Comments on: Running the Bases – Part 1

By: James

James — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 18:19:42 +0000

The issue with such an adjustment is that the value of a double versus a single is not just the extra base but also run-driving capabilities that a single+SB doesn’t have.

If you want to do this might as well just use Total Average.

By: Kincaid

Kincaid — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 00:11:58 +0000

BP’s team baserunning page seems to agree with you: http://baseballprospectus.com/statistics/sortable/index.php?cid=69262

There seem to be some other minor discrepancies. Maybe players who switched teams were counted differently in the original post? Not sure, but at least it doesn’t seem to be a huge issue in most cases.

By: hmm

hmm — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 19:48:24 +0000

I downloaded the data from the link provided and I cam up with -2 for the Phillies and -3.5 for the Padres. What am I missing here? Did you use different data?

By: Rob in CT

Rob in CT — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 15:10:41 +0000

The 2000 Oakland As weren’t as bad as I thought. They were bad, though.

By: Joe R

Joe R — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 15:06:58 +0000

And the Red Sox are decidedly average almost across the board in baserunning outside of SB. Youkilis is solid at it, Ellsbury takes too many chances (still our best overall baserunner by far), and according to this, Nick Green was a very plus-baserunner (+2.65 runs in 208 non-stolen base opportunities).

By: Rob in CT

Rob in CT — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 15:02:23 +0000

Heh, I should have checked the numbers first. I was right about Posada (-8, nearly a full win), but wrong about Cano (positive by a fraction of a run, so basically average). Gardner led the team, and Damon was good too. Everybody else was close to average, with the other poor runner being Teixiera (-2.5).

By: Joe R

Joe R — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 15:01:52 +0000

I’m assuming there’s a bit of subjectivity to it as well, like how often a player goes from 1st to 3rd on a ball to right center, etc.

It’s a good stat, though.

By: Rob in CT

Rob in CT — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 14:55:53 +0000

I think individual players’ baserunning can have a solid impact on their production. But these are the team-wide numbers, so you get good baserunners cancelling out bad ones. Generally speaking, MLB teams don’t put slow-pitch softball teams on the field. Though I wonder how a team like, say, the 1999-2000 As (when they had Giambi… hell, both Giambis, and a bunch of other guys I recall with questionable baserunning skills).

For instance, Jorge Posada is a dreadful baserunner, and so is Robbie Cano. But other Yankees are good ones (off the top of my head, I’d guess Jeter, Damon, ARod and, in limited duty, Gardner). So the team ends up only -6.

By: MikeS

MikeS — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 03:54:57 +0000

It’s hard to believe that over 162 games base running is of such little importance. I am not sure if the representation of defense and speed in the sabremetric community are due to their unimportance or the difficulty measuring them. It seems to me that statistical analysis places the most importance on hitting, then pitching, then defense and lastly, speed. Conicidentally (or not), this is the same order they can be placed in for ease of measurement. Just look at the “Three true outcomes” which has almost religious significance in some circles. These outcomes are completely independent of defense and speed. I can’t help but wonder if this is a true analysis, or bias towards what is easiest to measure.

By: Jeremiah

Jeremiah — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 23:39:10 +0000

I’ve also thought that a modified slugging percentage would be useful too. Guys like Willy Taveras (just an example) are oft criticized for their poor hitting abilities, and people point to the low slugging percentage. But if the guy reaches second base 60 times anyway, the low slugging isn’t quite as big of a deal. Something like:

(TB+SB-CS)/(AB+SB+CS)

Not to replace slugging, but just another number to consider for fast guys.