Archive of SportingNews.com's old SOM Baseball forum

Anybody have any data to back up the benefits of speed? How many more runs will a 1-17 runner score over a 1-13 (or 1-10)? When is a difference in run rating enough to make a difference when deciding between two similar players?

I ask because it just seems like those speed demons find ways to score. Pettis, even if he hits jack, will score runs in all but his really bad year. Coleman will score runs despite the bad OBP. Just wondering how much a difference it actually makes (or if a comparison like that can even be made).

Without having raw data to support this statement, I believe it is said that as longa s your SB pct is greater than 73%, the speed will add to your run differential in a positive manner. Anything less is taking runs off the table that would have otherwise scored.

Outside of that, I run aggressively on low slugging teams by nature, but also H&R and Bunt more as well. I need to push those runs over in other ways than playing Earl Weaver ball sitting on a 3-Run HR.

Hard to say, honestiago. I think speed is very important, although I sometimes seem to ignore it when I have a power team. Probably, a big mistake. If you read the ATG boards (I used to and actually had a couple of teams), speed is considered extremely important. Obviously, the 1-17 guys will advance the extra base more often than the 1-14 guys. The guys that are 1-12 and lower are likely station-to-station and clog up the bases. While it's all in the cards here, my teams seem to do better with a real leadoff guy, like Dykstra, Butler or someone like that, then when I squeeze in a Greenwell, Hargrove, etc.

Having replayed many seasons with the CD ROM game, I saw the benefits of speed right before my very eyes (not just SBs, but taking that extra base). My determination is that speed is underrated and benefits both small ball and bomber teams alike. Teams that play station-to-station ball hit into more DPs and run into more outs on the basepaths. The effects of which can be hidden with the occasional three run homer.

When a power team isn't hitting home runs, what else do they have to fall back on? They can't all of a sudden start running like jackrabbits. However, when does speed go into a slump? Never. Also, even the speedsters can exibit power once in a while. It doesn't work the other way around though.

IMO, a combination of both would be ideal, with an advantage towards speed. I try to build my teams this way.

You more experienced guys can correct me if I'm wrong, but I'd think that a speedster also makes the guys hitting behind him better if he can get the defense to hold him on. That can raise the batting average of the guys hitting behind him and that also leads to more runs scored.

I tend to lean in the other direction. Speed is an genuine asset--in terms of both high SB % and baserunning-- but in my mind it takes a back seat to good old OBP and SLG. It's a nice thing to add to a strong team OBP and SLG, but without those as a basis, speed alone is not going to produce a high scoring team.

On the other hand, a team with sufficient OBP and SLG is going to score a bunch of runs whether the runners are fast or not. Speed will add a few extra runs to the total, but speed alone can't create a good offense--it's a garnish, not a foundation in my opinion. And I'm quite willing to start a season without much team speed if I've got a strong enough load of OBP and SLG, especially in a HR park. One of my best offensive teams ever scored 958 runs while stealing 20 bases and getting caught 11 times. It had Trammell as its leadoff man--he led the team with eight steal. Basically, that team scored those 958 runs with good old OBP (.344) and SLG (.516). On the other hand, another team in the league with a 146-57 SB ratio scored only 727 runs because of a lower OBP (.315) and SLG (.420).

Please understand that I'm not dissing the steal and like to have speed when I can get it--for one thing, speed is fun! :D -- but all other things being equal I would take OBP, SLG or defense over speed. :wink:

My main question was about running, of course, which everyone has addressed fairly well. I've tried drafting different types of teams -- slow sluggers and all fast, etc., depending on ballpark. I do play the computer game a lot, using the historical disks (I just LOVE how Raines is a 1-12 runner on the all time list, but Mantle is 1-17 [Should be 1-17 and 1-14, maybe, but anyway). I just got a team to the finals that leadoff with Coleman, Pettis and Templeton, none of which is ever going to elad the league in OBP (Pettis' average is always too low), but who seem to score runs (Tempy even drove some in [80+]). I guess it's like everything else, a matter of balance, taste, ball park pitching and such. But I'll bet Coleman's worst card still scores 90 runs, and Pettis' worst would net at least 70 (if both played full time); and ONLY because of the SB and the 1-17 running. Perhaps the conclusion could be that speedsters might fair better at run production with their worst cards than slowpokes do? (seems obvious, but I thought I'd mention it anyway).