You see thats the REAL point here….
You can’t bitch that they did not follow the philosophy and then say they know what he means because you have no proof the understood it enough to implement it!

They are taking FAT strikes….

Is that what Hudgens is telling them to do?
If so then the problem is Hudgens not the players!

Can’t speak for Metsie but as far as myself, I’ll only repeat something I wrote to Metsie about that:

“Well, if you go by the list of players, managers I provided (along with BIll James when he referred to a statician telling one how to hit) and include those many others who have offered opinions like you and I have and I think there is a large enough contingent to say there is something wrong somewhere.

“But credit Bobby Ojeda for first bringing it to the attention of the fan base early in the season, warning us of what to expect during the time that the Mets were playing well and scoring runs. That clueless guy saw it coming.”

Bayonne also attached something Keith Hernandez had to say on the subject and I followed up with essays written by professional batting instructors regarding the importance of having to hit outside and inside pitches as well because if one can’t, that weakness is going to be exploited by the opposing pitcher – because the pitcher is going to use the entire strike zone..

And remember, I did raise the question of how one with the experience and background in the game like Hudgens could be instructing his hitters on plate discipline in a manner so much different than others. Compare what Tony LaRussa said to that of Dave:

LaRussa: “You watch your productive hitters in the big leagues, and they get a chance to drive in a run, they look for the first good strike, and the better the pitching, especially this time of the year, you get that first strike, that may be the last one that you get to see. So you’d better be ready to swing early. It’s not sitting up there and taking strike one, strike two so that you can work the count.’’

Hudgens: “Hunt your pitch…. “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.”

Now it does appear they were both saying the same thing with “hunt your pitch” and “look for the first good strike”. But what they then differ is when Dave says “If he doesn’t give you that pitch? We’re walking to first base.” which specifically refered to pitches within the middle 13 inches of the plate. But as we know, there are two additional inches on each side and LaRussa counters with “you get that first strike, that may be the last one that you get to see. So you’d better be ready to swing early”.

That “first strike” referred to by LaRussa as “may be the last one that you get to see” did not mean the rest of the pitches were going to be outside the strike zone – it was the ” first good strike” that a batter thought he could hit.

You obviously don’t understand hitting OR you don’t like Dave Hudgens???

I’m gonna go out on a limb and speculate that his hitters who average over a million dollars a year in salary, ie professionals, do understand exactly what he means even if you don’t!

Just because you don’t have the foggiest idea what he means, doesn’t mean they don’t…

Well, if you go by the list of players, managers I provided (along with BIll James when he referred to a statician telling one how to hit) and include those many others who have offered opinions like you and I have and I think there is a large enough contingent to say there is something wrong somewhere.

But credit Bobby Ojeda for first bringing it to the attention of the fan base early in the season, warning us of what to expect during the time that the Mets were playing well and scoring runs. That clueless guy saw it coming.

Even MORE in the group if you count those who THINK they know what he means when he talks, including many players on the NYM Roster!!!!

Thats the real issue in all of this…
Hudgens direction isn’t clear, isn’t precise, all open to the interpretation of the listener!
And VERY DIFFERENT depending on how “YOUR PITCH” is defined by that listener!

A Good Coach would not leave so much open to interpretation…
He would make it as CLEAR AS DAY to ensure they do what he MEANS not what they THINK he means!
There would be no debate on what YOUR PITCH is…
He would tell you what your pitch was by being clear on what that is!

I don’t think that is happening at all!

Everyone here has a different opinion on what it means….
That means players do too!

I guess if I’m cluelsss when it comes to what Hudgens says it’s because my conclusions are based not on my own observations but from what I have found to be been said (accompanied by links for backup) by otherprofessionals instead whom, I guess, are really clueless and don’t know what they are talking about as well – you know, Tony LaRussa, Terry Francona, Bob Ojeda, Larry Bowa, Mitch Wlliams, professional hitting instructors, even Terry Collins when it came to Ike Davis. And those links are provided for others to review and then point out what I might have been misinterpreting. Again, if Hudgens referred to each individual hunting for his one pitch, instead of defining what that pitch has to be on a group basis and not per hitter, none of us would be questioning him on that issue. As those other “clueless” ones mentioned above have said, that affects the entire at-bat.

As far as relying on stastical analysis, besides my own opinons about the limited use of them for professional baseball matter decision making (which is different from fan dicussion) not only have many of the above commented on the fascination with OBP and the conclusions derived from front office executives works against those on the field, Al Leiter also discussed that with Brian Kenny when it came to Kenny’s suggestion to employ more extreme shifts for each one in the batting order based on what the saber charts show, pointed out how that would have a negative impact on the pitcher and his game.

And even Bill James cautions about the limited use of stats for it is devoid of so many intangeables, as pointed out yesterday in the transcript from a 60 Minutes episode with and about James from 2009 that I had attached. The end of the segment was like this:

SAFER: “James says he’s always looking for new numbers to help the Red Sox. But even he admits the numbers will never say it all.

“There’s something in baseball that you really can’t quantify. And that is, the mix of guys at a given moment, there’s some magic or whatever, that goes on. That all the James-ian theory in the world will never find the answer to,” Safer Says.

JAMES: “It’s mostly intangible,” James says. “I mean, I don’t understand most of it. I don’t think that anybody in the Red Sox would tell you that we have that magic stuff figured out. But there are people here who understand that part of the equation a lot better than I do.”

Also, there is the tendancy for many to imply that advanced statistical analysis has provided new insight that was not understood before. What I posted yesterday is a perfect example. In that 60 Minute segment which credits Bill James with disproving the myth about Fenway Park:

“Example: Fenway Park and its infamous left field wall, the “Green Monster.” Fenway was legendary as a right-handed hitters’ park. But analysis showed it actually favored left-handed hitters, and the Sox line-up has been lefty-heavy ever since.”

This is why I felt the need to post something about my own understanding which I concluded a long, long tima ago on my own:

“For example, the ballpark factor. When I was a kid I knew that the Green Monster quite often saved a pitchers life more than it allowed a Bucky Dent to hurt him. A hard line drive that had the power and projectory to be carried over any normal outfield fence would instead bounce off the wall half-way through it’s flight with the left-fielder positioning himself near the wall – but at the same time most closer to the infield as well – to play that bounce and thus a swing that would have meant a home run in most other parks became a single due to Fenway. It could also prevent a runner from scoring from first on that type of play.

“In addition, the Green Monster saved a pitcher from being victim to the Texas Leaguer to left – the left fielder has to play in more because there is so less territory to cover behind him that he can get to those bloops because he is not playing the usual normal position he would have to in other places. The same with the old Yankee Stadium in right. With it’s 344 foot distance, there were many cheap shots that went over the fence for home runs but at the same instance, there were those in between pop ups that instead would not fall in.”

Again, my point is not to put down advanced statistics – I think they are definitely an asset for fans to get a better understanding of an individual’s profile especially when one cannot observe him on a daily basis. And that is the same for those in the front office.

But there is a difference between using advanced reference material for more precise information than there is the discovery of new revelations about the game itself and/or those with limited knowledge of the game (or, in Sandy’s case, none as he has never tried to hide that fact) can suddenly learn all they need to know from it’s deep study in order to run a team professionally. That information by itself is very superficial – as brought out by those who I have mentioned above – including Bill James.

And to say they reveal more about the game than observation, well, I did not post my thoughts about Fenway because some politely have said I am clueless, but rather to give an example of how the level of the intense, detailed understanding of the game that we have today did not suddenly originate in the early eighties as professed. Bill James is credited about showing how Fenway Park did not favor right handed hitters while I demonstrated how that fact was known long before that. So, the point is simply that old-time “traditionlists” were well aware of these things long before that. And the history of baseball shows that different types of play are adopted over different eras and we must expect that to be the case in future decades as well. Who knows, it might be in terms of starters going longer. We shall see.

So, don’t shoot me, I’m just the messenger.

All this be patient crap is moot if you teach the players how to do that!
Whatever you do early in the count doesn’t matter….Because even if the Pitcher gets ahead you know what to do!

Perhaps if I talked or let Hudgens coach me for awhile I would know what he means by HUNT YOUR PITCH…

the problem I think is he may mean one thing but the message being recieved is another story….
And that is because YOUR PITCH is UNCLEAR….
Hudgens needs to clear up what YOUR PITCH means…

Is it middle strikes?
Is it Just itches you like to drive?
Is it ALL strikes?

If it’s ALL strikes then I support his philosophy and suggest he should say HUNT STRIKES not leave is the subjective YOUR PITCH cause that could mean 40 different things on a 40 man Roster cause your leaving it up to someone else to define what YOUR PITCH is…

Mine is a Fastball outside and thigh high….Somtimes they are strikes, some are just off the black as well…But I can hit both a long mile….

A Strike low and inside is NOT MY Pitch….
Does that mean I should not swing at those? Is that my coach’s BEST coaching?

Or would he better off just telling me how to deal with those pitches instead?

What I DO have a problem with is one size fits all Team Batting Philosophy….
Each player has a strength and weakness and I would prefer the hitting coach works to make each better WITHIN thier OWN paramters instead of something that is easy to say through a loudspeaker but doesn’t work for every batter on the team.

Metsie. I can’t figure out if you understand and support Hudge or if you agree with Joey D’s B.S. ???

Every hitter is diff. Whether it be pitches in or out up or down. O they need to know what they can handle so they can attack those pitches. There is however 1 constant… all big leaguers can handle the fb down the middle. He teaches to be aggressive on pitches you can hit, layoff pitches you can’t hit hard PERIOD

Btw who hits bombs on the outer 2 inches with any kind of consistency? Name 1 who’s hit more than 1 bomb on a pitch on the outside corner even once or twice all last yr????

Get a clue!

You’re wasting your time copy n pasting several paragraphs of your nonsense…NOBODY READS IT!

I think Yogi would apply to number four.

But to be honest, I do have to wonder why Hudgens (notice I finally spelled his name right?) preaches such a philosophy. With all his years of experience in professional ball he should know better despite whatever the CEO on top believes.

I also have a question I would love to be answered regarding the team batting average of .200 swinging at pitches on the corner. Does that stat account for hitting when behind in the count giving the pitcher an extreme advantage. Instead of “hunting” for a pitch in the middle (or 13 inches) the batter is now forced to defend himself on pitches all throughout the strike zone – not to mention borderline pitches and having no choice but to swing at deceptive pitches on the chance they might not fall out of the strike zone or sensing that they were going to instead.

This is the point most of this argument is dancing around….

They think he is teaching to swing at all strikes because all strikes are hittable and therefore YOUR PITCH….
I bet most players don’t agree with that definition.
So they will define “YOUR PITCH” (thier pitch in thier head) as strikes they like…They will not swing at ALL Strikes as they believe the philosophy is treaching….They simply WILL NOT LEARN the lesson or implement it.

If they are correct about what Hudgens means and define your pitch to mean ALL STRIKES then Hudgens should stop giving them a say one what pitch to swing at and tell them hunt STRIKES and swing at them!

He’s not saying that!

And they certainly are not doing that!

So someone here has a problem with the definition of YOUR PITCH….
Either the folks supporting the philosophy have it wrong or
The Players are not understanding what Hudgens means…

And in BOTH cases the FAULT lies with the Coach because he is not giving CLEAR INSTRUCTIONS on what they are supposed to do.

YOUR PITCH seems to have many interpretations among people…

Some think it means ALL Strikes
Some think it means Strikes in the Middle
Some think it is Strikes but only the ones you can or like to hitand drive
And some might even think it means only swing at pitches you like to hit Strike or not!

Thats a lot of wiggle room with very different results based on how you define the lesson HUNT YOUR PITCH….

If Hudgens wants to see his philosophy implemented properly perhaps he should be more SPECIFIC in his coaching so there is no FUDGE FACTOR or misinterpretation of what he means….

1 – HUNT FOR STRIKES, ALL STRIKES and SWING AT THEM!
2 – Hunt for Middle strikes and let him srtrike you out if he can hit the corners
3 – Hunt for a pitch you like to hit but only if it is a strike (leaving open the strike locations you don’t like to hit to get you out)
4 – Hunt for Pitches you like to hit Strikes be damned!

If you ask me he would be much better off with #3 or #4 and then work on how to fight off pitches with two strikes on you….
The PPPA will go sky high, they won’t swing or be able to fight off pitches in zones they don’t like to hit when they have to and there will be no confusion as to what he means because it is as clear and a Sunny July Day!

Exactly the point. So what if by the “middle” the hitting coach meant those just 13 inches? So what? Pitchers work the entire plate and how often do we see a pitching sequence where all the tosses thrown were focused on those other four inches – coming inside and then outside, hight and tight or low, etc.? Batters need to concentrate on all seventeen inches. A coach can talk about what to do when pitches come within that 13 inch zone but it’s another thing telling batters to “hunt” for it. That handcuffs them.

Also, as you point out, there are many hitters who thrive on pitches on the corners. In fact, Yogi Berra is noted as being one of the most notorious “bad ball” hitters around (meaning he would gets hits on pitches often outside the strike zone. Can you imagine Hutchens telling him to hunt for a pitch toward the middle. Even more, no matter what one thinks of Yogi’s managerial strategies, he knew about hitting. I doubt he would hire a coach who spoke about approaching pitches in the manner Hutchens did.

This was again one of the many points LaRussa brought up and another example of the trend of hiring general managers with the dual role of running the team both financially and competitively who only have experience in one.

You do not WALK to first then you walk to the dugout!

And a guy like Davis LOVES to hit bombs on those pitches on the out 2 inces of the plate!

Each batter has his OWN preference for hitting…

You guys think he means just swing at middle strikes but thats NOT what hudgens said!

If thats what he meant then he should have said that and not leave it up to the batter on what he should and should NOT swing at!

In the manner in which Hutchens has been emphasizing going for the middle of the plate, I think we can safely say it’s a misuse of stats. After all, he wasn’t talking in terms of trying to improve that batting average, he was talking in terms of avoiding those type pitches.

My hunch is that this is an approach handed down in discussion with Sandy. It seems to fit right in with Sandy’s thought process when it comes to data. Data shows the Mets hit better with pitches thrown in the middle but that is misleading because the batters are getting away from the hitting techniques outlined by professionals. Instead of being prepared for more pitches in or away, they are being told to “hunt” for that pitch in the middle instead.

Data in the first half of the season showed that the Mets were scoring runs by taking more pitches but Bobby O. brought out in May how misleading this early success was as well – the data that Sandy referred to in September was compiled when (as brought out by Ojeda) pitchers had yet to recognize they could be more aggressive. They later understood the Mets were “hunting” for certain pitches and thus the first pitch could cut the corners for a strike rather than coming in with a pitch that eventually falls outside the strike zone.

And LaRussa noted how “front office executives” obsessed with OBP hinders hitters because of the reasons stated above – along with the fact that a batter may never get pitch better than the first one to hit. It depends upon how the pitcher is throwing. It’s been pointed out to us by Gary, Keith and Ralph that batters know when a pitcher is just missing the plate and thats when they become more selective, because just like a pitcher can nibble at the corners when ahead in the count, he has to come in toward the middle of the plate when behind – a big advantage for the hitter IF he can be patient enough and not be over-anxious.

So again, my own hunch is this is data related – and, if my theory is right (not swearing by it) – then this is another example of stats showing percentages but not reasons why and thus how one should not depend upon such information to formulate ideas.

Sorry about pointing out how little I know about the game but it’s because I don’t appreciate how much more statistical analysts understand baseball as compared to those like John McGraw, Casey Stengel and Tony LaRussa – you know, the idiots who wasted decades focusing on what they could only see on the field.

Using stats to explain something is not misuse unless they are the wrong conclusion to take on the situation….

Does hitting .200 show they should not swing at strikes on the inside outside part of the plate?
Or does it show they need to work on hitting the ball in those areas?

If he is using that stat to say don’t swing at those pitches that are strikes then he is using it in a bad way!
Because he is using the stat to draw the wrong conclusion!

But showing them that they hit only .200 on Edge strikes is not wrong provided your working to increase the BA on those types of Pitches!

You certainly can’t say don’t swing at them will help the BA because the result will be LESS BA not more, They will only increase the K rates by not swinging at giving up strike locations to the Pitcher!

And I wish you would stop with the notion that you don’t know baseball and therefore don’t know what your talking about….

You don’t need to be a baseball player to know that if you give a Pitcher a location to throw strikes that you will NOT swing at that the Pitcher will do whatever he can to throw strikes there and get you out!

You will NOT walk to 1st base you will walk to the showers instead!

The only way (definition) of what Hudgens means that actually works is the notion that ALL STRIKES are YOUR PITCH and you should swing at ALL STRIKES!

And if thats what he means then he should say THAT and not YOUR PITCH!

HUNT FOR STRIKES, Not YOUR PITCH!

Just as I woould tell you to Pick Apples if thats what I wanted instead of telling you to PICK FRUIT and hope you know Appleas are the Fruit I’m talking about but leaving it up to you to decide what I mean!

“If the intention is to swing at MIDDLE Strikes then that leaves a LOT of strikes they are being told to NOT swing at! And if they don’t Swing at those Strikes those Strikes are what the Pitcher will give them in spades.

That’s the whole point I’ve been making, as you know. But as you also know, I have very little knowledge of the game and don’t know what I’m talking about.

Actually, wouldn’t Hutchens pointing out that the team as a whole hit just .200 with pitches on the sides be another mis-use of stats? Remember Sandy Alderson the problem was not with Citi Field’s dimensions but the problem was that the Met hitters hadn’t learned how to hit home runs there. Shouldn’t the same philsophy apply -the problem is not those four inches on the sides of the plate, the problem is that Met hitters hadn’t learned how to hit pitches thrown there.

That’s why I attached that PDF about hitting the outside pitch – obviously, it can be done. Know when it couldn’t be done? Back in the sixities when the pitch was high or low because the strike zone was bigger and that type of pitch if placed well was very difficult to hit. That is why batting averages dropped each year to the point that if Carl Yaztremski had one less hit or went one more at-bat without getting one, there would have been no .300 hitters in the AL back in 1968. As we know, he was the only one hitting at .301

The only thing that matters is if the HITTERS KNOW what he means, if he is explaining it PROPERLY!

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

If the intention is as some state here “Swing At Strikes and ALL strikes are Hittable”
Then the Phrase or teaching of “Your (personalized) Pitch” is Confusing, Wrong, UNCLEAR and NOT DISTINCT! The General is at fault for any percieved LACK of execution by the Soldiers! He’s not teaching them to swing at Strikes he is teaching them to swing only at pitches they like!

He was not CLEAR about what he wanted them to do and so they did not do what he wanted!
The FAULT OF THE TEACHER not the PLAYERS!

If he truly meant Swing at all strikes he would have instead said HUNT FOR STRIKES not some personalized version of what the player thinks is a good pitch to swing at.

If the intention is to swing at MIDDLE Strikes then that leaves a LOT of strikes they are being told to NOT swing at! And if they don’t Swing at those Strikes those Strikes are what the Pitcher will give them in spades. Again the blame goes to the TEACHER because he isn’t teaching them the lesson people think he SHOULD be teaching and the Player may very well be doing PRECISELY what he says, the problem being is he is telling them to do the WRONG thing….Again the TEACHER is the issue in that scenario!

It all comes down to the use of “YOUR PITCH” Well what is YOUR PITCH? That varies from Batter to Batter….
It’s about as good advice as saying go up there and get a hit! Easy to say but your not exactly Teaching him anything worthwhile because Players ALREADY SWING at pitches they like…Thats not thier problem it is swinging at pitches they may NOT like because they either get fooled or because those pitches they don’t like are not as hittable as the ones they DO like but are going to be called strikes anyway.

If all he is going to tell them is to wait for THIER PITCH he would be much better off telling them and helping them IDENTIFY what the hell THEIR PITCH really is or giving him instruction on what to do with Pitches that are NOT HIS but destined to be strikes so he can extend his PA in hopes of GETTING HIS PITCH…..

But that requires INDIVIDUAL COACHING, it can not be a one size fits all Organizational PHILISOPHICAL approach.

Of course. When a batting coach points out that as a team the Mets hit about .200 on pitches two inches inside of either side of the plate and follows with “We want to hit these 13 inches in the middle” I think that is defining what is a hittable pitch.

But it’s not that simple. How the batter positions himself in the box has a lot to do with the type of pitches he is going to get – and the location of those pitches as well – and thus, compensating for one weakness then subjects the batter to a different disadvantage instead. It also has to do with his hands, wrist speed and his batting stance.

http://www.yougoprobaseball.com/what-pitches-to-throw-a-hitter-reading-his-hands-and-stance.html
.

In the attached, the author shows how different types of stances create problems with pitches on the corners.

a) An open stance usually means that a hitter has trouble seeing pitches. He may open his stance for comfort or to see the baseball better. Whatever the reason he is leaving his hips open. As a pitcher when you see this you should throw inside fastballs. The hitter is already sacraficing some power by opening his stance. By going inside we are forcing him to stay open and take that loss of power. These guys are easy to jam up and get a lot of pop outs on.

b) A closed stance usually means that this batter has a problem stepping in the bucket. He closes his stance to correct this. These guys usually have trouble hitting the outside pitch. Even though their stance gives them the best opportunity to hit the outside pitch I think a low and away fastball would work on this guys. They are standing that way for a reason. Let’s see if they can hit it and then try a different approach.

Pitchers are therefore going to try and hit those other four inches more than throwing pitches down the middle of the plate. By focusing on those 13 inches, this will allow opposing pitchers to start off with pitches on the corners for a quick first strike.

So, if the Mets only hit .200 on pitches on the edges, is it because they can’t or that they are not being instructed on how to do so?

The attached not only explains how a hitter could approach the outside pitch but also the importance of getting accustomed to looking for it. I’m sure that you, Bayonne and others could do the same explanation for the inside pitch as well.

– Hitting%20the%20Outside%20Pitch.pdf

http://www.yougoprobaseball.com/what-pitches-to-throw-a-hitter-reading-his-hands-and-stance.html

Voluntarily, Forced, Taught or BAD CHOICE OF WORDS used in the coaching (Wait instead of Swing at) leading to misunderstanding….

That is what happened!

Matt’s research was on the right track but he didnt (or couldn’t) show the O/Z Swing/Contact numbers of the different counts both Early in the PA (First 3 Pitches) and in Hitters Counts (2-0, 2-1, 3-0, and 3-1)

If he had we might have seen what you think Hudgens is teaching isn’t happening! at ANY TIME not just the second half of last year….