Dan Duquette Wanted You to Read This - Sports on Earth - LEGENDS OF THE REVOLUTION

[weams]

http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/112787544/sabr-analytics-conference-sabrmetrics-john-thorn-pete-palmer-john-dewan?tcid=tw_share

Walking here among the stars and power brokers are men less recognizable to many fans; the giants of Sabrmetrics, the men who started the revolution. On a panel moderated by longtime ESPN executive John Walsh, SABR brought together Hidden Game of Baseball co-authors John Thorn and Pete Palmer, Baseball Info Solutions founder John Dewan and statistical pioneer Dick Cramer.

These men, along with Bill James, of course, are among the most influential thinkers in the history of the game. Their contributions -- the invention of OPS, Runs Created and the proliferation of defensive shifts among them -- reverberate through the game to this day. In the audience were many current analytics staffers working in Major League front offices. I hope they realize they are working in Major League Baseball in large part because of the men on the stage.

[Frobby]

The point about sac flies at the end of the article is very interesting. Basically says when the fly out is the second out it makes sense to run if your chance of making it are better than 30%.

[JayThomas]

The point about sac flies at the end of the article is very interesting. Basically says when the fly out is the second out it makes sense to run if your chance of making it are better than 30%.

Yeah, great point about sac flies. In the context of the article it is meant to illustrate that sabermetrics is about asking the right questions and then answering them with statistically significant data.

[SteveA]

The point about sac flies at the end of the article is very interesting. Basically says when the fly out is the second out it makes sense to run if your chance of making it are better than 30%.

I think the cutoff point should be higher than 30%.

Because if you hold the runner, while you do not score on that play, there is not only the 30%ish chance you will still get the runner home with the next batter, but also the possibility to score 2, 3, 4, etc more runs that inning.

So if you compute the run expectation, it's not just 30% chance of 0 runs, 70% chance of 1 run.

So I would guess the number should be up around 40% to account for the small but real possibility of multi-run innings that may be lost if the runner is thrown out.

Actually, probably if there are additional runners on base (on 1st and/or 2nd), the % cutoff should b e higher than if it is just the runner on 3rd.

At any rate, yes, I see the obvious point that 90% is ridiculously high.

[El Gordo]

I would guess I'm old school, but I would base my decision on whether to send the runner, on where the ball was hit and what kind of arm the OF had.

[weams]

I think the cutoff point should be higher than 30%.

Because if you hold the runner, while you do not score on that play, there is not only the 30%ish chance you will still get the runner home with the next batter, but also the possibility to score 2, 3, 4, etc more runs that inning.

So if you compute the run expectation, it's not just 30% chance of 0 runs, 70% chance of 1 run.

So I would guess the number should be up around 40% to account for the small but real possibility of multi-run innings that may be lost if the runner is thrown out.

Actually, probably if there are additional runners on base (on 1st and/or 2nd), the % cutoff should b e higher than if it is just the runner on 3rd.

At any rate, yes, I see the obvious point that 90% is ridiculously high.

How does one determine the percentage? The eye test? TWTW? Is that were this breaks down? At Bobby Dickerson?

[Frobby]

I think the cutoff point should be higher than 30%.

Because if you hold the runner, while you do not score on that play, there is not only the 30%ish chance you will still get the runner home with the next batter, but also the possibility to score 2, 3, 4, etc more runs that inning.

So if you compute the run expectation, it's not just 30% chance of 0 runs, 70% chance of 1 run.

So I would guess the number should be up around 40% to account for the small but real possibility of multi-run innings that may be lost if the runner is thrown out.

Actually, probably if there are additional runners on base (on 1st and/or 2nd), the % cutoff should b e higher than if it is just the runner on 3rd.

At any rate, yes, I see the obvious point that 90% is ridiculously high.

I think you are right on all counts here. In any event, it's something to think about the next time Bobby Dickerson waves a guy home, the runner is thrown out, and the posts come flying in about how Dickerson is the worst 3B coach of all time.

[Frobby]

How does one determine the percentage? The eye test? TWTW? Is that were this breaks down? At Bobby Dickerson?

I can't see how the 3B coach has anything to go on but the eye test and his knowledge of the runner and the outfielder.

I'm not sure what the Orioles' percentage on sac flies was last year. According to BB-ref, they made an out at home 11 times, but they were out once going from 1st to home on a double, and out 11 times going from 2nd to home on a single. That doesn't add up.

[SteveA]

How does one determine the percentage? The eye test? TWTW? Is that were this breaks down? At Bobby Dickerson?

Well, he makes a determination now based on the "eye test". It's just that his threshhold is higher. It's not that he has a % number in his head. But he has some idea of "it looks like he can make it" when he is making the decision.

And the bottom line is that with one out he should lower that threshhold, and not only send the runners in the "it looks like he can make it" situations, but also in the situations that look "50-50ish". And not worry about being chewed out by his manager (or excoriated on talk shows and message boards) if a few more guys are thrown out.

And also, of course, in late, close games you should be more aggressive because that run means more.

[Just Regular]

Palmer didn't mention it specifically when making his point, but now the new home plate collision rules tip the balance towards baserunners even more.