Walks to Votto and OBP

[Kc61]

The Reds have some good things going, great bullpen, pretty good starting pitching. Even the team's slugging percentage is about league average, sixth in the NL, a bit disappointing but certainly not terrible.

But the Reds team OBP is .302, next to last in the league, and against righty pitching it is worse. In looking at the walks component of this OBP, we see the Reds with team walks of 106, in 12th place in the league.

This number isn't good (four NL teams have over 130 walks) but 106 isn't shockingly low.

Until you focus on the fact that 34 of the Reds' 106 are walks to Joey Votto.

This means that the rest of the team has only 72 walks in 35 games. Bruce and Cozart each have 10 walks, nobody else is in double figures. A few guys have 7.

Is this a function of the manager/hitting coach's approach? Is it just that the Reds have a bunch of free swingers (in the baseball sense)? Do others feel, as I do, that the walks to Joey Votto aren't that productive, I'd rather see him get pitches to hit? Will these numbers just improve naturally?

I thought it might be interesting to discuss the Reds' OBP problems as a separate thread. If this aspect of the team's game improved, it could really boost the offense.

[jhu1321]

Dusty stated the other day "he wants guy's to be more aggressive". Coaching coupled with several guys who are contact challenged lead to a low OBP team.

[dougdirt]

Cozart didn't walk much in the minors.
Phillips has never walked much in his career.
Ludwick has never walked much in his career.
Chris Heisey didn't walk a ton in the minors and hasn't walked much in his MLB career.

Votto has always walked at a very high rate. Bruce didn't walk a ton in the minors, but has seemingly improved his walks as he has aged (not surprising with someone who progressed as fast as he did). Hanigan and Mesoraco have their fair share of walks.

To me it seems more like personnel rather than coaching.... with the exception of Stubbs, who always walked a lot. I get the idea with him being more aggressive early, but it really isn't working so far.

[mth123]

Too many 7 and 8 hole types in the line-up. Pitchers don't fear getting burned so they pound the zone...

...Except to Votto and sometimes Bruce.

Its really that simple IMO. A lefty bat or two to at least make them change the formula from get ahead on the first pitch, throw balls that break away from all those RH bats and watch them expand their zone late in the count because they fell behind early.

[RedsManRick]

I thought it would be interesting to see how the Reds regulars rate across contact ability, discipline and power. So I did this quick and dirty look at Contact%, BB% and ISO.

I looked at league averages since 2010 and then took what I thought what a reasonable range around them to get a low, medium, and high category and assigned those to our regulars based on their performance 2010-2012. I then assigned 1, 2 or 3 points accordingly . Here's what I came up with.

Contact%:  <Low>   76%  <Med>   86%  <High>
BB%:	   <Low>  6.5%  <Med> 10.5%  <High>	 
ISO:	   <Low>  .120  <Med>  .180  <High>

		Contact	Disc.	Power	Total
Votto		Med	High	High	8
Rolen		Med	Med	High	7
Hanigan		High	High	Low	7
Bruce		Low	Med	High	6
Cairo		Med	Med	Med	6
Frazier		Low	Low	High	5
Heisey		Low	Low	High	5
Cozart		Med	Low	Med	5
Phillips	Med	Low	Med	5
Stubbs		Low	Med	Med	5
Ludwick		Low	Med	Med	5
Average		1.6	 1.8	2.4

Rembering that 2 is, theorhetically, league average, I think that looks about right. Below average contact, slightly below average discipline, above average power. Of course, when it comes to producing runs, these 3 things aren't equal, but I think the composition is right.

[Kc61]

Originally Posted by RedsManRick

I thought it would be interesting to see how the Reds regulars rate across contact ability, discipline and power. So I did this quick and dirty look at Contact%, BB% and ISO.

I looked at league averages since 2010 and then took what I thought what a reasonable range around them to get a low, medium, and high category and assigned those to our regulars based on their performance 2010-2012. I then assigned 1, 2 or 3 points accordingly . Here's what I came up with.

Contact%:  <Low>   76%  <Med>   86%  <High>
BB%:	   <Low>  6.5%  <Med> 10.5%  <High>	 
ISO:	   <Low>  .120  <Med>  .180  <High>

		Contact	Disc.	Power	Total
Votto		Med	High	High	8
Rolen		Med	Med	High	7
Hanigan		High	High	Low	7
Bruce		Low	Med	High	6
Cairo		Med	Med	Med	6
Frazier		Low	Low	High	5
Heisey		Low	Low	High	5
Cozart		Med	Low	Med	5
Phillips	Med	Low	Med	5
Stubbs		Low	Med	Med	5
Ludwick		Low	Med	Med	5
Average		1.6	 1.8	2.4

Rembering that 2 is, theorhetically, league average, I think that looks about right. Below average contact, slightly below average discipline, above average power. Of course, when it comes to producing runs, these 3 things aren't equal, but I think the composition is right.

Very interesting post, I enjoyed reading it, thanks. The outcome is what one might expect, but it's interesting to see how you got there.

[IslandRed]

Originally Posted by dougdirt

To me it seems more like personnel rather than coaching

Spot on. I know it's a popular narrative out there to say Dusty turns these guys into hackers, but they're pretty much the same hitters they've always been.

Anyway, the take-and-rake philosophy that was so popular last decade is partially dependent upon pitchers' fear of "rake." When that fear isn't present and pitchers are coming right after hitters -- and the hitters themselves are a little contact-challenged -- then I don't have a problem with what Dusty's saying. They're making most of our guys hit their way on, and many times the most hittable pitch in an at-bat is the first or second one as the pitcher tries to get ahead in the count. That doesn't mean swing no matter what, though, which is the line between "aggressive" and "hacking."

[Superdude]

Originally Posted by IslandRed

Spot on. I know it's a popular narrative out there to say Dusty turns these guys into hackers, but they're pretty much the same hitters they've always been.

Anyway, the take-and-rake philosophy that was so popular last decade is partially dependent upon pitchers' fear of "rake." When that fear isn't present and pitchers are coming right after hitters -- and the hitters themselves are a little contact-challenged -- then I don't have a problem with what Dusty's saying. They're making most of our guys hit their way on, and many times the most hittable pitch in an at-bat is the first or second one as the pitcher tries to get ahead in the count. That doesn't mean swing no matter what, though, which is the line between "aggressive" and "hacking."

I haven't done any in-depth studies or anything, but I'm coming around to Dusty's line of thinking as well. Gomes was a great example last year. He was extremely patient early in the year, but when pitchers figured it out, he was 0-2 every at bat and had nothing resembling the bat skills to claw his way out of pitcher's counts. I'm all for guys like Stubbs and Heisey letting it rip on a good pitch early.