Because of intentional walks. Let's take Slugging Percentage for example. The purpose for the metric is to give a number to how well a player hits the ball (an indicator of hitting strength). For this particular metric, including walks doesn't provide insight to the characteristic we're actually trying to measure. If we use Plate Appearances instead of At-Bats, then we're including data (with walks) that has nothing to do with what we're objectively attempting to measure. Especially with intentional walks, where the vast majority of the time it's the particular in-game situation that your team is in that influences whether you get walked, so you would get charged with a plate appearance but don't get to add a base with it. Even if we say that a walk equals a single, there's no guarantee that the player's bat would have gotten a single base if the situation were different. They could have gotten out, or may have been able to hit a double, triple, or home run. TL;DR: Some stats objectively try to isolate a single particular characteristic, and including walks and plate appearances doesn't help with that measure.
@@TangoWolf09 Right, that makes sense now you lay it out. I think I could've been more specific in saying 'why would any statistic used to generally evaluate a player's performance in the box want to ignore walks?', like yeah you're saying IBBs but non-intentional BBs are vastly more common anyway, and it's not like all IBBs are unrelated to that player's performance. As a Mariners fan so I do also understand that sometimes a walk is worse than a single because if you only had a runner on second and/or third, a walk does nothing for them, whereas a ball in play might. I watched my team do it 123 times last year and it sucked every time, but a walk's gotta be worth something and not including it in things like BA, SLG and therefore OPS misses a hell of a lot of information about whether or not the player is actually productive.
@@TangoWolf09 Well explained. I think pitchers walk a batter for two broad reasons. One is because this batter is too good and a walk is safer than a possible double or driving the man on second home. Those are walks because the batter is good, and should count for the batter. The other walk is a tactical one, say there's 2 outs and walking the batter makes an out more likely on the next at bat. That sort of defensive walk should not count toward the batter, as they are just a pawn in the opponent's strategy.
I love it. You have a really good functional understanding of what it means to be a valuable hitter. You could easily argue those are the 10 best hitters in baseball right now.
If you're going to include SB and CS, what about outs by pick-off? Extra bases taken? Getting out on the bases in a non-force play? Base running is so much more than SB and CS. Also consider hitting into a double play as -1 and a triple play as -2 in the numerator.
The double play and triple play should be easy to add and I’ll probably do that moving forward. I did think of the extra bases taken, but unfortunately when I calculate this I just import the stat line from fangraphs and to get the numbers for extra bases taken and stuff I would have to pull from different places and write it in for each player individually. So hopefully if I get the technical capability moving forward I can utilize the more advanced stats like extra bases taken. And hopefully I’d also be able to distinguish if a runner is caught stealing 2nd or 3rd and stuff like that as well. But if I want this to be a stat that can be utilized in like highschool in just like an auto calculated game changer app, the advanced stats would have to be left out.
Only getting a single vs a double is not the same as getting a double and then a caught stealing. Both created a numerator contribution of one, but one also created an out.
What if we also looked at teammate bases advanced in other situations, not just sacrifice plays? A sac fly that advances two runners is good value, but even better is hitting a single that scores one of them and puts the other on second or third. So a double with a man on first is not +2 bases, it's +4 now. That way, sac plays don't get unfairly weighted and you don't need any fancy correction factor for how many "bases" an out is worth. This makes Bases Created more intuitive as well, and doesn't abandon the singular focus on bases. e.g. Bases-empty single: +1 Single with a man on first: +2/+3 Sac fly with a man on first: +1 Grand slam: +10 Sac fly with runners on first and second: +2 Single followed by a steal: +2 Of course this is a very inconsistent stat now since it's not situationally agnostic, but we already crossed that line in choosing to count sac plays so we either need to abandon that concept or go all in and make it a situationally weighted stat and accept all the baggage associated with that.
The core principle of adding the sac fly is not so much to track the total movement a hitter provides (that’s a potential different stat “movement per pa”) The reason I add sac flies is it is a player purposely doing something and upon success there is no statistical reward. And I’m trying to reward the achievement of an objective. You are trying to hit a line drive base hit, you get that base, but when you are trying to hit a deep fly ball, that success never goes into most stats, but I just want to count that as a successful PA from a percentage stand point.
@@BHRogertit is looking at costs. Every plate appearance that doesn't produce a base is basically an out. But if you produce a base and also generate and out, the outcome is still a base.
Yea, it feels like creating a base without taking an out (like a single) and creating a base while taking an out (sac fly) should not be scored the same, somehow the number of outs needs to be factored in
I would say use a basic stat, and an advanced stat that would deduct value if caught stealing, along with other deductions like picked off, double plays, baserunning errors etc. Other additions to value could be extra base taken, fielders choice etc. Love the video! Looking forward to many more
I've always thought that runs allowed by relief pitchers should be assessed to both reliever and starter. For example, if starter departs with runner on first and reliever allows the run to score, reliever should be charged with .75 run and starter .25 run. Another stat that should get more attention is the % of runners on base that a batter actual drives in.
good video, only question I have is did you include "productive outs" in bases created? Ie RBI groundout as an example. If not, that would be a good tweak to make. Otherwise, great stuff!
yeah, i've been calculating OPS+SB for my own casual use for about a year and a half now - a single and a stolen base equals 2 Bases, a single and an out equals... an out, and no Bases. This seems right up that alley, but better. However, I think keeping the denominator the same as OPS (lol!) is important just for comparative purposes.
I’ve been thinking along these lines for quite a while. I’d love to see this included on baseball-reference. BRry Bonds’ numbers would be stratospheric!
only thing that came up for me a few times was single + stolen base feels less valuable than a double because of the time the batter actually spends at first. But batters losing a whole base for getting caught stealing feels way harsher than any leeway they gain from it so I wouldn't advocate changing it. Thank!!! Fun video
A good start. Consider further detailed attribution and/or the “present value of a base created” where time is measured in pitches. That is the difference between a double and a 1b+stl. This gets quite complicated and you can probably go at it from a few different angles, but you should consider it if you haven’t already. If the next hitter deliberately takes the first pitch so his teammate can steal a base then that batter may start in a 0-1 count. If the current better is handicapping himself so that his teammate can be credited with a base created then he deserves some sort of attribution. Perhaps he’s better at hitting while behind in the count. also, you aren’t considering bat control type plays. Say a runner on second with 0 out and the righty at the plate grounds into a fielder choice behind the runner to the 2nd basemen. put out 4-3. This essentially serves as a sac bunt with the added chance that the hitter finds the hole between 3 and 4 but it goes into the scorebook as an AB and PA but no credit for the base created. I’m not saying I have the answers. The attribution is very complicated.
A) One home run and three outs does NOT generate as many runs for a team as 4 singles B) a steal gives you one base. A bases-empty walk gives you one base. But a walk with men on 1st and 4rd gives you 2, and a single generates 3 or 4 bases.
Yes, but 4 singles could result in 4 runs or 0 runs which is why I left it to bases created not runs created. Factoring in the movement of your teammates on the base path kinda rewards players just for being on good teams so I’d like to limit that here. But I am thinking of making another stat that tracks that but I need to figure out a way to level the playing field based on some guys coming up to bat with runners on base less often.
I like the idea of hitting into a double play as being a -2 on the numerator. Future videos should explore that and also how this start applies historically. Does it quantify something that baseball guys all "knew" but the stats didn't show?
For full impact, you will also need to add bases taken by base runners ahead of the battery in question. Using your example, a single and a walk only counts the same as a double if nobody is on base. That's not scoring someone already on first, but a double probably is. The runner already on takes an extra base, which should carry weight.
Hey I love the stat, great video!! If you ever decide to expand on it, have you thought about applying weights via base-out states? (Such as how stealing third with 2 out isn’t as valuable as a leadoff walk or single, or how a two-out rbi double is more valuable than a rbi double with no out)
I have thought about that, but the struggle with weighting things is I would like this stat to be transferable at all levels of baseball, and probabilities are very different at each level. Just getting on base in high school is much more valuable than it is in the MLB. And I don’t want to reward a hitter for external circumstances, because that’s also punishing other players for their circumstances. That’s good for figuring actual value, but when looking at the skill of a player, you have to put their at bats in a vacuum and understand the situation isn’t in their control.
This. This is the kinda stuff that makes baseball the greatest sport. Great video! I really enjoyed the background development. Honestly, it sounds very reasonable, and I think has the potential to be a real, tracked stat. Sounds like peak Billy Beane’s Moneyball kinda stat. I totally agree that steals and walks should be included, as a player is ABSOLUTELY benefiting the team offensively. Again, great video. This is the first video of yours that I’ve seen, but definitely won’t be the last; just smashed the subscribe button.
Thomas Boswell introduced a comparable, and more accessible stat in Total Average, in the early '80s. Essentially measuring 'Bases' versus 'Outs'. It was probably better received at that time because base stealing (and running) were a big part of the game ...
If you're going to count a sacrifice as a base created (you not reaching base while a teammate advances or advances to score), then you're kind of opening the door to having to count extra bases created for situations like getting a single and your teammate advancing from 1st to 3rd, or 2nd to Home...
Sacrifices are interesting, because it creates a base for another runner and not for the batter. So what about a sacrifice that advances 2 runners? Does that add 2 in the numerator? I can imagine an extension of this where the numerator includes the number of bases advanced by other baserunners due to that plate appearance. It would be similar to RBI, but counting all of the bases advanced by runners as a result of the plate appearance, not just the number reaching home. Examples: 1. Hit a single with runners on 1st and 2nd. Runners each advance two bases. +5 to the numerator. 2. Walk with bases loaded: +4 (this could be interesting for guys who get a lot of intentional walks). 3. Sac fly with two on, and both safely advance one base: +2. Thoughts? I think this approach could be be kinda useful to measure the offensive impact of each player.
Yes, but that rewards hitters on good offenses. The core principle of adding the sac fly is not so much to track the total movement a hitter provides (that’s a potential different stat “movement per pa”) The reason I add sac flies is it is a player purposely doing something and upon success there is no statistical reward. And I’m trying to reward the achievement of an objective. You are trying to hit a line drive base hit, you get that base, but when you are trying to hit a deep fly ball, that success never goes into most stats, but I just want to could that as a successful PA from a percentage stand point.
I have actually in my head been theorizing almost the exact same idea as you for a stat. I strongly disagree with having sac flies/bunts as equal value to a single, for a few different reasons. A) If a player hits a ground ball with a runner on 1st but the defense only goes for the out at 1st instead of 2nd, then that's just considered an out by statistics instead of a sacrifice hit, despite having the exact same outcome. B) Getting a single is clearly a more favorable outcome than getting a sac fly/bunt, as there are fewer outs, and it's possible for runners to advance more than 1 base. C) Sac flies/bunts are dependent on players besides yourself, so your stat is heavily affected by what your teammates do, which makes the stat less informative (like RBIs and Wins). Another couple of things unrelated to that: I kind of like the idea of extra bases taken running being included, but it goes against my last point that teammates' gameplay shouldn't affect the stat, so I don't think it should be included. I'd be interested to see the stat if reaching base on error was included in your favor, as I have always theorized that a faster runner will pressure fielders into errors more often, but I don't know if that's actually supported by any data. As others have said, if possible, being caught trying to steal 3rd should cause you to go -2 instead of -1, but I understand that it would be difficult to implement
The fact this channel has less than 100 subs yet is making content that clearly has so much effort put into it is criminal. There are channels with 50,000 subs that put less effort
Cool stat, but a few things Id like to mention: - Create a stat with Total Bases created / Outs created. This is because Singles>Sac flies/bunts. A single is 1 base and 0 outs, while a sacrifice is 1 base and 1 out. Etc. - Caught stealing should be worth like, -3 outs. I heard that CS is worth -3x the run value of a SB. - I do think this would be much better considering outs created as well, because that considers double plays and weights things better
Great video! This has probably been mentioned in one of the 200+ comments already; but, if you're caught stealing following a double, then you've erased more than one base. And the same would apply for a triple and then getting caught attempting to steal home (or perhaps caught at home after tagging up). Those events happen so infrequently, it probably won't affect your calculation significantly; but, I thought I'd throw it out there. Similarly, if you're caught stealing third (after successfully stealing second), then you've erased your hit and successful steal (2 bases).
Yeah, I’d love to implement that, but I need to figure out how to track it. Like I need a separate number for CS3rd vs CS2nd whereas now we basically just have CS all lumped together in one number.
I like this concept but it could definitely use some work, have you thought ab using the RE24 chart instead of simply bases? This would eliminate a few of the issues I have with the formula. First, there should be some context in regards to how many outs there are when a player performs one of these actions. For example, using Fangraphs RE24 chart, if a player leads off an inning with a walk, then the next two batters strike out, and he is caught stealing to end the inning, these two actions are not equal in terms of run expectancy, and shouldn't be treated as such. Second, the biggest issue I have is that sacrifice bunts count TOWARDS the hitter. If the sac bunt results in a run this makes sense, but in any other scenario, trading an out for an extra base results in decreased run expectancy, and probably shouldn't be rewarded
Yeah, I’d need a way to figure out the situation of each caught stealing. Which would make this pretty easy to do if the stat were calculated live in a scorebook situation. When I calculate it I just import the stat line into excel but the general stat lines don’t give me those numbers so I need to figure out how to bring together numbers from different places without having to type it out individually for each player.
If I ever get the ability to track this stat in live time as games are going on (like a game changer app calculating it automatically) I could add cool stuff like that in.
So would this be interpreted (in Aaron Judge's case) as an ~80% chance of creating a base every time he has a plate appearance? That is damn valuable to know an honestly gives a better idea of their ability to impact the offense than an OPS+ stat.
I think 80% chance of creating a base makes it sound like he gets on base 80% of the time, and obviously he gets out more than 20% of the time. I would try to say it in a way that he’s getting 8/10ths of a base on average.
For the cs, make sure that it subtracts the total bases created at that plate appearance instead of just a flat 1. So if they get a double then get caught it shout subtracts 2.
@@the3rdout996 Ahh, I wasn't sure what population you were pulling your stats from. Probably not possible to factor in cs after a double, unless you developed a subset of new states that count cs after double, or triple. Since its not explicitly kept, you would have to go through a play by play for every game that had a cs and note if it was after the player hit a double. or triple. Its probably not worth the effort unless you already have a play-by-play data set for every game in a season.
Should you add advancing runners to your stat too? Starting with a runner on first an end result of runners on first and second or me out and the runner on second are weighted the same. Seems like it should either count the former as higher or the latter as lower.
I think I’m going to do that as a separate stat. (Movement created) the issue is this really starts to reward players for just having more at bats with runners on base. Which is unfair to hitter who simply have less opportunity. The reason I included sac’s the same as a single, is the hitter is setting aside their objective to take on a different goal for the good of the team. (I could try to hit a line drive or I could try to hit a deep fly ball) so I think to give a hitter anything less than the equivalent of a single feels like a punishment for doing something for the good of the team.
You should find a way to add additional bases taken on the basepaths. For example going first to third on a single soul also be an additional base created
I agree. I need a way to pull a bases taken number from like baseball savant and put it with the standard numbers I get from fangraphs without having to type it out for every single player.
In the end. How does that final player list differ than what is expected from other stats. If it doesn’t highlight stuff we do t already know, then what’s the point?
It moves players who run the bases well like Bobby Witt, Tommy Edman, and makes them more comparable to other sluggers. It also helps out players with good on base percentages and moves them up over other players.
I have. But a lot of my statistic ideas along those lines will require me to get in game tracking ability, whereas this I can just pull from a stat sheet.
I haven’t really thought about that, and I’m not really sure what fangraphs has to offer. I normally look at baseball savant for defensive numbers. I’ll look into it.
Bases created is being treated here as an analysis stat but is in reality a counting stat. Things like a sac fly that moves more than 1 runner should count for that many bases, but it might not be possible to add that in as an equation. If you have the time or resources it would be good to see more of a bean counting approach. Even something like a single that moves a player from first to third would be more than just 1 base created
I’m trying to figure out a way to do that, but I think it’s going to be a separate stat. Like “movement created” the big struggle is trying to find a way to make it even for players who simply come up to bat with less runners on base, who’d get punished just for having bad hitters around them. I included the sacs though because otherwise the hitter gets no statistical credit for accomplishing what they were attempting to do. If you hit a single and move a runner from first to third you’re already getting the credit for hitting the single, so adding on more credit start to border on giving advantages to just being on a good offenses.
How would you count a player hitting a single, and moving a runner to 3rd, but then a double steal is initiated where the player on 3rd scores but the runner on 1st is caught stealing?
I don’t really want to count to much of moving runners around the base path because then we really start to reward players just for being on good teams with runners on base more often. (Sac’s are a little different because they’re completing their objective and would otherwise get no statistical reward, they could have tried to hit a line drive for a hit but decided to hit a deep fly ball instead). Double steal, the runner who gets out get’s penalized for being the weak link, the runner who was safe get’s rewarded for not messing it up.
i'd be interested to hear what you think should be done in the case of interferences and errors - if you get on base via catcher's interference, should that be added to your total? anyway, i remember jon bois making up bases conquered for a video (TB + SB / AB), and this feels like a more in-depth version of that and i think it could actually be useful
I think a walk and stuff like that is the hitter working to success. And I think a error or interference is a failure by the hitter that he only received benefit because of a unusual mistake by the defense, so I don’t want to give a hitter a reward for someone making a uncommon mistake if that makes sense.
Am I correct in assuming you’re leaving RBIs or runners advanced out of the stat? As I think about it that’s a bit easier because then you wouldn’t have to dig into each PA to see who if anyone was on base ahead of the hitter and whether the runner scored or got stopped at third or got out on a fielder’s choice.
Yeah, and that would also kinda reward players on good offensive teams if I included runners advanced. I think that will be the next stat I create though “movement created” and it’ll measure how much you move everyone around the bases, but yeah, tracking would be difficult and I need to find a way to even it by opportunity (meaning hitters who just have more AB’s with guys on base don’t have extra benefit)
There seems to still be some stuff missing. As mentioned elsewhere, GIDP should count as a minus one, as you've eliminated a base. What about non sacrifice base advancement? Grounding out to the second baseman to advance a runner on second to third isn't a sacrifice, but is a base created. Base running mistakes needs to be also figured in, as getting a double, but being thrown out at third certainly doesn't help your team. What about induced errors? Stealing second and taking third on a throwing error needs to count. I'm sure I am missing some other cases also.
One thing that would add to this statistic would be to consider the bases created by advancing other players. A double advances other players more than a single and steal does. Oh, yes, double plays, as well. I don't think you mentioned that, but that would erase another runner.
Aren't you completely ignoring every other baserunner? If a sacrifice adds a base (due to ANOTHER baserunner advancing) how is a single with a runner on not worth (at least) an additional base than a single with no one on? Either the other baserunners advancing are included in the number of bases or they're not. But you seem to only include them in sacrifice situations.
I like it, but I need there to be an existing number that I can take from fangraphs or baseball reference to put in the calculation. So until I get the capability to auto calculate this as the game is being played, I don’t think I can do that really.
Is hitting into a fielders choice essentially a net zero? The hitter has created one base for themselves but caused another base to be taken from the runner that got out.
Essentially they’re just replacing the runner further back on the base path and added an out. Which is essentially the same as striking out to begin with. So 0/1
Don't most modern stats exclude sacs because they're not really under your control? If you hit behind a good hitter/fast runner you have a lot more sac opportunity than someone who hits after a terrible hitter. I agree that it feels like sacs should be rewarded somewhat because they're sort of intentional (although in TTO baseball do you really do much different to hit a sac fly than you would to just hit for power? Genuine question, I'm not a player). But I think they should probably be worth very little.
A few years ago (before the statomatic revolution really) I tried to created something I called Run Shares, because I saw stats rewarded getting to 1st, and also the player that made someone advance from 3rd to score, but did little to reward players that moved teammates from 1st to 3rd... So basically, when a run scores we have four shares to assign, one for each stop along the basepaths. Say a player singles, is bunted to second, and then next player hits a double, that's one share for player 1, one share for player 2, two shares for player 3. (And two potential more shares if he scores later). But it needs refining and I didn't have many ones to bounce ideas, so I kinda stopped... What do we do with players advancing thanks to the opponent? (HBP, Error, balk...). Walks are fuzzy. Good job by batter drawing a walk, or pitcher's fault? Intentionals are clearly the pitcher, but regular walks... If a player's single scores a teammate for second, shall we give two shares to the single? So, I think this has potential, but it's rough. What do you think?
I’d said walks are a hitter working a pitcher, but errors are more of a mistake by the defense that the hitter doesn’t really deserve a reward for. (If a hitter has way more errors made when he’s at the plate than someone else, does he deserve a statistical reward for what I would consider luck?) I am looking to do another stat that calculates movement created which will measure more than just the sac’s. The struggle is it will reward hitters just for being on good teams that put more runners on base, so I’m trying to think of ways to even it out. But that’s gonna require in game tracking rather than just looking at a standard stat sheet unfortunately, and that’s what I don’t have the capability for at the moment.
I’ve long thought there should be a stat along these lines, sort of a superior total bases. I’m curious if you feel that this stat gives any further predictive power than eg OPS, since I know one reason most people don’t care to improve on it is that they feel it’s good enough.
I think this is a little more true to a players consistency and actually gives a precise % of bases reached per appearance. I’ve always struggled to understand what an OPS number really means. Like a OPS of 1.00 does not mean that the hitter averages 1 base, it just is a number be so I think that alone makes OPS less predictive.
Interesting idea but i dont like how its weighted. Sac hits is a single with someone on first, with an out included, so they are clearly less valuable than singles. I think maybe .25 for a sac would be good. Caught stealings should be -2 or add to the plate appearance count, since you lost a base, and also lost the chance to do stuff with that base, getting an out where you didnt have one before
also, its shown that doubles arent exactly 2 times as good as singles, which is why woba has those weird values and why ops weirdly works well. good weights are 1 for a walk, 2 for a single, 3 for a double, 4 for a triple and 5 for a home run, it works surprisingly well
I agree but my concern when working in those probabilities is the fact that the value of a double is different from MLB to college to high school, and your probability of scoring from second with 2 outs is different at each level. And ideally I would like this to be a stat that can be used at all levels just by pulling numbers from the stat sheet.
I like it, but I will suggest if you're going to include sacrifices, then you should probably go one big step more and figure out how many collective bases all players obtained through the batter's efforts. For example, a sacrifice with one player moving up a base is less valuable than a sacrifice with two players moving up a base. Similarly a home run with the bases empty is 4 bases, but a home run with the bases full is (1 + 2 + 3 + 4,) 10 bases earned. Same logic goes with hits with runners on base. Now you have a much more accurate measure of "how many bases the batter earned for the team per plate appearance". The challenge of course is that this is more complicated to calculate.
I’m trying to figure out a way to do that, but I think it’s going to be a separate stat. Like “movement created” the big struggle is trying to find a way to make it even for players who simply come up to bat with less runners on base, who’d get punished just for having bad hitters around them. I included the sacs though because otherwise the hitter gets no statistical credit for accomplishing what they were attempting to do. If you hit a single and move a runner from first to third you’re already getting the credit for hitting the single, so adding on more credit start to border on giving advantages to just being on a good offenses.
Interesting. I think if you used total bases as a starting point then added in bases for sacrifices and penalties for getting caught stealing it could work better. That would allow for reaching on an error or going first to home, rewarding speed a lot more than you are now. Good stuff!
I like it. My one hesitancy is an error is an unusual mistake by the defense not necessarily something the hitter wants to be rewarded for. I kinda struggle with if the hitter should get the benefit for not doing what he wanted to do if that makes sense.
@@the3rdout996 most "reached on an error" events have to do with the defender being pressured by speed. I would say forcing a guy to make a bad throw is as much "in the hitter/runners control" as working the count to get a walk or getting caught stealing. Just because it is uncommon doesn't mean it doesn't have value in evaluating offensive performance.
Have you considered using outs as the denominator instead? It would change the meaning a bit, but I think that it's still fundamentallly measuring the same skillset of "how well does this player move themselves around the bases?", just asking "how many good things per bad thing" instead of "how many good things per appearance". Then you fix your problem of SF = 1B and 2B + CS = 1B
But an out isn’t always equal, an out to score a run is not the same as an out with nobody on base. It’s basically a measure of success rate and a sacrifice does add an out, but from a hitters perspective it’s the achievement of the outcome he was going for which should be a success. I think the 2B+CS issue can be solved if I get the ability to just track which base a runner was caught stealing.
That makes sense, but you're saying an out to advance another runner or score a run is better than an out that doesn't, which I agree. So you'd say SF > GO. But using outs in the denominator would still account for that. SF would be n+1/d+1, while GO would be n+0/d+1. You would still value SF > GO, but you'd also value 1B > SF, which currently it is not. Right? Unless you think SF should = 1B. I'm just trying to help discern that difference while preserving everything great about this statistic.
That is just considered an out. I see you want this included because it would be similar to being caught stealing. The runner could have just taken the safe base instead of pushing it. I think the stat captures this anyway.
OPS always felt like a weird stat to evaluate a single player. It's been proven that it's a good team stat but just smashing OPS and slugging seems really lazy. I like rewarding and penalizing for steals and CS, I understand the idea around creating bases per sacrifice and flyout but I feel like that's rewarding a batter for getting out but doesn't reward a batter for advancing a runner while actually getting a hit. Moving a runner with a single is as valuable as a sac fly in your calculations. Other than that I really like it. Subscribing to get more from you.
You should add errors and dropped third strikes, maybe? Also, what if a player reaches first, but gets forced out at second (via ground ball)- would that count like a CS? Or would you still award the batter a 1 for reaching first?
Fielders choice where the a different runner gets out instead of the hitter, you’re just replacing the runner that was on 1st before you and adding a out to the tally, which is a overall bad result. And for the runner who gets thrown out on a ground ball they didn’t hit, it really wasn’t their hit that produced that, so I don’t want to harm the statistic of the runner on first for something bad that the hitter did. Errors and dropped 3rd strikes I do battle with. Because yes they are creating a base, but it’s really a result of a mistake by the defense and not the accomplishment of the hitter. I don’t want someone who randomly hits into more errors to get a statistical advantage over someone that just has the defense do their job more often.
if you are counting sac flies and sac bunts as +1 in the numerator because it moves another runner forward, shouldn't you also count when a batter moves a runner forward but also gets on base themselves? Like a single with a man on third who scores is +2, or a 2 run home run with a man on first is +7 in the numerator? You could also make a weighted version of this where each successive base is worth more because there is a better opportunity to score from 2nd than first.
Agreed -- but if you're giving credit in the numerator for advancing other runners, then those other runners should also affect the denominator. That way you avoid the problem of players on good teams having more other runners to advance!
Yeah, I think sacs are situations where a hitter is willingly trying to do something that might result in him getting out and then getting punished by stats for succeeding. (Essentially trying to hit a fly ball to the outfield rather than going for a hard hit line drive) and so stats punish hitters for that situational mentality. The advancement of other runners are situations where generally the hitter is getting on base himself and thus he’s already getting statistically rewarded. And yeah it would really start to favor teams with lots of offense.
Also I kinda need there to be a stat for me to use that counts how many bases a hitter has moved around the bases. (There might be something but I don’t know what that number would be)
I think that starts to sway things in the advantage of people on good teams who just get to have more at bats with other runners on base. My other reason for wanting sacs and not the other advancements is because a sacrifice is a hitter accomplishing what he was trying to do. He could have tried to hit a line drive base hit but instead he took on another objective of either hitting a deep fly ball or bunt. And those sac’s don’t result in any statistical reward for a hitter. So I’m kinda just trying to count it as a 1/1 mission accomplished. Other time where you hit a single with a runner on first you’re already getting rewarded statistically because of the single itself.
I think another stat for total movement created would be a good thing to calculate how well you move everyone around the bases. I just need to find a way to even it between hitters that have more at bats with teammates on base and players that have less of those opportunities.
Subtracting 1 base for 1 CS is wrong. A SB is advancing 1 base but a CS is losing not just 1 base but a potential run (which is more valuable than 1 base) - so intuitively a CS should be penalized by more than 1 base. This is backed up by the rule of thumb that a success rate of % stealing breaks even at around 75%, meaning you have to be successful at SB more often than getting CS for it to make it worthwhile attempting steals - which means the cost of a CS should be greater than a SB (almost 3x)
Does it make sense to subtract 2 for caught at 2nd, subtract 3 caught at 3rd, subtract 4 caught at home? And what if the CS ends the inning with other runners on base? Lot to unpack with this
I would say -1 stealing 2nd, minus 2 stealing 3rd, -3 stealing home. I kinda want to simplify it to the point where getting caught stealing has the same weight as hitting a ground out from the start🤷♂️ without having to add it to much advanced measurements. I would like this to be something that even middle school book keepers could auto calculate.
wOBA weights things according to a more analytical value. (A double isn’t twice as valuable as a single, so instead of a 2 value for a double it gets 1.27) the issue with this is it’s based on probability of scoring from each base, which is cool for the MLB but probabilities aren’t the same at every level of baseball. Your chances of hitting a double and eventually scoring are much higher in high school baseball than they are in the MLB. I think it’d be cool for my stat to be easily usable and transferable for all levels of play. (That’s the major difference, the other differences are the same as the differences found between my stat and OPS that I kinda described in the video)
I think this stat will make a difference with the players who are around league average and really good at speed or OBP, or really bad at speed or OBP. The guys at the top don’t move because it’s with Soto and Judge who are elite OBP or Ohtani and Witt are great at steeling bases. I’ve started doing a position rankings, and I noticed all the catchers have lower number in this stat than their WRC+ or OPS+. Which makes sense since catchers are generally bad at OBP and speed.
If someone hits a grand slam do they get credit for creating bases for all baserunners? I think they should. That’s 10 bases created for the hitter. If a runner is on first and the batter hits the double but the runner scores then the batter should get 4 BC and the runner 2. If the throw goes into home and lets the batter go to third then who gets credit for that base?
I think I’m going to do that as a separate stat. (Movement created) the issue is this really starts to reward players for just having more at bats with runners on base. Which is unfair to hitter who simply have less opportunity. The reason I included sac’s the same as a single, is the hitter is setting aside their objective to take on a different goal for the good of the team. (I could try to hit a line drive or I could try to hit a deep fly ball) so I think to give a hitter anything less than the equivalent of a single feels like a punishment for doing something for the good of the team.
@@the3rdout996 Understood; sac flies and bunts are much more easily quantified. This was my first year watching baseball in years so I'm out of the loop on what's available in saber metrics or if numbers like "taking an extra base" or "hitting behind runners" type statistics are even available. Yes, it does reward players with runners on base more. Would MC and BC be mutually exclusive, would you give full 90 feet attribution to both the runner and the batter or would you give maybe .5 MC/BC to both the runner and the batter per 90 feet? Even after posting grand slam BC to 10 BC I'm having second thoughts. You could standardize this even further by including defensive bases eliminated/given and fit it into the same formula(s). Hitting into a double play should substract 1 from your numerator.
For caught stealings i think you need to account for which base it is. So if you get caught trying for third, the rinner still has net 1 bases for being on second. A caught stealing should always net 0 bases if I'm following your logic correctly
Yeah, I’m gonna have to find a way to see which base they were trying to steal when caught. Because right now when I import the basic number from the stat page I just get 1 caught stealing number. If I get the ability to track the stat live as games are happening in like a game changer app, I could definitely set it up this way.
Fun video, I enjoyed it. But since you asked for criticism… my biggest issue is that a new state, especially one that ads complexity needs to justify itself. Not just on a theoretical basis (golly, sbs should count for something) but in results. What do we know looking at this stat that we didn’t know looking at existing stats. The stats shows that Judge, Ohtani, Witt, etc are great. Well, duh. My next issue is with treating all bases as equal. We know that getting on first is much more valuable than advancing a base, maybe as much as twice as valuable. That’s not in here. Then I have some minor quibbles with things like how you treat sacrifices. But even if your treatment was perfect, sacrifices fit into the overall criticism of complexity without value.
I am currently working on a video that compares players WRC+, OPS+, and based created plus just to see how much it really does impact players and which players go down the most statistically and which players go up the most statistically.
I think those are more mistakes by the defense then accomplishments by the offensive player, so I am a little hesitant to statistically reward a guy who has more mistakes made around him because it might make him look like a better player than someone who has less mistakes made around them.
Yeah, it would be. And I don’t really have a good answer. I guess the only consolation is even specialists get plate appearances from time to time and they’re still going to get more plate appearances than chances on base so there will at least be something in the denominator. And I guess it just heavily rewards them for being good enough to provide that value to the team. Kinda a loop hole as far as the stat goes though.
@@the3rdout996 Why not just include them being put on to pinch hit as part of the denominator? Like adding that to plate appearances, it would address that case with little to no cost
Yeah, that would work. Unfortunately, I’d need to track the stat live and insert that, or have MLB make some sort of pinch running appearance number. But also, we can’t add something to the denominator in this situation unless there is an attempt to steal. (If we add 1 just for a pinch running appearance and the runner doesn’t even try to steal, they’d be hit with a 0/1) so if the stat were tracked live in like a game changer app or something it could work, but I can’t pull it out of a stat sheet realistically.
@@the3rdout996 "(If we add 1 just for a pinch running appearance and the runner doesn’t even try to steal, they’d be hit with a 0/1)" that makes sense to me, the formula already treats the bases you cover without stealing or batting to be irrelevant. They were put on and did nothing special so a zero is reasonable I do agree that measuring it is an issue that makes the formula change practically impossible even if it would fix the problem.
I would like to but unfortunately I can’t just look at a players stat line and see how many times they got caught stealing at each base. Maybe there’s a place that has that number but I don’t know where it is. In principle yes, I totally agree, and I thought about doing that when I made the stat. I just didn’t have the capability to do it.
How about a stat that takes into account hustle, grit and toughness. Or a stat that takes into account the players situational awareness and baseball iq? Oh that's because baseball isn't a complete star game although it can supplement teams and scouting. The problem comes in when people don't understand the team strategy in each situation both at bat and I'm the field. Most stat guys can't tell you those intricacies.
The reason Bobby Witt is closer to Soto and not Ohtani and Judge is solely because of his Caught Stealings lol. He brings those down this stat would shoot way up
And this stat also highlights guys with good OBP, like Soto and judge. So pretty much every elite player is getting rewarded for something. This stat really starts to make a difference for guys who are closer to league average hitters I think.
I like the idea of this stat a lot, as well as some of the suggestions from comments, but the only suggestion I will give is about the name. "Bases created" sounds like a counting stat similar to hits or total bases, not a rate stat like ba or slg. The term "bases created" works really well for just the numerator of your equation, but once you divide it by the denominator, it becomes a rate stat and should have a different name.
@the3rdout996 I think the stat would be base creation potential or base creation percentage. Essentially the stat is telling you the likelihood of a base being created during a plate appearance or estimating the number of bases a player will create during a game. If Judge had 5 plate appearances, he produces 4 bases on average based on this stat.
I kind of don't understand how Ohtani with more runs, doubles, way more triples, 59 SB and only 4 CS (compared to Judge's 10 SB) be that far behind Judge.
This stat also boosts those with high OBP, which is something Judge does a little better than Ohtani. This stat really starts to separate a lot of the league average players. Most elite players are good at OBP or speed, so they’re all benefiting from the stat in some st.
Bunting a guy from first to second is 1. Getting a single with no runners on base is 1. Getting a single with a guy on first and moving him to second should be 2.
I’m trying to figure out a way to do that, but I think it’s going to be a separate stat. Like “movement created” the big struggle is trying to find a way to make it even for players who simply come up to bat with less runners on base, who’d get punished just for having bad hitters around them. I included the sacs though because otherwise the hitter gets no statistical credit for accomplishing what they were attempting to do. If you hit a single and move a runner from first to third you’re already getting the credit for hitting the single, so adding on more credit start to border on giving advantages to just being on a good offenses.
This should be paired with an Outs created, including grounding into dps, baserunning errors, etc
Great idea
goated TH-cam recommendation.
I don’t understand why any stat uses ABs over PAs, why on earth would we ever want to ignore a walk??
Because of intentional walks. Let's take Slugging Percentage for example. The purpose for the metric is to give a number to how well a player hits the ball (an indicator of hitting strength). For this particular metric, including walks doesn't provide insight to the characteristic we're actually trying to measure. If we use Plate Appearances instead of At-Bats, then we're including data (with walks) that has nothing to do with what we're objectively attempting to measure. Especially with intentional walks, where the vast majority of the time it's the particular in-game situation that your team is in that influences whether you get walked, so you would get charged with a plate appearance but don't get to add a base with it. Even if we say that a walk equals a single, there's no guarantee that the player's bat would have gotten a single base if the situation were different. They could have gotten out, or may have been able to hit a double, triple, or home run.
TL;DR: Some stats objectively try to isolate a single particular characteristic, and including walks and plate appearances doesn't help with that measure.
@@TangoWolf09 Right, that makes sense now you lay it out. I think I could've been more specific in saying 'why would any statistic used to generally evaluate a player's performance in the box want to ignore walks?', like yeah you're saying IBBs but non-intentional BBs are vastly more common anyway, and it's not like all IBBs are unrelated to that player's performance. As a Mariners fan so I do also understand that sometimes a walk is worse than a single because if you only had a runner on second and/or third, a walk does nothing for them, whereas a ball in play might. I watched my team do it 123 times last year and it sucked every time, but a walk's gotta be worth something and not including it in things like BA, SLG and therefore OPS misses a hell of a lot of information about whether or not the player is actually productive.
@@TangoWolf09 Well explained. I think pitchers walk a batter for two broad reasons. One is because this batter is too good and a walk is safer than a possible double or driving the man on second home. Those are walks because the batter is good, and should count for the batter. The other walk is a tactical one, say there's 2 outs and walking the batter makes an out more likely on the next at bat. That sort of defensive walk should not count toward the batter, as they are just a pawn in the opponent's strategy.
I love it. You have a really good functional understanding of what it means to be a valuable hitter. You could easily argue those are the 10 best hitters in baseball right now.
If you're going to include SB and CS, what about outs by pick-off? Extra bases taken? Getting out on the bases in a non-force play? Base running is so much more than SB and CS. Also consider hitting into a double play as -1 and a triple play as -2 in the numerator.
Triple play should maybe be -3 since one of those runners is on second.
The double play and triple play should be easy to add and I’ll probably do that moving forward.
I did think of the extra bases taken, but unfortunately when I calculate this I just import the stat line from fangraphs and to get the numbers for extra bases taken and stuff I would have to pull from different places and write it in for each player individually. So hopefully if I get the technical capability moving forward I can utilize the more advanced stats like extra bases taken. And hopefully I’d also be able to distinguish if a runner is caught stealing 2nd or 3rd and stuff like that as well.
But if I want this to be a stat that can be utilized in like highschool in just like an auto calculated game changer app, the advanced stats would have to be left out.
pretty sure outs by pickoff count as CS. Double check me if you like. But i agree all that should be added into the calculation!
@@circumventreality3770 outs by pickoff absolutely do not count as caught stealing, because you can be picked off when not even trying to steal
@ right. you can, but look it up.
Only getting a single vs a double is not the same as getting a double and then a caught stealing. Both created a numerator contribution of one, but one also created an out.
If I could dissect the caught stealing stat to see which ones were caught stealing second and which ones were caught stealing 3rd I would.
Similarly, a sac fly shouldn't count the same as a single. The single creates one base, but the sac fly creates one base and one out.
@@booradley1138 I think you meant ", but the sac fly creates one base, one out, and one run."
There's something funky about sacrifice flys and singles counting the same. It's a good core idea though.
And sac bunts. “Bases only” is an interesting way to look at value generated, but it’s like looking at revenue without looking at costs.
What if we also looked at teammate bases advanced in other situations, not just sacrifice plays? A sac fly that advances two runners is good value, but even better is hitting a single that scores one of them and puts the other on second or third. So a double with a man on first is not +2 bases, it's +4 now. That way, sac plays don't get unfairly weighted and you don't need any fancy correction factor for how many "bases" an out is worth. This makes Bases Created more intuitive as well, and doesn't abandon the singular focus on bases.
e.g.
Bases-empty single: +1
Single with a man on first: +2/+3
Sac fly with a man on first: +1
Grand slam: +10
Sac fly with runners on first and second: +2
Single followed by a steal: +2
Of course this is a very inconsistent stat now since it's not situationally agnostic, but we already crossed that line in choosing to count sac plays so we either need to abandon that concept or go all in and make it a situationally weighted stat and accept all the baggage associated with that.
The core principle of adding the sac fly is not so much to track the total movement a hitter provides (that’s a potential different stat “movement per pa”)
The reason I add sac flies is it is a player purposely doing something and upon success there is no statistical reward. And I’m trying to reward the achievement of an objective. You are trying to hit a line drive base hit, you get that base, but when you are trying to hit a deep fly ball, that success never goes into most stats, but I just want to count that as a successful PA from a percentage stand point.
@@BHRogertit is looking at costs. Every plate appearance that doesn't produce a base is basically an out. But if you produce a base and also generate and out, the outcome is still a base.
Yea, it feels like creating a base without taking an out (like a single) and creating a base while taking an out (sac fly) should not be scored the same, somehow the number of outs needs to be factored in
Great content from a small channel, keep it up! You can never have too many quality baseball videos
Really close to Base-Out Percentage, which I think was based on Total Average - something that came out back in the 1980's through Sport Magazine.
I would say use a basic stat, and an advanced stat that would deduct value if caught stealing, along with other deductions like picked off, double plays, baserunning errors etc.
Other additions to value could be extra base taken, fielders choice etc. Love the video! Looking forward to many more
I've always thought that runs allowed by relief pitchers should be assessed to both reliever and starter. For example, if starter departs with runner on first and reliever allows the run to score, reliever should be charged with .75 run and starter .25 run. Another stat that should get more attention is the % of runners on base that a batter actual drives in.
good video, only question I have is did you include "productive outs" in bases created? Ie RBI groundout as an example. If not, that would be a good tweak to make. Otherwise, great stuff!
I’m 10 seconds in and this video scratches so many itches I didn’t know I had
yeah, i've been calculating OPS+SB for my own casual use for about a year and a half now - a single and a stolen base equals 2 Bases, a single and an out equals... an out, and no Bases. This seems right up that alley, but better. However, I think keeping the denominator the same as OPS (lol!) is important just for comparative purposes.
I’ve been thinking along these lines for quite a while. I’d love to see this included on baseball-reference. BRry Bonds’ numbers would be stratospheric!
only thing that came up for me a few times was single + stolen base feels less valuable than a double because of the time the batter actually spends at first. But batters losing a whole base for getting caught stealing feels way harsher than any leeway they gain from it so I wouldn't advocate changing it.
Thank!!! Fun video
A good start. Consider further detailed attribution and/or the “present value of a base created” where time is measured in pitches. That is the difference between a double and a 1b+stl. This gets quite complicated and you can probably go at it from a few different angles, but you should consider it if you haven’t already. If the next hitter deliberately takes the first pitch so his teammate can steal a base then that batter may start in a 0-1 count. If the current better is handicapping himself so that his teammate can be credited with a base created then he deserves some sort of attribution. Perhaps he’s better at hitting while behind in the count. also, you aren’t considering bat control type plays. Say a runner on second with 0 out and the righty at the plate grounds into a fielder choice behind the runner to the 2nd basemen. put out 4-3. This essentially serves as a sac bunt with the added chance that the hitter finds the hole between 3 and 4 but it goes into the scorebook as an AB and PA but no credit for the base created. I’m not saying I have the answers. The attribution is very complicated.
Pretty interesting. I've been thinking about making a couple stats myself by filling a pretty obvious gap and redeeming a legacy stat.
A) One home run and three outs does NOT generate as many runs for a team as 4 singles
B) a steal gives you one base. A bases-empty walk gives you one base. But a walk with men on 1st and 4rd gives you 2, and a single generates 3 or 4 bases.
Yes, but 4 singles could result in 4 runs or 0 runs which is why I left it to bases created not runs created.
Factoring in the movement of your teammates on the base path kinda rewards players just for being on good teams so I’d like to limit that here. But I am thinking of making another stat that tracks that but I need to figure out a way to level the playing field based on some guys coming up to bat with runners on base less often.
I like the idea of hitting into a double play as being a -2 on the numerator.
Future videos should explore that and also how this start applies historically. Does it quantify something that baseball guys all "knew" but the stats didn't show?
For full impact, you will also need to add bases taken by base runners ahead of the battery in question. Using your example, a single and a walk only counts the same as a double if nobody is on base. That's not scoring someone already on first, but a double probably is. The runner already on takes an extra base, which should carry weight.
Hey I love the stat, great video!! If you ever decide to expand on it, have you thought about applying weights via base-out states? (Such as how stealing third with 2 out isn’t as valuable as a leadoff walk or single, or how a two-out rbi double is more valuable than a rbi double with no out)
I have thought about that, but the struggle with weighting things is I would like this stat to be transferable at all levels of baseball, and probabilities are very different at each level. Just getting on base in high school is much more valuable than it is in the MLB. And I don’t want to reward a hitter for external circumstances, because that’s also punishing other players for their circumstances. That’s good for figuring actual value, but when looking at the skill of a player, you have to put their at bats in a vacuum and understand the situation isn’t in their control.
This. This is the kinda stuff that makes baseball the greatest sport.
Great video! I really enjoyed the background development. Honestly, it sounds very reasonable, and I think has the potential to be a real, tracked stat. Sounds like peak Billy Beane’s Moneyball kinda stat.
I totally agree that steals and walks should be included, as a player is ABSOLUTELY benefiting the team offensively.
Again, great video. This is the first video of yours that I’ve seen, but definitely won’t be the last; just smashed the subscribe button.
I appreciate the kind words!
I've been following Sabermetrics since reading Bill James' book in 1988. And I think this is BRILLIANT!
Thank you!
Thomas Boswell introduced a comparable, and more accessible stat in Total Average, in the early '80s. Essentially measuring 'Bases' versus 'Outs'. It was probably better received at that time because base stealing (and running) were a big part of the game ...
If you're going to count a sacrifice as a base created (you not reaching base while a teammate advances or advances to score), then you're kind of opening the door to having to count extra bases created for situations like getting a single and your teammate advancing from 1st to 3rd, or 2nd to Home...
Sacrifices are interesting, because it creates a base for another runner and not for the batter. So what about a sacrifice that advances 2 runners? Does that add 2 in the numerator? I can imagine an extension of this where the numerator includes the number of bases advanced by other baserunners due to that plate appearance. It would be similar to RBI, but counting all of the bases advanced by runners as a result of the plate appearance, not just the number reaching home.
Examples:
1. Hit a single with runners on 1st and 2nd. Runners each advance two bases. +5 to the numerator.
2. Walk with bases loaded: +4 (this could be interesting for guys who get a lot of intentional walks).
3. Sac fly with two on, and both safely advance one base: +2.
Thoughts? I think this approach could be be kinda useful to measure the offensive impact of each player.
Yes, but that rewards hitters on good offenses. The core principle of adding the sac fly is not so much to track the total movement a hitter provides (that’s a potential different stat “movement per pa”)
The reason I add sac flies is it is a player purposely doing something and upon success there is no statistical reward. And I’m trying to reward the achievement of an objective. You are trying to hit a line drive base hit, you get that base, but when you are trying to hit a deep fly ball, that success never goes into most stats, but I just want to could that as a successful PA from a percentage stand point.
I have actually in my head been theorizing almost the exact same idea as you for a stat. I strongly disagree with having sac flies/bunts as equal value to a single, for a few different reasons.
A) If a player hits a ground ball with a runner on 1st but the defense only goes for the out at 1st instead of 2nd, then that's just considered an out by statistics instead of a sacrifice hit, despite having the exact same outcome.
B) Getting a single is clearly a more favorable outcome than getting a sac fly/bunt, as there are fewer outs, and it's possible for runners to advance more than 1 base.
C) Sac flies/bunts are dependent on players besides yourself, so your stat is heavily affected by what your teammates do, which makes the stat less informative (like RBIs and Wins).
Another couple of things unrelated to that:
I kind of like the idea of extra bases taken running being included, but it goes against my last point that teammates' gameplay shouldn't affect the stat, so I don't think it should be included.
I'd be interested to see the stat if reaching base on error was included in your favor, as I have always theorized that a faster runner will pressure fielders into errors more often, but I don't know if that's actually supported by any data.
As others have said, if possible, being caught trying to steal 3rd should cause you to go -2 instead of -1, but I understand that it would be difficult to implement
The fact this channel has less than 100 subs yet is making content that clearly has so much effort put into it is criminal. There are channels with 50,000 subs that put less effort
Cool stat, but a few things Id like to mention:
- Create a stat with Total Bases created / Outs created. This is because Singles>Sac flies/bunts. A single is 1 base and 0 outs, while a sacrifice is 1 base and 1 out. Etc.
- Caught stealing should be worth like, -3 outs. I heard that CS is worth -3x the run value of a SB.
- I do think this would be much better considering outs created as well, because that considers double plays and weights things better
Have been using that for years myself! Cheers!
Great video! This has probably been mentioned in one of the 200+ comments already; but, if you're caught stealing following a double, then you've erased more than one base. And the same would apply for a triple and then getting caught attempting to steal home (or perhaps caught at home after tagging up). Those events happen so infrequently, it probably won't affect your calculation significantly; but, I thought I'd throw it out there. Similarly, if you're caught stealing third (after successfully stealing second), then you've erased your hit and successful steal (2 bases).
Yeah, I’d love to implement that, but I need to figure out how to track it. Like I need a separate number for CS3rd vs CS2nd whereas now we basically just have CS all lumped together in one number.
I like this concept but it could definitely use some work, have you thought ab using the RE24 chart instead of simply bases? This would eliminate a few of the issues I have with the formula.
First, there should be some context in regards to how many outs there are when a player performs one of these actions. For example, using Fangraphs RE24 chart, if a player leads off an inning with a walk, then the next two batters strike out, and he is caught stealing to end the inning, these two actions are not equal in terms of run expectancy, and shouldn't be treated as such. Second, the biggest issue I have is that sacrifice bunts count TOWARDS the hitter. If the sac bunt results in a run this makes sense, but in any other scenario, trading an out for an extra base results in decreased run expectancy, and probably shouldn't be rewarded
Yeah, I’d need a way to figure out the situation of each caught stealing. Which would make this pretty easy to do if the stat were calculated live in a scorebook situation.
When I calculate it I just import the stat line into excel but the general stat lines don’t give me those numbers so I need to figure out how to bring together numbers from different places without having to type it out individually for each player.
If there’s a way to track players going 1st to 3rd or scoring from 2nd on a sac fly it would reward both speed and awareness.
If I ever get the ability to track this stat in live time as games are going on (like a game changer app calculating it automatically) I could add cool stuff like that in.
So would this be interpreted (in Aaron Judge's case) as an ~80% chance of creating a base every time he has a plate appearance? That is damn valuable to know an honestly gives a better idea of their ability to impact the offense than an OPS+ stat.
I think 80% chance of creating a base makes it sound like he gets on base 80% of the time, and obviously he gets out more than 20% of the time. I would try to say it in a way that he’s getting 8/10ths of a base on average.
For the cs, make sure that it subtracts the total bases created at that plate appearance instead of just a flat 1. So if they get a double then get caught it shout subtracts 2.
Yeah, I just need the ability to tract that. Currently when I pull stats from the books there is just 1 caught stealing number.
@@the3rdout996 Ahh, I wasn't sure what population you were pulling your stats from. Probably not possible to factor in cs after a double, unless you developed a subset of new states that count cs after double, or triple. Since its not explicitly kept, you would have to go through a play by play for every game that had a cs and note if it was after the player hit a double. or triple. Its probably not worth the effort unless you already have a play-by-play data set for every game in a season.
Yeah, if I could track my stat live time in like a game changer app auto calculating as the game happens I could set it up for sure.
Can't wait to try and explain this to people
Should you add advancing runners to your stat too? Starting with a runner on first an end result of runners on first and second or me out and the runner on second are weighted the same. Seems like it should either count the former as higher or the latter as lower.
I think I’m going to do that as a separate stat. (Movement created) the issue is this really starts to reward players for just having more at bats with runners on base. Which is unfair to hitter who simply have less opportunity.
The reason I included sac’s the same as a single, is the hitter is setting aside their objective to take on a different goal for the good of the team. (I could try to hit a line drive or I could try to hit a deep fly ball) so I think to give a hitter anything less than the equivalent of a single feels like a punishment for doing something for the good of the team.
You should find a way to add additional bases taken on the basepaths. For example going first to third on a single soul also be an additional base created
I agree. I need a way to pull a bases taken number from like baseball savant and put it with the standard numbers I get from fangraphs without having to type it out for every single player.
Any chance we get to see a spreadsheet or google doc with the full list of 2024 stats you have? Love the content, keep up the great work!
Working on it!
Jose Ramirez, truly the 6th best hitter in baseball (and also defensively tops several above him!)
In the end. How does that final player list differ than what is expected from other stats.
If it doesn’t highlight stuff we do t already know, then what’s the point?
It moves players who run the bases well like Bobby Witt, Tommy Edman, and makes them more comparable to other sluggers.
It also helps out players with good on base percentages and moves them up over other players.
"Bases and outs ad nauseum" by Brandon Heipp in The Hardball Times 2008
this is great! I've been wanting to make a stat just like this! Now, I'm sure you also thought about doing a "bases prevented" stat for fielding...
I have. But a lot of my statistic ideas along those lines will require me to get in game tracking ability, whereas this I can just pull from a stat sheet.
@ yeah i hear you. It's a real pain sometimes with stats like this. but you think paid version of fangraphs or something would make it possible?
I haven’t really thought about that, and I’m not really sure what fangraphs has to offer. I normally look at baseball savant for defensive numbers. I’ll look into it.
@@the3rdout996 ok, yeah i forgot about savant
Bases created is being treated here as an analysis stat but is in reality a counting stat. Things like a sac fly that moves more than 1 runner should count for that many bases, but it might not be possible to add that in as an equation. If you have the time or resources it would be good to see more of a bean counting approach. Even something like a single that moves a player from first to third would be more than just 1 base created
I’m trying to figure out a way to do that, but I think it’s going to be a separate stat. Like “movement created” the big struggle is trying to find a way to make it even for players who simply come up to bat with less runners on base, who’d get punished just for having bad hitters around them.
I included the sacs though because otherwise the hitter gets no statistical credit for accomplishing what they were attempting to do. If you hit a single and move a runner from first to third you’re already getting the credit for hitting the single, so adding on more credit start to border on giving advantages to just being on a good offenses.
Love this stat. Also wish there was (maybe there is) something that measures pitches / AB (and pairs it with result to?). Quality AB stat basically
How would you count a player hitting a single, and moving a runner to 3rd, but then a double steal is initiated where the player on 3rd scores but the runner on 1st is caught stealing?
I don’t really want to count to much of moving runners around the base path because then we really start to reward players just for being on good teams with runners on base more often. (Sac’s are a little different because they’re completing their objective and would otherwise get no statistical reward, they could have tried to hit a line drive for a hit but decided to hit a deep fly ball instead).
Double steal, the runner who gets out get’s penalized for being the weak link, the runner who was safe get’s rewarded for not messing it up.
wBC+ has a really nice ring to it
i'd be interested to hear what you think should be done in the case of interferences and errors - if you get on base via catcher's interference, should that be added to your total? anyway, i remember jon bois making up bases conquered for a video (TB + SB / AB), and this feels like a more in-depth version of that and i think it could actually be useful
I think a walk and stuff like that is the hitter working to success. And I think a error or interference is a failure by the hitter that he only received benefit because of a unusual mistake by the defense, so I don’t want to give a hitter a reward for someone making a uncommon mistake if that makes sense.
So, hitting into a double play drops one from the numerator while adding one to the denominator?
Not currently. But I’ve thought about that.
Am I correct in assuming you’re leaving RBIs or runners advanced out of the stat? As I think about it that’s a bit easier because then you wouldn’t have to dig into each PA to see who if anyone was on base ahead of the hitter and whether the runner scored or got stopped at third or got out on a fielder’s choice.
Yeah, and that would also kinda reward players on good offensive teams if I included runners advanced. I think that will be the next stat I create though “movement created” and it’ll measure how much you move everyone around the bases, but yeah, tracking would be difficult and I need to find a way to even it by opportunity (meaning hitters who just have more AB’s with guys on base don’t have extra benefit)
There seems to still be some stuff missing.
As mentioned elsewhere, GIDP should count as a minus one, as you've eliminated a base.
What about non sacrifice base advancement? Grounding out to the second baseman to advance a runner on second to third isn't a sacrifice, but is a base created.
Base running mistakes needs to be also figured in, as getting a double, but being thrown out at third certainly doesn't help your team.
What about induced errors? Stealing second and taking third on a throwing error needs to count.
I'm sure I am missing some other cases also.
Wow, not what i expected to be recommended
One thing that would add to this statistic would be to consider the bases created by advancing other players. A double advances other players more than a single and steal does.
Oh, yes, double plays, as well. I don't think you mentioned that, but that would erase another runner.
Aren't you completely ignoring every other baserunner? If a sacrifice adds a base (due to ANOTHER baserunner advancing) how is a single with a runner on not worth (at least) an additional base than a single with no one on? Either the other baserunners advancing are included in the number of bases or they're not. But you seem to only include them in sacrifice situations.
the stat with division should be BC/PA or BC%. the numerator itself should be Bases Created
That is true. I think BC% and BC+ are decent names.
This is sick
Do you include sac flies where the player doesn't score? (Like 2nd to 3rd)
Unfortunately I just use the sac fly number from fangraphs and it only counts sac fly’s when someone scores I think.
@the3rdout996 also, since you include sac bunts, what about a player who grounds out but it advances a runner?
I like it, but I need there to be an existing number that I can take from fangraphs or baseball reference to put in the calculation.
So until I get the capability to auto calculate this as the game is being played, I don’t think I can do that really.
Great work dude
Is hitting into a fielders choice essentially a net zero? The hitter has created one base for themselves but caused another base to be taken from the runner that got out.
Essentially they’re just replacing the runner further back on the base path and added an out. Which is essentially the same as striking out to begin with. So 0/1
Don't most modern stats exclude sacs because they're not really under your control? If you hit behind a good hitter/fast runner you have a lot more sac opportunity than someone who hits after a terrible hitter.
I agree that it feels like sacs should be rewarded somewhat because they're sort of intentional (although in TTO baseball do you really do much different to hit a sac fly than you would to just hit for power? Genuine question, I'm not a player). But I think they should probably be worth very little.
A few years ago (before the statomatic revolution really) I tried to created something I called Run Shares, because I saw stats rewarded getting to 1st, and also the player that made someone advance from 3rd to score, but did little to reward players that moved teammates from 1st to 3rd... So basically, when a run scores we have four shares to assign, one for each stop along the basepaths.
Say a player singles, is bunted to second, and then next player hits a double, that's one share for player 1, one share for player 2, two shares for player 3. (And two potential more shares if he scores later).
But it needs refining and I didn't have many ones to bounce ideas, so I kinda stopped... What do we do with players advancing thanks to the opponent? (HBP, Error, balk...). Walks are fuzzy. Good job by batter drawing a walk, or pitcher's fault? Intentionals are clearly the pitcher, but regular walks... If a player's single scores a teammate for second, shall we give two shares to the single? So, I think this has potential, but it's rough. What do you think?
I’d said walks are a hitter working a pitcher, but errors are more of a mistake by the defense that the hitter doesn’t really deserve a reward for. (If a hitter has way more errors made when he’s at the plate than someone else, does he deserve a statistical reward for what I would consider luck?)
I am looking to do another stat that calculates movement created which will measure more than just the sac’s. The struggle is it will reward hitters just for being on good teams that put more runners on base, so I’m trying to think of ways to even it out. But that’s gonna require in game tracking rather than just looking at a standard stat sheet unfortunately, and that’s what I don’t have the capability for at the moment.
I’ve long thought there should be a stat along these lines, sort of a superior total bases.
I’m curious if you feel that this stat gives any further predictive power than eg OPS, since I know one reason most people don’t care to improve on it is that they feel it’s good enough.
I think this is a little more true to a players consistency and actually gives a precise % of bases reached per appearance. I’ve always struggled to understand what an OPS number really means. Like a OPS of 1.00 does not mean that the hitter averages 1 base, it just is a number be so I think that alone makes OPS less predictive.
Interesting idea but i dont like how its weighted. Sac hits is a single with someone on first, with an out included, so they are clearly less valuable than singles. I think maybe .25 for a sac would be good. Caught stealings should be -2 or add to the plate appearance count, since you lost a base, and also lost the chance to do stuff with that base, getting an out where you didnt have one before
also, its shown that doubles arent exactly 2 times as good as singles, which is why woba has those weird values and why ops weirdly works well. good weights are 1 for a walk, 2 for a single, 3 for a double, 4 for a triple and 5 for a home run, it works surprisingly well
I agree but my concern when working in those probabilities is the fact that the value of a double is different from MLB to college to high school, and your probability of scoring from second with 2 outs is different at each level. And ideally I would like this to be a stat that can be used at all levels just by pulling numbers from the stat sheet.
@@the3rdout996 yeah thats true, i'd still say make sacs less valuable than a single and caught stealings more punishing
Well done, this is super cool. Did you find any players that OPS undervalues that Bases Created values more?
I’m working on that right now. Probably will make a video when I find the answer to that.
I like it, but I will suggest if you're going to include sacrifices, then you should probably go one big step more and figure out how many collective bases all players obtained through the batter's efforts. For example, a sacrifice with one player moving up a base is less valuable than a sacrifice with two players moving up a base. Similarly a home run with the bases empty is 4 bases, but a home run with the bases full is (1 + 2 + 3 + 4,) 10 bases earned. Same logic goes with hits with runners on base. Now you have a much more accurate measure of "how many bases the batter earned for the team per plate appearance". The challenge of course is that this is more complicated to calculate.
I’m trying to figure out a way to do that, but I think it’s going to be a separate stat. Like “movement created” the big struggle is trying to find a way to make it even for players who simply come up to bat with less runners on base, who’d get punished just for having bad hitters around them.
I included the sacs though because otherwise the hitter gets no statistical credit for accomplishing what they were attempting to do. If you hit a single and move a runner from first to third you’re already getting the credit for hitting the single, so adding on more credit start to border on giving advantages to just being on a good offenses.
Interesting. I think if you used total bases as a starting point then added in bases for sacrifices and penalties for getting caught stealing it could work better. That would allow for reaching on an error or going first to home, rewarding speed a lot more than you are now. Good stuff!
I like it. My one hesitancy is an error is an unusual mistake by the defense not necessarily something the hitter wants to be rewarded for.
I kinda struggle with if the hitter should get the benefit for not doing what he wanted to do if that makes sense.
@@the3rdout996 most "reached on an error" events have to do with the defender being pressured by speed. I would say forcing a guy to make a bad throw is as much "in the hitter/runners control" as working the count to get a walk or getting caught stealing. Just because it is uncommon doesn't mean it doesn't have value in evaluating offensive performance.
Have you considered using outs as the denominator instead? It would change the meaning a bit, but I think that it's still fundamentallly measuring the same skillset of "how well does this player move themselves around the bases?", just asking "how many good things per bad thing" instead of "how many good things per appearance". Then you fix your problem of SF = 1B and 2B + CS = 1B
But an out isn’t always equal, an out to score a run is not the same as an out with nobody on base. It’s basically a measure of success rate and a sacrifice does add an out, but from a hitters perspective it’s the achievement of the outcome he was going for which should be a success. I think the 2B+CS issue can be solved if I get the ability to just track which base a runner was caught stealing.
That makes sense, but you're saying an out to advance another runner or score a run is better than an out that doesn't, which I agree. So you'd say SF > GO. But using outs in the denominator would still account for that. SF would be n+1/d+1, while GO would be n+0/d+1. You would still value SF > GO, but you'd also value 1B > SF, which currently it is not. Right? Unless you think SF should = 1B. I'm just trying to help discern that difference while preserving everything great about this statistic.
I think getting thrown out trying for 2 3 or 4 should also be subtracted from the numerator
That is just considered an out. I see you want this included because it would be similar to being caught stealing. The runner could have just taken the safe base instead of pushing it. I think the stat captures this anyway.
OPS always felt like a weird stat to evaluate a single player. It's been proven that it's a good team stat but just smashing OPS and slugging seems really lazy. I like rewarding and penalizing for steals and CS, I understand the idea around creating bases per sacrifice and flyout but I feel like that's rewarding a batter for getting out but doesn't reward a batter for advancing a runner while actually getting a hit. Moving a runner with a single is as valuable as a sac fly in your calculations. Other than that I really like it. Subscribing to get more from you.
You should add errors and dropped third strikes, maybe?
Also, what if a player reaches first, but gets forced out at second (via ground ball)- would that count like a CS? Or would you still award the batter a 1 for reaching first?
Fielders choice where the a different runner gets out instead of the hitter, you’re just replacing the runner that was on 1st before you and adding a out to the tally, which is a overall bad result. And for the runner who gets thrown out on a ground ball they didn’t hit, it really wasn’t their hit that produced that, so I don’t want to harm the statistic of the runner on first for something bad that the hitter did.
Errors and dropped 3rd strikes I do battle with. Because yes they are creating a base, but it’s really a result of a mistake by the defense and not the accomplishment of the hitter. I don’t want someone who randomly hits into more errors to get a statistical advantage over someone that just has the defense do their job more often.
Foolish Baseball been very quiet tho.
if you are counting sac flies and sac bunts as +1 in the numerator because it moves another runner forward, shouldn't you also count when a batter moves a runner forward but also gets on base themselves? Like a single with a man on third who scores is +2, or a 2 run home run with a man on first is +7 in the numerator? You could also make a weighted version of this where each successive base is worth more because there is a better opportunity to score from 2nd than first.
Agreed -- but if you're giving credit in the numerator for advancing other runners, then those other runners should also affect the denominator. That way you avoid the problem of players on good teams having more other runners to advance!
Yeah, I think sacs are situations where a hitter is willingly trying to do something that might result in him getting out and then getting punished by stats for succeeding. (Essentially trying to hit a fly ball to the outfield rather than going for a hard hit line drive) and so stats punish hitters for that situational mentality. The advancement of other runners are situations where generally the hitter is getting on base himself and thus he’s already getting statistically rewarded. And yeah it would really start to favor teams with lots of offense.
Also I kinda need there to be a stat for me to use that counts how many bases a hitter has moved around the bases. (There might be something but I don’t know what that number would be)
If a sacrifice is creating a base for your teammates, shouldn't a single with someone on base allowing them to advance = 2 bases created?
I think that starts to sway things in the advantage of people on good teams who just get to have more at bats with other runners on base.
My other reason for wanting sacs and not the other advancements is because a sacrifice is a hitter accomplishing what he was trying to do. He could have tried to hit a line drive base hit but instead he took on another objective of either hitting a deep fly ball or bunt. And those sac’s don’t result in any statistical reward for a hitter. So I’m kinda just trying to count it as a 1/1 mission accomplished. Other time where you hit a single with a runner on first you’re already getting rewarded statistically because of the single itself.
I think another stat for total movement created would be a good thing to calculate how well you move everyone around the bases. I just need to find a way to even it between hitters that have more at bats with teammates on base and players that have less of those opportunities.
Subtracting 1 base for 1 CS is wrong. A SB is advancing 1 base but a CS is losing not just 1 base but a potential run (which is more valuable than 1 base) - so intuitively a CS should be penalized by more than 1 base. This is backed up by the rule of thumb that a success rate of % stealing breaks even at around 75%, meaning you have to be successful at SB more often than getting CS for it to make it worthwhile attempting steals - which means the cost of a CS should be greater than a SB (almost 3x)
Does it make sense to subtract 2 for caught at 2nd, subtract 3 caught at 3rd, subtract 4 caught at home? And what if the CS ends the inning with other runners on base? Lot to unpack with this
I would say -1 stealing 2nd, minus 2 stealing 3rd, -3 stealing home. I kinda want to simplify it to the point where getting caught stealing has the same weight as hitting a ground out from the start🤷♂️ without having to add it to much advanced measurements. I would like this to be something that even middle school book keepers could auto calculate.
Based and creative
Rickie would be the goat then.
how is this different from wOBA?
follow up question:
what is wOBA?
wOBA weights things according to a more analytical value. (A double isn’t twice as valuable as a single, so instead of a 2 value for a double it gets 1.27) the issue with this is it’s based on probability of scoring from each base, which is cool for the MLB but probabilities aren’t the same at every level of baseball. Your chances of hitting a double and eventually scoring are much higher in high school baseball than they are in the MLB. I think it’d be cool for my stat to be easily usable and transferable for all levels of play. (That’s the major difference, the other differences are the same as the differences found between my stat and OPS that I kinda described in the video)
Funny that most of the time the same players end up at the top using many different stats...
I think this stat will make a difference with the players who are around league average and really good at speed or OBP, or really bad at speed or OBP. The guys at the top don’t move because it’s with Soto and Judge who are elite OBP or Ohtani and Witt are great at steeling bases.
I’ve started doing a position rankings, and I noticed all the catchers have lower number in this stat than their WRC+ or OPS+. Which makes sense since catchers are generally bad at OBP and speed.
If someone hits a grand slam do they get credit for creating bases for all baserunners? I think they should. That’s 10 bases created for the hitter. If a runner is on first and the batter hits the double but the runner scores then the batter should get 4 BC and the runner 2. If the throw goes into home and lets the batter go to third then who gets credit for that base?
I think I’m going to do that as a separate stat. (Movement created) the issue is this really starts to reward players for just having more at bats with runners on base. Which is unfair to hitter who simply have less opportunity.
The reason I included sac’s the same as a single, is the hitter is setting aside their objective to take on a different goal for the good of the team. (I could try to hit a line drive or I could try to hit a deep fly ball) so I think to give a hitter anything less than the equivalent of a single feels like a punishment for doing something for the good of the team.
@@the3rdout996 Understood; sac flies and bunts are much more easily quantified. This was my first year watching baseball in years so I'm out of the loop on what's available in saber metrics or if numbers like "taking an extra base" or "hitting behind runners" type statistics are even available. Yes, it does reward players with runners on base more. Would MC and BC be mutually exclusive, would you give full 90 feet attribution to both the runner and the batter or would you give maybe .5 MC/BC to both the runner and the batter per 90 feet? Even after posting grand slam BC to 10 BC I'm having second thoughts.
You could standardize this even further by including defensive bases eliminated/given and fit it into the same formula(s).
Hitting into a double play should substract 1 from your numerator.
For caught stealings i think you need to account for which base it is. So if you get caught trying for third, the rinner still has net 1 bases for being on second. A caught stealing should always net 0 bases if I'm following your logic correctly
Yeah, I’m gonna have to find a way to see which base they were trying to steal when caught. Because right now when I import the basic number from the stat page I just get 1 caught stealing number.
If I get the ability to track the stat live as games are happening in like a game changer app, I could definitely set it up this way.
This stat is basically "Total Average", which was invented by Tom Boswell in 1978: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_average
That’s closer than most other standard stats, for sure.
Fun video, I enjoyed it. But since you asked for criticism… my biggest issue is that a new state, especially one that ads complexity needs to justify itself. Not just on a theoretical basis (golly, sbs should count for something) but in results. What do we know looking at this stat that we didn’t know looking at existing stats. The stats shows that Judge, Ohtani, Witt, etc are great. Well, duh. My next issue is with treating all bases as equal. We know that getting on first is much more valuable than advancing a base, maybe as much as twice as valuable. That’s not in here. Then I have some minor quibbles with things like how you treat sacrifices. But even if your treatment was perfect, sacrifices fit into the overall criticism of complexity without value.
I am currently working on a video that compares players WRC+, OPS+, and based created plus just to see how much it really does impact players and which players go down the most statistically and which players go up the most statistically.
@ Looking forward to that
Two thumbs up
i dont care about baseball and even i think this is cool
Very happy to get this recommended and be in on the ground floor. I like seeing people experiment with stuff like this
Wrong if a player comes to the plate and a baserunner is thrown out ending inning it’s not a plate appearance
Any accounting for advancing on errors, wild pitches, or past balls?
I think those are more mistakes by the defense then accomplishments by the offensive player, so I am a little hesitant to statistically reward a guy who has more mistakes made around him because it might make him look like a better player than someone who has less mistakes made around them.
Did you actually draw/animate this yourself?
I used an animating software to edit it all. (They are not hand drawn by me though)
What about a specialist pinch runner who steals bases all the time but never makes a plate appearance? Denominator would be zero!
Yeah, it would be. And I don’t really have a good answer. I guess the only consolation is even specialists get plate appearances from time to time and they’re still going to get more plate appearances than chances on base so there will at least be something in the denominator. And I guess it just heavily rewards them for being good enough to provide that value to the team. Kinda a loop hole as far as the stat goes though.
@@the3rdout996 Why not just include them being put on to pinch hit as part of the denominator? Like adding that to plate appearances, it would address that case with little to no cost
Yeah, that would work. Unfortunately, I’d need to track the stat live and insert that, or have MLB make some sort of pinch running appearance number. But also, we can’t add something to the denominator in this situation unless there is an attempt to steal. (If we add 1 just for a pinch running appearance and the runner doesn’t even try to steal, they’d be hit with a 0/1) so if the stat were tracked live in like a game changer app or something it could work, but I can’t pull it out of a stat sheet realistically.
@@the3rdout996 "(If we add 1 just for a pinch running appearance and the runner doesn’t even try to steal, they’d be hit with a 0/1)" that makes sense to me, the formula already treats the bases you cover without stealing or batting to be irrelevant. They were put on and did nothing special so a zero is reasonable
I do agree that measuring it is an issue that makes the formula change practically impossible even if it would fix the problem.
OK I agree
Shouldn’t you include the bases created by your teammates if your plate appearance moves them along the bases?
Getting caught stealing third after hitting a double should subtract 2, not just 1.
I would like to but unfortunately I can’t just look at a players stat line and see how many times they got caught stealing at each base. Maybe there’s a place that has that number but I don’t know where it is.
In principle yes, I totally agree, and I thought about doing that when I made the stat. I just didn’t have the capability to do it.
.5 for sac & bunts because you get outs.
How about a stat that takes into account hustle, grit and toughness. Or a stat that takes into account the players situational awareness and baseball iq? Oh that's because baseball isn't a complete star game although it can supplement teams and scouting. The problem comes in when people don't understand the team strategy in each situation both at bat and I'm the field. Most stat guys can't tell you those intricacies.
Well that’s why we watch the game.
Well you can measure hustle, you just have to have player tracking data(Statcast)
I like this but it shouldn't take 5 and a half minutes to describe.
The reason Bobby Witt is closer to Soto and not Ohtani and Judge is solely because of his Caught Stealings lol. He brings those down this stat would shoot way up
And this stat also highlights guys with good OBP, like Soto and judge. So pretty much every elite player is getting rewarded for something. This stat really starts to make a difference for guys who are closer to league average hitters I think.
I like the idea of this stat a lot, as well as some of the suggestions from comments, but the only suggestion I will give is about the name. "Bases created" sounds like a counting stat similar to hits or total bases, not a rate stat like ba or slg. The term "bases created" works really well for just the numerator of your equation, but once you divide it by the denominator, it becomes a rate stat and should have a different name.
Bases created per plate appearance? (That feels a little long)
@@the3rdout996 you just have to pronounce the acronym BCPPA "bikup upah"
In a call: "Juan Soto is hitting .320 with a .780 bikupupah"
EZ
I kinda like the sound of that.
@@the3rdout996 Bases Created per Plate Appearance; Bic-Pah / Bic-Paw (depending on accouncer preferred pronunciation). Rolls right off the tongue.
@the3rdout996 I think the stat would be base creation potential or base creation percentage. Essentially the stat is telling you the likelihood of a base being created during a plate appearance or estimating the number of bases a player will create during a game. If Judge had 5 plate appearances, he produces 4 bases on average based on this stat.
I kind of don't understand how Ohtani with more runs, doubles, way more triples, 59 SB and only 4 CS (compared to Judge's 10 SB) be that far behind Judge.
This stat also boosts those with high OBP, which is something Judge does a little better than Ohtani.
This stat really starts to separate a lot of the league average players. Most elite players are good at OBP or speed, so they’re all benefiting from the stat in some st.
Bunting a guy from first to second is 1.
Getting a single with no runners on base is 1.
Getting a single with a guy on first and moving him to second should be 2.
I’m trying to figure out a way to do that, but I think it’s going to be a separate stat. Like “movement created” the big struggle is trying to find a way to make it even for players who simply come up to bat with less runners on base, who’d get punished just for having bad hitters around them.
I included the sacs though because otherwise the hitter gets no statistical credit for accomplishing what they were attempting to do. If you hit a single and move a runner from first to third you’re already getting the credit for hitting the single, so adding on more credit start to border on giving advantages to just being on a good offenses.