Jump to content

Podsednik hurt?


Gene Honda Civic

Recommended Posts

QUOTE(jackie hayes @ Apr 14, 2006 -> 03:12 PM)
# of times cs includes the # of times picked off.

 

If they get picked off going back into first base it does not count as a caught stealing. When they are picked off... and caught in a run down... it is a caught stealing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 88
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

QUOTE(qwerty @ Apr 14, 2006 -> 04:11 PM)
No it's not. Those are how many times he was caught running to either second or third.

 

I know for a fact he was picked off 10-12 times... you are not telling me he was caught stealing an actual base 11-13 times.

I'm pretty sure it is included. Hmm... Wikipedia's definition says it is included. The definition on MLB's website is a little ambiguous: "The total number of opposing base runners caught stealing by the catcher. A runner is charged with a caught stealing if he is put out attempting to advance to the next base without the ball having been hit into play." So it sounds like a pickoff is a cs for the runner's purpose, but not for the catcher's. (Which makes some sense.)

 

Look at Pods' game log from last year. He was picked off twice on May 12, and he has 2 cs on that day. (And he was only on base twice.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(jackie hayes @ Apr 14, 2006 -> 03:19 PM)
I'm pretty sure it is included.  Hmm...  Wikipedia's definition says it is included.  The definition on MLB's website is a little ambiguous: "The total number of opposing base runners caught stealing by the catcher. A runner is charged with a caught stealing if he is put out attempting to advance to the next base without the ball having been hit into play."  So it sounds like a pickoff is a cs for the runner's purpose, but not for the catcher's.  (Which makes some sense.)

 

Look at Pods' game log from last year.  He was picked off twice on May 12, and he has 2 cs on that day.  (And he was only on base twice.)

 

Exactly, so if they are diving back into first it is just a pick off.

 

Read the comment section here...

 

Bleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeak!

I'm a little confused about if/when caught stealing stats include pickoffs, but let me tell you that Bradley got picked off a number of times last season. Don't want to see him on base against Andy Pettitte, ever.

 

If the baserunner is out at second, it counts as caught stealing; if he's out at first, it's a pickoff. Anything else (as in tagged out on the basepaths) I'm not sure; liely scorer's discretion. Or perhaps it matters in which direction he's running?

 

CS do not officially inlcude pickoffs, which is a minor travesty of course. The numbers above, with all due respect to Rich, would mean a lot more with the PO numbers are included. Otherwise, it's like giving someone's BA without inlcuding bunt singles (or bloop singles, or some other infrequent but important event).

 

Actually, it's a lot like not including HBP's in a batter's or pitcher's line (a major travesty) or WP's for a pitcher (another minor travesty).

 

There are players who take such an aggressive lead that while they may have good SB/CS numbers, are prone to being picked off a couple to 3 time per season, or it is simply part of the cost of doing business (through litle fault of their own other than the fact that they are attempting a lot of steals).

 

And since the negative value of an out on base is so high (2-3 times that of the SB), it is that much more important to include PO's.

 

Again, with all due respect to Rich, I suggest that someone redo the above charts including PO's. I imagine that many of the final tallies will change significantly.

 

Last year, there were 153 PO's where the runner was actually out (there are some other official PO's where the runner ends up being safe on an error). Of course there are PO errors to offset some of the pickoffs, which are also not counted in the SB and CS totals. BTW, SB and CS totals can be a little misleading anyway. Some CS do not result in outs either (not that many), and of course there are SB errors (about 1 in 30 I think) that elevate the "normal" value of the SB.

 

Anyway, among the least efficient thieves, Bradley and Sanchez had 1 CS each (partial list).

 

Among the most efficient, Podsednick had 2 CS, Crawford 3, Furcal, Rollins, and Patterson 2 (also partial list).

 

Etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(jackie hayes @ Apr 14, 2006 -> 03:19 PM)
Look at Pods' game log from last year.  He was picked off twice on May 12, and he has 2 cs on that day.  (And he was only on base twice.)

 

That is because he was called out at 2nd. If Chen goes to pick off Podsednik at first, and Pods runs to 2nd and gets tagged out there, it is technically a CS.

 

Same situation, and Pods dives back to 1st, he is picked off, different than a CS.

 

EDIT: I can find the 06 leaders in Picked Off, but not 05.

Edited by SHAFTR
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(qwerty @ Apr 14, 2006 -> 04:24 PM)
Exactly, so if they are diving back into first it is just a pick off.

 

Read the comment section here...

 

Bleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeak!

 

QUOTE(SHAFTR @ Apr 14, 2006 -> 04:25 PM)
That is because he was called out at 2nd.  If Chen goes to pick off Podsednik at first, and Pods runs to 2nd and gets tagged out there, it is technically a CS.

 

Same situation, and Pods dives back to 1st, he is picked off, different than a CS.

 

Okay, I'm convinced. Why is it so damn hard to find po stats, then?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(jackie hayes @ Apr 14, 2006 -> 03:46 PM)
Okay, I'm convinced.  Why is it so damn hard to find po stats, then?

 

I don't know. Stats does keep track of them, but their website only has 06 stats up, not 05. Even my Bill james book keeps track of SB, CS, Stealing 3rd, baserunning (1st to 3rd, 2nd to home, thrown out while trying to advance), but no Picked Off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(aboz56 @ Apr 14, 2006 -> 07:06 PM)
It was also reported that he came to camp out of shape and doesn't put the work in to be the best player he can be.

 

No thanks.

 

Let him go to the Yankees, he sounds like a perfect fit for them.

 

Yep, we need more grinders.

 

f*** talent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(watchtower41 @ Apr 14, 2006 -> 10:26 AM)
Thank You.

How soon people forget that he hist a walk-off in the World Series, against one of the best closers in the game.

Remember that Frank Thomas guy that use to play on the southside? Sorry, but there is zero loyalty in baseball. Who cares what he did last year? Welcome to 2006, earn your paycheck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Felix @ Apr 15, 2006 -> 01:24 PM)
Zero?  I think there's some, just not a lot.  I mean, look at Konerko.  He was offered less money here, but came back.

 

And even he has said he wouldn't have been coming back if we didn't offer the extra year on the deal. I think the poster was referring to no loyalty by teams to their players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(fathom @ Apr 15, 2006 -> 09:25 AM)
And even he has said he wouldn't have been coming back if we didn't offer the extra year on the deal.

I must have missed those quotes, because I don't remember them. I'll take your word for it though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Felix @ Apr 15, 2006 -> 07:24 AM)
Zero?  I think there's some, just not a lot.  I mean, look at Konerko.  He was offered less money here, but came back.

 

OK, I will agree there is some, tiny bit of loyalty in baseball, but not much. No way Kong passes up Maggs money to stay.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...