216 SportsResearch

Launching Summer 2024. Aimed at improving sports discourse through historical education. Focused on the development of rules, amazing feats, and oddities.

[216 SportsResearch @216SportsRes]

@cg_geometry @ScoringChanges Given they were up 13-1, why would you assume this? He knew that was his chance at a 3B and I think he would have risked getting thrown out. If the throw is offline or he gets under a tag, that’s a 3B, not an error, because you can’t assume a perfect throw/tag on a non-force

[216 SportsResearch @216SportsRes]

@JoeHoffmann88 @crev99 @ScoringChanges It actually is. We just usually call it “on the throw,” but that’s a fielders choice. But it’s only “on the throw” if the guy doesn’t go UNTIL the throw.

[216 SportsResearch @216SportsRes]

@ScoringChanges Same as if a guy (foolishly) tries to stretch a single. U can look at it and say “he’s a dead duck,” but if the throw is a bit off the bag or he gets under a high tag, it’s a double. You don’t give errors for offline throws or bad tags, so u can’t assume a non force out.

[216 SportsResearch @216SportsRes]

@ScoringChanges The bottom line is this…. You can’t assume a perfect throw and a tag on a non-force play. So if a guy goes for 3d, and makes it, he gets the triple. Anyone saying it would only have been a 2B if bases are empty are assuming an online thrown and a tag, which you can’t do.

[216 SportsResearch @216SportsRes]

@Nolemusk168187 @ScoringChanges Not true. If the throw to 3B is offline or he gets under a tag, it’s NOT an error. U can’t assume a tag (until the ball’s there). U see offline throws home all the time not called errors (even though a good throw gets the runner). U only assume a perfect throw on a force out.

[216 SportsResearch @216SportsRes]

@gregd1111 @GageEHC More than that, it’s just…. not quick. This situation would require umpire/manager conference and debate. Defeats the whole purpose of trying to move quickly. If the opposing mgr realizes what you’re doing, it’s so easy to turn this into a 84 minute conversation.

[216 SportsResearch @216SportsRes]

@GageEHC Batting out of order (or any technical violation) takes a long time to sort out/confirm. There would be a 12 minute ump conference for each one. Opposing manager would make sure. The 3rd one would probably be a good 26 minutes lol. Quicker to lay down 3 crappy bunts.

[216 SportsResearch @216SportsRes]

On the other hand, Tigers are 9-3 in their last 12 close out games.

If the Guards do force a Game 5, Tigers haven’t lost a winner take all game since 1972. Guards are 0-7 in their last 7 winner take all games and have only won 1 (Game 5 of the 1997 ALDS) in their history.

[216 SportsResearch @216SportsRes]

Just a reminder going into tomorrow’s game… the Guardians have lost 11 straight win-or-go-home playoff games over the last 27 years. CLE hasn’t won a game to stave off elimination since Game 6 of the 1997 World Series. 11 straight losses since that game.

[216 SportsResearch @216SportsRes]

@BBGreatMoments The win can still be a meaningful stat with 2 changes: (1) get rid of the 5 inning rule; (2) you don’t lose your W if a reliever temporarily loses it. Give the W to the earliest P who closes his book with the lead. Make it retroactive. You leave with the lead, you did your job.

[216 SportsResearch @216SportsRes]

@AllAcesCards @robert09160618 I agree, but if we remove both the 5 inning rule and the rule that you lose the win if the relievers temporarily lose the lead (before your bats get it back), then it does a better job. We make those two changes, apply it retroactively, and the win stat is fixed and meaningful.

[216 SportsResearch @216SportsRes]

@AllAcesCards @robert09160618 How often your team wins when you start is a very useful stat.

[216 SportsResearch @216SportsRes]

@robert09160618 Yes. The inning qualifier should be removed entirely. If you leave with the lead, you should get the win (assuming your team holds it). This can be applied retroactively. The 5 inning rule is archaic and was designed for the assumption a team would never use more than 2 pitchers.

[216 SportsResearch @216SportsRes]

@EricMulhair @WayneTyson11 Sounds like you’re describing Range Factor, which measures usage. The stat can be useful to measure your pitchers’ tendencies, but people started using it (including as part of WAR) to assume fielders get more chances ONLY because they get 2 balls other guys don’t, which is bull.

[216 SportsResearch @216SportsRes]

@WayneTyson11 @notgaetti Starts by assuming every hit is a result of a fielder’s “poor range.” If a guy tends to fly to CF, it assumes that when he gets a hit, it’s because CF sucks (even if the hit really was an IF hit to SS). So NYY pitchers gave up hits to dudes who tended to fly to CF in other games

[216 SportsResearch @216SportsRes]

@notgaetti Did you know Freeman is the youngest active hits leader, at 34, since Stan Musial? Stan became the leader at age 31 after DiMaggio’s retirement (and held it until he retired right before his 43rd birthday). Mays was also 34 after Nellie Fox retired but slightly older than Freeman

[216 SportsResearch @216SportsRes]

@notgaetti And considering Freeman is only 34, there is a good chance he holds the distinction for 5 to 7 years himself, especially if he is chasing 3000.

[216 SportsResearch @216SportsRes]

@notgaetti In fact, this is only the 5th time since 1890 that there has been no active major leaguer with at least 2500 hits. The period between 1951 and 1954 was the only other time.

[216 SportsResearch @216SportsRes]

@notgaetti Freeman is the active leader with 2114 hits. This is the 2nd lowest total for the active hits leader since 1887 when Cap Anson led with 1944. The only time it’s been lower was in 1952 when Musial was active leader with 2023 after DiMaggio’s retirement. Make of that what you will

[216 SportsResearch @216SportsRes]

@JABowen22 @TheWARmonger_ @notgaetti The issue with RF/9 is it credits the player with ANY uptick in chances. It doesn’t mean a guy got to more balls, just that he had more chances, which are caused by fewer Ks, shifts, or even pull hitters literally targeting him. For all we know, all of those chances were routine

[216 SportsResearch @216SportsRes]

@JABowen22 @TheWARmonger_ @notgaetti No way. Counsell had 459 assists from 2B in 2005, which was about the same as Giles and Grudzielanek among NL 2B. There’s no way anybody can convince me that 76 of those assists (a full one-sixth) was him getting to balls no other major league 2nd baseman would have gotten to.