Originally Posted by Kc61
Respectfully, I disagree completely. These arguments IMO are just wrong.
They call it hitting. The object is to hit the ball. If you swing and miss, you cannot hit the ball. If you take a third strike, you cannot hit the ball. If you cannot hit the ball there are very few positive outcomes.
The Cards last year had the fewest strikeouts in the NL. They won the Woirld Series. They beat Texas which had the fewest strikeouts in the AL.
This year the Giants and Tigers are both low strikeout teams. In the World Series.
The double play argument IMO is a fallacy. The issue is not the RESULT of the hit. Yes, sometimes a struck ball will be a DP. The issue is the OPPORTUNITY for a successful at bat. Except for walks, hitting the ball is required.
Other things are important too. Power. Speed. Patience at the plate. Yes, sure.
But good playoff teams hit the baseball. As Verducci shows, particularly recently when pitching strikeout totals are high.
A great power hitter can compensate for strikeouts. But most players cannot. Drew Stubbs cannot. Chris Heisey cannot. Jay Bruce arguably can.
They call it hitting. That's the objective. Strike three is bad, except for the pitcher.
One thing I never understood, it's been argued that one of the qualities you want in a pitcher is the ability to strike hitters out, because the more balls allowed in play, the more hits are allowed.
So why, then, is putting the ball in play and strikeouts completely irrelevant for the hitter?