Getting To First Base

by Diamondhacks on Oct 4, 2008 6:54 PM EDT Comment 32 comments

Did you know the Diamondbacks hit the fewest singles in the National League? If my math is right, here's the list:

St Louis 1102

Atlanta 1035

Chicago 1018

Los Angeles 1018

San Fran 1010

NY 1007

Pittsburgh 966

Rocky Mtn God Squad 964

The Capitol Gang 964

Houston 959

San Diego 945

Cincinnati 871

Philadelphia 866

Florida 859

Milwaukee 841

Arizona 831

We knew our OBP was low, especially after park adjustments, but this sort of caught my eye. Dead last in singles. In a weak league featuring three or four clubs deemed 'major league' by little more than name. Why are we last? What's the significance?

I decided to take OBP (essentially H+BB+HBP/ AB+BB+HBP) and extract out extra base hits, so instead of asking the question, "How often does a team reach base?", I'm asking "How often does a team reach first base?". Now, stop yelling. I know that hitting a double or homer is technically "reaching" first base too -but OBP already captures that. I'm trying to understand something more specific here, than how often a team reaches "any base" safely.

Here's the above list after adding in walks and HBP - how often teams reached (and stopped, essentially, at) first base:

Toasted Ravioli 1721

Chicago 1704

Atlanta 1695

Shea It Aint So 1665

Hollywood 1604

Colorado 1591

Washington 1565

Philly 1519

Pet Co Boys 1516

Golden Gate 1510

Pittsburgh 1499

Brennamans 1481 (combined)

Miami 1471

Arizona 1467

Houston 1460

Laverne & Shirley 1460

Pretty similar. Philly jumped up several places, and we snuck ahead of Houston and Laverne's Brewers, who hit 60 more home runs than us. IOW, we're basically in the playoffs if we had Babe Ruth ;-)

More seriously, what this tells us in a more compelling way than OBP does, is that, after park adjustments, we are just off the chart miserable at reaching first base. Surely our youngsters' footspeed converted some potential singles into doubles, but it should also be noted that speedy Arizona ranks 13th in NL doubles, and is below league average in extra base hits.

The base we have the most trouble reaching is not second, or third or even home (ie "Runs"). The base we have the most trouble with (relative to the league) and from which, most of our offensive woes spread, is first.

I guess this interests me because, beyond the results themselves, scrbi and I (and many others) have been batting around the notion that this team's hitting philosophy is wrong. Young guys, driving the ball in the air when they hit it, striking out a ton - not "adjusting to the situation", as scrbi likes to say. Maybe there's something to that. Currently, we fly out and whiff as much as anyone and hit the fewest singles. Maybe we swing too hard too often, and should be looking to serve the ball instead, even if that compromises some of our power numbers.

I decided to drill this extraction of XBHs from OBP down to the player level, to ask how often players reached (and stopped at, or were satisfied with) first base. Here's those percentages for Dbacks with 200+ ABs, plus Adam Dunn. As you're reading the list, think in terms of the hitter's approach (philosophy) as well as talent. Who's trying to reach first base here?

Dunn .326

Ojeda .303

Jackson .298

Hudson .281

Upton .257

Snyder .254

Tracy .228

Reynolds .226

Drew .221

CY .214

Byrnes .183

....and some reserves

Clark .289

Burke .273

Montero .224

Romero .172

Haren .152

Drew's an outlier, I suppose, yet he still swings hard, pops up frequently (less so since June), and hardly ever walks. Tony Clark and Burke's numbers also surprised me, in that I dont perceive either as a philosophical "on base" guy. But the rest of the list, I think, is a decent representation of who's able (talent) and willing (philosophy) to reach (and stop at) first base. And it doesnt seem like age or experience has too much to do with it. Further, this propensity or "ability" may not have quite as much to do with talent as I had previously assumed.

Comments welcome as always

0 recs | Comment 32 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Just as my old little league coach liked to say...

A walk’s as good as a hit (or in this case as good as a single). AZ was 4th in the NL in drawing BB’s in 2008 with 587 free passes. That doesn’t balance out being 2nd in the NL with 1,287 K’s, but it does show that some of our young guys are finding a way to get on 1st base other than hitting singles. The other nice thing about walks is they drive up the opposing pitch count.

by TAP on Oct 4, 2008 9:04 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Glad you mentioned

the 587 walks, TAP.

First, it alerted me to a huge data error I made and have now corrected. Phew.

Second, I was surprised to learn just how poorly we ranked at reaching first (only) despite this more than respectable walk total you cited. I had a hunch we were near league bottom in singles, but assumed the walks would pull us up nearer league average overall. Yet, we’re still dead last in my curious little OBP-XBH stat, after park adjustments.

I think there are three reasons for this. A) We rank below average in HBP. B) Although we rank #4 in walks, our total is actually closer to 8th than it is to 3rd, and C) The largest formula component (ie singles) with the most effective weight is the one we’re the poorest at. So, all that drags our overall ability to reach first down.

I agree the walks are a good sign, and as such the strikout to walk ratio doesnt bother me much, especially for a young team. For example, there are a handful of NL teams with worse or comparable ratios. I feel like we’re getting a decent amount of walks in exchange for the strikeouts; a decent return, as it were. What I’m more troubled by is our ratio of strikeouts to singles, and several other ratios stemming from that. And I’m kinda flummoxed whether that’s a result of talent (raw and readiness level), philosophy (coaching), or some combination.

Thx again for your comment

by Diamondhacks on Oct 4, 2008 10:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

We rank below average in HBP

I know someone who could’ve changed that.

"There are only two seasons: winter and baseball"
-- Bill Veeck

by njjohn on Oct 5, 2008 7:31 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Two springs ago

I passionately advanced the idea that “someone” lead off, partly due to this skill. “Someone” proceeded to make my suggestion look foolish…and even stupider the year after!

Today, only Augie looks to take one for the team. Conor just cant get his hands out of the way :-)

by Diamondhacks on Oct 5, 2008 12:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

"Just as my old little league coach liked to say…

A walk’s as good as a hit …"

Little league….LMAO!!!

A walk is never ever as good as a hit.

lmao!!!

by foulpole on Oct 10, 2008 3:48 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Not exactly true

With nobody on base, a walk and a single have exactly the same value……and sometimes when the count has gone especially deep, a walk can be more valuable than a single. For example which would you rather have with nobody on base, a first pitch single or a 7 pitch walk ?

Of course in most other cases a base hit is better than a walk because of the additional base advancement potential for any runners on base. When it’s all added up, a walk has about 71% of the value of a single.

http://www.tangotiger.net/lwbymob.htm

by shoewizard on Oct 10, 2008 9:40 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Actually, what's funny is...

It’s been well-established that foulpole loooooooves working the count, even at the expense of actual results (i.e., a 10-pitch groundout can be more valuable than a first-pitch home run). So of all people, you’d think he’d understand your first paragraph.

I’m not holding my breath though.

by Azreous on Oct 10, 2008 12:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Really?

Worked just as well in the bottom of the ninth against the Rockies.

"Now, this is the dumbest thing I've ever heard [Hank Steinbrenner] say, and this is the third time I've said that this season."

by kishi on Oct 10, 2008 11:33 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Now now.

Don’t go bringing facts into this.

by Azreous on Oct 10, 2008 12:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Just as my old little league coach liked to say…

And that’s way Albert, Manny, Dunn etc. get walked all the time. Because the other coach is so clueless that they are giving up a free pass vs. a hit which holds the same value?

LMAO!!!

by foulpole on Oct 13, 2008 8:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Santa, the Easter Bunny and the tooth Fairy are real too.

Same lies that are told to children at the Little League level too.

Lol

by foulpole on Oct 13, 2008 9:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Did you really

just reply to your own comment twice, three days later, just to put up more poorly executed sarcasm?

I mean, I’d like to believe what I’m seeing, but I’m honestly just baffled at this point. You really have no idea whatsoever what people are actually saying. It’s embarrassing.

by Azreous on Oct 14, 2008 12:46 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

If only someone worked in the same office as foulpole

We could set him up his own blog on the “CreedThoughts” system.

"Now, this is the dumbest thing I've ever heard [Hank Steinbrenner] say, and this is the third time I've said that this season."

by kishi on Oct 14, 2008 1:04 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

And I wonder if he knows

that the people he listed are very talented and could hit a double or homerun. And the people hitting behind them are not as talented, therefore more likely to get an out.

You just got Scherzered.

by damdrs1717 on Oct 14, 2008 5:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Don't try to user logic

It just leads to him ignoring your posts.

Well, actually, then logic might be a good way to go.

"Now, this is the dumbest thing I've ever heard [Hank Steinbrenner] say, and this is the third time I've said that this season."

by kishi on Oct 14, 2008 5:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Trying to homer all the time

as apposed to just getting a solid hit, is also apt to be responsible for a lot of singles that got overhit into easy outfield catches that left the outfielder coming in with the momentum behind the throw.

Bob Melvin: Black Denarian in disguise.

by nargel on Oct 4, 2008 9:58 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

The numbers

seem to support your observation about the fly balls, in that we had the highest fly ball/groundball ratio in the league. That, and the high K totals, both seem consistent with anecdotal wisdom about “swinging for the fences”. It makes one wonder if the FO just decreed somewhere along the line to basically let these young hitters rip from the heels, since we play in a fly ball, hitter’s park. For anyone with doubts about how off the charts the Dbacks are in this respect, take a look at this, listing each team’s ground balls. We hit a hundred fewer grounders than the 29th team and 300 fewer than the MLB medium. No other team is that far from the median (norm).

Now I’m not saying the more ground balls the better, cuz Seattle and SF hit more grounders than anyone and we dont want to emulate them. But I think it’s clear we need to hit more grounders (and line drives) than we currently do, because in additon to outs and DPs, grounders result in hits, errors and advanced baserunners, whereas strikeouts only result in outs.

It appears trying to hit homers makes sense if you can do it, but places significant burdens on an offense when you cant.

by Diamondhacks on Oct 4, 2008 11:30 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

you don’t think we should model ourselves after Seattle???? i thought that was our organizational strategy (hence BoMel at the helm)!

"There are only two seasons: winter and baseball"
-- Bill Veeck

by njjohn on Oct 5, 2008 7:32 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

The Mariners may appear

lost at sea, but with nearly two thousand bounceouts, maybe they’ve run aground ;-)

by Diamondhacks on Oct 5, 2008 1:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

ba doom doom.

"There are only two seasons: winter and baseball"
-- Bill Veeck

by njjohn on Oct 5, 2008 11:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

If they runna round onna ground balls they are probably

doing it wrong.

I always thought that the power hitters should hit for power and the contact hitter types should work on better accuracy. Alex Cintron, our ex SS, for example should have stayed agile and moderately quick and kept hitting for contact rather than bulking up and trying to become a power hitter.

Bob Melvin: Black Denarian in disguise.

by nargel on Oct 5, 2008 8:25 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

bulking up = getting fat

"There are only two seasons: winter and baseball"
-- Bill Veeck

by njjohn on Oct 5, 2008 11:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I always thought that the power hitters should hit for power and the contact hitter types should work on better accuracy

Well, the power of the Dbacks’ power hitters is rather intermittent. And with the departure of Hudson, the Dbacks really only have one contact hitter left in the entire lineup. Conor Jackson. No one who hits down on the ball consistently, trying to get on base.

The three big speed guys (Upton, Drew and Young), four if you count Byrnes, all have big uppercuts and are the antithesis of smallball. None of em bunt. They all swing through a lot of pitches. You cant hit and run with any of them.

by Diamondhacks on Oct 5, 2008 11:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Big uppercuts = small time in the strike zone

Drew, of course, improved in the second half. The other three, especially Byrnes, need to fix their swings. They don’t even need to hit down, just get a level swing through the zone so as to get a much better chance of making contact. Upton was getting big hits that way until he started emulating Byrnes and aiming for the 3rd deck.

Bob Melvin: Black Denarian in disguise.

by nargel on Oct 6, 2008 5:20 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

The goal, of course, is line drives

Ted Williams, arguably the most accomplished hitter who ever lived, felt a slight uppercut maximized the potential contact zone; essentially a rising bat meeting a sinking ball on a shared trajectory.

When it comes to hitting, I’m not gonna argue with Ted Williams. So, when I say “hit down” on the ball, I really mean hit down more than they currently do, not hit down in an absolute sense.

I agree Byrnes, in particular, needs to reinvent his swing. He’ll never hit MLB pitching with his 2008 form. Young’s got better, or at least smoother, form but just doesnt hit the ball; other than learning to bunt and hit to the right side, I’m not sure what his solution is. Upton needs to concentrate more on meeting the ball than driving it. He’s so strong at the plate (and fast on the bases), mere contact will result in extra base hits, almost exclusively.

by Diamondhacks on Oct 6, 2008 3:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs