Postseason Scoreboard watching....

[Tony Cloninger]

Originally Posted by George Foster

Tigers in 5...too much pitching...way to much

Huh? The Giants have better pitching that the Tigers

[Reds Fanatic]

What a night for Sandoval. 3 HRs and it is only the 5th inning

[Kc61]

Panda with three homers. Unreal.

Tom Verducci had this post season completely pegged. Make contact, you win.

Reds - take notice. Guys who fan 200 times per year aren't getting you to the promised land, not against pitchers like Verlander.

[reds1869]

I'd say Pablo Sandoval is having an above average evening.

[Brutus]

Originally Posted by Kc61

Panda with three homers. Unreal.

Tom Verducci had this post season completely pegged. Make contact, you win.

Reds - take notice. Guys who fan 200 times per year aren't getting you to the promised land, not against pitchers like Verlander.

You mean like the Giants won game three striking out 16 times?

[Tom Servo]

Valverde is CoCo levels of bad.

[Roy Tucker]

Would have been a gorgeous night for a ballgame at GABP.

[Kc61]

Originally Posted by Brutus

You mean like the Giants won game three striking out 16 times?

No. I mean like the last two World Series had low strikeout teams on both sides.

I mean that NO GOOD can come from swinging and missing.

I mean that the Reds should look at offenses like the Cards and Giants and ask themselves why these teams do well in the post-season.

And the Reds should read Tom Verducci's article on this subject in Sports Illustrated.

That's what I mean.

[Big Klu]

Originally Posted by Tom Servo

Valverde is CoCo levels of bad.

I was at the game when Javier Valentin lit him up for a game-winning pinch-hit homer in the ninth inning at GABP.

[The Operator]

Originally Posted by Kc61

No. I mean like the last two World Series had low strikeout teams on both sides.

I mean that NO GOOD can come from swinging and missing.

I mean that the Reds should look at offenses like the Cards and Giants and ask themselves why these teams do well in the post-season.

And the Reds should read Tom Verducci's article on this subject in Sports Illustrated.

That's what I mean.

The Reds' hitters K'd 1266 times this year, compared to the Cards' 1192. A difference of 74 over the entire season - less than half a strikeout per game. Beltran, Holliday and Freese all K'd well over 100 times.

San Fran only K'd 1097 times yet they scored 47 less runs than the Cardinals on the year.

I think people get way too fixated on how outs are made instead of concentrating on avoiding outs in general. Good hitters with good OBP make good offenses, whether they K at a decent clip or not.

And I'd much prefer a guy strike out than to hit into a double play. Yes I know that's grasping at straws, but there is a tiny bit of out prevention from striking out. I want the Reds to make less outs in general, I could care less how they accomplish that.

[Tom Servo]

Yeah the problem isn't strikeouts, it's outs. The Reds need to be or acquire better hitters, strikeouts or no strikeouts.

[Kc61]

Originally Posted by The Operator

The Reds' hitters K'd 1266 times this year, compared to the Cards' 1192. A difference of 74 over the entire season - less than half a strikeout per game. Beltran, Holliday and Freese all K'd well over 100 times.

San Fran only K'd 1097 times yet they scored 47 less runs than the Cardinals on the year.

I think people get way too fixated on how outs are made instead of concentrating on avoiding outs in general. Good hitters with good OBP make good offenses, whether they K at a decent clip or not.

And I'd much prefer a guy strike out than to hit into a double play. Yes I know that's grasping at straws, but there is a tiny bit of out prevention from striking out. I want the Reds to make less outs in general, I could care less how they accomplish that.

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 and in baseball.

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. Making contact against playoff pitchers becomes critical.

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 guy pitching.

[Wonderful Monds]

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?

[Kc61]

People say a strikeout is like any other out.

True.

If Drew Stubbs fans 200 times, these are no worse than 200 pop ups.

True.

But if Drew Stubbs hit the ball 100 of those at bats, that would provide 100 additional opportunities for success.

The point is not the IMPACT of the strikeout. It's the lost OPPORTUNITY when you don't hit the ball.

Folks should read Verducci's stuff. He quotes Votto in one of his pieces. At least one article is on-line, it's very interesting. It discusses making contact, particularly with two strikes, and winning playoff games.

By the way, despite their victory over the Reds, I'm rooting Giants in this Series. I usually root for the NL and this is no exception. Giants have a well balanced team IMO. Not a great offense, but a good club and VERY well managed.

[PuffyPig]

Originally Posted by Kc61

Tom Verducci had this post season completely pegged. Make contact, you win.

Reds - take notice. Guys who fan 200 times per year aren't getting you to the promised land, not against pitchers like Verlander.

Of course, of the teams that made the final 8, the Reds have the best OPS in the playoffs.

And during the Reds/Giants series, the Reds out hit the Giants badly and had just one more K during the whole series.

The Giants have fanned 100 time in the playoffs, the most (though they have played more games). They are not a team built on contact.

Every year the announcers decide that to win the world series you have to have the kind of team that is currently winning. Even though it's a random thing. otherwise, the criteria for winning the series wouldn't change every year.

At the end of the day to win the wrold series you need to make the playoffs and hope randomness follows you along the way.