Mauer 2000 hit countdown

[Doubles]

Joe approaching 2,000 hits kinda puts the 3,000 hit milestone in some level of perspective.  

 

All those hits, and Joe's only 2/3 of the way there.  Crazy.

[Vanimal46]

Joe approaching 2,000 hits kinda puts the 3,000 hit milestone in some level of perspective.

 

All those hits, and Joe's only 2/3 of the way there. Crazy.

No doubt. 3,000 hits may start looking impossible like the pitching milestones we're accustomed to. Especially if teams continue to phase out mid-30 year old players in favor of prospects.

[Vanimal46]

It's a shame concussions and injuries took 3 years away from Joe. If that didn't happen, we'd probably be tracking him to 2,500 hits right now.

[Dantes929]

Walks are not quite as valuable as hits unless there is no one on, but they certainly are valuable and kind of Joe's calling card.   Combined hits and walks leaves him 125 short of 3000.   

[Steve Lein]

 

Joe approaching 2,000 hits kinda puts the 3,000 hit milestone in some level of perspective.  

 

All those hits, and Joe's only 2/3 of the way there.  Crazy.

 

I would argue Joe's never put up an 'elite' number of hits (outside of MVP season)—that's just not how he approaches hitting (patience and drawing walks).

 

Despite On-Base Percentage (avoiding outs) getting all the love in a sabermetric evaluation, people seem to forget hits are worth more than walks.

 

There's a point on that curve (and in situational hitting) of trying to avoid outs with patience where it becomes a detriment to scoring runs (only one rare situation where a walk can score a run). I might argue Mauer has been on the wrong side of that curve for a good chunk of his career. Not a knock, just who he is.

 

3,000 hits is the big number you bring up, but you have to rack them up to reach it. Kirby Puckett was well on his way before his career was cut short after 12 seasons (2,304 for his career) averaging 192 hits a season (and had over 200 five times, over 180 eight times) 

 

Mauer's career high for hits is 191 and since 2012 hasn't had more than 160 in a season. In 14 seasons he's not to 2,000 yet and if you extrapolate his career average for hits in a year it would take him 21 seasons to get to 3,000. You probably could cut some time off of that if not for his injuries, but I don't think he ever would have made it to that number even without them. He'd would have had to put up those numbers through 40-years old.

[prouster]

 

 

There's a point on that curve . . . of trying to avoid outs with patience where it becomes a detriment to scoring runs.

 

Not to get off topic, but avoiding an out is never detrimental to scoring runs. Joe is definitely one of the greats.

[70charger]

 

I would argue Joe's never put up an 'elite' number of hits (outside of MVP season)—that's just not how he approaches hitting (patience and drawing walks).

 

Despite On-Base Percentage (avoiding outs) getting all the love in a sabermetric evaluation, people seem to forget hits are worth more than walks.

 

There's a point on that curve (and in situational hitting) of trying to avoid outs with patience where it becomes a detriment to scoring runs (only one rare situation where a walk can score a run). I might argue Mauer has been on the wrong side of that curve for a good chunk of his career. Not a knock, just who he is.

 

3,000 hits is the big number you bring up, but you have to rack them up to reach it. Kirby Puckett was well on his way before his career was cut short after 12 seasons (2,304 for his career) averaging 192 hits a season (and had over 200 five times, over 180 eight times) 

 

Mauer's career high for hits is 191 and since 2012 hasn't had more than 160 in a season. In 14 seasons he's not to 2,000 yet and if you extrapolate his career average for hits in a year it would take him 21 seasons to get to 3,000. You probably could cut some time off of that if not for his injuries, but I don't think he ever would have made it to that number even without them. He'd would have had to put up those numbers through 40-years old.

 

Your points are good and shouldn't be discounted, but there's another curveball in there, so to speak.

 

Joe Mauer, as a catcher, in his prime averaged something like 135 games played a season, which is actually quite high for a catcher, especially since most catchers would never be able DH too.

 

Kirby Puckett, as an outfielder, in his prime averaged somewhere in the high 150s for games played in a season. Very impressive, and not to take anything away from his iron man abilities, but that's much more common for an outfielder. In fact, it's pretty much impossible to play all the games as a catcher.

 

If you average out hits per game, it becomes a much more even comparison. 

 

Let's take their respective age 27 seasons. They're relatively representative. Neither was a career season for either player, but both seasons were very close to (actually a bit above, because I'm focusing on their peaks) their career norms. 

 

In 1987, where as I recall the Twins accomplished something or other, Puckett led the league in hits with 207, and played 157 games. That averages to 1.32 hits per game.

 

In 2010, Joe Mauer racked up 167 hits in 137 games (112 as a catcher). That averages to 1.22 hits per game. 

 

That's like 10 to 15 hits a season difference if we're talking about the same amount of games. It would take more than a decade to even see a season's worth of difference between the two players.

 

The point about injuries and about playing fewer games as a catcher stands up to scrutiny. The point about it "not being Joe's game" isn't wrong per se, but I think it's probably a lot closer than you're giving him credit for.

[Sssuperdave]

 

Not to get off topic, but avoiding an out is never detrimental to scoring runs. Joe is definitely one of the greats.

 

I think there are a lot of situations where a Sac fly is better than a walk.

[ashbury]

Joe Mauer, as a catcher, in his prime averaged something like 135 games played a season, which is actually quite high for a catcher, especially since most catchers would never be able DH too.

Good point. I just did a baseball-reference.com search, of hits by players with 75% of their games at catcher, and the list above 2000 base hits is pretty slim:

 

1       Ivan Rodriguez   2844

2       Carlton Fisk    2356

3       Jason Kendall    2195

4       Yogi Berra      2150

5       Mike Piazza     2127

6       Gary Carter     2092

7       Johnny Bench    2048

8       A.J. Pierzynski 2043

 

Of course, Joe no longer meets this criterion - between occasional DHing and now 1B, he's below 65%. With a 60% threshold, Ted Simmons sneaks into second place with 2472. At 50%, no one else shows up in addition to these nine, plus Joe.

 

Top 10 all-time, among players who primarily caught, at the single most fundamental skill in the game. Not a bad body of work.

 

Anyway, Joe is already in elite company, but had he been able to continue catching for longer, i.e. without the concussion(s), he'd be gunning for the #2 spot soon.

[AlwaysinModeration]

Good point. I just did a baseball-reference.com search, of hits by players with 75% of their games at catcher, and the list above 2000 base hits is pretty slim:

 

1 Ivan Rodriguez 2844

2 Carlton Fisk 2356

3 Jason Kendall 2195

4 Yogi Berra 2150

5 Mike Piazza 2127

6 Gary Carter 2092

7 Johnny Bench 2048

8 A.J. Pierzynski 2043

 

Of course, Joe no longer meets this criterion - between occasional DHing and now 1B, he's below 65%. With a 60% threshold, Ted Simmons sneaks into second place with 2472. At 50%, no one else shows up in addition to these nine, plus Joe.

 

Top 10 all-time, among players who primarily caught, at the single most fundamental skill in the game. Not a bad body of work.

 

Anyway, Joe is already in elite company, but had he been able to continue catching for longer, i.e. without the concussion(s), he'd be gunning for the #2 spot soon.

Just so long as he finishes ahead of AJ, that’s all that matters.

[goulik]

 

Just so long as he finishes ahead of AJ, that’s all that matters.

Beating Johnny bench might help his HOF candidacy though...

AJ only 5 behind Bench?   

[Dantes929]

 

I would argue Joe's never put up an 'elite' number of hits (outside of MVP season)—that's just not how he approaches hitting (patience and drawing walks).

 

Despite On-Base Percentage (avoiding outs) getting all the love in a sabermetric evaluation, people seem to forget hits are worth more than walks.

 

There's a point on that curve (and in situational hitting) of trying to avoid outs with patience where it becomes a detriment to scoring runs (only one rare situation where a walk can score a run). I might argue Mauer has been on the wrong side of that curve for a good chunk of his career. Not a knock, just who he is.

 

3,000 hits is the big number you bring up, but you have to rack them up to reach it. Kirby Puckett was well on his way before his career was cut short after 12 seasons (2,304 for his career) averaging 192 hits a season (and had over 200 five times, over 180 eight times) 

 

Mauer's career high for hits is 191 and since 2012 hasn't had more than 160 in a season. In 14 seasons he's not to 2,000 yet and if you extrapolate his career average for hits in a year it would take him 21 seasons to get to 3,000. You probably could cut some time off of that if not for his injuries, but I don't think he ever would have made it to that number even without them. He'd would have had to put up those numbers through 40-years old.

 

I think there are a lot of situations where a Sac fly is better than a walk.

Hits are sometimes better than walks.   If there is no one on or if runners only advance as far as they would with a single then walks have exactly the same value as a hit and maybe even more if the pitcher is effected in any way but issuing a walk.   In Mauer's case a walk is less valuable than extra base hits and is sometimes less valuable than a single.  For someone like Buxton a walk has almost the same value as a double except in terms of RBI.   If Buxton ever gets to a .400 OBP he will be in the discussion for MVP regardless of how many hits he gets.

 

Sacrifice fly might be a good result in many at bats but a walk doesn't really take away from that possibility.   It just takes the possibility away from the guy being walked.    Much of Joe's career it just gave the opportunity to Morneau, Thome or Cuddyer.    Yes, if he walks he might create a double play possibility which would make a fly ball more valuable but in Joe's defense, he was often intentionally walked when that was the situation anyway.  

[ewen21]

 

Hits are sometimes better than walks. 

"Sometimes"?

 

Hits are better than walks MOST OF THE TIME.  Players are intentionally walked in certain situations.  There is no such thing as an intentional hit

[Mike Sixel]

Who would have guessed AJ was that high? Underrated player for sure

[Nine of twelve]

Who would have guessed AJ was that high? Underrated player for sure

One of my favorite quotes: ...in the inimitable words of Ozzie Guillen, "If you play against him, you hate him. If you play with him, you hate him a little less."

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

"Sometimes"?

 

Hits are better than walks MOST OF THE TIME.  Players are intentionally walked in certain situations.  There is no such thing as an intentional hit

Singles aren't better than walks most of the time. Last season, there were 185,000 total PAs in baseball. Only 80,000 of those PAs came with men on base, which is where a single has the ability to make a noticeable difference over a walk.

 

That means a single had the chance for a significantly better outcome than a walk only 43% of the time (ie. not "most").

 

 

[Mike Sixel]

 

Singles aren't better than walks most of the time. Last season, there were 185,000 total PAs in baseball. Only 80,000 of those PAs came with men on base, which is where a single has the ability to make a noticeable difference over a walk.

 

That means a single had the chance for a significantly better outcome than a walk only 43% of the time (ie. not "most").

 

don't forget singles can turn into "doubles" or more with errors....but your point stands.

 

But I think we are missing the point, overall....a hit is more valuable than a walk. Sometimes a sacrifice fly is more valuable.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

don't forget singles can turn into "doubles" or more with errors....but your point stands.

 

But I think we are missing the point, overall....a hit is more valuable than a walk. Sometimes a sacrifice fly is more valuable.

Bolded: absolutely, but what happens more often; a single with an error (thereby advancing an extra base) or a single with all runners advancing a single base (thereby negating the advantage of the single over a walk)? Probably the latter.

 

Anyway, not disputing that a single is more valuable, only pointing out that a single doesn't have a discernible advantage over a walk in 50%+ of opportunities.

[AlwaysinModeration]

Cuing Chief for the correct answer to this question: Which is more valuable, a single or a walk?

[ewen21]

 

Singles aren't better than walks most of the time. Last season, there were 185,000 total PAs in baseball. Only 80,000 of those PAs came with men on base, which is where a single has the ability to make a noticeable difference over a walk.

 

That means a single had the chance for a significantly better outcome than a walk only 43% of the time (ie. not "most").

I said HITS, not singles.

 

Walks could only be as good as a single.  All other hits besides singles are automatically better than walks (for obvious reasons).  Hence, hits are better than walks most of the time.

[ewen21]

With regards to any kind of countdown, can we get to 2,000?

[Dantes929]

 

I said HITS, not singles.

 

Walks could only be as good as a single.  All other hits besides singles are automatically better than walks (for obvious reasons).  Hence, hits are better than walks most of the time.

Many extra base hits occur in situations we already concede a hit is better than a walk.    2/3 of hits are singles and I imagine a rather significant portion of the 43% of the time there are runners on base they are on 1st base or 1st and 2nd and only advance one base with a base hit.  Most hits are singles and most singles happen with nobody on.   

I don't know how all those facts gel together but my original statement was in response to the statement that hits are worth more than walks  which seemed to have the implication that they are always better.    If you want to quibble about saying most of the time I will concede it with the acknowledgement that it is probably not much over 50% of the time.    Hits are on average better than walks but walks are a base attained for the batter, advances any runner already on, is not making an out and increases the chances for the next guy batting.    I don't think you need to discount the value of Mauer's walks.    They are in addition to an excellent batting average and often a pretty good extra base hit %, not a replacement for them.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

I said HITS, not singles.

 

Walks could only be as good as a single.  All other hits besides singles are automatically better than walks (for obvious reasons).  Hence, hits are better than walks most of the time.

Well, uh, sure...?

 

I don't think a single person who has watched baseball for even one minute will say a walk is equal to a triple.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

If you want to quibble about saying most of the time I will concede it with the acknowledgement that it is probably not much over 50% of the time.    Hits are on average better than walks but walks are a base attained for the batter, advances any runner already on, is not making an out and increases the chances for the next guy batting.

If we want to be pedantic about the situation, remember that roughly 70% of the time a ball is put in play, an out is recorded.

 

Can we say the same about walks?

 

It's a loaded statement to say that hits are better most of the time because it's focusing on an outcome that is largely outside the batter's control and also ignoring that in a vacuum, a walk is often the same as a single because most batters come to the plate with no one on base.

 

Sure, the outcome of a hit is superior to the outcome of a walk. But to say that hitters should pursue the former over the latter ignores the actuality of baseball; a hitter has a larger control over one than the other (as does the pitcher, inversely).

 

And in a game of failure, a hitter taking control of what they can control should not be diminished, particularly when literally the entire game hinges upon making the fewest outs possible.

[ewen21]

As far as Mauer is concerned, I would have been much more satisfied with him as a hitter if more of his hits were extra base hits.  HIs ISO has been pathetic for years.  Let's just tell it like it is.  He also has a penchant for keeping the bat on his shoulders when runners are on base or when it's a tight game.  You'd want your franchise player to take a crack at it in those situations, but it's just not his thing.  This the reason why we didn't see Mauer get a walk off hit (not home run) for ten seasons until he got one this past season.  Coupled with his dreadful ISO his walk obsession has helped ensure that he won't be making much of an impact on a game with his bat.

 

 

Don't believe me?  If you're like me you have watched almost every one of the games he has played in, but if that isn't enough to tell you go look at his splits from last year:

 https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/split.fcgi?id=mauerjo01&year=2017&t=b

In close and late situations he had 79 plate appearances and 19 walks.  With a margin of 4 runs or greater he had 81 plate appearances and 9 walks.  If you think that is a statistical anomaly then go look at the same numbers for 2016, 2015, 2014.....

Also take a look at his numbers with men on base compared to no one on base.  It is the same thing.  Way WAY more likely to walk with runners on than with runners not on base.

 

 

​Does this approach make sense?

[amjgt]

On a semi related note... I believe it was Gladden who said, like it was the greatest stat ever... “That’s Joe’s FOURTEENTH opening day hit”

 

I immediately thought... isn’t that about how many opening days he’s been a part of?

 

So actually, he’s worse than normal on opening day.

[70charger]

As far as Mauer is concerned, I would have been much more satisfied with him as a hitter if more of his hits were extra base hits. HIs ISO has been pathetic for years. Let's just tell it like it is. He also has a penchant for keeping the bat on his shoulders when runners are on base or when it's a tight game. You'd want your franchise player to take a crack at it in those situations, but it's just not his thing. This the reason why we didn't see Mauer get a walk off hit (not home run) for ten seasons until he got one this past season. Coupled with his dreadful ISO his walk obsession has helped ensure that he won't be making much of an impact on a game with his bat.

 

 

Don't believe me? If you're like me you have watched almost every one of the games he has played in, but if that isn't enough to tell you go look at his splits from last year:

https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/split.fcgi?id=mauerjo01&year=2017&t=b

In close and late situations he had 79 plate appearances and 19 walks. With a margin of 4 runs or greater he had 81 plate appearances and 9 walks. If you think that is a statistical anomaly then go look at the same numbers for 2016, 2015, 2014.....

Also take a look at his numbers with men on base compared to no one on base. It is the same thing. Way WAY more likely to walk with runners on than with runners not on base.

 

 

​Does this approach make sense?

Sounds like you’re assuming that pitchers are approaching him exactly the same way when it’s close and late as at any other time in the game.

 

And that...strains credulity. Charitably speaking.

[ewen21]

The problem is Mauer walks at a much more disproportionately high rate with runners on and in close and late situations than any other star hitter you want to bring up. If you don't believe me then pick six or seven of the best hitters in the league last year and compare.  Heck, do it for the last five or six seasons.  The league only approaches Mauer in a way where this happens, but not Mike Trout or JD Martinez or any other great hitter?  Seems to me pitchers are more apt to pitch around those guys last year than Mauer.  IF not then tell me something  

 

I am not a fan of Joe's approach.  He tries to swing at the last possible minute when he does commit and committing seems to come harder in key situations.  It's almost as if he says, "why worry about swinging and missing when I can draw a walk?"

 

Not saying a walk isn't a positive thing.  What I am saying is he's not supposed to be a table setter in those situations.  Not when his bat is what gave him his fame.

[USAFChief]

If we want to be pedantic about the situation, remember that roughly 70% of the time a ball is put in play, an out is recorded.

 

Can we say the same about walks?

 

It's a loaded statement to say that hits are better most of the time because it's focusing on an outcome that is largely outside the batter's control and also ignoring that in a vacuum, a walk is often the same as a single because most batters come to the plate with no one on base.

 

Sure, the outcome of a hit is superior to the outcome of a walk. But to say that hitters should pursue the former over the latter ignores the actuality of baseball; a hitter has a larger control over one than the other (as does the pitcher, inversely).

 

And in a game of failure, a hitter taking control of what they can control should not be diminished, particularly when literally the entire game hinges upon making the fewest outs possible.

According to the linear weights that form the basis of so much sabermetric theory, a walk is worth .55 runs compared to an out, a single is worth .70.

 

And that of course ignores the fact that swinging the bat might also result in a double, triple or HR.

 

https://www.fangraphs.com/library/principles/linear-weights/

 

Of COURSE a single is worth more than a walk. That’s not even debatable.

 

Mauer taking a walk with runners on often ends up leaving the task of driving in those runs to someone that most of you would describe as not as good a hitter as Mauer. And despite the current dismissal of RBI, SOMEone has to drive in those runs. They don’t add up base runners at the end of the game and declare a winner, they add up runners who actually crossed home plate.

 

Walks are fine. They are not the objective, and in the case of Mauer, comprise too much of his OPS. He’s worth less offensively than players with equal or even a little lower OPSs.

[USAFChief]

Sounds like you’re assuming that pitchers are approaching him exactly the same way when it’s close and late as at any other time in the game.

And that...strains credulity. Charitably speaking.

No more so than assuming Mauer approaches those situations exactly the same.