Gordon and Celestino. OBP short changed?

[jorgenswest]

As Buxton reached base on error again yesterday it had me wondering again about whether this is a skill. Is it reaching base as a result of an error simply random or does the skill of the hitter have some impact? Buxton leads the team in reaching on base by error this year with 4. I get the speed but would have expected someone with more ground ball outs to get on base more often by error. Adding those 4 and his OBP is increased by 15 (.015). That isn't insignificant. There are three players who have reached base by error 3 times in Kepler, Celestino and Gordon. Kepler gets a boost of 10 in OBP but it is the other two that I am interested in. It might change my perception of their offensive contribution.

If reaching base by error is in part skill of the batter it should be reflected in their OBP and OPS. It certainly seems intuitive that faster runners are more likely to get on base by error. It also might tend to be ground ball hitters or hitters who hit the ball hard. I wondered how reaching base by error might change my perception of Gordon and Celestino if it were treated similarly in the statistics to a hit by pitch.

Gordon's OBP goes from 312 to 328. His OPS would be 760. Celestino's OBP goes from 342 to 362. His OPS would be 715. Those are significant shifts. Is it luck or skill? Should reaching base by error be considered in their contribution to the offense?

[Doctor Gast]

I say it's a skill. To make a fielder rush his throw, otherwise it's a base hit. It's a judgement call but a speedy runner should be rewarded by his speed and hustle. So it should reflect on his OBP and I"d go so far as counting it a hit.

[bean5302]

Agreed, if a fielder is rushing the throw because they're trying to make a miracle happen, it shouldn't be ruled an error. In fact, I'm sure Buxton's OBP does reflect this already.

Buxton creates a lot of personal opinion judgement calls for official game scorers. Some for ruling an error, some for ruling a hit because it wasn't reasonable to expect a fielder to make the play.

[bean5302]

Oh. To answer the question, no, it's not a skill worth mentioning. It's just speed and luck for Buxton. It's just pure luck for Celestino (who isn't all that fast).

[jorgenswest]

53 minutes ago, bean5302 said:

Oh. To answer the question, no, it's not a skill worth mentioning. It's just speed and luck for Buxton. It's just pure luck for Celestino (who isn't all that fast).

Do you believe it is more random than hit by pitch? It could be. Donaldson is slow and gets on base by error more often than many.

I don’t think it is random but I also don’t think speed is the only factor.

Hard contact is going to cause more errors.

Hitting to the third base side will cause more errors.

Putting the ball in play more often will increase the likelihood of reaching base by error.

Are those skills particular to hitters? If so than I think some players have the skill to reach base by error more often than others. 

 

[bean5302]

37 minutes ago, jorgenswest said:

Do you believe it is more random than hit by pitch? It could be. Donaldson is slow and gets on base by error more often than many.

I don’t think it is random but I also don’t think speed is the only factor.

Hard contact is going to cause more errors.

Hitting to the third base side will cause more errors.

Putting the ball in play more often will increase the likelihood of reaching base by error.

Are those skills particular to hitters? If so than I think some players have the skill to reach base by error more often than others. 

 

Yep. Reached on error is definitely more random than HBP. There are batters who crowd the plate and or have stances making it much more likely they're going to get plunked.

In the absolute best case scenario, a hitter directing every single ball (if they could) at the 3rd baseman instead of a 2nd baseman would result in, what, a couple errors? The average qualified hitter gets about 600 plate appearances annually. They have a ground ball rate of 30-60% and a K rate between 10-35%, a BB rate between 5-20% and hit 5-40 HRs per year. That means, ground balls in play = 80 (absurdly low) and 300 (absurdly high). If the all ground ball, never walk, never strike out, never homer player could direct every single ball they hit at the third baseman's playing position, which is already insanely ludicrous, the third baseman would commit approximately 3 more errors in a season based on a median .970 fielding percentage for 3B and .980 fielding percentage for 2B. 

So are those extra 3 reached on errors worth the worst BABIP and SLG in the history of the game?

Anyway, I see you have a very strong opinion on the subject. Perhaps it would have been more fruitful to have stated your opinion rather than asking people if they agreed with you.

[jorgenswest]

What would be the point of starting a topic if I have already a strong opinion? There is nothing to learn there. I will always push against the conventional view though. There is nothing to learn without pushing against the conventional either. I am not convinced that reaching on base by error is more random than hit by pitch. It does happen less frequently now though.

In my quick scan of the BR leaderboard (shows top 20) I did notice Elvis Andrus among the leaders in reaching on base by error every year from 2010 to 2019 with the exception of the year he finished 29th in baseball. I don’t think that can be random. Similar to the characteristics of a player who gets hit by pitch more often Andrus must have characteristics that lead to reaching base by error more often.

I also appreciate your engagement in the discussion as you did in a previous thread where I challenged the conventional thought about pitchers the third time through the line up.

[Schmoeman5]

It's a skill if your name is Willie Mays Hayes or if you play on turf. See 85 Cardinals

[ashbury]

9 hours ago, Doctor Gast said:

I say it's a skill.

One of the earmarks of a skill is that it carries over from season to season.  No stats in baseball are absolutely static, but guys like Pete Rose used to regularly be among league leaders in BA.  Guys like Judge, Ohtani and Guerrero were top-ten in HR last year and are top-ten now.  Those are demonstrable skills.

I took a look at 2022 Reached On Error, and leading the majors is the Giants' Thairo Estrada with 7 (in 271 PA).  Last year, he had 1 (in 132 PA, admittedly a part-timer). 

In second place is Trey Mancini with 6 (327 PA).  Last year he had 2 (616 PA).

Turning it around, last year Josh Bell and Mark Canha tied for the lead with 10.  This year they have 2 each.

Hardly an exhaustive study, but I'm not seeing it, and don't find much justification to putting in further effort to make the case for it being a skill.

[tony&rodney]

This is an interesting topic for thought - good post. There looks to be some disagreement on the consistency of data for reaching on errors being a skill. The stat reads OBP and there could be an argument that reaching base on an error should count. An intentional walk counts.

It does seem that fielders often make their best plays (in the infield) against slower runners and infielders definitely take their time on routine ground balls by the slowest of runners.

[jorgenswest]

11 hours ago, ashbury said:

One of the earmarks of a skill is that it carries over from season to season.  No stats in baseball are absolutely static, but guys like Pete Rose used to regularly be among league leaders in BA.  Guys like Judge, Ohtani and Guerrero were top-ten in HR last year and are top-ten now.  Those are demonstrable skills.

I took a look at 2022 Reached On Error, and leading the majors is the Giants' Thairo Estrada with 7 (in 271 PA).  Last year, he had 1 (in 132 PA, admittedly a part-timer). 

In second place is Trey Mancini with 6 (327 PA).  Last year he had 2 (616 PA).

Turning it around, last year Josh Bell and Mark Canha tied for the lead with 10.  This year they have 2 each.

Hardly an exhaustive study, but I'm not seeing it, and don't find much justification to putting in further effort to make the case for it being a skill.

Thanks for the look at 2022.

I did a quick look 2010-2019 and don’t think Andrus can be random. I also looked in 1985. Turns out the Cardinals were below the middle likely due to to many switch hitters. It did illustrate how it happens less frequently now than in 1985 when it was more than double the frequency of HBP. 

I did find a historical study from retrosheet.

[ashbury]

4 hours ago, jorgenswest said:

Thanks for the look at 2022.

I did a quick look 2010-2019 and don’t think Andrus can be random. I also looked in 1985. Turns out the Cardinals were below the middle likely due to to many switch hitters. It did illustrate how it happens less frequently now than in 1985 when it was more than double the frequency of HBP. 

I did find a historical study from retrosheet.

Interesting.  That study concludes with an observation that more questions were raised than answers provided.

I didn't make my long-ish post longer by speculating why results could be elusive, but I think it boils down to Small Sample Size.  Errors used to be more common, but in the effort to standardize how official scorers do their jobs, more plays that are difficult are ruled as base hits in the modern game.  If there are hitters who make life more difficult for infielders, it could be reflected in their batting averages rather than in errors, and typical scoresheets don't distinguish a tough play not made versus an impossible one for God himself.  As for the plays ruled as errors, it seems to me that when you have hundreds of players each year getting a small number of events, some few will just stand out due to (I won't say random or lucky) seemingly irreproducible effects.  There could be reproducible effects scattered within that data, but teasing those out requires some serious statistical chops by a better analyst than me.

[stringer bell]

Another factor that plays in here would be official scoring. I suspect many infield hits have been scored as errors in the past. 
 

Obviously speed plus hitting the ball on the ground on the left side of the infield would give players a better chance to reach on an error. 

[baul0010]

On 7/9/2022 at 1:16 PM, Doctor Gast said:

I say it's a skill. To make a fielder rush his throw, otherwise it's a base hit. It's a judgement call but a speedy runner should be rewarded by his speed and hustle. So it should reflect on his OBP and I"d go so far as counting it a hit.

I've wondered since my playing days as well.  I got on base because of speed and errors and always felt short changed it didn't at least count towards obp.  You're getting on base!

[gil4]

On 7/9/2022 at 2:31 PM, jorgenswest said:

Donaldson is slow and gets on base by error more often than many.

That one might have another explanation. Donaldson isn't universally loved (to put it politely), so I wonder how often he just doesn't get the H because a scorekeeper doesn't want to give him the benefit of the doubt.  (That hard contact thing might be a good explanation, too.)

[terrydactyls]

Years ago, the softball team I played on determined the batting order based solely on a hitter's on base percentage.  We did not care how the person got as long as there was no out recorded on the play that allowed the batter to reach base safely.  We did this for many years and the amazing thing about it was the batting order remained pretty static from year to year.  That made me a believer that there was much more than just luck involved.