Trying to mmeasure hitter aggressiveness

[Scorekeeper]

Got tired of only using pitches per PA/AB to try to get some idea about aggressive hitting, so I tried something new. Page 1 is our hitters, page 2 is our pitchers, and page 3 is opponent pitchers. Yes, I know the numbers for our hitters and their pitchers don’t match exactly. I know they should, but believe me, there’s a reason. I also realize this is a SB board and the numbers are from a HSV baseball team, but I don't see hitter aggressiveness as being only in one sport or the other.

View attachment aggressive.pdf

Any comments good or bad are appreciated.

 

[CoogansBluff]

Well, I have to study it quite a bit to make sense of it. I don't know if that's necessarily bad since the person it's designed to help will eventually understand it. ...

What do you not like about PA/AB?

 

[starsnuffer]

Looks like you're trying to use the inverse of patience?

-W

 

[Scorekeeper]

… What do you not like about PA/AB?

While the computation is simple in that the number of pitches is divided by the number of either one, how does the result factor in that any of the pitches were not hittable. To me, aggressiveness should be measured only by pitches the batter feels can be hit and swings at.

What I’ve done with this particular metric is to only look at a very narrow definition of “aggressive”. What’s happening on 1st pitch strikes.

Here’s the total of 1st pitch strikes, here’s the number of times the batters swung at them, and here’s the percentage of all PAs the batter swung at the 1st pitch. To me that’s a much more valid measure of aggressiveness than simply dividing the number of pitches by the number of PAs.

Now I suppose I could do the same thing for the 2nd, 3rd, or 4th pitches as well, but then the count begins having an effect too. Its really only on the 1st pitch that we’ll see if the hitter is going to be a hacker, i.e. he swings at a pitch he thinks he can hit, or a waiter, i.e. for some reason doesn’t want to swing at a ball in the strike zone.

But, I see how it can be confusing, so I added called 1st strikes and percentage of all 1st pitch strikes that were called, then sorted by that. So, what you see now is that the most aggressive hitters take the fewest 1st pitch strikes without attempting to hit them. See if this is better.

View attachment aggressive.pdf

Yours was a good question and I think helped me add something to the metric to make it more clear. Thanx.

 

[Scorekeeper]

Looks like you're trying to use the inverse of patience?

Well, to be honest, I don't much like using pitches per PA/AB as an indication of patience either.

 

[starsnuffer]

As a pitcher and pitching coach, I can tell you that we always try to throw first pitch strikes, but we never throw a first pitch strike (on purpose) that we think can be hit hard.

I wouldn't used called strikes as a means to gauge aggressiveness. The hitters zone and the pitchers zone are completely askew on a 0-0 count.

-W

 

[Doug Romrell]

Given I believe it is harder to get a girl to swing more than she does at good pitches than it is to get her to stop swinging at so many pitches, the stats I tend to look at most are hit-the-ball-fair percentage and on base percentage. Further, I absolutely hate standing third strikes, so I tend to look at, and talk about, that one a lot.

What's that saying.... "A player can have the nicest looking swing, but it doesn't mean much if she isn't hitting the ball."

 

[starsnuffer]

I hear what you're saying. I think it's really dependent on the level of play. I remember when I coached 12u TB getting some of the girls to swing was a huge problem. By 16u and certainly at 18u, getting them to stop swinging at pitches they cannot hit well with 0 or 1 strikes is a bigger problem. The games where a pitcher strikes many batters out are gone for the most part replaced by great pitchers that get outs very efficiently by generating weak hits.

Taking third strikes is enough to piss anyone off. It never ceases to amaze me when a kid is 0-2 that they think they might get walked. I make sure to practice fouling off pitches well outside the zone regularly in the cages. A coach can't expect a kid to do something they don't practice.

-W

 

[CoogansBluff]

... the stats I tend to look at most are hit-the-ball-fair percentage and on base percentage. Further, I absolutely hate standing third strikes, so I tend to look at, and talk about, that one a lot.

Why do you like hit-ball-fair PCT? Just curious.

Also, nobody likes the called strike three. ... But I have to say that I don't hate it as much as most. You don't want a timid hitter who is hoping for a ball. But you do want a hitter who is trying to make difficult decisions w/ 2 strikes. It's easy to avoid called third strikes. Just swing at every pitch when the count is 0-2, 1-2, 2-2, 3-2. But is that what we want hitters to do? If you're never watch a third strike, then I'd argue that you're swinging at too many pitchers, or you're just so good that you don't strike out much period.

 

[CoogansBluff]

I make sure to practice fouling off pitches well outside the zone regularly in the cages. A coach can't expect a kid to do something they don't practice.

If it's well outside the zone, why would you want to foul that off? Why not take it for a ball?

I don't believe in trying to foul balls off. But I've never had a team practice it and attempt it, so don't know if I can judge that.