Tyler Flowers's lucky, lucky month

[Eminor3rd]

Luck implies that if the pitchers made no changes, Flowers would revert back to his old self. As I have consistently said, he will take a plunge when pitchers throw out the old book on Flowers and make new adjustments. That isn't "bad luck" or a lack of "luck". That is baseball, and pitchers trying to get out batters. All those numbers say it what I can see on my TV screen. Flowers and probably Steverson figured some things out and have plan of attack for how pitchers are going after Flowers. When the pitchers change, so will Flowers numbers. That has nothing to do with luck. And no has ever said the guy was a .350 hitter. That is absurd. He won't be a .350 hitter because pitchers won't pitch him the same way.

 

No, I think you're still missing what I'm saying. Here's a Flowers flowchart of the argument being made:

 

PART 1: Flowers' approach.

Decreased O-swing, increased contact

NOT luck; sustainable

 

PART 2: Flowers' batted ball profile.

Increased LD rate, decreased FB rate

NOT luck; probably not entirely sustainable (hot hand)

 

PART 3: Flowers' batted ball results

.357 xBABIP vs. .600 BABIP

Luck; the improvement afforded by I and II should earn him a 40-50 point increase in BABIP, not a 300 point increase

 

This third part is, essentially, just that balls are falling where defenders aren't. This is the part that is very much mostly luck. The likeliness of the types of hits he's been getting to fall is baked in to the xBABIP formula. To suggest that his improvement is allowing him to receive hits at a greater rate than historical batted ball coefficients is, again, to suggest that he has developed preternatural bat control.

 

So, again, there IS real, sustainable improvement that has come from his approach. But it's only good for about a 40-50 point increase in BABIP. Which is significant, but it's not near enough to make him the star-level hitter his number are suggesting.

[Eminor3rd]

Yes. I would. These are major league baseball hitters. When they KNOW what is coming, they can hit it. At that point it becomes glorified batting practice. That is why the arts of stealing signs, seeing where catchers set up, picking up pitchers who tip their pitches, etc, are so important. If it were simply "luck" in theory there should be no difference between knowing what pitch is coming, and not knowing, as it relates to the result of how a ball is hit. If BABIP were simply a measure of "luck" there should be no difference in results if you know what is coming, or if you don't. We all know that isn't true. Again, watching batting practice. In an extremely simplified version of baseball, these guys kill the ball.

 

Yes, but the LUCK is where the ball is landing, not how hard he's hitting it.

[southsider2k5]

Yes, but the LUCK is where the ball is landing, not how hard he's hitting it.

 

The "luck" is in his approach. He quit trying to pull that ball and hit it to the LF foul pole. He shortened his swing and redesigned it with the full intention of doing exactly what is is doing with the slow stuff on the outer half. He isn't try to hit it 500 feet. He is actually trying to dump it into RCF. You can see that with his swing.

[chw42]

The "luck" is in his approach. He quit trying to pull that ball and hit it to the LF foul pole. He shortened his swing and redesigned it with the full intention of doing exactly what is is doing with the slow stuff on the outer half. He isn't try to hit it 500 feet. He is actually trying to dump it into RCF. You can see that with his swing.

 

There's a good amount of players who try to do this in baseball, yet none of them have a .600 BABIP.

 

There's guys like Jason Motte and Matt Thornton who threw nothing but fastballs (hitters knew what was coming) and had great success. Clearly, knowing what's coming doesn't guarantee you success as a hitter in this game.

[Eminor3rd]

The "luck" is in his approach. He quit trying to pull that ball and hit it to the LF foul pole. He shortened his swing and redesigned it with the full intention of doing exactly what is is doing with the slow stuff on the outer half. He isn't try to hit it 500 feet. He is actually trying to dump it into RCF. You can see that with his swing.

 

Whether he hits it to RF or LF, a certain number of those should be playable by a defender, based on historical precedent. We know this (these) number(s). Way more of Flowers this year have fallen in for hits than average. This is the luck. If you disagree, you're saying that his approach doesn't just allow him to hit it to RF, but specifically in gaps to the side or in front of fielders. He is finding the holes at a rate much higher than every player ever, so even if you think he has developed an ability to control the bat like Tony Gwynn, he's still been successful about 20-25% than everyone in history right now, which is unaccounted for. This is the luck component, my friend.

[southsider2k5]

Whether he hits it to RF or LF, a certain number of those should be playable by a defender, based on historical precedent. We know this (these) number(s). Way more of Flowers this year have fallen in for hits than average. This is the luck. If you disagree, you're saying that his approach doesn't just allow him to hit it to RF, but specifically in gaps to the side or in front of fielders. He is finding the holes at a rate much higher than every player ever, so even if you think he has developed an ability to control the bat like Tony Gwynn, he's still been successful about 20-25% than everyone in history right now, which is unaccounted for. This is the luck component, my friend.

 

The comparison ends because we aren't comparing like samples. Tony Gwynn would too put up an insane BABIP if he knew was coming, as would most any other hitter.

 

Again, that becomes obvious when you look at the different in how hitters hit when they know what is coming. If there was no difference, in your version, a pitcher tipping pitches should see no difference in his BABIP against, nor should a guy who is getting his signs stolen.

 

Do you believe that to be true?

[Eminor3rd]

The comparison ends because we aren't comparing like samples. Tony Gwynn would too put up an insane BABIP if he knew was coming, as would most any other hitter.

 

Again, that becomes obvious when you look at the different in how hitters hit when they know what is coming. If there was no difference, in your version, a pitcher tipping pitches should see no difference in his BABIP against, nor should a guy who is getting his signs stolen.

 

Do you believe that to be true?

 

I think it's true that they can hit better if they know what's coming, and that is reflected in an increased LD rate.

 

I also think it's true that they can generally increase the direction in which they hit the ball (pull, push), which is reflected in more hits to RF (in Tyler's case).

 

I DON'T think it's true that they can hit the ball with such precision as to avoid defenders to the degree that 60% of everything that comes off his bat finds a hole. More importantly, historical precedent doesn't think it's true. If it was, you'd see the best contact hitters in history having months like this when THEY got hot and had an approach that pitcher's needed to adjust to. But that was kind of Feeky's whole point, this has never happened.

[Eminor3rd]

There's a good amount of players who try to do this in baseball, yet none of them have a .600 BABIP.

 

I don't buy this. While his approach is improved, it's next to impossible to have 60% of your contact land where fielders aren't. Because he hasn't been swinging for the fences and has shown a semblance of an idea with two strikes doesn't equal a .600 BABIP.

 

Yeah, these ^

[Dick Allen]

Besides, if Flowers "knew what was coming" to a rate where 60% of the balls he hits fair are hits, why is his k-rate so high?