Swing batter batter swing
By Tom Grout
May 2, 2008
I love watching the Twins but there is something that bothers me about them. The Twins and I have a little different hitting philosophy.
They preach taking pitches and hitting the other way and want the hitters to have “quality” at bats. That’s another one of those over used clichés, “quality”. He had a “quality” at bat or he had a “quality” pitching performance. How do you define “quality”, it’s different for different people. To me a quality at bat is getting a hit, drawing a walk, getting a successful sacrifice or hitting behind the runner when it is the right time to do so.
The Twins “quality” at bat is for the hitter to work the count. A lot can be said about that I suppose, but I like an aggressive hitter. I like the guy who goes up to the plate and tries to hit the ball hard someplace. I have always thought that if a hitter goes up with the idea that he is going to work the count he is more likely to take a called third strike. To me that’s not a “quality” at bat it’s a wasted at bat.
I like the Twins TV commercial where Tony Oliva says, “See de boll, hit de boll”. Simple huh? I don’t want my hitters to go up and swing wildly at everything; I would preach discipline more than working a count. As a hitter, learn the strike zone then learn your strike zone. Torri Hunter used to swing at almost everything because he didn’t have any plate discipline. He didn’t become a good hitter by working the count; he became a good hitter by learning plate discipline. This is what Carlos Gomez and Delmon Young still have to learn.
I don’t mind my hitter striking out as long as they are swinging at good pitches. I don’t mind my hitters striking out as long as they are productive. Harmon Killebrew struck out a lot but I think he was pretty productive. I would rather have my hitter strike out swinging at a good pitch than have him work the count and swing at a piece of crap with two strikes and ground out into a double play.
When I was coaching Jr. High baseball years ago I came up with what I called the Kirby Puckett drill for batting practice. I found that when I pitched batting practice to these 7th and 8th grade kids they would just stand there and not swing until they got a pitch that was right down the middle. With me pitching batting practice that just wasn’t going to happen all that often.
The Kirby Puckett drill came about for a number of reasons. One of the first reasons was like I said, they wouldn’t swing at anything. I usually had over 20 kids so if they didn’t swing, batting practice would never get over and my arm felt like a limp noodle by the time I was done. So I tried telling them that they were only going to get 10 pitches so they better use them. That didn’t work either.
I now had to figure out why they weren’t swinging, my pitches weren’t that bad. Finally I looked into their eyes as I pitched the ball and there I saw it. I saw fear. These kids were more afraid of me hitting them with the ball than they were thinking about hitting the ball. I couldn’t blame them I guess because I did plunk a few once in awhile. I needed to take that fear away and I wanted them to swing. So I told them that they were going to get 10 pitches and they were going to swing at all of them no matter where it was. I found that the fear in the eyes went away as they concentrated on trying to hit the ball. As they actually started to hit the ball, I also saw the confidence emerge in them and some of them became pretty good hitters.
These kids started to see the ball so they could hit the ball. They were aggressive hitters and the hand eye coordination was developing and there were few wasted at bats. I called it the Kirby Puckett drill because if he thought he could hit it he swung at it and he was very successful at it.
Maybe I’m wrong but overall I don’t see the Twins as aggressive hitters. Sometimes they will swing at junk but a lot of times its after they stood there and watched all the good ones go by so they could get that “quality” at bat. I know this just drives my Dad nuts.
Joe Mauer frustrates me. How can a batting champion and .300 hitter frustrate me? It’s because he is a moose of a guy who knows how to hit and doesn’t hit for power. I’ve heard all the reasons why he doesn’t especially the one that says he just isn’t that type of hitter. He is a good hitter and he is a smart hitter that’s why he should be able to figure out how to hit with some power.
Tony Oliva did it. Tony could have probably hit .400 if he wanted to, but he knew his job was to drive in runs and hit with some power. He was good enough to do both, and so is Joe Mauer.
I still think it is because of their philosophy of working the count. What is the difference between working a count and plate discipline? Plate discipline is learning to know what pitches you can hit and the ones you can’t. In my opinion working the count is just standing there watching good pitches go by and making the opposing pitcher throw more.
I’m not saying my way is the best way, I’m just saying I like my way better than the Twins way.
I agree with you on this point...I also think the Twins preach "taking the ball the other way" just a bit too much. I'll never forget reading an article in the Star Tribune a few years ago where David Ortiz said that had he stayed in the Twins organization he would never have hit 30 home runs in a season. The reason? As you point out, he said that the Twins coaches would, even when he was batting third or fourth, scold him for "letting it rip" and commend him for punching ground balls to move runners up a base. In Boston, he now has free reign (although, hitting in front of Manny Ramirez is nice!) to swing how he chooses and look how it has turned out!
What it comes down to is whether an organization wants to work with each individual players' style, or change them into a organizational style. The Twins are definitely the latter. Ever since TK took the reigns (and Gardy manages much like TK), the Twins have tried to convert hitters into their organizational form. The problem comes with guys like Jacque Jones, Torii Hunter, and now Delmon Young...while all good hitters, they are also all free-swingers. To them, slapping hits to the opposite field must have been as foreign as it was to David Ortiz.
Interesting topic!
I believe that these young hitters can learn alot from Gardy and his approach to hitting.
Yes, they need to be turned loose, much like Papi has been in Baastin.
However, I also think that learning the strike zone, working the count, and, being opportunistic about going the other way are important components of "quality" at-bats.
If from a manager's perspective, you can "work" a starting pitcher into throwing 30 pitches an inning, that starter won't be out there long {hypothetically}. Delving into an opponents bull-pen is a victory within itself.
The Twins have hitters that can be "turned loose."
Morneau, Mauer, Cuddyer...etc. Although, those players have been in the Bigs for a couple of years now, and have the advantage of "seeing" big league pitching a couple times.
Tom uses good analogies with Puck, (who imho was the biggest free swinger there was, next to Brunansky) and I see his point.
I say give the "kids" a part of this season, at least, to get acclimated to profession pitching at this level, and THEN cut 'em loose!
I am renowned for tomahawking an eye-baller over the fence. You're right, man, just hit the damn ball.
A called strike is just a wasted opportunity to hit something. I'm all for being aggressive.
“Going to the plate and trying to hit the ball hard someplace.” That’s Kirby Puckett and we loved it. That’s Jacque Jones and we hated it. Its also Gomez’s instinct – that’s where the four whiffs per game come from. “See the ball, hit the ball” –great phrase, but who could hit the ball like Tony O? Rod Carew, Tony O, Harmon, Kirby, Paul Molitor – these guys could hit the best pitcher’s best pitches. Good hitters like Cuddyer, Bartlett, Harris, Castillo, and Kubel cannot. They need to learn what the guy throws, how to recognize it, and what to do with it. They need to learn what pitches they can hit, and be ready for them. Ted Williams would take a called strike if it was a pitch that he didn’t think he could hit well. Good hitting for most hitters is learning the pitcher, finding that mistake pitch, taking the pitch that catches too much of the strike zone to the opposite field, laying off that slider in the dirt, fouling off close pitches to stay alive, and being ready for the cookie. Hitters need to be aggressive in seeking that pitch they can do some damage with – for Carew, Tony & Kirby, that was a lot of pitches. For most hitters, its not quiet so many, and a quality at bat is the search for that pitch.
"Aggressive in the strike zone" is a buzz phrase that we should all like. It implies some serious plate discipline along with aggressiveness. I would suggest that good plate discipline means more than not swinging at pitches out of the zone – rather, not swinging at pitches that you can’t do something with whether it’s a ball or strike. The count is 1-1, the pitch is a strike on the outer half of the plate – you don’t want your hitter aggressively trying to pull that ball because it’ll be an easy ground ball out. You want the hitter to either take it to the opposite field for a base hit, or to take the pitch for a called strike and go after the next pitch. You want him going after pitches that he can hit, and laying off those that he can’t. That’s quality batting. At least according to Ted Williams.
Louis Castilla worked the count and was a very good hitter. If his pitch selection had been like Kirby’s or Tony’s, he’d have been out of the league years ago. With his approach, he was a very tough out. With all of the pitches he saw, he learned what the pitcher was throwing, how he was throwing each of his pitches, and the rest of the club did too. A pitcher could get him out, but would have to work at it, every time. He never gave away an at-bat. With two or three Louis’s in the line up, you could add 20-30 to the opposing pitch count by the 6th inning – and that’s huge. We get frustrated when Mauer appears to mimic Castilla, but its worse to see piranhas swinging wildly for the fences.
I'm going to disagree on Mauer. Every time he tries to go and hit for power, he falters, and so do the Twins. He is the REASON the Twins have won 5 straight games...I'll take his .300+ and the base hits that come with it any day...if you want power, there is a thing called free agency...of course, that would involve pohlad actually opening his billion dollar wallet once in a while...
Here is an email I got on the topic of this posting from a trusted and knowledgeable source:
This has long been a classic debate. I have enjoyed the view from each of the opposing hill-tops.
Arnie Gieble, the Northfield HS baseball coach who was a AAA catcher in the Yankees organization, swore that any hitter could improve his BA by .080 if he took the first strike. It made no sense to me at the time, but he did have just a little more experience than I had.
I always admired Ted Williams view of the hitting zone where each 1/9 section of the strike zone has a distinctive BA pattern. So if he could get a pitch in the .450 sections that was the one to hit. Only on a 2 strike count would he go for a pitch in the lower BA sections.
But, on the other hand, the Yankee teams of old used to really piss me off by just wearing down the best opposing pitchers. They would do nothing for 5 innings but foul off pitches, take strikes, and go deeeep into every count. They would be smothered for 5 innings, getting my hopes up every time. Then with a high pitch count, the opponent brings in their middle reliever. The game then turns with the Yanks scoring runs and winning on the 2 innings of the soft underbelly of middle relief. It happened too often to not be an annoyingly effective plan.
So, I am currently of the mind to support very selective hitting early in the game to drive up the pitch count of a good starter. But going for the first hittable pitch from relievers or in key game situations.
How is that for middle of the road?
Post a comment