PDA

View Full Version : What makes a good hitter?



bucksfan2
09-03-2008, 03:15 PM
I was listening to Bronson yesterday on the way home from work and he said a few interesting things. He was talking about how the Reds needed to add a bat, which is obvious, but he was also talking about facing hitters. He said later in the game you don't want to see a Pujols or Holliday up at bat with two outs and RISP. He also said that you need a good bat that will hit .280-.300 and drive in runs as opposed to someone hitting .230 but hitting 40 HRS a year.

This got me thinking about the quality of hitters on the Reds and what they need. I realize that both Pujols and Holliday are two of the best hitters in the game but at the same time it didn't sound like Arroyo minded pitching to a guy like Dunn. I know we have the discussion about BA all the time over here but when a starting pitcher says it matters and it changes the way he pitches, does it matter? Wouldn't you rather have a Joey Votto up at the plate who has the ability to take any pitch and hit it all over the park as opposed to an Adam Dunn/Ryan Howard who if you make your pitches isn't nearly as dangerous?

I felt it was ironic hearing what Bronson said the team needs and what went through a pitchers mind when facing particular hitters.

Ltlabner
09-03-2008, 03:21 PM
He also said that you need a good bat that will hit .280-.300 and drive in runs as opposed to someone hitting .230 but hitting 40 HRS a year.

Sorry for the thread drift, but between this and throwing Dunn under the bus regarding desired sallary it doesn't apear Bronson is too fond of Dunn. Was there some big rift between them that I missed?

BRM
09-03-2008, 03:26 PM
Sorry for the thread drift, but between this and throwing Dunn under the buss regarding desired sallary it doesn't apear Bronson is too fond of Dunn. Was there some big rift between them that I missed?

That was my initial reaction as well. I haven't heard of any issues between them but Bronson's comments since Dunn was traded makes me wonder.

flyer85
09-03-2008, 03:32 PM
most hitters hit mistakes, very few are good enough to consistently hit pitchers pitches well(pujols and a few others).

For other than the few great hitters producing is more about getting a mistake then anything else.

Ltlabner
09-03-2008, 03:35 PM
There's all sorts of different types of salespeople with different tallents. Some are good prospecters, some are good detail folks, some are better as closers and still others are better at managing other salespeople than actually selling.

As long as they are producing who gives a crap what their individual tallent might be?

Same with hitters.

Power hitter, pull-hitter, gap-to-gap hitter, punch & judy.......all different flavors of the same ice cream. Just produce the numbers.

flyer85
09-03-2008, 03:42 PM
Power hitter, pull-hitter, gap-to-gap hitter, punch & judy.......all different flavors of the same ice cream. Just produce the numbers.you have to have a good BARISP ... else you suck.

bucksfan2
09-03-2008, 03:54 PM
There's all sorts of different types of salespeople with different tallents. Some are good prospecters, some are good detail folks, some are better as closers and still others are better at managing other salespeople than actually selling.

As long as they are producing who gives a crap what their individual tallent might be?

Same with hitters.

Power hitter, pull-hitter, gap-to-gap hitter, punch & judy.......all different flavors of the same ice cream. Just produce the numbers.

I have a feeling that most pitchers would disagree with you here.

dougdirt
09-03-2008, 04:08 PM
What makes a good hitter? Hitting the ball consistently and acquiring as many bases as possible while doing so. Guys that hit .250 or less aren't good hitters regardless of what else they do. They may be good batters because they walk a lot and still slug plenty, but they aren't good hitters. At the same time, guys that hit .300 aren't always good hitters because if you are hitting .300 and slugging .400, odds are you aren't getting a whole lot done for your team unless you are walking 70+ times a year too and guys with .100 IsoP's don't generally walk that much in todays game.

Ltlabner
09-03-2008, 04:17 PM
I have a feeling that most pitchers would disagree with you here.

Who cares what a pitcher thinks when constructing a baseball team?

Get guys who produce.

It's only natural that they'd aproach the fire-breathing big-bopper differently than the "run of the mill" singles and doubles guy but as long as they both do their jobs and produce it doesn't really matter. Does a run scored by a tradional gap-to-gap guy count for less than the one hit out of the park?

Cyclone792
09-03-2008, 04:20 PM
He said later in the game you don't want to see a Pujols

And who does?

I find it absolutely hilarious that Albert Pujols is always a name that comes up with regards to a guy you don't want to face, or a guy whose talents the Reds need (often on the heals of dissing an actual, current Reds hitter, or a recently traded Reds hitter).

Albert Pujols already is the second greatest first baseman in the game's history in peak value. His best seasons are greater than those of Jimmie Foxx. Chances are he'll retire as arguably the greatest right-handed hitter ever. And yet people seriously lament the fact that the Reds don't have a guy like Pujols.

Newsflash: the Reds aren't going to pick up some rock and find another Pujols underneath. Not unless Bob and Walt own some magic potion that can bring Gehrig or Foxx back to life circa 25-years-old.

Reds fans need to snap back to reality and quit dreaming about Pujols or Pujols-like in a Reds uniform this generation; he's not happening.

flyer85
09-03-2008, 04:40 PM
Reds fans need to snap back to reality and quit dreaming about Pujols or Pujols-like in a Reds uniform this generation.if they just wanted bad enough and would work hard enough they could be like Pujols. It's just because they are lazy bums and don't mind losing.

OldRightHander
09-03-2008, 05:25 PM
At the risk of being over simplistic, I would say that a good hitter is someone who gets on base a lot and who does things that result in his team scoring. How those runs score doesn't matter much to me as long as they cross the plate.

durl
09-03-2008, 05:41 PM
At the risk of being over simplistic, I would say that a good hitter is someone who gets on base a lot and who does things that result in his team scoring. How those runs score doesn't matter much to me as long as they cross the plate.

+1

Baseball's a pretty simple game. Just score.

I believe it's best to have a variety of hitters, however. A little power to help you score runs fast is good but you've got to have guys who can get on base first.

Highlifeman21
09-03-2008, 05:48 PM
if they just wanted bad enough and would work hard enough they could be like Pujols. It's just because they are lazy bums and don't mind losing.

I hope that is sarcasm...

Talent will trump work ethic more often than not.

Mario-Rijo
09-03-2008, 06:09 PM
Beyond Pujols most every team has/had a "bell cow" at the start of the season, if you will and I would call them all "good hitters". I would easily take any of them in their prime as a bonified #3 hitter.

NL
Derek Lee
Lance Berkman
Jason Bay
Prince Fielder
David Wright/Beltran
Chipper Jones
Chase Utley
Hanley Ramirez
Matt Holliday
Manny Ramirez
Adrian Gonzalez

AL
David Ortiz
A-Rod/Jeter
Gary Sheffield
Josh Hamilton
Travis Hafner
Justin Morneau
Vladimir Guerrero
Ichiro Suzuki
Carl Crawford

IMO these other teams don't have a legit #1 offensive force in their lineups but do have/had 1 or more a #2 type offensive force(s).

Us - Dunn
Arz - Dunn
CWS - Quentin
KC - Guillen
O's - Markakis
Nats - Zimmerman

None at all but a #3 or so with a little potential to be a 2.

Oakland
S.F.


Dunn IMO is a high end #2 type, certainly not chopped liver but with a big enough flaw to be exploited. Yes I think there are levels within levels, Elite, Good and Decent within each type.


BTW most of those teams with a #1 also have a bonified #2 type. So you must have a strong #1 (i.e. the elite Pujols/Arod/Ortiz/Manny), a good #1 and #2 (Hamilton and Dunn would have been nice to keep together) or at least 3 maybe even 4 # 2 types (ala CWS w/ Quentin/Swisher/Konerko/Dye) with a good pitching staff and defense to sustainably win in today's MLB.

Mario-Rijo
09-03-2008, 06:13 PM
I hope that is sarcasm...

Talent will trump work ethic more often than not.

And 1 w/o the other isn't that hard to find, find me a player with both and I'll say he's a keeper. And work ethic is more than just running out onto the field for 150+ games a year.

*BaseClogger*
09-03-2008, 06:15 PM
Carlos Quentin isn't an elite #1 hitter? I'm confused...

Mario-Rijo
09-03-2008, 06:24 PM
Carlos Quentin isn't an elite #1 hitter? I'm confused...

Simply waiting to see if the AL catches up with him. Usually takes IMO more than a season at times, about a season and a half i'd say. I guess the same could be said for Hamilton except that I watched him enough to consider him legit. The only question for him would be health/dependency issues. Quentin has looked equally as good but need to see how the league adjusts to him.

Redhook
09-03-2008, 07:02 PM
In simple terms, I think of a good hitter as someone who is tough to get out.

flyer85
09-03-2008, 07:33 PM
I hope that is sarcasm...

Talent will trump work ethic more often than not."I'm Good Enough, I'm Smart Enough, and Doggone It, People Like Me!" :D

blumj
09-03-2008, 09:11 PM
I was listening to Bronson yesterday on the way home from work and he said a few interesting things. He was talking about how the Reds needed to add a bat, which is obvious, but he was also talking about facing hitters. He said later in the game you don't want to see a Pujols or Holliday up at bat with two outs and RISP. He also said that you need a good bat that will hit .280-.300 and drive in runs as opposed to someone hitting .230 but hitting 40 HRS a year.

This got me thinking about the quality of hitters on the Reds and what they need. I realize that both Pujols and Holliday are two of the best hitters in the game but at the same time it didn't sound like Arroyo minded pitching to a guy like Dunn. I know we have the discussion about BA all the time over here but when a starting pitcher says it matters and it changes the way he pitches, does it matter? Wouldn't you rather have a Joey Votto up at the plate who has the ability to take any pitch and hit it all over the park as opposed to an Adam Dunn/Ryan Howard who if you make your pitches isn't nearly as dangerous?

I felt it was ironic hearing what Bronson said the team needs and what went through a pitchers mind when facing particular hitters.

It's funny, because Arroyo doesn't have a lot of experience pitching as a late inning reliever, you know, the pitchers who generally have to deal with those hitters in the kind of situations he's talking about. But, what experience he does have in that role, I don't remember him having much trouble with A-Rod and Pujols.

*BaseClogger*
09-04-2008, 12:27 AM
Simply waiting to see if the AL catches up with him. Usually takes IMO more than a season at times, about a season and a half i'd say. I guess the same could be said for Hamilton except that I watched him enough to consider him legit. The only question for him would be health/dependency issues. Quentin has looked equally as good but need to see how the league adjusts to him.

I also find it interesting you have less faith in Quentin than Sheffield, Hafner, Ichiro, and Crawford...

bucksfan2
09-04-2008, 09:24 AM
It's funny, because Arroyo doesn't have a lot of experience pitching as a late inning reliever, you know, the pitchers who generally have to deal with those hitters in the kind of situations he's talking about. But, what experience he does have in that role, I don't remember him having much trouble with A-Rod and Pujols.

I don't know if there is much of a difference between a late inning or key situation in the 5-6-7th inning. There are key moments in the game that come up at different times in the game. Pujols is always brought up because he is one of the best, if not the best hitter in the game, however any pitch you throw the Pujols that scares the plate can go a long way the other way. But as Mario-Rijo brought up almost every team has that good hitter. The one that makes a pitcher think a little bit more. The one that makes a pitcher really hit his spots. A pitching motion that is based upon repitition in which a split second difference can mean the difference between a strike or a HR.

The Reds haven't had that elite hitter for years now. You could argue that Casey in him prime or Larkin during the 90's was that type of hitter but Reds fans haven't see a good/great hitter in almost a decade. Look at the list of a "bell cow" hitter, when was the last time the Reds had a hitter of that caliber? I think Votto can develop into that style of hitter but he may be a year off.

SteelSD
09-04-2008, 12:59 PM
Look at the list of a "bell cow" hitter, when was the last time the Reds had a hitter of that caliber?

The Reds just traded two guys (Dunn, Griffey) who both had better seasons than a number of players you have on your "list".

In historical terms, the answer to your question might as well be "yesterday". It's that recent.

flyer85
09-04-2008, 01:21 PM
Pujols is always brought up because he is one of the best, if not the best hitter in the gametry ... the best in the history of baseball and you'll be a lot closer to the truth.

IslandRed
09-04-2008, 01:24 PM
most hitters hit mistakes, very few are good enough to consistently hit pitchers pitches well(pujols and a few others).

For other than the few great hitters producing is more about getting a mistake then anything else.

I agree. Reverse that from a pitcher's perspective and what Arroyo was saying is, when guys come to the plate the pitcher generally believes that if he makes his pitches he'll get him out. The scary guys are the ones where the pitcher thinks, "No matter what I throw, he might crush it."

Dunn wasn't that type of hitter, although his propensity for sending mistakes 450 feet away kept pitchers scared enough to walk him a lot, which added a lot of value. Griffey in his prime was that type of hitter, though. But you're right, there really aren't that many guys who fit the description and they're difficult to acquire, so it's kind of a moot point. The only real value I can think of is in its possible implications to playoff baseball -- you're going to see good pitching, it helps if your hitters aren't helpless against guys who can throw strikes without grooving them -- but the Reds are a long way from THAT being a consideration.

flyer85
09-04-2008, 01:28 PM
In recent years in the NL I have only seen three hitters who can consistently hit pitchers pitches ... Pujols, Berkman(LHB) and Jones(LHB). That's a rather short list.

IslandRed
09-04-2008, 01:38 PM
In recent years in the NL I have only seen three hitters who can consistently hit pitchers pitches ... Pujols, Berkman(LHB) and Jones(LHB). That's a rather short list.

I'd just settle for "sometimes." :cool:

flyer85
09-04-2008, 01:43 PM
I'd just settle for "sometimes." :cool:every hitter can do it on occasion, which means the large majority of hitters have to wait for mistakes ... excepting those like Phillips and Bruce who get themselves out consistently on pitchers pitches.

Mario-Rijo
09-05-2008, 01:16 AM
I also find it interesting you have less faith in Quentin than Sheffield, Hafner, Ichiro, and Crawford...

I don't have less faith, they just have a track record. Sheffield is just about done if not already though and Hafner could be headed there but I doubt it.