What do we overvalue and undervalue in baseball?

One great thing about the sport of baseball is it lends itself to many opinions about all aspects of the game. Some of us value strikeouts, whether they be a pitcher getting a lot of them or a hitter amassing too many. Some value homers, others like players more versed at attaining a high on-base percentage.

They are all just opinions, but sometimes (hopefully here often) they produce spirited and interesting debate.

With that in mind, and looking forward to hearing your opinions, today I present three topics or aspects of the sport - two I think are often overvalued and one that I believe is undervalued.

* The concept of a quality at-bat: Let's say Player A comes to bat in a 4-4 tie in the seventh inning. He leads off and grounds out to shortstop on the 12th pitch after working a 3-2 count and fouling off several pitches.

Most of us would say he had a quality at-bat. We'd appreciate the way he battled and extended the hurler's pitch count and maybe wore him down.

Let's say Player B had batted two innings earlier and, in a 2-2 tie, hit a two-run homer on the first pitch for a 4-2 lead. He produced two runs on one pitch. He didn't work the count, but he drove in two key runs.

Would anyone say he had a quality at-bat? Doubtful. We act as if he almost didn't have an at-bat, but he had one that counts the same as Player A.

Player A did some good things and maybe his 12-pitch at-bat would help his team score runs in some way later in the game, partially because of what he did. Player B produced two big runs. No maybes here on whether he helped his team.

Who really had the quality at-bat? How could a 12-pitch at-bat that leads to an out ever be better than a player swinging at the first pitch and actually producing runs?

But we celebrate those 12-pitch at-bats and see batters that can do that often as good hitters. They are tough outs, but in the case I cited, they were still outs and no runs scored.

* Fastball velocity: I think we often overvalue velocity. We, myself included, are almost obsessed with this. When Kevin Gausman threw 99 mph or Kelvin Herrera threw 100 mph in the American League Championship Series, fans were impressed and reporters couldn't tweet that out fast enough.

If there were two 21-year-old pitching prospects and one topped out at 91 mph and one at 95 mph, which do you think would garner more attention?

But what about the command of that fastball? Does it have good movement? What about their secondary pitches? What about their smarts and their delivery? What about their size, strength and durability? Can they field the position and hold runners well?

There are so many factors that go into pitching well and doing it well consistently. Chris Tillman's average velocity is 91 mph and clearly that is high enough for him.

I get the concept that a pitcher throwing 95 or 96 has more margin for error and can get away with more mistakes. I can see why scouts would love that velocity. But I also feel that we put too much weight on that and less than we should on some of those other aspects of pitching that I mentioned.

But after the postseason success of pitchers like Michael Wacha, Herrera and Wade Davis, I sense our love affair with velocity will only grow.

* Defense remains undervalued: It is interesting that the Kansas City Royals looked all-world on defense in the ALCS and not as much in the World Series.

Looking back, they had an unusual amount of opportunities to make great plays in the ALCS and it seemed like fewer in the World Series. Their defense looked better against the Orioles - probably because they had more chances to make great plays.

I remember Brooks Robinson once remarking about how many chances he had to make great plays (and he sure did) in the 1970 World Series. He said he could often go dozens of games and not have the same amount of chances to shine.

To me, part of the reason we generally undervalue defense is the inability to properly quantify it. Advanced metrics provide more numbers than we've ever had about defense, but I still don't think any are universally understood and/or accepted.

Offense will always be more valued, but leaping over the wall to rob a two-run homer is as important as hitting a two-run homer. Great defensive plays save pitchers from throwing more pitches and deflate the opponent. They can change momentum in games.

What do we most remember about the ALCS? The Royals defense is probably at or near the top of that list.

Defensive plays are big, even if we don't seem to put the same value on them as we do that big home run.

Stat of the day: Trying something new here today. Most days during the offseason, I will post a stat of the day. It can be something very conventional or a stat that is more obscure.

It can lead to some discussion about it or none at all. That is fine, too. But it gives us something else for potential discussion here.

Today's stat is a look at the 2014 American League leaders in fewest pitches swinging and missing. We hear about pitchers with swing-and-miss stuff. Here are the batters that swung and missed the fewest percentage of the time this season:

9.2 - Victor Martinez, Detroit
9.8 - Michael Brantley, Cleveland
9.9 - Jose Altuve, Houston
10.2 - Nori Aoki, Kansas City
11.0 - Alberto Callaspo, Oakland
11.1 - Nick Markakis, Orioles; Ian Kinsler, Detroit