[lex24]

I’m sure Mick or DC86 can cite the percentages, and I get the math,  but on the face of it both teams can score pretty easily. Man on 2nd with no outs translates pretty easily to man on 3rd with one out. I’m surprised there aren’t more games where it’s 14-14 going into the top of the 20th.

Since you asked, in the last full MLB season (2019) a team with a man on second and no outs scored at least one run 61% of the time. Offense is down slightly this season, but that's countered by teams in extra innings being more likely to use pinch runners, pinch hitters and context-specific strategies that increase the likelihood of scoring a run even if it decreases run expectancy (a team that is down by a run in the bottom of an extra inning will first prioritize scoring at least one run; a "big inning" of 3+ runs is obviously no longer a consideration.)

There have been a lot of additional total runs being scored in extra innings under the new rule but the scenario of multiple extra innings still requires teams to score the exact number of runs in each extra inning, which is not that common.

As far as runner on second with no outs vs runner in third with one out: the run expectancy with a man in second /no outs is significantly higher than the run expectancy with a man in third/one out, so in the top of an extra inning it's still a mistake to attempt a sacrifice since the goal is still to score as many runs as possible. In the bottom of an extra inning, even if the goal is not to maximize runs but to maximize the chance of scoring a run (i.e. in a tie game or down by a run) it's still very close. The chance of scoring in the second/no outs is the aforementioned 61% which increases to 65% in the third/one out scenario, however a successful sacrifice is not a 100% proposition; overall close enough that the optimal strategy probably comes down to the speed of the base runner, the hitting ability of the batter, the bunting ability of the batter, etc.

I would not bunt if on road. If at home and tied, it depends on where I am in the order. If behind a run, I’m not bunting. Except if I get first and second with no one out.  Then, I again look at who is up and who follows. 

One thing about a bunt.  It is so seldom employed these days that I don’t think it is defended nearly as well as in the past.  Thus, there is that factor to consider .

BTW - when is the last time you saw a well executed hit and run?  At any point of an MLB game.  Heck when’s the last time you saw a hit and run even attempted.

I wish the Giants would use it sometimes with Posey. He generally makes contact. And he is always a DP potential as he hits a lot of hard ground balls and he is slow.

[lex24]

I’m sure Mick or DC86 can cite the percentages, and I get the math,  but on the face of it both teams can score pretty easily. Man on 2nd with no outs translates pretty easily to man on 3rd with one out. I’m surprised there aren’t more games where it’s 14-14 going into the top of the 20th.

Since you asked, in the last full MLB season (2019) a team with a man on second and no outs scored at least one run 61% of the time. Offense is down slightly this season, but that's countered by teams in extra innings being more likely to use pinch runners, pinch hitters and context-specific strategies that increase the likelihood of scoring a run even if it decreases run expectancy (a team that is down by a run in the bottom of an extra inning will first prioritize scoring at least one run; a "big inning" of 3+ runs is obviously no longer a consideration.)

There have been a lot of additional total runs being scored in extra innings under the new rule but the scenario of multiple extra innings still requires teams to score the exact number of runs in each extra inning, which is not that common.

As far as runner on second with no outs vs runner in third with one out: the run expectancy with a man in second /no outs is significantly higher than the run expectancy with a man in third/one out, so in the top of an extra inning it's still a mistake to attempt a sacrifice since the goal is still to score as many runs as possible. In the bottom of an extra inning, even if the goal is not to maximize runs but to maximize the chance of scoring a run (i.e. in a tie game or down by a run) it's still very close. The chance of scoring in the second/no outs is the aforementioned 61% which increases to 65% in the third/one out scenario, however a successful sacrifice is not a 100% proposition; overall close enough that the optimal strategy probably comes down to the speed of the base runner, the hitting ability of the batter, the bunting ability of the batter, etc.

I would not bunt if on road. If at home and tied, it depends on where I am in the order. If behind a run, I’m not bunting. Except if I get first and second with no one out.  Then, I again look at who is up and who follows. 

One thing about a bunt.  It is so seldom employed these days that I don’t think it is defended nearly as well as in the past.  Thus, there is that factor to consider .

BTW - when is the last time you saw a well executed hit and run?  At any point of an MLB game.  Heck when’s the last time you saw a hit and run even attempted.

I wish the Giants would use it sometimes with Posey. He generally makes contact. And he is always a DP potential as he hits a lot of hard ground balls and he is slow.

[BobK]

Giants rained out today. Playing 2 Sunday

[BobK]

Giants rained out today. Playing 2 Sunday

[BostonCard]

I wonder if the new system further advantages home teams compared to the old extra innings system because knowledge of how many runs you need to score is even more valuable.  It's a bit like the college football overtime rule, except that at least in college football, the team on offense first alternates in each OT.


BC

[BostonCard]

I wonder if the new system further advantages home teams compared to the old extra innings system because knowledge of how many runs you need to score is even more valuable.  It's a bit like the college football overtime rule, except that at least in college football, the team on offense first alternates in each OT.


BC

[Phogge]

Screw the stats. Really, really crappy rule. Plus they really need to deaden the baseball. Parks like the Reds home should be declared unplayable. No wonder pitchers cheat.

[Phogge]

Screw the stats. Really, really crappy rule. Plus they really need to deaden the baseball. Parks like the Reds home should be declared unplayable. No wonder pitchers cheat.

[DC 86]

I wonder if the new system further advantages home teams compared to the old extra innings system because knowledge of how many runs you need to score is even more valuable.  It's a bit like the college football overtime rule, except that at least in college football, the team on offense first alternates in each OT.


BC

I had assumed that the new rule would make no difference, since knowledge of how many runs the home team needs would be equally valuable under the old rule and the new rule. However, there are various published analyses that argue that win expectancy for road teams is theoretically greater under the new rule, and this has been borne out so far. In the two years that the rule was tested in the minor leagues road teams won extra inning games at a greater rate than historical norms both years, and in last year's abbreviated MLB season and the start of this season that has also been the case.

I am pretty sure that seven inning games have a much more distortive effect. A weaker team has a significantly higher likelihood of upsetting a stronger team in a game that is only three quarters as long, not to mention that stronger teams usually have more pitching depth, and that advantage is obviously significantly mitigated in a seven inning game.

[DC 86]

I wonder if the new system further advantages home teams compared to the old extra innings system because knowledge of how many runs you need to score is even more valuable.  It's a bit like the college football overtime rule, except that at least in college football, the team on offense first alternates in each OT.


BC

I had assumed that the new rule would make no difference, since knowledge of how many runs the home team needs would be equally valuable under the old rule and the new rule. However, there are various published analyses that argue that win expectancy for road teams is theoretically greater under the new rule, and this has been borne out so far. In the two years that the rule was tested in the minor leagues road teams won extra inning games at a greater rate than historical norms both years, and in last year's abbreviated MLB season and the start of this season that has also been the case.

I am pretty sure that seven inning games have a much more distortive effect. A weaker team has a significantly higher likelihood of upsetting a stronger team in a game that is only three quarters as long, not to mention that stronger teams usually have more pitching depth, and that advantage is obviously significantly mitigated in a seven inning game.

[BobK]

Whisler traded for a AA pitcher

[BobK]

Whisler traded for a AA pitcher

[old spanish trail]

Whisler traded for a AA pitcher

Excellent. Paid some coins for him but way best to move on. One excellent year can't be relied on.....unless it's with the Gyros.

---

Scherzer has to leave game vs Gyros in first inning. Leg maybe.

[old spanish trail]

Whisler traded for a AA pitcher

Excellent. Paid some coins for him but way best to move on. One excellent year can't be relied on.....unless it's with the Gyros.

---

Scherzer has to leave game vs Gyros in first inning. Leg maybe.

[BostonCard]

I wonder if the new system further advantages home teams compared to the old extra innings system because knowledge of how many runs you need to score is even more valuable.  It's a bit like the college football overtime rule, except that at least in college football, the team on offense first alternates in each OT.


BC

I had assumed that the new rule would make no difference, since knowledge of how many runs the home team needs would be equally valuable under the old rule and the new rule. However, there are various published analyses that argue that win expectancy for road teams is theoretically greater under the new rule, and this has been borne out so far. In the two years that the rule was tested in the minor leagues road teams won extra inning games at a greater rate than historical norms both years, and in last year's abbreviated MLB season and the start of this season that has also been the case.

I am pretty sure that seven inning games have a much more distortive effect. A weaker team has a significantly higher likelihood of upsetting a stronger team in a game that is only three quarters as long, not to mention that stronger teams usually have more pitching depth, and that advantage is obviously significantly mitigated in a seven inning game.

Thanks for setting me straight.  I figured that the value of the extra information is greater with a man on base than without.  Specifically, having a man on second with no outs would produce drastically different results depending on whether the game were tied or the home team were losing by more than one run.

But sometimes what seems intuitively right isn't so.

BC

[BostonCard]

I wonder if the new system further advantages home teams compared to the old extra innings system because knowledge of how many runs you need to score is even more valuable.  It's a bit like the college football overtime rule, except that at least in college football, the team on offense first alternates in each OT.


BC

I had assumed that the new rule would make no difference, since knowledge of how many runs the home team needs would be equally valuable under the old rule and the new rule. However, there are various published analyses that argue that win expectancy for road teams is theoretically greater under the new rule, and this has been borne out so far. In the two years that the rule was tested in the minor leagues road teams won extra inning games at a greater rate than historical norms both years, and in last year's abbreviated MLB season and the start of this season that has also been the case.

I am pretty sure that seven inning games have a much more distortive effect. A weaker team has a significantly higher likelihood of upsetting a stronger team in a game that is only three quarters as long, not to mention that stronger teams usually have more pitching depth, and that advantage is obviously significantly mitigated in a seven inning game.

Thanks for setting me straight.  I figured that the value of the extra information is greater with a man on base than without.  Specifically, having a man on second with no outs would produce drastically different results depending on whether the game were tied or the home team were losing by more than one run.

But sometimes what seems intuitively right isn't so.

BC

[lex24]

Whisler traded for a AA pitcher

Excellent. Paid some coins for him but way best to move on. One excellent year can't be relied on.....unless it's with the Gyros.

---

Scherzer has to leave game vs Gyros in first inning. Leg maybe.

There has been an enormous number of muscle injuries across baseball this year.  It has to be related to the shortened season last year. Players not in the same game shape.  I can think of no other reason.

Great performance from DeSclafani.  Bullpen well rested going into tomorrow’s DH.  But the bats have been silenced last few games.  Have to wonder if injuries catching up.  Lineup looks like a Spring Training game. Half “regulars” half minor leaguers. 

I like what I’ve seen from Wade. Vosler, otoh, has an absurd swing. brobdingnagian uppercut.  He will hit the occasional HR.  And about .180. 

Tauchman has had a positive impact. Despite hitting about .180. Saved the Dodger game, GS vs Texas. And made an incredible catch to rob Soto of an HR.  Giants lose if he doesn’t make that play.  Still, he hasn’t shown much at the plate. Not much hard contact.

Duggar has struck out a ton.  I suspect he will be the .220 hitter we’ve come to expect.  With some occasional pop.

Slater seems to be lost.  They have faced a slew of righthanders lately.  And he’s now a straight platoon guy.  Looks awful at the plate.  Striking out a ton.

Longoria, Crawford, Posey and to a lesser extent, Belt, have carried the offense.  Ironic given they were all considered to be done.  Losing Longoria was a big blow.

[lex24]

Whisler traded for a AA pitcher

Excellent. Paid some coins for him but way best to move on. One excellent year can't be relied on.....unless it's with the Gyros.

---

Scherzer has to leave game vs Gyros in first inning. Leg maybe.

There has been an enormous number of muscle injuries across baseball this year.  It has to be related to the shortened season last year. Players not in the same game shape.  I can think of no other reason.

Great performance from DeSclafani.  Bullpen well rested going into tomorrow’s DH.  But the bats have been silenced last few games.  Have to wonder if injuries catching up.  Lineup looks like a Spring Training game. Half “regulars” half minor leaguers. 

I like what I’ve seen from Wade. Vosler, otoh, has an absurd swing. brobdingnagian uppercut.  He will hit the occasional HR.  And about .180. 

Tauchman has had a positive impact. Despite hitting about .180. Saved the Dodger game, GS vs Texas. And made an incredible catch to rob Soto of an HR.  Giants lose if he doesn’t make that play.  Still, he hasn’t shown much at the plate. Not much hard contact.

Duggar has struck out a ton.  I suspect he will be the .220 hitter we’ve come to expect.  With some occasional pop.

Slater seems to be lost.  They have faced a slew of righthanders lately.  And he’s now a straight platoon guy.  Looks awful at the plate.  Striking out a ton.

Longoria, Crawford, Posey and to a lesser extent, Belt, have carried the offense.  Ironic given they were all considered to be done.  Losing Longoria was a big blow.

[old spanish trail]

Whisler traded for a AA pitcher

Excellent. Paid some coins for him but way best to move on. One excellent year can't be relied on.....unless it's with the Gyros.

---

Scherzer has to leave game vs Gyros in first inning. Leg maybe.

There has been an enormous number of muscle injuries across baseball this year.  It has to be related to the shortened season last year. Players not in the same game shape.  I can think of no other reason.

Great performance from DeSclafani.  Bullpen well rested going into tomorrow’s DH.  But the bats have been silenced last few games.  Have to wonder if injuries catching up.  Lineup looks like a Spring Training game. Half  “regulars” half minor leaguers. 

I like what I’ve seen from Wade. Vosler, otoh, has an absurd swing. of immense proportions uppercut.  He will hit the occasional HR.  And about .180. 

Tauchman has had a positive impact. Despite hitting about .180. Saved the Dodger game, GS vs Texas. And made an incredible catch to rob Soto of an HR.  Giants lose if he doesn’t make that play.  Still, he hasn’t shown much at the plate. Not much hard contact.

Duggar has struck out a ton.  I suspect he will be the .220 hitter we’ve come to expect.  With some occasional pop.

Slater seems to be lost.  They have faced a slew of righthanders lately.  And he’s now a straight platoon guy.  Looks awful  at the plate.  Striking out a ton.

Longoria, Crawford, Posey and to a lesser extent, Belt, have carried the offense.  Ironic given they were all considered to be done.  Losing Longoria was a big blow.

Agree with all of above. Doing it with mirrors may be involved.

[old spanish trail]

Whisler traded for a AA pitcher

Excellent. Paid some coins for him but way best to move on. One excellent year can't be relied on.....unless it's with the Gyros.

---

Scherzer has to leave game vs Gyros in first inning. Leg maybe.

There has been an enormous number of muscle injuries across baseball this year.  It has to be related to the shortened season last year. Players not in the same game shape.  I can think of no other reason.

Great performance from DeSclafani.  Bullpen well rested going into tomorrow’s DH.  But the bats have been silenced last few games.  Have to wonder if injuries catching up.  Lineup looks like a Spring Training game. Half  “regulars” half minor leaguers. 

I like what I’ve seen from Wade. Vosler, otoh, has an absurd swing. of immense proportions uppercut.  He will hit the occasional HR.  And about .180. 

Tauchman has had a positive impact. Despite hitting about .180. Saved the Dodger game, GS vs Texas. And made an incredible catch to rob Soto of an HR.  Giants lose if he doesn’t make that play.  Still, he hasn’t shown much at the plate. Not much hard contact.

Duggar has struck out a ton.  I suspect he will be the .220 hitter we’ve come to expect.  With some occasional pop.

Slater seems to be lost.  They have faced a slew of righthanders lately.  And he’s now a straight platoon guy.  Looks awful  at the plate.  Striking out a ton.

Longoria, Crawford, Posey and to a lesser extent, Belt, have carried the offense.  Ironic given they were all considered to be done.  Losing Longoria was a big blow.

Agree with all of above. Doing it with mirrors may be involved.

[Phogge]

Told you last year re Slater. To contend all year they need a bat and a closer. Is Farhan willing to trade some prospects?

[Phogge]

Told you last year re Slater. To contend all year they need a bat and a closer. Is Farhan willing to trade some prospects?

[Phogge]

Slater fails again. Dubon beyond horrible. Outfield should be Yaz, Wade, Dickerson/Ruf when healthy (if ever). Time for Joey Bart. Too bad about Caselli but he's an automatic out and Tauchman is headed that way.

They need a soft tissue expert on staff. Nothing more important this year. Bullpen really came through today.

[Phogge]

Slater fails again. Dubon beyond horrible. Outfield should be Yaz, Wade, Dickerson/Ruf when healthy (if ever). Time for Joey Bart. Too bad about Caselli but he's an automatic out and Tauchman is headed that way.

They need a soft tissue expert on staff. Nothing more important this year. Bullpen really came through today.

[lex24]

Told you last year re Slater. To contend all year they need a bat and a closer. Is Farhan willing to trade some prospects?

He first has to determine if this is truly a contender.  I continue to question that.  But if they are still in this position come the ASB I suspect the Giants will be buyers.  They have much more depth in the system so he has some cards to play. Who is untouchable?  Just guessing - Luciano, Ramos, Corry, Harrison.  

I suspect they’d be willing to deal either Bart or Bailey.  Be interesting to know which one the Giants are higher on.  Bart is higher up the chain.  But Bailey is their pick. (Evans was at the helm when Bart was picked). He’s a switch hitter with power and supposedly a very good defensive catcher. 

Getting both a bat and a closer is probably a tad unrealistic. A right handed outfield bat would be my first choice.  I’d love to get either Marte.

[lex24]

Told you last year re Slater. To contend all year they need a bat and a closer. Is Farhan willing to trade some prospects?

He first has to determine if this is truly a contender.  I continue to question that.  But if they are still in this position come the ASB I suspect the Giants will be buyers.  They have much more depth in the system so he has some cards to play. Who is untouchable?  Just guessing - Luciano, Ramos, Corry, Harrison.  

I suspect they’d be willing to deal either Bart or Bailey.  Be interesting to know which one the Giants are higher on.  Bart is higher up the chain.  But Bailey is their pick. (Evans was at the helm when Bart was picked). He’s a switch hitter with power and supposedly a very good defensive catcher. 

Getting both a bat and a closer is probably a tad unrealistic. A right handed outfield bat would be my first choice.  I’d love to get either Marte.

[Mick]

Told you last year re Slater. To contend all year they need a bat and a closer. Is Farhan willing to trade some prospects?

He first has to determine if this is truly a contender.  I continue to question that.  But if they are still in this position come the ASB I suspect the Giants will be buyers.  They have much more depth in the system so he has some cards to play. Who is untouchable?  Just guessing - Luciano, Ramos, Corry, Harrison.  

I suspect they’d be willing to deal either Bart or Bailey.  Be interesting to know which one the Giants are higher on.  Bart is higher up the chain.  But Bailey is their pick. (Evans was at the helm when Bart was picked). He’s a switch hitter with power and supposedly a very good defensive catcher. 

Getting both a bat and a closer is probably a tad unrealistic. A right handed outfield bat would be my first choice.  I’d love to get either Marte.

Bart was the second overall pick in the draft.  I had hoped he'd be farther along, but oh well.  His current line at Sacramento is .333/.379/.617/.997 but he's improved each year in the minors. He has 25 strikeouts in 81 ABs.

The draft selection of Bailey was mystifying to me. Bailey's line in high-A Eugene is .187/.296/.301/.597.  Just 2 HRs in 123 ABs and 39 strikeouts.  Doesn't surprise me much because he hit just .302 in college, and the league average was .285.  Bailey had the 7th highest batting average of the team's starters in the year he was drafted. And it's not like he was a great handler of pitchers, his team's ERA was in the bottom half of the league despite the fact that they finished 14-3. He's your #1 selection?

[Mick]

Told you last year re Slater. To contend all year they need a bat and a closer. Is Farhan willing to trade some prospects?

He first has to determine if this is truly a contender.  I continue to question that.  But if they are still in this position come the ASB I suspect the Giants will be buyers.  They have much more depth in the system so he has some cards to play. Who is untouchable?  Just guessing - Luciano, Ramos, Corry, Harrison.  

I suspect they’d be willing to deal either Bart or Bailey.  Be interesting to know which one the Giants are higher on.  Bart is higher up the chain.  But Bailey is their pick. (Evans was at the helm when Bart was picked). He’s a switch hitter with power and supposedly a very good defensive catcher. 

Getting both a bat and a closer is probably a tad unrealistic. A right handed outfield bat would be my first choice.  I’d love to get either Marte.

Bart was the second overall pick in the draft.  I had hoped he'd be farther along, but oh well.  His current line at Sacramento is .333/.379/.617/.997 but he's improved each year in the minors. He has 25 strikeouts in 81 ABs.

The draft selection of Bailey was mystifying to me. Bailey's line in high-A Eugene is .187/.296/.301/.597.  Just 2 HRs in 123 ABs and 39 strikeouts.  Doesn't surprise me much because he hit just .302 in college, and the league average was .285.  Bailey had the 7th highest batting average of the team's starters in the year he was drafted. And it's not like he was a great handler of pitchers, his team's ERA was in the bottom half of the league despite the fact that they finished 14-3. He's your #1 selection?

[BobK]

Catchers rarely call pitches or location.
Bart missed about two weeks.
But worrisome about Bailey

[BobK]

Catchers rarely call pitches or location.
Bart missed about two weeks.
But worrisome about Bailey

[lex24]

Catchers rarely  call pitches or location.
Bart missed about two weeks.
But worrisome about Bailey

Way too early to make any conclusions on Bailey. Mick left out that he hit 6 HRs and had a slug pct of .685 in the 17 games played in 2020 before COVID shut down the college season. I believe this is his first taste of pro ball. Normally a guy out of college would get some work in an SS rookie league. He didn’t get that. Also I don’t think they had a fall league. (I may be wrong on that) So it’s understandable that he’s a bit slow to get going. If he’s still hitting a buck eighty in Aug, well then perhaps there’s a problem.

BTW here are the “offensive” totals for Nats series: 33 Innings.  17 hits. 3 runs (1aided by ghost runner) 6 walks (all in game 2 yesterday) 33 strikeouts.

And these were not top end  pitchers to say the least. But the obvious strategy they had going into the series was to attack the strike zone and make the Giants swing the bat. They have lived on walks and home runs. You  get rid of the walks and this team will have a very hard time scoring runs. (Especially given the injuries). So I suspect to see this going forward. Kind of surprised it hasn’t been the way they have been pitched to all year. I just wouldn’t worry about corner pitching this team until I have to. Just attack the zone early.  They don’t string together hits. And something that isn’t talked about much - they’re slow. So offensively they are highly dependent upon the walks.

Be interesting to see if this is somewhat of a turning point. Hope not.

[lex24]

Catchers rarely  call pitches or location.
Bart missed about two weeks.
But worrisome about Bailey

Way too early to make any conclusions on Bailey. Mick left out that he hit 6 HRs and had a slug pct of .685 in the 17 games played in 2020 before COVID shut down the college season. I believe this is his first taste of pro ball. Normally a guy out of college would get some work in an SS rookie league. He didn’t get that. Also I don’t think they had a fall league. (I may be wrong on that) So it’s understandable that he’s a bit slow to get going. If he’s still hitting a buck eighty in Aug, well then perhaps there’s a problem.

BTW here are the “offensive” totals for Nats series: 33 Innings.  17 hits. 3 runs (1aided by ghost runner) 6 walks (all in game 2 yesterday) 33 strikeouts.

And these were not top end  pitchers to say the least. But the obvious strategy they had going into the series was to attack the strike zone and make the Giants swing the bat. They have lived on walks and home runs. You  get rid of the walks and this team will have a very hard time scoring runs. (Especially given the injuries). So I suspect to see this going forward. Kind of surprised it hasn’t been the way they have been pitched to all year. I just wouldn’t worry about corner pitching this team until I have to. Just attack the zone early.  They don’t string together hits. And something that isn’t talked about much - they’re slow. So offensively they are highly dependent upon the walks.

Be interesting to see if this is somewhat of a turning point. Hope not.

[BobK]

Belt Looks at strikes and then wonders why a strike. So tired of him

[BobK]

Belt Looks at strikes and then wonders why a strike. So tired of him

[JeebsOak]

Me too. He is cold as ice right now and his advanced stats show a severe regression.

Meanwhile, LaMonte Wade is another great find

[JeebsOak]

Me too. He is cold as ice right now and his advanced stats show a severe regression.

Meanwhile, LaMonte Wade is another great find

[DC 86]

Way too early to make any conclusions on Bailey. Mick left out that he hit 6 HRs and had a slug pct of .685  in the 17 games played in 2020 before COVID shut down the college season.  I believe this is his first taste of pro ball.  Normally a guy out of college would get some work in an SS rookie league.  He didn’t get that.  Also I don’t think they had a fall league. (I may be wrong on that)  So it’s understandable that he’s a bit slow to get going. If he’s still hitting a buck eighty in Aug, well then perhaps there’s a problem.

Indeed. On-base percentage correlates much more strongly with run scoring than batting average and Bailey's OBP in college were .419, .390 and .466. Moreover his junior year power in a limited sample was not anomalous, his slugging percentages were .604, .513 and .685, so his batting average needs to be considered in the context of a power hitter. And all of his numbers need to be considered in the context of catchers. Catchers in aggregate are hitting .222 in MLB this year with a .303 OBP and .382 slugging percentage, so the bar is low. He may or may not make it, but it's far too early to draw conclusions, especially after an 11 month layoff.

[DC 86]

Way too early to make any conclusions on Bailey. Mick left out that he hit 6 HRs and had a slug pct of .685  in the 17 games played in 2020 before COVID shut down the college season.  I believe this is his first taste of pro ball.  Normally a guy out of college would get some work in an SS rookie league.  He didn’t get that.  Also I don’t think they had a fall league. (I may be wrong on that)  So it’s understandable that he’s a bit slow to get going. If he’s still hitting a buck eighty in Aug, well then perhaps there’s a problem.

Indeed. On-base percentage correlates much more strongly with run scoring than batting average and Bailey's OBP in college were .419, .390 and .466. Moreover his junior year power in a limited sample was not anomalous, his slugging percentages were .604, .513 and .685, so his batting average needs to be considered in the context of a power hitter. And all of his numbers need to be considered in the context of catchers. Catchers in aggregate are hitting .222 in MLB this year with a .303 OBP and .382 slugging percentage, so the bar is low. He may or may not make it, but it's far too early to draw conclusions, especially after an 11 month layoff.

[Phogge]

Watched a few innings of Stanford in the NCAA. They have a rodeo belt buckle full of info. The hitters look at coach after every pitch. I think Marquess started that. Jesus, let them play. I bet the kids have more fun playing strikeout.

[Phogge]

Watched a few innings of Stanford in the NCAA. They have a rodeo belt buckle full of info. The hitters look at coach after every pitch. I think Marquess started that. Jesus, let them play. I bet the kids have more fun playing strikeout.