Small Sample Sizes, PPA’s and Fun With Numbers

81 Comments + Add Comment

• Lorenzo October 23, 2012 at 1:52 pm

  That’s the first time I ever saw this charted like this and it does give me some pause about the direction we’re going. I’m not so sure anymore. According to these results there’s a big payoff for being aggressive.
• taskmaster4450 October 23, 2012 at 2:04 pm

  Very valid points you bring up. I agree with Hernandez….a batter needs to swing at the best pitch he sees. Of course, this operates on the presumption that the hitter is capable of swinging at strikes. Sadly, the Mets, especially in the 2nd half, excelled at swinging at pitches out of the strike zone. Even Wright expanded the zone considerably during his H2 swoon.
• Met Maniac October 23, 2012 at 2:08 pm

  Cant wait to see the Hudgens/Alderson Brigade attack this. Be right back, gonna fix me some popcorn.
  • stick October 23, 2012 at 2:29 pm

    put lots of butter on it. GOod for your arteries.
• stick October 23, 2012 at 2:28 pm

  I find it hard to believe that the “philosophy” has anything to do with trying to work out double digit pitches per AB, which really just means 1 foul ball after another.

  so, you want the other side? well, how about just going right to the source, hudgens and the players? They might have a slightly more accurate understanding than a few random guys on a blog.

  http://www.nj.com/mets/index.ssf/2012/03/mets_hitting_coach_dave_hudgen_1.html

  a piece of the article linked:

  The goal was to improve on-base percentage. Hudgens’ approach is simple but brutal.
  “Hunt your pitch,” he tells his players.
  “We want to do damage in the middle of the plate.”
  “If he doesn’t give you that pitch? We’re walking to first base.”
  In the first year of Alderson’s reign, the Mets offense raised their collective on-base percentage 21 points from the year before and vaulted from 14th in the National League to second in that category. They went from the team third-most prone to swing at a pitch outside the strike zone to the second-least. Both Alderson and manager Terry Collins had lauded Hudgens for his influence.
  In the process, the team established the sort of offensive identity lacking in years prior.

  The misconception about improving on-base skills is the process relies on passivity, on cowards willing to pass on pitch after pitch in search of the almighty walk.
  Hudgens shakes his head at that notion. He traffics in aggression. His players verify this.
  “We never sat down and had this ‘Moneyball’ discussion, like we’re going to walk and we’re going to take,” outfielder Jason Bay said. “It was never brought up.”
  Instead, Hudges looked to train hunters. One day recently, a reporter mentioned the practice to second baseman Daniel Murphy.
  “Hunt? Is that what you said?” Murphy’s eyes almost twinkled. “That’s a very good description.”
  • srt October 23, 2012 at 2:40 pm

    Interesting.

    Just goes to show that it’s not as simplistic as either side is making it out to be.
    If it was, we’d be enjoying way more elite hitters in the MLs.
  • Joey D. October 23, 2012 at 4:26 pm

    Hi Stick,

    I found one particular part of that article quite interesting:

    “On Monday night, Daniel Murphy offered at a 1-1 changeup on the outside. The pitch was probably a strike. No matter. When Murphy came back to the dugout, Hudgens pulled him aside for a refresher course in “the one area he needs to make progress on.”

    “He will get some hits on that (pitch) — because he’s a good hitter,” Hudgens said. “But he’s not going to do any damage on it. And early in the count, 1-1 is early, you want damage.”

    My question is, if the batter believes he could hit the pitch, what is the alternative – take the pitch and go into a 1-2 hole? Which, for a hitter, is more preferable – swinging at a pitch you think you can hit or having to become defensive and swing at every pitch near the strike zone because one is now in a 1-2 hole?
    • Donal October 23, 2012 at 5:18 pm

      “If the batter believes he can hit the pitch”

      That is the key right there. Ted Williams helped make the chart we all have seen that notes where a batter does his best work in the zone. He used that information to know which locations he hits best and which ones he should lay off of.

      So, it is more than if he can actually make contact. What Hudgens and Williams and George Brett and many others have all stressed is “can I hit it well?”
      • TRS86 October 24, 2012 at 9:00 am

        Right, better to take the close 1-1 pitch that I can do no damage on and get a better pitch later int he ab than to swing at it and roll it over for a most likely out.
        • Stick October 24, 2012 at 10:41 am

          there is also a difference between that pitch 1-1 and 1-2. At 1-1, if you swing you are trying to put it in play, likely with a weak result. But at 1-2, you could be looking to just slap it fould being too close to take.
          • Metsie October 24, 2012 at 11:43 am

            Right and TRS is suggesting wait until your forced to foul off pitches and not go after that 1-1 pitch you can put in play if only you happend to like it!

            Every player has a place in the strike zone they don’t like to hit or swing at.

            If the pitcher figures it out (With Kirk it was the high inside fastball) they will throw there all day until you show him it’s not going to be a free strike!
        • Metsie October 24, 2012 at 11:33 am

          Taking the 1-1 pitch you don’t like does nothing but show the pitcher that is where you are weak.

          And if it’s a strike at 1-1 your now 1-2 behind in the count and can expect a hefty diet of those pitches you showed him you don’t like!

          So you NEVER GET that better pitch you think waiting is going to get you!
• Alex68 October 23, 2012 at 2:31 pm

  Here we go.. . Somehow bob ojeda and keith hernandez are wrong about this phylosphy that hasn’t won anything… Stay Tune..
  • Donal October 23, 2012 at 5:15 pm

    Keith Hernandez actually praised the Mets plate discipline. And everyone who isn’t just looking to attack people realize that the Mets were completely lost at the plate. There was no mythical “philosophy” involved. They were just as happy to swing through first pitch junk as they were to look at fat ones over the plate.

    Or maybe you know better than Hernandez and Ted Williams.
    • Brian October 23, 2012 at 5:20 pm

      If players are still confused 2 years under Hudgens, than he heeds to go.
      • Brian October 23, 2012 at 5:21 pm

        *Needs to go,
        • Donal October 23, 2012 at 5:23 pm

          Or maybe we should get guys who understand to not swing at a first pitch curveball 4 feet off the plate.

          That would probably be more effective than coaching staff musical chairs.
          • Brian October 23, 2012 at 5:26 pm

            Seems like we lost more good players than added them. Fire the GM too while you’re at it.
            • Donal October 23, 2012 at 5:30 pm

              great. Find a guy who will work with a $50 million budget and a 22 man roster.
              • Bayonne Mets Fan October 23, 2012 at 5:34 pm

                Any GM should be able to do it to the best of their ability. That is their job. Is there a certain number that the budget should be in order for a GM to be hired?

                What is it?
                • Donal October 23, 2012 at 5:48 pm

                  Any GM? Can you name 1 that has done so?
    • This is stupid October 23, 2012 at 5:21 pm

      You’re completely right, but don’t start another huge argument…
    • Metsie October 23, 2012 at 6:00 pm

      Nice try but he had no problems being patient and BIG problems with them taking pitches in hitters counts like 2-1, 2-0, 3-1, 3-0 all because it wasn’t in your power wheelhouse!
      • Donal October 23, 2012 at 6:04 pm

        which is contrary to what Hudgens preaches. Or do you think he’s lying in the interview posted?
• Harry October 23, 2012 at 2:49 pm

  The problem is easy to fix.

  More players like Beltran, Reyes, Pagan and less players like Shoppach, Torres and Ronny Cedeno.

  Making Torres see 5 pitches or 50 pitches wont make him a better hitter.

  The problem is the front office. They don’t want to add quality players and they think they can turn bad players into good ones with this strategy and it went painfully wrong in second half.

  They think that the problem with bad players is fixable by employing new saber stat philosophies. Problem is for all the years of trying, they have no positive results they can point to that it worked.
  • Metsie October 23, 2012 at 2:53 pm

    These guys are like that bad contruction company who cuts corners using substandard materials to build the building that eventually gets someone killed when it collapses onto itself!

    We know it can’t do the job but we will use it anyway because it’s cheaper!
  • Met Maniac October 23, 2012 at 3:01 pm

    SRT!!!!

    Ooops, I mean THIS!!!!
    • Metsie October 23, 2012 at 5:42 pm

      LOL that was good!
  • Alex68 October 23, 2012 at 3:25 pm

    LMFAO @ Maniac…
• Metsie October 23, 2012 at 2:50 pm

  The data seems to illustrate precisely what Ojeda had been saying all season long….

  It’s the first 3 Pitches that are thrown the fattest and are the most hittable and it isn’t until the count is set ahead or behind that Pitchers will start to play with you more.

  I am disappointed that BA was not used in the chart. But I’m sure that was because all this talk about PPA and Patience is really about walks (and wOBA) which is constructed to award single base events more than multibase events.

  The HR% shows what wOBA would discount.

  The wOBA is naturally going to go up the later in the count you go because of the propensity to draw a walk. Once you get that far in a pitch count the Pitcher is going to throw lots of strikes that are obviously being fouled off or crushed!
  And when he doesn’t you get the BB!

  In the end the philosphy of pateince only works with Pitchers who don’t pound the zone.
  Those that do get you in a pitchers count quickly and patience can no longer be applied.
  At that point you need to be aggressive in your plate defense to get those extra PPA and maybe a mistake to hit.
  • Donal October 23, 2012 at 5:21 pm

    NIBB are the lowest value in the wOBA formula. HR the highest. By a lot.

    wOBA is meant to not only count the number of positive outcomes, but also the quality of those outcomes.
    • Metsie October 23, 2012 at 5:42 pm

      Is it 4 time as high as the single base awards?

      WHY NOT?
      • Donal October 23, 2012 at 6:06 pm

        do you understand concepts like “weighted”?
        • Metsie October 23, 2012 at 6:38 pm

          Do you? A HR should be WEIGHTED 4 times what a single base is!
          Because it’s 4 times the amount of bases earned!
• Ted Berg October 23, 2012 at 3:42 pm

  Joe — Gentile notes the sample-size issues inherent in his data about five times in the course of the article.

  Also, the chart you embedded above notes the plate appearances that end on the pitches in question, so the reason the home-run rate and wOBA are higher on the first two pitches of plate appearances is that the outcomes of those pitches are inherently limited — a batter cannot strike out on the first pitch.

  All 803939 plate appearances that ended on the fourth pitch also included a first and second pitch — many of which, presumably, the batter swung at and missed — so it is incorrect to say that “more home runs were hit while swinging at the first or second pitch than any other plate appearances lasting 3-10.”
  • Ken Tomlin October 23, 2012 at 4:04 pm

    Now I’m really confused.

    Yes or no, did the 545,647 PAs that swung on first pitch result in homeruns 3.6% of the time?

    Thanks, I’m trying to understand what I’m looking at.
    • Ted Berg October 23, 2012 at 4:15 pm

      No. PAs that ended on the first pitch were home runs 3.6 percent of the time.
  • Gina October 24, 2012 at 12:00 pm

    Hey, I know you! What’s for lunch?
• Bayonne Mets Fan October 23, 2012 at 3:45 pm

  Well Joe this is something I hope you bring up to Google Boy Depo when you interview him. And I still wish someone would ask The Stache where he got his info that Mets minor leaguers were starting to complain about this philosophy when he announced it on your MMO Radio Show.
• Hodges14 October 23, 2012 at 4:42 pm

  Has Keith Hernandez ever been asked to be the Mets pitching coach? I may be wrong here, but I seem to recall Mex being a spring training coach for a few years before SNY. Does anyone else recall that?
• taskmaster4450 October 23, 2012 at 4:52 pm

  From the Hudgins article:

  “Scott defines the approach as “focused aggression,” with an emphasis on targeting fastballs. They discourage players from swinging at breaking balls before two strikes. Instructors run drills to enhance pitch recognition. During instructional league action last year, hitters were forced to take a strike before they swung. ”

  Well there was a lot of disconnect between the philosophy and what the Met hits did. Ike and Duda, in particular, were swinging at breaking balls. As for the fastballs, I dont know who was the worst culprit of letting them go by: Duda, Bay, Tejada, Torres, Murphy, Thole, etc.. At least Tejada and Murphy are adept at hitting with two strikes. The rest of them obviously missed the hunt for your pitch part of the speech. It seems like many of them spent the entire year thinking it was the instructional league.
  • Metsie October 23, 2012 at 5:46 pm

    BINGO!

    Thats basically what I have been trying to get accross here to those who always want to charactherize what the approach is based on just the words and not the actual results.

    What they say to us may well be the way to say it but somehow those same words are not translating well when said to the players!

    Which means they are getting other instructions or an emphasis is being placed on what they are told that is being left out of the public spiel.
    • taskmaster4450 October 23, 2012 at 7:52 pm

      I dont think any sensible baseball person would argue with working the count. That is as old as baseball itself. Hitters have success in hitters counts and pitchers in pitchers counts. Swinging at the first pitch is often a bad idea especially when facing someone wild. However, there are times that it makes sense to swing against that same person i.e. he just walked the guy ahead on 4 pitches and is apt to groove one to get ahead.

      The Mets problem was they took too many 2-0 and 3-1 fastballs. This is the count that one needs to be ready to pounce. If the guy paints the black, fine. But most pitchers will get a big part of the plate in these situations. Waiting until there are two strikes before swinging is just plain stupid.
      • Metsie October 24, 2012 at 11:24 am

        “If words of command are not clear and distinct, if orders are not thoroughly understood, then the general is to blame. But, if orders are clear and the soldiers nevertheless disobey, then it is the fault of their oficers.” – Sun Tzu

        Well the commands being given are “Wait for a pitch you can do damage with”; “Wait for a pitch you can hit”

        Operative word in both those commands? ‘WAIT”

        So they are being taught that the default action is to wait. Doesn’t matter if it’s a strike, if the Player doesn’t like it he will take it and you can’t say he went against orders. He will have basically done what you told him to do!

        You can work the count without any batting philosophy in place. Doesn’t matter if you start patient or aggressive. Both will work provided you have learned the most important tactic of protecting the plate with 2 Strikes on you.

        Protecting the plate with 2Ks does more to WORK the pitcher than being patient at the plate and taking pitches does. Cause that patience philosophy is pretty much done after 5 pitches have been thrown. You want to go further you will have to protect the plate from not only strikes but close enough to call balls as well.

        If they taught the kids we have that and didn’t emphasize waiting or walking then we wouldn’t see all those 2-0, 3-0, 3-1 takes of fat pipe fastballs that should have been hit for that POWER we all complained we don’t have around here.

        This Patient stuff is the reason why our power numbers are down and the one guy who hit 30+ is the one guy who seemingly didn’t do what they told him to do!

        In the end you have to approach the PA based on the Pitcher on the mound and what he throws….
        Not some philosophy concocted because of another philosophy that says more walks mean more runs. Cause that one isn’t true either!
• XtreemIcon October 23, 2012 at 5:03 pm

  Part of the reason the HR numbers are so high on the first two pitches is because there are no other alternatives on those pitches. You can’t walk or strike out on those. What should be looked at, as far as those people who think the “philosophy” is all about walking, is how the PAs that saw a lot of pitches ended when something OTHER than a walk ended the AB. Since the number of PAs and the NIBB% and HR% weres given, we can determine the number of walks. Then we can subtract that from the number of PAs and use that number of non-NIBB PAs to determine the HR% when the hitter wasn’t walked.

  Pitch Count PA NIBB% NIBB # HR% HR # PA-NIBB HR%
  4 803939 8.8 70747 2 16079 733192 2.2%
  5 675616 15.8 106747 2 13512 568869 2.4%
  6 437931 20 87586 1.2 5255 350345 2.3%
  7 183572 22.8 41854 2.1 3855 141718 2.7%
  8 71214 23.8 16949 2.3 1638 54265 3.0%
  9 26344 24.5 6454 2.5 659 19890 3.3%
  10 9465 24.1 2281 2.5 237 7184 3.3%

  Look how the HR% rises the later the at bat goes, almost to the same rate as the first two pitches, when a hitter doesn’t even strike out. See, where your argument is flawed is that it lauds the first two pitches, which have to be put into play for a PA to end there, to later pitches when both walks and K’s are possibilities. I won’t bore you with the steps, but if we look at HR rates on pitches put in play that end a PA, the numbers look like this:

  Pitch Count HR%
  3 3.5%
  4 3.0%
  5 3.5%
  6 3.4%
  7 4.0%
  8 4.4%
  9 4.7%
  10 4.6%

  Look at that. See, it’s not enough to laud the early-count home runs when putting the ball in play is the only option. Even in the chart you showed, once the PA went past 6 pitches, the K% went down, the NIBB% went up and so did the HR%. But you can’t compare the HR rate in the entirety of those PAs, because they include PAs that don’t have the ball put in play to end the PA. When you look only at PAs that end in the ball put in play, you can see where making the pitcher have to throw strikes is advantageous. That’s quite a home run rate we see. Or as Hudgens would say, “look at all that damage done.”
  • Brian October 23, 2012 at 5:16 pm

    If you discount the walks everything goes up including HR%. You’re artificially inflating it and it looks better than what it really is. Also you either stick to PA or AB as your denominator you cant compare the data with different formulas.
    • XtreemIcon October 23, 2012 at 5:23 pm

      “If you discount the walks everything goes up including HR%.” – Exactly my point. Later in the PA, everything goes up, because the batter is forcing the pitcher to throw a hitter’s pitch. If the pitcher doesn’t then the hitter takes a walk, but if he does put it in play, the positive outcomes increase at a higher rate than they occur swinging early in the count. You were wrong about one thing, though. Not everything goes up. Strikeouts went down.

      “You’re artificially inflating it and it looks better than what it really is.” – No, I’m not. I’m using all PAs that ended with the ball put in play. The inflation is not artificial, it’s the result of proper plate discipline.

      “Also you either stick to PA or AB as your denominator you cant compare the data with different formulas.” – Not sure what you mean. I never used ABs. It was all PA so I could keep the same perspective the author did.
      • Metsie October 23, 2012 at 6:02 pm

        hes done that as soon as pitch 5 in most cases!

        So no he isn’t forcing the pitcher to throw a strike by being patient.
        What he might be doing is wasting a lot of strikes (due to aggressive plate protection) not passive pitch selection.
        • XtreemIcon October 23, 2012 at 6:14 pm

          That’s possible. Maybe the count gets as far as it does because the hitter takes hittable pitches early in the count. You could be right. But the issue isn’t why the pitch count gets up there, it’s what the result is when it does. It’s clear to see that the longer the PA continues, the better the outcome is for the hitter.
          • Metsie October 23, 2012 at 6:43 pm

            Which is precisely why I said PPPA is a god awful way to judge plate discipline and patience…

            Could be because he was offered three straight balls and didn’t take them…
            Could be he got two straight Strikes and found himself 0-2 and fouled off a bunch of pitches to get to pitch 10.

            Nothing about PPPA tells a story about how a batter approached the PA.
            Yet our GM is using it as such!

            Which goes to show using stats is fine provided you actually know what story the stat is meant to tell!

            PPPA doesn’t tell the story Sandy and you guys think it does.

            What happens after the first 5 pitches has a lot more to do with how well the batter protects the plate than anything to do with what he did in the first 5 pitches.
  • Metsie October 23, 2012 at 5:58 pm

    Oh please there are plenty of outcomes that can happen other than a HR Walk or K.

    Single Double Triple and HBP are also possible.

    Why is the percentage so high?
    Because pitchers want to get ahead as quick as possible and you have yahoos telling you that taking a fat fastball strike on the first pitch is a good thing so they try and sneak one by.

    But those who look for it hit them out of the park!

    As for the late HRs thats not due to his patience at all!
    Anything past pitch 5 is a product of the batter NOT TAKING and being PATIENT and instead AGGRESSIVELY abandoning the appraoch you like and fouling off pitches that may not even be a strike but are too close to let pass!

    And as a result he will get more pitches and more mistakes due to hanging breaking balls and fat fastballs that weren’t located because he tried to hit a spot and missed.

    So please don’t try to spin anything that happens aftter Pitch 5 as a product of Patience because we all know it’s about plate protection which is CONTRARY to your patient approach as it REQUIRES not to be selective in waiting for the pitch that you cvan do the most damage with and is all about protecting the plate even on pitches that are not strikes but close enough to get called!
• Donal October 23, 2012 at 5:10 pm

  “Why is it that the people who always scream “Small Sample Size” never mention it when it doesn’t suit their argument?”

  Example?

  Or should I wonder why some people need to create strawmen to disparage advanced stats or their findings?

  “Yes the wOBA goes up again in 7-10 but 25% of those were via walks.”

  HR % is also slowly rising back up. And since the w in wOBA stands for “weighted” it should be pointed out that the walks alone would not account for the rise. NIBB are the lowest value in the formula. It should also be noted that we see HR% start to rise (also not enough to totally account for the rise of wOBA). It is seems that all positive outcomes see a rise.
• Bayonne Mets Fan October 23, 2012 at 5:28 pm

  It’s funny how pitchers aren’t wild anymore. Now all walks are attributed to “plate discipline” and philosophies. Today now batters can control their destiny. Batters can now actually dictate to a pitcher when he’ll throw a strike.

  Amazing.

  29 other teams know the Mets philosophy. Smart. Each game is different with different kinds of pitchers throwing different kinds of pitches at different speeds and different approaches depending on the score and game situation.

  Mets have one philosophy. Wow, i can see the difference already! World Series here we come.
  • Donal October 23, 2012 at 5:29 pm

    See, Joe D. This is what I mean by constructing strawmen.

    He’s lying to try and support his weak point.
    • Bayonne Mets Fan October 23, 2012 at 5:32 pm

      I’m giving my opinion here and lying about nothing. This is my opinion but i get it, you read the exchange with Xtreem Lying Machine and even though you know i’m 100% correct in asking him to produce a link or any kind of evidence to support his claim that Omar Minaya advised Steve Phillips on the Mike Piazza deal and he’s not able to produce it you’ll defend him anyway, which i dont’ give a crap about. Maybe you can help him and maybe somebody somewhere can produce this evidence i’m asking for.
      • XtreemIcon October 23, 2012 at 5:34 pm

        You mean you haven’t found it yet?
        • Bayonne Mets Fan October 23, 2012 at 5:37 pm

          You brought it up you find it. Correct i have not found anything yet. You’re just a god damned liar who’s also a wise guy. Have been here and always will be.
          • XtreemIcon October 23, 2012 at 5:38 pm

            And what will you do or say if/when I supply that “proof?”
            • XtreemIcon October 23, 2012 at 5:46 pm

              To be fair, I’m the one who brought it up.
              • XtreemIcon October 23, 2012 at 5:47 pm

                Oops…this was in reply to Donal right below.
              • Donal October 23, 2012 at 5:50 pm

                True, I’m just pointing out his double standards.
                • XtreemIcon October 23, 2012 at 5:53 pm

                  But it is right there for him to find. Phillips said it while a guest on Francesa. He loves them both so much, he should just remember it instead of carrying on. Unless…wait…unless his memory is flawed? Couldn’t be…
          • Donal October 23, 2012 at 5:44 pm

            When you are asked to prove your assertions, you claim it isn’t your job to back up your claims and that we have to go find the information ourselves. You are not alone in this tactic.

            Never mind that you are wrong, but you are also a hypocrite.
      • Donal October 23, 2012 at 5:42 pm

        No, you were not stating your opinion. You presented those comments as facts.

        No one claimed pitchers were no longer wild. No one attributes walks to solely plate discipline or a philosophy you can’t even define, let alone understand.

        What has been proven over and over is that an increase in plate discipline (which is not defined as “waiting for a walk”) leads to more positive outcomes.
• Original Mets Fan October 23, 2012 at 8:04 pm

  Hi Joe, Maybe you could answer this question. If this guy Hudgens was so good, why did Billy Beane fire him?
  • TRS86 October 24, 2012 at 9:03 am

    Who hasn’t been fired?
    • srt October 24, 2012 at 10:09 am

      Very few and that’s why sometimes it’s hard for a coach/manager/GM with no experience to break in. They just keep recycling these guys.

      Good to see both first time managers this season – Ventura and Matheny – do well. We need a new generation of coaches coming up the ranks.
• Alex68 October 24, 2012 at 8:06 am

  2 years ago the talk was how sandy didn’t need a payroll to build a winner because of his genius status of finding undervalue players at a xtreemingly low cost.. players who will contribute and help us win.. Fast forward to today, the problem is the budget and how the mets have no money for him to spend on.. WHAT??? At first the man is praised for his ability to find undervalue players, since he hasn’t found any and the mets have back to back losing season under his belt then the excuse from the sandy apologist’s is that he has no money to work with?? Can we be more consitant with the arguments? I get that most of you sabergooners and ______s don’t wanna admit that guys like me, maniac, metsie, bayonne, leroy and the ghost of omar were right, but at some point you should let go of our ego and admit that the man has been a failure so far in NY.. Listen, if the man turn it around i am sure we would not never hear the end of it, and that’s fine, i’d be the first one to admit that he proved us wrong and I’ll even tag an I <3 Sandy to my screen name but in the meantime, nobody can make excuses for this guy… It's really getting sad to see many mets fans just being hardheads because of this guy phylosphy of moneyballing and sabermetrics approach..
  • Joey D. October 24, 2012 at 9:30 am

    Hi Alex,

    I’m really hurt that you did not include me on that list with the others…., after all I’ve taken so many punches myself I think I deserve at least some honorable mention – at least the purple hurt for being wounded in battle.. Don’t ya love me anymore?
    • TRS86 October 24, 2012 at 9:35 am

      Sorry Joey but contrary to the opinion of some, you are not obnoxious enough to be included in that group. Repetitive yes but no where near obnoxious enough.
  • Alex68 October 24, 2012 at 10:04 am

    Joey, Hi, thanks for commenting. i am sure i left a few others out as well, But you as well were right so far in what we said from day one…
    TRS, you see why me and you can’t co exist? Was there a need from you to call people obnoxious?? What exactly do you accomplish by that? For one of us to take offense to that and insult you back so you can go back and play the victim? You’re just another instigator like the others we got here, you come in, take a shot at us, and when we fight back then you feel offended.. Wanna know what’s annoying and obnoxious? you and the little desert crew here trying to prove that you’re right all the time and playing “THIS^^^” everytime there’s an alderson like comment that fits your stupid agenda.. just because you don’t curse doesn’t mean you can’t offend people, now, i know you’re a Defensive Back and you’ve been since day one, i pay no mind to you, but notice that the reason why you and your little oasis crew get blasted here all the time is because you start sh** up then play the victim… don’t go running your mouth about how offended you are when i or anyone blast your sorry ass blog for being deserted, and stop your little attempt to trying and link crap from your blog to draw commenters, at this point you’re starting to look a bit desperate
    • Bayonne Mets Fan October 24, 2012 at 10:11 am

      This!
    • Alex68 October 24, 2012 at 11:10 am

      Bayonne, thanks for commenting….
    • Metsie October 24, 2012 at 11:40 am

      THIS!
• TRS86 October 24, 2012 at 9:03 am

  What was lost in all of this was the fact that up until the ASB of this year the Mets for 1.5 years had very good offensive numbers especially considering all the changed and moving parts. Sandy’s point was that after this year’s all-star break they broke away from what they had been doing for 1.5 years and started pressing and not looking for pitches they could do damage on and protecting the plate with 2 strikes. YES this philosophy is huge on protecting the plate with 2 strikes which is why in the first half they seemed to be doing a good job of that.

  What we can all question is why those numbers went down in the 2nd half. My thoughts would be to the fact that the pressure of trying to carry the team or get out of their own personal funks made them pickup bad habits.
  • TRS86 October 24, 2012 at 9:08 am

    Again, to Alex’s dismay I link to another great work done by NJ
    http://realdirtymets.com/2012/10/05/a-look-to-see-if-indeed-the-mets-offense-was-productive-the-last-year-and-a-half/

    Please excuse the source but NJ does such a great job compiling information into usable charts that I find it appropriate for the discussion.

    There is validity to the point that the Mets started to get away from an offensive approach that was working until this ASB.
  • Alex68 October 24, 2012 at 9:15 am

    Lol, to my dismay?? Listen man, we disagree a bunch of times but i have the upmost respect for my boy MNJ..
    • TRS86 October 24, 2012 at 9:24 am

      Eh, it was just a jab. Notice how I have never linked, I don’t think, one of my own stories. It’s just NJ does such a great job with stuff like this that I feel like it actually benefits the discussions here.
  • Metsie October 24, 2012 at 11:36 am

    Sandy’s point was wrong….
    They didn’t change what they did or how they approached the PA, the Pitchers recognized they were keeping the bat on thier shoulders and pounding the strike zone and getting ahead early putting everyone into defensive mode.

    And the few batters who got aggressive we easily recognized and thrown breaking balls out of the zone…Players like Kirk, and Valdespin
• Joey D. October 24, 2012 at 10:26 am

  HI Alex and Hi TRS,

  Because I have nice relationships with both of you shows that despite the heated arguments, neither of you are really that obnoxious – so Alex and TRS, why not shake hands, quote Davy Jones “it’s a little bit me, it’s a little bit you” and carry on the debate in the good natured way that is more reflective of both ya good guys!

  I know it’s hard.. I have some friends who I’ve known for many years but we have the same disagreement and it is hard not to take things personally even though we both know it’s not meant that way. I’ve asked them to question themselves to see if they are ignoring the Mets financial situation and Sandy being the business person, not the architect, of those great Oakland clubs so not to shatter their belief in saber metrics and money ball when it comes to running a professional baseball club. And I know no matter how I word that, the question itself could be taken quite personally.
• Dick Young Lives October 24, 2012 at 11:05 am

  15-20 pitch at-bats? Is that what the goal is? Great Caesar’s ghost!