SABRQuixotics (Old School vs. SABRmetrics)
When I started this blog a few weeks back I stated why I thought that I could provide a different perspective into the blogosphere. My reasoning was that I grew up on old-school baseball philosophies, discovered SABRmetrics and have played baseball at a higher level than most people, so I have an understanding of both schools of thought...Old School vs. SABRmetrics

I've read many opinions about SABRmetrics that are quite erroneous all across the blogosphere. SABRmetrics have opened up a new world of baseball knowledge, but that doesn't mean that the Old School should be thought of as irrelevant or inaccurate. Remember, the Old School's knowledge has come from about 130 years of trial and error, so some of the Old School philosophies have withstood the test of time.

Now to get to my point, I'm going to reference fellow Brewers' blogger Al Bethke (read Al's Ramblings Roundtable "Opening Week Edition" by clicking here). Bethke is not the only person who has these opinions. Some of these thoughts are representative of an entirely new sect of baseball observers. I'll call this group the SABRquixotics. The SABRquixotics are the people who have read Bill James, Rob Neyer and have taken what they say far too literally. If you ever read Bill James, you might be surprised (as I was) to find out how far he actually dissents from the SABRmetric crowd. Personally, I think Rob Neyer is more partisan to the SABRmetric crowd than Bill James. Now after that brief history lesson, I'll show you what I mean...

In reference to the incredible amount of walks the Brewers have drawn so far this season...
"But, somehow, we've gone from the Lopester bizarro world method of offensive success, such as "being aggressive up there, can't fall behind in the count" (FYI, still heartily endorsed by Bill Schroeder on the TV side...)to intelligently planning out a strategy, attempt to induce fatigue in the other starting pitcher, while looking for a pitch to drive; in just a couple short years."

The whole idea of "being aggressive" has sort of been turned against the Old School much like the term "politically correct" has been turned against the progressive movement. To "be aggressive" doesn't mean "swing at everything". Being an aggressive hitter means hitting your pitch when it is thrown. If you're looking for a certain pitch and it's the first one in the at-bat, you attack it. If the pitcher hangs a breaking ball on the first pitch you attack it. If you're looking for a specific pitch in a specific location and it doesn't come, you let it go by. We'll call this "selective aggressive". You look for your pitch and when it comes you hit it hard. What often separates the good hitters from the bad ones is the ability to recognize the pitch and location and whether or not to swing or take it. And to make a comment on the last part of Bethke's statement, there is nothing wrong with having your plan at the plate be to drive the first pitch in your zone. I can't find the exact numbers, but the MLB average for first-pitch balls in play is something like .370.

"A while ago, Ronnie Belliard was criticized for taking too many pitches, and sat on the bench because of it, in favor of...Lenny Harris..."

The year he's talking about is 2002. The reason Ronnie Belliard sat was because he hit .217 with a .257 OBP in 289 ABs (with 18 walks). Plus he had a bad attitude. That's not always a good reason to sit a guy, but when your OBP is under .260 and you have a bad attitude, you better grab some bench. In 2002 Lenny Harris didn't get his first start until something like June and never complained. When he got in the line-up he played hard and, oh yeah by the way, hit .305 with a .355 OBP in 197 ABs (with 14 walks).

Another flaw in the SABRquixotics hitting philosophy (other than the fact that many of them have never picked up a bat)*** is that they tend to not make a distinction between "taking pitches" and "taking pitches for the sake of taking pitches". Going down 0-1 in an at-bat lowers a hitters batting average by about 70 points. Going down 0-2 lowers it to under .200. What these numbers mean is that a hitter should take a pitch that he cannot handle, not take a pitch just for the sake of making the pitcher throw more. Hitting line-drives all over the yard makes a manager go to his bullpen much faster than by making a pitcher throw one or two extra pitches here and there by automatically taking the first pitch.

***I just meant this as a joke. Please don't flood me with a bunch of angry emails.

Some players can make the "take a strike no matter what" philosophy work. Wade Boggs and Ted Williams come to mind. Barry Bonds is a player that gets tons of credit for his plate-discipline (and it is well deserved). I looked on ESPN.com to see Bonds' numbers by count. After 0-1 Bonds hit .289, after 1-2 he hit .204. After 2-2 Bonds was .198. First pitch in play Bonds was .339 (with a .768 SLG) and 7 HR. Again, what this means is not to go up and hack at everything. Basically what it means is hack at the best pitch you see (which many times is early in the count). The more strikes you have on you, the less of a chance you have to get a pitch to drive (as evidenced by one of the greatest hitters of all time's splits).
"Now, a walk is as good as a hit, and 3-1 offering does not necessarily mean swing for the fence at a breaking ball in the dirt; more along the lines of look for a pitch to drive...but don't be afraid to take it."

A walk is not as good as a hit. I've heard many SABRquixotics make this statement before. Runners don't move from first to third on walks. Runners don't score from second on walks. Of course a 3-1 count doesn't mean that you don't swing at a breaking ball in the dirt, but when has there ever been a situation in baseball when you should swing at a breaking ball in the dirt? Looking for a pitch to drive is something a hitter always should be doing (with the exception of two strikes, when a batter is usually just trying to protect).

In conclusion, walks are very important. I totally agree. The idea of runs created (in it's simplest form) is OBP X SLG=Runs, not OBP=Runs. I think the SABRquixotics are getting to the point where they are overvaluing walks. I can't believe that I'm saying that. "Selective aggressive" is the best approach at the plate. Taking strikes for the sake of taking strikes is the best way for a hitter to get himself into an unnecessary hole. Look for your pitch, and when you see it, hit it some place with authority.