The extra inning runner on 2B rule

[SteveA]

1 minute ago, DrungoHazewood said:

I went to this win expectancy calculator, and plugged in the applicable situations.  It says that with a runner on 2nd and nobody out in the bottom of the 10th of a tie game the home team wins 84% of the time.  With runners on first and second and nobody out the home team wins 86% of the time.  So that tells me that there is a disadvantage to walking the first batter.

But... those odds are based on 1957-2019 MLB data, which means the runner got to second by being the leadoff batter and doubling (or somehow getting to first and stealing second, or a few other odd cases).  Which skews the data a little, you know the pitcher on the mound just gave up something placing a runner on 2nd.  But in 2020 you might have a really great reliever on the mound throwing bullets, and the runner is on second by rule.  So the odds might be a bit different.

That surprises me.   Seems like the more DPs you would get in that situation would counter the disadvantages.   Guess I am wrong.

[DrungoHazewood]

8 minutes ago, SteveA said:

That surprises me.   Seems like the more DPs you would get in that situation would counter the disadvantages.   Guess I am wrong.

I would have thought so, too, but I can't say I thought through it too deeply before now. 

Somewhere in the back of my head I have that 14% of the time there's a runner on first and less than two out a DP is turned.  I don't know if that's still a valid number, it may be from 20 years ago.  But you also have a walk in about 9% of PAs, plus a HBP in another 1%, and a wild pitch about 1% of the time.  So while putting the runner on first sets up a double play, it also puts you in a situation where you've loaded the bases on a walk or an infield hit or a HBP.

Also, you have to consider the impact of the sac bunt.  A lot of teams will want to sacrifice the guy to third if you don't walk the batter, giving you an out.  Maybe the better situation is to let them do that.  The batter might fail, might pop up the bunt, or put down one right at the pitcher who throws the guy out at third.  Worst case he bunts the runner to third, then you walk the next guy and you set up the double play to get out of the inning altogether.

Win expectancy of runner on third, one out, tie game, bottom of 10th is 80% for the home team.  That's better than 2nd and no out.

[GuidoSarducci]

26 minutes ago, SteveA said:

That surprises me.   Seems like the more DPs you would get in that situation would counter the disadvantages.   Guess I am wrong.

You have to factor in the guy on 2nd being called out, without the team getting a double play.  So in those situations, the runner on first either stays there, or possibly advances to second.  

Like what happened the other night vs the Rays - Mullins throws Choi out on deep fly ball.  If the Rays had another runner on first, he may have advanced to second or worst case stayed at first.  Which obviously increases the chance of the Rays scoring a run in that inning.

[SteveA]

18 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

I would have thought so, too, but I can't say I thought through it too deeply before now. 

Somewhere in the back of my head I have that 14% of the time there's a runner on first and less than two out a DP is turned.  I don't know if that's still a valid number, it may be from 20 years ago.  But you also have a walk in about 9% of PAs, plus a HBP in another 1%, and a wild pitch about 1% of the time.  So while putting the runner on first sets up a double play, it also puts you in a situation where you've loaded the bases on a walk or an infield hit or a HBP.

Also, you have to consider the impact of the sac bunt.  A lot of teams will want to sacrifice the guy to third if you don't walk the batter, giving you an out.  Maybe the better situation is to let them do that.  The batter might fail, might pop up the bunt, or put down one right at the pitcher who throws the guy out at third.  Worst case he bunts the runner to third, then you walk the next guy and you set up the double play to get out of the inning altogether.

Win expectancy of runner on third, one out, tie game, bottom of 10th is 80% for the home team.  That's better than 2nd and no out.

I think I only saw one sac bunt in those 12 at bats that occurred leading off the inning w hen I went through each extra inning game.   That was Severino in the 11th.

That doesn't mean that others weren't attempted and foulled off until there were 2 strikes, or maybe one was popped up and recorded as a popout.

But so far it appears the primary strategy is just for the pitcher to face the batter and the batter to swing away.   As we saw in the Tampa game.

[Chavez Ravine]

3 hours ago, SteveA said:

I think I only saw one sac bunt in those 12 at bats that occurred leading off the inning w hen I went through each extra inning game.   That was Severino in the 11th.

That doesn't mean that others weren't attempted and foulled off until there were 2 strikes, or maybe one was popped up and recorded as a popout.

But so far it appears the primary strategy is just for the pitcher to face the batter and the batter to swing away.   As we saw in the Tampa game.

That supports my impression that there hasn’t been much in the way of a shift in strategy so far. It’s just that the odds have been changed. Maybe that will adjust as folks get used to things. Still, (if we have to do it) I would prefer something that might more aggressively force a radical change of approach in extra innings. Like (in seriousness) getting rid of a position player for each inning past 9, or adjusting the strikes needed for a k, or the balls needed for a BB. Or, if you have a robo ump, the size of the strike zone.

[SteveA]

20 minutes ago, Chavez Ravine said:

That supports my impression that there hasn’t been much in the way of a shift in strategy so far. It’s just that the odds have been changed. Maybe that will adjust as folks get used to things. Still, (if we have to do it) I would prefer something that might more aggressively force a radical change of approach in extra innings. Like (in seriousness) getting rid of a position player for each inning past 9, or adjusting the strikes needed for a k, or the balls needed for a BB. Or, if you have a robo ump, the size of the strike zone.

Never thought about this before but once you have robo-umps you can do all sorts of things.  You know how in bowling they will have this thing where the front pin is red every so many times and if you bowl a strike with the red pin you win a free game or snack from the snack bar?   They could have a hologram of a small area show up in the middle of the strike zone and if the pitcher can hit it and the batter doesn't put it in play it could count for two outs.   Or maybe everyone in the stands gets a hot dog.

The possibilities are endless.   They could find ways to bring fans back to the game!

[Frobby]

4 hours ago, Beef Supreme said:

If I went to the bathroom, the first thing I would ask when I got back was, "how did that guy get on second base?" Unless somebody answered, "It's magic!" I would know the rule had been changed.

And the first thing I’d ask you is, “did you wash your hands with warm water and soap for at least 20 seconds?”

[Hallas]

12 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

Except they have added two new varieties of Cricket in the recent past so make sure you tune into the right one.

I don't think you saw this back in 1870.

what, you're saying they didn't have multicolored compression shirts in 1870????

[Hallas]

4 hours ago, DrungoHazewood said:

I would have thought so, too, but I can't say I thought through it too deeply before now. 

Somewhere in the back of my head I have that 14% of the time there's a runner on first and less than two out a DP is turned.  I don't know if that's still a valid number, it may be from 20 years ago.  But you also have a walk in about 9% of PAs, plus a HBP in another 1%, and a wild pitch about 1% of the time.  So while putting the runner on first sets up a double play, it also puts you in a situation where you've loaded the bases on a walk or an infield hit or a HBP.

Also, you have to consider the impact of the sac bunt.  A lot of teams will want to sacrifice the guy to third if you don't walk the batter, giving you an out.  Maybe the better situation is to let them do that.  The batter might fail, might pop up the bunt, or put down one right at the pitcher who throws the guy out at third.  Worst case he bunts the runner to third, then you walk the next guy and you set up the double play to get out of the inning altogether.

Win expectancy of runner on third, one out, tie game, bottom of 10th is 80% for the home team.  That's better than 2nd and no out.

I don't think the difference between 84% and 86% is significant, and all of this assumes a league-average batter.  it wouldn't take a large difference in batter quality between the current batter and the on-deck batter to flip this around.

Also, if Zach Britton is pitching you probably go for the double play 7 days a week and twice on Sunday, no matter the batters.

[Frobby]

Here’s an idea: any team that has more than X number of players test positive in a three day window is disqualified from further play.    That helps prevent the spread to other teams and puts a lot of pressure on players to avoid situations where they’re likely to get infected.  

OK, it will never happen.    But I can dream.  

[Can_of_corn]

14 minutes ago, Hallas said:

what, you're saying they didn't have multicolored compression shirts in 1870????

No, they didn't have conch shells.

[Beef Supreme]

23 minutes ago, Frobby said:

And the first thing I’d ask you is, “did you wash your hands with warm water and soap for at least 20 seconds?”

It was those extra 20 seconds that made me miss the runner being placed on 2B in the first place!

[Beef Supreme]

10 minutes ago, Hallas said:

I don't think the difference between 84% and 86% is significant, and all of this assumes a league-average batter.  it wouldn't take a large difference in batter quality between the current batter and the on-deck batter to flip this around.

Also, if Zach Britton is pitching you probably go for the double play 7 days a week and twice on Sunday, no matter the batters.

Is it the uniform or does Britton's "sinker" not break as late and as sharp as it did before his Achilles injury? He still looks really good. But that one pitch that I had never seen anything like before in my life hasn't been the same in years, to my eyes.

[Frobby]

12 minutes ago, Beef Supreme said:

It was those extra 20 seconds that made me miss the runner being placed on 2B in the first place!

Well, I’d hope it was only an extra 15 seconds...

[Chavez Ravine]

Another approach that I would prefer would be to declare a tie after (insert inning you feel appropriate) and have a points system for the pennant. That keeps all the data collection more consistent. A 13th inning in 1986 was played under the same rules (If not the same pharmacology) as a 13th inning in 2026. I think it is also more honest. We just don’t want the game to go on any longer, and we are fed up watching the dudes in this current game: tie!!