Originally Posted by tk13:
There's a pretty decent correlation between making contact and having success. Those Royals teams were truly one of the best contact hitting groups ever... relative to the rest of baseball. They had the fewest strikeouts in the league by a mile.
Funny enough, a couple years after the Royals knocked the Astros out, Houston totally did a 180 in their philosophy and put an emphasis on contact. In 2015 when they lost to KC they had the 2nd most strikeouts in the league. Two years later they won the World Series and (like the Royals) had the fewest K's in the league. That's a crazy shift considering it was pretty much the same group of star players.
Same thing is happening this year. The Astros are in 1st and have the fewest strikeouts by a pretty good margin.
They also have the best power numbers, highest pull rate, yet the lowest K-rate at essentially every level of the minors.
They are simply a phenomenal organization. Wish the Cardinals had someone like that in their FO... [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
Happens to someone every year.
Kinda think we'll see the Yankees fall victim to it this year but they've put a few guys on that roster like Gregorious and Torres that take tougher ABs. Hicks is is out for the rest of the year, IIRC, but he'd have qualified, Gardner still does.
Guys like that can form the core of a nice offense but you need complementary parts around them as well. It's what makes the Astros so damn dangerous - they have guys like Brantley, Bregman and Altuve that will wear you down around their Springer, Correa and now Alvarez types.
Interestingly the only team to do a 'ideal type' for either of those players WAS the Royals and they won consecutive pennants and a championship by having almost exclusively type B players....and of course a ridiculous bullpen.
It’s been a fun to see the analysis on the question. I agree that both of those players serve a role and their impact depends on the offense. In a vacuum I do lean Player A.
The 2015 Royals were definitely a type B team and that was absolutely the Mets kryptonite (Lefties that hit to contact and forced their infield to try to field). The Royals did have two Type A players on their offense, and they honestly may have been what put them over the top in 2015. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Chiefspants:
It’s been a fun to see the analysis on the question. I agree that both of those players serve a role and their impact depends on the offense. In a vacuum I do lean Player A.
The 2015 Royals were definitely a type B team and that was absolutely the Mets kryptonite (Lefties that hit to contact and forced their infield to try to field). The Royals did have two Type A players on their offense, and they honestly may have been what put them over the top in 2015.
Fortunately, Player C types (who hit for average and get on base) exist, too.
That Royals team had six I’d put in that category (guys with OBP at least .050 higher than AVG): Hosmer, Moustakas, Gordon, Zobrist, Cain, and Morales all did that. [Reply]
Originally Posted by duncan_idaho:
Fortunately, Player C types (who hit for average and get on base) exist, too.
That Royals team had six I’d put in that category (guys with OBP at least .050 higher than AVG): Hosmer, Moustakas, Gordon, Zobrist, Cain, and Morales all did that.
Absolutely.
The Type A/Type B player was asking people how much they value walks (if at all).
Saying someone “only hit .270” and therefore was only a middling offensive player never tells the full story to me, but it might for some people. [Reply]
Tatis was taken out of the lineup with back spasms last week and is now done for the year with a herniated disc in his lower back (an absolutely terrible spot). It’s now being reported this was a struggled he had in the minors too. Gotta feel for Pads fans here - that’s a gutpunch. [Reply]