(03-30-2014 11:06 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(03-30-2014 10:57 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(03-30-2014 04:50 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  Again, put down the stat sheet and use the eye test-- we are anything but reasonably efficient offensively. I cannot believe anyone is trying to argue to the contrary.

And you're missing a key point with your eye test. What's killing us is not lack of efficiency but lack of extra base hits. When you're slugging .370, it simply takes more hits to score a run. There's a reason why sluggers are considered run producers--it's the extra base hits that plate the runs. I suppose you could say that extra base hits are more "efficient" run producers than singles, and in that sense you have a point.

Out-out-single-double-out equals one run and a runner left on second. Out-out-single-single-out equals no runs and runners stranded on the corners. If you want to include that in your efficiency calculus, so be it. But the inefficiency is the inability to produce an extra-base hit.

I see your point, but disagree since, I don't believe we're a below average team with regards to extra base hits. Yesterday's game was a perfect example. Yes, we scored 8 runs, but with 16 hits (5 for extra bases, including a HR), and 4 errors by MTSU, we should have scored 10 - 12 runs minimum. Aside from our relatively low free pass frequency and inability to execute the sac bunt, we not only can't steal bases, but our overall baserunning in general in well below average. We consistently run ourselves out of innings. Put everything together, and you get an extremely inefficient offense....but the extrabase hit frequency is NOT what makes us worse than others.

Can I assume that it sure doesn't help make Rice better than others?

My question would be, while we run ourselves out of innings sometimes, is that aggressiveness also serving to manufacture some runs we would otherwise not realize? Sort of an analogy to attacking defenses in football - you're going to cause bad offensive plays and turnovers, but you'll get burned deep sometimes too. As long as the added good outweighs the added bad, you go with it.


Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

(03-30-2014 06:18 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(03-30-2014 05:49 PM)DFW Owl Wrote:  

(03-30-2014 02:54 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(03-30-2014 01:43 PM)DFW Owl Wrote:  

(03-30-2014 12:46 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  Oh, and another two failed sac bunts attempts-- what's that, 5 on the weekend? At some point, you'd think The OG would read the riot act and put a stop to this insanity.

I think you mean he needs to get them to execute sacrifice bunts better. That's true. However, another option might be to not sacrifice bunt so often...since even if they are successful it is very questionable whether they really give you a better chance of scoring more runs.

Stop quoting me Bill James' analysis at the MLB level. This is college ball and, especially now with the new bats, it's a totally different game-- worse hitting, much lower power numbers, many more errors/wild pitches/pass balls, and many more walks and

Walt, I am sorry for bringing this up again...I know it has been already discussed too much here already. Can you please point to some mathematical analysis (again maybe...sorry!) that has been done at the college level that shows that on average bunting is the right or wrong move in various situations? I am interested both in increasing chances of scoring one run and total number of runs. (I believe that with a man at 2nd and no outs and you need only one run is the one situation in the majors where it improves your odds slightly to bunt. Of course it also depends on hitter ability, bunting ability, pitching, and fielding.)

Don't believe any analysis has been done at the college level; especially not since Gorilla Ball was eliminated some 15 years ago. I believe Boyd once did some work on the subject, but it was long before the most recent bat change.

http://www.boydsworld.com/data/ert.html

(03-30-2014 11:06 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(03-30-2014 10:57 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(03-30-2014 04:50 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  Again, put down the stat sheet and use the eye test-- we are anything but reasonably efficient offensively. I cannot believe anyone is trying to argue to the contrary.

And you're missing a key point with your eye test. What's killing us is not lack of efficiency but lack of extra base hits. When you're slugging .370, it simply takes more hits to score a run. There's a reason why sluggers are considered run producers--it's the extra base hits that plate the runs. I suppose you could say that extra base hits are more "efficient" run producers than singles, and in that sense you have a point.

Out-out-single-double-out equals one run and a runner left on second. Out-out-single-single-out equals no runs and runners stranded on the corners. If you want to include that in your efficiency calculus, so be it. But the inefficiency is the inability to produce an extra-base hit.

I see your point, but disagree since, I don't believe we're a below average team with regards to extra base hits. Yesterday's game was a perfect example. Yes, we scored 8 runs, but with 16 hits (5 for extra bases, including a HR), and 4 errors by MTSU, we should have scored 10 - 12 runs minimum. Aside from our relatively low free pass frequency and inability to execute the sac bunt, we not only can't steal bases, but our overall baserunning in general in well below average. We consistently run ourselves out of innings. Put everything together, and you get an extremely inefficient offense....but the extrabase hit frequency is NOT what makes us worse than others.

So yesterday, we got five extra base hits, proving that our slugging is fine. And we got eight walks proving that we don't get enough walks because any other good team would have gotten way more.

I looked at the stats sheets again. I tried not to, but I could not help myself. Rice's OBP is third worst out of the top 20 teams (by Boyd's ISR). Rice's Slugging percentage is also third worst.

(03-31-2014 07:28 AM)temchugh Wrote:  

(03-30-2014 11:06 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(03-30-2014 10:57 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(03-30-2014 04:50 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  Again, put down the stat sheet and use the eye test-- we are anything but reasonably efficient offensively. I cannot believe anyone is trying to argue to the contrary.

And you're missing a key point with your eye test. What's killing us is not lack of efficiency but lack of extra base hits. When you're slugging .370, it simply takes more hits to score a run. There's a reason why sluggers are considered run producers--it's the extra base hits that plate the runs. I suppose you could say that extra base hits are more "efficient" run producers than singles, and in that sense you have a point.

Out-out-single-double-out equals one run and a runner left on second. Out-out-single-single-out equals no runs and runners stranded on the corners. If you want to include that in your efficiency calculus, so be it. But the inefficiency is the inability to produce an extra-base hit.

I see your point, but disagree since, I don't believe we're a below average team with regards to extra base hits. Yesterday's game was a perfect example. Yes, we scored 8 runs, but with 16 hits (5 for extra bases, including a HR), and 4 errors by MTSU, we should have scored 10 - 12 runs minimum. Aside from our relatively low free pass frequency and inability to execute the sac bunt, we not only can't steal bases, but our overall baserunning in general in well below average. We consistently run ourselves out of innings. Put everything together, and you get an extremely inefficient offense....but the extrabase hit frequency is NOT what makes us worse than others.

So yesterday, we got five extra base hits, proving that our slugging is fine. And we got eight walks proving that we don't get enough walks because any other good team would have gotten way more.

I looked at the stats sheets again. I tried not to, but I could not help myself. Rice's OBP is third worst out of the top 20 teams (by Boyd's ISR). Rice's Slugging percentage is also third worst.

I never said our SLG was fine; I simply said it wasn't the primary cause for our inefficient offense. And, if you bothered to watch yesterday's game, as was the case in the Texas State game a couple weeks back, those walks were NOT attributed to plate discipline of any sort, as we continued to hack away at 0-0 and 1-0 in the count (even a couple times after the opposing pitcher had walked the previous two batters on a combined 8 - 10 pitches). Rather, it was due to extreme wildness on the part of the opposing pitcher. Our offensive inefficiency is due to our low OBP (which is largely due to our refusal to work the count and maximize the number of free passes)-- which you FINALLY appear to be acknowledging in your post above, embarrassingly poor sac bunt execution, inability to steal bases and situational hit (moving runners to 3B with less than two outs), and sub-par overall baserunning.

BTW, one reason our SLG is where it's at, IMO, goes back again to our refusal to work the count on pitchers. Batters tend to get good pitches to hit precisely when they're ahead in the count; especially when they get to a 2-0, 3-0, 3-1 and 3-2 count-- counts we rarely see given our hitters are so prone to swinging at 0-0 and 1-0 in the count.

I agree with Walt's assessment that the Owls would be much more successful if they worked the count, went the other way with two strikes and executed sacrifice bunts and steals more consistently.

But just as an indication of the variability of the actual instances (as opposed to the aggregated data):

1) Cook's triple was on an 0-2 count, and he pulled it past the first baseman (not going the other way).

2) And yesterday's home plate ump called such a wide zone that it surely threw off many batters' (on both teams) "plate discipline." Many batters K'd on called strikes off the strike zone or with flaying wiffs trying to hit such pitches. In the early innings, McDowell seemed particularly adept at exploiting this ump's zone.

WG: Worst game we played all year.

(03-31-2014 07:45 PM)grol Wrote:  WG: Worst game we played all year.

Edit: Worst series we played all year, and worst week of baseball we've played all year. Way too many mental and physical errors-- by pitchers, fielders and batters alike. As I mentioned in a different thread, a lot of things are working against us right now...but the team has to find a way to perservere. No better time and place than against the dreaded Horns tomorrow night before what should and better be a full house at The Reck. Go Owls!

(03-31-2014 08:20 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 07:45 PM)grol Wrote:  WG: Worst game we played all year.

Edit: Worst series we played all year, and worst week of baseball we've played all year. Way too many mental and physical errors-- by pitchers, fielders and batters alike. As I mentioned in a different thread, a lot of things are working against us right now...but the team has to find a way to perservere. No better time and place than against the dreaded Horns tomorrow night before what should and better be a full house at The Reck. Go Owls!

WG mentioned tonight that he will reduce the number of games to 50 or 52 starting next year to reduce the number of 5 game weeks. Too much travel, too tired, too many extra inning games with the bats/balls the way they are, all taking a toll on the team. Said that Stanford had reduced the number of games and he thought it was a good idea for Rice.

(03-31-2014 10:48 PM)grol Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 08:20 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 07:45 PM)grol Wrote:  WG: Worst game we played all year.

Edit: Worst series we played all year, and worst week of baseball we've played all year. Way too many mental and physical errors-- by pitchers, fielders and batters alike. As I mentioned in a different thread, a lot of things are working against us right now...but the team has to find a way to perservere. No better time and place than against the dreaded Horns tomorrow night before what should and better be a full house at The Reck. Go Owls!

WG mentioned tonight that he will reduce the number of games to 50 or 52 starting next year to reduce the number of 5 game weeks. Too much travel, too tired, too many extra inning games with the bats/balls the way they are, all taking a toll on the team. Said that Stanford had reduced the number of games and he thought it was a good idea for Rice.

Play more Fall games!

We need more gorillas so we can play gorilla ball. Singles and bunts are boring, especially when the risk of a bad bunt is pretty high.

I haven't watched any games to comment on the pitches the guys are swinging at. Just because a pitcher is wild doesn't mean you you should let hittable pitches go by early in the count. AVG/OBP/SLG drops for hitters by a remarkable amount when they are behind in the count compared to early in the count or when the batter is ahead. Sometimes you only get 1 really good pitch to hit and you don't want to let it go by with the bat on your shoulder just because the pitcher has been wild. But you absolutely can't help the pitcher out either by chasing early in the count.

Again, haven't seen games, but it sounds like the team needs to work on hitting the ball back at the pitchers head. Thinking about that during batting practice can help correct an approach that leads to too many pulled grounders or weak flies the other way.