Hitting Woes... who's to blame?

[chasfh]

Mark Canha is the best hitter on this team, coming into this game.

[RedRamage]

1 hour ago, chasfh said:

So now here's the $64 question: how real is this? Are we as bad as all this? Is the coaching making the hitters worse than they should be? Are the players feeding off each other and making everyone else worse? Is this just a random small sample that will iron itself out as the season progresses?

I report. You decide.

My decision is to give them more time to see whether this state of batting affairs is persistent after all.

Thanks for all this!  This is great stuff. Which of course means you now need to do that at the end of each month of the season so we can track this as the summer progresses.

[chasfh]

1 minute ago, RedRamage said:

Thanks for all this!  This is great stuff. Which of course means you now need to do that at the end of each month of the season so we can track this as the summer progresses.

I can try to remember! It shouldn't be super hard to update since I have the calculations on the sheet all set up. Remind me if I don't do so and you want to see it.

[gehringer_2]

they put a graphic up today that showed the Tigers rank near the bottom swinging at the 1st pitch. 

When you are a bad offense, you should think about what being an outlier in any offensive category is telling you.

[HeyAbbott]

I am kind of in the all of the above category considering the persistent offensive problems we are having.

1. We are lacking in talent and we have way over estimated the talent that we have.

2. I get the feeling that there are too many folks in the ears of our hitters. A batter cannot think about hitting as if it is a calculus problem after all. That is a coaching problem.

3. It is logical to assume that MLB has decided to exploit the control the strike zone model of the Tigers with throwing sure fire strikes on the first pitch as we are giving away the first strike. There needs to be some first pitch swinging to provide enough contraion behavior to keep everyone honest.

4. The lineup is too short. It needs one more experienced bat.

[Toddwert]

3 hours ago, gehringer_2 said:

they put a graphic up today that showed the Tigers rank near the bottom swinging at the 1st pitch. 

When you are a bad offense, you should think about what being an outlier in any offensive category is telling you.

make me wonder if they are over thinking it  or maybe they are loading the guys up with too much info... you want someone tell them to go out there just play like its little league

Edited April 17 by Toddwert

[chasfh]

12 hours ago, HeyAbbott said:

I am kind of in the all of the above category considering the persistent offensive problems we are having.

1. We are lacking in talent and we have way over estimated the talent that we have.

2. I get the feeling that there are too many folks in the ears of our hitters. A batter cannot think about hitting as if it is a calculus problem after all. That is a coaching problem.

3. It is logical to assume that MLB has decided to exploit the control the strike zone model of the Tigers with throwing sure fire strikes on the first pitch as we are giving away the first strike. There needs to be some first pitch swinging to provide enough contraion behavior to keep everyone honest.

4. The lineup is too short. It needs one more experienced bat.

I'm in on three of your four. Re: point #2, I would be really, really surprised to learn that the coaches are firehosing the hitters with the math so they could understand the science behind the numbers. That would strike me as being deeply dumb. I would bet the coaches are instead sharing the tendencies the numbers show: in this count from this guy, look for this particular pitch. I think it's more likely we simply have hitters not remembering that, or following through with it, in the heat of the moment.

[mtutiger]

13 hours ago, HeyAbbott said:

I am kind of in the all of the above category considering the persistent offensive problems we are having.

1. We are lacking in talent and we have way over estimated the talent that we have.

2. I get the feeling that there are too many folks in the ears of our hitters. A batter cannot think about hitting as if it is a calculus problem after all. That is a coaching problem.

3. It is logical to assume that MLB has decided to exploit the control the strike zone model of the Tigers with throwing sure fire strikes on the first pitch as we are giving away the first strike. There needs to be some first pitch swinging to provide enough contraion behavior to keep everyone honest.

4. The lineup is too short. It needs one more experienced bat.

To this point, I wonder if they manage to stay in it or above .500 over the next month or two (and if some of their core start producing as expected) if they don't try to look outside the org to improve their lineup.

Frustrating as this org can be, they have some actual bullets to use for a change in terms of trades. Particularly with pitching.

Edited April 17 by mtutiger

[HeyAbbott]

1 hour ago, chasfh said:

I'm in on three of your four. Re: point #2, I would be really, really surprised to learn that the coaches are firehosing the hitters with the math so they could understand the science behind the numbers. That would strike me as being deeply dumb. I would bet the coaches are instead sharing the tendencies the numbers show: in this count from this guy, look for this particular pitch. I think it's more likely we simply have hitters not remembering that, or following through with it, in the heat of the moment.

I talking figuratively about calculus. If a hitter is at the plate not ready to relax and hit and tries to keep all of the information being stuffed in their had at the ready, that seems to me to likely have and undue negative impact on results. I think we are generally in agreement.

I also think it is increasingly clear why Harris struggled to keep from bursting out laughing at his introduction to the Deroit press, with the core reason being that behind closed doors, MLB GMS do not think highly of Deroit's so called positional prospects.

[chasfh]

4 minutes ago, HeyAbbott said:

I talking figuratively about calculus. If a hitter is at the plate not ready to relax and hit and tries to keep all of the information being stuffed in their had at the ready, that seems to me to likely have and undue negative impact on results. I think we are generally in agreement.

What head-stuffing information are you talking about here? Are you envisioning them trying to do math in their head while they are at the plate? Or are you talking about information such as "in this count from this guy, look for this particular pitch" being too much for them?

[gehringer_2]

28 minutes ago, chasfh said:

What head-stuffing information are you talking about here? Are you envisioning them trying to do math in their head while they are at the plate? Or are you talking about information such as "in this count from this guy, look for this particular pitch" being too much for them?

How much good does that bit of information actually do a hitter? He has to recognize the pitch. If he does, his expectation about it is immaterial, because he sees it for what it is. If he doesn't recognize it, he's still swinging or not based on a guess. OK, I'll stipulate that early in the game, if you are ahead in the count and decide to sit on a pitch, then you should sit based on tendency. But once a game has played out for while, what is and isn't working for that pitcher in that particular outing will in most cases become more important data for the hitter than the pitcher's overall tendencies. But I don't even think that is what the Tiger hitters suffer from. They are taking too many hittable pitches and getting behind early too often and then uncertain about what they are swinging at too often when they do swing (the dreaded "in between" swing). That really has nothing to do with advance scouting reports, it has to do with basic approach, confidence levels, and how coaching and management expectations and feedback relate to that is probably a lot more subtle than anything to do with the hard data or preparation of advance scouting. 

Now, if none of them do anything other than what they are doing now, or in a career after leaving the Tigers, then we will know they were all simply poor hitters. But if in a few weeks or two months this team is starting to hit league average scoring levels like they did after June last season, then I will argue the coaching staff is responsible for some kind of poor psychological season prep!

Edited April 17 by gehringer_2

[chasfh]

13 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

How much good does that bit of information actually do a hitter? He has to recognize the pitch. If he does, his expectation about it is immaterial, because he sees it for what it is. If he doesn't recognize it, he's still swinging or not based on a guess. OK, I'll stipulate that early in the game, if you are ahead in the count and decide to sit on a pitch, then you should sit based on tendency. But once a game has played out for while, what is and isn't working for that pitcher in that particular outing will in most cases become more important data for the hitter than the pitcher's overall tendencies. But I don't even think that is what the Tiger hitters suffer from. They are taking too many hittable pitches and getting behind early too often and then uncertain about what they are swinging at too often when they do swing (the dreaded "in between" swing). That really has nothing to do with advance scouting reports, it has to do with basic approach, confidence levels, and how coaching and management expectations and feedback relate to that is probably a lot more subtle than anything to do with the hard data or preparation of advance scouting. 

Now, if none of them do anything other than what they are doing now, or in a career after leaving the Tigers, then we will know they were all simply poor hitters. But if in a few weeks or two months this team is starting to hit league average scoring levels like they did after June last season, then I will argue the coaching staff is responsible for some kind of poor psychological season prep!

Seems like that information would do them a lot of good! "Look for this type of pitch in this area. If you see it, swing; if you don't, lay off and look for a pitch related to the new count." That may be why the Tigers are laying off first pitches at a greater rate than any other team. They're not seeing the exact pitch they can do damage on, and by and large they're laying off, for better or worse. Otherwise, just what are they swinging at, and what do they hope to do with it, if they have no inkling of what to look for?

If a batter can't recognize a pitch when he sees it, he's probably not long for the major leagues in any event, since pitch recognition is a Hitting 101 skill. I suspect we have too many of those types of hitters to field a contender as it is.

I believe I remember reading that you're a big proponent of "see ball hit ball". Sounds reasonable on its face, and that was a reasonable approach fifty-plus years ago, when we were eleven years old and starting to learn the intricacies of the game. But in this new era of consistent faster-than-Feller heat and sophisticated pitch shaping, if you don't know what's coming, or at least what this pitcher in front of you is capable of, I wouldn't think you'd have much of a chance. Like it or not, the age of data science in baseball is here to stay, and it's never going away.

[gehringer_2]

12 minutes ago, chasfh said:

They're not seeing the exact pitch they can do damage on, and by and large they're laying off, for better or worse.

But maybe this doesn't give the pitchers enough credit? You can't give away every AB where the pitcher doesn't make a bad mistake, you have to be prepared to compete at the bar the pitcher sets or you might as well go home that day.  (this BTW is sort of the description of the Tigers making too many pitchers look like Cy Young)

Quote

 if you don't know what's coming, 

If you could only *know* what is coming, but all you have are tendencies*, and pitchers smart enough to deliberately pitch against them at will. The data will never go away, but as long as it actually remains 'sport' neither does having to deal with the human element in the competition. 😉

*unless you played for Hinch's Astros......🤣

Edited April 17 by gehringer_2

[chasfh]

6 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

But maybe this doesn't give the pitchers enough credit? You can't give away every AB where the pitcher doesn't make a bad mistake, you have to be prepared to compete at the bar the pitcher sets or you might as well go home that day.  (this BTW is sort of the description of the Tigers making too many pitchers look like Cy Young)

but you never *know* what's coming, all you have are tendencies, and pitchers smart enough to deliberately pitch against them at will. The data will never go away, but neither will the human element in the competition. 😉

If none of it works, then what's your solution for them?

[gehringer_2]

13 minutes ago, chasfh said:

If none of it works, then what's your solution for them?

well, that is why I'm interested in where the O ends up. If they come around and start getting better, then what I want is for Hinch to go back and think about the whole process from Feb and the transition  into the regular season and use his best brain to try and figure out how to avoid putting his hitters at an early season deficit in the future - i.e to recognize that maybe there is an induced problem and not just double down on more of the same next season - and that may well have nothing to do with analytics, it may be more a matter psychological prep. But I will want him to be considering change.

Edited April 17 by gehringer_2

[chasfh]

5 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

well, that is why I'm interested in where the O ends up. If they come around and start getting better, then what I want is for Hinch to go back and think about the whole process from Feb and the transition  into the regular season and use his best brain to try and figure out how to avoid putting his hitters at an early season deficit in the future - i.e to recognize that maybe there is an induced problem and not just double down on more of the same next season - and that may well have nothing to do with analytics, it may be more a matter psychological prep. But I will want him to be considering change.

I can promise you that any change Hinch makes will involve analytics, and that whoever is coaching the hitters, whether it's these guys or whether it's new guys, they will be sharing that information with hitters. The strategy of leaving hitters on their own to simply see ball hit ball is dead.

[HeyAbbott]

1 hour ago, chasfh said:

What head-stuffing information are you talking about here? Are you envisioning them trying to do math in their head while they are at the plate? Or are you talking about information such as "in this count from this guy, look for this particular pitch" being too much for them?

the latter.

[chasfh]

6 minutes ago, HeyAbbott said:

the latter.

If hitters don't have information about pitchers and pitches, then how would they have any idea of what to do at the plate?

[HeyAbbott]

1 minute ago, chasfh said:

If hitters don't have information about pitchers and pitches, then how would they have any idea of what to do at the plate?

I will try this again. Don't  overload hitters with too much to think about. Keep it simple. Keep it short. Condense information to a very brief indication what is likely. To me, it has looked like sometimes our hitters have been given too much to think about. " In this count, look for Y from pitcher X" as say opposed to " In this count, pitcher X throws a sweeper 46.75 percent of the time", and then go further to break down all possibilities totaling 100 percent in an extreme case. In short, it seems to me the hitters are being coached to the point that the coaching is negatively impacting the ability to respond what the pitcher is throwing throughout the entire at bat.

[chasfh]

16 minutes ago, HeyAbbott said:

I will try this again. Don't  overload hitters with too much to think about. Keep it simple. Keep it short. Condense information to a very brief indication what is likely. To me, it has looked like sometimes our hitters have been given too much to think about. " In this count, look for Y from pitcher X" as say opposed to " In this count, pitcher X throws a sweeper 46.75 percent of the time", and then go further to break down all possibilities totaling 100 percent in an extreme case. In short, it seems to me the hitters are being coached to the point that the coaching is negatively impacting the ability to respond what the pitcher is throwing throughout the entire at bat.

We have no insight into exactly what the coaches are telling or showing players, but I would really be surprised to learn that it involves computational math, and I don’t believe there’s anything we have seen to indicates that’s what’s happening, other than we are flailing at the plate. 

[gehringer_2]

16 minutes ago, chasfh said:

We have no insight into exactly what the coaches are telling or showing players, but I would really be surprised to learn that it involves computational math, and I don’t believe there’s anything we have seen to indicates that’s what’s happening, other than we are flailing at the plate. 

that's why I'm not focusing on the analytic aspect because there is no particular reason to suppose it's that per se, it may be more the idea of what the 'control the zone' mantra ends up meaning to hitters - do they take it to the point of paralysis instead of a point of practical value? There are any number of things beside scouting that go into how the players do prep/film/work, batting practice, approach their AB. My issue is does the org recognize they may have a problem or are they in denial? You can't fix something if you won't recognize something isn't working. After three years of poor hitting starts out of the box, I think there is a growing rebuttable presumption they need to look at their prep work - again, depending on how this group actually plays out.

Edited April 17 by gehringer_2

[chasfh]

21 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

that's why I'm not focusing on the analytic aspect because there is no particular reason to suppose it's that per se, it may be more the idea of what the 'control the zone' mantra ends up meaning to hitters - do they take it to the point of paralysis instead of a point of practical value? There are any number of things beside scouting that go into how the players do prep/film/work, batting practice, approach their AB. My issue is does the org recognize they may have a problem or are they in denial? You can't fix something if you won't recognize something isn't working. After three years of poor hitting starts out of the box, I think there is a growing rebuttable presumption they need to look at their prep work - again, depending on how this group actually plays out.

This whole line of discussion took off from your mention of inability to deal with information, which is analytics. In any event, maybe not you, but a lot of people want to see Hinch flop and get fired and be replaced by a manager who doesn’t know from analytics, just like when we were kids. That’s never going to happen. We have analytics, we are going to use it, we will share guidance from it with hitters, and that’s that.

I’ll also assume that Hinch is not so rock-headed that he will hold onto his one approach because he refuses to admit he’s wrong even when the hitting is failing and the team is losing, until he proves he is that guy after all. I will continue to hypothesize that we have not had hitting All Stars who are failing only because the coaching is failing them, and that instead we need different, better hitters on the team than many if not most of the guys we have now. 

[oblong]

46 minutes ago, chasfh said:

We have no insight into exactly what the coaches are telling or showing players, but I would really be surprised to learn that it involves computational math, and I don’t believe there’s anything we have seen to indicates that’s what’s happening, other than we are flailing at the plate. 

I've always heard that it doesn't involve that.  The coaches job is specifically to break down that kind of information from the font office staff into "player speak" so that they don't get wrapped up into the math.  Players are smart and learn tendencies and I'm sure keep that in mind when at the plate.  Of course it's a 50/50 proposition at that very point in time as to whether the expected pitch is what they throw.  Hitters don't have that much time to think or react. The phsyics don't allow for it. 

Gibson always claims his HR off Eckersley was based on that kind of thinking.  But who knows. 

Sometimes I think fans think it's like a video game where hitters decide to hit a GB to the left side with a man on first and "why did they do that?"

 

[chasfh]

10 minutes ago, oblong said:

I've always heard that it doesn't involve that.  The coaches job is specifically to break down that kind of information from the font office staff into "player speak" so that they don't get wrapped up into the math.  Players are smart and learn tendencies and I'm sure keep that in mind when at the plate.  Of course it's a 50/50 proposition at that very point in time as to whether the expected pitch is what they throw.  Hitters don't have that much time to think or react. The phsyics don't allow for it. 

Gibson always claims his HR off Eckersley was based on that kind of thinking.  But who knows. 

Sometimes I think fans think it's like a video game where hitters decide to hit a GB to the left side with a man on first and "why did they do that?"

 

Exactly. I think a lot of fans, maybe not here but elsewhere, who believe that geeks just want to fill players’ heads with endless numbers, because they are myopic and they themselves never played the game so they don’t know any better, are hoping it truly is that way, so they can point to analytics and say, see? Told ya analytics is a failure. They think analytics is still a debatable proposition. It’s not. The war on analytics has been over for at least a decade, and analytics won. 

[gehringer_2]

47 minutes ago, chasfh said:

This whole line of discussion took off from your mention of inability to deal with information

Just to yank your chain a little, I will argue that my whole approach is that it's statistics that argues that a team that consistently finishes years hitting better than they start them has some forcing function at work early in the season (a roster full of Tony Clarks would truly be an anomaly!). It's easy to just say these hitters are all bad, but they were not bad for significant segments of last year, it's not valid to wish away their previous success in defense of the status quo either. But again, that is why the strength of the evidence turns to a degree on what happens over the next month or so.

The possible whys are speculative. Finding causation is usually harder than finding correlation.

Edited April 17 by gehringer_2