The Art of Stealing Bases

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/ar...articleid=2607


"A runner on first with no one out is worth .9116 runs. A successful steal of second base with no one out would bump that to 1.1811 runs, a gain of .2695 expected runs. If that runner is caught, however, the expectation--now with one out and no one on base--drops to .2783, a loss of .6333 expected runs. That loss is about 2.3 times the gain.

Not all steals come with a runner on first and no one out, of course, and there's a lot of math that goes into the 75% conclusion. Michael Wolverton covers the concept in this excellent piece. The main point is that in considering stealing bases, you have to consider both the benefit and the cost. In all but the most specific situations, outs are more valuable than bases, which is why the break-even point for successful base-stealing is so high. "

that number seems appropriate for people who only convert 50% of the time.. @ 75% it seems like it should be half of that.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

that number seems appropriate for people who only convert 50% of the time.. @ 75% it seems like it should be half of that.

It has nothing to do with the runner, just the avg run expectation between no outs and a runner on versus one out and no runner on

[dalakhani]

Interesting stuff guys.

I really dont have anything to add although I do have a question. Does anyone have the stats on double steals of second and third?

[SniperSB23]

If you are an 85% base stealer your expected runs from attempting a steal is (0.85*1.1811) + (0.15*0.2783) which equals 1.04568 runs which is considerable higher than 0.9116 runs if you don't attempt a steal. Even at 75% it would be .9554 expected runs. At 70% they are equal. So basically if you have a 70% chance of stealing you won't help or hurt your team in the long run. Having more than a 70% chance will help your team, less than 70% will hurt your team. Yet there are a considerable amount of players well over 75% that should be running more.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

If you are an 85% base stealer your expected runs from attempting a steal is (0.85*1.1811) + (0.15*0.2783) which equals 1.04568 runs which is considerable higher than 0.9116 runs if you don't attempt a steal. Even at 75% it would be .9554 expected runs. At 70% they are equal. So basically if you have a 70% chance of stealing you won't help or hurt your team in the long run. Having more than a 70% chance will help your team, less than 70% will hurt your team. Yet there are a considerable amount of players well over 75% that should be running more.

Your math is not valid

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Your math is not valid

How do you possibly come to that conclusion? It's 100% valid. It's a simple calculation of expected value.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

How do you possibly come to that conclusion? It's 100% valid. It's a simple calculation of expected value.

You are only using the no out scenario and there are three scenarios that are in play in your sb%.

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

You are only using the no out scenario and there are three scenarios that are in play in your sb%.

(0.85*1.1811) + (0.15*0.2783)

That is the 85% chance of the steal plus the 15% chance of getting out. In the 85% chance the steal is successful your expected values of runs is 1.1811. In the 15% chance the steal is successful your expected value of runs is 0.2783. It factors in both possibilities if you attempt a steal.

For a 75% base stealer:

(0.75*1.1811) + (0.25*0.2783)

The break even point is the 70% base stealer;

(0.70*1.1811) + (0.30*0.2783)

That equals .91026 which is almost identical to the .9116 expected runs if you don't attempt the steal.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Your math is not valid

Why not?

the paragraph you posted before is implying a 50% success rate.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

Why not?

the paragraph you posted before is implying a 50% success rate.

No there is no implication of anything. There is no indication of HOW the runners got to the bases, just their chance of scoring under different scenarios.