OOTP Developments Forums - View Single Post

JAttractive · 04-24-2003, 02:28 PM

Good points as well. It definitely has it's benefits during different era's. But as you pointed out today there seems to be almost no correlation. As I said in an earlier post my LBA team essentially had the top offense in the whole league (1 run short) but with 7 Sb's for the entire team. This is in a league where homeruns aren't even as common as they are today (no one has reached 50 so far though a number in the 40s) either. One could argue that maybe I would have had even more if I ran and I won't dispute that is a possibility. I would need to run tons of different tests using the two strategies and then compare.

Regardless of how that would work out though I maintain that it is not a critical cog to the offense and if 66% was valid years ago it certainly seems plausible that it should be raised higher and higher as homerun numbers increase (since the stolen base in these instance gives no benefit when one was hit but still come at the same risk/cost if caught). If you can accept the 66% rule as accurate the logic would dictate that it goes up as homerun frequency increases for the reason just given in the brackets. I have no idea what that number would be now but my hunch tells me it is close to 75% or higher meaning only the elite basestealers should consider this as an option.

04-24-2003, 02:28 PM	#38
JAttractive All Star Starter Join Date: May 2002 Location: St. Catharines, Ontario Posts: 1,135	Good points as well. It definitely has it's benefits during different era's. But as you pointed out today there seems to be almost no correlation. As I said in an earlier post my LBA team essentially had the top offense in the whole league (1 run short) but with 7 Sb's for the entire team. This is in a league where homeruns aren't even as common as they are today (no one has reached 50 so far though a number in the 40s) either. One could argue that maybe I would have had even more if I ran and I won't dispute that is a possibility. I would need to run tons of different tests using the two strategies and then compare. Regardless of how that would work out though I maintain that it is not a critical cog to the offense and if 66% was valid years ago it certainly seems plausible that it should be raised higher and higher as homerun numbers increase (since the stolen base in these instance gives no benefit when one was hit but still come at the same risk/cost if caught). If you can accept the 66% rule as accurate the logic would dictate that it goes up as homerun frequency increases for the reason just given in the brackets. I have no idea what that number would be now but my hunch tells me it is close to 75% or higher meaning only the elite basestealers should consider this as an option.