Random SABR NERD rant

[Warner2BruceTD]

Remember when SABR people disliked the stolen base? Now that stolen base numbers have dipped to recent lows, i'm seeing a bunch of articles lamenting the lack of stolen bases, and people like Keith Law preaching that managers should be stealing second base in the late innings as opposed to bunting. Not too long ago the message was NEVER STEAL EVER AND IF YOU DO YOU ARE STUPID.

This is not a first. There was a Bill James backlash several years ago, right around the time the updated version of the Historical Abstract came out. James, you see, had the audacity to suggest that pitcher wins may not be a total product of luck or happenstance. He did some research that showed that while the stat is still overrated by some, we kinda sorta maybe possibly have beaten up the pitcher win stat to the point that we've gone too far. There was also some backlash to his beliefs that bad attitudes/bad clubhouse can matter, and his win shares system was rallied against.

We've also seen a WHIP backlash, but that one has seemed to die down some.

I see what's happening here.

Hardcore SABR people are essentially hipsters. Old crusty managers aren't stealing bases anymore, so that must mean stealing bases are good. Our dad's are reading Bill James now, so fuck Bill James, dude needs to get with the times. WHIP is being talked about by out of touch TV announcers, so that's no good anymore, it's all about FIP. And when Fangraphs genpop picked up on FIP, well, we had to normalize that shit and push xFIP.

And now, the OPS backlash has picked up serious steam. You knew that was coming.

wOBA, your time is almost up.

[SuperKevin]

I always felt that stealing 2nd is much better than a sacrifice bunt. With a sacrifice you are nearly 100% likely giving up an out(possibly two if the batter puts down a shitty bunt) where as with the stolen base you have a fairly solid chance at advancing without giving up the out.

[Warner2BruceTD]

Part of the problem too, is that the writers who are firmly on the SABR side of things are incredible douche bags. While the content of what they write is often times superb, the Calcaterra's, Law's, & Sheehan's are not people anybody would ever want to hang out with and watch a game. Or just plain hang out with. Or even speak to.

So when you have smart, savvy, intelligent people like that who behave like smarmy, uptight, incredulous assholes, it creates a culture or smarmy, uptight, incredulous fans. Read the replies to any tweet or the comments section of any article these guys write, and you will see an army of wannabees goosestepping in badly done amatuer smarm. You aren't on Sheehan's level, people. Not many are.

[SuperKevin]

Using a bunt to sacrifice a guy to third however is MUCH MUCH better than attempting to steal third though in my opinion

[Warner2BruceTD]

I always felt that stealing 2nd is much better than a sacrifice bunt. With a sacrifice you are nearly 100% likely giving up an out(possibly two if the batter puts down a shitty bunt) where as with the stolen base you have a fairly solid chance at advancing without giving up the out.

I can go either way. As with most things, it depends on many variables. Who is running, who is batting, who is pitching, score, inning, weather, etc etc etc.

That's another issue I have with robotic analysis. Game situation is something we're supposed to toss aside these days.

[Senser81]

I think in general, SABR thought has done more good than harm, but by the same token SABR thinking has the same irrationality as the "unwritten rules" of baseball. It seemed that in the mid-70's to mid-80's, many of the successful teams stole bases. They would rattle the opposing pitcher, force bad throws, etc. So while I couldn't really pinpoint the exact value of a stolen base, I knew it had to have SOME value, or else teams wouldn't be successful doing it. For the SABR people to think otherwise is nonsense, really. I would guess that there is no strict value to the stolen base...it changes over time. If pitching is dominant, then I would think that stolen bases are somewhat important. If your #7 hitter is hitting 50 HRs in the steroid era, then stolen bases would be less important.

[Senser81]

Part of the problem too, is that the writers who are firmly on the SABR side of things are incredible douche bags. While the content of what they write is often times superb, the Calcaterra's, Law's, & Sheehan's are not people anybody would ever want to hang out with and watch a game. Or just plain hang out with. Or even speak to.

So when you have smart, savvy, intelligent people like that who behave like smarmy, uptight, incredulous assholes, it creates a culture or smarmy, uptight, incredulous fans. Read the replies to any tweet or the comments section of any article these guys write, and you will see an army of wannabees goosestepping in badly done amatuer smarm. You aren't on Sheehan's level, people. Not many are.

Sounds exactly like the FootballOutsiders.

[Warner2BruceTD]

Keep in mind that i'm a guy who likes stats and considers himself a SABR NERD. On this site, we have people like gob who make me look like Jim Leyland, but I post in other places where i'm the gob.

It just seems to me, that when certain ideas gain acceptance, the SABP crowd can't just chalk up a win, they have to move the goalpost. Dusty Baker of all people was sending runners instead of bunting last night in extra innings. Guys, when we win one, win it gracefully and let it go.

[Villain]

Part of the problem too, is that the writers who are firmly on the SABR side of things are incredible douche bags. While the content of what they write is often times superb, the Calcaterra's, Law's, & Sheehan's are not people anybody would ever want to hang out with and watch a game. Or just plain hang out with. Or even speak to.

So when you have smart, savvy, intelligent people like that who behave like smarmy, uptight, incredulous assholes, it creates a culture or smarmy, uptight, incredulous fans. Read the replies to any tweet or the comments section of any article these guys write, and you will see an army of wannabees goosestepping in badly done amatuer smarm. You aren't on Sheehan's level, people. Not many are.

YES! THANK YOU!

[Villain]

Keep in mind that i'm a guy who likes stats and considers himself a SABR NERD. On this site, we have people like gob who make me look like Jim Leyland, but I post in other places where i'm the gob.

It just seems to me, that when certain ideas gain acceptance, the SABP crowd can't just chalk up a win, they have to move the goalpost. Dusty Baker of all people was sending runners instead of bunting last night in extra innings. Guys, when we win one, win it gracefully and let it go.

The first step is admitting you have a problem.

[FedEx227]

Using a bunt to sacrifice a guy to third however is MUCH MUCH better than attempting to steal third though in my opinion

Absolutely. Numbers bear that out a ton as well. Here's the linear weights on it:

Stealing Third - 0 Outs: 0.32 Runs Expected
Stealing Third - 1 Outs: 0.38 Runs Expected
Stealing Third - 2 Outs: 0.05 Runs Expected

Caught Stealing Third - 0 Outs: N/A (?)
Caught Stealing Third - 1 Outs: -0.6 Runs Expected
Caught Stealing Third - 2 Outs: -0.34 Runs Expected

Bunting Man to Third - 0 Outs: -0.02 Runs Expected
Bunting Man to Third - 1 Outs: -0.16 Runs Expected

FWIW this is 1999-2002 Linear Weights that are readily available via Tom Tango.

[FedEx227]

I'm not sure where I'd classify myself, maybe you guys can say. I was one of the first guys on VSN to really preach SABR stats and I got a ton of shit from it as a result of Lefty being around as well. Even though he probably won't admit it NAHSTE was one of the guys on my ass about it.

As it's evolved, I've taken a bit of a step back, I still follow it, read tons and am still a huge SABR guy but spend less time defending it because it's become more well received. I get Warner's gripe, there are a lot of guys that are total dicks about it and they don't need to be.

Basically it's this: do you want to have more information about the game you love or not? That's how I look at it. I'm not going to grill a guy for stealing bases or sac bunting, but I will point out what benefits of one versus the other using the information we have at hand.

I've found more enjoyment in recent years and less of the aggregate stats and more interest in the Pitch F/X data: looking at a guys spray chart, what he's doing on certain pitchers, what the pitcher is throwing, where, how often, etc. I find that way more fascinating these days than a simple "What's his xFIP?!"

What I will say though: teams are getting it. Teams understand you can't continue "ignoring" this glut of information. Defense has had the largest impact, it's not statistics (yet) but spray charts and that information have helped create a rise in shifts and a rise in defensive adjustments throughout the game which is really cool. There will always and always has to be a blend. The best way IMO to treat statistics is to look and see if what you see matches up with what the statistics or information are giving you. Gee, Adam Dunn sure looks like he's swinging at everything these days. Looks up stat, he's swinging at 75% more first pitches then he did at any point in his career. That's the just that's really cool to me.

I think, of course, that sac bunting and stolen bases (in most cases) are pretty stupid strategies overall but given the right guys (see: Trout, Mike 2012) stolen bases are a valuable way to increase your scoring chances provided you are confident in their ability to do it successfully. Teams or managers that continue to defy the information that's readily available to them deserve some laughter and finger pointing, but certainly not scorn.

[FirstTimer]

Part of the problem too, is that the writers who are firmly on the SABR side of things are incredible douche bags. While the content of what they write is often times superb, the Calcaterra's, Law's, & Sheehan's are not people anybody would ever want to hang out with and watch a game. Or just plain hang out with. Or even speak to.

So when you have smart, savvy, intelligent people like that who behave like smarmy, uptight, incredulous assholes, it creates a culture or smarmy, uptight, incredulous fans. Read the replies to any tweet or the comments section of any article these guys write, and you will see an army of wannabees goosestepping in badly done amatuer smarm. You aren't on Sheehan's level, people. Not many are.

I think you've also somewhat stumbled on the reason why VSN is dying.

[FirstTimer]

I think in general, SABR thought has done more good than harm, but by the same token SABR thinking has the same irrationality as the "unwritten rules" of baseball. It seemed that in the mid-70's to mid-80's, many of the successful teams stole bases. They would rattle the opposing pitcher, force bad throws, etc. So while I couldn't really pinpoint the exact value of a stolen base, I knew it had to have SOME value, or else teams wouldn't be successful doing it. For the SABR people to think otherwise is nonsense, really. I would guess that there is no strict value to the stolen base...it changes over time. If pitching is dominant, then I would think that stolen bases are somewhat important. If your #7 hitter is hitting 50 HRs in the steroid era, then stolen bases would be less important.

I can go either way. As with most things, it depends on many variables. Who is running, who is batting, who is pitching, score, inning, weather, etc etc etc.

That's another issue I have with robotic analysis. Game situation is something we're supposed to toss aside these days.

This has always been my issue with militant SABR heads. They seem to want to ignore situational realities and just deal up in the cloud of data. I'm not saying to ignore the data entirely...use it as a tool, but you also can't ignore the reality and the situation on the field either.

[NAHSTE]

You totally misunderstood the SABR stance on stealing, so it's not even worth refuting. And OPS is awful math, and having the goobs on FOX explain it to me every Saturday like I'm 4 years old makes me want to murder my brain.