Before we talk about baseball, let’s talk about the other three major sports. You’re on your own 20 yard line, you march down field on a series of plays, but ultimately, you punt. Or, you march down field and move far enough for a tough field goal that gets made. All those running and passing plays aren’t considered any differently based on the results. The RB got 25 yards on 4 running plays, and no one matches it up to the end result.
In hockey and basketball, a great pass that doesn’t ultimately lead to a goal or basket goes away like a fart in the wind. No one tracks it, and if they do, it’s not considered anything close to the impact of an assist that led to a score.
Why the difference? I think it’s because of the stop-start nature of football, that the “sequence” ends after each play, and the whole drive is 2-5 football minutes or 5-15 human minutes. In hockey and basketball, turnovers happen often enough and each drive lasts 10-30 seconds in sport or human minutes. I think that’s the reason.
So, let’s talk about the leadoff triple. Billy Hamilton gets on third base, and the next three batters strike out. He’s stranded there, no runs score. A fart in the wind triple? Or something much more tangible? Jarrod Dyson gets on third, the next batter hits a medium fly ball out, far enough to let Dyson score. The next two batters strike out. One run scores. That triple is obviously tangible.
How do you see these two triples?
You Aren't a FanGraphs Member
It looks like you aren't yet a FanGraphs Member (or aren't logged in). We aren't mad, just disappointed.
We get it. You want to read this article. But before we let you get back to it, we'd like to point out a few of the good reasons why you should become a Member.
1. Ad Free viewing! We won't bug you with this ad, or any other.
2. Unlimited articles! Non-Members only get to read 10 free articles a month. Members never get cut off.
3. Dark mode and Classic mode!
4. Custom player page dashboards! Choose the player cards you want, in the order you want them.
5. One-click data exports! Export our projections and leaderboards for your personal projects.
6. Remove the photos on the home page! (Honestly, this doesn't sound so great to us, but some people wanted it, and we like to give our Members what they want.)
7. Even more Steamer projections! We have handedness, percentile, and context neutral projections available for Members only.
8. Get FanGraphs Walk-Off, a customized year end review! Find out exactly how you used FanGraphs this year, and how that compares to other Members. Don't be a victim of FOMO.
9. A weekly mailbag column, exclusively for Members.
10. Help support FanGraphs and our entire staff! Our Members provide us with critical resources to improve the site and deliver new features!
We hope you'll consider a Membership today, for yourself or as a gift! And we realize this has been an awfully long sales pitch, so we've also removed all the other ads in this article. We didn't want to overdo it.
Well, some people do! And I have on occasion. Regardless, its important to speak for yourself, and not worry about how others have approached the issue. There are no wrong choices here.
My thinking is that the runner on third did nothing to influence the other batter who either struck-out or hit the sac-fly.
You could argue the runner on third’s speed/base-running should increase in value.
Twitchy
10 years ago
Funny I was thinking about this today. Someone mentioned RBI on the radio and it drove me crazy. The guy who hits the triple isn’t at fault for not scoring if the 3 guys strike out after him instead of putting the ball in play. Both triples had the same value, it’s just that the guys behind him failed to produce.
The second guy isn’t magically more productive because the guys behind him had different outcomes.
brianstorm33
10 years ago
This is difficult because in the plays in the other sports you mentioned, there’s more than one player (on the same team) involved in each play. A QB has to hand off the ball to the RB. In hockey and basketball, one player passes the puck/ball while the other receives the pass. However in baseball, no one but the batter helped hit that triple. This is something to consider.
Although in every scenario, the team as a whole let the player who made the good play down by not scoring, turning them into, as you put it, farts in the wind.
The stranded on third triple is more akin to the 25 yard run that on a drive that ends in a punt. Good and measurable individual effort. Something that’s difficult to track in basketball and hockey without a point on a score sheet.
thecodygriffin
10 years ago
Thank you Tango for dreaming up and carrying out this exercise. Each and everyone of these polls thus far has really forced me to stop and think, rather than just react. It is not that the question is difficult to comprehend, it is that I am actively questioning what is actually important to me as a fan and (amateur) analyst of baseball. Great stuff!
philosofool
10 years ago
I know the rule is that we’re not judging here, but I can’t understand the view that the “tangible” triple should be credited differently to the player who hit the triple.
Here’s a different case that feels to me the same:
(a) Hamilton hits a lead off triple. Next hitter sends a ground to second. Hamilton takes off, thinking he can get home before a throw. He’s wrong and is out. If he’d stayed at third, the batter would have been thrown out at first. The next two hitters strike out, ending the innning.
(b) Hamilton hits a lead off triple. Next hitter sends a grounder to second. Hamilton takes off, thinking he can get home before a throw. He’s wrong and is out. The next hitter reaches on a grounder to LF–Hamilton would have scored easily. Then two hitters strike out.
Is his base running bad in (b) but “intangible” or “indifferent” in (a)? That just seems wrong. We judge that player by looking at HIS results, not the team’s.
Phillies113
10 years ago
It’s not the triple-hitting batter’s fault that the schlubs behind him couldn’t drive him in. It also wasn’t his fault that he happened to be the one leading off that particular inning, as it was the schlubs in front of him who got the last three outs of the previous inning (or it was the schlub putting the lineup together who made him bat leadoff in the first inning). Therefore, a triple is a triple.
Doug LampertMember since 2016
10 years ago
The problem I have with this survey is that it’s being conducted on Fangraphs.
I read Fangraphs because I think their methods aren’t totally wrong/insane/bad. Those methods include a very heavy dependence on context independent stats.
If I liked pitcher wins, or hitter RBIs, or if I thought ERA was a better tool than things like RE24 and WPA to evaluate relievers, then I wouldn’t be here and wouldn’t be answering these questions. Hence, my responses are biased if we’re trying to figure out what a “typical” fan wants from a WAR type framework.
I’m not after a typical fan. I’m after a fan who is willing to take that first step with me. Fangraphs offers that.
Matt
10 years ago
The value of the triple is the same. But if the batter after him hits a shallow fly that he tags up on, whether he scores or not should factor into his WAR, but as a running rating.
Otherwise? A triple is a triple.
jfree
10 years ago
So when are we going to get to adjust WAR for altitude (or other team-specific things that don’t have much to do with game-context)? The Rockies are waiting!
Alec DentonMember since 2016
10 years ago
“In hockey and basketball, a great pass that doesn’t ultimately lead to a goal or basket goes away like a fart in the wind. No one tracks it, and if they do, it’s not considered anything close to the impact of an assist that led to a score.”
A triple is a triple.
It’s not like we go back and add more WPA to the triple that scored.
Well, some people do! And I have on occasion. Regardless, its important to speak for yourself, and not worry about how others have approached the issue. There are no wrong choices here.
My thinking is that the runner on third did nothing to influence the other batter who either struck-out or hit the sac-fly.
You could argue the runner on third’s speed/base-running should increase in value.
Funny I was thinking about this today. Someone mentioned RBI on the radio and it drove me crazy. The guy who hits the triple isn’t at fault for not scoring if the 3 guys strike out after him instead of putting the ball in play. Both triples had the same value, it’s just that the guys behind him failed to produce.
The second guy isn’t magically more productive because the guys behind him had different outcomes.
This is difficult because in the plays in the other sports you mentioned, there’s more than one player (on the same team) involved in each play. A QB has to hand off the ball to the RB. In hockey and basketball, one player passes the puck/ball while the other receives the pass. However in baseball, no one but the batter helped hit that triple. This is something to consider.
Although in every scenario, the team as a whole let the player who made the good play down by not scoring, turning them into, as you put it, farts in the wind.
The stranded on third triple is more akin to the 25 yard run that on a drive that ends in a punt. Good and measurable individual effort. Something that’s difficult to track in basketball and hockey without a point on a score sheet.
Thank you Tango for dreaming up and carrying out this exercise. Each and everyone of these polls thus far has really forced me to stop and think, rather than just react. It is not that the question is difficult to comprehend, it is that I am actively questioning what is actually important to me as a fan and (amateur) analyst of baseball. Great stuff!
I know the rule is that we’re not judging here, but I can’t understand the view that the “tangible” triple should be credited differently to the player who hit the triple.
Here’s a different case that feels to me the same:
(a) Hamilton hits a lead off triple. Next hitter sends a ground to second. Hamilton takes off, thinking he can get home before a throw. He’s wrong and is out. If he’d stayed at third, the batter would have been thrown out at first. The next two hitters strike out, ending the innning.
(b) Hamilton hits a lead off triple. Next hitter sends a grounder to second. Hamilton takes off, thinking he can get home before a throw. He’s wrong and is out. The next hitter reaches on a grounder to LF–Hamilton would have scored easily. Then two hitters strike out.
Is his base running bad in (b) but “intangible” or “indifferent” in (a)? That just seems wrong. We judge that player by looking at HIS results, not the team’s.
It’s not the triple-hitting batter’s fault that the schlubs behind him couldn’t drive him in. It also wasn’t his fault that he happened to be the one leading off that particular inning, as it was the schlubs in front of him who got the last three outs of the previous inning (or it was the schlub putting the lineup together who made him bat leadoff in the first inning). Therefore, a triple is a triple.
The problem I have with this survey is that it’s being conducted on Fangraphs.
I read Fangraphs because I think their methods aren’t totally wrong/insane/bad. Those methods include a very heavy dependence on context independent stats.
If I liked pitcher wins, or hitter RBIs, or if I thought ERA was a better tool than things like RE24 and WPA to evaluate relievers, then I wouldn’t be here and wouldn’t be answering these questions. Hence, my responses are biased if we’re trying to figure out what a “typical” fan wants from a WAR type framework.
I’m not after a typical fan. I’m after a fan who is willing to take that first step with me. Fangraphs offers that.
The value of the triple is the same. But if the batter after him hits a shallow fly that he tags up on, whether he scores or not should factor into his WAR, but as a running rating.
Otherwise? A triple is a triple.
So when are we going to get to adjust WAR for altitude (or other team-specific things that don’t have much to do with game-context)? The Rockies are waiting!
“In hockey and basketball, a great pass that doesn’t ultimately lead to a goal or basket goes away like a fart in the wind. No one tracks it, and if they do, it’s not considered anything close to the impact of an assist that led to a score.”
There is an argument (of debatable merit) in favor of tracking even non-assist hockey passes: https://aldland.wordpress.com/2015/04/03/taking-a-pass-on-new-hockey-statistics/.