From: hobbs@a.cs.wvu.wvnet.edu (Gerald R Hobbs)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Hisle (walks?)
Date: 9 Apr 92 17:00:02 GMT
Distribution: na


Walks seem to be extremely emphasized on this newsgroup.  I have always felt
uncomfortable with this analysis, so I decided to do some research into the
matter.  The most prevalent idea here is that maximizing walks maximizes run
productivity.  I think you will find the following numbers interesting.

The numbers I'm about to give are from 1949 to 1988.  A span of 40 years.  What
I first did take the leader in runs (AL) for each season and charted their
position in hits and walks.  During those 40 seasons the leader in runs scored
lead in the league in hits 18 times.   However the league leader in walks only
lead the league in runs 9 times.  Only twice during that span did the leader
in runs lead in walks and hits.  To take it a step further, only 7 times did
the league leader in runs finish below 3rd in hits.  However, the leader in 
runs finish below 3rd in walks 16 times.  The best run production team during
this period was the 1950 Boston team, scoring 1027 runs on 1665 hits and 719
walks.  The second best run production was the 1949 Boston team, scoring
896 runs on 1500 hits and, get this, 835 walks.  116 more walks, 165 less hits,
131 less runs.  This team walked more but got significantly less run 
production.

In the NL, the leader in runs lead the league in hits 18 times.  They lead
the league in walks 11 times.  4 times a team led in both walks and hits.
Only 5 times did they finish below 3rd in hits.  15 times did the leader
in runs finish below 3rd in walks.  The best run production was the 1953
Brooklyn team, scoring 955 runs on 1529 hits and 655 walks.  The 2nd best
production was the 1949 Brookly team, scoring 879 runs on 1477 hits and 
638 walks.  Only 17 less walks but 74 less runs.

Interesting so far?

I did some further analysis.  I have only done the National League, but I 
found the numbers to be interesting.

The league leader in hits....
        - lead in runs 45 % of the time.
        - finished 1st or 2nd in runs 60% of the time.
        - finished in the upper half of the league in runs 90% of the time.
        - lead in OBP 50% of the time.
        - finished 1st or 2nd in OBP 67% of the time.
        - finished upper half of league in OBP 95% of the time.

The league leader in walks....
        - lead in runs 32% of the time.
        - finished 1st or 2nd in runs 47% of the time.
        - finished in the upper half in runs 82% of the time.
        - lead in OPB 40%
        - finished 1st or 2nd in OBP 67%.
        - finished upper half in OBP 87% of the time.  

What this tells me is that although the ability to walk is somewhat important,
it is far more important to be able to hit.  Hitting philosophies aside, run
production is more directly influenced by the ability to hit than the ability
to walk.

Hope you have this info educational.  I will be presenting further analysis
in the future.

Carl Rempert

I don't think anyone ever suggested that walks were more or even
as important as hits. Even a single does, on average, advance
runners farther than walks do. Certainly extra base hits advance
both the batter and any runner(s) farther. The facination, I think,
revolves around the fact that to Joe Averagefan walks don't seem
to count at all. Joe thinks about avg, hrs, rbi's, etc. In that
view walks are non-events. You see, there is this pretty important
thing in baseball and it is often ignored.
              Gerry













Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball