Runners on 3rd with no outs

[scorekeeper]

Having the ability to look at many more things than ever before, I’ve really gotten intrigued by the numbers when looking at moving runners relative to where the runners are and how many outs there are.

While all 8 runner situations from none on to bases loaded are telling, with the data I have, a lone runner on 3rd seems to tell the strangest story. If you look at the attached, you’ll see how our team fared during last season. pbi5.pdf

The metric’s pretty simple, but I’ll explain just to be sure there’s no misunderstanding. There were 8 occasions where there was a runner on 3rd with no outs and there weren’t any times the AB caused the runner to score. There were 32 times with 1 out, and 13 times the AB caused the run to score. And there were 29 times with 2 outs with the AB causing the run to score 5 times.

I understand why the number of times an AB pushes a run across with 2 outs isn’t very high. After all, the number of ways to score is reduced. The number of times an AB pushed a run across with 1 out is pretty high because there are so many more ways for it to happen. But what I don’t understand, is why not 1 time in 8 opportunities with no outs, an AB didn’t generate a run.

When I looked at the details, I found of the 8 times, 1 was a K, 2 were BIP outs, 1 was a HBP, and 4 were walks. Our opponents were 0-4 with a runner in 3rd and no outs. They had 1 K, a BIP that scored the runner once, and BIPs that didn’t twice. One thing’s for sure. Our pitchers didn’t make things worse!

[raptor]

Having the ability to look at many more things than ever before, I’ve really gotten intrigued by the numbers when looking at moving runners relative to where the runners are and how many outs there are.

While all 8 runner situations from none on to bases loaded are telling, with the data I have, a lone runner on 3rd seems to tell the strangest story. If you look at the attached, you’ll see how our team fared during last season. [ATTACH]115921[/ATTACH]

The metric’s pretty simple, but I’ll explain just to be sure there’s no misunderstanding. There were 8 occasions where there was a runner on 3rd with no outs and there weren’t any times the AB caused the runner to score. There were 32 times with 1 out, and 13 times the AB caused the run to score. And there were 29 times with 2 outs with the AB causing the run to score 5 times.

I understand why the number of times an AB pushes a run across with 2 outs isn’t very high. After all, the number of ways to score is reduced. The number of times an AB pushed a run across with 1 out is pretty high because there are so many more ways for it to happen. But what I don’t understand, is why not 1 time in 8 opportunities with no outs, an AB didn’t generate a run.

When I looked at the details, I found of the 8 times, 1 was a K, 2 were BIP outs, 1 was a HBP, and 4 were walks. Our opponents were 0-4 with a runner in 3rd and no outs. They had 1 K, a BIP that scored the runner once, and BIPs that didn’t twice. One thing’s for sure. Our pitchers didn’t make things worse!

Your pitchers made things worse more than 50 pct of the time by walking the next batter four times and hitting him once..8 instances is way too small of a sample size.. did you turn any double plays? You must consider how many runs score from what the next batter could do.

[scorekeeper]

Your pitchers made things worse more than 50 pct of the time by walking the next batter four times and hitting him once..

Point of order, the attached was how our batters fared, not our pitchers. But none-the-less you’re correct that for some reason he pitchers did make things a lot worse. That particular situation in of itself is something that’s always bugged me about BARISP. Even though the batter made things a lot better for his team, since there was no “official AB”, his BARISP didn’t change. It just really bugs me that BARISP is given so much attention when it tells such a shallow story.

8 instances is way too small of a sample size..

Yes, 8 instances is a really small sample, but waddayagonnado? That’s an entire season’s worth of data, albeit the season is only 30 games long. When I 1st started messing with this stuff, to be honest I was surprised at how relatively few times the different situations came up. After I thought about it a bit I realized that even with 900 PAs in the season, when you spread out those PAs through the entire team, the chances of 1 player getting in a specific situation a high number of times is pretty slim. I guess this is gonna be one of those things that won’t pay a lot of dividends as far as individuals goes, but as more data becomes available, it may show interesting things as far as the team goes.

did you turn any double plays?

I don’t understand what double plays would have to do with it. In the runner on 3rd situation there was only 1 DP, but it was on a liner back to the pitcher and the runner got snagged.

You must consider how many runs score from what the next batter could do.

LOL! Heck, there are so many things in this data to consider, it makes my head spin. With some time, I’m pretty sure I could dig even deeper and find out lots more interesting things, but to tell the truth, with data being so hard to come by, I’ll likely just leave it where its at. Now if I had access to say even a dozen teams data I wouldn’t mind going on an “expedition”. Unfortunately, I don’t know of anyone else with that kind of data for a HS team.

An upshot of the stuff we’re talking about is I noticed how few times pitchers only face 3 batters in an inning, so I’m peeking into that now. I’d like to be able to compare pitchers by the number of batters they face in an inning. Its easy enough to compute batters per inning, but that doesn’t really tell much.

Oh well, its only mind fodder and lots of fun.

[raptor]

I only mentioned double plays as I thought you were speaking of charting YOUR pitchers walking 50 pct of batters in an R3, no out situation, so was thinking if you traded two outs for a run on the next batter it would still be a win. Sorry for the confusion! On the flip side, I'll take your batters' collective performance in that situation any day granted the small sample size. I'll take the walk..first and third, no out. A lot of possibilities on offense. Sabermetrics..what is the probablility of scoring multiple runs in an inning with two on, no outs, vs 1 run in, none on and one out?

[scorekeeper]

I only mentioned double plays as I thought you were speaking of charting YOUR pitchers walking 50 pct of batters in an R3, no out situation, so was thinking if you traded two outs for a run on the next batter it would still be a win. Sorry for the confusion!

Not confusion, just wanting to make sure I understood where the question was coming from. Never know where inspiration might come from.

On the flip side, I'll take your batters' collective performance in that situation any day granted the small sample size. I'll take the walk..first and third, no out. A lot of possibilities on offense.

Trust me, I have no complaint at all! This is one of those things that people, including myself, really don’t know what’s going on. I’m sure everyone has an idea how their batters/pitchers do in all the different situations, I know I sure did. But perception and reality have turned out to be 2 very different things, at least for me.

Sabermetrics..what is the probablility of scoring multiple runs in an inning with two on, no outs, vs 1 run in, none on and one out?

Sorry, you’ll have to get someone sharper than I to answer that one factually, but my guess would be the higher probability would be with the former.

[raptor]

Not confusion, just wanting to make sure I understood where the question was coming from. Never know where inspiration might come from.



Trust me, I have no complaint at all! This is one of those things that people, including myself, really don’t know what’s going on. I’m sure everyone has an idea how their batters/pitchers do in all the different situations, I know I sure did. But perception and reality have turned out to be 2 very different things, at least for me.



Sorry, you’ll have to get someone sharper than I to answer that one factually, but my guess would be the higher probability would be with the former.

Sharper than both of us then...those guys work for clubs or for baseball prospectus! I'd love to be able to have a flawlessly constructed lineup based upon trends, performace vs teams, righties, lefties, etc..ops..obp trends...you get the idea. NOT enough sample size and incomplete data...do you go with what you know..if you find a nugget here or there its lucky!

[omg]

Having the ability to look at many more things than ever before, I’ve really gotten intrigued by the numbers when looking at moving runners relative to where the runners are and how many outs there are.

While all 8 runner situations from none on to bases loaded are telling, with the data I have, a lone runner on 3rd seems to tell the strangest story. If you look at the attached, you’ll see how our team fared during last season. [ATTACH]115921[/ATTACH]

The metric’s pretty simple, but I’ll explain just to be sure there’s no misunderstanding. There were 8 occasions where there was a runner on 3rd with no outs and there weren’t any times the AB caused the runner to score. There were 32 times with 1 out, and 13 times the AB caused the run to score. And there were 29 times with 2 outs with the AB causing the run to score 5 times.

I understand why the number of times an AB pushes a run across with 2 outs isn’t very high. After all, the number of ways to score is reduced. The number of times an AB pushed a run across with 1 out is pretty high because there are so many more ways for it to happen. But what I don’t understand, is why not 1 time in 8 opportunities with no outs, an AB didn’t generate a run.

When I looked at the details, I found of the 8 times, 1 was a K, 2 were BIP outs, 1 was a HBP, and 4 were walks. Our opponents were 0-4 with a runner in 3rd and no outs. They had 1 K, a BIP that scored the runner once, and BIPs that didn’t twice. One thing’s for sure. Our pitchers didn’t make things worse!

It is a very interesting dynamic, runner on third, and I think you should continue gathering more data. Anecdotally, I see this situation all of the time and I feel batters "press" or base runners screw up with a higher frequency than different situations. Having stranded so many runners on third-via k or pop out- I'm almost to the point that batters should push bunt with no strikes, push bunt with 1 strike, and push bunt with 2 strikes.
If you leave it up to the batter (let him hit) then the odds are not good, at least it seems that way in my experience. A little like Arod and Swisher having a long track record of not producing in the playoffs.

[scorekeeper]

Sharper than both of us then...

Not much of a workout to get sharper than me.

those guys work for clubs or for baseball prospectus!

What’s funny is, for all the SABR dudes and dudettes out there, everyone’s still searchin’ for the ultimate answer.

I'd love to be able to have a flawlessly constructed lineup based upon trends, performace vs teams, righties, lefties, etc..ops..obp trends...you get the idea. NOT enough sample size and incomplete data...do you go with what you know..if you find a nugget here or there its lucky!

The problem is, there are just too many factors where there’s not any or enough data to work with, combined with the almost infinite way all the factors could be put together. IOW, at the present time there’s just no way to account for everything in a way that comes up with consistent answers. Those guys are getting better all the time, but for the moment at least, there’s still a lot of “dart throwing” involved.

That’s why I’ve always taken the position that what I’d like to do is nothing more than understand the data I have. Its not that I’m looking for any deep, dark secrets, but rather that if there’s a way to choose fact over dogma, I’m all for it.

FWIW, I haven’t given up on looking at our pitchers in different ways. The link shows how many batters our pitchers faced in the different innings they started. I’m sure you can easily tell which 3 players were our main guys. tbp.pdf

I thought it was pretty interesting that there were so many 3 and 4 batter innings. Kinda tough for the other team to score if they only get 3 or 4 batters.

[scorekeeper]

It is a very interesting dynamic, runner on third, and I think you should continue gathering more data.

Oh don’t worry about continuing to gather data, at least for the teams I score for. I made the program grab what was needed so I wouldn’t have to pull it out manually.

It caught my eye because I figgered a runner on 3rd with no outs would be the easiest runner to move, but as usual, I hadn’t thought of all the different things that could happen.

Anecdotally, I see this situation all of the time and I feel batters "press" or base runners screw up with a higher frequency than different situations. Having stranded so many runners on third-via k or pop out- I'm almost to the point that batters should push bunt with no strikes, push bunt with 1 strike, and push bunt with 2 strikes.
If you leave it up to the batter (let him hit) then the odds are not good, at least it seems that way in my experience. A little like Arod and Swisher having a long track record of not producing in the playoffs.

I think this is one of those things where you watch a game and come away with a sense of frustration win or lose because subconsciously you remember those runners who “should” have scored.

I do think you’re right about how batters “press”, but I don’t know that its all their fault. After all, talking about HS kids who are 14-18, its tough with your teammates hollering for you and you know they’re counting on you, not to mention the coach over at 3rd doing the same thing. Then to make things worse mom and dad in the stands hollering for you drive in the run, and the fans on both sides hollering either encouragement to you or encouragement to the pitcher!

Its certainly a learning experience to say the least!

[omg]

Exactly right.

[bbrages]

Possibly, when there is a runner at 3rd, the pitcher decides he's not going to let that guy get batted in, so he nibbles carefully at the strike zone...?

[omg]

Possibly, when there is a runner at 3rd, the pitcher decides he's not going to let that guy get batted in, so he nibbles carefully at the strike zone...?

True. That might mean he walks the guy. I don't know how Sk calculated the statistics but a walk would generally be a positive offensively. Also, the P might bear down, or as you say, nibble-either way it makes it tougher for the batter to get a hit.I've definitely seen it.

[scorekeeper]

True. That might mean he walks the guy. I don't know how Sk calculated the statistics but a walk would generally be a positive offensively. Also, the P might bear down, or as you say, nibble-either way it makes it tougher for the batter to get a hit.I've definitely seen it.

One reason I’ve gotten into things like this is my acquired disdain for RBIs and hatred for BARISP as meaningful metrics for hitters. Personally I can’t think of anything more positive for a hitter than leaving his team in a better position than when he came to bat, which a walk with a runner on 3rd would be. But neither RBIS nor BARISP credit the hitter with anything! In fact, as far as most offensive metrics go, other than OBP the batter may as well have not even come up.

As for whether the P nibbles trying to avoid a hit, I don’t think so. My guess is, they’re nibbling to try to avoid a BIP, since at the HS level nearly any BIP with a runner on 3rd and less than 2 outs will produce a run. Just more factors for the conundrum.

[raptor]

It is a very interesting dynamic, runner on third, and I think you should continue gathering more data. Anecdotally, I see this situation all of the time and I feel batters "press" or base runners screw up with a higher frequency than different situations. Having stranded so many runners on third-via k or pop out- I'm almost to the point that batters should push bunt with no strikes, push bunt with 1 strike, and push bunt with 2 strikes.

That is hilarious, or would be, if it didn't ring so true to me also..it's maddening..last weekend was a perfect example..first two innings runners on third with less than two outs..strikeout, pop up..dismal. Im curious as to what thoughts or cues you guys may use with hitters in that situation...get the ball down on the ground? Drive something up the middle? Look for a pitch you can get in the air? What does the conventional wisdom of situational hitting call for there? Our team has to play small ball to win, and we, more than most teams, desperately need to scratch out a run there.

[omg]

That is hilarious, or would be, if it didn't ring so true to me also..it's maddening..last weekend was a perfect example..first two innings runners on third with less than two outs..strikeout, pop up..dismal. Im curious as to what thoughts or cues you guys may use with hitters in that situation...get the ball down on the ground? Drive something up the middle? Look for a pitch you can get in the air? What does the conventional wisdom of situational hitting call for there? Our team has to play small ball to win, and we, more than most teams, desperately need to scratch out a run there.

I don't know but when you find out let me know.