The chart shows something that is painfully clear - if the offense had played at their 2008 level, the Rangers would likely still be playing right now.

Also, very disconcerting to see our ranking in walks plummet from 6th to 26th in one year. If we can get back into the top 10 next year, I think it will bode very well for Texas.

Rudy will be on Norm's show on the ticket (1310 AM) at 10:30 this morning.

The Ranger batters should be forced to watch Bobby Abreu and Chone Figgins AB's all winter in preparation for next season. Then, maybe it'll sink in how to approach each AB.

First of all excellent post and I fully agree with your thoughts on the change.

Nonetheless, I always find the either or arguement very interesting.

"Teams that emphasize slugging benefit from having a coach who teaches an aggressive approach to hitting. Team’s that emphasize defense (and speed/athleticism) have fewer sluggers and thus benefit from having a coach who emphasizes batting average and walks."

My batting hero, Ted Williams, had a lifetime OBP of .482 and actually exceeded .500 five times in his career. Yet, he had 521 HRs and typically averaged from the upper twenties to the mid thirties annually. In 1949 he hit 43 HRs with an OBP of .490!

Frankly, I want a hitting coach that stresses what Carl Yastrzemski said aboot Ted Williams. "They can talk about Babe Ruth and Ty Cobb and Rogers Hornsby and Lou Gehrig and Joe DiMaggio and Stan Musial and all the rest, but I'm sure not one of them could hold cards and spades to (Ted) Williams in his sheer knowledge of hitting. He studied hitting the way a broker studies the stock market, and could spot at a glance mistakes that others couldn't see in a week."

I firmly believe that a high OBP forces the pitcher to throw into the strike zone thereby generating not only a higher average, but also the opportunity to jump on the errant pitches and hit the HRs as Ted Williams approach and career demonstrate.

I agree about the approach that Abreu, Figgins, and Williams had and think the Rangers need more discipline. They are a young team that is learning to play the game the right way, and this move was necessary and will be beneficial...of course I could be wrong and the offense will flounder away and the Rangers will look like the Padres...but I feel like this is the final page that needed to be turned over before the organization could take the next step.

Jon - for me, the player of this generation that comes to mind is Albert Pujols. With a career line of .334/.427/.628, he's clearly productive (in fact I believe he's locked up the decade triple crown). The key for me is his walks and strikeouts (811 - 570). If you take out his intentional walks he still has more walks than strikeouts. Justin Smoak projects to be like this as far as his plate discipline is concerned. He won't have the power of Pujols, but he could finally be a Ranger who walks as much as he strikes out.

I think a good goal for the new hitting coach is to get our totals to where we're at a 2:1 K/BB ratio. It would be a big improvement, but I don't think thats all that unreasonable.

Dave H - Great example.

I guess it boils down to the pitch recognition. By not chasing balls out of the strike zone the batter should lower his SOs and increase his walks. What I find interesting about Ted Williams book, The Science (not Art) of Hitting is the part where he discusses the "little game" between the batter and the pitcher.

Pitch recognition for Williams was not so much a visual skill as it was a mental preparation skill. He studied the opposing pitchers until he seemed to almost get inside their heads. He knew what to look for at various times in the count snd he patiently waited for the pitcher to finally give him his pitch.

He noted that chasing pitches just one baseball diameter out of the strike zone increased the strike zone by something close to 30% which is giving up a huge advantage. Really interesting visual showing the strike zone filled with baseballs and inside is his lifetime average hitting the ball at that spot.

I can not recommend this slim volume highly enough and it is still being published even today.

In terms of security, I guess kinda sorta I understand where Rudy is coming from. But I would also add that being offered a cost of living increase on a one year contract when you're the highest paid coach in the game is no slap in the face. If he was let go at the end of next year, does he somehow think that nobody else would hire him then, and at a high end salary? That's the only thing that sticks in my craw just a little bit.

As far as coaching, at the end of the day it's all about scoring runs. All the other stuff are just indicators to the desired end result. Earl Weaver liked the three run homer pretty good, too, and his thinking about baseball then is now considered ahead of his time. Given his body of work, Jaramillo should be proud of what he accomplished and I think he will be missed. Best of luck to him.

Unrelated to the above...almost spit up my drink when I read the following:

Los Angeles will start Vicente Padilla(notes) against Philadelphia’s Pedro Martinez(notes) on Friday afternoon in Game 2.

Padilla is the second best pitcher on their staff???

Why is it certain organizations can handle volatile pitchers like Padilla and...(i forget the guy who went to the Yankees) but don't make it as a Ranger?

Stephen, I don't know that anyone really has an answer for that one; however, it might just be that he hasn't had enough time to let it boil over. We can look at another player in the world of football. Terrell Owens has a much worse reputation than Padilla, but take a look at his first year or two at his stops. In San Fransisco he didn't boil over for quite some time and was tremendously productive. His first year in Philadelphia didn't create any controversy but did create a trip to the Superbowl. He actually had two years in Dallas that were fairly smooth. It would seem that only prolonged exposure and a little adversity soured the team on TO.

They have two very different sets of attitude problem, but perhaps there's several things working in the Dodgers favor:
1) They were ahead in their playoff race which places less pressure on the shoulders of Padilla.
2) They didn't have much invested in him. If he didn't provide immediate results, cutting him is a lot easier than it was for the Rangers.
3) Padilla might take a little while to come out of his shell. It seemed to me he was fairly reserved here until he'd been around for a while.
4) This is the big one for me --> He's in the National League now. If he plunks a batter, he's got to stand in there with a bat at least a couple times in a start. He actually has to face the possibility that he could take a fastball in the head.