Official Around Baseball 2023 Thread

I was thinking they might have a Stras day, similar to Bobby Bonilla day for a few years. Would seem to be a great retirement program, and soften the blow for the team.

Of course, I have no idea, but I suspect some sort of settlement would be possible.
 
The Chosen One said:
If it's a medical retirement, that means insurance is paying for it.

So it's not like it's going to factor in to WAS's payroll.
Click to expand...
Nats don’t have insurance on Strasburg. It was reported a few months ago that no insurance company was willing to insure that contract prior to them signing it, so the Nats are on the hook for the whole thing.
 
bravesfanMatt said:
can you really quantify stolen bases/threat of stolen bases via a stat??

I wish I could find somewhere that shows where he lead off an inning and how many runs he scored. Sort of seeing how many times the team scores when he leads off an inning versus when he doesn't. But everywhere just shows the runs he produces (ie homer) We already know how good the team is in the first inning..
Click to expand...

Within some margin of error, yes, it is. Everything you mentioned would not change the value of stealing bases by enough to change the fact they simply aren't worth very much. The bulk of baserunning value comes from being able to advance bases on balls in play, as evidenced by Betts' baserunning value. Teams learned this long ago when they discovered SBs don't correlate with runs/wins. Correlation is quite possibly the most simple data analysis around, and it clearly shows this as fact....back in the 2000s when the As stop stealing bases. In fact, SBs were found to be the most overvalued traditional stat. Whatever people "think" about SBs, the numbers prove beyond all doubt that SBs do not lead to more runs very often.

The Braves are good in the first inning because they send 3-4 excellent hitters to the plate in the first inning. If they sent those 3-4 hitters to the plate in the 6th inning they would lead MLB in 6th inning runs. If Acuna batted 2nd they would still lead MLB in 1st inning runs. It has almost nothing to do with Acuna stealing bases.

The Dodgers understand this, and have scored the #3 most runs in MLB with their worst roster in many years despite being #22 in SBs. How can they do this? Because SBs aren't very valuable, despite whatever anyone "thinks".

Get on base, hit for power, don't waste outs. Offense is really as easy to analyze as that.
 
Last edited:
bravesfanMatt said:
I don't think a stat can properly measure value of base running. maybe it is the best we have right now.. but a guy being able to get to second on a walk has more value than a simple number can produce. If Acuna scores on a homer by Olson, then his baserunning doesn't improve.. but is there not some logic that a pitcher who is so focused on Acuna not stealing produced a worse pitch to Olson.

Ozzie since moving to the 2 hole has an .895 OPS versus .799 OPS every where else.. 13 homers in 2 hole versus 15 everywhere else (~50 fewer PA).. Does that really prove anything.. not really. A good counter point would be do you really have to steal a lot to make a pitcher worry about you. Everyone knows Mookie, even FF, will swipe a bag if you ignore him.. So a pitcher probably has same focus if Acuna or Mookie is standing on 1st. The Difference is a pitcher knows Acuna is going to try, where Mookie probably won't if you just pay attention to him.

conclusion, I agrued with myself and proved nothing... which is sort of my point. can you really quantify stolen bases/threat of stolen bases via a stat??

I wish I could find somewhere that shows where he lead off an inning and how many runs he scored. Sort of seeing how many times the team scores when he leads off an inning versus when he doesn't. But everywhere just shows the runs he produces (ie homer) We already know how good the team is in the first inning..
Click to expand...

At the same time, Olson's season really took off once he moved out of the second spot. I don't know if flipping spots has anything to do with the surges Olson and Albies have both enjoyed, but maybe some hitters are better suited to certain spots in the order. The strategy of line-up construction seems to ebb and flow through eras.
 
50PoundHead said:
At the same time, Olson's season really took off once he moved out of the second spot. I don't know if flipping spots has anything to do with the surges Olson and Albies have both enjoyed, but maybe some hitters are better suited to certain spots in the order. The strategy of line-up construction seems to ebb and flow through eras.
Click to expand...

Yeah. I thought about Olson too. Heck I couldn’t even convince myself that base stealing had any meaningful impact other than a few runs here and there.
 
bravesfanMatt said:
Man Mookie might sneak up and steal the MVP.. dude has been unreal of late.
Click to expand...

He's not stealing anything. Betts has been insane the last few weeks. 7 fWAR to Acuna's 6.3


As enscheff said, we're about to see what modern writers really think of SB. To this point Betts has been the better player.
 
Enscheff said:
Within some margin of error, yes, it is. Everything you mentioned would not change the value of stealing bases by enough to change the fact they simply aren't worth very much. The bulk of baserunning value comes from being able to advance bases on balls in play, as evidenced by Betts' baserunning value. Teams learned this long ago when they discovered SBs don't correlate with runs/wins. Correlation is quite possibly the most simple data analysis around, and it clearly shows this as fact....back in the 2000s when the As stop stealing bases. In fact, SBs were found to be the most overvalued traditional stat. Whatever people "think" about SBs, the numbers prove beyond all doubt that SBs do not lead to more runs very often.

The Braves are good in the first inning because they send 3-4 excellent hitters to the plate in the first inning. If they sent those 3-4 hitters to the plate in the 6th inning they would lead MLB in 6th inning runs. If Acuna batted 2nd they would still lead MLB in 1st inning runs. It has almost nothing to do with Acuna stealing bases.

The Dodgers understand this, and have scored the #3 most runs in MLB with their worst roster in many years despite being #22 in SBs. How can they do this? Because SBs aren't very valuable, despite whatever anyone "thinks".

Get on base, hit for power, don't waste outs. Offense is really as easy to analyze as that.
Click to expand...

As you've stated the data is pretty clear on the value (or lack of) of the stolen base.

On the other hand, what is the explanation for the Cardinals teams from 1982-1987 or so being so good? They would literally have one guy capable of hitting the guy out of the ballpark more than occasionally in their lineup, and at least a couple of Terrance Gores starting for them at all times. A quick glance back at their stats for those years shows that their OBPs were nothing special.
 
thewupk said:
He's not stealing anything. Betts has been insane the last few weeks. 7 fWAR to Acuna's 6.3


As enscheff said, we're about to see what modern writers really think of SB. To this point Betts has been the better player.
Click to expand...


Mookie has been absolutely insane in August, while Ronnie has simply been really good. Good news is that Mookie is due for some regression in September. I think we'll see Ronnie run away (no pun intended) with the award in September.
 
Last edited:
msstate7 said:
At worst, he's still a great hitter, right?
Click to expand...


Who doesn't play the field. He would still get 20+ million as a hitter as a DH but he would get 10+ million a year more for his bat if he played a position even at a below average level. Ironically his injury probably raised the Angel's chances of re-signing him.
 
cajunrevenge said:
Who doesn't play the field. He would still get 20+ million as a hitter as a DH but he would get 10+ million a year more for his bat if he played a position even at a below average level. Ironically his injury probably raised the Angel's chances of re-signing him.
Click to expand...

Surely he could play the field if his pitching career ended.
 
DirkPiggler said:
As you've stated the data is pretty clear on the value (or lack of) of the stolen base.

On the other hand, what is the explanation for the Cardinals teams from 1982-1987 or so being so good? They would literally have one guy capable of hitting the guy out of the ballpark more than occasionally in their lineup, and at least a couple of Terrance Gores starting for them at all times. A quick glance back at their stats for those years shows that their OBPs were nothing special.
Click to expand...

Well in 85 for example they were just an excellent base running team. Steals and I imagine 1st to 3rd happened a lot. Only a 102 WRC+ which ranked them 8th but were 4th in offensive value due to base running. Not to mention that year they were mile away better defensivley than anyone else which carried an above average pitching team.

Coleman was an outlier but that team had 3-4 other guys who were like Acuna on the base paths. So there is value there if over half your lineup is doing that sort of thing with nobody being an anchor. Like the Braves for example this year. Acuna and Albies are excellent base runners and bring good value there. But Murphy and Rosario negate almost all of that from a value standpoint.
 
DirkPiggler said:
As you've stated the data is pretty clear on the value (or lack of) of the stolen base.

On the other hand, what is the explanation for the Cardinals teams from 1982-1987 or so being so good? They would literally have one guy capable of hitting the guy out of the ballpark more than occasionally in their lineup, and at least a couple of Terrance Gores starting for them at all times. A quick glance back at their stats for those years shows that their OBPs were nothing special.
Click to expand...

The game has changed dramatically in the past 35-40 years (Wow! That long ago!). Catcher has become a much more defensive-centric position for one thing, but I believe the bigger factors were ballparks getting smaller and players getting stronger (Pre-renovation Busch was enormous), which have made the game became more longball-centric. In earlier eras, sending runners would put the infielders in motion, but hitting behind runners and the like have gone the way of the dinosaur because there's less value in that than the risk/reward of hitting through.

Add in some of the Moneyball analysis and we've come to where we're at. Just a change in eras. Some like it and some don't.
 
Hulavol said:
AstroTurf in St. Louis helped a whole lot of ground balls go through …..
Click to expand...

Looked it up after reading a bit of this thread and the Cardinals didn't hit 100 HRs as a team in any of those seasons. Big ballpark and, as you say, artificial turf and they built their club around that. Herzog was a pretty good manager and they made it work. Game has changed so much since.

Dodger teams in the early-1960s hit more HRs, but we used to call a Dodger HR Wills gets on first, steals second, goes to third when Gilliam hits it to the right side, and scores on a Willie Davis ground out or fly ball. Those teams also had Tommy Davis and Frank Howard, so they could go deep as well. Good teams.
 
Enscheff said:
Betts only has 10 SB yet trails Acuna in base running value 2.7 to 4.9. All that running and sliding into bases simply isn’t very valuable. Betts knows it, but Acuna still doesn’t.
Click to expand...

Acuna is -500 on one betting site. But other than SB, Mookie is basically even/about the same/or better everywhere else. I hope for Acuna's sake he holds on, he deserves the MVP since he was on pace to win it in 21 if he didnt get hurt.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top