Read More...The Yankees are only a month and a half into Ichiro’s new contract, and it already looks like they will rue the day the two sides reached a deal. Well, perhaps the business side of the organization is pleased, but I digress. Ichiro is hitting .239/.280/.328 through 145 plate appearances, and finally broke a 22 at-bat hitless skid last night. At this point, it is hard to be optimistic about him going forward.
It shouldn’t be a surprise that Ichiro is scuffling. From 2011 through 2012, Ichiro ...
Login to Join (6 members)
{/exp:tag:subscribed}Page rendered in 2.6602 seconds, 179 querie(s) executed
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
1. bjhanke posted on February 04, 2013 at 06:43 AM # hit 0 | hit 0And Doby grew up in Paterson, NJ, a couple of stone's throws from NYC.
Yeah, I was a lefty batter - consigned to 1B/OF duty, of course - and noticed almost never seeing a lefty pitcher. The one I did see lived in my neighborhood, a big strong kid who was wild as all hell, Nuke LaLoosh style. I tried to bunt on the first pitch, and the ball went about 100 feet in the air backwards. yikes. was thrilled to hit a feeble grounder to first and struggle to a couple of walks against him. I couldn't see the ball coming....
btw, I'm going to guess that BBTF has more than the typical number of left-handers. Does that make sense?
1. Between 1939 and 1960, AL teams started left-handers against the Red Sox less often than against any other team. Left-handed pitchers who didn't play for the Red Sox started only 19.1% of the games against the Red Sox during that time frame, and 27.1% of the games against the rest of the league.
2. Part of this - but not all of it - was a Fenway Park effect. Left-handers started against Boston in 15.5% of the games played there (compared to 27.4% of the time against other teams in their home parks), and in 22.7% of the games played against the Red Sox on the road (compared to 26.8% of the time against other teams playing on the road).
When you look at the construction of the Red Sox during those years, it's really not that surprising that WIlliams faced so few lefties. Except for Williams and Johnny Pesky, and Billy Goodman for a couple of years, the key hitters were almost always right-handed.
-- MWE
Politically? ;)
Um, I suspect it's true, but the perception may be driven by the fact that this is a setting where lefties are more apt to announce it. Also, baseball probably draws lefties to it (in terms of sustained interest) more than other sports.
Always did to me, for some reason.
I literally don't remember ever facing a fellow lefty pitcher. First few times I pitched (well, threw) against them, I remember overthinking things ('I like the ball down as a hitter - should I work up in the zone? Should I go inside more?').
only 14.1% of Snider's PAs were vs. lefties (1170 out of 8237)
1949 38.2%1950 32.3%
1951 23.4%
1952 15.6%
1953 15.9%
1954 12.6%
1955 8.0%
1956 11.1%
1957 5.8%
1958 14.1%
Total 17.8%
1947 28.1%1948 23.3%
1949 30.7%
1950 33.3%
1951 21.7%
1952 11.5%
1953 15.1%
1954 11.3%
1955 9.6%
1956 10.6%
1957 5.6%
1958 3.8%
1959 4.6%
1960 3.5%
1961 7.9%
1962 3.6%
1963 12.5%
1964 2.1%
Total 14.2%
Duke wasn't really sat against lefties until he got old and injured which is often the case for lefties.
Undoubtedly true, though Musial's LH-LHP split was probably (depending onhow one weights OBP and SL) a bit better, .327/.394/.533, and much closer than Williams (0.70 vs over .200) to his numbers against RHP. Good hitters hit well against almost everybody.
Retrosheet has complete game logs from 1916 on.
I only looked at the years in which Snider was a regular in Brooklyn (1949-1957). Once you get to LA the data is skewed to some extent by the reduction in Snider's playing time and the funky dimensions of the LA Coliseum. (FWIW, the Coliseum probably contributed to a delay in Koufax's emergence as a quality pitcher.) The Dodgers faced left-handed starting pitchers in 18.4% of their games, while other NL teams faced non-Dodger lefty starters in 33.3% of theirs - just a little under twice as often. At home, the Dodgers saw left-handers only 17.6% of the time, while other NL teams saw them 33.0% of the time. On the road, the figures were 19.3% for the Dodgers, 33.5% for other NL teams.
From 1946 when both Musial and Williams were back from the war, to 1960 when Williams retired, the AL actually had a higher percentage of games started by non-Red Sox lefties than the NL had that were started by non-Cardinal lefties. All else being equal, then, Musial should have faced fewer lefties than Williams.
-- MWE
(FWIW, the Coliseum probably contributed to a delay in Koufax's emergence as a quality pitcher.)Bill James' argument was that it didn't so much as delay that emergence, but hide it, in 1960/61 he pitched on the road about as well as he did from 62 to 66- which while true has something of a selective endpoints problem, he got hammered on the road in 59 but just fine at home...
His career ERA of 4.33 in the Coliseum was the worst mark of his career (not counting his 9 ip in Seals Stadium)
There is case to be made that he was unusually advantaged by LA Stadium and unusually disadvantaged by the Coliseum.
And it's more like 50% if you look only at good hitters, about 5x their proportion of the population. Of the hitters with a career OPS+ over 100, 49% were either LHH (42%) or switch hitters (7%). Among the top 200 hitters, 50% were LHH and 4% switch. When you consider that lefty throwers are excluded from 4 of the defensive positions, these proportions are even more extraordinary. The platoon advantage is a huge force.
I don't think lefty hitters are nearly as small a percentage of the population as lefthanded people. A good percentage of lefty hitters are righthanded people.
Not to say the platoon advantage isn't real and sizable, but the selection pool for lefthanded hitters is a bit larger than the pool for lefty throwers.
Fair point. Anyone know what % of LHHs are RH throwers?
Of all of the players in the Lahman DB who are listed as hitting left-handed and who have a throwing designation, 42.6% as listed as right-handed throwers.
-- MWE
Wow, that's higher than I would have thought, though it's probably also considerably higher than the general population, given the sport is tilted in favor of both throwing righthanded and batting lefthanded.
I think what would happen is baseball soon realized that counterclockwise made more sense. (-:
Barring that, I think you'd find righthanders at positions that are more suitable for southpaws, just as we see right now at first base. There may be one infield position where being lefthanded was such an advantage (possibly where today's second baseman plays) that it left righties out of the mix entirely, though that's probably something we'd only discover through trial and error.
Boy, that is high. Assuming that the large majority of switch hitters are RH throwers, it suggests that almost half of all LH plate appearances are from RH throwers. That tells us a lot of kids are being taught by their dads and/or coaches to learn to hit LH. I wonder if this has increased noticeably over time?
Wow, among those with careers, it's more like 60% -- 314 of 538 LHB with 3000+ PA. I never would have guessed this. LHB (not including switch) are about 1/3 of the total.
In that list at the top, it's just Murcer, Doby, Nettles.
Interestingly (to me), at SS, it's only 17 of 254 who played at least 500 games at SS. (i.e. 17 L/R out of all SS) Only 8-9 of them are in the expansion era. It strikes me as unusual that there'd be such a R/R bias at SS but not other positions. Stephen Drew is the 2nd greatest LHB SS of the expansion era (McAuliffe, who had only 600 starts there so you might still make a case for Drew).
At 2B, it's 45 of 239 with 29-31 from the expansion era (McAuliffe counted here too). At 3B, it's 34 of 226 with just 18 from the expansion era. Finally C, it's 63 of 305 with 38-40 from the expansion era. In the OF, it's 209 L/R out of 866 (any combo) or 649 RHT.
I don't know how much is taught and how much is natural. The oldest Unacceptable boy is a decided non-athlete, and a righthander in all other aspects of life, but he only batted lefthanded because that's what felt natural to him. I know I've played with others whose lefthanded stick had similar origins.
Could this be a cultural thing -- are Latin players any less likely to be L/R?
in contrast, there have only been 7 players in MLB history with >3000 PA's who threw left and batted right (not counting pitchers--there are a suprprising number of pitchers who fit this profile, including Koufax)
I think there are two factors at work here. First, baseball is vastly more favorable to batting left and throwing right than the other way around (save on the mound, so it's no surprise a lot of the TL/BR players are found there).
Second, I suspect there are far more people in general who BL and TR than the other way around. If your throwing arm is more indicative of your handedness than your batting side (which seems a fair assumption), than it stands to reason that more people would fit the BL/TR profile.
At one point there was a theory floating around that it was safer for pitchers to bat from the other side -- not getting your pitching hand whacked on a bunt attempt and I suppose the front shoulder/arm is the first thing you get out of the way when a pitch is riding in on you.
Could this be a cultural thing -- are Latin players any less likely to be L/R?
I wondered about that too but I don't see any way to do this within b-r. What I did do was sort Dominican born players by PA and looked at the famous ones. LH batters period seem pretty rare:
Ortiz, 11th in PA
Matty Alou, 25th
Carlos Pena, 34th
Polonia, 36th
Cano, 39th
Geronimo, 48th
Henry Rodriguez, 57th
Hopefully I didn't miss anybody and that's everybody in the top 60 (3000+ PA). So it's only 7 out of 60 who hit lefty at all which is close to the (US) population norm of left-handers. The only guy on the list who throws R is Cano. There are a lot of switch-hitters, at least as many as there are LHB, probably more. Perhaps they go that direction rather than L/R.
Do they think LHB are children of the devil?
Anyway, it does seem to be a cultural thing. Since 1990 (to give Latin integration plenty of time to be established), 472 players have 3000+ PA and 144 of them hit lefty only -- almost exactly 30%. But it's more like 10% among those born in the DR.
But, given this is all Dominican LHB not just L/R, this phenomenon should impact across all positions, albeit I suppose DR players are still more likely to end up at SS and other IF positions.
Spanning Multiple Seasons or entire Careers, Born in D.R., From 1901 to 2012, Bats LH, Throws RH, sorted by greatest Plate Appearances
Snider benefited from playing in the Ebbets Field bandbox, where he put up a .999 OPS for his career and hit 35% more HR/AB than he did on the road. The extra dose of RHP he faced only added to that advantage, and it was a big one: .949/.743 vs RHP/LHP. Bottom line is that it's hard to think of a slugger who enjoyed more environmental advantages than Duke Snider.
I think it's about 90% taught. If it were mainly natural, there would be proportionately as many LHH/RHT as RHH/LHT -- but that isn't what we see. It may be that a certain number of RH kids started swinging lefty on their own, but it's also true that some adult encouraged them to keep it up. But a LH kid who steps into the batters box as a RHH will quickly be told he's doing it "wrong."
My guess is that if someone studied this they would find:
Kids whose dads are coaches, or played ball seriously themselves, are much more likely to be LHH/RHT.
The most talented kids in little league or HS are more likely to be LHH/RHT.
No, there wouldn't be. First, it is an advantage to both throw right and bat left, and a disadvantage to throw left and bat right (at least for position players. For pitchers, who not coincidentally happen to represent a high percentage of the TL/BR cohort, throwing left is an advantage while hitting side is irrelevant). So baseball selects for BL/TR position players much more than it does for BR/TL players.
Second, it wouldn't be balanced if you assume handedness is correlated with throwing arm more than than batting side (which seems a fairly safe assumption - hitting is done with both hands, and most of us can more easily pick up a bat and swing the opposite way than we can pick up a ball and throw with the opposite arm).
So if that's true, then look at the numbers:
Say true lefthanders represent 10 percent of the population (which is the number I've always heard). Let's also say that 9 out of 10 people of either handedness will naturally bat the opposite way (just a guess, but the actual number isn't that important).
In a group of 100 people, you'll find 90 righthanders, 10 lefthanders.
Of the 90 righthanders, 90 percent will naturally also bat righthanded, or 81 people will be TR/BR.
10 percent of those people will bat lefthanded, or 9 people.
Of the 10 lefthanders, 90 percent will naturally bat lefthanded, or 9 people.
And 10 percent of the lefthanders will bat righthanded, or 1 person.
So the TR/BL combination should be expected in far greater numbers than TL/BR.
My suspicion is that if kids are being taught to bat the opposite way, it's part of a switch-hitting effort, rather than switching a kid from his natural side.
Anecdotally, from playing baseball through college and now having a second son involved, I don't know if I could recall hearing of a single instance of a kid being taught by a dad to hit the opposite way. I did play with one guy whose dad taught him to switch hit (and that SOB could rake. He also, I believe, ended the nation's longest high school hitting streak when he ordered his pitcher to IBB the kid with the streak during his last time up).
I'll make a point look at it this spring out at our diamonds (and, if possible, find out why if I see any kids who fit the bill), but as I said, I don't recall a single instance of a dad teaching his natural righty to bat the other way, and I've been involved with the game in one way or another for 40 years (not that I would necessarily know that was the origin of each and every BL/TR kid, though it seems I would have heard at least one anecdote along the way). I can speak with certainty that I had no bearing on my otherwise thoroughly righthanded son's preference to bat lefthanded.
I'm sure it does happen, I just don't believe it accounts for much when it comes to the BL/TR phenomenon. Not compared to baseball selection and natural inclination.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.