Drew Stubbs....

[SteelSD]

So there is no template in your opinion? Or the actual template for a leadoff hitter doesn't have to be a guy who is able to make consistent contact?

What in your opinion then constitutes as a good leadoff hitter? Again don't take this as snarky, I just don't understand where you are coming from on this.

There's really no template. The most productive hitter on any squad would be the best leadoff hitter on any squad. That being said, if the most productive hitter has a high SLG to go with his high OBP, he's generally going to be placed mid-lineup to take advantage of the SLG skill set's propensity to advance similarly high-OBP (in the best scenario) hitters ahead of him.

Your general lineup is going to look a bit like a bell curve from a SLG perspective. There are exceptions, of course (as there should be), but generally your high-OBP "leadoff" hitter is only there because he lacks a skill set to advance runners (SLG), but possesses a secondary base aquisition skill set (speed). Assuming a high enough OBP to be productive, contact rate is least important in this slot due to the lack of ducks on the pond and this also offers a speed guy a few more opportunities to better actualize that skill set versus a lineup slot that would result in more "base clogging" (for lack of a better term) ahead of him.

[SteelSD]

Well how about, no manager in baseball is going to put a high strikeout guy in the leadoff spot because thats just not how they work? Regardless of how we think it should be, its not going to happen unless you have Dusty Baker managing your team.... and well, fortunately we do.

No manager in baseball? Really?

Chris Young- Arizona
Alfonso Soriano- Chicago Cubs
Kelly Johnson- Atlanta
Rickie Weeks- Milwaukee
Curtis Granderson- Detroit
Grady Sizemore- Cleveland
Akinori Iwamura- Tampa Bay

I guess those guys didn't spend any time in the leadoff slot last year or this year? What about Nick Swisher, who's spent nearly half his time in the White Sox' leadoff slot a season after striking out 131 times? Even without him added to the group above, that group struck out 144 times per 600 AB in 2007. High K-rate hitters in the leadoff slot happens a lot more than "never".

[SMcGavin]

And frankly, if we assume Stubbs will steal a good number of bases at a high enough rate to be effective, placing him lower in the order will most likely suppress his value.

I agree with most everything you said except this. I've always liked base-stealers to be lower in the order. I don't like risking outs on the basepaths when your big bats are at the plate. I prefer running with the 7 or 8 hitter up to bat - those are guys unlikely to get a hit that will score you from first base, meaning stealing to get in scoring position is more valuable.

I completely agree with your more general argument about high K / low contact guys in the leadoff spot. Bases empty is the time where strikeouts are the same as any other out, and walks are the same as singles.

[Mario-Rijo]

There's really no template. The most productive hitter on any squad would be the best leadoff hitter on any squad. That being said, if the most productive hitter has a high SLG to go with his high OBP, he's generally going to be placed mid-lineup to take advantage of the SLG skill set's propensity to advance similarly high-OBP (in the best scenario) hitters ahead of him.

Your general lineup is going to look a bit like a bell curve from a SLG perspective. There are exceptions, of course (as there should be), but generally your high-OBP "leadoff" hitter is only there because he lacks a skill set to advance runners (SLG), but possesses a secondary base aquisition skill set (speed). Assuming a high enough OBP to be productive, contact rate is least important in this slot due to the lack of ducks on the pond and this also offers a speed guy a few more opportunities to better actualize that skill set versus a lineup slot that would result in more "base clogging" (for lack of a better term) ahead of him.

I see what you are getting at, that's certainly an interesting perspective. But my problem with that philosophy would be this. The pitcher's job is to keep runs off the board, that is his focus on the mound be it by his individual doing or with the help of his defense if need be. And if the key component to creating runs is getting on base, ideally in front of those who have a tendency to Slg for a high %. Then the pitchers mindset would be to make those people in that position in a lineup earn their way on base with beating you and your defense. Which is actually what they attempt to do, and more often than not are more likely to allow a hit than a BB.

So it would actually be wise to have higher contact guys ahead of those who are proficient in slugging, right? At least that's what seems logical to me.

[SteelSD]

I agree with most everything you said except this. I've always liked base-stealers to be lower in the order. I don't like risking outs on the basepaths when your big bats are at the plate. I prefer running with the 7 or 8 hitter up to bat - those are guys unlikely to get a hit that will score you from first base, meaning stealing to get in scoring position is more valuable.

Oh, don't get me wrong. Stolen bases are of only marginal value even if the runner produces a high enough success rate to be effective. I don't like risking Outs any more than you do.

[SteelSD]

I see what you are getting at, that's certainly an interesting perspective. But my problem with that philosophy would be this. The pitcher's job is to keep runs off the board, that is his focus on the mound be it by his individual doing or with the help of his defense if need be. And if the key component to creating runs is getting on base, ideally in front of those who have a tendency to Slg for a high %. Then the pitchers mindset would be to make those people in that position in a lineup earn their way on base with beating you and your defense. Which is actually what they attempt to do, and more often than not are more likely to allow a hit than a BB.

So it would actually be wise to have higher contact guys ahead of those who are proficient in slugging, right? At least that's what seems logical to me.

High IsoD actually is a skill set. It should be considered to be the "sixth" tool. While high IsoD is often seen coupled with an associated high IsoP component (princeton mentioned this earlier), it's not limited to that nor is a high IsoD limited to high contact rate hitters. See Rickie Weeks. Anderson Machado has it as well. Drew Stubbs' ability to stick at the MLB level is going to depend on him being more like Weeks and less like Machado, of course.

[Mario-Rijo]

High IsoD actually is a skill set. It should be considered to be the "sixth" tool. While high IsoD is often seen coupled with an associated high IsoP component (princeton mentioned this earlier), it's not limited to that nor is a high IsoD limited to high contact rate hitters. See Rickie Weeks. Anderson Machado has it as well. Drew Stubbs' ability to stick at the MLB level is going to depend on him being more like Weeks and less like Machado, of course.

I guess this is an area where I need to do some studying. I don't have a grasp on IsoP and IsoD so I'll have to get back to you when I have.

[Mario-Rijo]

I guess this is an area where I need to do some studying. I don't have a grasp on IsoP and IsoD so I'll have to get back to you when I have.

I have read IsoP (Slg% - BA), let me see if I can put this in terms that make more sense for me and see if it still meets the definition.

The average of how many hits you collect in 10 AB's that are not named a single. Would that be considered correct, even though it's not the exact definition?

Example:

Votto's current Slg% is .500 and his BA is .286 so his IsoP is .214.

So does Votto get an XBH 21.4% of the time that he get's a hit? So in essence he get's 4 singles and an XBH of some kind every 5 times he get's a hit?

If someone can confirm one way or the other I would appreciate it.

[Mario-Rijo]

I'll go ahead and move on to IsoD in the mean time.

IsoD is Isolated Discipline (OBP% - BA)

My assumption if correct on IsoP would be similiar to how I would view this as well I suppose. I'll use Votto as my example again since I still had his stats page up.

Votto's OBP% currently is .352 and BA of .286 come to an IsoD of .066. So to me that means for every 10 times Joey get's on base 93.4% of the time it's via a hit and 6.6% of the time it's some other way be it BB, HBP etc.

Is that correct? And what is say a major league average for players for both IsoP and IsoD? Is it a fluid # or a set #? In other words what's good and what's not good and is that always the same number?

Thanks again for anyone's help on this matter.

[RedlegJake]

double post

[RedlegJake]

The ML IsoD average I believe is .069 and the National League IsoP is about .150 so I use those as the baseline.

Player IsoD/IsoP
Junior .108/.034 He still has discipline but his power has disappeared
Votto .066/.147 Right at league average, good enough to improve as a hitter
EE .083/.124 Very good discipline. Problems lie in hitting certain areas of strike zone. Numbers indicate he could certainly get better.
BP .048/.171 Poor plate discipline. Good power.
Dunn .166/.273 Ridiculous IsoD. Ridiculous power. Problem is contact
CP .034/.159 Horrible plate discipline, power when he makes contact, which is rare
Bako .076/.155 Good discipline, decent power. Problem is contact

As you can see what these numbers reflect is a hitters tendency toward plate discip-line and raw power - they don't measure ability to make contact but rather the ability of recognizing what are strikes (IsoD) and their power ability IF they make contact regardless of how often they do. These numbers MUST be taken in context to have much value. For instance to look at just these stats Paul Bako looks like a pretty good hitter. In context with his BA/OBP and Slugging it's easy to see just a bad a hitter he really is. As Steele indicated IsoD & IsoP are independent of contact, IsoD is a skill in itself and IsoP is just raw power isolated. In other words when IsoD and IsoP indicate "good" and OBP and Slugging are "poor" then you have a guy that really can't hit - but - he might get hot for a month or two like Bako did in April. When both sets are bad as in Patterson then you have a guy that can't hit and isn't likely to sustain any streaks of hitting either. I also think they're pretty good at indicating whether a minor league guy is likely to succeed or improve. A really low IsoD is probably going to create problems for him as he moves up to better pitching. Steele is likely to be a lot better explaining any of this than me but this is my take on it.

[Mario-Rijo]

The ML IsoD average I believe is .069 and the National League IsoP is about .150 so I use those as the baseline.

Player IsoD/IsoP
Junior .108/.034 He still has discipline but his power has disappeared
Votto .066/.147 Right at league average, good enough to improve as a hitter
EE .083/.124 Very good discipline. Problems lie in hitting certain areas of strike zone. Numbers indicate he could certainly get better.
BP .048/.171 Poor plate discipline. Good power.
Dunn .166/.273 Ridiculous IsoD. Ridiculous power. Problem is contact
CP .034/.159 Horrible plate discipline, power when he makes contact, which is rare
Bako .076/.155 Good discipline, decent power. Problem is contact

As you can see what these numbers reflect is a hitters tendency toward plate discip-line and raw power - they don't measure ability to make contact but rather the ability of recognizing what are strikes (IsoD) and their power ability IF they make contact regardless of how often they do. These numbers MUST be taken in context to have much value. For instance to look at just these stats Paul Bako looks like a pretty good hitter. In context with his BA/OBP and Slugging it's easy to see just a bad a hitter he really is. As Steele indicated IsoD & IsoP are independent of contact, IsoD is a skill in itself and IsoP is just raw power isolated. In other words when IsoD and IsoP indicate "good" and OBP and Slugging are "poor" then you have a guy that really can't hit - but - he might get hot for a month or two like Bako did in April. When both sets are bad as in Patterson then you have a guy that can't hit and isn't likely to sustain any streaks of hitting either. I also think they're pretty good at indicating whether a minor league guy is likely to succeed or improve. A really low IsoD is probably going to create problems for him as he moves up to better pitching. Steele is likely to be a lot better explaining any of this than me but this is my take on it.

Thanks for the input. I thought .069 was the # but didn't know if it was a standing number or more of a floating one compared to the league or something I guess.

[SteelSD]

Mario-Rijo, Isolated Power (IsoP) speaks to frequency of base acquisition per AB after the first. For a hitter who produces an IsoP of .200, it means that the hitter is acquiring two additional bases after the first every ten At Bats.

This season, MLB average IsoP is .148. Last season it was .154. A number of about .150 in today's game is a good standard.

IsoD is the differential between a player's OBP and his Batting Average. It speaks to a player's ability to avoid Outs independent of Base Hits. The higher the number, the better equipped a player may be to get on base without needing a Base Hit to do so.

This season, average MLB IsoD is .070. Last season it was .068. A good standard to use in today's game is .070.

Don't over-think either metric. Higher is better in both cases.

Players possessing decent power will produce IsoP numbers above .200 and players with major power will routinely post .250 to .300 IsoP numbers. True freaks will produce seasonal IsoP numbers above .350 from time to time and only Babe Ruth and steroids are likely to exist above .400 IsoP.

High IsoD players? You'd better be at around .100 IsoD or higher or you need not apply for a "plate discipline" skill set star.

[Mario-Rijo]

Mario-Rijo, Isolated Power (IsoP) speaks to frequency of base acquisition per AB after the first. For a hitter who produces an IsoP of .200, it means that the hitter is acquiring two additional bases after the first every ten At Bats.

This season, MLB average IsoP is .148. Last season it was .154. A number of about .150 in today's game is a good standard.

IsoD is the differential between a player's OBP and his Batting Average. It speaks to a player's ability to avoid Outs independent of Base Hits. The higher the number, the better equipped a player may be to get on base without needing a Base Hit to do so.

This season, average MLB IsoD is .070. Last season it was .068. A good standard to use in today's game is .070.

Don't over-think either metric. Higher is better in both cases.

Players possessing decent power will produce IsoP numbers above .200 and players with major power will routinely post .250 to .300 IsoP numbers. True freaks will produce seasonal IsoP numbers above .350 from time to time and only Babe Ruth and steroids are likely to exist above .400 IsoP.

High IsoD players? You'd better be at around .100 IsoD or higher or you need not apply for a "plate discipline" skill set star.

Ok so if I'm reading you right the only thing I had wrong was the IsoP. I read on several of these sites that a point system is assigned to hits in order to calculate it. But I couldn't understand what the end # represented, which I bolded in your post. I better understand it now but not sure I can put it into lamens terms if I were trying to explain it to someone who didn't have a clue.

I think I understood IsoD much better even though I explained it somewhat differently, do you agree with my assessment on it? Basically a player with a .100 IsoD get's on base at 10% of his PA's w/o the benefit of a hit. Or 60 BB's + HBP, etc. in 600 Pa's?

[RedlegJake]

IsoP = total bases % after removing the first base which represents the hit in BA. It isolates the "extra" bases acquired in hitting after first base which is awarded in every type of hit. It measures a player's power when he makes contact regardless of the frequency of said contact.

IsoD is avoiding outs or acquiring bases without swinging if you like. Both imply good strike zone recognition and the discipline to not swing at non strikes.