Stolen Bases.

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from crazy-world-of-troybrown. Show crazy-world-of-troybrown's posts

    Re: Stolen Bases.

    I predict 30 stloen bases by those 3. I think Ellsbury will get 50. Just too fast, and good base stealer.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedSoxKimmi. Show RedSoxKimmi's posts

    Re: Stolen Bases.

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Some guys should have the green light to steal, some should not. A high success rate is very important. But if you have a guy who can steal with a high rate of success, it makes no sense to stay on first. Get in scoring position. The best base stealers know when to go and when not to.

    [/QUOTE]

     

    I would not give a runner, even one as successful as Ellsbury, the green light to steal whenever he thinks he can do so successfully.  In some cases, you could be negatively impacting the team's run scoring in the inning, even if the steal is successful.

    You may take the bat out of one of your best hitter's hands by having him intentionally walked.  You close the hole that you would have on the right side of the infield by not having the runner held on first.  You may change the entire approach of the following hitters by giving them a small ball mentality to get one run in rather than playing for the big inning.

    If you have a good offense to begin with, stolen bases become even less important.

     

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedSoxKimmi. Show RedSoxKimmi's posts

    Re: Stolen Bases.

    In response to SonicsMonksLyresVicars' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    This isn't a particularly in-depth analysis of the theoretical value of the SB, but I think it's simple, concise and measured:  http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2014/2/20/5425744/stolen-bases-lack-value

    I think the final paragraph shuts down this debate for both sides i.e. the sum of a team's SB isn't particularly relevant, but there are situations where the potential gain from a SB outweighs the potential loss from a CS:

    "The proper use of Big Data in baseball isn't identifying macro trends and blithely dismissing strategies out of hand, but instead using it to influence the 5-10 games a year that come down to a game decision and seeing if the data can provide a competitive advantage or novel insight. With five teams making the playoffs in each league, the importance of even one game takes on additional significance, and it makes sense to see if time-honored strategies like base stealing actually translate into runs, and by extension wins."

     

    [/QUOTE]

     

    Good read Sonics.  Base stealing definitely has its place in baseball.  Roberts stealing in Game 4 of the 2004 ALCS was a great time to steal, for instance.  Then again, one run was of extreme importance in that situation.

     

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from dgalehouse. Show dgalehouse's posts

    Re: Stolen Bases.

    In response to RedSoxKimmi's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Some guys should have the green light to steal, some should not. A high success rate is very important. But if you have a guy who can steal with a high rate of success, it makes no sense to stay on first. Get in scoring position. The best base stealers know when to go and when not to.

    [/QUOTE]

     

    I would not give a runner, even one as successful as Ellsbury, the green light to steal whenever he thinks he can do so successfully.  In some cases, you could be negatively impacting the team's run scoring in the inning, even if the steal is successful.

    You may take the bat out of one of your best hitter's hands by having him intentionally walked.  You close the hole that you would have on the right side of the infield by not having the runner held on first.  You may change the entire approach of the following hitters by giving them a small ball mentality to get one run in rather than playing for the big inning.

    If you have a good offense to begin with, stolen bases become even less important.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Honestly, I don't see an instance of your number two hitter being intentionally walked to face the number three hitter. The whole purpose of having the hole on the right side is to prevent the stolen base. Are you saying that teams should just allow the steal?  The approach of the three, four and five hitters is to drive in runs. Having runners in scoring position is always desirable for that. You don't play small ball with the middle of the order.  I really don't understand your argument. If you feel that letting Ellsbury go to the Yankees was the thing to do , fine. It was a lot of money. But to try and justify that by denying the value of a base stealer does not make sense. It is a very important asset. 

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Joebreidey. Show Joebreidey's posts

    Re: Stolen Bases.

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    To downplay the importance of stolen bases is totally absurd. It is pretty clear that a runner on second has a better chance of scoring than a runner on first. On third, even more so. The only other factor is that a good success rate  is needed. If you are getting thrown out too often, it defeats the whole purpose.

    [/QUOTE]

    I'm not seeing the value in this statement.  Of course you're better off at 2nd or 3rd, just like you're better off hitting a HR than a single.

    But the discussion of the SB is about how many extra bases you pick up, and how many outs you surrender for those extra bases.  There aren't that many Ellsbury types around.  And past the Ellsbury types, alertness counts more than speed.  Johnny Bench once stole maybe 25 bases in a row, and he was about as fast as me.  Papi went 4-0 last year.  Just focus on the overall percentage.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from dgalehouse. Show dgalehouse's posts

    Re: Stolen Bases.

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    To downplay the importance of stolen bases is totally absurd. It is pretty clear that a runner on second has a better chance of scoring than a runner on first. On third, even more so. The only other factor is that a good success rate  is needed. If you are getting thrown out too often, it defeats the whole purpose.

    [/QUOTE]

    I'm not seeing the value in this statement.  Of course you're better off at 2nd or 3rd, just like you're better off hitting a HR than a single.

    But the discussion of the SB is about how many extra bases you pick up, and how many outs you surrender for those extra bases.  There aren't that many Ellsbury types around.  And past the Ellsbury types, alertness counts more than speed.  Johnny Bench once stole maybe 25 bases in a row, and he was about as fast as me.  Papi went 4-0 last year.  Just focus on the overall percentage.

    [/QUOTE]

    I am missing your point. How many extra bases do you pick up? Obviously, you pick up one for each stolen base. I think I made it clear that the success rate is essential. Some guys can steal often with a high rate of success. Some can carefully pick their spots. The bottom line is that it is good to get into scoring position , if you can consistently do it with low risk of being thrown out. I don't see how that can be disputed. The stolen base is an important weapon. To say otherwise is absurd. 

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from pinstripezac35. Show pinstripezac35's posts

    Re: Stolen Bases.

    good read sonics thanks

     

     

     

    In response to RedSoxKimmi's comment:

    For every move that is made that seems to have a positive impact, there is an offsetting negative impact, to some extent.  Believe it or not, most secondary impact argues in favor of keeping the runner at first.

    not sure what that means but we have an expression in yankeeland  that comes to mind

    My point is not that teams should never steal bases, just that they are overrated.

    The Red Sox did well at 87%, but even with that, the impact of the stolen base is not as great as most people would think.  They scored a lot of runs because they got on base.

     

    well add 2 that dale qualifying his words

    w/'' the runner must have a good success rate ''

    I'm not sure how much we all disagree

    I mean U admitted they can B important

    just not as important as those 'other people' (non stat geeks) think

     

    but U stat geeks crack me up some times

     

    Furthermore, there is no evidence that the threat of a stolen base has any secondary offensive value by distracting the pitcher or by putting pressure on the defense.  The value comes from having a runner on first, regardless of his speed, because any runner of first disrupts the normal defensive alignment.  

    Also, studies have shown that the threat of a stolen base negatively impacts the batter at the plate.

     

    U R 2 much stat girl

    I was going 2 suggest

    U watch the games

    that U never saw ricky play

    but heck U saw johnny jr play enough

     

    I wonder how much of what U believe changes

    if we ever do get to the post PED era




     

    BTW stats geeks

    good luck

    with all these teams increasing the use of shifts

     

     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: Stolen Bases.

    In response to Pinstripejake's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Here is my prediction. Ellsbury will have more stolen bases himself this season than the entire Saux team.

    [/QUOTE]

    Quite possible.  And it won't matter in the least.

     

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: Stolen Bases.

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Pinstripejake's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Here is my prediction. Ellsbury will have more stolen bases himself this season than the entire Saux team.

    [/QUOTE]

    Quite possible.  And it won't matter in the least.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Its Pike HFX, masquerading as a Yankee fan trying to stoke the forum. Guess he thinks everyone missed him here.

     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from notin. Show notin's posts

    Re: Stolen Bases.

    In response to SonicsMonksLyresVicars' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Does anybody have any numbers to back up the assertion that stolen bases are closely correlated to runs scored? 

    [/QUOTE]

    The stolen base is a very overrated strategy.  It is nice when it works well, but trying to highlight by saying a high success rate is essential is like saying “it’s only effective when it works.”   Well, that pretty much goes for every strategy in every sport, does it not?  Pulling the goalie in hockey is also a great strategy when it works, too.  That doesn’t make it a good overall  strategy or mean teams need to do it more often.

     

    The bottom line is, there no real correlation between stolen bases and runs scored.  The much bigger factors is OBP, and it’s not even close.  The stolen base actually is an unnecessary risk in many cases. I mean, for every single small ball instance like the Yankee example, I can watch another game where the runner gets caught stealing and the next hitter rakes a double.

     

    From 2011 through 2013, the top 6 (or top 20%) stolen base teams over were, in order, Padres, Royals, Brewers, Rangers, Blue Jays, Rays.

     

    Same timeframe, the top 6 teams for Runs Scored were: Red Sox, Rangers, Yankees, Cardinals, Tigers, and Rockies.

     

    Same timeframe, top 6 in OBP in order: Tigers, Red Sox, Cardinals, Rangers, Yankees,  and Rockies,

     

    Same six teams that were the best in OBP were also the best in scoring.  Over 3 years, this is not a coincidence.  Only the Rangers were among the top 20% in both scoring and stolen bases, and THAT is the coincidence.  The Rangers scoring prowess is from getting on base, not taking free bases.  

     

    And actually, the top 6 SB teams were all over the place in scoring.  The Padres were 27th.  The Royals were 16th.  The Brewers were 11th.  The Jays were 7th. And the Rays were 14th.  (Rangers were second, as mentioned above.)   Know why?  Their OBPs were all over the place.  A stolen base helps with a single run on occasion, but frequently getting on base just keeps the Runs Scored supply train moving.  

    And now the data to support.

     

    Those Top Six teams actually litter most of the top offensive categories.

     

    Team BA – Tigers (1), Rangers (2), Red Sox (3), Cardinals (4), Rockies (5), Yankees (11).  Only the Yankees fell outside the top 20%.  The other team in it was KC, who was sixth in BA, second in SB, but 16th in RS.

     

    Team SLG – Red Sox (1), Rangers (2), Tigers (3), Yankees (4), Rockies (5), Cardinals (9).  The Yankees climb back into the ranks here to make up for their lower BA.

     

    Ad of course, team OPS, is the Top 20-percenter teams-  Red Sox, Rangers, Tigers, Yankees, Cardinals, and Rockies.  But then if they were all atop OBP and SLG, what did you expect?

     

    The SB has the nice occasional place as a strategy, but is a much smaller factor in scoring that simply getting on base, and even than getting XBH.  Part of the issue for this discrepancy is that too many teams – I’m looking at you, Padres and Astros – heavily rely on it as an offensive weapon because they are simply very ineffective scoring teams who need to do whatever it takes.

     

    And the threat of the SB is very nice, for many of the reasons already mentioned plus the fact that many pitchers, especially younger pitchers, are very, very uncomfortable and far less effective when they are forced to pitch from the stretch.

     

    Highlighting individual plays by guys like Garnder and Ellsbury does not change this.  In fact, it magnifies it, as they frequently hit in front of the more productive hitters.   The time when teams are more likely  NEED stolen bases is from the guys batting sixth and seventh, when getting that extra base is more important in front of the lesser hitters who are a lot less likely to get an extra base hit or string together a couple singles to bring a run home.  Yet we all look at the leadoff guy to steal bases and take that unnecessary risk in front of actual hitters who are already more capable of getting XBH and stringing hits together.  (And stealing from the leadoff spot it certainly does take the bat out of the hands of these hitters on many occasions.)  How many teams get many, if any, stolen bases from the 6-spot and 7-spot-hitters?

     

    A stolen base is nice when you need it.  But in the picture, it is not really needed.  And as this thread was worrying about where all the Sox stolen bases are going to come from, who cares?

      

     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from dgalehouse. Show dgalehouse's posts

    Re: Stolen Bases.

    Saying a high success rate is essential is not the same as saying it's only effective when it works. Not at all. The idea is that you don't run unless there is a good chance of success. This would include the ability of the base stealer, the pitcher, the catcher, the lead off the bag, getting a good jump, things like that. It is all about being smart. It has nothing to do with OBP. They are two entirely different things.

     
  15. This post has been removed.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from dgalehouse. Show dgalehouse's posts

    Re: Stolen Bases.

    In response to notin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to SonicsMonksLyresVicars' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Does anybody have any numbers to back up the assertion that stolen bases are closely correlated to runs scored? 

    [/QUOTE]

    The stolen base is a very overrated strategy.  It is nice when it works well, but trying to highlight by saying a high success rate is essential is like saying “it’s only effective when it works.”   Well, that pretty much goes for every strategy in every sport, does it not?  Pulling the goalie in hockey is also a great strategy when it works, too.  That doesn’t make it a good overall  strategy or mean teams need to do it more often.

     

    The bottom line is, there no real correlation between stolen bases and runs scored.  The much bigger factors is OBP, and it’s not even close.  The stolen base actually is an unnecessary risk in many cases. I mean, for every single small ball instance like the Yankee example, I can watch another game where the runner gets caught stealing and the next hitter rakes a double.

     

    From 2011 through 2013, the top 6 (or top 20%) stolen base teams over were, in order, Padres, Royals, Brewers, Rangers, Blue Jays, Rays.

     

    Same timeframe, the top 6 teams for Runs Scored were: Red Sox, Rangers, Yankees, Cardinals, Tigers, and Rockies.

     

    Same timeframe, top 6 in OBP in order: Tigers, Red Sox, Cardinals, Rangers, Yankees,  and Rockies,

     

    Same six teams that were the best in OBP were also the best in scoring.  Over 3 years, this is not a coincidence.  Only the Rangers were among the top 20% in both scoring and stolen bases, and THAT is the coincidence.  The Rangers scoring prowess is from getting on base, not taking free bases.  

     

    And actually, the top 6 SB teams were all over the place in scoring.  The Padres were 27th.  The Royals were 16th.  The Brewers were 11th.  The Jays were 7th. And the Rays were 14th.  (Rangers were second, as mentioned above.)   Know why?  Their OBPs were all over the place.  A stolen base helps with a single run on occasion, but frequently getting on base just keeps the Runs Scored supply train moving.  

    And now the data to support.

     

    Those Top Six teams actually litter most of the top offensive categories.

     

    Team BA – Tigers (1), Rangers (2), Red Sox (3), Cardinals (4), Rockies (5), Yankees (11).  Only the Yankees fell outside the top 20%.  The other team in it was KC, who was sixth in BA, second in SB, but 16th in RS.

     

    Team SLG – Red Sox (1), Rangers (2), Tigers (3), Yankees (4), Rockies (5), Cardinals (9).  The Yankees climb back into the ranks here to make up for their lower BA.

     

    Ad of course, team OPS, is the Top 20-percenter teams-  Red Sox, Rangers, Tigers, Yankees, Cardinals, and Rockies.  But then if they were all atop OBP and SLG, what did you expect?

     

    The SB has the nice occasional place as a strategy, but is a much smaller factor in scoring that simply getting on base, and even than getting XBH.  Part of the issue for this discrepancy is that too many teams – I’m looking at you, Padres and Astros – heavily rely on it as an offensive weapon because they are simply very ineffective scoring teams who need to do whatever it takes.

     

    And the threat of the SB is very nice, for many of the reasons already mentioned plus the fact that many pitchers, especially younger pitchers, are very, very uncomfortable and far less effective when they are forced to pitch from the stretch.

     

    Highlighting individual plays by guys like Garnder and Ellsbury does not change this.  In fact, it magnifies it, as they frequently hit in front of the more productive hitters.   The time when teams are more likely  NEED stolen bases is from the guys batting sixth and seventh, when getting that extra base is more important in front of the lesser hitters who are a lot less likely to get an extra base hit or string together a couple singles to bring a run home.  Yet we all look at the leadoff guy to steal bases and take that unnecessary risk in front of actual hitters who are already more capable of getting XBH and stringing hits together.  (And stealing from the leadoff spot it certainly does take the bat out of the hands of these hitters on many occasions.)  How many teams get many, if any, stolen bases from the 6-spot and 7-spot-hitters?

     

    A stolen base is nice when you need it.  But in the picture, it is not really needed.  And as this thread was worrying about where all the Sox stolen bases are going to come from, who cares?

      

    [/QUOTE]

    • dgalehouse
    • Posts: 11797
    • First: 6/4/2010
    • Last: 4/8/2014

    Saying a high success rate is essential is not the same as saying it's only effective when it works. Not at all. The idea is that you don't run unless there is a good chance of success. This would include the ability of the base stealer, the pitcher, the catcher, the lead off the bag, getting a good jump, things like that. It is all about being smart. It has nothing to do with OBP. They are two entirely different things.

     

     

Share