Suppose your leadoff hitter has a 9 pitch PA: if (1) it ends in an out, and (2) is followed by two at-bats of average length also ending in outs, the pitcher has only thown about 17 pitches (9+4+4), just slightly more than the major league average for pitches/inning last year (16.3, if I remember that right).

Now, suppose your leadoff hitter has a 3 pitch PA: if (1) it ends in a hit, and (2) is followed by three at-bats of average length that end in outs, the pitcher has thrown about 15 pitches (3+4+4+4), or only about 2 pitches less than he would have, if the leadoff hitter had struck out after a 9 pitch at-bat.

I guess what I’m trying to say is that the importance of long at-bats is overstated, if those at-bats end in outs. Even three seven pitch PA in a row — an event I’d imagine is rare, given that PA of seven pitches or more comprised only 7% of MLB PA last year — would result in a 21 pitch inning, or only about five more pitches than the average inning. So, yes, the hypothetical Brandon who strikes out everytime at the plate tires the pitcher out more than the hypothetical Brandon who grounds the first pitch to the shorstop every PA, but either Brandon will tire out the pitcher more if he actually gets on base, no matter how many pitches it takes him to do it, because he increases the number of batters that the pitcher faces in the inning.

It’s ridiculous to say that it’s not, even at a small level.

If a pitcher gets all first pitch outs, he has thrown the minimum 27 pitches. If he gets all strikeouts, he’s thrown at least 81.

27

The idea that one can’t make a pitcher work in a strikeout is “bunk.”

You get less out of a first-pitch-swinging Magglio flyout than you do out of a nine-pitch, 3-2 count while fouling balls off by someone like Thames or Pudge or (ok, even Inge).

9 or 10 pitches is almost ten percent of a pitcher’s workload - and to waste that on one guy, who ends up striking out? How is that laughable?

I think over the last 2 years his outstanding defense combined with slightly below average offensive numbers make him a little above average.

Nobody can play defense good enough to make up for how bad Inge has been offensively this season. I also don’t expect him to continue to hit in the low 100s.

Like I said, a player could technically hit .300 while striking out half the time - whereas, if he only hits the ball into playable situations (groundouts, flyouts) he could never strike out and still be well under .200.

I’m just tired of people saying “Oh, he’s striking out at a .340 clip,” because a lot of players who ARE worth their salt do that, and it doesn’t bother you. So you’re not looking at the right thing. If you want to look at something meaningful, make it the balls he DOES hit, and puts into the air for easy outs. That’s something that we can all see and understand the value (devalue) of.

If you’re arguing the difference between what you consider a bad player and a good player, don’t compare them in areas where they are equal and say that’s why the bad player is bad. That was the use for my Granderson comparison.

We will have to agree to disagree on Inge’s defensive value. I don’t like it when people put words into my mouth, so I will be careful here, please correct me if I am wrong. But I would say that your belief about Inge defensively is that he is one of the top two at his position in the AL and he should be considered for a gold glove. I have him as above average defensively, but not gold glove material. However, he has gotten much better about making routine plays over the last 3 seasons, I will admit. I have never once said he does not make outstanding plays, he does. The differences between your assessment and mine is your belief in his range factor and my contention that you overvalue his range, and that range factor itself is overrated.

Further, there are two componants to having a great arm 1) arm strength 2) accuracy. I agree that most firstbasemen should field bad throws 3/4 of the time. I would go so far as to say 90% of the time. But what isn’t considered is the frequency that firstbasemen need to make these plays. My contention is that while Inge does have a cannon of an arm, he is not accurate as some imagine. Evidence (not final proof) of this is the amount of times Inge has to be saved by other fielders (Polanco and Casey). You may call it bunk, but to me it is evidence of questionable accuracy.

If we agree to disagree on his defensive value, then we will have different idea’s of where offensive production needs to be in order for Inge to be of value to the team. Clearly my contention is that this year his offensive woes are vastly overshadowing his defensive value. I won’t put words in your mouth, but will ask you: Is his defense this year making up for his offensive numbers?

David,

You have managed to blend some stats together and say “Look, Inge is doing better than Sean Casey”. Well, we aren’t discussing Casey, but if we were I would say that Casey isn’t doing well and we should bring up Shelton. Comparing Inge and Casey is like saying that Hitler was more evil than Mousolini. Yep, they are both evil, and they both needed to go. Same with Inge and Casey, both need to go.

You failed utterly to actually look at Inges’s numbers this year and then you say “Look at Casey”. Better to look at Casey as a means to defend Inge? Interesting defense of Brandon’s play.

Saying Inge’s strikeouts are good because it tires out the pitcher. Wow. Trully, wow. Never heard that one before. I really don’t know what to say to that.

Thanks for saying that baseball is a team game. I am glad Inge is your Tiger. Casey happens to be one of my three favorite Tiger’s. Yet I put the TEAM first by saying Casey’s play isn’t up to snuff, we need to put someone in there that will help the team. You seem to put Inge first by saying he is tiring out pitcheers with his brilliant Make Them Work To Strike Me Out, That Will Make Them Tired Battle Plan and this helps the team we don’t need an upgrade.

Adam,

I just don’t know what this means: “So, here’s the deal. Inge’s strikeouts aren’t helping him, but they aren’t the thing that are keeping him at .122. What’s doing that are the balls he actually puts in play.”

I am not trying to be an ass to you, I just don’t know what you are saying. I am also lost on your quote “Granderson grounds out, as well as do many good line-drive hitters, as well as do many bad line-drive hitters - like Inge”

I am pretty lost on your Granderson versus Inge comparrison. Yes, Granderson has a lot of strikouts this year, but I can live with those becuase he his hitting other balls all over the park. Inge is striking out, then striking out some more, then flying out weakly. So, again in my opinion, Inge is hurting the team and Granderson has been a real benefit. Did I just help your strikeout argument? I am really not sure because I am a little lost on what you are trying to say.

Inge is not helping us, and there needs to be a change to help in the win colum. My suggestion: Polanco at third, Infante at 2nd. Inge as late inning defensive replacement, moving Polly back to second. Infante’s bat is wasted with Inge’s endless K’s.