Royals and Fangraphs New Base Running Metric, UBR
by Jeff Zimmerman on May 24, 2011 12:11 PM EDT
Email
PrintToday Fangraphs released their new metric, Ultimate Base Running, that measures the number of runs that a player gains and loses running the bases. The data is from 2002 and on and doesn't take into account SB/CS which was previously counted in base runs. I have just gone through to see how the Royals faired.
For the 2011 season, the Royals are 4th in the league at +3.9 runs. I can't believe we are actually 4th. Is the rest of the league that bad? Since 2002, the team is 19th in the league with -11.9 runs. With 10 runs equating to one win, all the complaining about base running as been the equivalent of one win since 2002.
Besides the team, here are the best and worst Royals base runners since 2002:
| Name | Bsr |
| David DeJesus | 14.1 |
| Carlos Beltran | 11.4 |
| Angel Berroa | 7.2 |
| Alex Gordon | 6.5 |
| Mike Aviles | 5.7 |
| Joey Gathright | 5.3 |
| Mark Grudzielanek | 4.9 |
| Mark Teahen | 4.4 |
| Ruben Gotay | 3.3 |
| Neifi Perez | 3.1 |
| Mitch Maier | -3.9 |
| Doug Mientkiewicz | -4.0 |
| Ryan Shealy | -4.1 |
| John Buck | -4.5 |
| Alberto T. Castillo | -5.9 |
| Matt Stairs | -6.9 |
| Ken Harvey | -7.1 |
| Jose Guillen | -7.2 |
| Billy Butler | -17.1 |
| Tony Pena | -17.1 |
Tony Pena was as bad a base runner as Bulter. I just don't buy that one for sure. The rest of the list seem to generally make sense. Thoughts?
37 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Can you please add a request that people actually read about what is and isn't included
in UBR and how it is measured before they start bitching about it and saying “no way!” and “it’s impossible to measure!”
Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.
What is the fun in that?
- .-. ..- … – / – …. . / .—. .-. - .. . … …
by Jeff Zimmerman on May 24, 2011 12:32 PM EDT up reply actions
to summarize
SB/CS are not included. I’m not sure if bases on passed balls / wild pitches are included or not. I don’t think pickoffs are. This is only a measurement of base running on balls in play.
I’m surprised to see Mitch so low though. I especially remember Frank pointing out what a good job he did of rounding 2nd and 3rd the other night when he scored from first. It was super smooth. Maybe he’s just not that fast though, or that was a rare performance. Frank said he thought he was the best base runner on the team, but this favors Alex Gordon.
2011 Royals Review NCAA Bracket Challenge Winner, by process of attrition
@omg how is dyson not #1?@
Scoring on a sac to shortstop had to have been worth at least 5 runs
by Boots 58 on May 24, 2011 12:27 PM EDT via mobile reply actions
Doesn't SB/CS seem like it should be part of "baserunning", rather than wOBA?
Maybe it’s just being done this way now because of logistics. But that would be my recommendation (albeit from the peanut gallery).
by SagehenMacGyver47 on May 24, 2011 1:01 PM EDT reply actions
So WAR now includes the 'little' baserunning things like going first to third on singles.
And stolen bases are alreand included in WAR since they’re inputted into in the hitting stats. Makes sense, but when looking at this baserunning stat this year, we’ll have to remember that it doesn’t factor in the outs we make trying to steal.
Does anyone know which stat, if either, catches pick-offs? Pick-offs are really the heart of the 2011 Royals, and it would be a shame if they weren’t given a spotlight to stand in.
Mike Aviles vehemently disagrees!
Pick-offs are just a way to keep Mike down.
by kansasjohn on May 24, 2011 2:03 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
On Pena...you have to be on base to be a bad baserunner.
Not buyin’ that one either.
We have met the enemy, and he is us.
by Royal Kingdom on May 24, 2011 2:03 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Note the disclaimer on the page
that the vast majority of players will remain within +/- 1 or 2 for their careers. It’s telling just how bad it is when players like Ken Harvey are in the neighborhood of -7 when their careers were so short to begin with.
"That's fine wood from... somewhere."
by KeepItCopacetic on May 24, 2011 2:06 PM EDT via mobile reply actions
Did Fangraphs really roll this into WAR?
They’re going to end up ruining their statistic; what does it mean to be a “replacement level” player on the basepads?
by BlueEyes_Austin on May 24, 2011 2:58 PM EDT reply actions
They are using average runs gained or lost
Just like UZR and RAA.
- .-. ..- … – / – …. . / .—. .-. - .. . … …
by Jeff Zimmerman on May 24, 2011 3:13 PM EDT up reply actions
So
I went and read the article. They are measuring baserunning as a second-order statistic off of UZR.
That’s building an edifice, if not on sand, certainly on sandstone.
by BlueEyes_Austin on May 24, 2011 4:48 PM EDT up reply actions
This is not the case
I understand why one might think so, but what MGL actually writes is
Base running linear weights or base running runs, or Ultimate Base Running (UBR), is similar to the outfield arm portion of UZR. Whatever credit (positive or negative) is given to an outfielder based on a runner hold, advance, or kill on a batted ball is also given in reverse to the runner (or runners).
My emphasis. ARM does not “found” BsR; they simply draw on the same data, which makes sense, as they deal with (mostly) the same events: extra bases taken/prevented on the bases, outs made/avoided on the bases, etc. While the overall impact of both long-term is a bit underwhelming because of the relative lack of variance in true talent, on the simple “events” level, it is more “reliable” than Zone-based metrics (which isn’t to say that zone-based metrics can’t be incorporated into arm ratings, that’s another debate). While hit location/batted ball data is conceded by various people to have different levels of being problematic, our data on e.g., how often a runner takes an extra base on a single is much better.
Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on May 24, 2011 7:37 PM EDT up reply actions
just to clarify
I do think than “UBR,” like ARM, does include some hit location data (I’ve read that before, but it isn’t clear from either the UBR or UZR primer as I’ve re-scanned them today) how much of it does. I’m simply pointing out that UBR isnt’ “founded” on UBR, even if it does include hit location data, in which case they are equally basic. But as opposed the just the zone-rating part of UZR, both ARM and UBR are heavily based on data that is much less problematic: outs, advances, base/out states, and so on.
That’s how I’ve understood it, at least.
Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on May 24, 2011 7:42 PM EDT up reply actions
I thought the primer said all balls hit to the outfield were treated the same
part of the hit location question.
Glad I came, just wish I hadn't stayed so long.
Rock Chalk Talk
yeah, I thought I'd read both
maybe he changed it at some point, or was just speculating on possible changes. Or I’m crazy. Anyway, the main thing to take away is that UBR is not “based” on UBR
Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on May 24, 2011 10:49 PM EDT up reply actions
IS NOT BASED ON UZR
argh…
Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on May 24, 2011 10:50 PM EDT up reply actions
To expand on what Jeff wrote
The general WAR model used by both FanGraphs and Baseball-Reference have in common that replacement level is derived form league average, thus the “replacement” component is added in for position players after runs above/below average for each component is calculated (B-R’s later addition of “oWAR” and “dWAR” unhelpfully confuses this point, Sean Smith, whose numbers they use, never did this).
As Tango often seays, “There is no such thing as a replacement-level fielder, or replacement level fielder, only a replacement level player.”
Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on May 24, 2011 3:50 PM EDT up reply actions
Ghost runner?
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
by RoyalsRetro on May 24, 2011 4:29 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Maybe Pena is just small sample size?
I mean, what…he got on base like a dozen times maybe?
The main problem I have...
is that these stats are basically counting stats, where the guys with the higher OBP’s will have a much higher score in one way or another. For example, if Billy only had half the opportunities to be a horrible base runner, his UBR would be half as bad (assuming his UBR has already normalized).
It does match reality in that players who are on base more actually do impact the game more with their baserunning. I don’t think this actually tells us who the best base runners are though. All time, Juan Pierre ranks #1 and Pujols is #10, but Pujols is only #10 because he has had MANY more opportunities than Pierre to “score points” with this system. Maybe there needs to be some adjustment for “opportunities above replacement” for comparison purposes only to factor out the OBP differences.
right, WAR is meant as a record of actual performance
Rathr than true talent
Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on May 24, 2011 3:43 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
That's a good point about how to interpret the stat.
But it does what it’s intended to do which is tell us how much a player has contributed to team success in his baserunning. A player who gets on base more will have more impact through his baserunning just like a starting pitcher who pitches more innings will have more impact than a reliever.
You make a good point that they could post this baserunning stat divided by times on base to better isolate baserunning talent.
well, it would have to be a bit more complex than that
you’d need to do it by “oppotunities” and “oppotunity type,” at least
Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on May 24, 2011 4:05 PM EDT up reply actions
"opportunity"
Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on May 24, 2011 4:05 PM EDT up reply actions
That means Pena was really bad.
-17.1 out of about 50 times actually on base means he was -3 every time he was on base.
Worst in baseball
Paul Konerko -44.2
David Ortiz -40.5
Jim Thome -33.9
Pat Burrell -30.6
Kevin Millar -30.2
Seems about right.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
This stat seems almost meaningless.
In a single season, without counting S/CS, the value of a single player’s baserunning is going to be so low that it will have minimal effect.
At the extremes it has some value
Using a run expectancy matrix, it can be determined that on average a triple is worth about .3 runs more per event than and double. If Butler had some more speed, he could easily turn one of those doubles in to a few triples.
Another example would have been Sunday when Butler got thrown out between 2nd and 3rd. man on 2nd with 2 outs = ~.3 runs scored. team with 3 outs = 0 runs. They will add up slowly.
- .-. ..- … – / – …. . / .—. .-. - .. . … …
by Jeff Zimmerman on May 24, 2011 5:42 PM EDT up reply actions
...
Does the “opportunity cost” of doubles not becoming triples factor into why Billy’s number is so bad? I would guess they’d have to build an expectation as to how many triples an average player would have if they hit this many doubles. or something like that. I can’t see how they could pull that in…
Look
I cannot judge when a guy goes to third on an infield grounder, and more power to fangraphs for being able to. But I have data for outs made in the bases, extra bases taken, movement on singles and doubles, stolen bases, caught stealing and pickoffs that are not included in the above. According to the formula I have been using for years ( i don’t usually separate the base running but doing a quick and dirty, late at night) I have the Royals about 7 runs below average.
Fangraphs also does not include data on wild pitches or passed balls, and we have made some outs that way. Maybe the Royals are fabulous at advancing on outs, but I believe if they included pickoffs, we would be in the negative.
"Trying is the first step to sucking" -Jimmy Chance
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Royals Review
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- College player makes impossible over the fence catch to save tournament game (Video)
- Security!: Camden Yards guard collides with Royals’ Mike Moustakas
- The Juice: Nelson Cruz matches career high eight RBIs, Pujols stays hot in Seattle
- Benches clear at Fenway as Red Sox-Rays rivalry heats up
- Keeping good company: Albert Pujols becomes fourth-youngest player to hit 450 home runs
