Will the Reds be a winning team in the next 10 yrs?

On Sat, 9 Aug 2008 01:00:51 -0700 (PDT), BenchMade <gkotr DeleteThis @earthlink.net>
wrote:

>On Aug 8, 3:03 pm, Ron Johnson <john... DeleteThis @ccrs.nrcan.gc.ca> wrote:
>> On Aug 5, 5:49 pm, tom dunne <dunn... DeleteThis @gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> > I wasn't saying anything about Pete's baserunning, just making the
>> > point that hustle and showing off are not exclusive.  However, since
>> > you bring it up...
>>
>> > Pete Rose was not a good baserunner.  He's the perfect example of
>> > someone who is overaggressive on the bases.  For his career, he was
>> > successful just 57% of the times he tried to steal.  That is just a
>> > terrible rate.
>>
>> Yeah but base running and base stealing aren't the same thing.
>> Or to be more precise base stealing is merely the easiest to
>> track part of base running.
>>
>> However we've got PBP data going back to the 50s and Tom Ruane
>> has gone through it.
>>
>> Rose was -3.2 runs stealing bases but +43.2 runs on the other
>> stuff (reaching on error, net bases gained). All in all, somewhere
>> in the top 30 on the bases. Here are the people I'm aware of who
>> were better than +50.
>>
>> Rickey Henderson 163.5
>> Tim Raines       135.5
>> Joe Morgan       101.0
>> Paul Molitor      98.1
>> Bert Campaneris   76.2
>> Craig Biggio      71.5
>> Barry Larkin      69.9
>> Rod Carew         50.6
>>
>> (Others with very high totals would include Vince Coleman,
>> Willie Wilson among others)
>>
>> >  Most folks will say that a success rate of 80% is the
>> > break-even point to make it worth your while.
>>
>> More like 75%. Today. Basically the higher the offensive
>> level the more an out costs.
>>
>> But Rose played his career in a much lower offensive context.
>> Break even point in his day was a lot closer to 2/3.
>>
>> > If Pete had stolen
>> > bases at that rate, he'd have stolen an additional 80 bases in his
>> > career.  Sure, sometimes he took advantage in going first-to-third and
>> > things like that, but that's just part of the equation - many other
>> > times he gave away outs he didn't have to.
>>
>> That doesn't seem to be the case. Got a pretty fair number of
>> extra bases at relatively little cost -- outside of base stealing
>> that is. (Though the bulk of his value in misc. running actually
>> comes from the 210 times he reached on error -- the highest
>> total I'm aware of by a pretty fair margin)
>>
>> As for the base stealing, well context matters. According to
>> linear weights Rose was -22.5 runs. In fact once game situation
>> is taken into account he was only -3.2. That's the second largest
>> positive difference (behind Paul Molitor). In other words,
>> he was doing the bulk of his running in high weight situations.
>> (As Pete Palmer pointed out in the first article on this
>> type of analysis, bottom of the 9th, two out, score tied, the
>> break even point is so low that anybody faster than Cliff
>> Johnson should be sent. And a 2 out steal of home always has
>> a break even point under 40%)
>>
>> And that seems to fit a working definition of smart.
>
>Don't bother with facts Ron.

So, you do ascribe to statistical analysis when it's convenient to your
argument, huh?

>Tom and Kevin are right - they are always
>right. I was wrong in what I stated and I bow to them. It just isn't
>fun to be part of group where the same two guys are 'literally' always
>right and you are 'literally' always wrong. <sigh - rolling my eyes>

Well, words mean things. Since words are the only things we have with
which to communicate in this medium, I would think that people should
choose the words they use pretty carefully (yes, being "literal" is
important). I had enough of the "that's not what I meant, but it's your
fault for not knowing that, even if I didn't actually *write* what I
meant" attitude about a decade ago. I have no patience for it now.

********************************************************************
Kevin McClave

"Courage, the footstool of the Virtues, upon
which they stand." ~Robert Louis Stevenson
********************************************************************