An On Base Rant...

[DOUGHBOYS]

Some think that batting average is the most over rated stat in baseball. There thought process is that true production for a team should not be measured through batting average, but on base percentage.
Some fantasy enthusiasts agree, and some leagues have changed their batting average category to on base percentage.
In my mind, this is stupid.
And to go even further, it's my opinion that on base percentage is over rated.

Fantasy baseball is weighted towards the power hitter.
Heavily weighted.
On base percentage is weighted, mostly, towards hitters that can hurt a team with one swing.
A single home run is productive four four fantasy categories.
The home run is the worst thing that can happen to a pitcher. For fantasy purposes, that pitcher takes a hit in two and a half categories. E.R.A., WHIP, and a lesser chance for a Win.
For real baseball, a home run is instant runs against.
Two outs and nobody on with Miguel Cabrera in the batters box, what is a smart pitcher to do?
Right!
He walks.
On base percentage rewards Cabrera for what he has done in the past. The thought of being a threat.
In reality, he is standing in the box, helpless as he sees four unhittable pitches.
In this case, a walk is NOT as good as a hit. Yet, Cabrera's on base percentage increases and Bryan Kenny babbles on about how wonderful on base percentage is.
I guarandamntee you that on base percentage picks has pseudo producers like Adam Dunn and Dan Uggla in all lineups.
Gee, sounds enticing.

Allow me to cherry pick an annual on base monster. And I know it is a small sample size....
Carlos Santana's on base percentage is .354
That is higher than Carlos Gonzalez. Higher than Giancarlo Stanton.
Stanton, quietly, has expanded his strike zone. He is swinging at pitches off the plate. It could mean more strike outs for Stanton.
Big deal.
In that Miami lineup, having Stanton swing at a pitch that is off the plate, is better than down the middle to other Miami hitters.
Stanton's line thus far is .299/12/5/21/2
Santana's line is .160/6/0/1/0
And on base enthusiasts want to reward Santana?
Stupid.

Santana has Vottoreal Disease.
A disease that Joey Votto seems to be slowly shedding.
Santana has not realized that if not swinging at pitches on the corner, that eventually, he will see a pitch over the plate.
How's that working?
There is a way to help Santana out.
Terry Francona can hit him second, in front of Jason Kipnis. He will see a lot more pitches to his liking.
Nick Swisher, another on base percentage guy is hitting .164
He's not taking advantage of seeing good pitches in front of the best hitter on the Cleveland team. Let Santana have a shot.
If a player like Votto or Santana does not want to change the method to their madness, a manager should, at the least, put them in a position to succeed.
Votto is thriving as the second hitter behind Hamilton. I screamed last year that Votto should be the Reds second hitter.
Now thriving there.
Santana is wasted down the Cleveland lineup. If putting lesser hitters behind him, he will continue to bolster his on base percentage.
And continue to be a headache for all of us who do NOT play in on base percentage leagues.

We are all brought up to believe that a walk is as good as a hit. I won't believe that till I see somebody driven in from second base with a walk.
A walk is a weapon for a pitcher.
Seeing Miguel Cabrera take a base on a walk is a victory for the pitcher. He is now nine hitters away. He can't hurt that starter for a couple of innings.
Walking him?
So worth it!
Last year, Paul Goldschmidt earned respect. It took time for him to earn that respect. He walked 59 times over the first four months of the season.
40 Times over the last two months.
He didn't change his approach. Pitchers changed theirs.
Analysts hail on base percentage as THE hitting statistic in baseball.
In actuality, it is THE NON-hitting statistic in baseball.

[headhunters]

dan- you are all knowing. in atlanta- where should the pitcher bat? i think 6th. then "say hey ward" then wanta bj upton and finally isn't it uggly- uggla. even if the pitchers batting average is .150- if you pinch hit with a real hitter on the 3rd ab- he might hit .250 raising that total batting average up to .183- probably higher than those 3 jomokes. man- i like greg walker but he really needs to get fired.

[DOUGHBOYS]

Ha! All knowing...I'll tell my wife that one!...

That Atlanta lineup construction is the worst in baseball and I said that on Opening Day.
Simmons, the guy who has struck out once was sentenced to hit eighth while all the overpaid guys hit in front of him.
He should be leading off. BJ should be hitting eighth. At the least, it'll let him see pitches if a pitcher wants to lead off the next inning with Atlanta's pitcher. If pitching around him, he can steal a bag.
A pitcher like Kershaw or Jose Fernandez has a chance to get 17 or 18 strike outs against the Braves.

[Navel Lint]

Two outs and nobody on with Miguel Cabrera in the batters box, what is a smart pitcher to do?
Right!
He walks.

But is it?

Lets just look at the statistics only.


If Cabrera walks, it would create the "Two Outs - Runner on First" scenario. In this case, historically speaking, the runner will score 13.1%** of the time.
That's all runners. Regardless of speed or place in the batting order.
I think I could make a legitimate case that a number 3 hitter like Cabrera has a higher probability of scoring in front of the 4 and 5 hitters, but lets just stick with the base number(13.1%).

During Cabrera's career, he has come to the plate 1,121 times with two outs and none on base.
If he walked all 1,121 times, he would score 147 times ....... in theory .....

In those plate appearances, he has
171 singles
48 doubles
3 triples
62 HR's
114 BB

His BA is .285 which is 35 points below his career average. My guess would be that he expands his zone and swings at pitches that are not strikes in an effort to be more aggressive.

What are the scoring probabilities from his actual results?

171 singles X .131 = 23
48 doubles X .229** = 11
3 triples X .260** = 1
62 HR X 1.00 = 62
114 BB X .131 = 15

Total Probable Runs Scored = 112

That's 35 less times (or 24% less) than if he walked every time.

Admittedly, these are all probabilities and anything could happen during a single event.
Sometimes the guy at the BlackJack table that stands on 15 against a dealer face card wins, but I'll go with the long run probabilities.

Long story short.......walking Cabrera is not a win for the pitcher.....pitch to Cabrera .......and hope probability is on your side


** The run scored probabilities have changed slightly over time, but have been relatively stable over the last 30 years. The run scored probabilities of scoring from 2nd or 3rd are higher and are reflected in the calculations.

[DOUGHBOYS]

Numerish!
Worse. Probable Numerish!

Let me just ask a simple question, Russ.
Your Cubs and the Tigers are tied 2-2 in the bottom of the ninth with two outs.
Do you want Jose Veras (piching to anybody?) Cabrera?

Do you follow Numerish?
Or do you put him on first base?

[DOUGHBOYS]

[DOUGHBOYS]

dan- you are all knowing. in atlanta- where should the pitcher bat? i think 6th. then "say hey ward" then wanta bj upton and finally isn't it uggly- uggla. even if the pitchers batting average is .150- if you pinch hit with a real hitter on the 3rd ab- he might hit .250 raising that total batting average up to .183- probably higher than those 3 jomokes. man- i like greg walker but he really needs to get fired.

It's not hard, Fredi!

1. Simmons
2. C Johnson
3. Freeman
4. J Upton
5. Gattis
6. Heyward
7. Uggla
8. BJ Upton
9. Pitcher

Better yet. Bench BJ Upton and massage Schafer and Doumit into the lineup.

[Navel Lint]

Numerish!
Worse. Probable Numerish!

Let me just ask a simple question, Russ.
Your Cubs and the Tigers are tied 2-2 in the bottom of the ninth with two outs.
Do you want Jose Veras (piching to anybody?) Cabrera?

Do you follow Numerish?
Or do you put him on first base?

Of course I pitch to Cabrera. All the numbers are on my side.

Which is not to say that he won't hit a 500ft HR on to Waveland Ave. I wouldn't be surprised if he did.

And after the game when I'm sitting in one on the local Wrigleyville watering holes and I'm listening to all my friends rant and rave about "How can you pitch to Cabrera? HOW??", I'll just sit there drinking my beer.

[DOUGHBOYS]

Numerish!
Worse. Probable Numerish!

Let me just ask a simple question, Russ.
Your Cubs and the Tigers are tied 2-2 in the bottom of the ninth with two outs.
Do you want Jose Veras (piching to anybody?) Cabrera?

Do you follow Numerish?
Or do you put him on first base?

Of course I pitch to Cabrera. All the numbers are on my side.

Which is not to say that he won't hit a 500ft HR on to Waveland Ave. I wouldn't be surprised if he did.

And after the game when I'm sitting in one on the local Wrigleyville watering holes and I'm listening to all my friends rant and rave about "How can you pitch to Cabrera? HOW??", I'll just sit there drinking my beer.

[Navel Lint]

Two outs and nobody on with Miguel Cabrera in the batters box, what is a smart pitcher to do?
Right!
He walks.

But is it?

Lets just look at the statistics only.


If Cabrera walks, it would create the "Two Outs - Runner on First" scenario. In this case, historically speaking, the runner will score 13.1%** of the time.
That's all runners. Regardless of speed or place in the batting order.
I think I could make a legitimate case that a number 3 hitter like Cabrera has a higher probability of scoring in front of the 4 and 5 hitters, but lets just stick with the base number(13.1%).

During Cabrera's career, he has come to the plate 1,121 times with two outs and none on base.
If he walked all 1,121 times, he would score 147 times ....... in theory .....

In those plate appearances, he has
171 singles
48 doubles
3 triples
62 HR's
114 BB

His BA is .285 which is 35 points below his career average. My guess would be that he expands his zone and swings at pitches that are not strikes in an effort to be more aggressive.

What are the scoring probabilities from his actual results?

171 singles X .131 = 23
48 doubles X .229** = 11
3 triples X .260** = 1
62 HR X 1.00 = 62
114 BB X .131 = 15

Total Probable Runs Scored = 112

That's 35 less times (or 24% less) than if he walked every time.

Admittedly, these are all probabilities and anything could happen during a single event.
Sometimes the guy at the BlackJack table that stands on 15 against a dealer face card wins, but I'll go with the long run probabilities.

Long story short.......walking Cabrera is not a win for the pitcher.....pitch to Cabrera .......and hope probability is on your side


** The run scored probabilities have changed slightly over time, but have been relatively stable over the last 30 years. The run scored probabilities of scoring from 2nd or 3rd are higher and are reflected in the calculations.

A live test..........

Tonight Baltimore manager Buck Showalter had his pitcher intentionally walk Mark Reynolds with two out and nobody on base in the bottom of the tenth in a 6-6 tie game.

Reynolds does have 12 HR's this year, but he is also hitting just .216

The MLW pitcher F Rodriguez was on-deck. With MLW out of bench players, another pitcher, Y Gallardo, came up as a pinch hitter.

Gallardo hits a double and Reynolds scores, Brewers Win

A couple of things.........
M. Reynolds is not M. Cabrera, but he does have 12 HR's compared to Cabrera's 7; and in this situation, a HR is what you would be worried about.
More times than not, Gallardo would make an out and Reynolds would not score, but..........
More times than not, Reynolds would have made an out if pitched to (or at least not hit a HR)

Don't walk any hitter with two outs and none on in a tie game, last at-bat situation

[DOUGHBOYS]

Ha!

This is a little bit like hitting a Seventeen in blackjack when the dealer shows an eight.
The Brewers drew a four and won the game.

We'll never know if the dealer (Baltimore) was playing an unwin-able game.
Their hole card may have been a four giving them 12. If the Brewers hadn't drawn a card, Reynolds may have hit a homer.
The four the Brewers drew, would go to the dealer giving him a 16, then a Jack busts him.
Loser either way.

The Brewers hit on 17 last night, and won. Were the odds on their side to win?
NO.
Would I bet that Mark Reynolds hits a homer before Gallardo hits a run scoring double?
Yes.
Baltimore may have just had the cards stacked against them last night, no matter their decision.

[ToddZ]

Walking Reynolds was a mistake -- the math favors a run scoring in that situation even with Gallardo (a .202 hitter) coming up than pitching to Reynolds.

[DOUGHBOYS]

Would the odds be shorter in Las Vegas of Reynolds hitting a homer or Gallardo driving in a runner from first base?

[ToddZ]

Would the odds be shorter in Las Vegas of Reynolds hitting a homer or Gallardo driving in a runner from first base?

That's not the pertinent math.

It's the odds of scoring a run before recording the final out

a. pitching to Reynolds
b. walking Reynolds

The odds of getting the third out before a run scores is greater via pitching to Reynolds.

[DOUGHBOYS]

Would the odds be shorter in Las Vegas of Reynolds hitting a homer or Gallardo driving in a runner from first base?

That's not the pertinent math.

It's the odds of scoring a run before recording the final out

a. pitching to Reynolds
b. walking Reynolds

The odds of getting the third out before a run scores is greater via pitching to Reynolds.

There are many parts to the math.
Showalter was guaranteeing that KROD is hit for and out of the game or hits for himself.
Odds are, in a two out/none on situation, whether walking Reynolds or not, that the Brewers do not score.

[ToddZ]

But they are greater by walking Reynolds.

Forcing K-Rod out of the game is moot. Heck, he threw 21 pitches, only 10 for strikes - O's would have been better off if he came out for the 11th - but it's moot. You have to get to the 11th before it matters and the move decreased the chances they'd get there.

It's like keeping your best reliever for the ninth when there's bases loaded and 1 out in the 7th. You may not get to the 9th if you don't get out of the 7th but teams insist on using their 3rd or 4th best MR in that situation.

[DOUGHBOYS]

It's like keeping your best reliever for the ninth when there's bases loaded and 1 out in the 7th. You may not get to the 9th if you don't get out of the 7th but teams insist on using their 3rd or 4th best MR in that situation.

1000% agreement here.
Managers have fallen into a cookie cutter order of doing things.
The situation you described calls for a strike out pitcher. On most teams, this is their Closer.
Instead, a pitcher who is more used to pitching to contact is brought in. The Managers major train of thought is not bringing in his best pitcher or strike out pitcher at, most likely, the most crucial point of the game. It is making sure it is righty/righty or lefty/lefty.

[DOUGHBOYS]

Getting back to the original debate....
Two outs, runner on second, eighth hitter up. I am guessing you are a proponent of going after the eighth hitter, rather than pitching around or walking him?

[Bronx Yankees]

It's like keeping your best reliever for the ninth when there's bases loaded and 1 out in the 7th. You may not get to the 9th if you don't get out of the 7th but teams insist on using their 3rd or 4th best MR in that situation.

1000% agreement here.
Managers have fallen into a cookie cutter order of doing things.
The situation you described calls for a strike out pitcher. On most teams, this is their Closer.
Instead, a pitcher who is more used to pitching to contact is brought in. The Managers major train of thought is not bringing in his best pitcher or strike out pitcher at, most likely, the most crucial point of the game. It is making sure it is righty/righty or lefty/lefty.

Do you think managers finally are starting to move away from this? Seemed like the Indians stuck with John Axford in the closer role for far longer than it took to recognize that Cody Allen was their best RP, but I think Tito liked bringing Allen into higher-leverage situations in the 7th or 8th inning while hoping to get to Axford with no one on base to start the ninth. Could be part of the reason they are using Shaw to close some games (I.e., keeping the flexibility to bring Allen in when most needed). Similar situation going on in Anaheim. They had to have Joe Smith close for a bit because Frieri was imploding, but now they are back to Frieri as the closer because - in my opinion only - they want to use Smith in tougher situations in the 7th or 8th innings, when men are on base, because they don't fully trust Frieri to come in and throw strikes and get guys out. I do not think the Angels view Frieri as a better reliever than Smith but, because Smith (like Cody Allen) hasn't been closing for years, they can get away with using their best reliever as a non-closer.

Mike

[ToddZ]

Getting back to the original debate....
Two outs, runner on second, eighth hitter up. I am guessing you are a proponent of going after the eighth hitter, rather than pitching around or walking him?

All depends on the game situation. This scenario is completely different than what occurred last night.

[DOUGHBOYS]

Getting back to the original debate....
Two outs, runner on second, eighth hitter up. I am guessing you are a proponent of going after the eighth hitter, rather than pitching around or walking him?

All depends on the game situation. This scenario is completely different than what occurred last night.

No elaboration on the mathematics of last night.
Would you under no circumstances walk the Reynolds spot?
Was it because it was Reynolds, or would a better hitter such as Cabrera or even an 'on-baser' like Choo make a difference?
I understand the Showalter thinking. He did not want to pitch to a hitter who was more able to end the game on one pitch.

[ToddZ]

FWIW -- there are many much better at explaining this than I am. I understand the logic but may not do a very good job at explaining it "off the cuff". But here goes...

Specific to last night -- walking Reynolds put the winning run on which completely alters the math.

You basically total up probabilities of a game-ending scenario of which there are two

a. OUT - game over, Baltimore wins
b. RUN SCORES - game over, Milwaukee wins

Reynolds is up -- the probability of getting him out is 68%-70 %. The probability of a home run is around 5%-6%.

That leaves 25% to continue through. He walks, he singles, he doubles, he triples etc.

You then do the same for the next hitter, applying every situation. There's about an 80% chance you get Gallardo out. So you take .8 x .25 and add that 20% onto the 68-70 % above so we've got 88-90% probability of an out before a run.

Then you need to go through all the scenarios of that 20% and determine how many lead to a run (Reynolds scoring) and how many continue the game (Segura up).

Later rinse repeat until the game scenario ends the game either way (bases loaded). I don't know the numbers but it's going to be something in the lows 90% probability of an out before a run scores. We're starting with a 5-6% chance Reynolds hit a homer so the most it can be is 94-95%.

Now you repeat the exercise with Reynolds at first and Gallardo up. There's an 80% chance of getting him out so then you start working with the other 20%. Some of that 20% will end the game with a run scoring and some will extend it.

Lather rinse repeat until the bases are loaded.

When all is said and done, the probability of getting an out before scoring a run is greater when pitching to Reynolds than walking him.

Put in another player and the chance of getting a HR change, of getting an out change, etc..

A bunch of people mush better at this than me ran the numbers - Showalter made the wrong decision.