Okay, no gratuitous insults or personal attacks -- I'll take issue with a Richard Griffin column on its merits alone.
Griff's column today is about the Blue Jays' virtual abandonment of the stolen base as an offensive weapon, and he's not especially in favour of it. He points to successful Jays teams of the past (Tim Johnson's Runnin' Jays of 1998) and current speedsters like the Yankees, Angels and Mariners as examples of what lots of baserunning can accomplish.
Admittedly, he's not advocating for a '98 redux -- that year, virtually the whole team had the green light, which can be murder on the guy at the plate. But his strong implication is that since the Jays have the wheels to run much more than they do, they could steal scores of bases if Carlos Tosca were a little looser with the reins.
The 1998 Blue Jays did indeed steal 184 bases and won 88 games, as Griff says, but it's dangerous to presume a causation between the two. This is because the '98 squad was also caught stealing 81 times, for a total stolen-base percentage of 69%. That's not bad, but it's also right around the break-even mark for stolen-base percentage (opinion varies on whether the break-even is 67%, 75%, or somewhere in between. I'd be glad to be pointed to a definitive source on that).
There are those who factor in the "disruption to the defence" element in stealing bases --- the pitcher getting distracted by the throws to first base, the defence settling back on its heels, the catcher getting jittery. But there are also countervailing distractions to the offence: the hitter who gets restless in the box during throw-overs, or distracted by false starts at first base, or even swings and misses at a high fastball to help the runner steal. I think these all tend to cancel each other out, and we're still in the high 60s or low 70s just to break even.
Now take a look at last year's Blue Jays: 71 steals, 18 caught stealing (80%). I can't offer a breakdown of SB/CS between Buck Martinez and Carlos Tosca, but I don't recall the Jays running a whole lot under Buck anyway (probably because they were usually down 6-1 in the 3rd inning), so this number is a pretty accurate reflection of the JP Jays on the basepaths. A hundred fewer steals, but hardly any CSs, and ten extra percentage points on the success rate. This all adds up to a better offensive contribution via the stolen base.
Still not convinced? Check out these numbers:
1998 Jays: .266/.333/.448, 816 runs scored
2002 Jays: .261/.327/.430, 813 runs scored
Last year's squad had a lower BA, OBP and SLG than their speedy predecessors, yet they scored just three fewer runs. How come? I submit that an 80% success rate on steals contributed more offence than a 69% did.
For more evidence on the shortcomings of steals per se, check out the 2002 AL leaders in steals, along with their position in runs scored:
Royals, 140 SB (68%), 11th
Mariners, 137 SB (70%), 5th
Angels, 117 SB (69%) 4th
Orioles, 110 SB (69%), 13th
Rays, 102 SB (69%), 12th
The Yankees and Red Sox, the top two run-scoring teams in the league, had SB%s of 72 and 74, respectively.
So what all this amounts to is that stolen bases by themselves are not an indicator of runs scored or of wins -- it's stealing carefully and successfully that pays dividends. And this is what Tosca's Jays are doing, to their benefit.
As for the station-to-station running of which Griff accuses this current team, well, it's a little harsh to judge a team's baserunning abilities on the basis of their fourth spring training game, under what I understand were fairly damp playing conditions. If anything, it's exactly through smart and assertive baserunning -- first to third and second to home on base hits -- that this squad can use the excellent speed it does have.
Running amok isn't the key to a good offence: running intelligently is. We'll see the proof of this as the Jays assemble an offensive machine that's both efficient and effective.
Griff's column today is about the Blue Jays' virtual abandonment of the stolen base as an offensive weapon, and he's not especially in favour of it. He points to successful Jays teams of the past (Tim Johnson's Runnin' Jays of 1998) and current speedsters like the Yankees, Angels and Mariners as examples of what lots of baserunning can accomplish.
Admittedly, he's not advocating for a '98 redux -- that year, virtually the whole team had the green light, which can be murder on the guy at the plate. But his strong implication is that since the Jays have the wheels to run much more than they do, they could steal scores of bases if Carlos Tosca were a little looser with the reins.
The 1998 Blue Jays did indeed steal 184 bases and won 88 games, as Griff says, but it's dangerous to presume a causation between the two. This is because the '98 squad was also caught stealing 81 times, for a total stolen-base percentage of 69%. That's not bad, but it's also right around the break-even mark for stolen-base percentage (opinion varies on whether the break-even is 67%, 75%, or somewhere in between. I'd be glad to be pointed to a definitive source on that).
There are those who factor in the "disruption to the defence" element in stealing bases --- the pitcher getting distracted by the throws to first base, the defence settling back on its heels, the catcher getting jittery. But there are also countervailing distractions to the offence: the hitter who gets restless in the box during throw-overs, or distracted by false starts at first base, or even swings and misses at a high fastball to help the runner steal. I think these all tend to cancel each other out, and we're still in the high 60s or low 70s just to break even.
Now take a look at last year's Blue Jays: 71 steals, 18 caught stealing (80%). I can't offer a breakdown of SB/CS between Buck Martinez and Carlos Tosca, but I don't recall the Jays running a whole lot under Buck anyway (probably because they were usually down 6-1 in the 3rd inning), so this number is a pretty accurate reflection of the JP Jays on the basepaths. A hundred fewer steals, but hardly any CSs, and ten extra percentage points on the success rate. This all adds up to a better offensive contribution via the stolen base.
Still not convinced? Check out these numbers:
1998 Jays: .266/.333/.448, 816 runs scored
2002 Jays: .261/.327/.430, 813 runs scored
Last year's squad had a lower BA, OBP and SLG than their speedy predecessors, yet they scored just three fewer runs. How come? I submit that an 80% success rate on steals contributed more offence than a 69% did.
For more evidence on the shortcomings of steals per se, check out the 2002 AL leaders in steals, along with their position in runs scored:
Royals, 140 SB (68%), 11th
Mariners, 137 SB (70%), 5th
Angels, 117 SB (69%) 4th
Orioles, 110 SB (69%), 13th
Rays, 102 SB (69%), 12th
The Yankees and Red Sox, the top two run-scoring teams in the league, had SB%s of 72 and 74, respectively.
So what all this amounts to is that stolen bases by themselves are not an indicator of runs scored or of wins -- it's stealing carefully and successfully that pays dividends. And this is what Tosca's Jays are doing, to their benefit.
As for the station-to-station running of which Griff accuses this current team, well, it's a little harsh to judge a team's baserunning abilities on the basis of their fourth spring training game, under what I understand were fairly damp playing conditions. If anything, it's exactly through smart and assertive baserunning -- first to third and second to home on base hits -- that this squad can use the excellent speed it does have.
Running amok isn't the key to a good offence: running intelligently is. We'll see the proof of this as the Jays assemble an offensive machine that's both efficient and effective.
