Running on contact

[Pushmonkey]

It appears that the Os run into a lot of outs at the plate. The idea of running on contact is a horrible idea in this day and age.  Maybe just maybe if we have flash at third then you go but everyone on this team is not a super hero. This maddening idea drives me nuts. 

[dzorange]

I don’t see the issue with today’s play. 1 out already and this was not an automatic out at home.

[Aristotelian]

I would like to see the numbers on it. 1st and 3rd, seems like most likely outcome if you stay is 2nd and 3rd. Most likely outcome if you run is 1st and 3rd but you have a chance of scoring with 1st and 3rd, no out. Seems like the upside case is worth the risk. Bottom line you are better off with a sac fly!

[now]

It is infuriating to see this happen like three times in the past week. I think all with hard grounders to the left side. It seems partly a problem with the automatic send, and partly the hitting approach. 

[Moose Milligan]

I don’t see the issue with AR holding up to see if the ball made it through. Now, he was quite a bit off third when the ball was hit.

But if he makes the defender look him back to third, maybe the worst thing is that he’s late on the throw to first and they’ve got the bases loaded. Or he makes the out at first and there’s still 2nd and 3rd. 

[Aristotelian]

2 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

I don’t see the issue with AR holding up to see if the ball made it through. Now, he was quite a bit off third when the ball was hit.

But if he makes the defender look him back to third, maybe the worst thing is that he’s late on the throw to first and they’ve got the bases loaded. Or he makes the out at first and there’s still 2nd and 3rd. 

With none out I would agree but with 1 out you are giving up your chance to score. If you hold up and it doesn't get through, now you've got 2nd and 3rd with 2 out. If it gets through you score anyway so why wait?

[Moose Milligan]

5 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

With none out I would agree but with 1 out you are giving up your chance to score. If you hold up and it doesn't get through, now you've got 2nd and 3rd with 2 out. If it gets through you score anyway so why wait?

Because I’m willing to bet that there’s a better than 90% chance the runner is dead at the plate on that play they just nailed Adley on.  I don’t think that run scores very often.  
 

If you want to send him on contact when the ball doesn’t get through on the off-chance the fielder makes a bad throw or the catcher can’t wrangle it in, fine. 

I’d rather have 2nd and 3rd with 2 out instead of 1st and 2nd with 2 out. I’ll take an extra 90 feet anytime, doesn’t really matter to me. 
 

[eddie83]

Just now, Moose Milligan said:

Because I’m willing to bet that there’s a better than 90% chance the runner is dead at the plate on that play they just nailed Adley on.  I don’t think that run scores very often.  
 

If you want to send him on contact when the ball doesn’t get through on the off-chance the fielder makes a bad throw or the catcher can’t wrangle it in, fine. 

I’d rather have 2nd and 3rd with 2 out instead of 1st and 2nd with 2 out. I’ll take an extra 90 feet anytime, doesn’t really matter to me. 
 

1st and 3rd. 

[Moose Milligan]

3 minutes ago, eddie83 said:

1st and 3rd. 

I’ll take 1st and 3rd too. But on that play AR got nailed on today, pretty sure Santander was on 2nd behind him. He didn’t have to advance, either. 

[RZNJ]

With one out it makes sense. Took a good throw and it was still bang bang.  At worst the runner is thrown out and you have 1st and 2nd 2 out.  If he stays you have 2nd and 3rd 2 out.  Worth the risk with one out.   

[Aristotelian]

2 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

Because I’m willing to bet that there’s a better than 90% chance the runner is dead at the plate on that play they just nailed Adley on.  I don’t think that run scores very often.  
 

If you want to send him on contact when the ball doesn’t get through on the off-chance the fielder makes a bad throw or the catcher can’t wrangle it in, fine. 

I’d rather have 2nd and 3rd with 2 out instead of 1st and 2nd with 2 out. I’ll take an extra 90 feet anytime, doesn’t really matter to me. 
 

The run expectency with 2nd and 3rd/2 out is about 0.1 higher vs 1st and 3rd/2 out, so 10% chance of scoring 1 run is a pretty even trade. On the off chance you score, you now have 1st and 3rd with 1 out and a great chance to pick up another run at least. I am also skeptical it fails 9 out of 10.

 

[eddie83]

8 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

I’ll take 1st and 3rd too. But on that play AR got nailed on today, pretty sure Santander was on 2nd behind him. He didn’t have to advance, either. 

Once Adley goes though he takes off. No reason to hold. 

[Frobby]

On the year, in 211 chances, the O’s have scored with a runner on 3B and less than two out 55.0% of the time, fifth in the league and better than league average 51.7%.   

They’ve made an out at home plate on a non-force play 15 times (16 now), which is fifth most in the league.  League average is 12.   

Overall, I’ll take the trade off.  

 

[Pushmonkey]

5th most in the league would say to me that it’s not an effective plan. 

[RZNJ]

8 minutes ago, Pushmonkey said:

5th most in the league would say to me that it’s not an effective plan. 

Does that inning turn out any different if he stayed at 3rd?  No.