The importance of base running

[markedman5]

I enjoyed this video

 

[dlk9s]

Running the bases is the only way you can score runs in baseball.

[kestrel79]

It is crazy the amount of infield hits they get. A fast lineup top to bottom you can get a lot of infield hits off weak contact. It puts pressure on the D, and it's mentally draining for the other team as well to get beat by little dink hits. 

[Team Canada]

17 minutes ago, kestrel79 said:

It puts pressure on the D

With all of the infield errors against them recently I wonder if this shows up statistically - do teams commit more errors against the Brewers because they know they have no margin for error?

[RobDeer 45]

15 minutes ago, Team Canada said:

With all of the infield errors against them recently I wonder if this shows up statistically - do teams commit more errors against the Brewers because they know they have no margin for error?

I used to bring this up back in the day with Tony Gwynn Jr and Carlos Gomez.  I was curious if teams tracked the issues they caused with their speed.  Not sure I ever got an answer.

[Thurston Fluff]

24 minutes ago, Team Canada said:

With all of the infield errors against them recently I wonder if this shows up statistically - do teams commit more errors against the Brewers because they know they have no margin for error?

Good question. It could also just be guys putting the ball in play more creates more chances for an error. One of the things that always bugged me about the strikeouts are just outs argument is they eliminate any chance of a error, bad hop, lost in the sunlight, misplay or a seagull getting in the way. It may be a small difference but that doesn't mean the results are the same.

[rluzinski]

You can also reach base on a strikeout. 😉

https://www.teamrankings.com/mlb/stat/opponent-errors-per-game

[Brian]

1 hour ago, kestrel79 said:

It is crazy the amount of infield hits they get. A fast lineup top to bottom you can get a lot of infield hits off weak contact. It puts pressure on the D, and it's mentally draining for the other team as well to get beat by little dink hits. 

And also stolen bases after you get on.  I think speed is what made the 2023 Diamondbacks so good. They had 166 stolen bases that season. 

[owbc]

It seems pretty obvious that aggressive baserunning makes pitching worse but exactly how much is hard to say. 

1) It is easily quantified that stealing with > 75% success rate is independently good.
2) Pitcher/catcher are distracted or pitch type gets relayed to batter by runner at 2B (should be possibly to quantify by looking at batter performance when a fast runner is on base). 
3) Fast baserunners forcing infielders to rush, creating more errors (seems to track based on rluzinski's link).

It seems to affect certain pitchers more than others. Some pitchers completely ignore the baserunners and let them steal (hence how Josh Naylor has 20-some steals this year with 3rd-percentile sprint speed). Then there are relievers who seem to be really good at getting out of jams.

[nate82]

2 hours ago, Thurston Fluff said:

Good question. It could also just be guys putting the ball in play more creates more chances for an error. One of the things that always bugged me about the strikeouts are just outs argument is they eliminate any chance of a error, bad hop, lost in the sunlight, misplay or a seagull getting in the way. It may be a small difference but that doesn't mean the results are the same.

An out is an out regardless if it is a strike out or a ground out.  What you are talking about is random occurrences in the process.  A batter could strike out and not record an out it does happen though it is rare.  An error or something else occurring doesn’t matter when you are talking about the end result.  A pop out for a third out is the same as a strike out for the third out.  They carry the same weight over a course of a season.

Now if you want to say someone striking out 40% of the time is an issue then yes that is an issue.  But if you are talking about a strike out versus another out then no there is no difference.  Stating it could turn into an error or something else occurring is just a what about this type of an argument which doesn’t go anywhere as you can’t prove either side of the what about as there could be billions of different outcomes for each.

[Thurston Fluff]

36 minutes ago, nate82 said:

An out is an out regardless if it is a strike out or a ground out.  What you are talking about is random occurrences in the process.  A batter could strike out and not record an out it does happen though it is rare.  An error or something else occurring doesn’t matter when you are talking about the end result.  A pop out for a third out is the same as a strike out for the third out.  They carry the same weight over a course of a season.

Now if you want to say someone striking out 40% of the time is an issue then yes that is an issue.  But if you are talking about a strike out versus another out then no there is no difference.  Stating it could turn into an error or something else occurring is just a what about this type of an argument which doesn’t go anywhere as you can’t prove either side of the what about as there could be billions of different outcomes for each.

You're making the same error as the rest of the K's don't matter crowd does. It's not about the times the out is made. It's about increasing the amount of times a should be out doesn't end up an out. Striking out leaves a smaller chance of getting on first safely than putting the ball in play that should be an out. A lazy fly to center should be the same result as a strikeout. But when we combine the number of errors, balls that gets lost in the sun, misplayed so badly they fielder never touches the ball or drops between two defenders due to miscommunication are higher than the number of strikeouts that end with the batter safe at first. That admittedly small increase in reaching first safely is not zero. Every single ball put in play has that added small chance of reaching first safely that a K does not. The correct way if stating it should be strikeouts are almost, but not quite, the same as other outs.

[SomewhereInTime]

2 hours ago, nate82 said:

An out is an out regardless if it is a strike out or a ground out.  What you are talking about is random occurrences in the process.  A batter could strike out and not record an out it does happen though it is rare.  An error or something else occurring doesn’t matter when you are talking about the end result.  A pop out for a third out is the same as a strike out for the third out.  They carry the same weight over a course of a season.

Now if you want to say someone striking out 40% of the time is an issue then yes that is an issue.  But if you are talking about a strike out versus another out then no there is no difference.  Stating it could turn into an error or something else occurring is just a what about this type of an argument which doesn’t go anywhere as you can’t prove either side of the what about as there could be billions of different outcomes for each.

What about productive outs that advance runners?

[tmwiese55]

It's probably all moot when talking about such small numbers and really both sides aren't wrong.    But, was just going to add that double plays probably more than outweigh the lost in the sun type defensive F ups.  It's all in the ballpark of a wash though. 

[Cool Hand Lucroy]

I have never seen a team go from first to third on hits to left field as often as the Brewers do. It's nuts. 

The joy of watching this team every day is seeing all the things nobody else can see.

[formerlybis]

5 hours ago, rluzinski said:

You can also reach base on a strikeout. 😉

https://www.teamrankings.com/mlb/stat/opponent-errors-per-game

That's pretty interesting, thanks.

The Brewers were pretty average in opponent errors last year, but this year we are way above last year's highest rate. I also notice that the '24 ranks and the '25 ranks seem to have no correlation - e.g.. #1 and #2 last year are #13 and #20 this year. In other words, Brew Crew Voodoo is at work...

[Baldkin]

2 hours ago, SomewhereInTime said:

What about productive outs that advance runners?

https://www.baseballprospectus.com/news/article/3634/assessing-productive-outs-little-things-mean-a-little/

Non-repeatable and overhwelmingly luck based. 

Baserunning as a whole, however, the Brewers are tops in MLB by a WIDE margin, per Fangraphs. They are farther ahead of 2nd place, than 2nd place is from 10th. 

https://www.fangraphs.com/leaders/major-league?team=0%2Cts&sortcol=18&sortdir=default&pagenum=1

[Playing Catch]

32 minutes ago, Baldkin said:

https://www.baseballprospectus.com/news/article/3634/assessing-productive-outs-little-things-mean-a-little/

Non-repeatable and overhwelmingly luck based. 

Baserunning as a whole, however, the Brewers are tops in MLB by a WIDE margin, per Fangraphs. They are farther ahead of 2nd place, than 2nd place is from 10th. 

https://www.fangraphs.com/leaders/major-league?team=0%2Cts&sortcol=18&sortdir=default&pagenum=1

I'm perfectly okay with the conventional wisdom within the statistical community believing that the Brewers are just lucky. Although, that article was written in George W Bush administration, so I'm not sure how conventional that wisdom is?

Also, I'm confused by your takaways from the article. For me, I pulled out this quote:

"Our [teams with the best productive] outmakers have a combined .531 winning percentage, with three 90-win teams and no 90-loss teams. The worst productive outmakers have a .457 winning percentage, one 90-win team, and five 90-loss teams."

So the article acknowledges that there IS a corrolation with winning based on productive outs, which isn't that much of a surprise. But unless I'm mistaken (and I very well could be), it seems like their methodology presumes that each situation where a productive out can be made, is equal. That the batter or baserunner involved doesn't impact the value of the outmaking event.

I acknowledge that I can quickly get over my head with statistical methodology, so I'm open to being educated on this.

[Baldkin]

11 minutes ago, Playing Catch said:

I'm perfectly okay with the conventional wisdom within the statistical community believing that the Brewers are just lucky. Although, that article was written in George W Bush administration, so I'm not sure how conventional that wisdom is?

Also, I'm confused by your takaways from the article. For me, I pulled out this quote:

"Our [teams with the best productive] outmakers have a combined .531 winning percentage, with three 90-win teams and no 90-loss teams. The worst productive outmakers have a .457 winning percentage, one 90-win team, and five 90-loss teams."

So the article acknowledges that there IS a corrolation with winning based on productive outs, which isn't that much of a surprise. But unless I'm mistaken (and I very well could be), it seems like their methodology presumes that each situation where a productive out can be made, is equal. That the batter or baserunner involved doesn't impact the value of the outmaking event.

I acknowledge that I can quickly get over my head with statistical methodology, so I'm open to being educated on this.

 

"Across all four years, the correlation between runs from productive outs and winning percentage is just .16, not even close to being significant."

"That said, there is simply no evidence to support the notion that making productive outs is a legitimate, repeatable skill. Nor is their any reason to believe that they are the key to winning games. The productive out is to baseball what a lab fee is to a college term bill: sure it's there, but those big numbers at the top still trump everything else."

Statistical correlation is on a scale from 0 to 1,  the higher the number the more correlated they are.

.16 is in the "That doesn't matter at all" category. 

https://www.samford.edu/sports-analytics/fans/2022/MLB-Winning-Percentage-Breakdown-Which-Statistics-Help-Teams-Win-More-Games

[Jimbo]

20 hours ago, rluzinski said:

You can also reach base on a strikeout. 😉

https://www.teamrankings.com/mlb/stat/opponent-errors-per-game

Long time, no see! :)

 

[Frisbee Slider]

15 minutes ago, Jimbo said:

Long time, no see! :)

 

I was going to say the same thing! Always enjoy posts from @rluzinski

 

[gregmag]

22 hours ago, tmwiese55 said:

It's probably all moot when talking about such small numbers and really both sides aren't wrong.    But, was just going to add that double plays probably more than outweigh the lost in the sun type defensive F ups.  It's all in the ballpark of a wash though. 

I think the point about double plays is very important. You would also have to include other disadvantageous outs made on the bases in live-ball situations — like a fielder’s choice that results in and out at third base or home in exchange for the batter’s getting to first base.  If we’re going to talk about outcomes that balls in play make possible and strikeouts don’t, we need to look at both sides of the ledger.

That said, I have no idea whether it’s a wash. It’s possible to count all the events we’re talking about. I haven’t counted them, and I’m not at all confident in my ability to guess how the balance comes out.

[MadScientist]

It would be interesting to see the number of unearned runs the Brewers have scored, compared to other teams.  I suspect it's pretty high, but i can't find that statistic anywhere. 

[Underachiever]

1 hour ago, MadScientist said:

It would be interesting to see the number of unearned runs the Brewers have scored, compared to other teams.  I suspect it's pretty high, but i can't find that statistic anywhere. 

Do what I do when I have a question...

[wiguy94]

9 hours ago, MadScientist said:

It would be interesting to see the number of unearned runs the Brewers have scored, compared to other teams.  I suspect it's pretty high, but i can't find that statistic anywhere. 

I don't recall the numbers but I think it was Hogg or one of the Brewers beat guys in the last couple weeks who said the Brewers had the most unearned runs scored in MLB and it wasn't particularly close.

Edit: Found the tweet from Dom. It was tweeted almost a month ago but at that time there was a substantial gap between us and 2nd