Master Index of Archived Threads


Swinging 3-0

metirish May 18 2012 06:56 AM

I read or heard that when Duda took a hack at a 3-0 pitch the other night(Brewers?) it was the first time this season that a Mets player did that. That just kind of stunned me and still does. That comes form the top?, hitting coach? apologies if this was talked about elsewhere.

Edgy MD May 18 2012 06:59 AM Re: Swinging 3-0

No, there's definitely a universal restraint being preached from the top here. It's pretty unusual when a guy swings 3-1, too.

Ceetar May 18 2012 07:01 AM Re: Swinging 3-0

don't think we've talked about it much. from memory they almost never swung 3-0 with HoJo but they seemed to be doing it more last year. I guess it could just be small sample. They're supposed to be looking for their pitch and maybe they're just not getting it? Or they're simply strugglnig enough that the players you'd want swinging have the take sign (except Wright, who I imagine doesn't get a lot of good pitches there)

metirish May 18 2012 07:05 AM Re: Swinging 3-0

Well, I guess 38 games in to the season and however many total at bats that is just seems crazy to me that that swing was the first all season . I should temper that by wondering how many 3-0 counts there have been.

Frayed Knot May 18 2012 07:19 AM Re: Swinging 3-0

metirish wrote: I should temper that by wondering how many 3-0 counts there have been. Hard to figure that out since the BB-Ref stats only list those ABs where the AB ends via the 3-0 count IOW, many 3-0 counts eventually become 3-1 or 3-2 counts and therefore whatever finally ends that AB isn't tallied as occurring on a 3-0 count anymore. Of the ones that have ended by the 3-0 pitch, the Mets indeed are now a whopping 1-for-1 along with 32 walks (11 of those intentional) in 33 PAs. That all seems unusually cautious to me although it can probably be partially chalked up to being a team of mostly young hitters* with the exception of Wright and when pitchers get to 3-0 on him it probably means they're pitching around him. I'd expect Murph to be more aggressive at times in those counts but maybe he just hasn't seen something he liked. * especially with Bay & Torres missing so much time

Nymr83 May 18 2012 08:20 AM Re: Swinging 3-0

I don't like an "aggressive" approach on 3-0, even if you put the ball in play what's your expected BA? .400? Sluggin .600? You are one pitch away from a walk which most guys should be looking for. I'd give all but the best power hitters the RED LIGHT on 3-0, and even those guys better jack it regularly or they are getting the red light next time too.

Edgy MD May 18 2012 08:33 AM Re: Swinging 3-0

Ralph's been saying it for 40 years. You get the same pitch 3-1 as you get 3-0. I'm sure that's not 100% true, but close enough to 100% for Kiner. The implication: you might as well force the pitcher with his back to the wall to throw it twice, and you might as well get two good looks at it.

Vic Sage May 18 2012 09:13 AM Re: Swinging 3-0

i'm sick of Ojeda and Darling, and many others in the media, bashing the team's selectivity as being "passive", calling for a more aggressive approach. Wasn't this the same media who used to heap praise on the MFYs smart and mature offensive approach, which not only often put hitters in favorable hitting counts, but forced starters to throw alot of pitches per hitter/inning, resulting in early entry into an opponent's bullpen, all the while putting many men on base and putting constant pressure on the defense? It was true then and it's true now. It's not like we have a lineup of sluggers who score runs in bunches. Wright's our best hitter, and he's not a 30hr guy when he's going well. I think this approach is ideal for them, as evidenced by the fact that they're 5th in Runs scored in the NL so far this season even though they're 15th (out of 16) in HRs. That's about as well as we could have reasonably projected for this bunch, and i think their approach has maximized their potential production. Unfortunately, they're 14th in team ERA (and likely to finish around the bottom third), so their top-3rd offense will be unlikely to carry them very far this season, particularly in a division with dominant pitching like the NL East. But criticizing their offensive approach is so much "old school" pre-SABR bullshit. While i expect that view from jockcasters and moron media, it's still irritating.

Benjamin Grimm May 18 2012 09:19 AM Re: Swinging 3-0

As long as managers are ruled by pitch counts, it only makes sense to make the other pitcher throw as many pitches as possible. Letting a guy get out of an inning with only eight pitches thrown pretty much gets him an extra inning, and helps keep the opposing bullpen from getting chewed up.

Edgy MD May 18 2012 09:34 AM Re: Swinging 3-0

Know what would really make sense? Taking advantage of other managers' rigid devotion to pitch counts, while escaping the mental trap yourself.

Benjamin Grimm May 18 2012 09:37 AM Re: Swinging 3-0

Exactly. I think that what would give a serious competitive advantage.

Frayed Knot May 18 2012 09:55 AM Re: Swinging 3-0

Vic Sage wrote: i'm sick of Ojeda and Darling, and many others in the media, bashing the team's selectivity as being "passive", calling for a more aggressive approach. Except that there's also such a thing as being too passive even as one is working the count. As long as the hitter has the discipline to limit himself to a particular pitch in a favorable count, plate discipline doesn't always mean seeing as many pitches as possible, sometimes it means jumping on a 2-0 or 3-0 pitch and smacking the snot out of it. Now it's true that a non-power hitting team has less up-side in that approach. But going nearly two months while never once swinging at a 3-0 pitch suggests maybe too much the other way. IOW, maybe the lack of power from the likes of Duda or Murphy (Ike's too screwed up at the moment to use his data for anything) is a result of working themselves into counts where they have to swing at anything close and no longer have the ability to zone in on something. High rates of two-out singles w/men on base is driving much of our run scoring these days and it's tough to count on that continuing as time goes on.

Ceetar May 18 2012 10:12 AM Re: Swinging 3-0

Frayed Knot wrote: Vic Sage wrote: i'm sick of Ojeda and Darling, and many others in the media, bashing the team's selectivity as being "passive", calling for a more aggressive approach. Except that there's also such a thing as being too passive even as one is working the count. As long as the hitter has the discipline to limit himself to a particular pitch in a favorable count, plate discipline doesn't always mean seeing as many pitches as possible, sometimes it means jumping on a 2-0 or 3-0 pitch and smacking the snot out of it. Castillo would profile as too passive, although he probably wasn't always like that. But many of the same fans that criticized Castillo's selectiveness are now praising the Mets as a whole. I'm sick of Ojeda in general.

Frayed Knot May 18 2012 10:23 AM Re: Swinging 3-0

True, but for the most part Castillo needed to be passive. I mean, what's the result going to be if he ambushes a pitcher -- a slightly longer single? It would be a different story if Murph or Duda or Ike could sit on a particular pitch and whack it if they got it, particularly with men on. Keith makes this point a lot too when someone looks at a fastball down the middle in a favorable count; 'hey, anticipating pitches like that in order to jump on one is what you worked the count in your favor for!'

metirish May 25 2012 06:32 PM Re: Swinging 3-0

For the first time all season Wright took a swing at a 3-0 pitch in his 3rd AB tonight.