Lou on SportsCenter

[CubColtPacer]

 

If the runner scores late in the game who's wasting an out?

 

when you could be trying to score enough runs to win instead of playing for extras, in which your chances could be worse, why not attempt to utilize the scoring chance by scoring 2 runs instead of one? unless the object of the game is to simply get a tie.

 

It depends on who's up. If you have Theriot up in the situation we have said and Izturis up next, it's what I would do. Again, it's not giving up an out and you're still hitting the ball hard.

 

having izturis up will still be worth not trtying to make an out. the only player who is not working with the percentages would abe a very bad hitting pitcher.

 

Again...no one is making an out on purpose.

 

Yeah-the chances of an out go up using our method, but there's still a decent shot of a hit.

[Magnetic Curses]

 

Can you point me to any data that supports your hypothesis either?

 

Hilarious. So the onus is always on the people who are tearing down conventional wisdom to provide proof, while you can spout CW all you want and never provide a shred of evidence to back your claims?

 

No, I'm not saying that whatsoever. He says I have no proof and then mentioned possible proof for his case. All I did was ask for the data. If he cannot provide the specific proof, then neither side will have won. I can't prove my case, because I can't prove how much higher of a chance the run will score with a different mindset at the plate-without that variable, I cannot do the math and show that run expectancies would be higher that way. He implied that he can prove his side-I'm waiting to see if that is the case or not.

 

Instead of waiting or requiring Sully to post the link, google TangoTiger. I'm not the biggest fan of his, but his research on this speaks fr itself.

 

I have read most of his data-as far as I know, he hasn't can't introduce a variable to see how much the run scored from trying to make an out vs trying to make a hit, because things like ground ball RBI's are ambigous-was the player trying to make a hit and ended up grounding into an RBI, or were they trying to do what they actually did? Without that question answered, this debate cannot be finished. If he has tried to tackle something like that, then I'd love to see the specific study, but since I have never seen anything like it from looking over most of his studies, I don't think it would be as easy for me to find as somebody who thinks they have seen it proven.

 

it is my understanding that attempting to make an out is worth fewer runs in all situations.

 

Well, I can tell you that's not correct. Sacrifices have been proven that they are worth it if the hitter is bad enough, so that's making an out that is worth more runs if the hitter is really bad (for bunts, the hitter has to be really bad though). So already, your assertion that attempting to make an out is worth fewer runs in all situations is not correct.

 

Now, this discussion is not about sacrifice bunts, but there would stand for reason also be situations where bringing in the runner from 3rd would be appropriate with one out (in fact, there should be more situations for that then just moving the runner up a base), so the caliber of hitter could be improved and still have possible situations where attempting to bring home the runner with a ground ball or a fly ball would be the correct move. I'm just saying there are some situations where it is correct, not that is correct all the time.

 

the bold is absurd. if you're trying to drive the ball, you have a much better chance of driving a runner home either way. if you're trying to hit the ball hard, there are plenty of chances that the hitter will still make an out capable of driving the runner home, one does not need to try to make an out.

 

and weren't you the one who said trying to hit the ball hard would only induce useless pop-fly, yet somehow trying to hit a fly ball wouldn't? that's ludicrous. can you step away from your comments and look at how they sound?

 

this is exactly what conventional wisdom gets you. tied up in your own logic and, in the end, believing that making an out is somehow good for the team.

 

see the forest for the trees, my friend.

[Magnetic Curses]

 

If the runner scores late in the game who's wasting an out?

 

when you could be trying to score enough runs to win instead of playing for extras, in which your chances could be worse, why not attempt to utilize the scoring chance by scoring 2 runs instead of one? unless the object of the game is to simply get a tie.

 

It depends on who's up. If you have Theriot up in the situation we have said and Izturis up next, it's what I would do. Again, it's not giving up an out and you're still hitting the ball hard.

 

having izturis up will still be worth not trtying to make an out. the only player who is not working with the percentages would abe a very bad hitting pitcher.

 

Again...no one is making an out on purpose.

 

yes, they are. hitting the ball weaker than you normally do on purpose is tantamount to sacrificing.

 

and there's a much better chance you'll make an out than score a run.

[CuseCubFan69]

 

If the runner scores late in the game who's wasting an out?

 

when you could be trying to score enough runs to win instead of playing for extras, in which your chances could be worse, why not attempt to utilize the scoring chance by scoring 2 runs instead of one? unless the object of the game is to simply get a tie.

 

It depends on who's up. If you have Theriot up in the situation we have said and Izturis up next, it's what I would do. Again, it's not giving up an out and you're still hitting the ball hard.

 

having izturis up will still be worth not trtying to make an out. the only player who is not working with the percentages would abe a very bad hitting pitcher.

 

Again...no one is making an out on purpose.

 

yes, they are. hitting the ball weaker than you normally do on purpose is tantamount to sacrificing.

 

and there's a much better chance you'll make an out than score a run.

 

Unless you have an OBP of 500 or better it's pretty much true for everyone.

[CubColtPacer]

Well, let me be the first to provide a study for my case:

 

The value of a productive out is minimized by the fact that it's production is accompanied by an out. According to Run Expectancy Charts, there are only three situations where a productive out increases your expected runs scored: bases loaded with nobody out, runner on third with one out, and first and third with one out. Those are the only three situations in which a productive out is a good thing. In any other situation, it can only be positively described as "less bad."

 

Of course, depending on the batter at the plate, and the lineup he plays in, there may be other situations where a productive out is a good thing.

 

One of those situations, the runner on third with one out, was exactly what I'm talking about. As has been said, a productive out actually increases expected runs scored in this situation.

 

Here is the link:

http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/productive-outs-and-the-people-who-love-them/

[Magnetic Curses]

Well, let me be the first to provide a study for my case:

 

The value of a productive out is minimized by the fact that it's production is accompanied by an out. According to Run Expectancy Charts, there are only three situations where a productive out increases your expected runs scored: bases loaded with nobody out, runner on third with one out, and first and third with one out. Those are the only three situations in which a productive out is a good thing. In any other situation, it can only be positively described as "less bad."

 

Of course, depending on the batter at the plate, and the lineup he plays in, there may be other situations where a productive out is a good thing.

 

One of those situations, the runner on third with one out, was exactly what I'm talking about. As has been said, a productive out actually increases expected runs scored in this situation.

 

Here is the link:

http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/productive-outs-and-the-people-who-love-them/

 

i said "trying to make an out". a "productive" out can be made when a player isn't trying to sacrifice, if you can believe it. thus, a player who's giving it their all by hitting the ball as sharply in any direction as they can, would probably be more likely to score the run in any situation while a player who's waving weakly at a bad pitch in the dirt, can find themselves in an 0-2 hole very quickly.

[CubColtPacer]

Well, let me be the first to provide a study for my case:

 

The value of a productive out is minimized by the fact that it's production is accompanied by an out. According to Run Expectancy Charts, there are only three situations where a productive out increases your expected runs scored: bases loaded with nobody out, runner on third with one out, and first and third with one out. Those are the only three situations in which a productive out is a good thing. In any other situation, it can only be positively described as "less bad."

 

Of course, depending on the batter at the plate, and the lineup he plays in, there may be other situations where a productive out is a good thing.

 

One of those situations, the runner on third with one out, was exactly what I'm talking about. As has been said, a productive out actually increases expected runs scored in this situation.

 

Here is the link:

http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/productive-outs-and-the-people-who-love-them/

 

i said "trying to make an out". a "productive" out can be made when a player isn't trying to sacrifice, if you can believe it. thus, a player who's giving it their all by hitting the ball as sharply in any direction as they can, would probably be more likely to score the run in any situation while a player who's waving weakly at a bad pitch in the dirt, can find themselves in an 0-2 hole very quickly.

 

Ok, let me ask you this-here is my quote:

 

If the defense is conceding the run, run expectancies would tell you that sometimes it's worth more runs just to take the more sure ground ball out (which could still turn into a hit) rather than risk an out that does not drive in the run.

 

Here is your response to my quote:

 

and i've yet to see the situation in which making an out is worth more runs than not making an out. the situation may exist, but i don't think so.

 

Now how does your response lessen my argument whatsover? I see only one difference in our arguments now. You say that you're going to make the same number of productive outs if you go up there trying to score the run in any way possible (including hitting a fly ball or a ground ball that will likely get you out but score the run) or if you try to get a hit, but with trying to get a hit you get more hits. I'm saying that your productive out percentage goes way up when you're willing to possibly give yourself up and hit a ground ball to second or a fly ball instead of waiting for a pitch that you can drive that may never come, and that is sometimes worth depending on game situations/defense/hitters up the drop in hits that you give up in doing this. Do you disagree with this assessment of where we disagree?

[Magnetic Curses]

Now how does your response lessen my argument whatsover? I see only one difference in our arguments now. You say that you're going to make the same number of productive outs if you go up there trying to score the run in any way possible (including hitting a fly ball or a ground ball that will likely get you out but score the run) or if you try to get a hit, but with trying to get a hit you get more hits.I'm saying that your productive out percentage goes way up when you're willing to possibly give yourself up and hit a ground ball to second or a fly ball instead of waiting for a pitch that you can drive that may never come, and that is sometimes worth depending on game situations/defense/hitters up the drop in hits that you give up in doing this. Do you disagree with this assessment of where we disagree?

 

check the bolded, you're not understanding me.

 

a player has a better chance to score the run if he's trying to strike the ball sharply. if he tries to ball sharply, there's a much greater chance that he:

 

1. gets a hit, scoring the run.

 

or

 

2. drives the ball deep enough to score the run

 

in addition, when trying to hit a weak ground ball or a lazy pop fly, the hitter will have a less a chance of scoring the run while making an out....but i agree with you here, a hitter trying to hit the ball weakly DEFINITELY has a better chance at making an out.

you might as well try hitting the ball hard.

 

and you never addressed the issue: you seem to think trying to hit the ball hard will increase the chances that the player will hit a harmless pop fly, yet you champion the idea of a player trying to hit a pop-fly. which is it?

[CubColtPacer]

Now how does your response lessen my argument whatsover? I see only one difference in our arguments now. You say that you're going to make the same number of productive outs if you go up there trying to score the run in any way possible (including hitting a fly ball or a ground ball that will likely get you out but score the run) or if you try to get a hit, but with trying to get a hit you get more hits.I'm saying that your productive out percentage goes way up when you're willing to possibly give yourself up and hit a ground ball to second or a fly ball instead of waiting for a pitch that you can drive that may never come, and that is sometimes worth depending on game situations/defense/hitters up the drop in hits that you give up in doing this. Do you disagree with this assessment of where we disagree?

 

check the bolded, you're not understanding me.

 

a player has a better chance to score the run if he's trying to strike the ball sharply. if he tries to ball sharply, there's a much greater chance that he:

 

1. gets a hit, scoring the run.

 

or

 

2. drives the ball deep enough to score the run

 

in addition, when trying to hit a weak ground ball or a lazy pop fly, the hitter will have a less a chance of scoring the run while making an out....but i agree with you here, a hitter trying to hit the ball weakly DEFINITELY has a better chance at making an out.

you might as well try hitting the ball hard.

 

and you never addressed the issue: you seem to think trying to hit the ball hard will increase the chances that the player will hit a harmless pop fly, yet you champion the idea of a player trying to hit a pop-fly. which is it?

 

I don't want the hitter to pop-up to the infield-I never champion that I want the hitter to hit a pop fly, but a fly ball-which assumes a fly ball deep enough to score any decent speed runner.

 

Ok-so if a person had good enough bat control to be able to make a productive out every time with a runner on third and one out, you would take it right because it increases run production? I know nobody is that good, but my premise is that a person with good bat control can have their number of hits while trying to hit a ground ball or a fly ball=the number of times they fail to make a productive out.

If they can do that, then that increases the run expectancies over a hitter who is trying to hit away like a normal at-bat. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree if a player has the ability to do that or not.

 

Edit: BTW, one thing is that my argument has more to do with pitch selection than hitting the ball hard or weakly. I still want a person to hit it as hard as they can (albeit with a shorter swing) but there are many more type of pitches that a person can turn into a productive out than pitches that they can drive effectively. If they are looking to score the runner and see a pitch they can drive, then drive it-but if they get a pitch where they can hit a ground ball, instead of taking it and waiting for a possible pitch they could drive they should just take the ground ball and the run.

[Magnetic Curses]

Now how does your response lessen my argument whatsover? I see only one difference in our arguments now. You say that you're going to make the same number of productive outs if you go up there trying to score the run in any way possible (including hitting a fly ball or a ground ball that will likely get you out but score the run) or if you try to get a hit, but with trying to get a hit you get more hits.I'm saying that your productive out percentage goes way up when you're willing to possibly give yourself up and hit a ground ball to second or a fly ball instead of waiting for a pitch that you can drive that may never come, and that is sometimes worth depending on game situations/defense/hitters up the drop in hits that you give up in doing this. Do you disagree with this assessment of where we disagree?

 

check the bolded, you're not understanding me.

 

a player has a better chance to score the run if he's trying to strike the ball sharply. if he tries to ball sharply, there's a much greater chance that he:

 

1. gets a hit, scoring the run.

 

or

 

2. drives the ball deep enough to score the run

 

in addition, when trying to hit a weak ground ball or a lazy pop fly, the hitter will have a less a chance of scoring the run while making an out....but i agree with you here, a hitter trying to hit the ball weakly DEFINITELY has a better chance at making an out.

you might as well try hitting the ball hard.

 

and you never addressed the issue: you seem to think trying to hit the ball hard will increase the chances that the player will hit a harmless pop fly, yet you champion the idea of a player trying to hit a pop-fly. which is it?

 

I don't want the hitter to pop-up to the infield-I never champion that I want the hitter to hit a pop fly, but a fly ball-which assumes a fly ball deep enough to score any decent speed runner.

 

chances are, if you aren't trying to hit the ball with authority with the intention of getting a hit, you aren't going to hit the ball deep enough to score the runner anyways.

 

Ok-so if a person had good enough bat control to be able to make a productive out every time with a runner on third and one out, you would take it right because it increases run production? I know nobody is that good, but my premise is that a person with good bat control can have their number of hits while trying to hit a ground ball or a fly ball=the number of times they fail to make a productive out.

 

it would be a crime to make a hitter of that caliber do anything but try to get a hit. if a such a hitter existed, you wouldn't be using him right.

[Magnetic Curses]

Ok-so if a person had good enough bat control to be able to make a productive out every time with a runner on third and one out, you would take it right because it increases run production? I know nobody is that good, but my premise is that a person with good bat control can have their number of hits while trying to hit a ground ball or a fly ball=the number of times they fail to make a productive out.

 

it would be a crime to make a hitter of that caliber do anything but try to get a hit. if a such a hitter existed, you wouldn't be using him right.

 

by the way, do you get what i mean now when i said that sometimes people get so wrapped up in the conventional logic of baseball that if conventional wisdom told them that down was up, they'd argue that it was until blue in the face?

[CubColtPacer]

Read my edit on my previous post-I think that better defines exactly where I am, and I think you might like it at least a little bit better as well also.

[Magnetic Curses]

 

Edit: BTW, one thing is that my argument has more to do with pitch selection than hitting the ball hard or weakly. I still want a person to hit it as hard as they can (albeit with a shorter swing) but there are many more type of pitches that a person can turn into a productive out than pitches that they can drive effectively. If they are looking to score the runner and see a pitch they can drive, then drive it-but if they get a pitch where they can hit a ground ball, instead of taking it and waiting for a possible pitch they could drive they should just take the ground ball and the run.

 

if you're swinging at a pitch where you can hit a ground ball, you're swinging at a pitcher's pitch, and should just probably take a walk if the pitcher won't throw you a strike.

[CubColtPacer]

Ok-so if a person had good enough bat control to be able to make a productive out every time with a runner on third and one out, you would take it right because it increases run production? I know nobody is that good, but my premise is that a person with good bat control can have their number of hits while trying to hit a ground ball or a fly ball=the number of times they fail to make a productive out.

 

it would be a crime to make a hitter of that caliber do anything but try to get a hit. if a such a hitter existed, you wouldn't be using him right.

 

by the way, do you get what i mean now when i said that sometimes people get so wrapped up in the conventional logic of baseball that if conventional wisdom told them that down was up, they'd argue that it was until blue in the face?

 

No, because I think that many more hitters have the ability to control the bat well enough to get it to a spot to score a run than to get a hit-I disagree with you on the quality of hitter needed to be able to hit a grounder to the second baseman or shorstop if they need one, and I think any decent hitter would be able to do that most of the time.

[CubColtPacer]

 

Edit: BTW, one thing is that my argument has more to do with pitch selection than hitting the ball hard or weakly. I still want a person to hit it as hard as they can (albeit with a shorter swing) but there are many more type of pitches that a person can turn into a productive out than pitches that they can drive effectively. If they are looking to score the runner and see a pitch they can drive, then drive it-but if they get a pitch where they can hit a ground ball, instead of taking it and waiting for a possible pitch they could drive they should just take the ground ball and the run.

 

if you're swinging at a pitch where you can hit a ground ball, you're swinging at a pitcher's pitch, and should just probably take a walk if the pitcher won't throw you a strike.

 

A pitcher's pitch can be a strike as well-not all strikes can be driven well-if it's a ball, I want my hitter taking it yes and waiting for a strike that they can either drive or if it's a strike that's a pitcher's pitch hitting the ground ball to score the run.

[Magnetic Curses]

 

Edit: BTW, one thing is that my argument has more to do with pitch selection than hitting the ball hard or weakly. I still want a person to hit it as hard as they can (albeit with a shorter swing) but there are many more type of pitches that a person can turn into a productive out than pitches that they can drive effectively. If they are looking to score the runner and see a pitch they can drive, then drive it-but if they get a pitch where they can hit a ground ball, instead of taking it and waiting for a possible pitch they could drive they should just take the ground ball and the run.

 

if you're swinging at a pitch where you can hit a ground ball, you're swinging at a pitcher's pitch, and should just probably take a walk if the pitcher won't throw you a strike.

 

A pitcher's pitch can be a strike as well-not all strikes can be driven well-if it's a ball, I want my hitter taking it yes and waiting for a strike that they can either drive or if it's a strike that's a pitcher's pitch hitting the ground ball to score the run.

 

if a pitcher is good enough to throw you bad picthes for consistent strikes, then he's very good and trying to hit the ball weakly wouldn't be any more productive.

[CubColtPacer]

 

Edit: BTW, one thing is that my argument has more to do with pitch selection than hitting the ball hard or weakly. I still want a person to hit it as hard as they can (albeit with a shorter swing) but there are many more type of pitches that a person can turn into a productive out than pitches that they can drive effectively. If they are looking to score the runner and see a pitch they can drive, then drive it-but if they get a pitch where they can hit a ground ball, instead of taking it and waiting for a possible pitch they could drive they should just take the ground ball and the run.

 

if you're swinging at a pitch where you can hit a ground ball, you're swinging at a pitcher's pitch, and should just probably take a walk if the pitcher won't throw you a strike.

 

A pitcher's pitch can be a strike as well-not all strikes can be driven well-if it's a ball, I want my hitter taking it yes and waiting for a strike that they can either drive or if it's a strike that's a pitcher's pitch hitting the ground ball to score the run.

 

if a pitcher is good enough to throw you bad picthes for consistent strikes, then he's very good and trying to hit the ball weakly wouldn't be any more productive.

 

The only thing I think is that this will decrease the strikeout rate for that hitter. In most situations, decreasing the strikeout rate is not necessarily a good thing (I do agree with you that in most situations putting the ball in play only to put the ball in play is a bad strategy)-in this scenario though where most of the balls that the hitter puts into play will likely result in a run (I'm talking mostly early in the game where the infield is conceding the run) then anything that decreases the stikeout percentage against such a good pitcher is a good thing.

[Magnetic Curses]

 

Edit: BTW, one thing is that my argument has more to do with pitch selection than hitting the ball hard or weakly. I still want a person to hit it as hard as they can (albeit with a shorter swing) but there are many more type of pitches that a person can turn into a productive out than pitches that they can drive effectively. If they are looking to score the runner and see a pitch they can drive, then drive it-but if they get a pitch where they can hit a ground ball, instead of taking it and waiting for a possible pitch they could drive they should just take the ground ball and the run.

 

if you're swinging at a pitch where you can hit a ground ball, you're swinging at a pitcher's pitch, and should just probably take a walk if the pitcher won't throw you a strike.

 

A pitcher's pitch can be a strike as well-not all strikes can be driven well-if it's a ball, I want my hitter taking it yes and waiting for a strike that they can either drive or if it's a strike that's a pitcher's pitch hitting the ground ball to score the run.

 

if a pitcher is good enough to throw you bad picthes for consistent strikes, then he's very good and trying to hit the ball weakly wouldn't be any more productive.

 

The only thing I think is that this will decrease the strikeout rate for that hitter. In most situations, decreasing the strikeout rate is not necessarily a good thing (I do agree with you that in most situations putting the ball in play only to put the ball in play is a bad strategy)-in this scenario though where most of the balls that the hitter puts into play will likely result in a run (I'm talking mostly early in the game where the infield is conceding the run) then anything that decreases the stikeout percentage against such a good pitcher is a good thing.

 

there's no way that you can say that. i could say that putting the ball in play just to put the ball in play would increase the likelihood that the hitter would get out in an unproductive fashion and be just as correct.

 

if you try to go back up the middle, bam, the pitcher grabs it easily and starts an instant run-down.

[CubColtPacer]

 

Edit: BTW, one thing is that my argument has more to do with pitch selection than hitting the ball hard or weakly. I still want a person to hit it as hard as they can (albeit with a shorter swing) but there are many more type of pitches that a person can turn into a productive out than pitches that they can drive effectively. If they are looking to score the runner and see a pitch they can drive, then drive it-but if they get a pitch where they can hit a ground ball, instead of taking it and waiting for a possible pitch they could drive they should just take the ground ball and the run.

 

if you're swinging at a pitch where you can hit a ground ball, you're swinging at a pitcher's pitch, and should just probably take a walk if the pitcher won't throw you a strike.

 

A pitcher's pitch can be a strike as well-not all strikes can be driven well-if it's a ball, I want my hitter taking it yes and waiting for a strike that they can either drive or if it's a strike that's a pitcher's pitch hitting the ground ball to score the run.

 

if a pitcher is good enough to throw you bad picthes for consistent strikes, then he's very good and trying to hit the ball weakly wouldn't be any more productive.

 

The only thing I think is that this will decrease the strikeout rate for that hitter. In most situations, decreasing the strikeout rate is not necessarily a good thing (I do agree with you that in most situations putting the ball in play only to put the ball in play is a bad strategy)-in this scenario though where most of the balls that the hitter puts into play will likely result in a run (I'm talking mostly early in the game where the infield is conceding the run) then anything that decreases the stikeout percentage against such a good pitcher is a good thing.

 

there's no way that you can say that. i could say that putting the ball in play just to put the ball in play would increase the likelihood that the hitter would get out in an unproductive fashion and be just as correct.

 

if you try to go back up the middle, bam, the pitcher grabs it easily and starts an instant run-down.

 

There aren't many scenarios that could cause an unprodctive out in this scenario. A pop-up to the infield or short outfield and a grounder to the pitcher are the only two likely ways-it's much, much more likely that a person is going to make an out in another way than that if the ball is put into play.

[A New Era]

I like baseball.

 

I love the cubs.

 

thought the tread needed some of that simplicity.

[Magnetic Curses]

 

Edit: BTW, one thing is that my argument has more to do with pitch selection than hitting the ball hard or weakly. I still want a person to hit it as hard as they can (albeit with a shorter swing) but there are many more type of pitches that a person can turn into a productive out than pitches that they can drive effectively. If they are looking to score the runner and see a pitch they can drive, then drive it-but if they get a pitch where they can hit a ground ball, instead of taking it and waiting for a possible pitch they could drive they should just take the ground ball and the run.

 

if you're swinging at a pitch where you can hit a ground ball, you're swinging at a pitcher's pitch, and should just probably take a walk if the pitcher won't throw you a strike.

 

A pitcher's pitch can be a strike as well-not all strikes can be driven well-if it's a ball, I want my hitter taking it yes and waiting for a strike that they can either drive or if it's a strike that's a pitcher's pitch hitting the ground ball to score the run.

 

if a pitcher is good enough to throw you bad picthes for consistent strikes, then he's very good and trying to hit the ball weakly wouldn't be any more productive.

 

The only thing I think is that this will decrease the strikeout rate for that hitter. In most situations, decreasing the strikeout rate is not necessarily a good thing (I do agree with you that in most situations putting the ball in play only to put the ball in play is a bad strategy)-in this scenario though where most of the balls that the hitter puts into play will likely result in a run (I'm talking mostly early in the game where the infield is conceding the run) then anything that decreases the stikeout percentage against such a good pitcher is a good thing.

 

there's no way that you can say that. i could say that putting the ball in play just to put the ball in play would increase the likelihood that the hitter would get out in an unproductive fashion and be just as correct.

 

if you try to go back up the middle, bam, the pitcher grabs it easily and starts an instant run-down.

 

There aren't many scenarios that could cause an unprodctive out in this scenario. A pop-up to the infield or short outfield and a grounder to the pitcher are the only two likely ways-it's much, much more likely that a person is going to make an out in another way than that if the ball is put into play.

 

or a direct groundball to a corner position, or a strikeout (swinging at bad pitches can cause that).

 

there are plenty of ways to unsuccessful at chasing the run home, it happens all the time, a sure run is just not a common thing.

 

as i've said, you're more likely to score the run by trying to put the ball in play effectively, even guys who strike out a ton amke contact a good majority of the time.