went nuts. Well, this team has greatly underachieved for three years. And having a very bad manager was part of that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 QUOTE (iamshack @ Nov 2, 2011 -> 10:41 AM) But what we're not all in agreement on is why a most-likely walk is necessarily better than your best hitter taking a walk and bringing up your next hitter, who in all likelihood, creates a significant dropoff in expected results... Really good point. It creates higher OBP, and still lessens your likely results. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan4life_2007 Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 QUOTE (iamshack @ Nov 2, 2011 -> 09:41 AM) But what we're not all in agreement on is why a most-likely walk is necessarily better than your best hitter taking a walk and bringing up your next hitter, who in all likelihood, creates a significant dropoff in expected results... This I can agree with. You can make good arguments either way. But I'll never view a walk as bad or useless. Isn't that Dusty Baker smack? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve9347 Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Nov 1, 2011 -> 04:53 PM) NO SHUT UP YOU'RE ALL A BUNCH OF BABY WHINERS AND I'M TAKING MY BALL AND GOING HOME. #slavburn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve9347 Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 2, 2011 -> 10:43 AM) Really good point. It creates higher OBP, and still lessens your likely results. It does, however, mean more pitches. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 QUOTE (Cerbaho-WG @ Nov 2, 2011 -> 10:18 AM) Another runner on base is going to lead to a higher probability of more runs scored regardless of the situation. As for Manto's quote, I think he's spot on. With a runner on 3rd and less than one out the marginal increase in the probability of runs scored due to a walk is going to be small. If the ball is an inch outside, get the f***ing run in. This nails it. Nothing wrong with a walk, it is pretty much always better than an UNproductive out... but you nailed what I think Manto was really trying to say here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 Someone needs to change the thread subtitle because its not close to true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Chappas Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Nov 2, 2011 -> 10:48 AM) It does, however, mean more pitches. Which if it is a team philosophy can be useful. If you have one or two guys working the count and the remainder of the lineup swinging at the first close pitch they see, the walk is not effective. Boston and New York are successful because they can tax a good starter and get them out with the philosophy of fighting off good pitches and taking a ton of pitches. If Adam Dunn looks at a strike down the middle on 2-0 and gets a walk to get to the OPS terrible Alex Rios, this idea has failed. You have to have a team of OPS focused players not just a couple sprinkled in here and there. When Frank Thomas and Ray Durham were in sync it worked to perfection when Julio Franco was there to protect them. When Dan Pasqua was there to protect them, it did not work that well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanOfCorn Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 QUOTE (Harry Chappas @ Nov 2, 2011 -> 10:58 AM) Which if it is a team philosophy can be useful. If you have one or two guys working the count and the remainder of the lineup swinging at the first close pitch they see, the walk is not effective. Boston and New York are successful because they can tax a good starter and get them out with the philosophy of fighting off good pitches and taking a ton of pitches. If Adam Dunn looks at a strike down the middle on 2-0 and gets a walk to get to the OPS terrible Alex Rios, this idea has failed. You have to have a team of OPS focused players not just a couple sprinkled in here and there. When Frank Thomas and Ray Durham were in sync it worked to perfection when Julio Franco was there to protect them. When Dan Pasqua was there to protect them, it did not work that well. Don't you DARE defame The Great Pasqua! He was a better version of the right handed Dan Pasqua! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.