Originally Posted by AvesIce51
This is no mystery though. We traded away two offensive players, for pitching. WK knew this would happen.
Leading the league in P/AB is nice to see, but sometimes it is deceiving. It might now ALWAYS be great patience because a lot of swing and misses add up to more pitches seen. But the high SLG % and OBP is a good sign though too.
Scott Hatteberg sees a lot of pitches, and gets on base without swinging and missing much.
Dunn sees a lot, gets on base not as frequently, and swings and misses a lot.
(Just throwing that out there, not really trying to take away from the positive numbers.)
Knowing you're going to lose a little bit of offense and then going out and losing .70 runs per game are two totally different things. The former is making a small sacrifice in an attempt to make run differential gains via better pitching/defense while the latter is decimating an offense altogether.
Over about 60 games, we've replaced ~25 walks with maybe four hits and 21 outs. That's just the value in lost walks, nothing more, and doesn't include other lost value in the frequency of hitting counts (Kearns was third on the team, 20 percent better than league average).
BTW, if you want to see a true value example of what we lost in terms of plate discipline, working the count, etc., go back and examine the 2004 ALCS, Games 1-7. Split the series into two groups, one for Games 1-3, and the other for Games 4-7. In each group, analyze which team, Boston or New York, controlled the strike zone offensively and defensively as a collective unit.
The answer should be very telling.