Hit and Run Efficiency

[CubColtPacer]

Mike Fast from Baseball Prospectus takes a look at how effective hit and runs really are. He looks at data from 2003-2011 As you see from his research, there is a lot of noise in the data so it is hard to pin down exactly. But after taking a hard look at the data, here is his conclusion:

 

The hit-and-run is far from the worst play in baseball. For a small-ball tactic, it has been quite successful over the past nine seasons, increasing scoring by .06 runs per attempt on average. The value of the hole in the infield defense is real, adding about 27 points to the batting average of the hitter. The double plays avoided by executing the hit-and-run offset the runners caught stealing on the play, and the extra bases gained by the runner when the ball is put in play are enough to move the play into the plus column overall.

 

Here is the long article explaining the reasoning and the math behind that:

 

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=15713

 

Also interesting to note that the Cubs had the 7th fewest hit and runs in baseball over that time period (which comprises the whole tenures of Baker,Piniella, and Quade). The hit and run was completely neutral for them over that time period-no runs gained or lost.

 

Thoughts? I've always thought the hit and run got a little bit of a bad rap, but I'm surprised to see that it actually is a positive play overall the way it's been used.

[treebird]

Finally, we arrive at the definition used for a hit-and-run situation in this study: (1) runner on first, bases not loaded, (2) none or one out, (3) a ball-strike count of 0-0, 1-0, 2-0, 1-1, or 2-1, and (4) the team leading or trailing by four runs or less. If the runner went on the pitch and the batter swung in such a situation, I will consider it a likely hit-and-run play.

 

i don't love this.

 

i also feel like we need more of an adjustment for who the baserunners are than i am seeing.

 

all that said,the suggestion that the hit and run isn't a disaster now that we've cut it down to only to most ideal situations isn't a shocking one. i still don't want to see my team using it.

[jersey cubs fan]

Finally, we arrive at the definition used for a hit-and-run situation in this study: (1) runner on first, bases not loaded, (2) none or one out, (3) a ball-strike count of 0-0, 1-0, 2-0, 1-1, or 2-1, and (4) the team leading or trailing by four runs or less. If the runner went on the pitch and the batter swung in such a situation, I will consider it a likely hit-and-run play.

 

i don't love this.

 

i also feel like we need more of an adjustment for who the baserunners are than i am seeing.

 

all that said,the suggestion that the hit and run isn't a disaster now that we've cut it down to only to most ideal situations isn't a shocking one. i still don't want to see my team using it.

 

Yeah, that's pretty silly.

[CubColtPacer]

Finally, we arrive at the definition used for a hit-and-run situation in this study: (1) runner on first, bases not loaded, (2) none or one out, (3) a ball-strike count of 0-0, 1-0, 2-0, 1-1, or 2-1, and (4) the team leading or trailing by four runs or less. If the runner went on the pitch and the batter swung in such a situation, I will consider it a likely hit-and-run play.

 

i don't love this.

 

i also feel like we need more of an adjustment for who the baserunners are than i am seeing.

 

all that said,the suggestion that the hit and run isn't a disaster now that we've cut it down to only to most ideal situations isn't a shocking one. i still don't want to see my team using it.

 

Yeah, that's pretty silly.

 

I don't think he's trying to cut it down to ideal situations. He's trying to define what is a called hit and run and what isn't from the data. He acknowledges he will miss a few hit and run situations from limiting the data like he has, but he's removing a lot more noise from the data than he is part of his sample.

 

And what exactly is this study replacing? Conjecture. The "Well, when the hit and run works, it gets a free base hit and moves a runner up so it must be good" or "The team runs into outs when it uses the hit and run so it must be bad". If there's been a better, more detailed study on the hit and run I'd love to see it. As for now, I would say this study is like defensive metrics. It isn't perfect, it may not even be good, but it's the closest we have to objective statistical analysis on the subject. And since analyzing the effects of the hit and run with your eyes is much harder than analyzing a player's defense, the statistical analysis has to be given a little more weight.

[biittner77]

The counts listed also help differentiate the hit and run from the straight steal which would seem to happen more often with the batter behind in the count. More to the point, if this study proves that the hit and run is a slight positive in those counts than that suggests it might help define when to start the runner(s).