|
|
#42
10-11-2005, 05:13 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: A theoretical baseball question
let's just assume the pitcher is telling the hitter what is coming (like for some reason i was thinking [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]).
[ QUOTE ] This is not right. If the hitter knew Lidge was throwing a slider and it started on the plate, there would be NO reason for the hitter to swing at it because he "knows" it will break down and out of the strikezone. [/ QUOTE ] you didn't understand what i was talking about. when the hitter didn't know what was coming the slider that moves out of the zone is harder to lay off of b/c of the 97 mph fastball (once again a pitch that works of the fastball, all offspeed does). now assume he knows the slider is coming. lidge knows the hitter knows this, he knows he will lay off of the slider that starts on the corner and breaks off the plate so he isn't going to throw that pitch, he will put that in his back pocket. i am saying that his slider has so much tilt to it that it is almost impossible to center if he gets on top of it and throws it right which he does almost everytime. the only one a hitter is going to crush (you may hit the good one but not CRUSH) is the one he gets underneath and spins. the only reason he throws that pitch that breaks off the plate is b/c he will throw to fastballs on the black and then throw that slider that starts on the black and runs way off and they can't lay off, its unhittable (why throw something they can touch?). this is of course assuming that both lidge and the hitter are on the same page. 
|
|
#43
10-11-2005, 05:22 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A theoretical baseball question
Let me also add that this year, Pujols hit .419 when ahead in the count (no specific count, just ahead) and Mark Teixeira hit .417. Some of these situations (like 2-0 and 3-1) they were undoubtedly lookign fastball, but 1-0, 2-1, etc. they could not look for one pitch yet they were able to to hit well over .400. I have little doubts that this would easily push .500 if they knew the pitch as well.
|
|
#44
10-11-2005, 05:23 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A theoretical baseball question
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] mariano has been throwing the same pitch for years and nothing has been done about it. ichiro is 1 hitter, i repeat 1 hitter. 1 hitter will not make a difference in the entire league average. [/ QUOTE ] True, but Mariano has more than just a great cutter. Also, his cutter has been progressively hit harder over the past 3 seasons. If a hitter knew for sure that the cutter was coming, RH hitters would start opening their hips earlier on the inside cutters and driving the ball oppo or just laying off it if it was on the outside corner. LH hitters would be able to get the bat head out in front more so they would not be getting busted on the hands. [/ QUOTE ] His cutter is getting hit more not because of the batters, but because of him. Despite his ultra-high level of effectiveness, he is not as dominant as in the past.
|
|
#45
10-11-2005, 05:25 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A theoretical baseball question
[ QUOTE ]
Then to see you go on this rant [/ QUOTE ] rant? just talking about baseball. guess i will do it with bravos only since you are obviously way too defensive, i have yet to be mean and yet here you are with this post.
|
|
#46
10-11-2005, 05:28 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A theoretical baseball question
[ QUOTE ]
Let me also add that this year, Pujols hit .419 when ahead in the count (no specific count, just ahead) and Mark Teixeira hit .417. Some of these situations (like 2-0 and 3-1) they were undoubtedly lookign fastball, but 1-0, 2-1, etc. they could not look for one pitch yet they were able to to hit well over .400. I have little doubts that this would easily push .500 if they knew the pitch as well. [/ QUOTE ] i think these guys could do some damage, you are right. what do you think about christian guzman (miserable hitter) and all of the call-ups and 40-man guys? do you think they are going to hit well enough to keep the league avg at .400?
|
|
#48
10-11-2005, 05:49 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A theoretical baseball question
[ QUOTE ]
you guys are saying, "barry would have hit 100 for sure," thats crap. once he got to 80, he would have never got an official AB for the rest of the year (especially since he knows what's coming), these are all variables. this game is to complex to come up with certainties, i just said that i thought that those numbers were high b/c i have dine this at a level close to what is mentioned in the OP and i know for a FACT that it is hder than you think. [/ QUOTE ] I have also played a reasonably high level of ball, and still have many friends, some close, that are still playing. In fact, one of them is the target of another thread where the OP "hates" him (argg Yankee fans.. LOL, the most fair weathered fans ever.. worse than the Dodgers!). I do not know the level you play, although I believe I read somewhere that you said you were playing semi-pro??? I played 2 years of ball at a smaller (Div 1-AA for football) school before deciding to hang up my cleats, transfer schools (Ga Tech), and get my degree. I was NEVER good enough to keep playing, but I have played on the field with more than 10 current pro players which are all household names. So I know for a FACT that I DO know how hard it is, and my opinion remains unchanged. Let my also state that if A-Rod had 80, there is now way that they walk him every other AB because Sheffield, Giambi, and Matsui would be following with 60+ each as well.
|
|
#49
10-11-2005, 05:58 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A theoretical baseball question
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Let me also add that this year, Pujols hit .419 when ahead in the count (no specific count, just ahead) and Mark Teixeira hit .417. Some of these situations (like 2-0 and 3-1) they were undoubtedly lookign fastball, but 1-0, 2-1, etc. they could not look for one pitch yet they were able to to hit well over .400. I have little doubts that this would easily push .500 if they knew the pitch as well. [/ QUOTE ] i think these guys could do some damage, you are right. what do you think about christian guzman (miserable hitter) and all of the call-ups and 40-man guys? do you think they are going to hit well enough to keep the league avg at .400? [/ QUOTE ] Yeah, Guzman is pathetic.. he hit .265 in this situation. But look at some others in the same situation... David Dellucci - .376 Coco Crisp - .374 Jason Ellison - .372 Raul Ibanez - .371 Garrett Atkins - .365 Emil Brown - .359 None of these guys are exactly strike fear in a pitcher, although Dellucci, Crisp, and Ibanez are "quality" players. Also, I never said the league avg would be .400, my guess was somewhere around .350 for league. edit - OK I originally said 100-150 pts higher (lg avg), but I brought that down a bit in another post after I though about it some more. I said 75 - 125 or so (I think) would be more practical although 125 would definately be on the higher end. .350 would seem about right.
|
|
#50
10-11-2005, 06:00 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A theoretical baseball question
it seems to me that one aspect that people aren't considering are the amount of walks and what that will do to the mix of pitches. The batters will be able to lay off sinkers, splitters, low and away "raul mondesi specials". This will cause
A) a bunch of walks allowing batters to hit more often w/ runners on base B) batters to be hitting from ahead in the count C) Pitchers to get so frusterated because they can't get hitters to swing at junk that they end up throwing more pitches over the plate Something to think about...
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
