I was watching the Mets-Phillies game on Tuesday. Both teams had 10 hits and the Phillies out-homered the Mets 4-3. But the Mets won 6-5.

Basically it came down to the walks. The Mets’ pitchers only gave up 1 walk and the Phillies’pitchers gave up 5.

It’s hard to remember what a good player John Kruk was because he’s such a goofy guy on ESPN. I mean this is a guy with a lifetime line of .300/.397/.446 and remember he was stuck in Jack Murphy stadium during the late 80’s. His lifetime ops+ is 133.

Again it’s strange that a guy who built his career around walks and on base-percentage would make that statement.

I think the basic problems with walks is that for years walks were seen as “something that just happens” or “a Pitcher making a mistake” rather than an important and positive offensive action.

It still amazes me that with all of the attention walks and on base percentage got from the “Moneyball” book people still don’t credit players enough for taking walks.

Take a look at a list of underrated players in baseball history and I guarantee that most of them had decent to great walk totals.

I think the biggest problem with baseball people and fans accepting walks is that it is seen as a passive event rather than an aggressive one. As if aggresive behavior is the best play under any circumstance during any moment of a game.

It seems like players are constantly encouraged to “be aggresive” even if that aggresive behavior results in a caught stealing or a strike-out or an out running the bases. I hear it all the time during broadcasts, “Well he made an out at third base during a tie game, but it was an aggresive out” “Well he was caught stealing, but it was an aggresive out” “Well he struck out with the bases loaded but it was an aggresive swing.”

I give you Max Bishop, 2nd baseman and leadoff hitter for the Philadelphia A’s 3 straight pennante winning teams from 1929-1931. Maxie was small (165 pounds), had no power (41 HRs in 12 ML seasons) and pitchers certainly didn’t want him on base with Cochrane, Simmons, Foxx and Haas coming up.

Here is his line from 1929: 1929 29 PHA AL 129 616 475 102 110 19 6 3 36 1 4 128 44 .232 .398 .316 .713

To interpret. He hit .232, but scored 102 runs because he walked 128 times. He only had 28 extra base hits, so I doubt the opposition was shaking in its boots when he came up. (BTW, that was a bad year for him, his lifetime OBP was .423)

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/joe_lemire/05/18/mauer.morneau/index.html

“Mauer has seen 4.31 pitches per plate appearance this season and has swung at the first pitch only twice in the 68 times he’s dug into the batter’s box. That’s a taking rate of 97.1 percent, easily the highest among all players with at least 15 plate appearances. Heck, Mauer doesn’t swing at the next offering much either, having taken cuts on only 12 of 67 second pitches.”

Of course, when you have the talent of Mauer, a hitter can afford to stand there like a statue for the first few pitches, knowing that he can make contact with pretty much anything in or around the strike zone on subsequent offerings, even if the count is in the pitcher’s favor.

The result of the attempted change is that the Royals walk up to the plate in an anti aggressive manner. They are not looking to hit the ball at all on the first pitch, and at this point other teams and pitchers know it. Joe, you yourself said in an EXCELLENT statistical breakdown that hitters have a good OPS on the 1st pitch, but if they go 0-1 it is much worse(I would reference the piece but I cannot remember what it was called) Even the Royal’s aggressive hitters seem to be passive at the beginning of an at bat- and opposing team’s pitcher’s are aggressive.

Then, being the natural born hackers that they are, when the pressure mounts, they revert to their nature, but are already behind in the count, so the pitcher expands the zone and they swing- at pitchers pitches. I do not have the computer skills or time to do this, but I would bet that the Royals face a higher percentage of “pitchers counts” than any other team, (especially during the slump-when scouting caught up to them) When you take mundane to marginal hitters, and put them at a disadvantage, you have to expect them not to hit.

Dayton Moore did one good thing by bringing in Seitzer: He took the first step to change a decades old Royals “walks are bad” philosophy. (Yes even the old good teams-who were good enough to overcome it.) Now Seitzer needs to bring some aggression into the mix. Swing at the first pitch down the middle! Dayton needs to get Seitzer (and the manager) guys who walk and field well. These are the cheapest, most available skill sets for a small market team.

In fact, Guillen has walked 17 times in 171 PAs, nearly 10% of the time which is really not bad. (OBP=.351.) Prior to this year he walked in only 4.8% of his plate appearances.

The Jacobs case is not so stark, but there too with 18 BBs in 195 PAs he is walking in about 9% of his times to the plate as opposed to his pre-2009 frequency of 7.6%.

I do not know whether, as with Crisp, these figures represent an early surge followed by a return to their norms. Nor do I know whether they represent an effort to implement the supposed intentions of the coaches to teach patience or that these are the two most established power hitters in the lineup so pitchers are unwilling to give in to them.