from Amazon
Sunday, April 17, 2011
Fielder’s choice, SB and CS
In the second inning of the Jays Sox game, the Jays had a runner on 1B and 3B with 2 outs. The runner from 1B took off for second, but stopped halfway. The catcher didn’t look at the runner on 3B and threw to 2B. The runner from 3B scored easily. They then got the runner between 1B and 2B in a rundown. The “official” (not to be confused with correct) call on the play was a fielder’s choice for the run scoring and a CS for the out.
The run expectancy in this situation was 0.530 runs. If you end up with second and third, it goes up to 0.626, or a gain of almost 0.1 runs. On an out, it goes down .53 runs. The breakeven point is .53 / (.53+.096) = 85%. That’s the kind of breakeven point you get on “defensive indifference”. That is, the only players who steal when the breakeven is 85% is those players who really think they are going to be safe, or they think the defense won’t even try. The runner intentionally stopped halfway to draw the throw. This was not a “stolen base attempt”, not matter how you want to fit the square peg in the round hole.
When the season is over, all we are going to know about Juan Rivera is that he was CS. Instead, he should be given a big plus for being the catalyst on a run-scoring play. He was part of a play that gained +.47 runs for his team. In no way can you give +.715 runs to Aaron Hill for a “fielder’s choice”, and -.245 to Rivera for the “CS”.
And it’s not like this is an unusual play. Drawing a throw to 2B in the hope of giving the runner on 3B a chance to score is something that the offense and defense is both aware of. How the defense responds, and how the offense plays it out is part of the game.
FC and CS are a terrible way to reduce what actually happened on this play. And don’t say “Well, how else?”. C’mon dude. You create the necessary category to capture this play.
Recent comments
Older comments
Page 1 of 344 pages 1 2 3 > Last »Complete Archive – By Category
Complete Archive – By Date