from Amazon
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
What should you do when a pitcher has just thrown a bunch of balls in a row?
According to Jeff Brantley during the CIN/MIL game on Tuesday, “smart baseball” is to take until you get a strike. Not withstanding the fact that you probably don’t want to be asking advice on strategy from Brantley, is this true?
Without going through any calculations, I don’t think it can possibly be true. The only time you EVER want to take a pitch is when the chance of one or more of five things is higher than usual. One, the cost of a strike. This will really only occur on hitter’s counts, principally 3-0, 3-1, and 2-0, probably in that order, although 2-0 may be around the same as 3-1, in terms of the relative cost of the strike. Two, the value of the walk relative to the hit. For example, the leadoff batter is much more likely to want to take a pitch then would a batter with 2 outs and a runner or runners in scoring position. Third, the chance of the pitcher throwing a strike. Clearly the higher this chance the more you would want to take a pitch, but I am not sure if this factor is as significant as the other three. After all, the batter ought to be able to identify most of the pitches that are strikes or balls. IOW, he doesn’t HAVE to swing at a ball even if he is not taking. In fact, if the batter could theoretically identify every ball and strike, whether to take or not would not be at ALL dependent on the chance of a strike being thrown. Fourth, whether the pitch is predictable or not is a decisive factor. That is in terms of whether it is going to be a strike (which relates to the strike frequency - # 2 above) and whether it is going to be a fastball (or whatever you expect the picher’s “get me over” pitch to be). That depends on the game situation and the individual pitcher of course. For example, with 2 outs and a runner on second in a close game, the pitcher may not be interested in necessary throwing a strike or a good pitch to hit with a 3-0 count (at least he shouldn’t be), whereas if the pitcher’s team is up by 2 runs in the 9th and he is 3-0 on the leadoff batter, if he does NOT try and throw a fastball right down the middle, he is an idiot. Finally, the more pitch recognition skills the batter has, the more likely he is to not be taking.
Anyway, getting back to the real situation in the Reds game and Brantley, the bases were loaded with 2 outs, so a hit is worth much more than a walk, although a walk does produce a run. Still, this is in favor of the batter NOT taking. As well, on an 0-0 or 1-0 count, I am not sure it is EVER correct to take a pitch. The conventional wisdom of taking is generally predicated on the fact that the pitcher is less likely to throw a strike because he has just thrown X amount of balls in a row. I’m pretty sure that in most cases, it is is just the opposite, and the pitcher is MORE likely to throw a strike and more likely to throw a predictable pitch (fastball usually).
One of the ironies of Brantley’s comment (if that is the right word) is that he starting complaining about the “non-take” when the batter, Valentine, swung at a thigh-high fastball right down the middle. Clearly if you know that a fastball down the middle is coming (or even just a fastball) or if you have enough pitch recognition skills to identify one, swinging is better than taking. The other irony is that after the count went to 2-2, Valentine roped a single to RF on a hanging curve. Amusingly, after Valentine swung at a curve in the dirt for strike 2, Brantley said, “If he had taken every pitch, it would be ball 4 by now.” Did he not see that the third pitch was right down the middle?
Anyway, two things in MGL’s “How to coach and manage major league baseball” manual would be: One, “On a 3-2 count, if the pitch is close do NOT swing (especially for a free-swinger),” and, “When the pitcher has just thrown a bunch of balls in a row, expect a fastball strike and if you get it, tee off! Do NOT take!”