PDA

View Full Version : Trying to figure out the true value of a stolen base.



thatcoolguy_22
05-13-2009, 11:48 PM
I'm trying to quantify the true value of a stolen base and how they translate into run production.


Some Factors to consider...

-Success rate of the SB
-Extra base putting a runner into scoring position or into a better scoring position
-The added stress on the pitcher working against the batter.
-Increases in the likely hood of errors
-Increase in Wild Pitches
-Batter losing concentration due runner's shenanigans or having to protect the hit and run
-steal 2B only to have the batter walk 2 pitches later
-thrown out at 2nd only to have the batter walk 2 pitches later
etc etc



Are there any stats that show how much benefit a SB gains for RC?

I have always been against the SB in general. I always felt more often than not a SB was a wash. I've seen time after time someone get caught stealing only to have the batter lace a double or a HR. Or someone walk after 2nd base was swiped. There was a quote I read the other day about (this isn't verbatim by any means) "the 2 hardest things to do are throw the ball and catch the ball. The goal is to force the other team to do this as many times as possible in a game." The SB is a great way to force the action on an opponent and to turn lead off singles into doubles. Now for all saber inclined individuals on the board how much does it actually benefit or am I slowly becoming just another fan who puts too much value into exciting plays?



EDIT: I found this article (http://baseballanalysts.com/archives/2007/05/the_value_of_th.php) to help but I would like to see some good discussion here.


The Value of the Stolen Base: A Comparison of MLB and NCAA Division I Baseball
By Mike Current and Chad McEvoy

Over the years there has been a great deal of debate amongst baseball insiders and fans over the value of the stolen base. Some, such as longtime Baltimore Orioles manager Earl Weaver, have argued that the stolen base is rarely worth the risk. Others, however, view the stolen base as a valuable means of applying pressure to the opposing team's defense. The question is: Which side is right?

Most past research on the stolen base seems to side with Weaver. Using data from Major League Baseball, researchers have found that stealing at less than a 75% success rate is detrimental to success. Joe Sheehan explains in Baseball Prospectus Basics: Stolen Bases and How to Use Them that when considering stolen bases, one must consider both the cost and the benefit. Therefore, the break-even point for successful base-stealing is so high because outs are more valuable than bases in nearly every instance. For example, the Run Expectancy Matrix created by Baseball Prospectus reveals that a runner on first base with no one out is worth approximately 0.864 runs. A successful steal of second base would raise that figure to 1.173. However, a failed stolen base attempt drops that number to 0.270. In this example, the loss is nearly two times the gain.

In the same article, Sheehan also suggests that the secondary effects of base-stealing, such as putting pressure on the opposing pitcher and defense, do not exist. In fact, he goes as far as to suggest that a runner at first base is more disruptive to the defense than a runner at second base, simply because the first baseman must hold the runner on and the middle infielders are forced to cheat toward second base to have a chance at a double play.

While these findings have been consistently replicated and are generally accepted by Sabermetricians and others when talking about professional baseball, there has been little or no research conducted examining the stolen base at other levels of play. As a Division I college baseball coach, this leads me to wonder: Is the stolen base a more valuable offensive weapon in college baseball than it is at the professional level?

The numbers seem to indicate that the stolen base is more a part of the college game than it is the professional game, even to the casual fan who has taken a few minutes to compare player and team statistics from both levels. For example, in 2006, the Los Angeles Angels led all of Major League Baseball in stolen bases with .91 stolen bases per game. That same season, the average Division I college baseball team stole 1.2 bases per game, with the national leader averaging slightly more than three stolen bases per game.

A deeper analysis of both college and professional statistics is even more revealing. A series of multiple linear regression models were created using data from both NCAA Division I and Major League Baseball. The models used both stolen bases per game and caught stealing per game to predict runs scored, while controlling for base-stealing opportunities. The results were interesting. The first set of regression models, examining the relationship between stolen bases per game and runs scored, revealed that in college baseball, runs per game increased by .295 with each stolen base per game. However, in Major League Baseball, runs per game actually decreased by .208 with each stolen base per game. While it seems strange that a successful stolen base attempt would result in fewer runs scored, it is likely explained by the fact that teams stealing more bases generally do so to compensate for a lack of offensive firepower (i.e. power hitting). Therefore, it is not the stolen base itself that is costing the team runs but the team's overall style of play. The second set of regression models, analyzing the relationship between caught stealing per game and runs scored, indicated that in college baseball, runs per game decreased by .304 with each unsuccessful stolen base attempt per game. In Major League Baseball, the cost of a failed stolen base attempt was even more severe at .845 runs per game.

So what do these findings actually tell us? In the most simplistic sense, they indicate that the stolen base is indeed a more valuable offensive weapon in college baseball than it is in Major League Baseball for two reasons: 1) The reward for a successful stolen base attempt is greater; 2) The cost of an unsuccessful stolen base attempt is less significant. Therefore, because they have more to gain and less to lose, it makes sense for college teams to utilize the stolen base more liberally. However, the fact that college baseball teams attempt considerably more stolen bases per game than do big league teams seems to suggest that many college coaches are already aware of this more favorable "risk/reward" ratio.

That being said, it is also important to acknowledge and understand the limitations of these findings. The biggest weakness of this study is the inability to examine specific situations. Therefore, while the above findings provide information about the big picture, they offer little or no guidance relative to specific in-game strategy decisions. In other words, there are a multitude of factors (i.e. the ability of the base runner, the opponent, the game situation, etc.) that were not considered in this study but are extremely influential in the outcome of any base-stealing attempt. As a result, coaches must remember that the actual "risk/reward" ratio changes with the situation. Below is a more detailed look at factors that must be considered before attempting a stolen base.

The Base Runner
The speed and base-running ability of the runner are extremely important when deciding whether or not to steal a base. It makes the most sense to run when the base runner is fast and has good instincts.

The Hitter
The ability of the hitter at the plate is extremely important. It makes the most sense to attempt a stolen base when the hitter at the plate is a double play threat and/or when the hitter has little chance of driving a runner in from first base.

The Pitcher/Catcher
The ability of the pitcher and catcher to stop the running game is also important. A pitcher that is slow to the plate is much easier to run on than one who is quick. Similarly, a poor throwing catcher is easier to run on than one who throws well.

The Game Situation
Research has repeatedly shown that in the majority of Major League Baseball games, the winning team scores more runs in one inning than the losing team does in the entire game. This revelation backs up Earl Weaver's advice to play for the big inning, especially early in games. Therefore, one-run strategies, such as the stolen base, make the most sense in situations where one run is of great importance (i.e. late in games or in low-scoring games).

Michael Current is an assistant baseball coach at Illinois State University. He graduated from Blackburn College with a degree in Communication and recently completed his master's degree in Sport Management at Illinois State University. Last summer, Current served as an assistant coach with the Yarmouth-Dennis Red Sox in the prestegious Cape Cod League, where his team won the league championship.

Dr. Chad D. McEvoy is an Assistant Professor of Sport Management in the School of Kinesiology and Recreation at Illinois State University, where he is the coordinator of the sport management program. Dr. McEvoy has published articles in journals including Sport Management Review, Sport Marketing Quarterly, International Journal of Sport Management and Marketing, and Sport Management and Related Topics.

jojo
05-14-2009, 09:27 AM
An intuitive way to look at the value of a stolen base is by using run expectancy.

Here's a matrix for mlb using last season's data (the matrix gives the average runs that scored in an inning after the designated base/out state occurred):



base 0 outs 1 out 2 outs
0 0.52 0.28 0.11
3 1.50 0.97 0.35
20 1.15 0.69 0.33
23 2.01 1.42 0.59
100 0.90 0.53 0.23
103 1.77 1.16 0.48
120 1.53 0.92 0.46
123 2.31 1.59 0.80


So on average, teams scored .9 runs in an inning where they started with a runner on first with no outs. So to see the value of stealing second in that situation, one could subtract the run expectancy associated with having a runner on first with no outs from the run expectancy of having a runner on second with no outs (i.e. the run value of the final base/out state minus the run value of the initial base/out state; 1.15-.9= .25 runs). So in that case, stealing second would've been worth .25 runs. Getting caught stealing in that situation would've had a -.62 run value (.28-.9= -.62).

The average run value of a stolen base and being caught stealing has been determined across all base/out states by the authors of "The Book (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1597971294/ref=s9_sims_gw_s6_p14_t1?pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_s=center-2&pf_rd_r=1KQAVKEKDRVHTMB6ZN1R&pf_rd_t=101&pf_rd_p=470938631&pf_rd_i=507846#reader)" for a data set encompassing about half a decade. They determined that on average a stolen base was worth .175 runs and being caught stealing was worth -.467 runs.

REDREAD
05-14-2009, 09:50 AM
The problem with using run expectance analysis though is that it's all about the theoretcial hitter and pitcher.

Does Wily T on 1b, threatening to steal, change the pitcher's pitch selection, which also impacts the batter's chances of getting a hit? Maybe it does for some pitchers, but not others.

Does a guy like Wily T successully stealing 2b lead to a different run expectancy than a guy like Ramon Hernandez at 2b? And the counter.. A guy as fast as Wily probably has a higher run scoring expectancy when he's on 1b than a slow player.

Also, factor in that different pitcher/catcher combinations have different levels of effectness at defending against the stolen base.

Really, I think just saying a player needs a 73% rate for the steal to be worthwhile is vastly oversimplifying. Different situations are treated differently. If you are down by 5 runs in the 8th, it's probably dumb to attempt a steal and risk an out no matter what your percentage is.

jojo
05-14-2009, 10:09 AM
duplicate post.....

jojo
05-14-2009, 10:14 AM
The problem with using run expectance analysis though is that it's all about the theoretcial hitter and pitcher.

It's an average across all situations that very quickly gets one at least 90% of the way to the answer. I don't really see that as a problem.


Really, I think just saying a player needs a 73% rate for the steal to be worthwhile is vastly oversimplifying. Different situations are treated differently. If you are down by 5 runs in the 8th, it's probably dumb to attempt a steal and risk an out no matter what your percentage is.

Nobody is suggesting that one use run expectancy in place of thinking. It's a tool.

That said, I think one needs to be careful when ascribing extra value to a player because "he can shoot bolts of lightning from his rear". In other words, I'd buy the argument that you'd rather have Taveras on second than Hernandez. But is there a huge difference in run expectancy for having Taveras on second versus the run value generated "on average"? My money is on "it's not as dramatic a difference as one might think".

It would be an interesting study though (anyone want to wade through the base/out states for Taveras' career?).

thatcoolguy_22
05-14-2009, 10:43 AM
But is there a huge difference in run expectancy for having Taveras on second versus the run value generated "on average"? My money is on "it's not as dramatic a difference as one might think".

It would be an interesting study though (anyone want to wade through the base/out states for Taveras' career?).

how would I go about doing that? I just got out of surgery and am still on convalescence leave and stuck at home all day. I have oodles of time and am willing to put in the legwork.

With the recent decline in SLG% across all of MLB could SB begin to play a larger role in future offenses and can a team designed around aggressive base running succeed?

I'm looking for how many stolen bases would be needed for a season of .350OBP and .350SLG to equate the RC of an .800 OPS. Is it even possible?

REDREAD
05-14-2009, 10:47 AM
That said, I think one needs to be careful when ascribing extra value to a player because "he can shoot bolts of lightning from his rear". In other words, I'd buy the argument that you'd rather have Taveras on second than Hernandez. But is there a huge difference in run expectancy for having Taveras on second versus the run value generated "on average"? My money is on "it's not as dramatic a difference as one might think".



I agree that a faster runner like Tavares might have less of a value in advancing to 2nd, since he's more likely to score from first than a slow runner.

It's hard to say if the odds of Wily scoring from 1st vs a slow runner is significant.

Someone did post something interesting though in the offseason. It said that Wily seemed to have a higher percentage of scoring runs when he did get on base. IIRC, this was both in Houston and Colorado. It will be interesting to see if he can maintain that pace here (examine after the season is over).
Wily doesn't exactly have a powerhouse lineup hitting behind him to drive him in -- Harriston and Votto.. Votto is off to a hot start, for sure, but probably isn't one of the most elite #3 hitters in the game (at least not yet).

Another thing that makes it difficult to analyze is that there's so few players like Wily.

I can see the 73% rule making more sense on guys that can only steal maybe 15-20 bases/year if they pick their spots and read the pitchers well.

westofyou
05-14-2009, 10:49 AM
IMO the true value of steal is a variable and is fluid based on the league and the stealer's team(s) slugging percentage, with the value increasing in low slugging environments and decreasing in high slugging environments

thatcoolguy_22
05-14-2009, 10:59 AM
IMO the true value of steal is a variable and is fluid based on the league and the stealer's team(s) slugging percentage, with the value increasing in low slugging environments and decreasing in high slugging environments

Makes sense. So in theory, going into the post PED era of baseball it is likely that we will see an increase in SB across the board.

bucksfan2
05-14-2009, 11:22 AM
Makes sense. So in theory, going into the post PED era of baseball it is likely that we will see an increase in SB across the board.

You bring up a great point, the post PED era of baseball. Where the game goes from here I have some ideas but nothing concrete. I also don't know when the PED era is going to end. Players, even stars like Manny are still getting caught which leads me to believe that the era isn't over all together.

Now back to the topic at hand. IMO I think we will see the game revert back to a style played in the mid 80's with a little difference. Weight training will still be an important aspect of the game but not to the PED degree. Power numbers will likely be up from mid 80's, but not the type of numbers we have seen over the past 15 years. I think we are going to see an era in which the SB becomes more relevant than it has over the past 15+ years. I would imagine that SLG is going to decrease which will mean advancing a base via the stolen base is going to become a great benefit.

IMO the value of a SB will increase, but at the same time it will be very situation dependent.

Chip R
05-14-2009, 11:23 AM
Are the days of the 90-100 base stealer over? Will we ever see their like again?

gonelong
05-14-2009, 01:19 PM
It's an average across all situations that very quickly gets one at least 90% of the way to the answer. I don't really see that as a problem.
...
Nobody is suggesting that one use run expectancy in place of thinking. It's a tool.


I think it's way less than 90% of the answer. At best, it's a rule of thumb IMO.

A guy with a 5.60 ERA is not a guy that a 75% success rate is an acceptable risk IMO. Chances are you are going to score against that guy in spades anyway.

A guy with a 1.25 ERA, maybe a 50% chance is an acceptable risk.

7th inning, one out, and a shutdown closer in the oppo's pen? Maybe 50% is acceptable there too?

GL

REDREAD
05-14-2009, 02:31 PM
I'm looking for how many stolen bases would be needed for a season of .350OBP and .350SLG to equate the RC of an .800 OPS. Is it even possible?


Here's a link to the various formulas.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Runs_created

As you can see, the stolen base is devalued, even relative to walks. (Walks are counted in both of the numerator factors that are multiplied together, steals are only in one of the factors). Also a steal only counts as .52 or .55 of a "total base", which kind of makes sense because a double is more likely to drive in a run than a single and a SB.

mth123
05-14-2009, 09:14 PM
I think the real value of the SB is that its kind of exciting and gets the fans going. If that has a positive impact on attendance it may allow the team to go out and get players who get on base and/or hit with some pop.

paulrichjr
05-15-2009, 09:32 AM
Anyone remember Vince Coleman or Ricky Henderson? I would say that having someone like them get on and disrupt the pitcher and the entire defense was worth a bunch. When I use to go see the Cards and Reds play in St. Louis during the 80s you could just feel the intensity go up all over when Coleman got on. It was amazing and to be honest was more thrilling than a lot of homeruns that I have witnessed. I personally think the "threat" of being able to steal is more valuable than the actual steal is. Speed on offense and defense makes a huge difference in my eyes...no stats to back it up though.

mth123
05-15-2009, 07:11 PM
Anyone remember Vince Coleman or Ricky Henderson? I would say that having someone like them get on and disrupt the pitcher and the entire defense was worth a bunch. When I use to go see the Cards and Reds play in St. Louis during the 80s you could just feel the intensity go up all over when Coleman got on. It was amazing and to be honest was more thrilling than a lot of homeruns that I have witnessed. I personally think the "threat" of being able to steal is more valuable than the actual steal is. Speed on offense and defense makes a huge difference in my eyes...no stats to back it up though.

Ricky Henderson had good power and great on base skills which was the real reason for his success IMO. His SB are what got him noticed. Coleman had good teammates that got him home alot.

I guess if a guy can steal 100 bases per year, it probably has value beyond the normal 40 to 50 steal guy. In general, the average base stealer's contrbutions to the team's production are more associated with how often he gets on base or how much power he may have. IMO, an offense can not survive on steals alone.

I do agree that given the choice between two guys that get on base alot and have power that I'd rather have the fast one that can steal bases, run well and cover ground. I also want speed on defense up the middle, but that doesn't necessarily mean the guy is a base stealer.

My problem is with players who struggle to get on and have no power but somehow get a reputation as great table setters simply because they can run. I just don't agree. Willy Taveras is a guy I'm skeptical of, but he's been real valuable so far because he's getting on base, not because he has 10 steals.

jojo
05-15-2009, 07:18 PM
People tend to forget that the season Rickey swiped 130 bases he was also caught stealing 42 times! No one in the history of major league baseball has been caught stealing more times in a single season...

FYI, that equates to a 76% success rate so a sabermatrician might say that Rickey did a lot of running on a tread mill that season (i.e. he roughly broke even).

kpresidente
05-15-2009, 07:18 PM
They determined that on average a stolen base was worth .175 runs and being caught stealing was worth -.467 runs.
Anyone remember Vince Coleman or Ricky Henderson? I would say that having someone like them get on and disrupt the pitcher and the entire defense was worth a bunch.

If you use jojo's numbers, then only about 90 of Rickey Hendersons 2,300 runs scored were a result of his base-stealing. Seems low doesn't it?

jojo
05-15-2009, 07:23 PM
If you use jojo's numbers, then only about 90 of Rickey Hendersons 2,300 runs scored were a result of his base-stealing. Seems low doesn't it?

Some would argue that stolen bases are one of the more overrated stats... maybe they're like fireworks....cool to watch but they're not really going to pierce the armor of a sherman tank...

It's not that speed is useless, it's just that outs are so expensive.

kpresidente
05-15-2009, 07:44 PM
Ricky Henderson had good power and great on base skills which was the real reason for his success IMO. His SB are what got him noticed. Coleman had good teammates that got him home alot.

I guess if a guy can steal 100 bases per year, it probably has value beyond the normal 40 to 50 steal guy. In general, the average base stealer's contrbutions to the team's production are more associated with how often he gets on base or how much power he may have. IMO, an offense can not survive on steals alone.

I do agree that given the choice between two guys that get on base alot and have power that I'd rather have the fast one that can steal bases, run well and cover ground. I also want speed on defense up the middle, but that doesn't necessarily mean the guy is a base stealer.

My problem is with players who struggle to get on and have no power but somehow get a reputation as great table setters simply because they can run. I just don't agree. Willy Taveras is a guy I'm skeptical of, but he's been real valuable so far because he's getting on base, not because he has 10 steals.

Here's Henderson compared to guys w/similar OBP. Of course, he's batting leadoff, but on the other hand, the other guys hit a lot more HRs. You can't tell me that speed isn't a big reason Henderson scored so many more runs than Kruk.


Player PA/R OBP
Rickey Henderson 5.8 .401
Larry Walker 5.9 .400
Chipper Jones 6.3 .408
Jim Thome 6.3 .405
Bobby Abreu 6.7 .405
Jason Giambi 7.0 .407
Brian Giles 7.0 .401
John Kruk 7.9 .397
John Olerud 8.0 .398

kpresidente
05-15-2009, 07:47 PM
Some would argue that stolen bases are one of the more overrated stats... maybe they're like fireworks....cool to watch but they're not really going to pierce the armor of a sherman tank...

It's not that speed is useless, it's just that outs are so expensive.

I think your numbers reflect an average, which doesn't always do justice to the extremes, like Henderson.

jojo
05-15-2009, 07:53 PM
I think your numbers reflect an average, which doesn't always do justice to the extremes, like Henderson.

I'd enjoy seeing the argument laid out concerning why Rickey's stolen bases were more valuable than someone else's SBs.

kpresidente
05-15-2009, 08:01 PM
I'd enjoy seeing the argument laid out concerning why Rickey's stolen bases were more valuable than someone else's SBs.
Because a guy who steals 10 bases doesn't represent a threat. So if the average player steals 10 bases/year, that doesn't tell us anything about what effect a guy who steals 50-70 will have.

mth123
05-15-2009, 08:04 PM
Here's Henderson compared to guys w/similar OBP. Of course, he's batting leadoff, but on the other hand, the other guys hit a lot more HRs. You can't tell me that speed isn't a big reason Henderson scored so many more runs than Kruk.


Player PA/R OBP
Rickey Henderson 5.8 .401
Larry Walker 5.9 .400
Chipper Jones 6.3 .408
Jim Thome 6.3 .405
Bobby Abreu 6.7 .405
Jason Giambi 7.0 .407
Brian Giles 7.0 .401
John Kruk 7.9 .397
John Olerud 8.0 .398


I think those OBP's are deceiving. Rickey hung on a long time and it lowered his OBP. In his prime, he was routinely well above .410 which Kruk only topped twice. But I do think speed had some effect. I just don't think the steals themselves have enough of an effect to be the primary basis of a player's value.

Steals are the nice stereo in your new car. Everyone wants one, but it will never make up for a poor engine or problems with the transmission.

jojo
05-15-2009, 08:09 PM
Because a guy who steals 10 bases doesn't represent a threat. So if the average player steals 10 bases/year, that doesn't tell us anything about what effect a guy who steals 50-70 will have.

If you truly find that a compelling argument (I don't necessarily) then how could you value the impact of his stolen bases?

kpresidente
05-15-2009, 08:13 PM
I think those OBP's are deceiving. Rickey hung on a long time and it lowered his OBP. In his prime, he was routinely well above .410 which Kruk only topped twice.
That effect would raise his PA/R as well, though


]But I do think speed had some effect. I just don't think the steals themselves have enough of an effect to be the primary basis of a player's value.

Steals are the nice stereo in your new car. Everyone wants one, but it will never make up for a poor engine or problems with the transmission.
I think the same could be said about most skills. If a guy has power but nothing else, that's certainly going to hurt his value? I'm thinking about a Mike Jacobs type (or your favorite player, David Ross).

Yet stolen bases seem to be singled out as the "overrated stat."

kpresidente
05-15-2009, 08:17 PM
If you truly find that a compelling argument (I don't necessarily) then how could you value the impact of his stolen bases?
Of course you don't. But then again, I don't consider vast generalizations, which is what an average is, very compelling.

As to the second part, it's simple. Compare a guy who steals a lot of bases to one who doesn't. Make sure all other effects (OBP, SLG, where they bat in the order) are similar. That's what I was trying to do with the figures earlier. Obviously those numbers were basic, but I'm not writing a book.

(edit) e.g.

PLAYER OBP/SLG/OPS PA/R
Rickey Henderson (leadoff) .401/.420/.822 5.8
Wade Boggs (leadoff) .413/.428/.841 7.0

Two players, same era, same league, same spot in the order, similar batting figures, yet Henderson scores significantly more runs. Granted, two players is no sample, but that's the comparisons I'd be looking for.

mth123
05-15-2009, 08:23 PM
That effect would raise his PA/R as well, though


I think the same could be said about most skills. If a guy has power but nothing else, that's certainly going to hurt his value? I'm thinking about a Mike Jacobs type (or your favorite player, David Ross).

Yet stolen bases seem to be singled out as the "overrated stat."

I think its because steals are a secondary skill. First you have to get on base. When you do, if you have some pop, you get multiple bases at a time. If you fail at reaching second base from the batters box, the you steal to get there to make up for the pop that was lacking. Add in that getting on base is hard enough, but basing your game on giving the defense a second chance to get you out because stealing is the only way you can enhance your value seems like a skill that should take a back seat to a skill that doesn't require such risk.

jojo
05-15-2009, 08:38 PM
Of course you don't. But then again, I don't consider vast generalizations, which is what an average is, very compelling.

As to the second part, it's simple. Compare a guy who steals a lot of bases to one who doesn't. Make sure all other effects (OBP, SLG, where they bat in the order) are similar. That's what I was trying to do with the figures earlier. Obviously those numbers were basic, but I'm not writing a book.

What you seem to be doing is abandoning a baseline that gets you most of the way to an answer in favor of an intuitive notion without spending the sweat equity to verify the intuition.

If it's simple, then show us definitively. I'm not trying to hammer you-it's just that I had assumed you had already done the work considering the strength of your belief.

kpresidente
05-15-2009, 08:50 PM
What you seem to be doing is abandoning a baseline that gets you most of the way to an answer in favor of an intuitive notion without spending the sweat equity to verify the intuition.

I put some sweat equity in. I looked up 10 players with historically similar OBP and compared the runs they scored. I dug around until I could find another player in Boggs who had a comparable situation to Henderson, minus the SB. That's pretty good for a MB.


If it's simple, then show us definitively. I'm not trying to hammer you-it's just that I had assumed you had already done the work considering the strength of your belief.
What strength of belief? What strong, positive statements have I made? I'm criticizing what appears to be a lack of healthy skepticism when looking at large-scale generalizations.

jojo
05-15-2009, 08:59 PM
I put some sweat equity in. I looked up 10 players with historically similar OBP and compared the runs they scored. I dug around until I could find another player in Boggs who had a comparable situation to Henderson, minus the SB. That's pretty good for a MB.

If comparing OBP to runs scored for a sample of ten players is enough to draw any meaningful conclusion about the value of a stolen base, then we'll have to agree to disagree.


What strength of belief? What strong, positive statements have I made? I'm criticizing what appears to be a lack of healthy skepticism when looking at large-scale generalizations.

Stop right now if you're evoking the "slavish, intellectually incurious devotion" accusation-it simply isn't anywhere near a fair characterization of those involved in this discussion.

kpresidente
05-15-2009, 09:34 PM
If comparing OBP to runs scored for a sample of ten players is enough to draw any meaningful conclusion about the value of a stolen base, then we'll have to agree to disagree.


Keep in mind that's career numbers. Thousands of games played. These aren't 10 randomly selected players, either. It's every player in the same era who had and OBP within about 10 points either way of Henderson. Considering that RedsZone is full of arguments made over half a season or so, I'd say it's pretty good.


Stop right now if you're evoking the "slavish, intellectually incurious devotion" accusation-it simply isn't anywhere near a fair characterization of those involved in this discussion.

Uh, huh...

I'd enjoy seeing the argument laid out concerning why Rickey's stolen bases were more valuable than someone else's SBs.

flyer85
05-15-2009, 11:46 PM
maybe the difference is that Henderson was the only leadoff hitter of the bunch.