The Count of Counting Counts, Part II
Posted: April 22nd, 2009 | Filed under: Baseball | 33 Comments »
OK, so you saw Part I of Counting Counts … you weren’t expecting a Part II were you?
But here we go. What follows is more about the data than analysis. This is a look at what happens AFTER a count is reached. So now, instead of seeing what happens on the 0-1 pitch, we are looking to see what happens to a batter who at one point in his at bat faced an 0-1 count.
Again, we are looking at all the data from 2000 to 2008.
First, you should know that batters this decade have hit .266/.335/.424.
And then we already gave you the numbers for how batters did on the first pitch. But, to repeat, batters who get the first pitch in play hit: .338/.344/.547.
OK, now to the counts.
After 0-1 Count
Batters hit: .236/.279/.364
After 1-0 Count
Batters hit: .279/.394/.457
Here are a few fun facts:
Batters start 0-1: 52.6% of the time.
Batters start 1-0: 47.4% of the time.
Batters are about three times more likely to draw a walk when starting 1-0 than 0-1.
Batters hit home runs one out of every 41 or so at-bats when starting behind 0-1.
Batters hit home runs one out of every 27 or so at-bats when starting ahead 1-0.
Here’s a fun one … and I have no idea why this would be true. But pitchers are twice as likely to hit a batter after getting ahead 0-1 as they are when starting the count is 1-0.
So, you can see the advantages of getting that first strike … it’s about 40 points in batting average, 115 points of on-bse and more than 90 point s of slugging.
After 0-2 Count
Batters hit: .179/.210/.269
Pitchers go from 0-1 to 0-2 counts: About 47% of the time.
Once hitters get into the deep hole, they rarely get out. The 0-2 count leads to a strikeout about 41% of the time, and it leads to a an extra base hit about 5% of the time. It’s funny, I’m here in Cleveland watching the Indians Royals, and Kansas City’s leadoff batter Coco Crisp fell behind 0-2 right away and I said, “Well, he has about a 5% chance of getting an extra base hit.” He promptly smacked a double.
After 2-0 Count
Batters hit: .293/.518/.500
Pitchers go from 1-0 to 2-0 counts: About 44% of the time.
When a batter starts the count at 2-0, he will walk roughly one out of three times.
After 1-1 Count
Batters hit: .247/.318/.391
Here are percentages of the first two pitches:
Batters hit the ball on first pitch: 12.5% of the time.
Batters hit the ball on second pitch: 17% of the time.
The count goes to 0-2: 16.6% of the time.
The count goes to 2-0: 14.9% of the time.
The count goes to 1-1: 39% of the time.
That should give you a pretty decent feel for how the early part of the count works. Roughly two out of five times, the count will go to 1-1. Interesting to note that pitchers do have a pretty nice advantage after the count goes to 1-1.
After 3-0 Count
Batters hit: .297/.762/.520
Pitchers go from 2-0 to 3-0 counts: 42.5% of the time.
It’s interesting to me that hitters do not quite hit .300 after getting to a 3-0 count. They crush the ball on 3-0, and they crush it on 3-1. But pitchers get enough 3-0 counts to 3-2 to prevent hitters from hitting .300.
When a batters works a 3-0 count, he will walk roughly two out of three times.
After 2-1 Count
Batters hit: .264/.401/.434
After 1-2 Count
Batters hit: .190/.240/.292
Big, big difference there, obviously. I mentioned in the previous version of Counting Counts that many people in baseball believe that the third pitch is the key pitch in baseball. And this is why:
Batters walk more than three times more often after 2-1 count.
Batters strike out more than twice as often after 1-2 count.
1-2 Count strikeout to walk ratio: 6.7 to 1.
2-1 Count strikeout to walk ratio: Slightly less than even.
With 2-1 Count: Batters homer every 29 at-bats.
With 2-1 Count: Batters get extra-base hit every 10.4 at-bats.
With 1-2 Count: Batters homer every 52 at-bats
With 1-2 Count: Batters get extra base hit 16.7 at-bats.
After 2-2 Count
Batters hit: .205/.304/.326
After 3-1 Count
Batters hit: .287/.593/.496
Just in case you are curious …
44.4% of 3-1 counts become 3-2 counts.
39.4% of 2-2 counts become 3-2 counts.
I know what you are saying: Man, I hope there isn’t a Part III.
Loading ...
Great stuff. I hope there is a Part III.
After reading Part I today I was watching the MLB Gameday of the Twins-Red Sox game. With two outs and a man on, Kevin Youkilis had a 1-2 count. I was thinking of the blog post and how the Twins were pretty likely to get out of the inning unscathed. He then hit a fastball a few inches out of the strike zone, for a two run homer. I was sad.
Very cool articles. Are you typing this up AT the game? I just have to know if you took your laptop and popped it open in the stands or what you’re working on!
I was listening to the O’s vs. White Sox game today and heard Jim Thome got a count to go 3-1. I tried calling a big hit, but I was alone in the car. He also ended up walking- after already hitting a 1-1 pitch out earlier.
What I’m trying to say is: I hope there’s a Part III.
My request for part III: slash stats for two strike hitters after removing strikeouts from the equation.
I voted Yogi for #8, but I’ve got Pops Stargell over Aikman, S. Young and Ripken, and on par with Kobe & Yaz. Just sayin’.
GregE – That is sad…
I’m looking forwards to part 3 if only because I’ll read anything that Joe writes.
thanks, joe. the first part was interesting, but what i really wanted to know was what you include here. i wonder what brandon phillips would say about this. 1-0 is good, 2-0 is better, and 3-0 is killer.
This was great, thanks so much for getting up close and personal with your spreadsheet. In reading some of the early responses above, I’m reminded of what I learned in undergrad stats class: percentages are much more useful for understanding broad trends than for predicting individual outcomes (even though that’s how we’re all tempted to use them).
I find this whole discussion of the strategy behind whether or not to hit the first pitch of an at bat to be leaving out something critical: the swings! Seems to me the relevant way to study the problem is to look at what happens when the batter SWINGS at the first pitch, not whether it is put in play. Obviously, all the batter can control is whether to swing — whether the ball is missed, fouled or put in play we don’t know. So can you run the data of at bat outcomes when swinging at the first pitch vs. taking the first pitch vs. prior to the first pitch?
Can I get a Part III?
And a Part IV!
I’m just curious- where are you getting all of this detailed information from?
Frankly, while all of this statistical ball-strike count business might be fascinating, I find it more fascinating that these stats are kept and reliably retrievable. I guess this is proof that man can build a better mousetrap but somedays I find myself rooting for the mice instead.
Joe: I just saw your column about Bannister for the KC Star….It must have been mighty cold in Cletown tonight because it froze your otherwise miraculous brain…”Spahn, Sain and pray for rain” line was from Boston Braves ‘48 season, not Milwaukee Braves. Quick, halt the presses!
From Bob Dutton’s wrap up of todays game: Yeah,†[Wright] grumbled, “I threw a ball on the third pitch.â€
I assume you have your fortune teller’s hat on.
I voted George Best as #7 on the strength of a story he told on TV in his later years, replayed at the time of his death. Late 1960s, he’s at the peak of his powers and the star atraction at the opening of a London casino. During he evening he cleans up at the tables and also pairs up with Miss somewhere or other – could have been Miss World. Later that night he’s in his hotel room with the beauty queen, the money from the tables scattered over the bed. He rings for room service and orders champagne, as you would. When it turns up it’s delivered by a fellow of mature years (probably a Man U supporter), who takes in the scene, spots Best and recoils at what he sees — the dolly bird, the money scattered about, the air of mild debauchery. He turns to Best and in a horrified voice accuses him, “George! Where did it all go wrong!”
My wife, who graduated Magna Cum Laude from Missouri-Rolla (now Mo S&T), minored in math and loves them. The calculator and I, on the other hand, have an uneasy truce between us. That said, I love these two posts on counts. (Although, when I read the title on my iPhone they made me think of The Count from Sesame Street)
What makes this surprising is that, while I am pleased at the statistical approach to the game employed by teams such as the Cardinals, some blogs (Viva El Birdos) drown me under a sea of numbers and I simply can’t wade through the post to the point of the article. Joe, brilliantly of course, does not do that to me.
Here’s what a typical hitter looks like after each count:
0-0: Jay Bell, or Shane Victorino, or Freddy Sanchez
0-1: John Shelby / Henry Blanco / Benji Gil
1-0: Nick Johnson / Tony Gwynn / Joe Mauer
0-2: Steve Carlton / Dwight Gooden / Fernando Valenzuela
1-1: Deion Sanders / Ray Knight / Terry Pendleton
2-0: Hank Greenberg / Rogers Hornsby / Manny Ramirez
1-2: Hal Lanier / Danny Ainge / Jeff Torborg
2-1: John Kruk / Alvin Davis / Mark Grace
3-0: Barry Bonds in 2003
2-2: Gary Bennett / Tim Bogar / Tony Muser
3-1: Todd Helton in 2003-4 / Gary Sheffield in his best year
3-2: Wade Boggs / John Olerud
Depends on the batter too. Tony Gwynn batted .357 on an 0-1 count but only .248 on an 0-2 count. Melky Cabrera batted .271 on an 0-1 count but only .208 on an 0-2 count. Jack Cust bats an amazing .456 with an 0-1 count but only .106 with an 0-2 count. Manny Ramirez batted .396 with an 0-1 count but only .173 with an 0-2 count.
Pete R.: Fun comment. Enjoyed that.
Quick point on the greatest NO. 10’s ever. Pele is dominating the vote. At this point he has 536 more votes than Maradona. that to me is ridonculous (yes, I watched I Love You, Man last night).
Now I think it would be fair to assume that most readers of this blog don’t know/care much about football (look at the vote totals for Ronaldo, Best and Cantona in the other polls) but picking Pele by that much over Maradona is to me not quite right.
They are considered the two greatest ever footballers and many people cannot choose between the two (Fifa co-awarded them a player of the cetury award). Its kind of like asking who is better Ruth or Mays (I’m guessing this would be the closest baseball equivalent since they are the general consensus for two greatest players).
I am not necessarily saying that Maradona should be ahead of Pele (although that would be my preference), I’m just saying how can there be such an overwhelming favouring of Pele?
Look at it like this:
Were both players the best of their time? Undoubtedly yes
Did both players win on the biggest stage? Again yes (both were World Cup winners)
How significant were their contributions to those winning teams? This is where Maradona pulls streaks ahead of Pele in my opinion. Would Brazil have won in 58 and 70 without him? I think so, especially since in 62 he had to withdraw from the squad and Brazil still won the World Cup. Brazil were quite simply the best team regardless of Peles involvement. Now would Argentina have won in 86 without Maradona? Probably not as he pretty much single-handedly (especially against Engalnd quite literally) took Argentina to the title.
Also consider that Pele played nearly his whole career for Santos (not his fault) with a short stint at the Cosmos towards teh end of his career. Maradona meanwhile came to Europe and elevated Napoli to titles and heights they had never been to before or since again almost single-handedly.
Fair enough though if people want Pele to be their alltime #10 but then at the very least Maradona should be an extremely close second.
Was Pele a class act throughout his career? Yes
Was Maradona a cokehead whose most famous goal went in off his hand? Yes
As a Canadian, my favourite #10 is Guy Lafleur, but Pele seems an obvious choice.
You mentioned Greg Maddux in part one. He knew exactly the difference between 1-2 and 2-1.
In an ESPN interview in the mid-90s, when both were in their primes, he and Tony Gwynn were sitting down for a dual interview. One of the talking heads asked, “how important is 0-1 v. 1-0?”
Both responded with, “not very.” They proceeded to talk about how much more important 2-1 v. 1-2 was. Interesting stuff. Wish I could find it.
Sorry, Geoffrey, but we’re not awarding fractional points. If I think Pele’s better, he goes up 1-0. If most people think Pele’s better, he goes up 623-42.
Firstly, he’s the first name in soccer. (Ha ha! Get it?) And secondly, Pele scored twice as many goals, both in the same number of caps and in nearly the same number of league games (560-490). No issue with you liking Maradona more, or even thinking him better, but not much surprise to me that most people side with Pele, who also might be getting points for being an ambassador of the game. And this doesn’t even address their playing styles.
Pele was far better than Maradona.
PS my favorite number is 10
“Here’s a fun one … and I have no idea why this would be true. But pitchers are twice as likely to hit a batter after getting ahead 0-1 as they are when starting the count is 1-0″
Joe to answer your question in this blog post on hit batsmen. It is clear that pitchers are hitting batters way more often when they get ahead in the count. Look at the numbers from your first counting blog post, the hit batsmen are clearly the difference between BA and OBP in any count without 3 balls or 2 strikes; when the pitcher is ahead, there is about .1 difference, when the count is even, there is about a .05 difference, and pitchers almost never hit batters when they are behind in the count.
This tells me that when ahead in the count, pitchers often are “moving” the batter off the plate and occasionally they get a little too far inside and hit the batter.
“Was Pele a class act throughout his career? Yes
Was Maradona a cokehead whose most famous goal went in off his hand? Yes”
I respond to this with one of Joes favourite quotes from Buck O’Neil
“Could he play ball, that’s what counts”
Obviously referring to football here rather than baseball
“Pele scored twice as many goals, both in the same number of caps and in nearly the same number of league games (560-490)”
Unlike baseball, football cannot be quantified quite the same with numbers, especially when talking about players who do not play the same position. Pele was a striker (or a support striker if you prefer) whereas Maradona was a midfielder (albeit a very attacking one). If you only used this scored more goals/better goal to game ratio than Maradona would also be classed second best to the great Gabriel Batistuta who also played for Argentina and scored a great many more goals (and at a better strike rate).
Also let me point to the fact that in Argentina the #10 shirt for the national team is considered to be Maradona’s and new players simply inherit his shirt. This is most definately not the case in Brazil where the #10 is not held in anywhere near the same esteem even with regards to Pele having worn it.
It is in the unmeasurables alongside the basic stats that make Maradona a better player in my opinion. His reputation and drugs past should not effect his position as a great player.
I do concede however that Maradona’s drug use may tarnish his #10 legacy especially in countries such as the USA where most people are less knowledgable on football and so Pele’s cleaner image would help in the poll.
Trevor Hoffman and Mariano Rivera did not walk anyone last year after a first pitch strike.
Of the 449 batters to see 0-1 against Mariano Rivera since 2006, only one achieved a walk.
Johan Santana last year
After 1-0: .199/.289/.311
After 0-1: .217/.260/.331
Jonathan Papelbon career
After 1-0: .170/.267/.280
After 0-1: .188/.224/.280
In light of how much the balance tips in favor of pitchers after two strikes, check out these notes from Jayson Stark on Wang’s recent struggles:
* He’s gone to an 0-2 count on just six hitters all season — and those hitters have gone 4-for-6 against him, with two doubles.
* He has at least gotten to two strikes at some point against 21 of those batters — and those 21 have gone an insane 11-for-18 (.611), with three walks, six doubles and only two strikeouts.
WOW. Given Joe’s numbers, this is pretty crazy. I’m wondering, does the fact that he’s having such trouble even with two strikes suggest the problem is particularly serious, or that it’s something temporary? Can we even know from this info? The numbers seemed very striking given the results from Joe’s almighty spreadsheet.
After reading these stupid soccer debates I want to change my #10 vote from Pele to Walt Frazier…..CLYDE!!!
Yep. If you don’t care about it, it must be stupid, ‘Shark.’ We apologize for talking soccer here on … uh, your blog.
Excellent observations by McKingford (1st Counts Post), Sid, and others with regards to the large number of first pitch swings (fouls/whiffs) not represented by Joe’s data.
This may point to the existence of an optimum % of first pitch swings for MLB hitters.
In the same way that game theory shows that optimal poker strategy dictates that a player, even a tight one, should occasionally raise pre-flop with mediocre cards in order to maintain unpredictability, a batter may need to keep the opposition honest by occasionally jumping on the first pitch of an at bat.*
This is definitely not a license to hack away at the first offering most of the time. Perhaps something more like ~20% of first pitch strikes should be pounced on in accordance with said theory? I would love to read more on this topic.
*Obviously, there are many variables at work in any given plate appearance. A pitcher struggling to find the zone (i.e. a four pitch walk preceding the PA), a hitter’s history w/ the pitcher, a hitter’s ability to make contact/hit with two strikes, various unique game situations, etc. A hitter must be aware of so many things**, still, I wonder if there might be some empirical evidence pointing to an optimum first pitch swing rate as a general guideline.
**I love this game!
Can someone please inform Clint Hurdle that it probably is not necessary to bench players for swinging at a bad pitch in an 8-1 game? Wouldn’t it be more prudent to work with that player to gain better pitch recognition?