Comments on: Running the Bases – Part 3: The Laggards http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/running-the-bases-part-3-the-laggards/ Daily baseball statistical analysis and commentary Mon, 13 Feb 2012 01:42:02 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: CH http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/running-the-bases-part-3-the-laggards/#comment-108917 CH Thu, 19 Nov 2009 19:48:40 +0000 http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/?p=11635#comment-108917 I would have bet brian mccann would be on this list. I'm sure he's close to the bottom. Not that it matters, I'd take him on my team any day. But he's really got a huge piano on his back. I would have bet brian mccann would be on this list. I’m sure he’s close to the bottom. Not that it matters, I’d take him on my team any day. But he’s really got a huge piano on his back.

]]> By: Oscar http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/running-the-bases-part-3-the-laggards/#comment-108741 Oscar Wed, 18 Nov 2009 21:11:32 +0000 http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/?p=11635#comment-108741 I have a probably minor issue with this stat: I am not surprised to see the Orioles, and Melvin Mora in particular, ranked so low in baserunning, because Dave Trembley went insane this year. Hitting and running Aubrey Huff and Mora, having Luke Scott steal...it was just a disaster, anecdotally and now statistically. My issue is this: don't questionable manager decisions reflect unfairly onto the player in this instance? Mora is not fast anymore, and he makes his share of mistakes, but isn't his low score magnified by Trembley's extremely aggressive approach on the basepaths this year? While you could argue that being forced to be active on the basepaths simply exposed Mora's poor baserunning, that also means that many worse baserunners will not appear on this list because their managers used them more sensibly. So as a measure of who did the most damage to their teams on the basepaths, I like it. But conclusions like "[Mora has] awful baserunning" seem less solid. I think the best way to rank players in terms of baserunning skills would be a rate version of this stat instead of a counting one. Right now this reminds me a bit of errors: Mora made a ton, but in how many opportunities, and in what situations? A rate stat for baserunning would seem to be the logical next step. I have a probably minor issue with this stat: I am not surprised to see the Orioles, and Melvin Mora in particular, ranked so low in baserunning, because Dave Trembley went insane this year. Hitting and running Aubrey Huff and Mora, having Luke Scott steal…it was just a disaster, anecdotally and now statistically. My issue is this: don’t questionable manager decisions reflect unfairly onto the player in this instance? Mora is not fast anymore, and he makes his share of mistakes, but isn’t his low score magnified by Trembley’s extremely aggressive approach on the basepaths this year? While you could argue that being forced to be active on the basepaths simply exposed Mora’s poor baserunning, that also means that many worse baserunners will not appear on this list because their managers used them more sensibly.

So as a measure of who did the most damage to their teams on the basepaths, I like it. But conclusions like “[Mora has] awful baserunning” seem less solid. I think the best way to rank players in terms of baserunning skills would be a rate version of this stat instead of a counting one. Right now this reminds me a bit of errors: Mora made a ton, but in how many opportunities, and in what situations? A rate stat for baserunning would seem to be the logical next step.

]]> By: OsandRoyals http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/running-the-bases-part-3-the-laggards/#comment-108716 OsandRoyals Wed, 18 Nov 2009 20:01:19 +0000 http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/?p=11635#comment-108716 Melvin Mora is done in terms of being a starting position player, in part because of the number of better thirdbasemen available this year. However he had a great year last year and a simply terrible year this year so it's likely will regress to the mean even with aging and have a bounceback year if he got a starting position. As is, he's going to be looked at as a utility player, which is what he started out as. Fortunately his fielding is probably around average (UZR seems to say he's slightly below average while Tango places him average or slightly above) Melvin Mora is done in terms of being a starting position player, in part because of the number of better thirdbasemen available this year. However he had a great year last year and a simply terrible year this year so it’s likely will regress to the mean even with aging and have a bounceback year if he got a starting position. As is, he’s going to be looked at as a utility player, which is what he started out as. Fortunately his fielding is probably around average (UZR seems to say he’s slightly below average while Tango places him average or slightly above)

]]> By: B http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/running-the-bases-part-3-the-laggards/#comment-108714 B Wed, 18 Nov 2009 19:51:41 +0000 http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/?p=11635#comment-108714 Good thing Bengie doesn't get on base very often, otherwise he would probably top this list*! *Note: Sarcasm Good thing Bengie doesn’t get on base very often, otherwise he would probably top this list*!

*Note: Sarcasm

]]> By: Lee Panas http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/running-the-bases-part-3-the-laggards/#comment-108703 Lee Panas Wed, 18 Nov 2009 19:05:23 +0000 http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/?p=11635#comment-108703 Yes, the EqBRR run values are based on linear weights. Yes, the EqBRR run values are based on linear weights.

]]> By: now http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/running-the-bases-part-3-the-laggards/#comment-108700 now Wed, 18 Nov 2009 18:40:46 +0000 http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/?p=11635#comment-108700 You mention incorporating somehow the baserunning numbers into WAR for some players. Would that be these players, identified in part 2? - "Only 18 players contributed 4 or more runs, and only 13 players hurt their teams by 4 or more runs." And will these additional numbers be visible in the "Value" lines or added into the existing offensive run numbers "behind the scenes"? Better to know out front which players are being adjusted - or simply add the baserunning component up front for all players... You mention incorporating somehow the baserunning numbers into WAR for some players. Would that be these players, identified in part 2? – “Only 18 players contributed 4 or more runs, and only 13 players hurt their teams by 4 or more runs.” And will these additional numbers be visible in the “Value” lines or added into the existing offensive run numbers “behind the scenes”? Better to know out front which players are being adjusted – or simply add the baserunning component up front for all players…

]]> By: Michael http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/running-the-bases-part-3-the-laggards/#comment-108691 Michael Wed, 18 Nov 2009 18:09:59 +0000 http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/?p=11635#comment-108691 In this particular case, I think it should not be the case. I believe BP builds its Run Expectancy matrix empirically (as they put it, they use a "mutli-year Run Expectancy matrix") and not dynamic run estimator models like RC or BaseRuns. If this is indeed the case, then all we're doing here is adding linear weights from wOBA (which encompasses whatever you want it to encompass) to baserunning run values determined in the same sort of way. In this particular case, I think it should not be the case. I believe BP builds its Run Expectancy matrix empirically (as they put it, they use a “mutli-year Run Expectancy matrix”) and not dynamic run estimator models like RC or BaseRuns. If this is indeed the case, then all we’re doing here is adding linear weights from wOBA (which encompasses whatever you want it to encompass) to baserunning run values determined in the same sort of way.

]]> By: Detroit Michael http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/running-the-bases-part-3-the-laggards/#comment-108689 Detroit Michael Wed, 18 Nov 2009 17:55:41 +0000 http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/?p=11635#comment-108689 Might we be double-counting non-steal baserunning? If we weren't taking into account when computing runs created or base runs, then we may have indirectly let non-steal baserunning into the runs created or base runs formula anyway because (i) stolen bases may be correlated with non-steal baserunning and (ii) stolen bases then would have been overweighted to improve the correlation between estimated runs and a teams' actual runs. I hope the question is clear. Might we be double-counting non-steal baserunning? If we weren’t taking into account when computing runs created or base runs, then we may have indirectly let non-steal baserunning into the runs created or base runs formula anyway because (i) stolen bases may be correlated with non-steal baserunning and (ii) stolen bases then would have been overweighted to improve the correlation between estimated runs and a teams’ actual runs. I hope the question is clear.

]]> By: Rob in CT http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/running-the-bases-part-3-the-laggards/#comment-108682 Rob in CT Wed, 18 Nov 2009 17:15:56 +0000 http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/?p=11635#comment-108682 Jorge is really slow & he has bad instincts. The combination is, well, not good. It's all good so long as he can still rake. The moment the bat slows, though, things get really ugly. Jorge is really slow & he has bad instincts. The combination is, well, not good. It’s all good so long as he can still rake. The moment the bat slows, though, things get really ugly.

]]>