PDA

View Full Version : Just a random baseball (scoring) question..


Mr. N Paul Todd
07-24-2005, 11:08 PM
I know that getting the runner home at the cost of two outs (DP) doesn't count as an RBI, but why does a sacrifice fly not count as an AB but a ground-out (1 out) RBI does? It seems like the same result has occured.

Clembasbal
07-24-2005, 11:38 PM
Sorry, no answer here other than that it is in the rule book. But I would love to find out the real answer for this.

I know that back int he day if a fly ball moved a runner over the 3rd base then that was a sac fly too. That cut down on AB's and raised averages, don't know how long ago that was. My grandpa used to mention it.

TornLabrum
07-25-2005, 12:02 AM
I know that getting the runner home at the cost of two outs (DP) doesn't count as an RBI, but why does a sacrifice fly not count as an AB but a ground-out (1 out) RBI does? It seems like the same result has occured.

Because in their infinite wisdom the rule makers decided after maybe 30-40 years of playing professionally that a batter could intentionally fly out to score a runner, just like he could bunt to advance the runner. I guess they figure that it's obvious that the batter, by hitting a deep enough fly to allow a runner to score is doing that solely to advance the runner.

I guess they figure the ground out is ambiguous enough that they could actually be trying to get a hit but failed.

And as I said, those are guesses.

rmusacch
07-25-2005, 12:07 AM
Sorry, no answer here other than that it is in the rule book. But I would love to find out the real answer for this.

I know that back int he day if a fly ball moved a runner over the 3rd base then that was a sac fly too. That cut down on AB's and raised averages, don't know how long ago that was. My grandpa used to mention it.

Wasn't that pretty recent that a fly ball that moved the runner to 3rd was a sac fly?

TornLabrum
07-25-2005, 12:11 AM
Wasn't that pretty recent that a fly ball that moved the runner to 3rd was a sac fly?

Not as long as I've been following the game (55 years).

SOX ADDICT '73
07-25-2005, 12:56 AM
:hijacked: Since we're talking about rules we'd like to see changed, I'll propose this one:

Though they do keep track of "inherited runners scored" as a stat for relievers (IMO the single greatest measure of their effectiveness), I think such runs should not be added to the previous pitcher's "runs allowed" total.

For example, as things are, if Pitcher A allows a baserunner, is relieved by Pitcher B, and that runner scores, Pitcher A gets credited with the "earned run" and the "run allowed".

In my world, if Pitcher B allows the run, it should appear in their stats as such. Part of a reliever's job is to get inserted into crappy situations and stop the bleeding. Give Pitcher A the "earned run", since it's his fault the runner's on base to begin with, but give Pitcher B the "run allowed" for, well, allowing the run.

Hijack over. Making fun of SOX ADDICT '73 may commence...

Ol' No. 2
07-25-2005, 11:12 AM
:hijacked: Since we're talking about rules we'd like to see changed, I'll propose this one:

Though they do keep track of "inherited runners scored" as a stat for relievers (IMO the single greatest measure of their effectiveness), I think such runs should not be added to the previous pitcher's "runs allowed" total.

For example, as things are, if Pitcher A allows a baserunner, is relieved by Pitcher B, and that runner scores, Pitcher A gets credited with the "earned run" and the "run allowed".

In my world, if Pitcher B allows the run, it should appear in their stats as such. Part of a reliever's job is to get inserted into crappy situations and stop the bleeding. Give Pitcher A the "earned run", since it's his fault the runner's on base to begin with, but give Pitcher B the "run allowed" for, well, allowing the run.

Hijack over. Making fun of SOX ADDICT '73 may commence...Baseball prospectus actually does something like this. They worked out the likelihood of a run scoring for all possibilities of runners on base and number of outs. For pitchers leaving the game with runners on base, they are charged with a fraction of a run allowed corresponding to the statistical likelihood those runners will score. Relievers coming into the game get charged with the remaining fraction of the run scored for every inherited runner that scores, but are credited with a fractional NEGATIVE run scored for inherited runners stranded.

As an example, if a pitcher leaves the game with a runner on first and one out, and the statistical likelihood of that runner scoring is 20% (just as a guess, I don't know the actual likelihood), then that pitcher gets charged with 0.2 earned run. If the reliever allows him to score, he gets charged with the remaining 0.8 earned run, but if he strands him, he gets a -0.2 run scored.

It all adds up and IMO is a pretty good way to deal with the inherited runners problem.