runners LOB....

[Magnetic Curses]

....is a good thing, people!

 

i was reminded of this by a post in the game thread.

 

discuss.....

[CyHawk_Cub]

Huh?? It's a "good" thing to have runners LOB? Sure, if you score 10 of a possible 20...then the LOB isn't really relevant. I see the point that having runners on in the first place is important, but making the blanket statement that runners LOB is good, w/out adding a qualifying statement is ludicrous.

[Magnetic Curses]

Huh?? It's a "good" thing to have runners LOB? Sure, if you score 10 of a possible 20...then the LOB isn't really relevant. I see the point that having runners on in the first place is important, but making the blanket statement that runners LOB is good, w/out adding a qualifying statement is ludicrous.

 

runners LOB is symptom of good hitting. the more runners you get on, the more you strand. leading the league in runners LOB generally means that you have scored a lot of runs.

[seanimal]

It's just one of those things that few grasp, that leaving baserunners out there is generally a symptom of a productive offense, not an unproductive one. The negative feelings towards it are magnified and largely defined by those days when there's like 10 LOB but the team only scores 1 run.

[TruffleShuffle]

assuming that hitting in the clutch is not a skill, and teams will hit in the clutch like they do in other situations, then any poor performance at knocking in runners during a game or stretch of games is likely to even out. So yes, over the course of a season, teams that leave a lot of runners on base are likely going to score a lot of runners too.

[cubfan1955]

Just like bad teams usually lead the league in DP's turned. Because they allow more runners. Not because they have great defense.

[Magnetic Curses]

It's just one of those things that few grasp, that leaving baserunners out there is generally a symptom of a productive offense, not an unproductive one. The negative feelings towards it are magnified and largely defined by those days when there's like 10 LOB but the team only scores 1 run.

 

exactly.

[NCCubFan]

I think percentage of base runners stranded would be more meaningful than number LOB.

[CyHawk_Cub]

It's just one of those things that few grasp, that leaving baserunners out there is generally a symptom of a productive offense, not an unproductive one. The negative feelings towards it are magnified and largely defined by those days when there's like 10 LOB but the team only scores 1 run.

 

exactly.

 

Ahh, o.k., I "get it"; guess the '06 Cubs are still fresh in my mind. I know it's not truly the case, but it seemed like we always left about 10 on base every game & maybe pushed across 1 or 2. And no, I don't buy into the fallacy of "clutch" hitting....'06 Cubs just seemed to be the confluence of all things bad in baseball...

[CyHawk_Cub]

I think percentage of base runners stranded would be more meaningful than number LOB.

 

That's what I was getting at...just didn't articulate it well..

[Magnetic Curses]

I think percentage of base runners stranded would be more meaningful than number LOB.

 

no. i think percentage is generally meaningless and much less predictive than total runners left on base.

[David]

It's like Adam Dunn's 200 strikeouts being a symptom of his patient approach at the plate.

[KatJ]

It's like Adam Dunn's 200 strikeouts being a symptom of his patient approach at the plate.

 

In the words of Slappy the Squirrel, now that's comedy! :D

[Rob]

It's like Adam Dunn's 200 strikeouts being a symptom of his patient approach at the plate.

 

In the words of Slappy the Squirrel, now that's comedy! :D

 

Actually, that's true.

 

Think about it, are you going to be able to walk much without working deep counts?

 

Dunn's MLB rank in P/PA:

 

2001 - did not qualify, but his 4.12 P/PA would have been #7

2002 - 2

2003 - did not qualify, but his 4.33 P/PA would have been #2

2004 - 5

2005 - 5

2006 - 11

2007 - 14

 

You work that many deep counts, odds are very good you're gonna strike out a lot. You're not gonna go ahead 3-0 before the walk each time.

[NCCubFan]

It's like Adam Dunn's 200 strikeouts being a symptom of his patient approach at the plate.

 

In the words of Slappy the Squirrel, now that's comedy! :D

Good to see you posting again; it's been awhile.

[Magnetic Curses]

It's like Adam Dunn's 200 strikeouts being a symptom of his patient approach at the plate.

 

In the words of Slappy the Squirrel, now that's comedy! :D

 

Actually, that's true.

 

Think about it, are you going to be able to walk much without working deep counts?

 

Dunn's MLB rank in P/PA:

 

2001 - did not qualify, but his 4.12 P/PA would have been #7

2002 - 2

2003 - did not qualify, but his 4.33 P/PA would have been #2

2004 - 5

2005 - 5

2006 - 11

2007 - 14

 

You work that many deep counts, odds are very good you're gonna strike out a lot. You're not gonna go ahead 3-0 before the walk each time.

 

it's a plate strategy that seems to be designed to get the most out of his talent. i always thought that bellhorn got the most out of his talent when he was starting everyday. he wasn't a very good player, but he squeezed every single OPS point out of his body because he worked deep counts, got on base a lot and hit for some power. strikeouts are just a necessary evil with that kind of approach, i applaud it. that said, it's not an approach that should work for every player or that every player should attempt.

 

i think dunn would be much less effective if he tried to cut down significantly on his strikeouts.

[KatJ]

Good to see you posting again; it's been awhile.

 

Yeah, it's good to see the Cubs playing solid baseball. I suppose that posting when they're doing well probably makes a bandwaggoner out of me, but after 20 years, I think I've paid my dues. :-)

[David]

It's like Adam Dunn's 200 strikeouts being a symptom of his patient approach at the plate.

 

In the words of Slappy the Squirrel, now that's comedy! :D

 

LOL, I wasn't making a joke, though.