PDA

View Full Version : disturbing comments coming from Stubbs and Bruce



icehole3
03-07-2012, 02:29 PM
Maybe I'm over reacting, but doesnt it sound like he doesnt care what people think, he's going to try to jack the ball out no matter what. Bruce's comment about the player is the player sounds weird too, shouldnt you be a better player by year 3 or 4 and not be settle with the player being the player.

I didnt post the whole article, didnt want to cause problems with the mods.

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20120306/COL03/303060116/Doc-Same-swing-fewer-misses-?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|

Doc: Same swing, fewer misses?
Stubbs won't change approach just to cut Ks

GOODYEAR, ARIZ. — Drew Stubbs isn’t as concerned with his strikeouts as you are. Nor are the Reds. Stubbs would prefer not to strike out every third at-bat. But that concern isn’t going to keep him from hacking at every pitch he finds attractive. And he sees a lot of lookers up there.

Stubbs is OK with Stubbs. Striking out 205 times is too much, he knows. He also believes striking out is part of doing business. He’s entirely adamant about this. “You don’t want to give away some of the damage you can do, just to try to punch the ball around,” he says.

Baker says pitchers pitched Stubbs tougher. Now, it’s his turn to adjust. But the manager concedes, “Most of the guys who strike out have been striking out most their life.” Or as Bruce put it, “The player is the player. Drew can hit 20 home runs. You don’t want to change him too much.”

Cooper
03-07-2012, 02:37 PM
Nothing to react too....he is what he is....I'll take that.

durl
03-07-2012, 02:41 PM
Agreed. He is what he is...or what he wants to be. The question is, is the player what the Reds need?

MikeThierry
03-07-2012, 02:51 PM
Maybe I'm overreacting to Stubbs comments but if I was the Reds management, I would trade him while his stock was still high. I cannot stand players who are OK with the status quo and won't do things to better themselves. It's one of the reasons why I was ok with the Cardinals trading Rasmus. Rasmus wouldn't follow coaches advise and wouldn't do things to better himself. I'm afraid that I can see the same sort of mentality with Drew Stubbs. Yeah he is a heck of a talent but whats the point of keeping a player if he isn't going to get the most from that talent? I just get annoyed at pro-athletes that waste their natural talent and ability.

icehole3
03-07-2012, 02:57 PM
Maybe I'm overreacting to Stubbs comments but if I was the Reds management, I would trade him while his stock was still high. I cannot stand players who are OK with the status quo and won't do things to better themselves. It's one of the reasons why I was ok with the Cardinals trading Rasmus. Rasmus wouldn't follow coaches advise and wouldn't do things to better himself. I'm afraid that I can see the same sort of mentality with Drew Stubbs. Yeah he is a heck of a talent but whats the point of keeping a player if he isn't going to get the most from that talent? I just get annoyed at pro-athletes that waste their natural talent and ability.

thats how I took it, it was like he knows better than everyone type of feel, IMO if Im feeling like that I would just keep quiet about it, thats just me. It sounds a little like something Jr might say.

WildcatFan
03-07-2012, 03:05 PM
That's a very Spring Training answer from Stubbs. I'd wager he's not taking the 205 strikeouts as lightly as that quote suggests. Every hitter in the game tries to improve his hitting from year to year, and improved hitting will mean fewer strikeouts. The real issue is whether or not his hitting actually improves. If not, he's still a perfectly fine hitter who will live in the lower half of the lineup and be a very solid defensive centerfielder. My guess is you will see the strikeout total go down a little while Stubbs hits 15-20 homeruns and puts up a .330ish OBP while stealing 40-45 bases.

Then again, it'll be his third full season, and maybe he breaks out and bats .270/.350./.450. I don't think that's out of the realm of possibility, either, in which case even another 190 strikeouts isn't going to bother me a bit.

klw
03-07-2012, 03:06 PM
thats how I took it, it was like he knows better than everyone type of feel, IMO if Im feeling like that I would just keep quiet about it, thats just me. It sounds a little like something Jr might say.

Well lets see here is a piece that he has been working on his bunting
http://cincinnati.com/blogs/reds/2012/03/06/francisco-testing-reds-patience-baker-on-stubbs-bunting/

And then here is Fay's recent entry about all the work he has been doing on his hitting.
http://cincinnati.com/blogs/reds/2012/02/25/stubbs-anxious-to-get-back-to-work/


After a year like Stubbs had — he hit .244 and struck out a team-record 205 times — he was anxious to get back to work.

“Absolutely,” he said. “I think whenever you go through a tough year as a competitor, as an athlete, you want to get out and get yourself back on the right track. It’s a long wait sometimes. You spend a few months thinking about what you’ve been through.

“It does make you anxious and excited at a new opportunity to help the team to hopefully a successful year.”

Stubbs’ strikeouts get the attention. He hopes to cut them down but that wasn’t his only problem.

“That’s part of it,” he said. “But that was just a byproduct of a lot of other stuff going on. That’s part of the game. It’s going to happen with everyone. With me last year, it was amplified a lot more. If I’m able to do some things to help my approach and my overall at-bats, those will take care of themselves.”

Cooper
03-07-2012, 03:20 PM
The difference between Colby and Stubbs is that Stubbs is doing what Baker wants --Baker is ok with what he is.

It's a terrible article that makes silly assumptions. There's nothing there that sticks. It's not disturbing in any way.

Vottomatic
03-07-2012, 03:24 PM
Reminds me completely of the Austin Kearns ordeal. Kearns wouldn't work on things management asked and the next you know, he was traded.

If Stubbs has a good season and raises his value, I can see him gone quickly while his value is high.

I don't ever see him being a premier player, ever.

Hoosier Red
03-07-2012, 03:32 PM
But he is working on things that management wants him to work on.

I think there's also a difference between changing approach and changing results. Obviously, no one wants to strike out 200 times. But if he did nothing but make sure that he only struck out 100 times, I can almost guarantee you that he'd be a worse hitter. After all, if he wanted to, he could simply bunt every time at the plate and he'd strike out fewer than 100 times.

Of course he'd also likely bat aboout .150.


He should approach the plate confident that the small adjustments he's going to make will lead to bigger results. If he focuses too much on the results, he's not likely ever going to get there.

MikeThierry
03-07-2012, 03:38 PM
The difference between Colby and Stubbs is that Stubbs is doing what Baker wants --Baker is ok with what he is.


Is what Baker OK with, something that will elevate a player to achieving his full potential?

Cooper
03-07-2012, 03:38 PM
Vottomatic _ you got both sides of the aisle covered there...if he does perform well he'll be traded, but just in case he doesn't he won't be a premier player....ever.

lollipopcurve
03-07-2012, 03:40 PM
I want Stubbs to be confident in his abilities. The danger with him, I thought, is that he would be listening to a million different bits of advice and would end up not being able to fully focus on which skills he wanted to work on.

Proof will be in the pudding. If he is more the 2010 Stubbs than the 2011 Stubbs in 2012, that's a win for him and the organization.

Cooper
03-07-2012, 03:42 PM
Thierry: and what would that be --what does Baker want him to change...is he asking him to bunt more? if so, that's fine ...yesterday Stubbs said he was working on it. The article is written with major assumptions that add up to Doc's opinion.

dougdirt
03-07-2012, 03:50 PM
Stubbs is saying what most of us say: Trading strikeouts for power rather than slap hitting for less power is what you want to do.

REDREAD
03-07-2012, 03:58 PM
Geez, I am not sure I read any negativity from those comments.

Stubbs, kind of like Dunn, is going to strike out a lot.
He said he's working on reducing strikeouts but he doesn't want to change his swing so dramatically that he loses all his power.

Seems like the author wanted to stir the pot a bit. Stubbs said he was trying to cut down on Ks. Baker is happy but realistic.
Stubbs will never have a 400 OBP season. We should accept that.

Even in Stubbs down year last season, he was right in the middle of the pack of CF production when WAR was used as critieria. Sure, WAR is flawed, but he is an asset as is, and he still has upside.

Not sure why so many people are desperate to trade him and create another hole on the team. Heisey isn't going to cut it as the everyday CF.

AtomicDumpling
03-07-2012, 04:06 PM
I took it as Stubbs being annoyed with a pencil-necked geek reporter confronting him about his strikeouts.

Daugherty is one of the casual baseball guys that still thinks strikeouts are worse than other outs despite dozens of studies that have proven strikeouts are no more harmful than other outs. Rather than explaining the basics of sabermetrics to a clueless journalism major, Stubbs just told him that he is working on more important things than reducing his Ks. I have no problem with that.

Drew Stubbs knows what he needs to work on and I have zero doubt that he is working very hard to improve his game.

RichRed
03-07-2012, 04:11 PM
“There’s a fine line,” Stubbs said. “There’s a balance point. If guys are striking out more, but also doing more damage, then OK. If guys are putting the ball in play and making outs, how is that an asset to the team?”

Sounds to me like Stubbs gets it, something "Doc" can rarely be accused of. He really is the worst.

We'll just have to see how the things he's working on translate to the field.

Patrick Bateman
03-07-2012, 05:22 PM
The comments in this thread are completely bizarre IMO.

Stubbs said nothing about remaining status quo. He recognized that his strikeouts are too high, but felt like altering his approach to trade K's and power for dinky singles was not the appropriate means to counteract the issue.

I am in disblief that anyone has an issue with that statement.

Redsfaithful
03-07-2012, 05:31 PM
I didn't realize Stubbs was such a cerebral player, that is good to know. I think he improves this year.

Cedric
03-07-2012, 10:07 PM
I find these comments to be the exact opposite of disturbing.

Kudos to Jay and Drew.

I(heart)Freel
03-07-2012, 10:11 PM
Sounds to me like Stubbs gets it, something "Doc" can rarely be accused of. He really is the worst.

We'll just have to see how the things he's working on translate to the field.

About the only thing Doc is worst at is being a bad writer.

Everyone should take a chill pill and read Doc's column on Votto's Ted Williams fascination. You want a player saying he thinks about improving every day? Good. You got one in Votto. (I think Doc "got" that.)

wheels
03-07-2012, 10:13 PM
Those are just the types of things I wanted to hear from Stubbs.

He gets it more than I thought. It's refreshing.

BCubb2003
03-07-2012, 11:03 PM
At least strikeouts don't hurt his feelings.

RedsManRick
03-07-2012, 11:17 PM
Personally, I'm thrilled by this. Stubbs gets it. He doesn't want to strike out. But fundamentally altering what he does in pursuit of a higher batting average, but at the cost of his power, doesn't make him a better hitter. Daugherty falls in to the old trap of imaging Stubbs could cut 30% of his strikeouts without affecting the rest of his plate appearances -- it's simply not how it works.

VR
03-07-2012, 11:48 PM
At least he's not a pitcher, then he would be happy about all the strikeouts.

kaldaniels
03-08-2012, 12:39 AM
In the bylaws of Redszone, is there anyway in which a thread title can be overturned?

Tom Servo
03-08-2012, 01:16 AM
Thread title makes it sounds like they admitted to being the Cincinnati Stranglers or something.

The Operator
03-08-2012, 01:52 AM
In the bylaws of Redszone, is there anyway in which a thread title can be overturned?
Disturbingly Awesome comments from Stubbs and Bruce?

I checked the RZ Constitution and found nothing allowing such a change without thread starter approval. To do so would require an amendment to the RZ Bill of Rights, meaning an emergency session of Redszone Congress. I dunno how easy that would be...

Ron Madden
03-08-2012, 04:51 AM
Seems like over reaction to me.. Stubbs and Bruce said nothing wrong IMHO.

redsmetz
03-08-2012, 05:44 AM
Seems like over reaction to me.. Stubbs and Bruce said nothing wrong IMHO.

I'll go a step further. When I read this article, I liked Stubbs comments a lot. They struck me as fairly level-headed - acknowledging that strikeouts aren't good, but that his value comes from the power he has. I heard a recognition that he needs to improve and it sounded to me as if he's been putting in the work. I heard the same from Bruce, his comment about batters being what they are notwithstanding.

Griffey012
03-08-2012, 07:19 AM
Is this the "We actually had a productive off-season and filled a lot of holes so we need something to put under the microscope and complain about thread?"

All joking aside, I see no issue with the quotes in the article. Stubbs got to the big leagues and has performed at a solid level offensively doing what he is doing. Why try and change who you are because you have a flaw that comes with the package? Why not try and fix that flaw and keep the same package that has brought you success? He isn't saying he isn't trying to strike out less and not working at it, he just said he isn't going to become a contact/slap hitter just to cut down on strikeouts. I get his quotes, I get Dusty's quotes, and I get Jay's quotes. Seems to me like there is nothing to see here.

redsmetz
03-08-2012, 07:29 AM
Maybe I'm over reacting...

Will the defendant please rise?

You have been tried before a jury of your peers. What say the jury? Guilty.

Sorry, guy, you're overreacting. ;)

icehole3
03-08-2012, 07:41 AM
sorry http://www.sternfannetwork.com/xen/data/avatars/l/182/182039.jpg

Vottomatic
03-08-2012, 07:58 AM
Maybe the problem simply is that Stubbs isn't a leadoff guy. He's a power hitter with speed. And maybe we should be cutting him slack on all the K's if he's going to be a power hitter.

Eric Davis would hit 35 HR's and steal 60 bases. He didn't leadoff.

Stick Stubbs in the 7, 8 or 9 hole and leave him alone.

redsmetz
03-08-2012, 08:01 AM
sorry http://www.sternfannetwork.com/xen/data/avatars/l/182/182039.jpg

Oh, thanks, I've been fretting I might have been a little over the top.

On a serious note, I was impressed with how much of what Stubbs said pretty much echoed the earlier conversation here on RZ regarding this matter. And even more seriously, we need the real season to get here so we can all stop being on pins & needles and start arguing over real games.

osuceltic
03-08-2012, 09:46 AM
Personally, I'm thrilled by this. Stubbs gets it. He doesn't want to strike out. But fundamentally altering what he does in pursuit of a higher batting average, but at the cost of his power, doesn't make him a better hitter. Daugherty falls in to the old trap of imaging Stubbs could cut 30% of his strikeouts without affecting the rest of his plate appearances -- it's simply not how it works.

But you have to look at the bigger picture. From 2010 to 2011, Stubbs saw his average drop 12 points, his OBP drop 8 points, his slugging drop 80 points, his hits fall by 16, his HRs drop by 7, his RBI by 33, while his strikeouts went up by 38. He wasn't significantly less patient (his walks increased by 8 in about 100 more plate appearances). So as the strikeouts went up, the production across the board went down.

I agree -- if he had struck out more while seeing a corresponding increase in production (or even sustaining the 2010 levels of production), then it's not a problem. But he didn't. He struck out a lot more while producing a lot less. When that happens, you have to look at your approach and make some adjustments.

What I think we all can agree upon is that the more important piece is the production -- if he can boost the production to 2010 levels while striking out at 2011 levels, fine. But does anyone believe he can do that? The truth is it's all part of the same puzzle.

CySeymour
03-08-2012, 10:29 AM
Maybe the problem simply is that Stubbs isn't a leadoff guy.

I think you'd get a bunch of people in agreement with you.

Hoosier Red
03-08-2012, 12:43 PM
But you have to look at the bigger picture. From 2010 to 2011, Stubbs saw his average drop 12 points, his OBP drop 8 points, his slugging drop 80 points, his hits fall by 16, his HRs drop by 7, his RBI by 33, while his strikeouts went up by 38. He wasn't significantly less patient (his walks increased by 8 in about 100 more plate appearances). So as the strikeouts went up, the production across the board went down.

I agree -- if he had struck out more while seeing a corresponding increase in production (or even sustaining the 2010 levels of production), then it's not a problem. But he didn't. He struck out a lot more while producing a lot less. When that happens, you have to look at your approach and make some adjustments.

What I think we all can agree upon is that the more important piece is the production -- if he can boost the production to 2010 levels while striking out at 2011 levels, fine. But does anyone believe he can do that? The truth is it's all part of the same puzzle.


I think the difference is in whether his production dropped BECAUSE the strikeouts increased, or if his production dropped AND his strikeouts increased.

There seems to be an underlying assumption that the strikeout increase caused his lower production. While it may have been a part of that, I would argue that if he only focuses on lowering strikeouts, it might not actually benefit his production.

Nasty_Boy
03-08-2012, 12:48 PM
As a guy that played in college and has coached at the high school level, I feel that most swing and miss problems (especially at advanced levels) have more to do with pitch recognition than the mechanics of the swing. Sure, some guys have better swings than others and are shorter/quicker to the ball than others... or they keep their hands inside the ball instead of out and around the ball. But the reason most guys swing and miss is because they get fooled on the pitch. This is Stubbs problem and has been Bruce's problem at times. Some guys are so good (Votto,Pujols) that they can slow the AB down, let the ball get deeper before reacting and still put a firm swing on things. Others have trouble recognizing the pitch, so they cheat on the fastball or get out in front of the offspeed. Stubbs obviously has the swing and the ability to have impressed scouts enough to be a top 10 pick. IMO, at the big league level he's been a little slow adjusting to how guys were pitching him and because of that he started being a guess hitter. When then K's started racking up, he pressed more and looked more lost at the plate. Will he be able to hit and provide consistent ABs going forward? That's yet to be seen, but I don't fault the mechanics of his swing one bit... To me it's 95% pitch recognition.

Griffey012
03-08-2012, 01:02 PM
As a guy that played in college and has coached at the high school level, I feel that most swing and miss problems (especially at advanced levels) have more to do with pitch recognition than the mechanics of the swing. Sure, some guys have better swings than others and are shorter/quicker to the ball than others... or they keep their hands inside the ball instead of out and around the ball. But the reason most guys swing and miss is because they get fooled on the pitch. This is Stubbs problem and has been Bruce's problem at times. Some guys are so good (Votto,Pujols) that they can slow the AB down, let the ball get deeper before reacting and still put a firm swing on things. Others have trouble recognizing the pitch, so they cheat on the fastball or get out in front of the offspeed. Stubbs obviously has the swing and the ability to have impressed scouts enough to be a top 10 pick. IMO, at the big league level he's been a little slow adjusting to how guys were pitching him and because of that he started being a guess hitter. When then K's started racking up, he pressed more and looked more lost at the plate. Will he be able to hit and provide consistent ABs going forward? That's yet to be seen, but I don't fault the mechanics of his swing one bit... To me it's 95% pitch recognition.

Great post, I was thinking the same thing myself but wasn't sure how to clearly explain it. Well done.

IslandRed
03-08-2012, 01:03 PM
Maybe the problem simply is that Stubbs isn't a leadoff guy. He's a power hitter with speed. And maybe we should be cutting him slack on all the K's if he's going to be a power hitter.

Here's the thing, though... If a guy is going to use the "I'm a power hitter" exemption, he actually needs to be a power hitter. Stubbs has plenty of raw power but he's only had brief stretches of actually producing slugger-like numbers, and that goes all the way back to the beginning of his pro career.

As a guy who's neither high-OBP nor high-SLG (but not terrible at either when he's not walking back to the dugout 35% of the time), that's why he belongs around #7 in the order, which is what most people want anyway.

IslandRed
03-08-2012, 01:05 PM
As a guy that played in college and has coached at the high school level, I feel that most swing and miss problems (especially at advanced levels) have more to do with pitch recognition than the mechanics of the swing. Sure, some guys have better swings than others and are shorter/quicker to the ball than others... or they keep their hands inside the ball instead of out and around the ball. But the reason most guys swing and miss is because they get fooled on the pitch. This is Stubbs problem and has been Bruce's problem at times. Some guys are so good (Votto,Pujols) that they can slow the AB down, let the ball get deeper before reacting and still put a firm swing on things. Others have trouble recognizing the pitch, so they cheat on the fastball or get out in front of the offspeed. Stubbs obviously has the swing and the ability to have impressed scouts enough to be a top 10 pick. IMO, at the big league level he's been a little slow adjusting to how guys were pitching him and because of that he started being a guess hitter. When then K's started racking up, he pressed more and looked more lost at the plate. Will he be able to hit and provide consistent ABs going forward? That's yet to be seen, but I don't fault the mechanics of his swing one bit... To me it's 95% pitch recognition.

Nice post. I've mentioned the guess-hitter thing before but I hadn't thought about it potentially being a consequence of a lack of confidence in pitch recognition.

RedsManRick
03-08-2012, 01:30 PM
But you have to look at the bigger picture. From 2010 to 2011, Stubbs saw his average drop 12 points, his OBP drop 8 points, his slugging drop 80 points, his hits fall by 16, his HRs drop by 7, his RBI by 33, while his strikeouts went up by 38. He wasn't significantly less patient (his walks increased by 8 in about 100 more plate appearances). So as the strikeouts went up, the production across the board went down.

I agree -- if he had struck out more while seeing a corresponding increase in production (or even sustaining the 2010 levels of production), then it's not a problem. But he didn't. He struck out a lot more while producing a lot less. When that happens, you have to look at your approach and make some adjustments.

What I think we all can agree upon is that the more important piece is the production -- if he can boost the production to 2010 levels while striking out at 2011 levels, fine. But does anyone believe he can do that? The truth is it's all part of the same puzzle.

But 2010 strikeout levels and 2011 levels were nearly identical. If he struck out at 2010 levels in 2011, he would've K'd only 196 times instead of 205. Would that really make the difference? Give him 2 hits on there and he hits .247/.325/.370, still a far cry from .255/.329/.444. Sure, the average dipped a bit due to a few more strikeouts, but the strikeouts weren't the cause of a 70 point dip in slugging. We've misdiagnosed the problem.

Why did his slugging drop by 70 points? It was because he hit fewer flyballs (40.5% to 33.2%) and the flyballs he did hit were only 2/3 as likely to leave the yard (15.9% to 11.5%).

So, what caused those changes? I'd guess that the were a combination of random variation and a guy being coached to cut down his swing, focus on putting the ball in play and to put the ball on the ground so he can use his speed.

And while his strikeout rate when up a tiny bit, he wasn't making less contact (72.4% contact rate in 2010, 72.8% in 2011). And in fact, he was swinging a bit more (we know how much people hate watching guys take pitches). But what else changed? Pitchers gave him less to hit. In 2010 51.1% of pitches against him were in the zone. In 2011 that dropped 48.6%. And meanwhile Stubbs was being told he needed to swing more, exacerbating his weakness. No wonder he was confused.

As far as I'm concerned, people need to accept that Stubbs is a horrible contact hitter and approach maximizing production from that point of view. He just doesn't have good contact ability. Ryan Hanigan is slow. Paul Janish has no power. Dave Sappelt has a crappy arm. And Drew Stubbs lacks the talent to put the bat on the ball as well as most major leaguers. Sure, he could change his approach and improve at the margins, but he'll never have even Votto's ability to foul stuff off.

So you want him to cut his strikeouts. So do I. But the question remains, how do you do that without taking away that value he does provide. The scenario Daugherty paints where you can just substitute 60 strikeouts for balls in play without changing the other 600 PA simply isn't based in reality. If Stubbs starts swinging at more stuff early in the count, pitchers will just give him even less to hit early.

From my perspective, we're over complicating this. Stubbs needs to know what he can hit well and what he can't. What he can't hit well, he shouldn't swing at. What he can hit well, he should. It's more about swinging at the right pitches for him than swinging more or swinging less. And when the opportunity presents itself for him to bunt his way on base, he should take advantage of that.

Nasty_Boy
03-08-2012, 01:53 PM
I went through it in college... With some guys being better than others, they were tougher to hit because of the lack of time (speed) to recognize the pitch or due to the deception of the offspeed stuff. I knew could hit anyone and never felt too overmatched but the ability to recognize quicker (and health issues) were a big reason I never had a chance to move on past college ball. There's a point when you maximize your talent, reach your full potential and you're just not good enough. I could hit the ball a country mile or I could stay back and slap the ball around but I couldn't do both. So the problem was I couldn't drive the ball against elite pitchers on a consistent basis, because I had to guess the pitch and take my hack. And nobody wants a 6-2 220 lb guy that's a punch and judy hitter and has 30 speed. Some guys are talented enough to adjust and have the power and avg hit tools, but some guys are not... I don't know that Stubbs is totally void of the avg tool, but I do see why going towards that would take away his ability to drive the baseball.

Chip R
03-08-2012, 02:34 PM
Here's the thing, though... If a guy is going to use the "I'm a power hitter" exemption, he actually needs to be a power hitter. Stubbs has plenty of raw power but he's only had brief stretches of actually producing slugger-like numbers, and that goes all the way back to the beginning of his pro career.

As a guy who's neither high-OBP nor high-SLG (but not terrible at either when he's not walking back to the dugout 35% of the time), that's why he belongs around #7 in the order, which is what most people want anyway.

I think that's a very fair point. I understand that on some players, cutting down on their swing to keep from striking out would be detrimental to their overall hitting results but I don't know if Stubbs is one of those players. Perhaps if he just forgot about hitting the ball out of the park and concentrated more on making contact - while not necessarily having to be a slap hitter - he would get on base more instead of making more outs.

RedsManRick
03-08-2012, 03:20 PM
I think that's a very fair point. I understand that on some players, cutting down on their swing to keep from striking out would be detrimental to their overall hitting results but I don't know if Stubbs is one of those players. Perhaps if he just forgot about hitting the ball out of the park and concentrated more on making contact - while not necessarily having to be a slap hitter - he would get on base more instead of making more outs.

Do you think he's thinking more about trying to hit the ball out of the park than any other guy? There's a difference between trying to make hard contact and actively trying to hit HRs and I don't think its fair to assume he's trying to hit HR per se'.

Chip R
03-08-2012, 03:39 PM
Do you think he's thinking more about trying to hit the ball out of the park than any other guy? There's a difference between trying to make hard contact and actively trying to hit HRs and I don't think its fair to assume he's trying to hit HR per se'.

Could be. You couldn't blame him if he does. The big money goes to HR hitters and even his biggest detractors will say he has power. He's had that power probably ever since he started playing ball. Taking a big swing and going for the fences can get you through high school, college and possibly the minors. But this is the highest level and taking that big swing may not work out for him the way it does for guys like Fielder. He has 22 and 15 HRs in his first 2 full seasons. Nothing to sneeze at but that doesn't scream out power hitter to me. He has power but does he have big league power?

I think Stubbs has to figure out whether he's going to be a power hitter or a guy who is satisfied to cut down on the swing and walk a little more and possibly get more base hits. Sure it could lower his slugging percentage but his OBP may increase because he'll get on base more often.

osuceltic
03-08-2012, 04:09 PM
Could be. You couldn't blame him if he does. The big money goes to HR hitters and even his biggest detractors will say he has power. He's had that power probably ever since he started playing ball. Taking a big swing and going for the fences can get you through high school, college and possibly the minors. But this is the highest level and taking that big swing may not work out for him the way it does for guys like Fielder. He has 22 and 15 HRs in his first 2 full seasons. Nothing to sneeze at but that doesn't scream out power hitter to me. He has power but does he have big league power?

I think Stubbs has to figure out whether he's going to be a power hitter or a guy who is satisfied to cut down on the swing and walk a little more and possibly get more base hits. Sure it could lower his slugging percentage but his OBP may increase because he'll get on base more often.

And you can be both. Be a power hitter, but with two strikes, cut down and put the ball in play. For a guy like Dunn it might not be the right approach. For a guy with the speed of Stubbs, I think taking a more defensive approach and trying to use that speed to his advantage makes a lot of sense.

Mickey Mantle used to love to bunt with two strikes, and he hit for a lot more power than Drew Stubbs ever will.

Ghosts of 1990
03-08-2012, 10:31 PM
Not too bothered with what Bruce said.

redsmetz
03-25-2012, 08:36 AM
Drew Stubbs & Austin Jackson were the topic of today's NY Times baseball blog:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/25/sports/baseball/austin-jackson-and-drew-stubbs-are-exceptions-to-a-rule.html