Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

[batmagadanleadoff]

when you put it in the game situation, you're still ascribing it to "worth X runs which equals Y wins", just with a more narrow focus.

Yeah. I didnt get that either. Runs scored and wins correlate positively and very powerfully. The circumstances in which runs are scored are irrelevant to this.

[Edgy MD]

Well, I'm saying that X and Y do not have a constant value.

The assumption, when constructing bottom-line stats like WAR, is often that homers happen when they happen, so there is no point in distinguishing between a homer hit when up 10 in the eighth inning batting against a position player forced into service on the mound (of infinitesimal value in the great scheme of things) and a homer hit when down three with the bases loaded in the bottom of the ninth batting against Kenley Jansen to close (of supreme value). The notion is that the situation in which you hit the ball is a random roll of the dice. One could argue with that, but I understand why that's the way WAR is built. In bWAR and in fWAR, a homer is worth approximately two runs (X ≈ 2), no matter how many were on when you actually hit it, no matter what the game situation.

But it's different in stealing. Virtually nobody would steal up 10 in the eighth. But if you're the winning run trying to get into scoring position in the ninth — the very difference maker — the temptation to run is higher. There's a wicked closer on the mound who your matter has virtually no chance of squaring up for extra bases, but maybe they can squeak one through the infield and you can score from second. These are the factors that more typically occur around stealing.

Steals and steal attempts are not randomly distributed across all game situations.

So the difference between adding .31 runs (or whatever) by stealing second and losing .57 runs (or whatever) by being caught should not be measured against all situations for a strategy that is mostly deployed in a narrower range of situations. The game situation matters, and the difference between a runner on first and a runner on second is vastly different and the strategy selected defers to that. When stealing, the difference between a runner on second and a runner on first is typically more valuable than its general difference. And of course, the difference between a runner on first and a runner out has a different value.

Sense? Does that make any?

[batmagadanleadoff]

But it's different in stealing. Virtually nobody would steal up 10 in the eighth. But if you're the winning run trying to get into scoring position in the ninth — the very difference maker — the temptation to run is higher. There's a wicked closer on the mound who your matter has virtually no chance of squaring up for extra bases, but maybe they can squeak one through the infield and you can score from second. These are the factors that more typically occur around stealing.

Steals and steal attempts are not randomly distributed across all game situations.

The break even rate for base stealing is a direct function of run expectancy. And run expectancy has nothing to do with whether a team is up by a dozen runs or down by one.

[Edgy MD]

But the relative value of a run does. And the relative value of an out.

Please feel free to cite any studies or formulas you are referring to.

[metsmarathon]

M.e.t.b.o.t. would tell you that the value of an out or a run or even a base can be situationally valued in terms of the probability of winning the game.

The probability of a base turning into a run is derived from the run expectancies.

You could argue that run expectancies change given the expected performance of the players in question, sure, but in a macro sense they can be readily determined.

I feel like you’re both mostly arguing about the same thing here.

I would say too that edgy, maybe you could provide some data and formulas that show that the risk of stealing a base against a wicked good closer is somehow greater, when it may be true that that unicorn base runner himself has higher value because of how unlikely he was to get on base in the first place and erasing him in an unsuccessful base steal attempt has a terribly detrimental effect on the outcome of the game.

[Edgy MD]

I'm not actually offering a thesis, but expressing dubiousness toward one.

With regard to your post above, however, I would actually propose that the risk of stealing against a wicked good closer in a wicked high leverage spot is, if anything, less, not more. The impact of the run expectancy difference is filtered through the reality that the potential first run may be far more valuable relative to the potential second run than it is in a more general situation. We intuitively know this, which is why we call stealing and related maneuvers "one-run strategies."

Though I certainly don't think the matter is closed.

[batmagadanleadoff]

But the relative value of a run does. And the relative value of an out.

Break-even rates are averages. Of course, a player should always consider the context when attempting a steal. And the catcher. Mike Piazza wasn't a bad defensive catcher but he couldn't throw his mother out on a stolen base attempt. And a base-runner twice as fast as Terrance Long should attempt a steal every single time he's on first base and second base is unoccupied. Also, any runner on first base should always attempt a steal of second base if the pitcher has a heart attack on the field and drops to the ground in cardiac arrest, so long as time-out isn't called. But none of this should impact the break-even rate. A runner caught stealing hurts his team just the same whether the pitcher on the mound had a heart attack or not.

As mentioned, there are separate break-even rates for when a team needs only one run to win a tie game. And it's understood that break-even should drop in the later innings of close games. Stolen bases are more valuable the closer the game is. That's because failed attempts tend to wreck a team's chances of having a big inning and very often, the winning team will score more runs in one inning than the losing team will score in nine innings.


But you can say this for every stat. A player doesn't get an extra boost to his BA or SLG or OPS or OBP just because his HR was a decisive come from behind walk-off HR. In the stats, that HR registers the same as a HR hit at the tail end of a blow-out win.

Break-even rates are based on run expectancy tables. And that, to some degree, is a limit. But no stat is perfect. A stat only measures what it measures A player's HR totals don't reflect how many doubles he hit.

[Edgy MD]

But you can say this for every stat. A player doesn't get an extra boost to his BA or SLG or OPS or OBP just because his HR was a decisive come from behind walk-off HR. In the stats, that HR registers the same as a HR hit at the tail end of a blow-out win.

As noted above, stolen base attempts differ from homeruns because they are more targeted to game situations. Judging their utility by the average value of the difference between a on runner second vs. a runner on first doesn't really represent when and how they occur. This is true moreso with stolen bases than with most other offensive stats.

I wouldn't propose inflating a hitter's slugging percentage if his homeruns were all in high leverage situations, but I might be open to the idea that his slugging percentage is further from the bottom line on the ultimate value of his performance than another guy's.

[Edgy MD]

Are you ready for the storm?

Brandon Nimmo meets press to discuss his long-term contract with Mets, but is more inclined to talk about the weather.



Scott Boras joins the show, with cameos from from Chelsea Nimmo and Angela Showalter.

Buck is great, because no matter how anodyne the words being spoken into the mic are, Buck sits there with a face that says, "Am I really hearing what I'm hearing?"

[metirish]

https://greaterlongisland.com/video-tou ... land-home/

New spread for Brandon and family

[A Boy Named Seo]

Great find, I love shit like this. I don't what Nimmo and his family's style is, but I suspect they won't be trying to buy all the staging furniture. Maybe they won't end up with a rope-lined wagon wheel in the house, but maybe they will?

I bet he told his agent "anything ranch-style" but ranch-style apparently looks hella different in the east.

[Edgy MD]

Yeah, four or five spacious colonials smashed together apparently equals "ranch" in Wantagh.

[metsmarathon]

needs more pixellated artwork

[metirish]

Brandon might have lots of time to enjoy his new spread