Alan Schwarz/BA with Lou Piniella

[UK1679666180]

http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/majors/features/262959.html

 

Basic yet interesting article.

[David]

Just started reading it.. Not liking what I'm hearing so far...

 

Already talking about being "up there" in stolen bases and giving the green light. Gotta love giving away outs...

 

EDIT -

 

FWIW, I do like the approach with regard to Prior and Wood (but that's not something we didn't already know), and I like that he recognized the big problem with our pitchers (too many walks).

[cheapseats]

 

Already talking about being "up there" in stolen bases and giving the green light. Gotta love giving away outs...

 

 

Someone should show Lou this:

 

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=5764

 

Only four teams did better than breaking even last year. Every other team gave up runs by trying to steal bases. Florida, Detroit, Washington, and Colorado each lost more than ten runs.

[Butterscup1679666578]

 

Already talking about being "up there" in stolen bases and giving the green light. Gotta love giving away outs...

 

 

Someone should show Lou this:

 

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=5764

 

Only four teams did better than breaking even last year. Every other team gave up runs by trying to steal bases. Florida, Detroit, Washington, and Colorado each lost more than ten runs.

 

Who were the four teams that broke even or better?

[cheapseats]

 

Already talking about being "up there" in stolen bases and giving the green light. Gotta love giving away outs...

 

 

Someone should show Lou this:

 

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=5764

 

Only four teams did better than breaking even last year. Every other team gave up runs by trying to steal bases. Florida, Detroit, Washington, and Colorado each lost more than ten runs.

 

Who were the four teams that broke even or better?

 

San Diego, Baltimore (thanks in large part to Corey Patterson), the Phillies, and the Mets. The Yankees and A's were very close to even.

[Amazing_Grace]

Nice article. I like the emphasis on giving up fewer walks as a pitching staff, and about not putting too much pressure on young players (after all that's part of how Prior and Wood blew up and Patterson was run off). I'm not thrilled about giving the "green light" to steal bases, but really the only person that that is even relevant to is Soriano, unless of course we bring in a new CF.

 

The main problems with Baker were overworking pitchers and playing horrible players like Perez and Bynum for reasons that defy all logic and rationale. If Piniella can avoid doing those two things, then he'll be worlds better than Baker.

[Dirt Dog Sparly]

 

Already talking about being "up there" in stolen bases and giving the green light. Gotta love giving away outs...

 

 

Someone should show Lou this:

 

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=5764

 

Only four teams did better than breaking even last year. Every other team gave up runs by trying to steal bases. Florida, Detroit, Washington, and Colorado each lost more than ten runs.

 

A quick question for you in all seriousness. Do the stats take into account the runs that were created by pitchers making mistakes and getting to much of the plate trying to get the ball to the catcher quicker? Or the very human feel of momentum shift when a base is stolen, or its counter weight the momentum stopped by throwing out a baserunner to kill an inning?

 

Stats are great, and very under utilized and less understood by this organisation, but if you forget the human element you are forgetting the GAME.

 

Edited to add. A story to illustrate. In a tied game two years ago the first two batters of my team for the inning were walked on four pitches apiece. The pitchers coach goes out to talk to him, and judging from his body language it isnt a love ya conversation. Knowing that I had a hitter who was struggling at the plate I saw a perfect opportunity. I put on the Run and Hit, (I dont do the hit and run), with no outs. Yes I know you dont make the first out at third and dont help a struggling pitcher by swinging till he throws a strike. Yes if he hits to a MI and either runner gets a bad break I could be hitting into a double play and really reduce my percentages of scoring. Yada, Yada, Yada.

 

My players get the sign and make the breaks and my batter? He sits on the get me over fastball and misses a HR by about a foot. Ends up with a triple. The next five batters all get basehits, one more off the same kid and then the reliever.

 

I am brilliant right? Not exactly. The same relative situation happened about three years before that. The batter swung through the pitch and the runner was called out at third. We lost that game badly despite scoring four in the first inning.

 

My point is that stats are great for seeing the overall picture, but dont lose the forest because of the trees. Situations and the feel of the game are as important as my spray charts, game stats, and the deeper stats that are in their way a part of the mythical book.

[TruffleShuffle]

 

Already talking about being "up there" in stolen bases and giving the green light. Gotta love giving away outs...

 

 

Someone should show Lou this:

 

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=5764

 

Only four teams did better than breaking even last year. Every other team gave up runs by trying to steal bases. Florida, Detroit, Washington, and Colorado each lost more than ten runs.

 

A quick question for you in all seriousness. Do the stats take into account the runs that were created by pitchers making mistakes and getting to much of the plate trying to get the ball to the catcher quicker? Or the very human feel of momentum shift when a base is stolen, or its counter weight the momentum stopped by throwing out a baserunner to kill an inning?

 

Or throwing errors or balks by pitchers who have to pay attention to runners on base, because they know your team might actually steal bases? Or the pitcher having to pitch from the stretch with runners on base, thereby losing a tic off his fastball? Or the pitcher being distracted by the runner on base and not having quite as much focus on where he wants to put each pitch? I highly doubt that all of these things are accounted for.

[UK1679666180]

A quick question for you in all seriousness. Do the stats take into account the runs that were created by pitchers making mistakes and getting to much of the plate trying to get the ball to the catcher quicker? Or the very human feel of momentum shift when a base is stolen, or its counter weight the momentum stopped by throwing out a baserunner to kill an inning?

 

The further up you the ladder go, the less likely that will happen. Then it leaves it to opinion as to whether or not that bad pitch was caused by the baserunner, I think it was more b/c of the pitcher throwing a bad pitch regardless of the runner on base.

 

Even the great pitchers on their best days will throw bad pitches at various points during a game. A hitter's job is to wait and react aggressively for those bad pitches.

 

As far as stats.

 

"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital."

[RynoRules]

Good points and discussion so far here.

 

Stats to me are a bit like humanity itself - always evolving. They reveal more than the naked eye can, but they have yet to discover all of the nuances that are factors in the game. I suspect that some day someone will figure out a way to measure things like distracted picthers and what happens when a pitcher throws from the stretch, but it may not happen at all. That's what makes sports great, IMO - there is plenty of room for debate and nuance.

[cheapseats]

 

A quick question for you in all seriousness. Do the stats take into account the runs that were created by pitchers making mistakes and getting to much of the plate trying to get the ball to the catcher quicker? Or the very human feel of momentum shift when a base is stolen, or its counter weight the momentum stopped by throwing out a baserunner to kill an inning?

 

The vaunted secondary effects of stealing bases--distracting the pitcher, putting pressure on the defense--do not appear to exist. In fact, most secondary effects argue in favor of keeping the runner of first base. A runner on first is more disruptive to a defense, with the first baseman holding and the second baseman cheating towards second for a double play, than a runner on second. Additionally, studies show that stolen-base attempts negatively impact the performance of the batter at the plate, presumably due to hitters getting themselves into negative counts by taking pitches or swinging at bad balls to protect the runner.

 

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=2607

[David]

That's the exact quote I was trying to find. Thanks, cheap.

[CubColtPacer]

 

A quick question for you in all seriousness. Do the stats take into account the runs that were created by pitchers making mistakes and getting to much of the plate trying to get the ball to the catcher quicker? Or the very human feel of momentum shift when a base is stolen, or its counter weight the momentum stopped by throwing out a baserunner to kill an inning?

 

The vaunted secondary effects of stealing bases--distracting the pitcher, putting pressure on the defense--do not appear to exist. In fact, most secondary effects argue in favor of keeping the runner of first base. A runner on first is more disruptive to a defense, with the first baseman holding and the second baseman cheating towards second for a double play, than a runner on second. Additionally, studies show that stolen-base attempts negatively impact the performance of the batter at the plate, presumably due to hitters getting themselves into negative counts by taking pitches or swinging at bad balls to protect the runner.

 

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=2607

 

I understand the point, but without the threat of the stolen base some of those disruptions by a runner on first do not exist, such as the first baseman could simply play back. That suggests a team should steal just enough to keep the threat very much alive in the opponents heads, but no more.

 

Do they factor errors into the equation when calculating the percentage though, if it be the pitcher mis-throwing the pickoff throw or the catcher throwing the ball into center field?

[goonys evil twin]

I understand the point, but without the threat of the stolen base some of those disruptions by a runner on first do not exist, such as the first baseman could simply play back. That suggests a team should steal just enough to keep the threat very much alive in the opponents heads, but no more.

 

Do they factor errors into the equation when calculating the percentage though, if it be the pitcher mis-throwing the pickoff throw or the catcher throwing the ball into center field?

 

Only the slowest of the slow non-SB threats don't bring a 1B in to hold him. I agree there might be some value in keeping the threat alive, which is why it's probably smartest to be middle of the pack in SB attempts. What you don't want is to be leader of the pack, standing out against the rest, because that means you are giving up more outs than the rest (kind of like Florida before they canned Torberg). You don't want to be the team with the most sacrifices, or the most SB/attempts. It's like the situation with the Cubs and walks. People are begging them to take more walks and give up fewer, not necessarily lead the league in either department. Just stop letting the walk be a primary reason why you are not winning.

 

 

I don't know the answer to the second part, but I don't think that happens all that often anyway. I mean, we see it when it does, because it's so glaring, but that's the case with many things.

[cheapseats]

 

A quick question for you in all seriousness. Do the stats take into account the runs that were created by pitchers making mistakes and getting to much of the plate trying to get the ball to the catcher quicker? Or the very human feel of momentum shift when a base is stolen, or its counter weight the momentum stopped by throwing out a baserunner to kill an inning?

 

The vaunted secondary effects of stealing bases--distracting the pitcher, putting pressure on the defense--do not appear to exist. In fact, most secondary effects argue in favor of keeping the runner of first base. A runner on first is more disruptive to a defense, with the first baseman holding and the second baseman cheating towards second for a double play, than a runner on second. Additionally, studies show that stolen-base attempts negatively impact the performance of the batter at the plate, presumably due to hitters getting themselves into negative counts by taking pitches or swinging at bad balls to protect the runner.

 

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=2607

 

I understand the point, but without the threat of the stolen base some of those disruptions by a runner on first do not exist, such as the first baseman could simply play back. That suggests a team should steal just enough to keep the threat very much alive in the opponents heads, but no more.

 

Do they factor errors into the equation when calculating the percentage though, if it be the pitcher mis-throwing the pickoff throw or the catcher throwing the ball into center field?

 

Oh sure, if there were no threat of a stolen base, the offense would lose some advantages of having a runner at first.

 

And there are definitely situations in which attempting a steal is well worth the risk. Dan Fox concludes from his work that the stolen base shouldn't be a "general purpose weapon," but there are situations in which it makes sense as a strategy. In other words, giving most guys a permanent green light is a bad idea, but calling for steals judiciously can help a team score runs.

 

Fox's formula takes number of outs, occupied bases, and the base that the runner is trying to steal into account. For example, the risk/reward ratio of stealing second is far better when there are two outs and no one else on base than when there are no outs and runners on first and third.

 

Alfonso Soriano was the best at producing runs through stolen bases in 2005, but he was among the worst in 2006. Lou should only give him the green light in low-risk, high-reward situations. If he does so, Soriano will probably be an asset.

 

AFAIK, errors aren't currently factored in to Fox's formula, but they might be in the future. It won't make a very big difference, but it would make some difference. For example, his numbers show about 4% of runners scoring after wild throws by catchers to third.

[treebird]

Edited to add. A story to illustrate. In a tied game two years ago the first two batters of my team for the inning were walked on four pitches apiece. The pitchers coach goes out to talk to him, and judging from his body language it isnt a love ya conversation. Knowing that I had a hitter who was struggling at the plate I saw a perfect opportunity. I put on the Run and Hit, (I dont do the hit and run), with no outs. Yes I know you dont make the first out at third and dont help a struggling pitcher by swinging till he throws a strike. Yes if he hits to a MI and either runner gets a bad break I could be hitting into a double play and really reduce my percentages of scoring. Yada, Yada, Yada.

 

My players get the sign and make the breaks and my batter? He sits on the get me over fastball and misses a HR by about a foot. Ends up with a triple. The next five batters all get basehits, one more off the same kid and then the reliever.

 

I am brilliant right? Not exactly. The same relative situation happened about three years before that. The batter swung through the pitch and the runner was called out at third. We lost that game badly despite scoring four in the first inning.

 

My point is that stats are great for seeing the overall picture, but dont lose the forest because of the trees. Situations and the feel of the game are as important as my spray charts, game stats, and the deeper stats that are in their way a part of the mythical book.

 

your first two batters walk on 8 pitches total, and you force the next hitter, who has been struggling, to swing at the first pitch?

[CuseCubFan69]

How close to being right was James last year?

[abuck1220]

Edited to add. A story to illustrate. In a tied game two years ago the first two batters of my team for the inning were walked on four pitches apiece. The pitchers coach goes out to talk to him, and judging from his body language it isnt a love ya conversation. Knowing that I had a hitter who was struggling at the plate I saw a perfect opportunity. I put on the Run and Hit, (I dont do the hit and run), with no outs. Yes I know you dont make the first out at third and dont help a struggling pitcher by swinging till he throws a strike. Yes if he hits to a MI and either runner gets a bad break I could be hitting into a double play and really reduce my percentages of scoring. Yada, Yada, Yada.

 

My players get the sign and make the breaks and my batter? He sits on the get me over fastball and misses a HR by about a foot. Ends up with a triple. The next five batters all get basehits, one more off the same kid and then the reliever.

 

I am brilliant right? Not exactly. The same relative situation happened about three years before that. The batter swung through the pitch and the runner was called out at third. We lost that game badly despite scoring four in the first inning.

 

My point is that stats are great for seeing the overall picture, but dont lose the forest because of the trees. Situations and the feel of the game are as important as my spray charts, game stats, and the deeper stats that are in their way a part of the mythical book.

 

your first two batters walk on 8 pitches total, and you force the next hitter, who has been struggling, to swing at the first pitch?

 

it worked, so it must have been the right call.

[cheapseats]

How close to being right was James last year?

 

huh?

[CuseCubFan69]

How close to being right was James last year?

 

huh?

 

I read one thread and wrote in another....opps!

[Dirt Dog Sparly]

Edited to add. A story to illustrate. In a tied game two years ago the first two batters of my team for the inning were walked on four pitches apiece. The pitchers coach goes out to talk to him, and judging from his body language it isnt a love ya conversation. Knowing that I had a hitter who was struggling at the plate I saw a perfect opportunity. I put on the Run and Hit, (I dont do the hit and run), with no outs. Yes I know you dont make the first out at third and dont help a struggling pitcher by swinging till he throws a strike. Yes if he hits to a MI and either runner gets a bad break I could be hitting into a double play and really reduce my percentages of scoring. Yada, Yada, Yada.

 

My players get the sign and make the breaks and my batter? He sits on the get me over fastball and misses a HR by about a foot. Ends up with a triple. The next five batters all get basehits, one more off the same kid and then the reliever.

 

I am brilliant right? Not exactly. The same relative situation happened about three years before that. The batter swung through the pitch and the runner was called out at third. We lost that game badly despite scoring four in the first inning.

 

My point is that stats are great for seeing the overall picture, but dont lose the forest because of the trees. Situations and the feel of the game are as important as my spray charts, game stats, and the deeper stats that are in their way a part of the mythical book.

 

your first two batters walk on 8 pitches total, and you force the next hitter, who has been struggling, to swing at the first pitch?

 

Treeman, you are absolutely right. I am nuts for putting on the Run and Hit in that situation.

 

However it was a tight game. I had speed on the front end of the double steal and a line drive hitter at the plate, even if he had been struggling. I could read the coaches body language, he was not out there giving a pep talk. I knew, in my gut, that the next pitch was going to be a get me over fastball. I knew, again in my gut, that if it worked it would break their back.

 

The "stats" and the "book" say dont do what I did in that situation. But that is what a coach is paid to do. Know when, and where, and most importantly why, to break "the rules." 99 times out of 100 in that situation I would play it by the book. However it those times where doing what is unexpected, for the right reasons, and having it work is a game breaker.

 

It dosent always work, that is when guys like you and me come on places like NSBB and write; "That coach is an idiot." Even when it is played by the book and it dosent work.

 

My point once again baseball is a numbers game played by humans. To eliminate one over the other is to miss half the game. The Cubs to their loss have not paid enough attention to the former, so they dont utilize the latter in the proper manner.