Posted by: BHL (Knight1285@aol.com) on Wed May 17 20:45:04 2006

> > > > Kevin, you'll find that this thread won't be worth your time...I've seen the issue raised by BHL before...its interesting in a laughable way. Its clear that he never actually played the game seriously. jima
> > >
> > >
> > > Not to demean anyone intelligence, but it is clear that both ways have merit. I agree that in a perfect world or with almost as perfect a hitter as possible like a Ted Williams pulling the ball could be done on most every pitch. But as we know Ted Williams was the only Ted Williams. And since most hitters do not have the ability to time most every pitch and hit it hard conventional wisdom would have us use the opposite field at minimum in the case of a right hand hitter. And as someone mentioned the ground ball would be most effective and should be the easiest way to advance the runner which is how to play winning baseball. Of course if we have a player who has not practiced enough to execute a ground hit to the off field, it would not make good sense to have him attempt it at such time. But BHL in using more of a station to station theory might be used in an Earl Weaver 3 run homer mindset if the team is structured on power and the hitters would more likely have to bunt in an emergency rather than hit the other way. The late Charlie Lau believed the most important part of winning baseball was moving the runners. As to which way is better depends a lot on what tools the team is working with. Even so, a major league hitter and or any professional hitter should be able to hit to the opposite field when necessary as even the great Ted Williams found out while hitting against the Boudreau shift.
> >
> > Hi All,
> >
> > I understand that the shift, when the ball is hit within the confines the ballpark, will count as an unsuccessful at bat. But what happens if the ball is hit over the shortest fence--how do defenses guard against this possibility. As far charley Lau's moving runners along theory, pulling the ball also accomplishing these ends, since a fly ball hit deep enough will score a runner from ground. Even a ground ball might advance the runner, as fielders seldom chance hitting the runner in the back with the throw because the runner obscures their throwing angle to the plate (unfortunately, this favors on right handed batters).
> >
> > According to Arthur Mann's "How to Play Winning Baseball," the best throwing arms are rightfielders. This means that, since there are more right handed than left handed hitters in the "Show," the majority of balls will be pulled to the left fielder, who more than likely possesses a weaker throwing arm.
> >
> > Since steroids are now banned from baseball, smaller guys have three choices: they can uses muscle enhancing drugs, and risk eventual banishment from the game, shortchange themselves, and become single / contact hitters, who do nothing more than set the table for others (who will inevitably take all the credit), or they can use a strategy more prone to creating the RBI. I would choose option number three.
> >
> > Today, as sbl suggested, hitters can pull every pitch by crowding the plate. Seldom do pitchers throw inside anymore, as this June 2006 issue of "Baseball Digest" suggests (sometimes the month has not come yet, but the issues are still minted). Consider such an excerpt from this edition (Baseball Chat... [Goose] Gossage): Pitchers Need to Throw Inside), page 56:
> >
> > "When (Mark) McGwire and (Sammy) Sosa were going through their home run chase, it was like guys were afraid to go inside. Those two were taking batting practice [...] My teammates wouldn't have allowed that."
> >
> > Just my premonitions.
> >
> > Best,
> > BHL
>
> Pulling every pitch is the craziest thing ive ever heard. Every situation the hitter has a diffent task. runner on second nobody out your telling me u want a right handed to pull the ball recipe for disaster. Some days u have to give into the pitcher if hes on hitting the outside corner u have to go the other way, and if u move close to the plate like u say will eliminate this if my pitcher brings it hes goin to jam u all day. u need good team baseball to win big games, good example team usa in world baseball classic the only time they scored runs was when they hit homeruns. didnt get them very for because good pitching will always dominate good hitting. to win big ballgame u have to play good team ball wich is moving runner over in situations needed and always putting pressure on the defence. Another thing when a hitter is in a slump he is pulling everything ounce he start to hit the ball up the middle and other way his timming is back and he will soon be out to the slump. u have more time the deeper the ball gets like ted said wait and be quick

Hi All,

Why settle for table-setting when run producing is in one's grasp? Basically, I have familiarized myself with Ted Williams, and his protege, Steve Ferroli. Here is what Ferroli has to say on the matter: "We've all heard about hitting to all fields. [...] Stay away from it! Bottom line, it increases your strike zone [...] in depth. [...] Too much to remember--to much to practice!" ("Hit Your Potential" 158).

Besides this argument against hitting to all fields, I have another reason: a batter can strike the ball more solidly if he makes a mistakes on a pull swing than if he hits to the opposite field, simply because the opposite field stroke is a weaker one. On the contrary, sometimes an individual accidentally late on a pull hit will still drive the ball to the opposite field hard, which is quite a serendipitous event.

As for roles, even if a player is slated to be a table-setter, the ability to place the ball strategically over the power field fence will draw one enslaved to a diminutive role to grand stature.

By the way, I do not really believe that roster players care about any World League. Their main goal is to win a World Series ring, and all other games are secondary. Bud Selig even had to offer the league (i.e., NL or AL) the incentive for players to win the All Star game (i.e., home field advantage in the World Series). I believe that the latter part of your argument is explainable by the torpor-like attitude of high salary players to compete in events that does not immediate yield large sums of cash.

On the other hand, underpaid singles hitters have plenty of reasons to seek strategies that will pad their power numbers. Say, for example, Ichiro Suzuki hits .370-1-45-38. Suppose a guy of his stature uses the pull philosophy, and now hits .254-39-118-12. Who boasts the most important stats for the team? The latter, because home runs always drives in an automatic 1-4 runs. Stealing bases adds flavor the game, but it does not always offer results. Hence, the home run hitter is always more valuable statistically to his team than the table-setter.

I stand by original argument of pulling every pitch, and will defend it even more so if necessary.

Best,
BHL