Speed

[Sessh]

3 hours ago, Number5 said:

The fact that there are more important factors offensively than stolen bases is far from being irrelevant.  In fact, it is the crux of the matter.  The point you are overlooking is that the fact that Billy Hamilton doesn't score a lot of runs isn't a statistical anomaly based on the failures of his teammates.  It is rather the very obvious fact that he isn't on base very often, and he certainly doesn't knock himself in very often.  As I thought I had stated clearly, the ability to steal bases can make a good player even better, but it doesn't overcome the inability to get on base.

Hey man, I said I agreed with you about Hamilton. If you can't get on base, then it certainly puts significant limits any potential benefits his base running speed would bring to the table. I am more referring to guys that can get on base and can steal once they get there. I kind of went off on my own points halfway through that, so it wasn't all directed at you. I agree fully with your comments about Billy Hamilton and I am certainly not overlooking the fact that a  guy that struggles to get on base is effectively negating his athletic gift of base running speed and stolen base ability. You can't steal second from the dugout. I am more referring to the guys who can get on base and can steal bases at an acceptable success rate.

When I said it's irrelevant, I was more referring to how people like to say that there are more important stats to look at and draft for and they are correct, but just because there are more important stats does not mean steals are negligible. The fact that better stats exist really has nothing to do with it when trying to look at steals on their own merits. The purpose of stealing bases is to create scoring chances VIA putting runners in scoring position or improving an existing scoring chance by stealing third or executing a double steal. When people point to stats saying that steals are "negligible", what's basically being said is that scoring chances are negligible if they are created with a stolen base. That is ridiculous. Who in their right mind would argue against additional scoring chances? That's what stolen bases do; they create scoring chances. That is in no way negligible. Whether or not that scoring chance becomes a run on the board is totally on the rest of the offense.

[weams]

10 hours ago, Sessh said:

That's what stolen bases do; they create scoring chances. That is in no way negligible. Whether or not that scoring chance becomes a run on the board is totally on the rest of the offense.

No they don't - the math does not work. Caught stealings negate all the positivity and then some. And as you emphasize speed, you decrease extra base strength. Also a negation. 

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, weams said:

No they don't - the math does not work. Caught stealings negate all the positivity and then some. And as you emphasize speed, you decrease extra base strength. Also a negation. 

That is why you target guys that are good at everything and have speed and power.

It's really pretty simple if you stop and think about it.

[weams]

2 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

That is why you target guys that are good at everything and have speed and power.

It's really pretty simple if you stop and think about it.

It's also why ages 25 through 29 are so important. 

[baltfan]

I would be good with an all speed team experiment.  Not much to lose.  You are just as likely to find a gem among the speedsters as any other group of players. 

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, baltfan said:

I would be good with an all speed team experiment.  Not much to lose.  You are just as likely to find a gem among the speedsters as any other group of players. 

So they pick the rotation based on who has the best wind sprints? 

[baltfan]

4 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

So they pick the rotation based on who has the best wind sprints? 

Sure why not maybe there’s a correlation that we didn’t know. 

[Frobby]

4 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

That is why you target guys that are good at everything and have speed and power.

It's really pretty simple if you stop and think about it.

Yes.  All you need is 9 guys like Mike Trout or Willie Mays.   Simple game.   

[Can_of_corn]

6 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Yes.  All you need is 9 guys like Mike Trout or Willie Mays.   Simple game.   

Or even a Mickey Mantle type.

[weams]

3 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

Or even a Mickey Mantle type.

Griffey Jr,  Bo Jackson,  RIckey Henderson too. 

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, weams said:

Griffey Jr,  Bo Jackson,  RIckey Henderson too. 

ARod, Bonds.

Lots of guys.

[Sessh]

14 hours ago, weams said:

No they don't - the math does not work. Caught stealings negate all the positivity and then some. And as you emphasize speed, you decrease extra base strength. Also a negation. 

Yes they do. By default, getting a runner into scoring position is a scoring chance. The math that doesn't work is implying that stealing successfully seven times out of 10 is "negated" by the three times he got caught. That's ridiculous. It is negated when he gets caught stealing too often. Henderson's 1406 stolen bases were completely negated by the 335 times he got caught and Altuve's 248 career steals are completely negated by the 69 times he got caught.

Whit Merrifield, Jose Ramirez, Starling Marte, Adalberto Mondesi, Mookie Betts, Trevor Story, Francisco Lindor, Mike Trout, Christian Yelich, Javier Baez, Andrew Benintendi and Jose Altuve are all in the top 30 in steals last year and have decent to exceptional power. Merrifield isn't much for home runs, but hit 43 doubles. Just draft the best athletes and go from there. You'll get speed with everything else.

 

 

[Frobby]

8 hours ago, Sessh said:

Yes they do. By default, getting a runner into scoring position is a scoring chance. The math that doesn't work is implying that stealing successfully seven times out of 10 is "negated" by the three times he got caught. That's ridiculous. It is negated when he gets caught stealing too often. Henderson's 1406 stolen bases were completely negated by the 335 times he got caught and Altuve's 248 career steals are completely negated by the 69 times he got caught.

I’m not following you.    First of all, it’s been well established that 70% is about the break-even point on stolen bases — the break even point varies a couple percentage points depending on the overall run scoring environment (lower run scoring —> lower break even point for stolen bases).    It also varies in specific situations (number of outs, which base is stolen, other bsserunners).   Overall though, 70% is a rough guide.  https://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/breaking-down-stolen-base-break-even-points/

Second, both Henderson (81%) and Altuve (78%) were well over the break even point, so their stolen bases were/are not negated by getting caught stealing.  

[Sessh]

2 hours ago, Frobby said:

I’m not following you.    First of all, it’s been well established that 70% is about the break-even point on stolen bases — the break even point varies a couple percentage points depending on the overall run scoring environment (lower run scoring —> lower break even point for stolen bases).    It also varies in specific situations (number of outs, which base is stolen, other bsserunners).   Overall though, 70% is a rough guide.  https://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/breaking-down-stolen-base-break-even-points/

Second, both Henderson (81%) and Altuve (78%) were well over the break even point, so their stolen bases were/are not negated by getting caught stealing.  

Of course there's variables, but the bottom line is a stolen base creates a scoring chance by moving a runner into scoring position or improves one by moving a runner to third or getting two guys in scoring position instead of one. To say that steals are negligible because they don't score is extremely misleading since the reason they didn't score has nothing at all to do with the stolen base. It has to do with the guys behind him in the order that failed to bring him in and this data then uses that failure of the batter to justify saying steals are negligible. It's flawed.

Let's extend that to other situations, a bases empty double for example. What this data is trying to tell me is that if that runner doesn't score, it means bases empty doubles are negligible even though the reason the run didn't score had nothing to do with the double. Scoring chances are not guaranteed runs, they are chances. If we get a lead off double and the next three guys strike out, that does not mean that lead off doubles are negligible and that's what this data is saying about steals. It is projecting the responsibility of the other hitters in the lineup to produce with RISP on the stolen base or the double and using that as "data" to say that the scoring chance created by those plays are negligible.

What if we got three walks to lead off the inning and the next three guys strike out. Does that mean walks are negligible? Does it mean loading the bases is meaningless? That's why this is a team sport. There's lots of ways to put runners in scoring position with steals being only one such way. Doubles are another way, a single and a walk is another way and so on. If those runs don't score, it's not because they are meaningless, negligible strategies. It means the offense failed to produce with RISP. This is blame misplaced. The guy who hits the double or hits a single/takes a walk and steals second both got themselves into scoring position. They did their part. Their part is not negligible if his teammates fail to produce and bring him home. What more are they supposed to do exactly? Steal home? Whether that run scores or not has nothing to do with the double, steal or walks. It has to do with the failure of the rest of the lineup.

[Moose Milligan]

11 hours ago, Sessh said:

Just draft the best athletes and go from there. You'll get speed with everything else.

 

 

I feel like this is what the Orioles did with Alex Ochoa, Darnell McDonald and Curtis Goodwin.  It's not the best approach, IMO.  Hammonds could have been the real deal, could never stay healthy.