For the sake of argument, regarding Raffo

[bulldogbaja]

I am procrastinating doing what I need to do, so I did some stats research on MSU baseball over the last few years. Lots of people say we shouldn't hire Raffo because, among other things, our hitting has been so bad. I looked up our BA and ERA since 2004.

2004- BA .310 (SEC rank 2), ERA 4.47 (SEC rank 10)
2005- BA .297 (5), ERA 3.51 (2)
2006- BA .308 (4), ERA 4.22 (6)
2007- BA .316 (3), ERA 4.86 (9)
2008- BA .301 (6), ERA 6.1 (12) (so far)

Each of those years, we were in the NCAA and had a postseason record of 14-8, counting the SECT, and it sure wasn't because of our pitching.
Now for me, game 3 of the Kentucky series helped me make up my mind that Raffo is too conservative, ie. polk-esque. But maybe he's not that bad of a hitting coach.
Stats came from here: http://web1.ncaa.org/stats/StatsSrv/rankings?sportCode=MBA

 

[GOPdog]

[No message]

 

[ArrowDawg]

Not to argue against you, but I wonder if there's not more to it than meets the eye. Batting average is one thing, but how well did we hit with runners on base or in scoring position? How well did we put down bunts in sacrifice situations? What was our slugging percentage? These are all things that factor heavily into a baseball team's offensive performance, and sometimes a mere batting average can be deceptive. To be frank, a .300 or better batting average should almost be automatic with metal bats and at this level of competition. I don't think I'd personally say Raffo is a "bad" hitting coach. He's done okay, but just not enough to my liking.</p>

</p>

</p>

 

[patdog]

you're looking at the wrong statistic. Batting average means very little. The only important stat is runs per game. And to get a real comparison, you need to look at SEC games only, not all games. My offhand guess is that we won't stack up quite as well there, but also not as badly as popular opinion would say.

 

[Stormrider81]

We haven't been terrible at getting people on base. Problem is we have a bunch of singles hitters and don't sac bunt, hit and run, or steal all that often so we typically need 3-4 hits in an inning to drive in one run. That's tough to do. Our big problem has been driving in the people that do get on base. Our average with RISP cannot be very good and the number of times we've hit into double plays has to be high.

Raffo isn't a terrible hitting coach, but he isn't excelling in his current job either. Look at our run production versus SEC teams this year. The only time we've scored a lot has been in UK's tiny ballpark. We scored a grnnd total of 5 runs in the SC series. 2 of our 3 SEC wins were one run affairs. Our other win was 4-0 over Ole Miss. We've haven't been consistently good at scoring runs in a long, long time. That isn't the type of job performance that screams promotion.</p>

 

[SanfordRJones]

I don't think runs per game is the best measurement. There are too many other variables outside the hitting coach's control that influence this stat. In our case, the most notable example is the guy in the third base coaching box who can't manufacture a run to save his life.

I've been drinking Sabermetrics kool-aid, so I think a better indicator is OPS, or slugging percentage by itself, at least.

I don't think Raffo is a bad hitting coach. However, the fact that he has never managed a college program should automatically disqualify him from even being considered as our head coach. It's nothing against Raffo. He just doesn't have the experience to be leading one of the top (or at least it should be) programs in the nation.

Edit to add: You're right about batting average not meaning much for the sake of judging a hitting coach, especially with aluminum bats.

 

[8dog]

"I've been drinking Sabermetrics kool-aid, so I think a better indicator is OPS, or slugging percentage by itself, at least."

But in the end, OPS and the Sabermetric favored stats are relied upon to determine how to best score runs. I think in Moneyball they even note that Billy Beane calculated the total number of runs that he thought the A's needed to score in that year to make the playoffs.

 

[8dog]

we are currently 9th in BA in conf games.

We were 5th last year and 5th in 06 in conf games.

the problem is that that's not translating to runs b/c in 06 were were 7th in runs in conf, in 07 we were 9th in runs in conf. and this year we are 12th.

I can only find that far back for conference only and am tired of researching but I have a feeling that we are probably the worst every year in Ks, SBs and sac bunts which leads to fewer runs.

 

[SanfordRJones]

It does say Beane calculated the number of runs.

Still, it is out of the hitting coach's control after the player leaves the batting box. If a team has a high OPS, the hitting coach is doing his job. It's the rawest stat available to judge that particular coach, and therefore the best.

Sabremetrics preaches not wasting outs with sac. bunts, stolen bases, etc. This is because it's rooted in moving station to station with high on-base % and getting as many plate appearances as possible. If that's the case, the person calling the offense has less effect on runs scored than what happens in the batter's box because there's a lot less to call. Still, if you have a third base coach who is way too conservative or has a penchant for getting runners thrown out at the plate, for example, the runs per game stat is getting negatively affected vs. the other stats like OPS.

 

[8dog]

"Sabremetrics preaches not wasting outs with sac. bunts, stolen bases, etc"

Very true, but I think that emphasis only rings true on the major league level where skills are premium. In college, your best chances are to put pressure on the opposing defenses. The best example I can think of is the 05 regionals/super regionals. Miami ran us ragged stealing bases with the two guys at the top of the order. And Ole miss took game one of the super against Texas by bunting several times.

 

[patdog]

You're right that runs per game can't totally be attributed to Raffo. Maybe a better statistic to measure him by would be slugging percentage in conference games, although I think you'd probably also want to consider walks, strikeouts and hit by pitches as well.</p>

 

[SanfordRJones]

although I think you'd probably also want to consider walks, strikeouts and hit by pitches as well.

OPS would do, except for the strikeouts, that since it's slugging plus on-base.

 

[bulldogbaja]

Obviously Kentucky is #1, but also MSU is #12. Couldn't be farther from Cohen's style of play.

 

[SanfordRJones]

You're not going to find major league arms on most college catchers. I've always looked at it as not wasting outs rather than not stealing.

As an extreme example, my squad had a kid a few years ago who was 35 for 36 stealing bases. In other words, he turned 35 singles/ walks/ HBP's into doubles and turned one single into an out. The major league view of sabremetrics as it regards stolen bases doesn't hold water at all when you have a smart baserunner who runs a 4.4 forty playing against opposing catchers with terrible arms.

When it comes to sac bunts, I think common sense has to prevail sometimes. For instance, if you're late in a game and need 1 run, you should be trying to manufacture it instead of letting sabremetrics run its course.

 

[Todd4State]

How many times we hit behind on the count because we take too many pitches.

 

[bulldogcountry1]

a year or two ago where he figured out batting averages at different counts. if i remember correctly, statistically, a college player's batting average drops .100 points with an 0-2 count. every time we go up and take a perfect strike, i think, "there's 50 points."

 

[SanfordRJones]

"Perfect strike" is kind of a misnomer since different batters can hit different pitches hard.

I saw another study that, instead of looking at pitches that ended an at-bat, it looked at pitches put in play only. In other words, it didn't factor in strikeouts along with balls put in play on 2 strike counts or walks along with balls in play on 3 ball counts. The results of this study ran counter to the results of the study Polk cited in his playbook, and the one you're citing, it sounds like.

This study was making the argument that the position in the count during which a ball is put into play doesn't have as big an impact as conventional wisdom leads you to believe. If I remember correctly, there was a downward trend in averages on pitcher's counts and an upward trend on hitter's counts, but not nowhere near as steep as the other study.

While there are obvious flaws with the study if I'm remembering correctly how it was done, I still buy the argument to some degree. My general philosophy is to teach hitters to know what they can hit hard and the discipline to look for that pitch early in the count and on hitter's counts, then open up the zone on pitcher's counts. I'd much rather they take a strike at a location they usually don't handle well than to hit that pitch and ground out or something, obviously. Swinging away early in the count just to put the ball in play isn't very smart if the batter isn't able to get good wood on the ball. On the other hand, I threaten to shoot their dog if they take strike 3.

I'd like to see a study where, instead of using batting average, an objective scale is used to determine hard hit balls vs. weakly hit balls measured on a count-by count basis. Just saying X batting average on Y count can be misleading, because a rocket shot right at someone is an out and a weak bloop over the infield is a hit. I would be pretty surprised if this kind of study ran counter the study you mentioned.

 

[bulldogbaja]

I'm not convinced Raffo "teaches" players to take the first pitch. And in response to the runs argument, Raffo also doesn't give the bunt sign or hit and run sign- that's Polk. Well, he doesn't either, but you get the idea.

 

[SanfordRJones]

That's the point I was trying to make in my unreadable essay on Sabremtrics. Raffo is responsible for what happens in the box as the hitting coach. Polk is responsible for them on the bases. Yes, the philosophy of sabremetrics is to go station to station and not give up outs through sac. bunts and getting caught stealing, but that style doesn't hold as much water at lower levels, where doing things counter to the sabremetric style make a lot of sense. Those things are out of the hitting coach's control unless he is also calling offensive signals and coaching third base.

As an aside, Bill James also looked at the detriment of stealing bases to the batter (i.e. the player in the box when the runner attempts to steal). He concluded that batting success (I can't remember what stat he used - batting, on-base, slugging, etc.) goes down when a runner attempts to steal during an at-bat, and theorized that the batter was taking emphasis away from his AB and putting it toward doing what he could to advance the runner, whether it was swinging through pitches he would normally take, taking/ swinging through pitches he would otherwise put in play, etc.