Page 4 of 6

PostPosted: Mon Jul 04, 2005 5:26 pm
by HOOTIE
baseballnewb wrote:Those numbers are nice and all, but they don't take into effect how a pitcher reacts to a big SB guy on first base. More fastballs for the hitter at the plate, distracted pitcher, etc. It makes a lot bigger difference than just the bases they do steal, it makes a difference every time they get on base.



GTWMA just posted on studies that show the hitter gets more distracted in general, then pitchers.

PostPosted: Mon Jul 04, 2005 5:48 pm
by GotowarMissAgnes
HOOTIE wrote:
baseballnewb wrote:Those numbers are nice and all, but they don't take into effect how a pitcher reacts to a big SB guy on first base. More fastballs for the hitter at the plate, distracted pitcher, etc. It makes a lot bigger difference than just the bases they do steal, it makes a difference every time they get on base.



GTWMA just posted on studies that show the hitter gets more distracted in general, then pitchers.


I have a couple I can post later. Basically, people forget that the guy at bat also takes more pitches to give the base stealer a chance to run, which puts them behind in the count.

The studies I've seen show everything from a very minor negative to a very minor positive effect of having a runner on base, but nothing worth making any fuss over. The positive effect, includes the effect of holding the runner, which opens up the infield, and is somewhat different than the distraction effect. I've seen a study, though I can't put my finger on it, that looked not only whether a runner was on base, but whether it was a good base stealer or not. That study, iirc, found that the positive effect of a base runner was about the same for good and not good base stealer and was likely due simply to the first baseman's positioning, rather than any effect of distraction.

PostPosted: Mon Jul 04, 2005 6:25 pm
by ChoneJohn
IMO, Cliff Floyd and Nick Johnson should have made it to the All-Star game, although I can see how difficult it would be to squeeze in Johnson, who basically becomes a numbers casualty. But Cliffy...he's been the most consistent player on an under-achieving team. He's got my vote anyway. Especially over Beltran, who's been the epitome of the rest of the team.

PostPosted: Mon Jul 04, 2005 7:19 pm
by kenjinenjin
cliff floyd cliff floyd cliff floyd...and i cant even vote him in as the last guy because its pitchers this is wack

PostPosted: Mon Jul 04, 2005 7:43 pm
by CubsFan7724
HOOTIE wrote:
Mookie4ever wrote:Why is that? I tend to feel that the stolen base actually has more value in real life.

So I don't get why the SB has next to no significance in real life.


Nah. The sb has far more value in fantasy. Look how sb affect fantasy $ values.

Irl, the sb can be significant if it's a big sb like Dave Roberts had in Game 4. But over a season, linear weights has shown that a sb is worth only (.17) of a run. A caught stealing is worth (-.45). So you need to have a 72% success rate to break even. Sb are only 1 extra base. Once you factor in the negative (CS -outs made), the value is marginal. People look at the # of sb, and equate that with success. But the success rate is much more telling. A guy who steals 40, but gets caught 20 times, shouldn't be running. A guy who steals 14/15 has done a much better job. The sb has some value, but is overrated. Like a 30/30 guy. They equate a sb to a hr, crazy.

Pods is not a snub.

Pods is 40/49, so hes doing a bit better than even (81.6%). Last year he was 70/83, or 84.3%. I don't think getting caught stealing is the problem. He isn't an allstar because he honestly doesn't do much else besides steal bases. He has a mediocre OBP, and an atrocious SLG.

PostPosted: Mon Jul 04, 2005 8:06 pm
by reznorsboy
Ensberg should be there!

PostPosted: Mon Jul 04, 2005 8:30 pm
by bigh0rt
CubsFan7724 wrote:
HOOTIE wrote:
Mookie4ever wrote:Why is that? I tend to feel that the stolen base actually has more value in real life.

So I don't get why the SB has next to no significance in real life.


Nah. The sb has far more value in fantasy. Look how sb affect fantasy $ values.

Irl, the sb can be significant if it's a big sb like Dave Roberts had in Game 4. But over a season, linear weights has shown that a sb is worth only (.17) of a run. A caught stealing is worth (-.45). So you need to have a 72% success rate to break even. Sb are only 1 extra base. Once you factor in the negative (CS -outs made), the value is marginal. People look at the # of sb, and equate that with success. But the success rate is much more telling. A guy who steals 40, but gets caught 20 times, shouldn't be running. A guy who steals 14/15 has done a much better job. The sb has some value, but is overrated. Like a 30/30 guy. They equate a sb to a hr, crazy.

Pods is not a snub.

Pods is 40/49, so hes doing a bit better than even (81.6%). Last year he was 70/83, or 84.3%. I don't think getting caught stealing is the problem. He isn't an allstar because he honestly doesn't do much else besides steal bases. He has a mediocre OBP, and an atrocious SLG.


That was my point from square one. I wasn't devaluing the SB, however I was saying that we value it more in fantasy than in real baseball (and I maintain, we do) and past that, Podsednik doesn't do a whole heck of a lot.

PostPosted: Tue Jul 05, 2005 12:41 am
by tribefan13
I want someone tot ell met hat Hafner didn't get snubbed the most. Just today in the double header he had 3 home runs and 3 singles in 10 at bats. His slugging % was 1.500 and 3 homers. Thats terrible. His Batting average has gone up about 80 points in the past 3 weeks.

PostPosted: Tue Jul 05, 2005 12:56 am
by The Roto Authority
yeah i agree big-time on the podsednik opinion. that is, that he adds little value to the sox. a bit, but not a lot.

i have an argument with a friend that the sox would be better off with carlos lee right now...he doesnt care about VORP though so it's hard.

PostPosted: Tue Jul 05, 2005 2:43 am
by baseball6791
Ensberg from the NL and hafner from the AL. I'd say oswalt, but I'm assuming he will be voted on in this final vote.