Is there any way to compare stolen base percentage when the steal comes against a pitch out to other instances when it doesn’t? I’m having a discussion with friends about the actual value of the pitch out, compared to it’s perceived value. You would think that it increases a catcher’s chances to catch the runner, but does statistical analysis support this?
The conventional wisdom is that the caught stealing rate will be higher on pitch-outs but I’ve also never seen statistical evidence of this - only anecdotal. For one you’ll never have pitches in the dirt or WP/PB during a pitch out which has to have some effect.
I think you’re going to have a hard time finding any comprehensive numbers because AFAIK box scores have no way of indicating a pitch out - they are just recorded as balls.
I’ve been pondering this after seeing some numbers by count data. Is it worse giving the extra ball for a possible added shot at throwing out a runner if he happens to run. My gut says no, but I don’t know an easy way to research this.
We had a discussion in another thread last week where it arose that rule 10.2 (IIRC) defines a steal for statistical purposes as being a judgment call of the official scorer.
He can rule that “defensive indifference” means a steal is not recorded, even when the runner takes the base.
How often this happens, or when this rule was added (maybe in the 80s?), might affect your calculations on both pitchout and non-pitchout situations.
The Retrosheet pitch-by-pitch event files do distinguish pitch-outs from other balls. So I believe the necessary information is available, at least for more recent seasons when Retrosheet observers have been logging the games themselves. However, I’ve never seen anybody perform the necessary analysis.
Just from casual observation, though, I’m wondering why anybody would question that pitch-outs are effective when the runner runs. It’s ridiculously easier to throw out a runner on a pitch-out. The runner success rate is what, 67% or 75% for all steals? I doubt that it’s more than 25% on pitch-outs.
Nobody would ever pitch out in a “defensive indifference” situation. The exception for defensive indifference, which has always been in the scoring rules, merely eliminates a few non-pitch-out steals that would otherwise inflate the non-pitch-out success rate.
I did not know this - sounds like an area ripe for a quick study.
I agree with your observation here. There is no doubt that if the runner runs a pitch-out is effective - and that’s probably why the particular question as posted by the OP hasn’t been studied.
A more interesting one is probably something more like what Hawkeyeop asked. Taking into account that the runner only runs on a certain percentage of pitch-outs, and pitch-outs only reduce stolen bases by a certain percentage, does this decrease in steals outweigh the cost of giving up one (or more) free balls. My gut feeling is that it probably doesn’t after looking at just how much better hitters do when ahead in the count.
But could “defensive indifference” be ruled on a pitchout? that is a different kettle of fish.
Suppose the middle infielder that is to cover the base doesn’t get the signal, so he never moves. The catcher sees this, and never even cocks his arm to throw. The runner goes in standing up.
Defensive indifference? I dunno.
I would think this would still be ruled a stolen base. Obviously SOMEBODY (i.e. the pitcher) isn’t indifferent towards the runner stealing a base if he’s going to do a pitchout.
This statement reminds me of Line-Up protection. Everyone has always said it, but do stats bear it out? There are many factors out of the catcher’s control that goes into a caught stealing. If the runner reads the pitcher right and gets the right jump, a pitch out doesn’t make it easier to nab a guy who’s going to be safe anyway. There are superior defensive catchers that are just as good from the crouch then they could be from a standing pitch out.
Generally speaking, it has no effect at all. There are a few very isolated and extreme examples where it mgiht have had an effect.
So I’m a little late to the party, but this was the most relevant thread when I Googled this topic. Since I couldn’t find any data, I ran the stats myself and I figured you guys might be interested. I did the analysis for games between (and including) 1990 and 2010. Here were the results:
Stealing on Pitch-out (1990-2010):
Stolen Bases: 1124
Caught Stealing: 1510
Stolen Base Percentage: 42.7%
Stealing Overall (1990-2010):
Stolen Bases: 62196
Caught Stealing: 27240
Stolen Base percentage: 69.5%
Pitchout Stats:
Total Pitchouts (1990-2010): 19405
Total Runners Going on Pitchouts: 2634
Runners Going Percentage: 13.6%
So pitching out does make a difference, as it catches runners about 27% more often than regular pitches. However, a runner only goes on pitch outs about 14% of the time. I’m not sure where exactly to go with that information, but maybe someone who is more familiar with pitch value can take it from there
Well, that’s interesting. My guess of 25% was much too low. There’s a tendency, when a runner steals against a pitch-out, to think that it was a one-off, a severe and even comical screw-up by the defending team. But you’re numbers say that it’s common.
So maybe the pitch-out is overused. The problem is, that it’s hard to measure the payoff of a 27% reduction in steal success against the cost of a ball.
This strikes me as a significant factor. Are the runners who go on a pitch-out those who steal “when everyone in the ball park knows he is going to steal”–that is, presumably, those with the best chance of success regardless of the defensive team’s response? What is the success rate of those runners in non-pitch-out situations?
Oh, I think that’s very measurable on a league average level (though still a little beyond my maths). The trick would be in more specific tactical situations, for particular runners and batters (extra balls in the count helping some batters much more than others).
I don’t have any stats on this, but I do know the rationale. A pitchout is a fastball that’s high and very far outside. The catcher comes out of his crouch when the pitch is thrown so that he’s in a better position to make a strong throw. Also, the pitch is far enough outside that the batter can’t get in the way of the throw, or make it hard for the catcher by swinging at the pitch.
A pitchout is probably more effective against a hit-and-run than against a straight steal. The runner usually doesn’t get as good a jump on a hit-and-run, and a pitchout prevents the batter from putting the ball in play. A successful hit-and-run either puts a runner at second at the expense of an out, or runners at first and third without costing an out. A pitchout against a hit-and-run usually results in an out, a runner taken off the bases, and a strike (because the batter will flail helplessly at the pitch in an attempt to put the ball in play).
I missed the original discussion regarding defensive indifference, but the only time the official scorer will record it is if 1) the first baseman is not holding the runner, 2) no one covers the base and 3) the catcher doesn’t make a trhow. DI on a steal of 3rd base is slightly more tricky because you don’t have a situation like 1st base where a defenseman is literally holding the runner by planting himself on the base.
As for the success of the pitchout, I couldn’t find any stats, but I would guess the success rate is substantially higher than pitches that aren’t pitchouts.