The blog seems to enjoy these, and since I still am the only person I know who reads Joe Posnanski's blog, here's some good baseball stuff to kill a half hour or so at work on Monday.

And by the way, if anyone tries is still trying to defend pitchers' wins and losses are important, you're wrong.

Also, I'm using the Bucky's Gas Stations label because I endorse what they do and I have no idea why this label exists but it made my day.

Labels: baseball, Bucky's Gas Stations, Joe Posnanski, Statistics

This was taken from my main man Joe Posnanski's blog, which is not read at least weekly by most baseball fans I know and that is a goddamned travesty, especially among my Royals friends. Essentially he looked at every "action play" in baseball this decade (there have been almost 1.7 million), which would be any pitch that results in something happening, whether it be a strikeout, hit, foulout, hit by pitch, etc.

Then he analyzed the results based on pitch count to get an avg/obp/slugging comparision based on individual results. I will just cut and paste them, but it's very intersting stuff...

Here we go:

First pitch.
Action pitch: 12.5% of the time — one out of every eight at-bats.
Batters hit: .338/.344/.547.

There is probably more grumbling at the park about batters swinging at the first pitch of an at-bat than any other time. The Kansas City Royals once had a prospective owner meet with manager Tony Muser and suggest to him that his batters needed to stop swinging at the first pitch. This, of course, is ludicrous. About one of out every five home runs hit in the game are hit on the first pitch of an at-bat.

Then again, about one out of every five double play grounders you will see are also hit on the first pitch. And that’s why there are so many complaints.

To get this out of the way: The offensive numbers listed above — all the numbers here — can be misleading because they only count balls that were HIT IN PLAY. Foul balls do not count. Swings and misses do not count (except when there are two strikes). Pitches that are called balls do not count (except when there are three balls). And so on. So the batting averages are naturally going to be much less with two strikes. And on-base percentages are going to be much higher with three balls.

Still, there are some cool things to see. There are real advantages, for instance, for batters who put the ball in play early in the count. Once they get two strikes on them, the averages go way down.

Here’s a statistic you can ponder if you like:

OPS for batters putting the first pitch in play: .891
OPS for batters who do not put first pitch in play: .739

So, for someone to decide to never swing at the first pitch … no, that’s probably not the best strategy.

0-1 Count.
Action pitch: 9% of the time — one out of every 11 at-bats.
Batters hit: .317/.326/.485

Well, this was a bit of a surprise to be: Batters would hit quite well when behind one strike. And this gets into what I was saying about hitting early in the count: As you can see, there is not a drastic difference if the batter is hitting behind 0-1 or ahead 1-0.

1-0 Count
Action pitch: 7.6% of the time — one out of every 13 at-bats.
Batters hit .339/.340/.563.

See? Batters do hit with a bit more power when ahead 1-0 — they are also a little bit less aggressive — but the point here is that the game does not shift dramatically to the pitcher until he gets two strikes on a batter. You always hear people say how important it is to get that first pitch strike … and it is hugely important. But getting that second strike is what turns an at-bat around.

0-2 Count
Action pitch: 7.7% of the time — one out of every 13 at-bats.
Batters hit: .162/.173/.236

Now, you can see the pitcher taking control. There are different philosophies about what to do with an 0-2 pitch. There are some pitching coaches and pitchers who think that this is absolutely the time to go for the strikeout pitch … the nasty slider tailing away, the split-fingered fastball in the dirt, the fastball up around the eyes. But there are others — and I tend to agree with this — who think that batters are so defensive at 0-2, that this is perfect time to go get them with a pitch over the plate (especially with pitch counts being SO important in today’s game).

This might be the most amazing statistic in this whole bit: Batters on an 0-2 count hit home runs once every 79 at-bats.*

* My favorite pitcher, Greg Maddux, gave up 11 home runs in his entire career 0-2 — that’s in more than 1,600 at-bats. No, he did not like wasting pitches. Here’s another good Maddux statistic: He only walked 45 batters in his entire career after getting ahead 0-2. Maddux had a 32-1 strikeout-to-walk ratio after he got ahead 0-2.

2-0 Count
Action pitch: 2.7% of the time — one out of every 37 at-bats.
Batters hit: 351/.351/.625

Well, this is a interesting situation … batters very, very rarely put the ball in play on a 2-0 count. In fact, batters don’t put the ball in play much more on a 2-0 count than they do on a 3-0 count. When they connect, though, they do connect hard … batters bang home runs once out of every 16 at-bats.

And you know, if I was a batting coach, I would want my batters to be a bit more aggressive on 2-0. Because here’s something else … pitchers only very, very rarely hit a batter with the count 2-0 (one out of every 179 or so at-bats). That tells me they are simply looking to get a pitch over the plate to get back into the count. It sure seems to me that 2-0 is an underutilized opportunity for hitters.

1-1 Count
Action pitch: 8.8% of the time — one out of every 11 at-bats.
Batters hit: .325/.330/.512

This is more or less a repeat of the first pitch. I have heard scouts and players say that, generally speaking, the most important pitch of the at-bat is the third pitch. And there does seem some truth to that. Most of the time (roughly 54% of the time), batters face a 1-1 count going into the third pitch. And the next pitch will, pretty often, determine the fate of the pitcher and the batter. Look what happens if a pitcher gets a strike:

1-2 Count
Action pitch: 13.6% of the time — one out of every 7 at-bats.
Batters hit: .177/.185/.263

Yes, pitchers are dominant in the 1-2 count. And this is actually the most common situation in baseball … a 1-2 count action pitch. And the batter is all but helpless. But when the third pitch is a ball …

2-1 Count
Action pitch: 5.6% of the time — one out of every 18 at-bats.
Batters hit:.337/.338/.554

Yeah, that’s a sizable difference. Batters hit 160 points better and slug twice as much when that third pitch is a ball rather than a strike. Batters may not know these numbers, but they instinctively know how much their chances go up when the count goes to 2-1.

Here’s a fun experiment: Next time you’re at a game, watch the batter’s reaction when the count goes from 1-1 to 1-2. They will, often, hit their bats with their hands or kick at the dirt or gripe at the umpire. I’ve never counted but I would bet that batters visibly reaction more than half the time.

3-0 Count
Action pitch 2.4% of the time — one of out every 42 at-bats
Batters hit: .390/.958/.780

A few facts about the 3-0 pitch.

1. Batters put the ball in play on 3-0 only about 7% of the time. In fact, over the course of a season, you will only see batters put the ball in play about 300 times on 3-0 … that’s about 10 times per team, per season. it does seem like in today’s game, lots of batters get the green light on 3-0, but the numbers say that you really don’t see them hit the ball on 3-0 very much.

2. When you DO see them hit it, there’s a good chance you will see them hit it a long way. Batters hit 3-0 homers roughly one out of every 10 at-bats.

3. Jim Thome, in his long career, has only put the ball in play 58 times on 3-0. He has hit SIXTEEN home runs. For the record, that’s one homer per every 3.6 at-bats.

4. Or how about Mike Piazza. In his whole career, he only put the ball in play FOUR TIMES on 3-0. That’s all. Four times. Apparently nobody was throwing Piazza a good pitch 3-0. And that was a good idea: Two of them were home runs.

5. Batters almost never get hit on the 3-0 pitch — one out of every 640 plate appearances.

6. Very, very few base runners try to steal on the 3-0 pitch, for obvious reasons, but those that do are ultra-successful — 89%. What’s interesting is that the 3-1 pitch — which has conventionally been called the perfect pitch to steal on — is anything but: Only 61% of base stealers are successful on 3-1.

2-2 Count
Action pitch: 12.9% of the time — one out of every 8 at-bats.
Batters hit: .194/.199/.299

You will often hear announcer say “He evened the count at 2-2.” But there is nothing really even about a 2-2 count. The pitcher is still firmly in control. If a pitcher consistently can make it so the action pitch is always 0-2, 1-2 or 2-2, he will do very nicely for himself and make quite a lot of money.

3-1 Count
Action pitch: 4.9% of the time — one out of every 20 at-bats
Batters hit: .355/.691/.638

Well, here is the ultimate hitter’s pitch … I’ve called a few home runs over the years, wowing friends and impressing strangers, but it’s really not that hard. When you see a good hitter at the plate (or a lousy pitcher on the mound) and a 3-1 count, go ahead, make the call. If you want to play the 3-1 homer game yourself … here are a few good players to consider:

Josh Hamilton: .611/.833/1.167
Chase Utley: .444/.713/.852
Adam Dunn: .392/.777/.908
Alfonso Soriano: .435/.694/.848
Jermaine Dye: .406/.656/.767

Full Count
Action pitch: 12.3% of the time — one out of every 8 at-bats
Batters hit: .229/.468/.381

A couple things interest me here. One, I find it interesting that one out of every eight or so at-bats goes to a full-count. That seems like a lot to me … that means you should see, seven to 10 full counts every single night. I wonder if that number has gone up through the years. I have no idea how to find out.

Also, it really is telling — again and again — that hitters really do swing defensively with two strikes. In total, with two strikes, batters hit .190/.257/.293.

I think that’s one of the takeaway as a baseball fan. Pitchers do not (and should not) give up many two strike hits. And they certainly should not give up two-strike extra base hits.

Another takeaway is that until the pitcher gets two strikes, the advantage* is with the hitter. Batters hit .334 and slug almost .600 when not facing two strikes.

Labels: dorky stats, Joe Posnanski, Major League Baseball, royals

As promised, today we will be posting the second part of Tom Shatel's interview with Heavy Soul. As we mentioned yesterday, Part II will get into some talk about the 2008 Husker season, and some more personal questions for Tom.

Part I clearly generated a lot of interest--thanks to Matt Perrault on "The Big Show" on Big Sports 590 AM, Huskerpedia, and several message boards for the readership.

Let's start the show...

Heavy Soul: We saw on Joe Posnanski's blog--he's a Heavy Soul favorite--that you left a comment of congratulations for him on the recent news that he's being picked up by SI.com. Is Joe a personal friend or someone you've gotten to know by way of geography and the industry? And would you consider him one of the best baseball writers in the country as we do?

Tom Shatel: I grew up in KC and worked for the Star for 10 years after I got out of Mizzou. The Star is near and dear to my heart. I actually looked into the job when Joe was hired in 1996. They made a very good hire. I didn't know him then. But when he was hired I made it a point to introduce myself, explain my background and offer any help or advice about KC. I did the same with Jason Whitlock when he was hired in 1994. Joe and I hit it off, we see each other at events, occasional Nebraska-MU/KU/KSU game and we keep threatening to get our families together, but it's hard. I admire his blog. That's a pure love for writing, plain and simple, because he's got kids to raise and a wife to see, too. In this day and age of blog hit men, it's nice to see pure writing has a place as well.

HS: It's fairly well-documented that you are a Mizzou alum. That said, do you consider yourself--at this point in your life--a Nebraskan?

TS: I do. Funny, but I lived in KC from 1970 to 1989 and I'm approaching that number of years here (1991-2008). I did not come to Omaha planning to stay. I thought I would hang out a few years, bang out a few columns, make a name for myself and skidaddle. But I fell in love with everything: Omaha and its old-school values, traditions, corner bars, friendliness, etc. Small town Nebraska. I love driving around Nebraska. When I was single, I would look for stories in the small towns during the summer and I loved just stopping to eat or have a drink in a random town. I just love the rustic feel of small town Nebraska. It's absolutely priceless. And don't even get me started on the Sand Hills. The dateline out there should be God's Country, USA. My wife is from Valley, her family from Alliance. One of my favorite things to do is to drive to Alliance, taking the highways through Wahoo and St. Paul and Broken Bow (old hotel diner, I think it's the Arrow, is a classic) and onto rancher country. My wife's uncle and aunt have a farm. We go to the farm, grill a steak, drink at the Legion club. Simply awesome. My favorite story came a couple years ago, when we had finished dinner, another 20-once t-bone with all the trimmings, and for some reason Chimney Rock came up. I said I had no idea what that was. Uncle Larry popped up off the couch and said, "Well, let's go.'' Apparently it was an hour south of there. We got in his car and he started driving down a dirt road, then a gravel road, then he turned left, then right, then left, and kept turning and kicking up gravel and rocks for almost an hour, without one road sign or direction, until finally he said, "There it is,'' And sure enough, there it was, Chimney Rock. That drive was the most amazing thing I've been through in my life. After that drive, yes, I felt like a Nebraskan.

HS: A couple of Omaha-specific questions: What's your favorite restaurant in town? Favorite bar?

TS:I've had two lives here. When I was single, it was M's Pub or Jam's. Now that I'm married, we like Millard Road House. We go there every Sunday after church. We have our own booth. The waitresses play with the kids while we eat. I also like Hector's, a Mexican joint with a baja flavor that takes me back to San Diego, where I grew up as a kid and still retreat to every summer. It doesn't hurt that Hector has pictures of my San Diego Chargers on the wall. Killer margaritas and enchiladas. Hector, who is from San Diego, is usually hanging out at the bar and eager to tell you how bad Norv Turner is.

(Ed. Note: Get the #19 at Hector's with shredded chicken. Trust us.)

My taste in bars has changed, too. When I was single, it was anywhere in the Old Market. I met my wife at Pauli's, the CWS and Cubs bar in midtown. I"ll always have a sentimental place for Pauli's. But it's too far to drive. I had a DWI six years [ago], the night my first daughter was born. I figured it was God's way of saying, slow down, now. You're a dad. Act like one. These days, my bar is my front porch after the kids are in bed. Once in a while, I'll sneak out to Tanner's (my favorite sports neighborhood bar in KC) or Caddy Shack, a couple of great neighborhood joints where everyone knows your name and it's a quick drive home.

HS: Where is your favorite place to travel for work (of the places you go on a semi-regular basis)? What was your favorite travel assignment of your career?

TS: I like all of the old Big Eight towns, because I have so many great memories there. St. Louis for Valley hoops is a new favorite. KC for Big 12 hoops. And my sleeper favorite, maybe all-time favorite, is Oklahoma City for Big Eight/12 baseball. That's a wonderful event that nobody knows about. Lot of great memories in OKC in the spring, none of which I willl share because I'm certain this is a family web site.

HS: Indeed it is. You seem to be the only sports writer left that does not seem entirely jaded by being a sports writer. In fact, you seem like you're still legitmately a fan. Do you write with that intentionally in your head? Or do you still watch and follow sports the same way you did when you first discovered how much you liked them?

TS: It's funny. I never get to sit in the stands and be a fan, wear the colors, tailgate, cheer during a game, etc. But, yes, I consider myself a fan of sports and the games and people. And I would say this: I have changed the way I cover and view the games in recent years. I used to get all caught up in winning, losing, fire the coach, he's a bum, etc. Now, I find myself more into the experience of a college football game and a college football season, savoring the relationships and the people, the players, the stories, the color, etc. Why do we always have to fire the coach? Today's world is so mean and reactionary. I say we miss a lot of stories falling into that trap. Sometime you just have to get to Jack Trice Field or Folsom Field early, climb up to the top row, sit back, put your feet up and look down onto the empty field, hours before a game, and try and imagine all the history, all the times you've been there before, the games you've seen, the people you've met. I do that on every road trip now. It's my way of stopping to smell the roses.

HS: Along those lines, who is your favorite writer--sports or otherwise?

TS: Jim Murray, Dave Kindred, Mark Whicker, Joe Pos, Mark Kiszla, Edwin Pope, Bill Lyon and John Schulian. Murray was my all-time favorite. Out of sports, that's easy. Mike Royko, the greatest columnist ever. These days, I read Leonard Pitts of the Miami Herald.

HS: Favorite sportscaster?

TS: Vin Scully with Keith Jackson a very, very close second.

HS: ESPN: Good or evil?

TS: Good. Look behind the hype and gaudiness and they still put out a lot of information and they are one of the few media groups left who do serious investigative work.

HS: Last season was obviously a tumultuous one. However, the story never really changed: the defense was terrible, there was seemingly little-to-no passion with the players, and the coaching staff seemed oblivious to everything. That said, how hard was it for you to do your columns every week? In other words, was it difficult coming up with a different "angle" for columns when in reality it was essentially the same story week to week?

TS: The hardest part was finding something new to say. But, with the Pederson firing happening in October, and a new low on the field every other week, it truthfully wasn't that hard.

HS: As a kind of follow-up to that question, is your job easier or more challenging when the team you are covering is bad? Good? Historically bad? Average?

TS: I used to think it was easier, or more fun, when it was bad. But 10 years of MU, KU and K-State football, in the 80's, changed my mind. So did covering Nebraska in the 90's. It's more fun when your team is on national TV, the national media is always around and you're covering big, meaningful end-of-the-world games.

HS: Moving on to the upcoming Husker season...What are Coach Bo Pelini's practices like? What's the intensity level like?

TS: Don't know. We're not allowed to watch. I hear there's some hitting going on.

HS: Who are your players to watch? Freshmen to watch?

TS: I think any of the running backs will be fun to watch, just to see if any of them emerge as a big-time threat with more emphasis. As for freshmen, I want to watch Will Compton. My feeling is Pelini will play freshmen if they can play, and this is a linebacker with terrific skills and instincts. If he can play his first year, that's a good sign for the future.


HS: Who, besides Ganz, do you think that NU simply cannot afford to lose this season?

TS: Matt Slauson, Phillip Dillard or one of the safeties.

HS: We're pretty sure we know the answer to this from reading your columns, but what letter grade would you give Tom Osborne, the Athletic Director?

TS: I give him a B-plus for handling this thing with class and dignity and bringing back a lot of the old way. The overall grade is still incomplete--it's tied to the performance of his head coach.

HS: Do you see anything happening this season that is really going to surprise Husker fans?

TS: I don't think the defense will be anywhere near what people think. There's no magic wand. And the talent isn't near as good as it was when Pelini was around in 2003. There will be some busts, some bad plays. Pelini won't be perfect this year.

There you have it. Once again, on the behalf of everyone that contributes to Heavy Soul, a HUGE thanks goes out to Tom Shatel. We were thrilled that he even e-mailed us back, let alone took so much time to answer an obnoxious amount of questions.

Hopefully we will have more interviews like this one down the road with other local media personalities.

Untill then...2 days 'till kickoff!

Labels: Joe Posnanski, Nebraska Cornhuskers, Nebraska Football, Omaha World-Herald, The Heavy Soul Interview, Tom Shatel

Just wanted to link this quick from Joe Posnanski's blog: he writes about the age-old, almost always bullshit topic of "_______ never comes through in the clutch, and only gets garbage RBI's when the game doesn't matter."

Thankfully, Joe basically blows this argument out of the water. It's a fairly long column, but worth the read.

Labels: Dumb Baseball Arguments, Joe Posnanski, Pribbies

I saw a link to this at Joe Posnanski's blog, which is probably my favorite blog ever, all things considered. Seriously, the fact that a guy this talented who obviously can make a good living writing is generous enough to give us these kinds of efforts for free is miraculous and awe-inspiring.

Anyway, I saw this interview with Craig Finn that is all about baseball and is really great. He's a huge fan of the Twins and not only knows his shit, he regales us with stories about Paul Westerberg that simply kick ass. Great times, and "Stay Positive" is unbelievable. I'm not sure that it tops "Boys and Girls" but it's pretty amazing for the most part. At least four or five of the songs are as good as anything they've done. I give it a 9.1 out of 10. (Boys and Girls I would give a 9.8 out of 10)

They are The Official Band of Heavy Soul. It's decidedly so.

Labels: Craig Finn, Joe Posnanski, Minnesota Twins, The Hold Steady

Go check out my main man Joe Posnanski's blog post about yesterday's events and what was one riveting golf tournament. If you have never visited that site or aren't familiar with Mr. Posnanski, you're welcome. Maybe it was the best major ever, maybe it wasn't, I don't know enough about golf to bestow such platitudes upon it.

What I can say with absolute certainty is that I have never seen another golf tournament with such enthralling storylines as this particular U.S. Open. To recap:

Thursday: Tiger vs. Phil, knee injuries, opening round on a course they both love
Friday: Journeyman atop the leaderboard, Tiger lurking with bum knee
Saturday: Tiger's back nine, as documented by The Deuce
Sunday: Tiger vs. Rocco, part one ends in tie
Monday: Tiger vs. Rocco, part two ends in tie, then ends in sudden death

I can also say that NPGage and I passed up the chance to attend the LSU-UNC CWS game that we were pretty excited about to sit (actually stand) at the church bar, drink Coors Lights out of plastic bottles and watch the tournament. No regrets at all. It was a 10 out of 10.

Labels: church bar, College World Series, Excitement, Joe Posnanski, U.S. Open