How much does gazing at home runs hurt a team?

by cwyers on Apr 12, 2008 4:08 PM CDT Comment 45 comments

Let's start a little project here. We have a few hitters (Soriano and Ramirez come to mind) that like to appreciate their work at the plate a little more than some might appreciate.

So let's start a thread here (I'll keep a link to it available as much as I can, so that it doesn't get lost - if you need a link to it later, just ask me) to keep track of just how often Cubs players sit there and admire a hit that isn't a home run. Then at the end of the season, we can take a look at how often it happens, and what the "cost" is to the team in runs/wins/etc.

I'll start us off, with an example of how to specify it:

04/11/2008 @ Philadelphia - Aramis Ramirez gazes at a fly ball in the ninth inning; ends up with a double to deep center off So Taguchi

Your participation in this project is greatly appreciated, and you have my thanks in advance. Have I missed any plays so far this season?

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of SB Nation or Al Yellon, editor-in-chief (unless it's a FanPost posted by Al). FanPost opinions are valued expressions of opinion by passionate and knowledgeable baseball fans.

1 recs | Comment 45 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

so Im assuming you are of the belief

that he would have had a triple if he hustled out of the box?

don't get me wrong I'm not a fan of guys admiring their handy work, but I don't know if that's the best first example.

---AC 00 00 00 - Believe

by mjk83 on Apr 12, 2008 4:29 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

I was just about to say that.

It's likely that would have been a double anyway. But the point is taken -- sometimes these types of hits, which should be doubles, wind up being singles.

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al on Apr 12, 2008 4:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm going to track all such events...

...and compare them to his overall production on the season - probably going to look at Ramirez's/Soriano's general distribution of 1B/2B/3B on fly balls in play compared to when they gaze at home runs that aren't home runs.

I has a blog.

by cwyers on Apr 12, 2008 4:39 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Shouldn't the events

where they gaze, and it does turn out to be a HR, also be tracked? In other words, all gazing events no matter the outcome of the event.

"Is there anything he can't do?" ~Len Kasper, 4/5/08, on Kosuke Fukudome

by JohnM on Apr 12, 2008 4:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Doesn't really matter

The point of the exercise is to try to see how much the gazing hurts the player's production. There is nothing gained or lost when the players run hard when the ball flies over the wall.

That said, I do hope cwyers does keep track of this all season. It will be useful to have some data to convince people to stop whining about the maybe two times a year that Ramirez gets a single instead of a double because he watched the ball instead of running hard like scrappy Theriot who is almost to second base every time one of his infield pop flies is caught.

by Leon Durham on Apr 12, 2008 4:52 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well, if it's to measure how much the gazing hurts

I would have thought with the home runs, it doesn't hurt at all. "Not at all" is an example of "how much", isn't it?

"Is there anything he can't do?" ~Len Kasper, 4/5/08, on Kosuke Fukudome

by JohnM on Apr 12, 2008 4:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Not really

The only way those instances where the actual home runs would matter is if the goal was to figure out the average impact of each time someone watches the ball, but that statistic is obviously going to be tiny as even the most ridiculous of the Soriano/Ramirez bashers surely realize that most of the time they watch the ball, the ball actually does leave the park.

The better number to figure out is how many runs or games the gazing causes the team to lose. Don't worry, the number will still be very close to zero.

by Leon Durham on Apr 12, 2008 5:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

What's ridiculous is...

...Soriano watching a ball that landed in the first or second row and Ramirez (who is actually one of my favorite players--I just don't like that one bad habit) watching one that didn't even get out of the park. Seriously, major league hitters know when they've crushed one and I don't begrudge them a little bit of a look on those occasions, but I seriously doubt any of them can tell the difference between one that's going to barely make it and one that's going to stay in the park. What's wrong with running those out and watching it on video--where they can see it from five different angles--if it winds up being a homer?

by Mike Vails Evil Twin on Apr 12, 2008 5:19 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

There's obviously nothing wrong with hustling

although we don't want guys prone to leg injuries unnecessarily overdoing it.

But your question changes the subject. The issue isn't whether Aramis and Soriano and others like them should run hard on balls they think are home runs, but whether their failure to do so actually has any significant negative impact on their or the team's performance. I would suggest that it has virtually no impact at all given that how rarely a player is 1) wrong about it being a home run, 2) does not get a double out of the hit, and 3) doesn't score later in the inning because of it.

Because the impact is, I believe, non-existent, I think that people who get worked up about it are doing so for no logical reason whatsoever.

by Leon Durham on Apr 12, 2008 6:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

But i think the impact has some existence

even if it is very small, and therefore, statistically meaningless. Sorry for bringing this up but I would compare the impact of hustle with the impact of clutch. I we can all reasonably assert that clutch does, in some form, exist. Through life experience, I think everyone can say some people are better at handling high-pressure situations than others, and therefore, clutch exists in baseball to some extent. What's in question is the impact of it. It's hard to say what exactly qualifies as "clutch" and what doesn't, and even if we can examine a hitter's performance in "clutch" situations, there's many other variables and a considerably smaller sample size that affects our ability to evaluate what effect clutch has. But batting clutch players (assuming we could somehow tell who was clutch, which we can't), while it likely has barely any effect in a statistical overview, has some effect, even if it is very limited.

The same is true for hustle. It's hard to evaluate completely and probably has very limited effect, but it does have some effect

by ecbc on Apr 13, 2008 1:04 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

those two times

don't mean much, but they are something. And I'm projecting that this experiment will say the times wont affect their production by much at all, but its something. Maybe it doesn't statistically add up to "one game" using sabermetrics, but maybe that one run it did produce came in a one run game.

It's a win/win situation. You lose nothing by hustling (unless you're out of shape, which would then be something to work on), and gain something, so why not hustle? Of course, i mean playing hard within reach of the physical capacities, so don't say someone might "try too hard" and get thrown out stretching for a double on a triple, or get hurt because they "tried too hard". That falls in the category of the runner being careless, or not being field-aware.

Also, cwyers, if you want to just measure how gazing at home runs affect production, go ahead. But if you are measuring hustle, which i think would be more helpful statistically, you should add in singles that should have been doubles, close infield singles where some players may have simply given up on while others ran and got safe, hustling that caused errors, etc. Though that would be a lot harder to measure and usually needs human judgment to decide.
Also, you probably should note that the Ramirez HR would likely have been a double anyway. But like I said before, his choice to gaze and his slow trot out of the box forced him to make a potentially dangerous slide, where he would have been safe otherwise.

by ecbc on Apr 12, 2008 6:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Chart the opposition, too

It also would be interesting to see how many times the Cubs are helped by opposing hitters who would rather watch their long fly balls than hustle around the bases.

And I have to wonder if all the people who think this isn't a big deal have to say about players who don't run out pop ups. They occasionally get dropped, so is it okay if a guy just gets to first when he could have made it to second. Carlton Fisk didn't think so a few years ago when he took Deion Sanders to task for not hustling. I know standing and watching has been a part of the game for a long time, but that doesn't make it right. Maybe it doesn't make any difference at all over the course of a season, but why even take that chance? Frankly, I'm surprised this has caused such controversy.

by Mike Vails Evil Twin on Apr 12, 2008 5:13 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

I don't like the gazing and admiring very much

although I give them a pass when it's a no-doubter. I'm not going to vigorously defend or attack the practice, because I think the stat cwyers comes up with is probably going to show the impact to be negligible. And the one person who mentioned kind of liking it - adding some swagger, etc. I'm not sure there isn't something to that. Soriano admired and gazed like crazy last June in a series in Atlanta, which led to some bean ball wars, Ted Lilly getting ejected in the first inning of a game, and Fontenot getting clotheslined in his first week in the bigs. But that series was a very positive spark for a badly struggling team, and it was Soriano's cockiness (when he was successful in beating the opposing pitcher badly) that seemed to set it off. OK, so this is a stretch, but that's right around when they started winning.

"Is there anything he can't do?" ~Len Kasper, 4/5/08, on Kosuke Fukudome

by JohnM on Apr 12, 2008 5:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

As far as popups...

...I can handle that right now.

On average, a hitter will reach base after a popup 3% of the time. Now, for Aramis Ramirez:

2004 - 0.08
2005 - 0.057142857
2006 - 0.087719298
2007 - 0.075

Aramis Ramirez reaches base on popups more often than the average hitter!

I'll just sit over here and watch casually as everyone's head explodes.

(Meanwhile, Ryan Theriot has never reached base on a popup. True story!)

I has a blog.

by cwyers on Apr 12, 2008 5:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think

the poster was saying how many times could a player have reached second on a high pop up instead of a one base error. Most players can and will just jog to first unless they think its foul, so measuring how often they reach base doesn't really help.

by ecbc on Apr 12, 2008 6:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Could it be

that with his power, he hits his pop-ups so high and possibly, at times, with so much "english" that it increases the difficulty of catching them, thus resulting in errors and Aramis reaching base? Do you have stats for similar power hitters, and do their numbers also reflect reaching base on pop-ups at an above average frequency?

Alan Trammell: Assistant (to the) Manager

by northsider on Apr 13, 2008 2:53 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

FIRST PITCH IN A HALF HOUR....

THANK GOD....ALL THIS GAZING TALK IS MAKING ME WISH WE HAD A DAY GAME....LET IT GO PEEPS

All things great in 2008!!

by By Santo's Grace on Apr 12, 2008 5:30 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

No way to track this, but even if it goes go

it could hurt, in a way.

Never give your opponent extra incentive to beat you.

by Shanghai Badger on Apr 12, 2008 5:40 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Was that

2 pitches 2 outs?

"Is there anything he can't do?" ~Len Kasper, 4/5/08, on Kosuke Fukudome

by JohnM on Apr 12, 2008 6:26 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

I like guys sliding into first on a single

instead of running full speed through the bag. Those guys might be safe running it out but I've never seen a guy sliding end up safe.

Just like the gazing (and it's happened to a couple guys this year on different teams) not getting that extra base because they have to watch it.

"The important thing is not to stop questioning. Curiosity has its own reason for existing." ~Albert Einstein

by Jettero2112 on Apr 12, 2008 7:26 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Sorry

IT'S like, not I like.....

"The important thing is not to stop questioning. Curiosity has its own reason for existing." ~Albert Einstein

by Jettero2112 on Apr 12, 2008 7:26 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Can't they

run while watching? Standing and admiring their shot makes it about them and not about the team.

by sue369 on Apr 12, 2008 8:04 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

What exactly are you pro-gazers defending?

I'm also shocked by my BCB colleagues standing up and fighting for Ramirez's and Soriano's right to stand in the batter's box and admire their home run. More than that, I'm confused. I'll tell you how I see it and please reciprocate.

When a batter catches all of a pitch and knows it's a home run, then proceeds to stand in the batter's box and admire their work, they come across as a cocky primadonna. They look arrogant. I don't like players (in any sport) that try to show up and out-macho their opponents (e.g. end-zone dances), especially if they play for my favorite teams.

I also don't like that such gazing separates an all-star from the bench player--that it's all right for Ramirez to admire his work, but not, say, Eric Patterson. If we expect Patterson, Cedeno, etc. to play fundamentally sound, run out every ball hit, etc. we should expect Lee and Soriano to do the same. Remember how much crap Julian Tavarez got for walking down the first base line when he laid down a sac bunt or when he bounced a ball to the first baseman. It's not all right for him and it's not all right for our all-stars.

Now, I've said why I advocate every player on the Cubs running out every in-play ball. Please help me to understand why you think people should be encouraged to stand in the batter's box and admire home runs.

by Rev Gunia on Apr 12, 2008 8:57 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

100% agreed

The point of this exercise, will be that when you add up all the times throughout the season the result will be at the most, it'll cost a team 1 loss. and afterall, what's only 1 loss? It's like the old how many wins/losses is a good/bad Manager worth to a team.

SOme people just seem to think that the game is played by numbers or on paper in some fantasy world. Anyone who even tries to advocate "gazing" or loafing and not giving 100% effort, is someone who has never ever played the game of baseball.

" I want to point something out in the quickly-becoming-tiresome Old Media vs. Bloggers debate: most stuff sucks. All stuff. In all forms. Most books suck. Most movies suck. Most magazines suck. Most trees likely suck if you get to know them. Fish, bugs, various metals -- they all probably mostly suck". - FJM 4/6/8

by lemon20pie on Apr 12, 2008 9:17 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Loud, sustained applause.

n/t

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al on Apr 13, 2008 5:12 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Please get off your high horse

As someone who has played plenty of baseball, and who never stood and watched a ball (I was scrappy), I can assure you that you have absolutely no clue what you are talking about.

While your ad hominem attack on everyone who disagrees with you might make you feel good (given the number of times on this board that you insult people, I'm certain that it does), it has no basis in fact.

The specific debate here is not about advocating gazing. Nobody is suggesting that they want people to stand and watch balls. And loafing generally isn't even part of the discussion here except where you brought it in to rant. Nobody is advocating watching a ball fly. What some of us are saying is that it really doesn't matter that they do.

by Leon Durham on Apr 13, 2008 2:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

hmm

I really don't think equating people who believe that baseball is governed by statistics (which it pretty much is) with people who advocate loafing (which nobody has) is justified.

by tal1286 on Apr 13, 2008 6:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

The ONLY time I've seen a HR

or anything associated with a Home Run hurt a team was never. The worst I can think of was back in 98 or 99 when Robin Vebture hit a HR in the playoffs and stopped at 2nd base so his run didnt count and therefore I lost my OVER bet. Once the player on third came in to touch the plate the game was over. Bummer.

SOMEONE SHOOT THAT DAMN PARROT!!!

by Keystone80435 on Apr 12, 2008 9:08 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

That's not quite how it happened.

Ventura hit what should have been a walkoff grand slam. His teammates mobbed him before he got to 2nd base and so he never touched the base... it wound up being called "the grand slam single".

It was game 5 of the 1999 NLCS.

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al on Apr 13, 2008 5:14 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

i have an idea....

let's talk about how bad the pitching and defense is rather than something that matters very little!!

by goatstew on Apr 12, 2008 9:55 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Feel free

to start a fan post about something you want to talk about. Just because you don't want to talk about this doesn't mean others don't.

by sue369 on Apr 12, 2008 10:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Loud, sustained applause.

Thank you, Sue.

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al on Apr 13, 2008 5:14 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

sure

except for the fact that we've basically talked about our pitching and defense for the entire 11 games of the season. And for pretty much any time in the entirety of this blog's existence in some form or another. This is something different that is (slightly) less talked about, so why not talk when the topic is brought up? It might inform and teach people with different perspectives.

by ecbc on Apr 13, 2008 12:36 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

With all due respect, cwyers

measuring the effects of hotdogging by how many wins it negates is not the point, IMO. First, it's simply impossible. How are you going to measure the affect hotdogging has on the hotdogger's teammates? How do you discern the microscopic damage done to the hotdogger's knee when he has to run full bore into a close play at second because he stood at the plate too long to cruise into a no-doubt double? How much did those microscopic tears contribute to the subsequent full-blown injury the hotdogger experiences?

Second, I don't care if doesn't cost a single game. It's just plain selfish baseball. Why not celebrate your achievements with the whole team after the play is over - when there is NO chance of risking the outcome of the game?

"Confidence is what you have before you understand the problem." Woody Allen

by BlueSox on Apr 13, 2008 10:47 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Dome's impact?

Although I don't see how that specific stat could actually be kept. What I do like is that we are seeing some players that aren't hotdoggers.

It's been a treat to see that there are players are out there, that aren't like that. I think we have Dome to thank for that.

by Madison Cub Fan on Apr 13, 2008 8:10 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

the winner is

i know i could tell you one thing... if there was an all time winner for who gave up the most bases for watching home runs.. many ramirez wins by a long shot

by dariot2 on Apr 13, 2008 8:55 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Don't all home runs equal 4 total bases

whether you watch them or not? How does watching home runs cost bases?

"I've always felt that starting pitching is the most important part of the rotation." - Joe Morgan, Sunday Night Baseball 8-12-07

by gary varsho on Apr 13, 2008 9:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

sry

sry i thought it was clear.. i was talking about a hit that a player watches and thinks will be a home run.. when actually it falls for a hit

by dariot2 on Apr 13, 2008 9:47 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

I've got a better project: hustling down to first

How many times does A-Ram or Soriano jog to first on a groundball?

Meanwhile, you see Zambrano run his a55 off to first base today, and it his hustle causes a throwing error that helps us win a game.

If you force the defense to pick up their game and hurry a throw, because you're hustling down the line... you increase the odds for a mistake to happen.

Cubs 2008 (7-5)
Home (3-3) | Road (4-2) | 1-Run Games (2-2) | Extra Innings (3-1)
Updated on April 13, 2008

by SackMan on Apr 13, 2008 10:04 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

This is exactly the argument

I have tried to make to people who ridicule "hustle," or heaven for bid, "scrappy." Defensive players that have to hurry a throw are more likely to throw it away, like today.

"My bed is pulling me, gravity, daysleeper. Daaaysleeper."

by markleonette on Apr 13, 2008 10:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Great post!

I didn't have time to read all comments but can I add the problem of not hustling on pop ups?

DeRo recently jogged around 1st and almost was out at 2nd when the CF dropped the pop up. Had he been running the way Dome does on EVERY hit, he would certainly been at 3rd. I watched the replat to see and Len and Bob said the same thing.

JUST HUSTLE! Why is this so hard? It is so much more respectable to run the bases rather than look stupid when you are thrown out at 2nd. I would think that the humility of this experience would have humbled these guys a bit..not so.

Calm down.

by Kinky Reggae on Apr 14, 2008 10:19 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Agreed

And Ramirez hurt his knee while loafing out of the box in MIL last year, he had to bust his butt the last 45 feet and stretched weird when hitting the bag.

Just hustle.....you only work 8 months of the year, and have 4 months off to vacation and work out.

"Hey.....Cubs win!!!" ---Harry
"Swung on belted!!!"---Chip

by Hammer on Apr 14, 2008 11:49 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I don't know how...

...much this hurts you in regards to wins and losses, but I sure as heck can't find much good that comes from it.

IMO, it is a direct reflection on a players attitude and it also is not something you want your young players to recognize as being "ok". There is no reason for any player to selectively decide when they want to go 100%.

If a player does not run balls out, you have to wonder how many times they are not focusing 100% at the plate, on the bases or in the field, because this is a direct reflection on how they approach the game.

I have mentioned before, baseball has really gotten hollywood in regards to this particular topic (like the NBA). It's all too common for some star players to go hard when they choose, and it kills me to see it.

A part of me wonders whether Piniella has spoken with Soriano or Ramirez about this one on one. I don't know the answer to that, but I do know he would have made his opinion on this trend very clear to everyone earlier in his career.

"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel

by MPH73 on Apr 14, 2008 12:54 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Imagine you are at work--you know real life

Imagine you make a great deal and shake everyones hand for your hard work. OR, imagine you say "Bam thats right" and walk out of the office---------Which one earns more respect?

"Hey.....Cubs win!!!" ---Harry
"Swung on belted!!!"---Chip

by Hammer on Apr 14, 2008 12:59 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

I have also taken issue as many others have

with respects to selfish assholes who choose not to travel with the club or who start a season halfway through. This is why I think Clemens deserves what is coming to him. He has always been a selfish ass that only cared about himself rather than the team he played for.

Calm down.

by Kinky Reggae on Apr 15, 2008 1:59 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs