[Argonaut]

Not all that interesting or useful of a test, but I was pondering how much of an impact the Hold Runners rating had on pitcher/team performance. In the spirit of Mark Buehrle being on the Hall of Fame ballot.

So I tested a full staff/bullpen with varying Hold Runners ratings (1-250 scale): 100 (Normal), 20 (Weak), and 200 (Strong). Texas Rangers against Seattle Mariners in Modern MLB. The Mariners have Mallex Smith who's a great base-stealer.

It has a big impact on stolen bases against, naturally. With the strong set of pitchers giving up about half as many steals as the normal set, and the weak set of pitchers giving up 2.5x the stolen bases as the strong set. But does this matter? In some ways I'd want more attempts against me because analytics say most batters shouldn't ever bother stealing.

So more important is the SB% success rate. In my test the great holders pin the opposition to 73%, while the weak holders give up 79%. This difference is definitely skirting the line from unprofitable to profitable steal attempts.

The other factor is pickoffs... I assume pitchers with high Hold Runners pickoff more men on base. This is a great asset with no downside. Free outs. And outs are really good.

So what does it all add up to? Well if you go from an entire pitching cohort of weak holders to strong holders, you can maybe expect 10 fewer earned runs and 1 more win per season. Not earth shattering, but nice to have. Practically speaking though, that will never be a real decision to make... pitchers still generate most of their value from STU/MOV/CON.

Note: My conclusions don't fully take into account unearned runs saved, extra innings, and probably some other things. I'd wager it's all mostly a wash though.