What Happened to the Leadoff Hitter?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 27 окт 2023
- In modern baseball, the conventional notion of a leadoff hitter as the fastest player with a high batting average and stolen base potential has evolved. Teams now prioritize optimizing their lineups based on data and statistics. The leadoff spot is the most critical position in the lineup, with the highest expected runs and runs created per game. This shift in strategy has led to unconventional leadoff hitters like Kyle Schwarber, who may lack speed and have a low batting average but excel in other aspects, such as working deep at-bats and drawing walks, thus setting the tone for the team. The focus is no longer solely on speed and average, as teams look for players who get on base and create more scoring opportunities. This new approach has resulted in slow hitters with high on-base percentages being placed in the leadoff position, demonstrating that a one-size-fits-all approach to leadoff hitters is no longer valid in today's game.
Music provided by:
Artlist.io
&
HOME
/ home-2001
Instagram:
/ analyticswithchris
TikTok:
/ analyticswithchris_
Twitter:
/ greveanalytics
Scriptwriter and Director:
Chris Greve
Editing and Voiceover:
Matt Greve
#kyleschwarber #phillies #mlb #mlbpostseason #baseball #diamondbacks #bryceharper 
Спорт
Billy, his name is Kyle Schwerber. He’s overweight, slow, bad at defense, and he’s constantly among the league leaders in strikeouts…but he gets on base
Such a good movie
I love how you tied it together in the end
Imagine how much higher his on base percentage would be if he cut down his strikeouts by 20%
Honestly, the biggest credit to Billy Beane's Moneyball team, are named Zito, Hudson or Mulder.
And that's not the true schwaber effect. His teammates bat like .050 average higher with him leading off.
I'm OK with the trend of having on base be more important for the leadoff spot. But in an overall sense I want to see baseball play a lot faster and be less "three outcome" focused.
Yeah I agree. It’s great to see a balance and fast players are a ton of fun.
I would think that Schwarber striking out 200 times a year negates his OBP, at least when it comes to batting leadoff. Hell wouldn't Harper be a better leadoff option?
I would think that Schwarber striking out 200 times a year negates his OBP, at least when it comes to batting leadoff. Hell wouldn't Harper be a better leadoff option?
Wouldn't strikeouts be least important from a leadoff hitter? If nobody is on base ahead of them, a strikeout is entirely identical to a groundout, flyout, any other out.
It's gotta be the single spot in the lineup where strikeouts are punished least given that at least one PA per game has nobody on base and likely more given that 7-9 hit ahead of them
@@unkledoda420 he could strike out 400 times w/ a .350 OBP and still be a net positive in the leadoff spot.
Had to do a double take on that title cause i thought
"Wait what does that austrian painter have to do with baseball"
Believe it or not he invented the 7th inning stretch
I’m glad I’m not the only one, I saw Le Adolf Hittler
@@nickhueper2906me too 😂
STEVEN KWAN HAS GOT IT GOIN' ON.
These videos are so damn good. Absolutely love how he is able to pick things apart and then put them back together so it makes more sense. 👨🏻🍳
I like to say Kyle is not batting leadoff, he's batting cleanup for the 7-8-9 hitters. If we do get value out of the 7-8-9 batters, Kyle has a chance to bring them all home with a single swing. On top of that, he gets on base a lot and has a speedy turner behind him who is fast enough to avoid almost all GBDPs. He's technically leading off for inning 1 but is kinda batting 9th for the rest of the game.
Would players who would’ve been hitting leadoff a decade ago hit 7,8, or 9 now?
oh god that's genius
Schwarber drove in 57 RBIs from those guys. The 47 where he drove in himself isn't too shabby either.
I’m I the only one that thought it said adof hitler
Yes
Nope I somehow read that to
Dyslexia fro teh wni!
I’ve been looking for this comment for 10 min
Wade Boggs (a slow guy with great OBP) was batting leadoff in the ‘80s (sometimes).
.330 lifetime hitter with 3,000 hits are the key stats.
@@vlada 27th in average, 31st in hits, tied for 20th in OBP for players with 5000 PA (Equivalent of ~10 years of qualifying for the batting title).
I think it makes a ton of sense. Most of the traditional lead off hitters aren’t real power threats. A guy like Nico Hoerners gonna get on base just as much as Schwarber despite hitting like 80 points better. What does it matter if it’s a single or a walk if you still got a runner on. Combine that with the power to give the team a lead and shake up the pitcher from the first at bat and it’s a good option.
Haa nothing to do with "shaking up the pitcher" but...
@@paulg6274Absolutely does.
Statistics remove the human element from the equation.
Getting a lead off homerun has a good chance of shaking up the pitcher for the rest of the game.
@@randomstuff508 significantly moreso than a HR from the 2 hole? 🙄 Fans make these elaborate psychological narratives to explain everything. 😂 Pitchers have given up hundreds or thousands of HRs in their career, it's not like every time it happens it completely changes the way they pitch for x amount of time. And you think its rattling them so much that its worth more than having a runner or 2 on base for that HR? 😂 Further, most human element theories can ve tested via analytics
@@randomstuff508 Statistics don't remove the human element, they show you what the output of the human element is.
@bobbygetsbanned6049 Mhm. Yep.
That's why so many pitchers are staying healthy this year.
Back in the day the Angels batted Brian Downing leadoff. Lifetime .370 oba. Had pop. Was slow.
Wade Boggs was the leadoff hitter in Boston more often than not. Can't say he didn't get on base. And was slow.
This is not a new phenomenon. OBA is the single most important stat in hitting. It's a lost art in most respects. Working counts and getting on base.
Speed is important too. Ricky Henderson had a undeniable impact on the game.
Brett Butler fouling off 12 pitches and walking in his first at bat had a impact on the game.
Kenny Lofton...
You just have to have a guy that has that ability. And it's lacking in todays game.
A certain professional bowler in Los Angeles has that skillset
I agree ... not a brand new concept batting a high walks guy 1st. I think that classic leadoff guy is just more rare nowadays. Homeruns are all the rage, and players growing up work on that more than the classic fundamentals. Guys like Henderson and Butler were so valuable. Juan Pierre won the Marlins a World Series against the Yankees with his leadoff abilities as well.
@furiogiunta7886 Juan Pierre was a relatively poor OBP guy, especially relative to his averages. Rickey Henderson was very much the prototype of a lead off hitter, but he had plenty of power.
@@N1120A Juan Pierre was not Rickey Henderson, but he was no slouch either. The season I referenced he batted .326 with an OBP of .374. In a 14 year career his batting average was .295 with an OBP of .343. Not Hall of Fame numbers, but certainly not poor.
PS ... Kyle Schwarber's career OPA is .340.
The most retarded season for a leadoff hitter was Brady Anderson in 1996. He hit .297 with 50HR, 110 R'sBI, OBP of .396 and a slugging % of .637 on top of a 1.034 OPS. Of course we can argue it was steroid fueled but it was a ridiculous season nonetheless.
The best option for picking a great leadoff hitter is to get Ricky Henderson. Okay, I guess that's not possible anymore.
🎯 😂
Teams don't what there doing anymore
@@levidezern3190what
Definitely a interesting concept, and is just further proof that batting average means very little.
At this point, I view it as a fluff/sparkle stat. Its cool to look at, but it doesn't mean a whole lot.
Agreed!
Watching Rickey Henderson as a kid, it was quite common for him to lead the game off with a walk, steal of 2nd base, steal of 3rd base and scoring a run with a sacrifice fly. Nothing deflates a starting pitcher more than scoring a quick run without even giving up a hit.
Rickey Henderson 81 lead off HRs. Next closest is Springer with 57, but I think George is running out of gas on that. Mookie Betts is at 52 so he'll probably move the #2 mark, but it's a long way to Rickey.
Rickey's 1982 was terrifying to your point, 172 (Stolen bases + Caught attempts) in 149 games played. Ignoring foul offs, he was going more than once per game.
I feel like George Springer as leadoff for the Astros was a game changer
Brady Anderson
@@deepzone31Anderson was a lesser version of Rickey Henderson
@@N1120A I accept that.
yo this video is fantastic keep up the good work i hope your channel blows up and you get the recognition you deserve!
Putting Ricky Hendersons picture up when you say "what was important in the past is drifting away" is quite silly. He had a career .401 OBP and if you take out his rookie season and his last 4 seasons his OBP was even better over the heart of his career. Ricky was exactly what you are talking about here as an ideal leadoff man with the same cherry on top that Acuna has. If he was in his prime today he'd be leading off, not because of his stolen bases, but his consistently fat OBP (297 HR doesn't hurt either).
this guys knows ball
Ricky was just ridiculous.
I don't think he's saying that Ricky wouldn't be a lead off hitter today, just that speed/steals aren't as important today. He used Ricky because although it absolutely wasn't the only thing he was good at, stealing bases and being fast as hell is what Ricky is most famous for
Rickey gave Rickey all kinds of opportunities to steal bases. In 1982, Rickey had more recorded steal attempts than games played. 130 steals, 42 caught.
i dont recall "the book" saying 1 was the most important, from my memory it said 1, 2 and 4 are where you put your best hitters, but you need different guys in each. if you had 2 guys with the same obp, but one has more home runs, you want the one with more home runs batting second
“The Book” used to say you put your best hitter 3rd.
@@lordofthemound3890 im talkin about the actual book called "the book." the metaphorical book used to say that, but, that was wrong, doesnt matter too much though, dont sweat the lineup too much.
I do like how the Phillies ended up losing both of the series you highlighted with Schwarbs (22 WS, 23 LCS). Funny how you can tell stories with statistics but somehow conveniently omit the most important outcome of all.
The goal of analytics is to provide a slight edge, which over the course of a season might result in more wins etc. Fans and critics of analytics mess up by thinking single event outcomes are heavily influenced by analytics
And? They still went far
Very entertaining.. i’m Digging the background music .. Good job .. 👍🏼
Thank you! We spend a lot of time looking for songs 😂 glad you enjoy!
Rickey Henderson says, “Rickey is the greatest of all time”
❤ Rickey was amazing
Correct
Great video. I hadnt quite put together the value of seeing more pitches and hitting dingers from the first spot. After all, a home run is a guaranteed run but getting on base relies on the guys following to get them home. I wont be as upset anymore seeing these sluggers at the top of the lineup
Great video bro, good job 👍
Thank you!!
I'm pretty sure that over the years on base percentage was always valued more for the leadoff hiitter than just considering pure batting average. As far as speed teams don't have any idea how to utilitze a player with base stealing speed anymore. There were so many other factors that a Rickey Henderson or Tim Raines affected when they got on. They disrupted everything on defense from the pitcher to the defensive positions. If a guy gets 30 stolen bags today he's a superstar. That doesn't even sniff the numbers that Henderson could get where in his best season he stole 130 bags.
Kyle Schwarber's two seasons at leadoff did NOT produce as many runs as Rickey Henderson did despite the massive HR totals Schwarber racked up. Schwarber is never going to sniff seasons like Henderson where he scored 146 or 130 runs. And if you look at RBIs to compare the two Henderson by correcting (deducting) HRs from Schwarber's totals Henderson's RBI totals also still compare well too. But what the numbers nerds really don't understand is the chaos created by men with speed on the bags and how it affected the overall play back when speed play was utilized. But then again that's why numbers nerds do what they do and aren't athletes that know how to play and win in sport.
A lot of those guys have played sports lol, there is a reason why every team uses those stats, are they not athletes anymore? And it also doesn’t matter if those speedy guys can’t get on base
How did you make your intro? That was amazing watching the players coming in that way!
Great video!
I know this is a month old but I’d like to point out a few things. First, the stat with RBI+R is very flawed, as home runs count as both an RBI and a run for the player hitting it. You’d have to make a home run only count for one RBI+R, as it’s only 1 run scored and not 2, like it’s counted. Secondly, Trea Turner stated that he cannot steal bases a lot because he’s in front of Harper, and if he steals, then Harper will get walked. You mentioned how his stealing isn’t as valuable with power hitters, but I’d argue that successful stealing is more valuable than given, as it forces the pitcher to adjust his approach to the current batter. I’d rather see Trea Turner leadoff with Schwarber second, as if Schwarber gets intentionally walked, it’s not as big a deal since Harper, Bohm, Castellanos or Realmuto will follow. The numbers don’t agree with my statement, but they don’t have the context we do to see that lineup configuration is a balance between the numbers and the players, with the goal always being run scoring.
Guess you could fix RBI+R by just adding -HR to the equation
Well, I can’t speak for every team, but my team’s lead-off hitter led MLB in stolen bases and also won the NL MVP last season. Also he was the first ever 40-70 player.
The issue is that these 3 true outcome guys are great over the course of a 162 game season. But sometimes you just need well rounded guys who can get on base in a variety of ways when things tighten up at the end of a playoff series. The Phillies power-first team and lineup construction came back to bite them in games 6 and 7 of the NLCS.
I've been following baseball for 50+ years and I've always considered OBP to be the top priority for lead-off hitters, followed by base-running expertise, and speed itself didn't equal good base-running. Rickey wasn't the fastest runner in the league, but he was IMHO the best baserunner and his career OBP speaks for itself.
The Leadoff Hitter figured out than he makes more $$$ if he swings all his might EVERY time (like the PGA) and accidentally hits 20+ Homers.
This video makes valid points, but give me the leadoff guy with speed and OBP. When he gets on, he can throw the pitcher's focus off with his base stealing threat.
Idk how many RBIs Schwarber had in 2023, but i think he wouldve had way more batting behind Turner instead of vice versa. And probably wouldve seen more pitches to hit. But thats just my opinion.
Agree to disagree.
I was waiting to see someone with a comment like this. Thank you good sir
But Turner didn’t have a high OBP that year
One of the best videos I’ve ever watched, great work
Thank you!
Just foind this channel , love the content and degails ypu put in the baseball videos
Thank you!
Teams figured it out the lead off man should be with the teams. Best hitter because he’s guaranteed the most ABs
2:46 "In Chronological Order" would just mean in order of time.
Just a minor little nitpick
I get the more at bats for power hitters who bat lead-off, but they also bat more with the bases empty. Batting in the clean-up spot you get less at bats over the course of a year, but you bat with more people on base.
If only someone posted a RUclips video discussing the very thing you’re talking about
@@lucasscott6984 For lead-off hitter give me the high on-base percentage guy that can steal 2nd and 3rd when needed to manufacture a run to win the close game. I want the power guys batting 3rd or 4th behind speedy high OBP guys with more power. I want the 3 run bomb instead of the solo homer.
Leadoff hitter only bats leadoff once per game. After that, he is just like anyone else, just with more plate appearances.
@@shorewall The lead-off hitter is guaranteed to bat with the bases empty at least once per game. After that the batters with the potential to be on base for the lead-off hitter are typically lower on-base percentage hitters. Whereas the cleanup hitter typically has the higher OBP hitters hitting ahead od him.
@@user-iu4ek5fq5kand Schwarber has a high OBP
great video!
Thanks!
I loved having the home run with soler in the 9 hole.
Hate to sound like the "get off my lawn" guy, but i miss the old school leadoff hitter types. To me, they made the game more exciting.
Otis Nixon, Kenny Lofton, Vince Coleman, Rickey Henderson, Rafael Furcal, and i could go on forever.
Oh, another underrated one was Scott Podsednik. He was good for like a couple years though.
Ichiro got turned from a slugger in the NBL to one of the best leadoffs in the MLB
Rocco Baldelli as well before injuries derailed his career
Bro that title is nuts I really thought Hitler played baseball for a sec
I used to disagree with people when they said baseball was boring, Now I agree its boring AF watching guys walk or strike out so much.
Bret Butler , Otis Nixon, Rickey Henderson, these arw leadoff hitters. Dodger's have a Bret Butler type in high A- 1st pick ( there's) Kendall George. Same look size , stance, speed,. attributes etc. Other than pigmentation difference obviously.
I'm really curious if there has been an increase in first inning double plays since this change in the role of the lead off hitter.
Speed is a lot more useful for someone in say the 7 spot than the leadoff position. Getting a stolen base, only to have the person behind you hit a double or HR negates the benefit. But going from 1st to 2nd for a slap hitter with no power is going to generate some runs.
Oh god don’t show me that Clevinger “I just gave up a bomb” squat that flashed me tf back to that game
"Turner could have been an amazing leadoff hitter on another team" we loved him in DC
Makes you wonder if the Giants would have won the 2002 WS if they led off with Barry Bonds 🤔
イチローは引退会見で次のように述べている
「2001年に僕がアメリカに来てから、この2019年の現在の野球は全く別の違う野球になりました。頭を使わなくてもできてしまう野球になりつつあるような…」
私は日本人ですが、それ以上に一人のMLBファンとして、イチローのような天才的なバットコントロールを持つ選手をまた見てみたい。
I'm a hardcore analytics/sabermetrics apologist, but I think managers and players need to get back to stealing more bases. The breakeven point is generally 67%, and that's not really hard that to get, and not running enough just doesn't put enough pressure on pitchers.
Honestly, I think that avoiding steals is less about sabermetrics, and more about owners wanting to protect their investment and avoiding injuries.
i agree obp is honestly far more important than avg at the leadoff but looking at a team like the phillies, turners obp is that much lower and so having him at 1 and schwarber at 2 feels much more valuable, what goods a leadoff homer when he could hit a 2 run nuke batting second, in most circumstances id agree but schwarber hits way too many bombs that couldve lead to lost rbis
Getting hits doesn't matter as much when the bases are empty. A walk and a single are the same. Singles are worth more with runners on
@@bopete3204 no but home runs do, in the phillies case, trea turners obp isnt that much worse than schwarbers so him going to 1 and schwarber to 2 means much more potential runs with 2 run shots instead of solo shots, in most cases schwarber at 1 would be perfect but phillies are one of the few with a players whos close enough that dropping him down 1 wont change much
@@Kaoticreepera .3 difference is pretty big
I'm confused by the expected runs created per game table. If each player in the lineup has an ERC number of about 2.5, that seems to mean the team is expecting to score 9 x 2.5 = 22.5 runs per game. I think runs created is a straightforward figure like that, and nota proxy number, so I must be missing something. Can someone please explain?
It honestly seems like if a guy with a high OBP has a low BA it’s better to put them in the lead off spot so guys that get hits at a higher rate have someone on base.
Youre right. If you simply put the guy who walks the most leadoff it would work out most of the time
I read that your #2 hitter should have the highest wRC+ on the team but from this video it sounds like your best hitter should actually hit leadoff then cleanup with your third best hitter in the 2 spot in the lineup. Am I understanding this correctly?
Steven Kwan is the ideal leadoff hitter
I’m convinced the fans that are mad are all above the age of 50 or just don’t like math. Baseball is really only interesting because of the analytics otherwise it’s the sport with the most variability of outcome based on pretty much randomness (if you refuse to use analytics)
I'm convinced that baseball is actually a drinking game you play at picnics and then 18 assholes took it way too seriously and here we are
@@davidrafferty2491 I’m sorry you don’t like numbers or statistics
How is this new? Rickey was getting on base more than anyone else forty years ago
Yes but Rickey was fast
As Phils fan this is not aggravating me at all. I look at Runs and OPS by Schwarbs. A double is just as good as a single and a steal. A walk is a s good as a single. Would they be just as well off with Trea at leadoff? Yes, but there is a fear factor for starters who know what Schwarber will do to a mistake. He's such a tone setter (as we have seen in the playoffs).
Ironically, the Nats of all teams are staying true to the old ways with the speedy, high avg CJ Abrams leading off
The problem I ha e with all these analytics is that they all focus on slight advantages over the course of a season like 10 extra potential runs but can anyone point to a single instance where you can say that would actually have made a difference. You cant say the 10 extra runs ever came in a 1 run game. For all you know it's just 10 more runs in blowout wins or losses. And it seems to me that the champ at the end of the year pretty much ranks the same in OBP that they do in BA. Almost like the entire different between their OBP and the rest of the league is that they just hit the ball more. And honestly I think it makes much more sense to build a team around BA because in the playoffs, against elite pitching, you can't rely on getting walks. If I'm in the 9th in the playoffs vs an elite closer I hope my leadoff guy hits .300 rather than be someone who is going to stare at 3 heaters painting the corner.
Kyle had an on Base% of nearly .400 last year, 47 homers, 100 RBIs, and 100 BBs. I'm fine with him not hitting .280+
One huge problem with this.. the 2 teams in the World Series last year play old school baseball. You will see the teams playing old school win in the playoffs more.
Or guys who have high OBP, who just happen to have speed
If the ‘08 Phillies were playing today, who do you think would be hitting leadoff?
Hmmm this is interesting. Rollins was not a bad leadoff hitter for that team at all because he still got on base at a super high rate and saw a lot of pitches. It wouldn’t surprise me if this team played today they tried Utley leadoff since he had the best OBP. That lineup was so loaded there are so many options they could’ve done and most would’ve worked.
His name is Steven Kwan
the lead off spot is 4th highest on this list, not 3rd 5:04
The first time I read the title, I thought it was about a grandson of Hitler or about a guy with a really unfortunate name
Speed isn’t as important these days because base stealing isn’t as big a part of the game.
The new rules have helped a little to bring stealing back but it’s a high risk, low reward play.
Not only are you risking an out but you also increase the risk of injury significantly.
Very true. It can be situationally good here and there but it is more of a cool bonus than a determining factor for the value of an offensive player.
This is why baseball is great. I have often wo dered why the best hitter doesnt hit first. More at bats/game
Best hitter should hit 2nd or 4th cause its not just about most ABs but ABs with runners on base are also very important. It's bizarre how 3 hole is actually 4th most important slot but thats how the permutations work out
@paulg6274 the 7 8 and 9 hitters can get on base too so the "best hitter" #1 has rbi opportunities right?
@@Bhanna4d but if you put good hitters 7 8 and 9 to get on base for the lead off, those htters are getting less ABs/game so that hurts more than gains. Your 3 worst hitters should hit 8, 9,7 in that order. "The Book" analyzes optimal line up construction in depth, it all makes sense.
@@Bhanna4d haha well ya obviously you want everyone to get on base, nobodys advocating for making outs, but the 3 lowest ob% guys should hit 789, maybe 678. You do want your 9 hole to be better than 8 hole cause the advantage of being OB for top of the order outweighs the slightly less plate appearances; but that's as far as it stretches
This is why you want to put your best hitter 3rd.
dang 5 spot is more important than 3. That’s crazy
What happened to the clean up hitter also
He may get on base a ton, but unless the next guy up hits a home run he's not going to score because he's too slow to get around the bases quick enough. I'd rather have a high OBP guy whose also fast in the leadoff spot so he can actually score if the next few hitters put the ball in play. Schwarber should hit cleanup where he can protect Harper and others in the lineup and hit his 40+ home runs with guys on base. THAT would lead to more runs.
But Schwarber literally has the second highest OBP on the phillies
For the record, I enjoy any video that is informative even if I don't agree with the subject matter. So, I appreciate the effort it took to create it and shed some light.
I cannot imagine a scenario where Sammy or Mark would be credibly batting lead off in 1998 - just to get more at bats and more chances to break the record/hit more homeruns. Same goes for Barry Bonds in 2001. Hell, what about Mickey or Roger batting lead off in 1961?
Not saying this video in particular but there is a smugness of sabematricians when they gladly announce "strikeouts/wins/batting average/base steals don't matter." These are the same people that proudly seek to discredit and delegitimize the great players of the past.
As a Yankees fan who constantly saw/sees 1-9 RISP and 11 LOB in every box score for the better part of the last 10 years...three true outcome guys like Kyle Schwarber are not better than Trea Turner just because it has been decided by...I'm not sure who that batting average doesn't matter. Of course it matters: you're paid to hit - not walk. A single is not the same as a walk when you have runners in scoring position; striking out instead of putting a ball into play that can advance the runners or drive in a sac fly is not the same. I've seen the "analytics" put guys like Aaron Hicks in the lead off spot or three spot because his OBP is high but his average is embarrassing. Strangely, it never worked despite the little binder saying it would.
Once again, I don't have the numbers (and feel free to add them) but the Yankees can't walk in a run. So, all you do is pass the burden of the inevitable pop up or strikeout to the next guy. How about when you have the go ahead run at third with one out but first base is open...so you just walk the next guy then get the GDP to end the inning? The only way that is gonna be a productive inning is if someone swings the bat and makes contact. Getting guys on base is useless if you can't bat them in which a walk can't do unless the pitcher is erratic in the first place and has the bases loaded. And if you're just gonna play for solo shots and prove your lineup is useless without HRs then watch the failure unfold in the playoffs (as it has decidedly so since 2018 at least).
I find there to be an arrogance in today's "modern game" thinkers that I never saw previously. The game has been around since before anybody or their parents were born but it's been decided we've been doing it wrong until...2016? With all the technology, all the analytics, all the amazing hypotheticals that have been created to theoretically win games - these Yankee teams are no where near as good as the high batting average teams of the 90s/early 2000s/2009. Those teams got the big hit when it mattered to either win the series or stay competitive. Pitching was gritty and players were scrappy. That's why they won. Nobody even touched 30 HRs in 1998 but you better believe 4 guys batted above .300. We're talking a world where Tony Gwynn is downplayed because he didn't hit for power? But Adam Dunn would've been a hero while batting .180 and slugging 40 HRs and striking out 200 times?
I'm not as familiar with baseball, but there is a similar trend in Basketball. Favoring 3 point shots instead of getting the ball to the hoop, which even the analytics say is the best shot to take. But it's hard to get the ball to the hoop, and it's easy to jack up step back 3s like a gambler.
Analytics takes some theoretical long run to work out the kinks. But in the long run, we are all dead. Games have a limit, the regular season has a limit, and the Postseason has a limit. Things don't always even out. You have to make the most of every opportunity, and don't just trust the science.
You talk about 90s/early 00s MLB like its remotely the same environment. Schwarber would hit WELL over .300 in 1995, because the biggest fireballers where rocking up and throwing, what, 95 max? And they didn't have customized breaking balls designed to maximise movement. The best pitchers still had insane breaking balls. The average pitchers, well....
Its not a matter of denigrating past players, a lot of the stuff modern players have access to didn't exist back then, or they would have used it.
Run expectancy charts aren't made up math or estimates, they are simply observations of whats happened over baseballs history. Bases loaded 2 outs, how many runs on average ended up scoring when that situation happened?
Like bunting, its fallen out of favor not cause sbaermatricians said so, but because 1000s of ABs of history have shown its not worth it in most situations.
A team who goes from runner on 2nd no outs to runner on 3rd 1 out is simply in a worse position. Because historically in those situations, teams ended up scoring more runs in the first scenario than they did in the second.
OBP is also just intuitively better for leadoff hitters IMO, batting average is far more important for the people behind them. A leadoff hitter is supposed to get on base, not clear them. If you can have a guy who is ALSO super fast and has a 300+ BA obviously thats great. But given the choice between a speedy guy with a 300/320/340 slash, or a slower player with a 250/350/450, well ones gonna score a lot more runs for you, cause they are on base more often. Hell, they may not NEED to steal a base, they are far more likely to get extra base hits, so they would already be in scoring position.
@@andrewbloom7694
I appreciate the reply.
The only issue I have with what you're saying and many folks who have made similar arguments is you can't take 2024 Schwarber and put him in a time machine for 1995 and say he'd be MVP unless you're going to ignore that all the greats of 1995 would/could have access to the same resources and adjustments in 2024.
It's a relatively silly comparison to make. I would have no doubt that if you take Pedro from 2000 and give him every resource imaginable...he would be more God like than he already was. But it doesn't really work that way and I do see arguments like that being made to, as I said, smugly delegitimize the generational talents of the past.
Now, I'm not sure how old you are but one thing I've learned as I've gotten older _is_ if you/they don't think people 20 years from now will be just as dismissive and claim your ideas and your world views on the are game outdated and the old guard, you'll be in for a great surprise. One thing I've noticed about this generation and even my own previous generation is they make the mistake of thinking they're going to be young, relevant, and informed forever and that _they_ finally got it. But "it" always changes. They revise history and it's done not in good faith but in an arrogance to dismiss all the amazing trailblazers that made this game what it is today. Hopefully, there will be a humility that will bring this game back down to earth. This idea that Babe Ruth had more homeruns than entire teams simply because he played before the color barrier is insane and a very common statement made any time someone talks about his greatness.
As for the statistics behind bunting with a runner on 2nd, for example, it's damned well effective if you don't have strikeout losers that can actually put a ball into play instead of swinging out of their shoes on 0-2. There's no reason why an average hitter can't make contact with a runner on third to just put the ball into play to score an RBI groundout or sac fly - or better yet, a hit to keep the traffic flowing. If you play for one...you'll get one.
There's something to be said here about how analytics and advanced metrics have levelled the playing field as well. Obviously there are a metric fuck ton of factors that go into a full MLB season, but there are reasons other than random chance that we haven't had a repeat World Series winner in over 20 years, and my opinion is that advanced metrics are at the top of that list. They also give guys who probably wouldn't have had an opportunity in the past the chance to stay on an MLB roster long term.
It's really not that controversial to think that the single best skill required for hitting at the professional level is knowing the strike zone well, ie knowing what to swing at and what not to. That is going to get you a lot good results regardless of the situation. And these are the guys that walk a lot, and are now the "leadoff" guy.
Are there going to be times when situational hitting is applicable and this doesn't work out? Absolutely, all the time. But it's about the numbers over an extended time regressing to the mean over a large sample size. You just have to make it to the dance, and then anything can happen.
And yeah, anytime someone like Schwarber strikes out with runners on base in the playoffs it looks stupid to have him there. But you also have to think about if you would have made it to the postseason in the first place without all the wins he created from getting on base so much and giving his team a 1-0 handicap immediately off the cuff.
TLDR- In a small sample size anything is volatile, advanced metrics included. But baseball teams actually have been doing it wrong until this century when it comes the marathon that is the season. Just make it to the postseason then anything can happen. And I look forward to 20 years from now to see how the game has evolved even further.
When will a manager have the courage to field a team of the vertically challenged?
I was spoiled growing up with Soriano
I thought the guy who leads off is the guy who gets on base most...thought that was always the case...
On base percentage
Where did you get “who sees most pitches per at bat” stat
Fangraphs and Baseball Savant both have it
Err, try to PAUSE a little longer on key numbers, like runs created. That table flashed up there so quickly that I ha to back the video up like 4 times (pause works poorly on my tablet). i.e., leave the table up for say 10 seconds while you are talking.
Analytics has been so much more of a cancer to the sport of baseball and all professional sports in general then it has been a boon. Those who played at a remotely high level before it's obsessive adoption knows that is the truth too. Those who never played will never understand how fucking stupid and obtusely pointless it is.
No lol, those analytics give teams the advantage to win if used right, which the Phillies do
Don't confuse the efficacy of analytics with their value. They DO work, but their value to the overall health, beauty and enjoyment of the game is not beneficial (in my opinion). I think there is a frustration between those who view the data analysis as beautiful in its own right (where the game basically becomes a sudoku puzzle to those types) and those that find a particular style of play beautiful in its own right. I think there needs to be some rule changes to make the analytics say that the baseball you want to see is what you SHOULD be seeing. I want the ball to be deadened a bit and have HRs be the produce of a select few slugging specialists instead of this slot machine approach to hitting (the 3 outcome hitter). Manufactured runs with a wide variety of skills being applicable in pursuit of victory.
The problem with analytics is that they are correct, not that they are stupid
Well, kid me was on to something when I always put Bonds (the fake Bonds since they couldn't use his name) at lead off in all the baseball video games I played
@breadandcircuses8127 Haha yep you know it. I think it was John Dowd tho?
I was using this strategy 10 years ago! (In MLB the show) lol
It'sa losimg strategy
@@levidezern3190no it’s not😭
Another reason why baseball was better before.
What
pitcher 8th is big brain. done that in mlb the show for ever til they added dh
Explain
More likely for the 9 hitter to get on base for the top of the lineup
Steven kwan has something to say
If you think abput it leadoff is the spot were BA matters LEAST. You will take a lot of at bats with no one on base anyway. So really the OBP should be the more important factor. Now for a 2-4 hitter? Sure you need them to hit for average.
.343 OBP%? I guess it's easier for pitchers to sit a batter down when the nerds are telling the batter to swing for the fences on every pitch. Remember .400+ OBPs?
I have a feeling that OBPs are down because pitchers are better
Remember steroids?
I am actually game to hit a Schwarber lead off. But a .343 OBP ain't worth it.
Jarren Duran.
That’s the whole comment.
That's incorrect, average has never truly mattered for a lead-off hitter, only the on base percentage. A good example of this would be someone like JP Crawford, who last year only hit .266, but yet had an OBP of .380 which was 11th best out of qualified hitters last year. But then you look at someone like Bo Bichette who hit .306 which was the 8th highest average in the league, but his .339 OBP pales in comparison to a guy like Crawford who walks well above the major league average, while Bichette walks well below the league average. If you're not on base at a high rate, your chances of stealing bases goes way down. Though someone like Schwarber doesn't hit for a high average most years, his extremely high walk rate has helped him to produce a .339 OBP, which is actually higher than the major league average, thus making him partially acceptable.
Schwarber is hitting .239 this season with an OBP of .367 so he IS getting on base.
Am I alone in hating the “three outcome “ thing?
Sabermetrics make everyone play the same. That's why.
Homers, walks and strikeouts.
Homers, walks and strikeouts.
Homers, walks and strikeouts.
Schwarber's career OBP is not much higher than league average. If leadoff is the most important spot in the lineup why not use Harper there? No one would claim Schwarber is a better hitter than Harper.
.3 is well above average lol, and you have Harper in the 3 hole bcz he is your best hitter, so that he is always guaranteed his AB in the first inning
@@sir.muffiniii7011 League average OBP is over 0.300 this year, like it is every year
@@chris8155 no I mean that he is .3 above average, he had a .343 OBP last year
You dont want to know what my brain jumped to when reading that title
But i do.
@@isiight.adolf hitler?
Felt like I was watching money ball when they say they get on base
Why isn’t Harper a better option? He has a higher OBP and usually a better wRC+
Cause you don't want your *best* hitter leadoff, its usally your 3rd best. Harper should hit 2nd or 4th. And you dont necessarily need power leadoff, ob% is just really what matters and the power is incidental. If your best hitter also has a lot of power he should hit 4th. (This is based on "The Book on Baseball"
The thing is: Kyle Schwarber does not get on base.
His BB% might looker impressive but combined with his extremely low BABIP, he only has a career .339 OBP.
And this year, there are 4 guys on the phillies, including now Bryson Stot, who have a higher OBP than him.
.339 is getting on base, and last year he had a .343 OBP, which was the second on the phillies, so yes, they should bat him leadoff
@@sir.muffiniii7011 then why not bat Bryce Leadoff? or Bohm? Both their OBPs are much higher.
@@vcortez87 Bohms OBP was not higher last year and u have Bryce at 3 bcz he is your best hitter and they are forced to pitch to him
Not everyone is a power hitter. This issue has to, become adressed.
Not every teams does this...
I know but, it has to be said out loud.
don't care, still plugging Rickey in at leadoff in Dynasty mode
Yeah well schwarber make ball go boom
Steven Kwan would like a word…
Wade Boggs use to leadoff