Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiefsCountry
I don't follow closely enough to know about Mabry's techniques. I just figured Reynolds having to play every day is getting him exposed. His role as a spot starter at 1st or 3rd and pinch hitter bat would do him better.
|
I actually don't mind his approach as a baseline. The best way to describe it would be an outline of what its polar opposite is and to me that's Oakland.
The Cardinals focus is on 'limiting negative outcomes' - so essentially avoiding strikeouts and unproductive ABs. Their belief is that cutting down your swing, living up the middle and perhaps even being more aggressive early in counts is the way to do that.
Oakland, OTOH, doesn't care as much about the negative outcomes and will instead go hunting for positive outcomes. They'll deal with strikeouts in exchange for XBHs. They'll take guys who hit a lot of fly balls (easily caught and bad BABIPs) in exchange for more bombs due to relatively static HR/FB rates.
By and large, I have no issues with Mabry's overarching theme. The problem is his stubborn insistence on hammering
everyone into the same mold. He'll take Matt Adams and turn him into an inside out hitter trying to pop liners up the middle or even go oppo to beat a shift. In so doing, his power vanished. He's done the same with Reynolds. Honestly, I think he's a terrible fit for Heyward because that's kinda what Heyward wants to do but his raw talent says he should be looking for pitches to drive. We steer into the skid by putting Heyward with Mabry. Heyward needs someone in his head telling him to do the opposite of his natural inclination, IMO.
Mabry's probably a pretty good guy to have around as a secondary hitting instructor. He's just too much of a one-trick pony to turn the keys to your offense over to, IMO. We had our season of insane RISP luck and he thinks it can be duplicated by focusing on minimizing negative outcomes. He's just wrong, IMO.