Thread: Christensen: Mauer Needs To Swing

Originally Posted by Brock Beauchamp

Originally Posted by Ultima Ratio

His at bat was hardly memorable, not something stupid or really disappointing. It was prudent. Some of us are just a little disappointed, and I think that's okay, that his AB was a little too prudent, too safe. And who cares what the board would do with a 4-3 putout to end it. That's a red herring and many would say (irony thick) that that's who you want swinging and since it's more likely to make an out when making contact, we shouldn't be so critical of him unless we expect him to hit over .500. Thus, some on here won't stand for any criticism of Mauer, in any measure, even something as benign as this issue.

And that's fine. I don't think anyone here was entirely happy with the result. All I'm arguing is that Joe Mauer became a .325 hitter with a .400 OBP by playing the game a certain way. If he saw the pitch he wanted to hit, I'm positive he would have swung at it. Did he get fooled on one or more of those called strikes? It's possible. The guy certainly isn't perfect.

I think people make too much of one AB. There are other times where Joe has come up big late in games and helped the team win. Sometimes, his strategy works. Sometimes, it doesn't. More often than not, it's going to be a more successful strategy than what most other hitters bring to the box. This time it didn't pan out. Against Aroldis Chapman a month or two ago, it did. That's just the game of baseball.

"This time it didn't pan out". Wait a minute, what I've been reading here on this thread was that it did pan out.

"Against Aroldis Champan a month or two ago, it did." A great at AB, one of the best this year, seriously, I was in awe of that battle for days afterward. And it actually involved removing the bat from his shoulder.

Originally Posted by jokin

"This time it didn't pan out". Wait a minute, what I've been reading here on this thread was that it did pan out.

"Against Aroldis Champan a month or two ago, it did." A great at AB, one of the best this year, seriously, I was in awe of that battle for days afterward. And it actually involved removing the bat from his shoulder.

Again, the game didn't pan out. Mauer put the bat in the hands of the Twins' most prolific hitter this season instead of possibly rolling over on a pitch and ending the game by swinging at a pitch he didn't like. I don't have a problem with that... And I don't see why anyone else would, either. The Chapman AB is an example of him seeing a pitch he liked and going with it. Given Mauer's history, I trust him to make the right decision... He won't do it "right" every time but he'll do it right more often than almost anyone else in baseball.

Strange article... A few years ago, just after Mauer signed his contract, I wrote a blog about the similarities between Kevin Garnett and Joe Mauer. One aspect of this was that they are both really good team players and unselfish and willing to let someone else play the hero. I personally think that's a good thing. I do not believe that Joe Mauer should go outside the strike zone just to be the man. I like KG taking the big shot if it's there for him, but if not, pass to the open guy. Of course, passing to Latrell Sprewell or Ray Allen or Paul Pierce is different than passing it to Trenton Hassell or Troy Hudson. Likewise, Mauer being smart, getting on-base, not going outside the zone and trusting Willingham and/or Morneau is absolutely the right thing.

I would also add that if Mauer is in a big situation and had a 2-0, 2-1, 3-1 count and gets a pitch down the middle, I do like seeing him take a big swing. He should. But if the pitch isn't there, he should never force it.

Originally Posted by jokin

Originally Posted by Brock Beauchamp

Originally Posted by Ultima Ratio

His at bat was hardly memorable, not something stupid or really disappointing. It was prudent. Some of us are just a little disappointed, and I think that's okay, that his AB was a little too prudent, too safe. And who cares what the board would do with a 4-3 putout to end it. That's a red herring and many would say (irony thick) that that's who you want swinging and since it's more likely to make an out when making contact, we shouldn't be so critical of him unless we expect him to hit over .500. Thus, some on here won't stand for any criticism of Mauer, in any measure, even something as benign as this issue.

And that's fine. I don't think anyone here was entirely happy with the result. All I'm arguing is that Joe Mauer became a .325 hitter with a .400 OBP by playing the game a certain way. If he saw the pitch he wanted to hit, I'm positive he would have swung at it. Did he get fooled on one or more of those called strikes? It's possible. The guy certainly isn't perfect.

I think people make too much of one AB. There are other times where Joe has come up big late in games and helped the team win. Sometimes, his strategy works. Sometimes, it doesn't. More often than not, it's going to be a more successful strategy than what most other hitters bring to the box. This time it didn't pan out. Against Aroldis Chapman a month or two ago, it did. That's just the game of baseball.

"This time it didn't pan out". Wait a minute, what I've been reading here on this thread was that it did pan out.

"Against Aroldis Champan a month or two ago, it did." A great at AB, one of the best this year, seriously, I was in awe of that battle for days afterward. And it actually involved removing the bat from his shoulder.

It didn't pan out in the sense that, I assume Joe didn't get the pitch he was sitting on, unlike against Chapman. I think Joe hits the ball often enough to give him the benefit of the doubt that he generally know a good pitch to hit. It did pan out in the sense that he kept the inning alive for a player with a .913 OPS.

But, flail away if you prefer.

Originally Posted by gunnarthor

Originally Posted by Bark's Lounge

Nice one Brock/RP. Sometimes it takes a player to leave the team for the fans to realize what they had and regret what they lost. It seems like a lot of fans have become jaded with Mauer and expect him to perform acts of unrealistic proportion. He is the best player on this team - bar none. I am assuming someone will throw his salary in my face after posting this.

Meh. Span and Willingham both have credible claims to being better this year.

I think Span and Willingham are excellent. Season wise you might have a good argument for Willingham being better than Mauer - Span, No way. Mauer is their superior career wise.

Originally Posted by Aaron Gleeman

He also got the basic math of the situation wrong. It's not a comparison between Mauer's batting average and Willingham's batting average, because by walking Mauer made it possible for Willingham to drive in a run with a hit OR a walk (or a passed ball, wild pitch, error, etc.). So it should be Mauer's AVG vs. Willingham's OBP, in which case Willingham's OBP (plus errors, WP, PB, etc.) is much, much higher anyway.

Well look who poked his head out.

Our # 3 hitter has 60 some RBIs. I want more than that from my #3 hitter. IMO he needs to look to drive the ball more in those favorable count situations. He is an incredible hitter, but with room for improvement.

Also, does anyone else think his throwing from behind the plate has deteriorated?

I would want a player making $23M to do the same thing I would want a player making $1M (or less). I would want my 3-hitter to do the same as I would want my 9-hitter and everyone else to do. I would want him to give the team the best chance to win, every time he can, given the circumstances and situations presented to him. Well done, Kid St. Paul.

Originally Posted by pipers44

Also, does anyone else think his throwing from behind the plate has deteriorated?

For sure. I think that's just his body wearing down. He's had some shoulder problems that aren't talked about much.

Originally Posted by Seth Stohs

I would also add that if Mauer is in a big situation and had a 2-0, 2-1, 3-1 count and gets a pitch down the middle, I do like seeing him take a big swing. He should. But if the pitch isn't there, he should never force it.

Uh, he did get a 3-1 pitch down the middle. It wasn't a fastball but it split the plate thigh high.

Sort of an interesting column. If you worship at the alter of OBP, it was a great AB. If you're a dinosaur like me, and still think runs don't materialize out of thin air just because someone reaches first base, then you also think someone has to drive them in. I want my three hole hitter taking a rip at a 3-1 pitch in that situation if it's a hittable pitch. It was.

Originally Posted by twinsnorth49

Originally Posted by jokin

Originally Posted by Brock Beauchamp

Originally Posted by Ultima Ratio

His at bat was hardly memorable, not something stupid or really disappointing. It was prudent. Some of us are just a little disappointed, and I think that's okay, that his AB was a little too prudent, too safe. And who cares what the board would do with a 4-3 putout to end it. That's a red herring and many would say (irony thick) that that's who you want swinging and since it's more likely to make an out when making contact, we shouldn't be so critical of him unless we expect him to hit over .500. Thus, some on here won't stand for any criticism of Mauer, in any measure, even something as benign as this issue.

And that's fine. I don't think anyone here was entirely happy with the result. All I'm arguing is that Joe Mauer became a .325 hitter with a .400 OBP by playing the game a certain way. If he saw the pitch he wanted to hit, I'm positive he would have swung at it. Did he get fooled on one or more of those called strikes? It's possible. The guy certainly isn't perfect.

I think people make too much of one AB. There are other times where Joe has come up big late in games and helped the team win. Sometimes, his strategy works. Sometimes, it doesn't. More often than not, it's going to be a more successful strategy than what most other hitters bring to the box. This time it didn't pan out. Against Aroldis Chapman a month or two ago, it did. That's just the game of baseball.

"This time it didn't pan out". Wait a minute, what I've been reading here on this thread was that it did pan out.

"Against Aroldis Champan a month or two ago, it did." A great at AB, one of the best this year, seriously, I was in awe of that battle for days afterward. And it actually involved removing the bat from his shoulder.

It didn't pan out in the sense that, I assume Joe didn't get the pitch he was sitting on, unlike against Chapman. I think Joe hits the ball often enough to give him the benefit of the doubt that he generally know a good pitch to hit. It did pan out in the sense that he kept the inning alive for a player with a .913 OPS.

But, flail away if you prefer.

No flailing on my part. As I stated when I first posted Christensen's article last night, I am right in the middle on this one. Joe wasn't having a good night at the plate going into the last AB. He has a certain way of going about his business, his business is getting on base and for him, business is always good, even when he is in a short term slump. For how Mauer generally approaches this situation, he did his job and I get where he's coming from. But to insist that Mauer's walk=Mastroianni's walk (which immediately preceded Joe's) is not a credible assertion- there were two very hittable pitches in his AB and having your best hitter taking a chance at swinging on one of them to win the game is arguably a pretty good strategy, in this case, the obligatory strike, low-middle, on the 3-0 count was the pitch that most team's best hitters would likely not pass up with the game literally on the line.

The other side in this debate argues that a walk is as good as a hit, therefore, things did pan out for Mauer, as he maintained his precious OBP average and did his job in loading the bases by which the potential lead run was now only 90 feet away. Mauer continues to maintain his lofty averages by sticking to what has always worked for him, but then things didn't pan out- for the team (not saying Mauer is selfish, it's just who he is and how he does things).

To pretend that the other point of view has no merit at all and isn't worth consideration is just a little close-minded on their part. It certainly appears that Seattle had a plan about the scenario as well, and with Willingham struggling recently, having a tough righty ready to go in Wilhelmsen, and given Mauer's virtual MLB-best-average Lefty/Lefty split, they may have felt the odds were in their favor by not giving Mauer much to hit and defying the "walk is as good as a hit" thinking.

Originally Posted by Nick Nelson

Originally Posted by pipers44

Also, does anyone else think his throwing from behind the plate has deteriorated?

For sure. I think that's just his body wearing down. He's had some shoulder problems that aren't talked about much.

That's the other side of this that tends to get overlooked. A lot of defenses of 26-year-old Mauer's game revolved around the assumption of Mauer as a "plus" defender and and game manager behind the plate. I always thought that was a bit exaggerated to begin with, but he's now decidedly average as a defensive catcher (though certainly not bad).

You keep in mind that only does he only play catcher half the time anyway, but he's effectively "past his prime" defensively. And if you compared him to other positions, there are very few Hall of Fame players that are on their downside defensively by age 29. Nature of the position, too, I know, but still...

Originally Posted by jokin

Originally Posted by twinsnorth49

Originally Posted by jokin

Originally Posted by Brock Beauchamp

Originally Posted by Ultima Ratio

His at bat was hardly memorable, not something stupid or really disappointing. It was prudent. Some of us are just a little disappointed, and I think that's okay, that his AB was a little too prudent, too safe. And who cares what the board would do with a 4-3 putout to end it. That's a red herring and many would say (irony thick) that that's who you want swinging and since it's more likely to make an out when making contact, we shouldn't be so critical of him unless we expect him to hit over .500. Thus, some on here won't stand for any criticism of Mauer, in any measure, even something as benign as this issue.

And that's fine. I don't think anyone here was entirely happy with the result. All I'm arguing is that Joe Mauer became a .325 hitter with a .400 OBP by playing the game a certain way. If he saw the pitch he wanted to hit, I'm positive he would have swung at it. Did he get fooled on one or more of those called strikes? It's possible. The guy certainly isn't perfect.

I think people make too much of one AB. There are other times where Joe has come up big late in games and helped the team win. Sometimes, his strategy works. Sometimes, it doesn't. More often than not, it's going to be a more successful strategy than what most other hitters bring to the box. This time it didn't pan out. Against Aroldis Chapman a month or two ago, it did. That's just the game of baseball.

"This time it didn't pan out". Wait a minute, what I've been reading here on this thread was that it did pan out.

"Against Aroldis Champan a month or two ago, it did." A great at AB, one of the best this year, seriously, I was in awe of that battle for days afterward. And it actually involved removing the bat from his shoulder.

It didn't pan out in the sense that, I assume Joe didn't get the pitch he was sitting on, unlike against Chapman. I think Joe hits the ball often enough to give him the benefit of the doubt that he generally know a good pitch to hit. It did pan out in the sense that he kept the inning alive for a player with a .913 OPS.

But, flail away if you prefer.

No flailing on my part. As I stated when I first posted Christensen's article last night, I am right in the middle on this one. Joe wasn't having a good night at the plate going into the last AB. He has a certain way of going about his business, his business is getting on base and for him, business is always good, even when he is in a short term slump. For how Mauer generally approaches this situation, he did his job and I get where he's coming from. But to insist that Mauer's walk=Mastroianni's walk (which immediately preceded Joe's) is not a credible assertion- there were two very hittable pitches in his AB and having your best hitter taking a chance at swinging on one of them to win the game is arguably a pretty good strategy, in this case, the obligatory strike, low-middle, on the 3-0 count was the pitch that most team's best hitters would likely not pass up with the game literally on the line.

The other side in this debate argues that a walk is as good as a hit, therefore, things did pan out for Mauer, as he maintained his precious OBP average and did his job in loading the bases by which the potential lead run was now only 90 feet away. Mauer continues to maintain his lofty averages by sticking to what has always worked for him, but then things didn't pan out- for the team (not saying Mauer is selfish, it's just who he is and how he does things).

To pretend that the other point of view has no merit at all and isn't worth consideration is just a little close-minded on their part. It certainly appears that Seattle had a plan about the scenario as well, and with Willingham struggling recently, having a tough righty ready to go in Wilhelmsen, and given Mauer's virtual MLB-best-average Lefty/Lefty split, they may have felt the odds were in their favor by not giving Mauer much to hit and defying the "walk is as good as a hit" thinking.

I'm not saying the other point of view has no merit and I respect your assessment. I'm really just more incredulous that so many people (including Joe Christenson) are making one AB such a talking point and using that at bat to characterize Mauer. Actually what's worse is that it's not even that AB but seemingly only 1 or 2 pitches from that AB this is the source for their vitriol.

I believe good hitters go about their business the same way all the time, it's what makes them good hitters. To change your approach based on the situation is the very thing that will lead most guys to be lousy hitters, in fact that "approach" is a non-approach, it's a make it up as you go along philosophy. "Clutch" hitters are nothing more than good hitters at bat at the right time.

Originally Posted by John Bonnes

I can understand, in general, the criticism that Mauer is too patient. But I can't in that at-bat. There just wasn't much there. It was if they were pitching around him.

Exactly! What would people be saying if Joe swung at the breaking ball on 3-1 and hit a week grounder or eventually struck out? People sometimes just reach for an excuse to criticize Joe, and usually their point surrounds how much money he is making....

I guess I don't see the problem with Joe taking walks... yes he is hitting in the three spot and should drive in runs whenever he can. But another equally important role for a 3 hitter is to get on base for the clean up man (and Morny in the 5 hole), and let them do their sole job... drive in runs!

It bears noting that when he does swing the bat with RISP, he's been extremely effective, both this year (.351 AVG, .474 SLG) and in his career (.339 AVG, .493 SLG). His plate approach – working the count, waiting for his pitch, refusing to chase borderline offerings – plays a large part in that.

Originally Posted by Nick Nelson

It bears noting that when he does swing the bat with RISP, he's been extremely effective, both this year (.351 AVG, .474 SLG) and in his career (.339 AVG, .493 SLG). His plate approach – working the count, waiting for his pitch, refusing to chase borderline offerings – plays a large part in that.

And his unwillingness to take an aggressive swing when the count is squarely in his favor accounts for the fact that he only has 60 some rbis in spite of these impressive numbers with RISP. He is an incredible hitter, but the teams needs him to do more than just get on base.

Originally Posted by pipers44

And his unwillingness to take an aggressive swing when the count is squarely in his favor accounts for the fact that he only has 60 some rbis in spite of these impressive numbers with RISP. He is an incredible hitter, but the teams needs him to do more than just get on base.

That doesn't make a lick of sense. His batting average with RISP is .351. His slugging percentage with RISP is .474. Without even factoring in his walks with RISP, that's an OPS of .825.

So he gets a hit 35% of the time runners are in scoring position and is slugging close ~.475 when runners are in scoring position. What more is the guy supposed to do to get these almighty RBIs? Run to the mound and beat up the pitcher while the top of the lineup circles the bags? I'm not familiar with every rule in the MLB handbook but I'm pretty sure those runs wouldn't count even if Joe tried it.

If a guy is OPSing at .938 with RISP, it's not his fault that the RBIs aren't coming. You're letting the tail wag the dog in your analysis. You can't praise a guy for hitting well with RISP and then blame him for his RBI count. It's nonsensical.

I've noticed that this discussion shows the disconnet between Mauers RBI totals (61) and his AVG/OBP/SLG (.354/.468/.478) with RISP. Since the goal of a batter with RISP is to drive them in I was wondering if anyone knew where I could find the following stats:

% of runners on 3rd Driven In
% of runners on 2nd Driven In
% of runners on 1st Driven In

I think it the stats I described above would be a nice intersection between RBI total and RISP performance that would give us a better feel of Joe as a run producer

Originally Posted by Seth Stohs

Strange article... A few years ago, just after Mauer signed his contract, I wrote a blog about the similarities between Kevin Garnett and Joe Mauer. One aspect of this was that they are both really good team players and unselfish and willing to let someone else play the hero. I personally think that's a good thing. I do not believe that Joe Mauer should go outside the strike zone just to be the man. I like KG taking the big shot if it's there for him, but if not, pass to the open guy. Of course, passing to Latrell Sprewell or Ray Allen or Paul Pierce is different than passing it to Trenton Hassell or Troy Hudson. Likewise, Mauer being smart, getting on-base, not going outside the zone and trusting Willingham and/or Morneau is absolutely the right thing.

This is interesting to me because what you might view as "unselfishness", others might view as a lack of leadership.

If you are willing to let someone else be the hero, it seems to me that you might also be just as willing to let someone else be the "goat."