Decline of base stealing

[Omeletpants]

http://www.espn.com/blog/buster-oln...ehind-the-decline-and-fall-of-the-stolen-base

 

[beckdawg]

Think it's a combination of the fact teams have run statistical models and figured out when the best times to steal are and that plays in with the rise in offense. If you look at the 80's which were largely the hey day of stolen bases with guys regularly over 100, the runs per game were way down. Runs per games between 1980 and 1989 ranged from 4.00-4.72 and more realistically if you exclude an abnormal 1987 4.41 was the peak. Around 1993 that changed in a big way. In 93 runs per games went to 4.60, then 4.92, 4.85, 5.04, 4.77, 4.79, 5.08, and peaked in 2000 at 5.14. From 2001 onward they have gone down starting at 4.78, 4.62, 4.73, 4.81, 4.59, 4.86, 4.80, 4.65, 4.61, 4.38, 4.28, 4.32, 4.17, 4.07, 4.25, and then the past 2 years they've again began to spike at 4.48 and 4.65.

Some people have proclaimed they are juicing the ball. It wouldn't surprise me given the league probably wants more offense over pitching duels. I think had we stayed in that run starved environment from 2010-2015 we would have seen teams start to focus on the core tenants of 80's baseball namely speed and contact. KC essentially went that way and won a world series in 2015. I don't think we would have quite seen 80's type of base stealing numbers because as mentioned I think teams statistically know the "right" time to send runners now. I also think that unless run numbers are down there's little incentive for teams to play small ball. From a game theory perspective it rarely makes sense to give up an out. Where that type of play flourishes is when runs are hard to come by. Effectively low runs push the risk/reward higher to take chances on bunting and stealing.

Personally I like 80's baseball. I prefer the gambling style of base stealers and pitching duels. Ironically, if they stopped juicing the ball or whatever is causing the higher run totals they'd also likely see pace of play improve because 1-0 pitching duels are generally fast games.

 

[TC in Mississippi]

Olney makes some good points and it really comes down to risk reward. Stealing bases is a risky play and what's at risk is an out. Teams are far more concerned with creating as many opportunities for their power hitters to come through that you're going to limit your potential for giving up an out.

 

[CSF77]

I would look at it as SB fails works against OBA. It is pretty simple really. Every failed steal is subtracted from the team’s OBA.

You can go even further and go into base running mistakes. Not taking the extra base when able or making a ill advised attempt.

Now in some situations it pays off when the risk can win a game but in general you lose more than gain from risking outs.

 

[CubsFaninMN]

Think it's a combination of the fact teams have run statistical models and figured out when the best times to steal are and that plays in with the rise in offense. If you look at the 80's which were largely the hey day of stolen bases with guys regularly over 100, the runs per game were way down. Runs per games between 1980 and 1989 ranged from 4.00-4.72 and more realistically if you exclude an abnormal 1987 4.41 was the peak. Around 1993 that changed in a big way. In 93 runs per games went to 4.60, then 4.92, 4.85, 5.04, 4.77, 4.79, 5.08, and peaked in 2000 at 5.14. From 2001 onward they have gone down starting at 4.78, 4.62, 4.73, 4.81, 4.59, 4.86, 4.80, 4.65, 4.61, 4.38, 4.28, 4.32, 4.17, 4.07, 4.25, and then the past 2 years they've again began to spike at 4.48 and 4.65.

Some people have proclaimed they are juicing the ball. It wouldn't surprise me given the league probably wants more offense over pitching duels. I think had we stayed in that run starved environment from 2010-2015 we would have seen teams start to focus on the core tenants of 80's baseball namely speed and contact. KC essentially went that way and won a world series in 2015. I don't think we would have quite seen 80's type of base stealing numbers because as mentioned I think teams statistically know the "right" time to send runners now. I also think that unless run numbers are down there's little incentive for teams to play small ball. From a game theory perspective it rarely makes sense to give up an out. Where that type of play flourishes is when runs are hard to come by. Effectively low runs push the risk/reward higher to take chances on bunting and stealing.

Personally I like 80's baseball. I prefer the gambling style of base stealers and pitching duels. Ironically, if they stopped juicing the ball or whatever is causing the higher run totals they'd also likely see pace of play improve because 1-0 pitching duels are generally fast games.

Generally very much agreed. I will note that your observation about runs per game is sort of a truism -- when runs are harder to come by, it's best to get any runner you get on base as far down the line as possible. I watched a bunch of 80's teams win championships by stealing games on the basepaths. Power? Yeah, fine, but the "two walks and a homer" management style was all but entirely discredited, at that time. Interesting how all the metrics have brought us back to that.

I think you're right that the metrics guys are micro-planning various moves on most teams (certainly it's rumored the Cubs do), coming up with the statistical "right" times to steal. But there have to be flaws in that process, how else can you explain why more teams won't actually try to steal on Lester? I mean, yeah, you've had some real gun-arms behind the plate, with Contreras and Ross, during Jonny's tenure here, but hey, Montero caught Lester, as well. And the runners would dance, and dare -- and not take off.

So, the stats guys and their wonderful higher-level numeric understanding, will still be wrong. At least at times. Because it's still a game played by people, and people cannot (yet) be perfectly modeled mathematically.

I will say, though, that I enjoyed a good 80's-style pitcher's duel, with few baserunners and exciting steals and sac bunts. And guys stealing home. Say what you will about last year's post-season, watching Baez steal home is still one of my favorite memories of the 2016 post-season.

But yeah -- home runs are cool. As long as we're hitting more of t hem than the other guys. When our pitchers are giving up team record numbers of home runs in a year and our own offensive production hasn't kept up, then the emphasis on the homer gets to be old. Real fast.

I also think there has been more inequality in production lately. Yes, we're not broaching the steroid era in average runs per game, but I think the average range from most to least earned runs is greater, and you have a handful of "great" teams -- the teams conceded the title of contenders from the start of the year, usually -- who are setting team records for home runs and runs scored every year. So, the teams with the best OBP and most power are scoring the most runs, and if the production was more spread out, we'd be heading back to the speed-and-bluff 80's...

 

[TC in Mississippi]

So, the stats guys and their wonderful higher-level numeric understanding, will still be wrong. At least at times. Because it's still a game played by people, and people cannot (yet) be perfectly modeled mathematically.

My favorite baseball saying (possibly apocryphal as I've seen it worded many ways) of the last few years is that baseball is a math problem where silly humans get in the way. I really think that's pretty much correct. That's where baseball is unique among the major sports as math really doesn't come into play much in football, basketball or even hockey. The beauty of it of course is that because of the human element you can never complete solve the mathematical equation or in other words "that's why they play the games". The other side of this is that humans will always find ways to thwart the math in different ways at different times. I don't think "small ball" is ever coming back but elements of it could. I just don't think one of those elements is base stealing.

 

[anotheridiot]

hmm, I thought stealing bases was a bigger part of small ball. Get him on, get him over and get him in. getting him to second without giving up that out just gives you a better chance to get him in.

 

[beckdawg]

My favorite baseball saying (possibly apocryphal as I've seen it worded many ways) of the last few years is that baseball is a math problem where silly humans get in the way. I really think that's pretty much correct. That's where baseball is unique among the major sports as math really doesn't come into play much in football, basketball or even hockey. The beauty of it of course is that because of the human element you can never complete solve the mathematical equation or in other words "that's why they play the games". The other side of this is that humans will always find ways to thwart the math in different ways at different times. I don't think "small ball" is ever coming back but elements of it could. I just don't think one of those elements is base stealing.

Well honestly the only thing stopping small ball from coming back in my opinion is the league itself. If they want the league to be high scoring games then sure it's dead. But all it takes is them giving pitching some small advantage to tilt the scale back to a less run friendly environment and you're going to see teams look at old ideas. It also wouldn't hurt if they actually developed 80's style players in HS/College.

 

[Diehardfan]

Small ball is not dead. It's just more situational rather than a style of play. With the way balls fly out of the park these days, the old Earl Weaver "pitching and a 3 run homer" is much more prevalent.

 

[brett05]

And I would say that teams that want to play small ball still can and win at it, but it's a lot harder given the tendency to be "smashers" at this point

 

[CSF77]

And I would say that teams that want to play small ball still can and win at it, but it's a lot harder given the tendency to be "smashers" at this point

I kinda miss the hit and run plays where the runner moves and the hitter shoots for the opened position. It takes quick hands to pull it off and Almora would be the best with his bat control.

It is very situational hitting.

But with the evolution of the 2 hitter becoming your best hitter it has killed this type of O.