I'm not avoiding the question. We've been over this before.
If a batter comes up and does not get a hit or walk, he makes an out (ignoring ROE/HBP/ETC). That value of that out depends on the situation but breaks down three ways:
The first group can be called plain negative. This includes all strikeouts, all first outs, and all outs in play that can't or don't advance a runner (pop ups, line outs, shallow flies, come backers, and certain ground balls). This is the majority of outs by a large margin.
The second group can be called negative with a small benefit. This includes outs that move or score a runner. The small benefit varies by situation but never outweighs the overall negative and is only slightly better than the first group. You were always in a better position prior to the out.
The third group can be called "tec's understanding of baseball." This group is a disaster. Just joking, let's call it negative plus an inning crushing negative. And it's a disaster. This group is obviously double plays. These are far and away the worst and the difference between these and the first group is large. Much larger than the difference between groups 1 and 2.
I believe, and I think the data backs this up, that players can't control how and when they make their outs. Guys who strike out a lot will do so at times when you would prefer contact. Guys who make a lot of outs in play will do so at times when a ground ball destroys your inning. In the end, things tend to balance out and how the outs were made really doesn't matter. Which is why yearly team run scoring and team strikeouts don't correlate.