Yankee fans have been hollering all year about the team’s propensity for leaving runners on base. Last week, a reader wondered where the team ranks in that category. David Pinto has pointed me in the right direction, and it should come as no surprise that the Yanks lead the American League in runners left on base with 1163. The Red Sox are second with 1149, followed by Oakland (1089), Cleveland (1049) and Minnestoa (1036). However, as Pinto also mentioned to me, the Yanks and Sox score a lot of runs so it is natural that they would be at the top of the league in leaving men on. Boston currently leads the league in runs scored with 838, followed by Texas (816), New York (806), Cleveland (727) and Oakland (724). The team that looks the worst here are the Twins who are dead last in the AL in runs scored (637).
Sunday
December 22, 2024
Since 2002
"This ain't football. We do this every day."
--Earl Weaver
--Earl Weaver
1. The Yankees better get a move on to set the major league record for LOB in a season. It's 1334 by the 1941 Browns.
2. It doesn't seem real useful unless it is a percentage of total plate appearances or total batters who reached base. It is interesting that the ChiSox are dead last(or first). Seems to me that the teams that have the fewest LOB would probably have the most 1-2-3 innings.
3. I'm very surprised to see that the Twins have stranded so many runners - with their lineup, I wouldn't have expected that many guys to be on base in the first place! (No offense to any Twins fans out there.)
4. I'm sure that someone has studied this in detail (I have not), but just as Pinto mentioned, the high scoring teams will leave more on base. What we really want is scoring efficiency, which could be 1- LOB/(LOB+R-HR). This is a rough number of the percentage of runners who score after they get on. (To do better, we'd have to think about DPs and base-running outs.) A quick calculation gives:
BAL .325
MIN .330
CLE .339
NYY .340
DET .345
OAK .348
KC .350
CHI .351
SEA .352
TEX .355
LAA .357
TB .360
TOR .361
BOS .364
So while the Yanks aren't the worst, they're toward the bottom. And the Sox are the best in the league (which is certainly how it FEELS, rooting against them).
(Not trying to go all baseball prospectus on this site or anything -- just thinking in the comments.)
5. Thanks Andrew, that is very helpful.
6. I studied this a few years ago and came up with a metric called BPR or baserunners per run, (Hits+BB+HBP+Reached on Error)/Runs.
It's a pretty concise measure of offensive efficiency but I haven't run the numbers for this season. It's pretty time consuming but an interesting exercise. In general teams that hit lots of HR's tend to have much lower BPR. Nothing shocking there but it validates the notion that offenses like the Sox and Yankees, are approaching the game sensibly.
7. // And the Sox are the best in the league (which is certainly how it FEELS, rooting against them). //
As a Sox fan, I can tell you that it certainly doesn't feel like they lead the league in scoring efficiency (especially lately). It just goes to show you how perception and reality can differ so much.
8. Very interesting, Andrew - thanks for the numbers for thought!
If I'm understanding you correctly, by including CS and GIDP, you correct for teams who might have an artificially high efficiency because they have left fewer runners on base by running or grounding into more outs. I'm thinking of the White Sox and the Angels (tied for 9th in AL in runs, 691), second and fourth-worst in the AL, respectively, in CS + GIDP, but higher in efficiency than the Yanks (yet 3rd in runs, 3rd lowest number of outs via CS + GIDP).
9. One Question.
Is there going to be a test, because if so, can I cheat off one of you guys?
I have a headache.
I feel like a more well rounded baseball fan, and I thank you Alex, Andrew and Schteeve, but I have a headache nonetheless.
10. Shaun,
I didn't include GIDP, nor did I include CS or any other base-running outs. I think including them would be better, but I didn't have the data. (I couldn't find 'reached-on-error' data.) Mine was just a quick-look.
If I had the reached on error, the better number would be this:
Total Baserunners = H-HR+BB+HBP+Reached on Error.
Efficiency would be (R-HR)/Total Baserunners. I think this would be a better number and would account for things like running into outs and grounding into double plays. (Thus, it would include Dale Sveum in the equation, KJC.)
11. Schteeve,
That's an interesting equation. Why did you conclude it was better to have fewer baserunners per run? Isn't that mostly a measure of power, or more to the point Home Runs? And doesn't it most benefit teams with high slugging percentage but relatively low OBP? I realize that your formula is very close to mine, so these questions can come right back at me, too. That's why I'm asking, since you said you'd thought about this a bit.
12. Andrew, I originally started looking at this because I wanted to get a handle on how many baserunners, on average it takes to score a run. And then I wanted to see what types of teams over or underdelivered on that average.
Purely looking at BPR in a vacuum certainly discouts OBP, so you really have to look at any it, or any measure of scoring efficiency in context of total runs scored or runs per game.
13. Oh, and to answer your question, I think it's pretty logical to assume that the fewer baserunners per run, the better. The lower the BPR the higher the probability of any given runner scoring.
14. Interesting item in today's "Red Sox Mailbag":
//For a team that lives on statistics, am I the only one that looks at Mike Timlin's record with inherited runners. He is great where he starts an inning, but bring him in with men on base and you might as well count the men on base as runs after which he proceeds to get the side retired.
James, Shreveport, La.
A: James, we've noted it numerous times in the paper this season, and I'll gladly update the numbers now for you. Timlin has stranded just 14 of 31 runners this season, a success rate of 45.2 percent, the worst in the AL. I suspect you'd be surprised to learn that Tom Gordon of the Yanks is second worst. It is an important barometer of a reliever's effectiveness, and underscores the fact that Timlin is much better when he can start an inning than when he enters with men on. //
Yikes.
15. I'm issuing a Fatwah on whomever started this conversation!
I would, however, be interested in a stat which told me how often a team scores the runs which they hypotheticially, should score.
For example, leadoff walk, leadoff base hit, runner on second less than two outs, runners on either second or third, or both, and less than two outs. This, to me, would be both a measure of efficiency and more importantly, solid productive play.
Something has to account for the two out base hit, which you would of course love to score, but likely will not.
I think we can all agree, well at least I can, that two-out hits contribute more than anything else to a teams ability to win consistently, which to my untrained mathematical eye has hampered the Yanks this season.
I am sure I have made my voracious "less than love affair" with stats quite clear in the past, but am willing to accept their importance to a degree.
Ok then, who's got the numbers for my "should score" problem? I was a Poli Sci major, I'm not qualified to crunch numbers, as I said before, headache, but I will gladly discuss comparaitive politics of developing nations with you:) I'm sure I can relate that to baseball somehow.
16. number crunching? stats? uuuhh... cliff? you out there?
17. Dammit Stormer, I knew I should not have gotten rid of my Bill James yearly abstracts. The later ones had those average stats.
Hubba Bubba & Bubbalicious lead off the YES broadcast.