David, you mention that the defense "tend[s] to be overly concerned with the stolen base." What about the assertion that the stolen base attempt has an even greater impact on the distracted batter? During a stolen base attempt, arguably only the second baseman or shortstop has to react while the ball is pitched. However, the batter's swing is always impacted, most of the time for the worse. Thanks.

Manuel should hang out with Dusty Baker. Heaven forbid that Beltran clog up the basepaths! Hopefully he'll run into some outs!

By defense, I also mean the distraction of the pitcher (see Tom Gordon vs. Dave Roberts). A moving defense opens holes for hitters, so I don't really see the stolen base as a net negative for batters. Putting a ball in play with the runner moving can often result in a hit through a vacated spot.

Would the pitcher really be distracted though? His back is to a runner stealing second. However, the batter is always distracted, as the play is occurring in front of him. Moreover, he has to adjust his swing in order to "take advantage" of the situation. I would be curious to compare league-average BABIPs in hit-and-run situations to those in all circumstances....

JE,

I would think that you are talking about two very interrelated, but ultimately different beasts.

Yes, batters may be distracted during steal attemps, but surely not all batters are swining during steal attempts (i.e., a batter MAY choose to swing or not, but he is not obligated to do so because of a hit-and-run sign).

Agreed, JRVJ, but let's stick to hit-and-run situations. We agree that batters often swing at pitches that they otherwise would otherwise lay off, correct? Therefore, I wonder whether the hit-and-run all too often takes the bat out of the batter's hands in a de facto sense.

Have you ever played baseball? Every player on the field better be moving when they see the runner go - infielders have to adjust if the balls hit to them and OF have to come in to get to a ball quicker. The catcher has to shift so he can throw and generally the pitcher rushes his delivery when he sees the catcher shift. I think Manuel's exaggerating the concern with SB percentage or at least he's not phrasing it correctly. Lot's of guys don't want to run against the catcher and will go if they think they can get a jump which is most likely what Beltran is doing.

Yes, I have played baseball, Bandit. Thank you for asking. Would you like to look my career high school numbers?

Admittedly, I may not have been clear in my comment, as you missed my point.

The left fielder may indeed move in one or two steps, but if the ball isn't hit in his direction, then there's no consequence to his shuffling. However, the pitch ALWAYS gets thrown to the batter. Consequently, he will ALWAYS be distracted while taking his swing.

You exaggerate the impact a steal IN PROGRESS has on pitchers. The only time a pitcher hurries up his throw home when a steal is in progress is when it's an attempted steal of home or a pitchout. Otherwise, the pitcher's delivery is predetermined (e.g., a shorter stride when a fast runner is on first, a longer one when Frank Thomas is there ;-) ).

If you were distracted that much during your at bats in high school, it's small wonder you missed the big leagues.

Any MLB batter that gets that easily distracted will find themselves out of a job pretty quickly. Of course, if you want to look down to first base while someone is throwing a ball 90 mph in your direction that's your business. And let's not suggest that peripheral vision is a serious consideration in this scenario. The batters strategy may change (ie contact over power) but the distraction is all on the defense (1B out of position, 2B/SS moving to cover, etc).

Unless you are in SD, then you just let the guy take the base at his leisure.

Yeah, Thumbie, I was so distracted in the batters box that now I sit alone in my mother's basement and sulk at why I never made the bigs.

I see: so any batter who gets distracted isn't fit for the Show, but you cannot explain to me why it is ok for position players to lose their cool.

Dude, why don't you make yourself useful and do some math on BABIPs when the hit and run is on versus all other situations? Or did you flunk math too?

See below the excerpt from a Joe Sheehan column from 2004 on when a stolen base attempt (or hit-and-run) may hurt the offense, not the defense.

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=2607

The vaunted secondary effects of stealing bases--distracting the pitcher, putting pressure on the defense--do not appear to exist. In fact, most secondary effects argue in favor of keeping the runner of first base. A runner on first is more disruptive to a defense, with the first baseman holding and the second baseman cheating towards second for a double play, than a runner on second. Additionally, studies show that stolen-base attempts negatively impact the performance of the batter at the plate, presumably due to hitters getting themselves into negative counts by taking pitches or swinging at bad balls to protect the runner.

Sorry to hear about your Mom's situation. Glad to see you could take some time out from WoW to talk intelligently about baseball without resorting to personal attacks. Anywaaay...

I would suggest you do the math as well and maybe try some observational analysis (gasp).

Sheehan - A runner on first is more disruptive to a defense, with the first baseman holding and the second baseman cheating towards second for a double play...
Me - the distraction is all on the defense (1B out of position, 2B/SS moving to cover, etc).

Call me crazy but that sounds the same to me.

Sheehan - studies show that stolen-base attempts negatively impact the performance of the batter at the plate, presumably due to hitters getting themselves into negative counts by taking pitches or swinging at bad balls to protect the runner.
Me - The batters strategy may change (ie contact over power)...

Again, it sounds the same to me. The point is that the batter's approach changed, not that he was distracted.

And yes, any batter that can't concentrate on his job is not going to last and no, it is not OK for a fielder to lose his cool (batters and fielders are the same guys, BTW). I don't even understand how you made that conclusion from my post.

If your statement is true, that the defense is totally unphased by trying to hold the runner, then why wouldn't the 1B always stay on the bag? Why change the way you position your fielders if the net effect is nil? Why pitch from the stretch?

So I guess 100+ years of ballplayers and managers are all morons because Joe Sheehan published a cursory 300 word analysis on the subject. And Joe has never been off the mark. Ever. I would like to see Piazza's take on this subject. Or anybody that tried to pitch with Ricky Henderson on first. If I can't prove the effect with simplistic statistical analysis, it must not exist (thank you John Brittian).

Here's some flunky math for you. SB is worth ~.25 runs and a pick off is worth ~.63 runs. Clearly, catching the runner during a steal is more valuable to the fielding team than the steal is to the batting team. So who do you think is paying more attention to the play?

Save the "dude" for bowling night, Lebowski.

Yeah, Thumbie, that's right. (Or should I call you "Buzz"?) Between Joe Sheehan and Joe Morgan, I'll take the analysis of the former any day. One thing that this site, BP, THT, and FJM have demonstrated is that ballplayers and managers can learn a great deal from analysts who have never played a game in the majors

John Brittain would also agree that just because some Tony LaRussa claims that major league pitchers threw more innings in the minors 30 years ago than they do today, doesn't make it so. You have to look it up, Buzz. That's why I asked the question about BABIP.

Thanks for the flunky math (did you have to remove your socks first in order to do all of the counting?) but your numbers have no bearing on this conversation. I never (ever) made the claim that the defense shouldn't care about a runner on first, only that maybe "distraction" during a hit-and-run impacts both the offense and defense.

Get back to me when you have calculated the BABIP numbers, Buzz.

I should have taken Pinto's clue and ignored you after the second post. I'll do this for you just once.

From Mark Pankin for SABR (2002) - you have heard of SABR right? Mostly analysts that never played MLB.

For a true SB threat at first (40+) the batter goes from .274/.340 to .329/.373 based on 6377 AB from 1980-2001. The effect is similar for all baserunners regardless of SB ability, but to a lesser extent.

Just in case my simple math is too abstract for you, when a known basestealer is on first the batter goes from league average to all-star. No analysis, just the stats. Didn't have to calculate anything as this presentation was readily available for Joe Sheehan or anybody else to review before making any claims that the batter is at some disadvantage with a runner on first.

The only thing we agree on is Joe Morgan.

Buzz, for the absolute last time, I asked whether a player's BABIP was lower during an actual hit-and-run based on Sheehan's claims. If you would have bothered to review the thread, you'd know that. (Maybe I'll post that question to Sheehan during his next BP chat.) Accordingly, even your latest math doesn't answer that question.

So you agree that Michael Schur of FJM fame, who makes his living as a TV writer and not an athlete, has more insights on today's game than Joe Morgan, perhaps the greatest second baseman in history. Mazel tov!

By the way, Buzz, I never asked Pinto to respond to my subsequent messages. Again, you'd know that if you bothered to read the thread.

Nitey nite!

Buzz, for the absolute last time, I asked whether a player's BABIP was lower during an actual hit-and-run based on Sheehan's claims. If you would have bothered to review the thread, you'd know that. (Maybe I'll post that question to Sheehan during his next BP chat.) Accordingly, even your latest math doesn't answer that question.

So you agree that Michael Schur of FJM fame, who makes his living as a TV writer and not an athlete, has more insights on today's game than Joe Morgan, perhaps the greatest second baseman in history. Mazel tov!

By the way, Buzz, I never asked Pinto to respond to my subsequent messages. Again, you'd know that if you bothered to read the thread. (I know, I know, that's WAY too much to ask.)

It's official, you are a complete moron.

2008 Luis Castillo (Mets) - .244 BABIP with bases empty, .303 with Reyes on first.

2008 Jose Lopez (Mariners) - .300 BABIP with bases empty, .330 with Ichiro on first.

I won't waste anymore of my time with this nonsense. You want more BABIP #s? Go figure them out yourself, I got my answer and I'm moving on, Dude.