"No matter how good you are, you're going to lose one-third of your games. No matter how bad you are you're going to win one-third of your games. It's the other third that makes the difference." ~Tommy Lasorda
In a lower run scoring environment, a steal would be more valuable, but a caught stealing would also be more detrimental. My guess? It is still pretty close to evening out in that 74% range.
In the meantime, I did have this link saved that had it around 68.3% from 2007-2009 run environments, which I believe averaged out to about 4.5 runs. It has the 2010-current numbers around 72.7%.
I will definitely try to find the Tango link though because it was a pretty extensive article IIRC.
My point here is simply to make a case that in the post steroids era, when more balls are staying in the park, Hamilton's game not simply for stealing, but also for stretching, tends to be more valuable than it would have been 20 years ago.
I said that the run is more important. I just don't think the risk/reward changes much because that out costs you more as well when you get caught. Speed in a non-stolen base thing is entirely different.
Games are won on run differential -- scoring more than your opponent. Runs are runs, scored or prevented they all count the same. Worry about scoring more and allowing fewer, not which positions contribute to which side of the equation or how "consistent" you are at your current level of performance.
The run expectancy of .950 of a runner on first includes all the SB and small ball scenerios to move him to 2b.With no outs and a runner on first in a five run/game environment, the average team is expected to score 0.950 runs. Moving the runner to second base on a steal yields a run expectancy of 1.192 runs, meaning that the change in run expectancy from that steal was 0.242 runs. The same move with two outs, a move often lauded because the runner is placed in scoring position for the current batter, only yields 0.09 runs on average. In total, in this run-scoring environment, the average stolen base was worth 0.175 runs. A worthwhile move if successful, but hardly worth making a fuss about teams emphasizing.
Don't they get run expectancy by averaging the number of runs that actually scored in a given scenerio?
Example.. Stubbs leads off and singles. Steals 2b. Steals 3b. Scores on a sac fly.
He started the inning at 1b, so that run gets credited to the run expectancy of a runner on 1b, no outs.
I think in order to accurately calculate this, you'd have to average out "station to station" run expectancy with a runner at 1b.
Then calculate run expectancy when the runner is at 1b and attempts to steal 2nd.
Both these run expectancy numbers might be different than the values expressed in the article.. A runner that just stole 2nd might score more frequently than a slow runner that just got a double (or maybe not).
I just think the saber communities analysis to get this 68%-74% number is not complete. If they wish to make a bold statement such as "speed is overrated", as the author does, they need more precise data collection, not a sloppy, back of the envelope calculation.
Thank you Walt and Bob for going for it in 2010-2014!
Nov. 13, 2007: One of the greatest days in Reds history: John Allen gets the boot!
Having said that, I'm guessing the allowable CS% doesn't move that much, maybe between 65% and 75%.
Last edited by Rojo; 08-24-2012 at 03:06 PM.
The widow is gathering nettles for her children's dinner; a perfumed seigneur, delicately lounging in the Oeil de Boeuf, hath an alchemy whereby he will extract the third nettle and call it rent. ~ Carlyle