Originally Posted by BadFundamentals
So let me ask you PAP and I stand with an open mind for your response. Where is the flaw in this conceptual logic/argument (as opposed to a stat based RC-type argument) I have layed out that the deep flyout to right is a relatively better out than the popout or strikeout ? How is this argument not based on facts?
To play devil's advocate, first of all, all fly outs are not deep to right...
Usually it is a left handed hitter who hits deep to right, and there are more right handers in the majors than left handers. If you are going to use the situations you mentioned, 24 possibilites of men on base etc.,then you should also factor in the different results of where the ball is hit. With the K, the ball goes no where, with a hit, the ball can go anywhere. Anywhere is not always good. If you say that, and I am being very generous, that half the hit balls are "productive," then that 58-42 advantage has fallen to 29-42. Needless to say, no longer an advantage.
On the flip side, I used to be a big anti-K guy, just cause it hurts so much when it happens, especially in key situations in a game. And at least with contact, you feel there is a chance that the runner may advance or score. So high Ks are bad in that sense, but what our peers are pimping is not just high Ks, but a high walk rate to correspond, which Adam has, and can therefore help just as much in those late situations.
It may or may not be "clutch," in those late game situations, but it does not hurt, and may help.