Originally Posted by dougdirt
Except you are incorrect that his walk rate is a problem. Its only a problem because of his strikeouts. If he struck out 10% of the time, his 4% walk rate would be fine. Likewise, his 20% strikeout rate isn't a problem by itself, because if he had a 7%+ walk rate he could be just fine. His 20% strikeout rate is a problem because of his 4% walk rate. Guys simply can't get on base enough with such a discrepancy between the two rates. Alone they aren't problems. together though, they are because they make it too difficult for a player to post a .330 OBP, much less something higher.
Sorry, I don't see it.
If you strikeout too much, it's bad.
If you walk too little, it's bad.
You can compensate for these tendencies in several ways. But the two do not correlate in my view.
A guy can fan 200 times. That's bad. He can compensate several ways. He can compensate by hitting 70 homers. He can compensate by batting .350. He can compensate by walks. But it doesn't have to be by walks.
A guy can walk at a very low rate, like Francisco. He can compensate by a very high batting average. By a slew of extra base hits. A low strikeout rate helps, but it is not necessary if other good things happen.
Walks and strikeouts are important. But they are not, IMO, strictly related.