Turn Off Ads?
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 18

Thread: The "Hit" Tool

  1. #1
    Stat Wanker Hodiernus RedsManRick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Guelph, ON
    Posts
    16,181

    The "Hit" Tool

    So one of the big 5 tools is the "hit" tool. The tools aren't always thought of the same way by scouts, but there's some general agreement that the hit tool is about squaring the ball up. But how do you measure it? Fangraphs just posted an article about it. http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index...omment-1312035

    The author takes the position that you should try to isolate the tools and I agree with that. Btu he takes the approach of subtracting out power. I thought that was the wrong approach and responded thusly

    I love the idea, but think your power hypothesis is misplaced. If the tool is about putting the bat squarely on the ball, homers are actually a decent sign of that and players should not be penalized for having a good power tool in addition to a good hit tool. The bigger confounding issue is hits that happen without squaring the ball up. So hereís the same idea, but subtracting out just infield hits and bunt hits (H-BUH-IFH)/(AB-BUH-IFH):

    2009-2011, min 1000 PA

    Top 10
    1. Miguel Cabrera, .321
    2. Joe Mauer, .320
    3. Joey Votto, .309
    4. Robinson Cano, .302
    5. Victor Martinez, .301
    6. Albert Pujols, .300
    7. Adrian Gonzalez, .298
    8. Josh Hamilton, .296
    9. Michael Young, .293
    10. Paul Konerko, .292

    Bottom 10
    10. Rick Ankiel, .215
    9. Drew Stubbs, .214
    8. B.J. Upton, .213
    7. Brandon Inge, .213
    6. Mark Reynolds, .212
    5. Alcides Escobar, .212
    4. Tony Gwynn, .211
    3. Ronny Cedeno, .202
    2. Cameron Maybin, .201
    1. Carlos Pena, .198
    What do you guys think?
    Games are won on run differential -- scoring more than your opponent. Runs are runs, scored or prevented they all count the same. Worry about scoring more and allowing fewer, not which positions contribute to which side of the equation or how "consistent" you are at your current level of performance.

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #2
    Blowing away bad memories Redsfan320's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Oxford, OH
    Posts
    2,284

    Re: The "Hit" Tool

    Just a question, based on the results, it would seem this is on the same scale as BA, is this correct?

    320
    I'd rather listen to Kelch read the phone book than suffer through Thom Brennaman's attempt to make every instance on the field the most important event since the discovery of manned space flight. -westofyou

  4. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    4,712

    Re: The "Hit" Tool

    I think that something was lost in translation between the Tony Gwynns.

    Moreover . . . good work.

  5. #4
    Maple SERP savafan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    Posts
    17,584

    Re: The "Hit" Tool

    I thought this was going to be another thread about Pete Rose.
    My dad got to enjoy 3 Reds World Championships by the time he was my age. So far, I've only gotten to enjoy one. Step it up Redlegs!

  6. #5
    Charlie Brown All-Star IslandRed's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Melbourne, FL
    Posts
    4,866

    Re: The "Hit" Tool

    If the tool is about putting the bat squarely on the ball, homers are actually a decent sign of that
    Obviously, a guy has to hit it square to get it out of the ballpark. But if we're isolating factors instead of combining them, I think we have to recognize that home-run power has other factors at work besides merely making hard contact: swing plane, bat speed, strength etc. I don't think a player should be penalized for having power, but in the context of measuring how often a guy squares it up, power can overstate the case also. Obviously, Joey Votto has a great hit tool. Despite his greater power, I don't think he hits the ball on the nose a higher percentage of the time than Pete Rose did -- but Rose's swing was not designed to lift the ball. (See, sava, Pete Rose is relevant to this thread.)
    For those who believe, no proof is necessary. For those who don't believe, no proof is possible

  7. #6
    Five Tool Fool jojo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    19,139

    Re: The "Hit" Tool

    I thought this thread was going to be about Milton Bradley.
    "This isnít stats vs scouts - this is stats and scouts working together, building an organization that blends the best of both worlds. This is the blueprint for how a baseball organization should be run. And, whether the baseball men of the 20th century like it or not, this is where baseball is going."---Dave Cameron, U.S.S. Mariner

  8. #7
    Vampire Weekend @Bernie's camisadelgolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    11,492

    Re: The "Hit" Tool

    Why would you penalize someone for being a good bunter? I think you have to incorporate BABIP, too.

  9. #8
    Haunted by walks
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Syracuse
    Posts
    6,732

    Re: The "Hit" Tool

    If power is part of the hit tool then are only four tools.

  10. #9
    Moderator Plus Plus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Indianapolis, IN
    Posts
    1,525

    Re: The "Hit" Tool

    Quote Originally Posted by BCubb2003 View Post
    If power is part of the hit tool then are only four tools.
    Carlos Pena would take objection to that statement.
    Quote Originally Posted by westofyou View Post
    Thus his team was punished

    Long live punishment
    Quote Originally Posted by BCubb2003 View Post
    The base you want to acquire is home.

  11. #10
    Stat Wanker Hodiernus RedsManRick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Guelph, ON
    Posts
    16,181

    Re: The "Hit" Tool

    Quote Originally Posted by camisadelgolf View Post
    Why would you penalize someone for being a good bunter? I think you have to incorporate BABIP, too.
    Because bunting is a completely different skill than what is being described when talking about a guy's "hit tool".
    Games are won on run differential -- scoring more than your opponent. Runs are runs, scored or prevented they all count the same. Worry about scoring more and allowing fewer, not which positions contribute to which side of the equation or how "consistent" you are at your current level of performance.

  12. #11
    Stat Wanker Hodiernus RedsManRick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Guelph, ON
    Posts
    16,181

    Re: The "Hit" Tool

    Quote Originally Posted by IslandRed View Post
    Obviously, a guy has to hit it square to get it out of the ballpark. But if we're isolating factors instead of combining them, I think we have to recognize that home-run power has other factors at work besides merely making hard contact: swing plane, bat speed, strength etc. I don't think a player should be penalized for having power, but in the context of measuring how often a guy squares it up, power can overstate the case also. Obviously, Joey Votto has a great hit tool. Despite his greater power, I don't think he hits the ball on the nose a higher percentage of the time than Pete Rose did -- but Rose's swing was not designed to lift the ball. (See, sava, Pete Rose is relevant to this thread.)
    Perhaps, but I think you do more harm than good by subtracting it out. Even guys without plus power hit homers when they make great contact. Ultimately, hit f/x data would be a great source here, but I think my list gets us 90% of the way there.
    Games are won on run differential -- scoring more than your opponent. Runs are runs, scored or prevented they all count the same. Worry about scoring more and allowing fewer, not which positions contribute to which side of the equation or how "consistent" you are at your current level of performance.

  13. #12
    Stat Wanker Hodiernus RedsManRick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Guelph, ON
    Posts
    16,181

    Re: The "Hit" Tool

    Quote Originally Posted by BCubb2003 View Post
    If power is part of the hit tool then are only four tools.
    It's more of an "overlap" than a "part of". If the hit tool is about the ball coming hard off the bat, then power lets you hit the ball harder even when you don't make as high quality of contact. And of course, it means some good contact leaves the park, inflating a batting average based stat compared to guys who merely hit it hard in the field of play.

    I think Carlos Pena and Mark Reynolds (and Stubbs, Dunn, etc.) are precisely the type of hitters that demonstrate that "hit" and "power" are pretty independent from each other. Not fully, but enough for government work.
    Games are won on run differential -- scoring more than your opponent. Runs are runs, scored or prevented they all count the same. Worry about scoring more and allowing fewer, not which positions contribute to which side of the equation or how "consistent" you are at your current level of performance.

  14. #13
    Charlie Brown All-Star IslandRed's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Melbourne, FL
    Posts
    4,866

    Re: The "Hit" Tool

    Quote Originally Posted by RedsManRick View Post
    Perhaps, but I think you do more harm than good by subtracting it out. Even guys without plus power hit homers when they make great contact. Ultimately, hit f/x data would be a great source here, but I think my list gets us 90% of the way there.
    I think you're probably right about hit f/x, because what we're ultimately looking for is "percentage of balls in play that are squared up and hit hard," which can correlate with home-run power but I'd think it's not a strong correlation, especially once moving out of the PED-fueled power era. Line-drive percentage is probably closer to what we're after, should the various sources of baseball data ever agree on what a line drive is. Going back to the Pete Rose example, and Tony Gwynn Sr. would be another good one, there are guys who routinely hit it on the nose without the lift required to get it out of the yard. If a guy routinely posts a good batting average without blazing speed or remarkable home-run power, that's how it gets done.
    For those who believe, no proof is necessary. For those who don't believe, no proof is possible

  15. #14
    Vampire Weekend @Bernie's camisadelgolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    11,492

    Re: The "Hit" Tool

    Quote Originally Posted by RedsManRick View Post
    Because bunting is a completely different skill than what is being described when talking about a guy's "hit tool".
    Which tool is bunting part of? It's still a matter of how you square up the ball, right?

  16. #15
    Haunted by walks
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Syracuse
    Posts
    6,732

    Re: The "Hit" Tool

    Quote Originally Posted by RedsManRick View Post
    It's more of an "overlap" than a "part of". If the hit tool is about the ball coming hard off the bat, then power lets you hit the ball harder even when you don't make as high quality of contact. And of course, it means some good contact leaves the park, inflating a batting average based stat compared to guys who merely hit it hard in the field of play.

    I think Carlos Pena and Mark Reynolds (and Stubbs, Dunn, etc.) are precisely the type of hitters that demonstrate that "hit" and "power" are pretty independent from each other. Not fully, but enough for government work.
    Yes, that makes sense. The description is usually, "hits for average, hits for power, runs, throws, fields," which is kind of primitive.


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | GIK | BCubb2003 | dabvu2498 | Gallen5862 | LexRedsFan | Plus Plus | RedlegJake | redsfan1995 | The Operator | Tommyjohn25