Youtubers are all going in
-
Okay, I’ll bite. A walk isn’t as good as a hit? Explain. I first heard that expression when I was in Little League which was well before the dawn of sabermetrics.
A walk will not score a runner in scoring position unless the bases are loaded, and even then, only scores one run, not two on a single. Of course, like with everything else in baseball, it's all about context, the exact nature of the hit, and the quality of the defensive fielding and your own base running.
But, a walk is certainly as good as a single when the bases are empty, and with a runner on first.
However, there can be a definite context where a walk can actually work better than a single -- driving up pitch count. If a string of batters force deep counts to earn walks, it can put a pitcher into a severely fatigued state with runners on first and second, increasing the odds of a mistake getting hammered for a multi-base hit.
Baseball is beautiful because of the complexity of how plays can materialize. The odds can be measured, but never guaranteed. There are no absolutes in baseball, only events that play out uniquely.
-
Exactly. All of this.
But the idea of a single being better than a walk is actually already accounted for by sabremetrics. OPS (on base percentage plus slugging percentage) became a mainstream stat because of sabremetrics. The basic runs created formula is times on base plus total bases divided by plate appearances (or something to that effect). A single increases the numerator in that expression by two (one for getting on base and another for the total base). While a walk doesn’t produce a total base at all (only half as good as a single).
No sabremetrician is saying that walks are better than singles (with maybe the exception of pitch counts), but rather that walks had been overlooked as an accomplishment by batters (walks were often merely interpreted as a lucky bonus from a wild pitcher).
Now we’re talking about a video game. Of course walks and high pitch counts are boring. And yes, when the three outcomes of walks, strikeouts and homers are too prevalent, I understand @victoryphoenix_mlbts saying that it’s boring. But I’m not sure if SDS’s devotion to sabremetrics is the reason for this.
-
It’s not that, it’s the terrible hitting engine and undersized playing field that makes anything but a HR or walk a high probability for an out. Fielders cover way too much ground killing doubles and all but eliminating triples. If they made the playing field bigger and scaled fielders back more hit variety would come back. The change is long overdue.
-
@PriorFir4383355_XBLI'll let this go, but before we move on, here is my formal dissertation—complete with empirical proof—on why a base hit blows a walk out of the water in every meaningful game state:
-
Nobody on base
This is the only scenario where a walk is even remotely comparable to a single. Even then, a hit puts pressure on the defense and gives you a shot at extra bases. -
Runner on first
A hit advances the runner at least to second base, and often first-to-third. Even a slow runner moving to second is now in scoring position. If they make it to third, the ways you can score (sac fly, wild pitch, groundout, passed ball) multiply exponentially. With a walk, the runner only moves to second—meaning you still need a hit to bring them home. -
Runners on second and third
A base hit almost always scores one run, and frequently clears both bases for two. A walk loads the bases and scores zero. -
Bases loaded
A solid hit almost always scores two runs—and if it’s a double, you’re likely clearing the bases for three. A walk forces in a single run and puts the crowd to sleep.
Bonus: When an out is actually better than a walk
With a runner on third and fewer than two outs, a deep fly ball (sacrifice fly) or a productive groundout drives in the run. A walk just clogs the bases and keeps the run stranded at third.In analytics, they call it RE24 (Run Expectancy)—and the math backs up the eye test. A walk only moves runners one base at a time, whereas a hit unlocks extra bases, forces defensive mistakes, and actually cashes in runs. Case closed
Runner on third less than 2 outs, a ground ball to the middle of the infield or a slow roller or buntm get that run in, a walk just gets you a runner on base with no run scored. Or A flyball deep enough to the outfield get the run scored.These are just a few scenarios where a hit is better than a walk, also a hit depends on your skill and a walk depends on the pitcher not throwing strikes.
By far the m ost under rated stat in the game is batting average with runners on base... I would suggest that you listen to Will Clark's podcast, or check out Brooke knows ball.... Both are advocates for a return to less analytics more fundamentals. Truly the onlt wasted out is a strike out. and a walk is something you take, not something you go up there looking to do. Baseball can be an exciting sport if we allow it to be.
-
-
I sometimes feel that the game should be called PRIMAL BASEBALL because of the prevalence of homers, strikeouts, walks (to some extent,) stolen bases and spectacular defensive play. Nolan Ryan is pitching to Dave Kingman who morphs into Lou Brock when he reaches base and the fielders are all Ozzie Smith, Willie Mays & Johnny Bench types. Ha ha. That’s what a lot of games feel like to me especially when challenging yourself on a higher difficulty.
P.S. Feel free to insert the names of players from your generation. -
Excellent analysis, Gentlemen. What I’m gathering here is that it’s all about context and a walk is roughly the same as a hit with no runners in scoring position but overall not as valuable as a hit which has more potential to advance runners which ultimately creates runs. Am I on the right track? Also, wasn’t sabernetrics trying to convey that not making outs is paramount and maybe this somehow fused into the old adage about walks being as good as hits? By the way, if I’m ever on a game show, expect a request to be a lifeline.
-
I wonder what Ted Williams would say about the notion that walks are not important
-
Again, there are no absolutes in baseball.
Runners on first and third and one out. Hitter strikes a sharp hit but is defended by an infielder leading to a double play to end the inning. In hindsight, a walk to load the bases would have worked better for the offense. Point is there are no absolutes in baseball. There are only probabilities and outliers with an excellent defensive play can upset even those probabilities.
The adage "a walk is as good as a hit," has a context. It doesn't mean a walk is as good as any hit in any situation.
Sabermetrics is also a measuring tool, nothing more and nothing less. BTW: The movie Moneyball glossed over many truths in the A's that season, and also engaged in a lot of outright lies about real people. The movie barely acknowledged the existence of the A's starting pitchers. That ignored a heck of a lot given that the game of baseball is primarily pitching and defense.
Driving up pitch counts by trying to earn walks only works when your pitching staff keeps you in the game so that the one or two runs you can work this way can make the difference.
Another flawed adage is that "a strikeout is just another out." This is context based. A strikeout in a first and third situation is better than a double play to end the inning. But, overall, putting the ball in play is better than walking when there are runners in scoring position, but a walk always is better than an out.
A third adage: "There is no defense against the base on balls!"
-
no one has ever contended walks are not important, you never swing at bad pitches, my only contention is hits are better because you are taking control of the situation, thats how was taught to play, thats the baseball I prefer. I think the three outcomes of HR, SO or BB are boring. I can appreciate a patient hitter, Joey Votto is one of my favorite players and he walked a lot, but he went up there looking for his pitch with the idea of hitting. I read Ted Williams and Charlie Lau's books when I was playing, and I led the independent league I was in in walks, that doesn't change my philosophy of hits are better... I'll die on that hill
-
I wonder what Ted Williams would say about the notion that walks are not important
His philosophy centered on a core rule: "Get a good pitch to hit." Imparted by Hall of Famer Rogers Hornsby and detailed in his book "The Science of Hitting", Williams believed a hitter who never walks is simply swinging at the pitcher's pitch rather than controlling the at-bat.
If Ted watched me play the game, he'd be disappointed in my approach.
-
@victoryphoenix_mlbts
Maybe contributing to your boredom is flaws, mistakes or other unnecessary unwanted elements included in the game itself by the creators (e.g. like CPU pitchers never giving you a pitch to hit). I don’t think a commitment to sabermetrics is causing this. Tell me something about the game that suggests they are heavily influenced by sabermetrics or are forcing it upon us. -
@TripleH-4481_PSN
Yes, these are the reasons. Not sabremetrics. -
I think they value home runs above all else. They push players with 125 power. When they create a moment, most of them hit a home run. That's my opinion as an old-school ball player and a proponent of the old-school game.
-
@MarioMendoza935_XBL
It's good to be seen. After my heart attack in 24 and reduced playing time, and then only playing very little in 25, I skipped 26 altogether. I was thinking of coming back for 27, but now I'll just wait and see. It's good to see some of the ol' peeps are still around.
