Comments on: 2007 bases-loaded walks http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/566 This and that about baseball stats. Mon, 21 Dec 2009 06:07:41 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Stat of the Day » Hey wait, that was the pitcher! http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/566/comment-page-1#comment-3851 Stat of the Day » Hey wait, that was the pitcher! Wed, 30 Jan 2008 11:17:43 +0000 http://www.baseball-reference.com/sotd/archives/566#comment-3851 [...] Yesterday Andy focussed on bases-loaded walks. I’d like to focus on the most demoralizing type of bases -loaded walk, the two out walk to the opposing pitcher. Just when you think you’re out of the jam, not only have you replaced an easy out with a run, you have also brought up the top of the order. Recently this is has become an uncommon event, but it seemed happen about 3-10 times a year before 2006. Let’s take a look at the last 5 years. [...] [...] Yesterday Andy focussed on bases-loaded walks. I’d like to focus on the most demoralizing type of bases -loaded walk, the two out walk to the opposing pitcher. Just when you think you’re out of the jam, not only have you replaced an easy out with a run, you have also brought up the top of the order. Recently this is has become an uncommon event, but it seemed happen about 3-10 times a year before 2006. Let’s take a look at the last 5 years. [...]

]]> By: Johnny Twisto http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/566/comment-page-1#comment-3848 Johnny Twisto Tue, 29 Jan 2008 23:49:14 +0000 http://www.baseball-reference.com/sotd/archives/566#comment-3848 There were 16 teams playing 154 games in 1960, and 30 teams playing 162 games now, so the change in bases-loaded walks per game is very slight. There were 16 teams playing 154 games in 1960, and 30 teams playing 162 games now, so the change in bases-loaded walks per game is very slight.

]]> By: David in Toledo http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/566/comment-page-1#comment-3847 David in Toledo Tue, 29 Jan 2008 22:18:37 +0000 http://www.baseball-reference.com/sotd/archives/566#comment-3847 Good joke about control-artist Curt Schilling, by the way! Is there a way to compute which hitters took the most pitches per at-bat and which pitchers tossed the fewest pitches per at-bat? Is there a way to find out what the longest battles have been for a given year (that is, which at-bats came closest to 38 actual pitches)? Good joke about control-artist Curt Schilling, by the way!

Is there a way to compute which hitters took the most pitches per at-bat and which pitchers tossed the fewest pitches per at-bat?

Is there a way to find out what the longest battles have been for a given year (that is, which at-bats came closest to 38 actual pitches)?

]]> By: David in Toledo http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/566/comment-page-1#comment-3846 David in Toledo Tue, 29 Jan 2008 18:44:02 +0000 http://www.baseball-reference.com/sotd/archives/566#comment-3846 In paragraph two of my post (#4), I said LHB were about 14% advantaged. The % is undoubtedly wrong, but I hope everyone gets the obvious point: RHP threw to 136,887 batters last year; RHB came up only 111,067 times; LHB have the consequent advantage of hitting against opposite-handedness more frequently. LHB will, it stands to reason, be pitched to, more frequently, with greater caution. That greater caution will result, in most situations, in a higher rate of bases on balls. The height of caution? In 2007, a LHB got an IBB nearly 1% of the time (.0095). A RHB was walked intentionally about half as often (.0052). With the bases full, however, it's a different story. In paragraph two of my post (#4), I said LHB were about 14% advantaged. The % is undoubtedly wrong, but I hope everyone gets the obvious point: RHP threw to 136,887 batters last year; RHB came up only 111,067 times; LHB have the consequent advantage of hitting against opposite-handedness more frequently.

LHB will, it stands to reason, be pitched to, more frequently, with greater caution. That greater caution will result, in most situations, in a higher rate of bases on balls. The height of caution? In 2007, a LHB got an IBB nearly 1% of the time (.0095). A RHB was walked intentionally about half as often (.0052). With the bases full, however, it's a different story.

]]> By: Andy http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/566/comment-page-1#comment-3845 Andy Tue, 29 Jan 2008 18:09:57 +0000 http://www.baseball-reference.com/sotd/archives/566#comment-3845 John C: Numbers of bases-loaded walks: 2007: 351 2006: 319 2005: 271 2004: 329 2003: 326 2002: 268 2001: 255 2000: 397 1995: 270 1990: 211 1985: 248 1980: 205 1975: 218 1970: 267 1965: 171 1960: 159 It's definitely increasing in the long-term sense, but perhaps it's tracking pretty directly with the overall increase in baserunners per game. John C:

Numbers of bases-loaded walks:

2007: 351
2006: 319
2005: 271
2004: 329
2003: 326
2002: 268
2001: 255
2000: 397
1995: 270
1990: 211
1985: 248
1980: 205
1975: 218
1970: 267
1965: 171
1960: 159

It's definitely increasing in the long-term sense, but perhaps it's tracking pretty directly with the overall increase in baserunners per game.

]]> By: David in Toledo http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/566/comment-page-1#comment-3844 David in Toledo Tue, 29 Jan 2008 16:50:03 +0000 http://www.baseball-reference.com/sotd/archives/566#comment-3844 Thanks! It appears that 58.9 of all plate appearances were by right-handed batters, that they got only 53.5% of all bases on balls, but when the bases were full, their walk rate came back up to their rate of plate appearances: that is, to 58.4%. From the data you supplied in comment #3, right-handed pitchers threw during 72.6% of all plate appearances. Therefore, left-handed batters were about 14% advantaged (72.6 - 58.9) in the handedness of the pitchers they faced. On average, a right-handed pitcher facing a lefty batter is more likely to give an EBH or a run-scoring single to that lefty than to a righty batter. Let's get into that pitcher's head. Most of the time, that LHB will be pitched to more carefully and will draw a disproportionate rate of walks. When the bases are loaded, however, and there's nowhere for the batter to go, the pitcher can no longer treat lefties differently. Actually, I think the difference may be explained just in the different rates of intentional bases on balls. If I read the data correctly, in 58.9% of all plate appearances, RHB drew only 44.1% of all IBB. In 41.1 of all PA, LHB drew 55.9% of all IBB. Right-handed pitchers were being only prudent, until the bases were full and they had to go right at the batter, no matter which box he was standing in. Thanks! It appears that 58.9 of all plate appearances were by right-handed batters, that they got only 53.5% of all bases on balls, but when the bases were full, their walk rate came back up to their rate of plate appearances: that is, to 58.4%.

From the data you supplied in comment #3, right-handed pitchers threw during 72.6% of all plate appearances. Therefore, left-handed batters were about 14% advantaged (72.6 - 58.9) in the handedness of the pitchers they faced. On average, a right-handed pitcher facing a lefty batter is more likely to give an EBH or a run-scoring single to that lefty than to a righty batter. Let's get into that pitcher's head.

Most of the time, that LHB will be pitched to more carefully and will draw a disproportionate rate of walks. When the bases are loaded, however, and there's nowhere for the batter to go, the pitcher can no longer treat lefties differently.

Actually, I think the difference may be explained just in the different rates of intentional bases on balls. If I read the data correctly, in 58.9% of all plate appearances, RHB drew only 44.1% of all IBB. In 41.1 of all PA, LHB drew 55.9% of all IBB. Right-handed pitchers were being only prudent, until the bases were full and they had to go right at the batter, no matter which box he was standing in.

]]> By: Andy http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/566/comment-page-1#comment-3843 Andy Tue, 29 Jan 2008 15:36:27 +0000 http://www.baseball-reference.com/sotd/archives/566#comment-3843 You can get that data right here: http://www.baseball-reference.com/pi/bsplit.cgi?team=TOT&year=2007&lg=ML You can get that data right here:

http://www.baseball-reference.com/pi/bsplit.cgi?team=TOT&year=2007&lg=ML

]]> By: John C http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/566/comment-page-1#comment-3842 John C Tue, 29 Jan 2008 15:35:52 +0000 http://www.baseball-reference.com/sotd/archives/566#comment-3842 wow hard to belive it happened 351 times. I always thought it to be a cardinal sin to walk someone with the bases loaded. Can you run the numbers for prevoius years. I am wondering if it happens more nowadays then it happened years back. I swear as a kid you never saw it happen but now it happens all the time. Thanks wow hard to belive it happened 351 times. I always thought it to be a cardinal sin to walk someone with the bases loaded. Can you run the numbers for prevoius years. I am wondering if it happens more nowadays then it happened years back. I swear as a kid you never saw it happen but now it happens all the time. Thanks

]]> By: David in Toledo http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/566/comment-page-1#comment-3841 David in Toledo Tue, 29 Jan 2008 15:31:50 +0000 http://www.baseball-reference.com/sotd/archives/566#comment-3841 With regard to bullet point #3, how can we determine what percentage of all at-bats were made by right-handed batters and left-handed batters? (It will be some breakdown different from the 58.4/41.6 or the 53.5/46.5 splits already cited.) I think the info I'm asking for -- depending on what it is -- might offer at least a partial explanation for the discrepancy you point to. With regard to bullet point #3, how can we determine what percentage of all at-bats were made by right-handed batters and left-handed batters?
(It will be some breakdown different from the 58.4/41.6 or the 53.5/46.5 splits already cited.) I think the info I'm asking for -- depending on what it is -- might offer at least a partial explanation for the discrepancy you point to.

]]>