Comments on: Color by Numbers: Too Much of a Good Thing?

By: Mr OK Jazz Tokyo

Mr OK Jazz Tokyo — Fri, 27 May 2011 04:31:14 +0000

[0] How dare you, William. A “real” baseball man like Jim Riggleman says “We do the little things and play the right way. Some call it Small Ball..we call it SMART Ball”. So go back to your Ma’s basement and crank some Foghat while you crunch numbers,stat boy!

By: SteveF

SteveF — Thu, 26 May 2011 22:05:05 +0000

You would expect an older team to score more runs via the home run (as a percentage) than you would a younger team. I recall reading some study somewhere about how hitters age. Doubles decline and home runs increase. Strikeouts and walks increase. Batting average declines.

All three of those factors increase the difficulty of scoring runs on non home run type events.

On the plus side, it’s been show that non-sequential (homer heavy) offenses seem to do slightly better (i.e. they get closer to their regular season average) at scoring runs than their more sequential counterparts in the post-season.

The first study was probably something done by Bill James and is likely very old and outdated by now (though probably still relevant). The second was something I read on Baseball Prospectus five or so years ago. No idea if things have changed since then.

By: Chyll Will

Chyll Will — Thu, 26 May 2011 18:26:43 +0000

[8] Well that’s neither hear nor their… >;)

By: William J.

William J. — Thu, 26 May 2011 18:08:14 +0000

[7] Make that “their” instead of “there”! I hate that mistake.

By: William J.

William J. — Thu, 26 May 2011 18:07:40 +0000

[3] It definitely seems like perception is the issue. It’s kind of like when bad hitters get reps for being clutch simply because we only remember the unexpected event (i.e., there one big hit instead of there many more expected outs).

[4] Sample size is a good starting point. For example, if you throw out 2007 (when Yanks had highest BABIP and one of highest BAs with RISP), the correlation doubles. In many ways, the Yankees offense has been a relative outlier to the rest of baseball, so some deviation from the norm isn’t surprising.

[5] I actually posted something on that topic yesterday (put into graph form what you displayed above). In one of the charts, the Yankees run distribution over the past five years is depicted. One thing to keep in mind is the changing the run evironment also needs to be factored into this equation. http://t.co/lpsPheA

[6] I think many people are confusing two arguments. There is nothing wrong with hitting alot of HRs, but there could be negative ramifications from trying to hit them. I think Tex’ steady evolution into a dead pull hitter (http://t.co/JUE6NsM) might be an example of that tradeoff, but I am not sure if any other player currently fits the profile.

By: Chyll Will

Chyll Will — Thu, 26 May 2011 17:43:24 +0000

You might have to also consider who is relying on themselves to hit homers when they could almost obviously produce at a better rate doing something they’re far more capable of. Everyone has the potential to hit a home run, but certainly not at the same rate. So if Derek and Brett are going up to the plate and swinging for the fences each time, is that really something you can ignore or not be concerned about based on just present production? Brett still has potential to hit double digits consistently, Derek not so much. Up and down this lineup, you have guys who can pop it at any moment, but half of them probably shouldn’t being trying so hard to do so, as the case may be.

By: joejoejoe

joejoejoe — Thu, 26 May 2011 17:32:42 +0000

Here are the per game run totals of the Yankees this year, by frequency.

15 runs – 1 time
13 runs – 1 time
12 runs – 2 time
10 runs – 1 time
9 runs – 2 times
7 runs – 4 times
6 runs – 7 times
5 runs – 10 times
4 runs – 6 times
3 runs – 7 times
2 runs – 2 times
1 run – 1 time
0 runs – 4 times

The Yankees average 5.2 runs per game but they are just as likely to score 3 or fewer runs per game as score 9 or more runs in a game. Is there any evidence that a less homer dependent offense that scores fewer runs could produce more wins by scoring more consistently in individual games?

By: RIYank

RIYank — Thu, 26 May 2011 16:55:18 +0000

Yay! Good job, William.
My hunch about why the correlation between runs scored and % of runs from HR does not hold for the Yankees is: small sample size.

By: ms october

ms october — Thu, 26 May 2011 16:14:56 +0000

i was hoping you would tackle this topic william.
very good stuff.

although i am not a big ice cream lover and i am perfectly happy scoring runs via the hr.
i mean if manager binder himself realizes they are hits i don’t see why everyone is so up in arms about them.
i sort of think it is the perception that more stuff is happening while playing “small ball” that leads people to think it nets more runs – “oh they are stealing, and bunting, and hitting it the other way to move the runner – they must be scoring.”

By: William J.

William J. — Thu, 26 May 2011 15:36:32 +0000

[1] Thanks…and what better for the gut than a nice healthy bowl of ice cream (with a little cake on the side too)?

By: kenboyer made me cry

kenboyer made me cry — Thu, 26 May 2011 15:04:56 +0000

William, I throughly enjoy reading your pieces and diving into the analysis. I am not a sabermetrician, but you break it down for us passionate fans “of the gut” style.

Thank you.

AND, ice cream with cake is even better.