Component 8 vs. Component 9: The Relationship between Baserunner Outs and Baserunner Advancements
Component 8, baserunner outs, and Component 9, baserunner advancements, are very closely related. From the perspective of the baserunner, there is a school of thought that more aggressive baserunning has as its upside greater than average baserunner advancement (Component 9) with a downside of increased baserunner outs (Component 8).Basic Correlation between Component 8 and Component 9 Winning PercentagesLooking at Components 8 and 9, how do players' Component 8 winning percentages compare with their Component 9 winning percentages? I calculated weighted correlations for Component 8 and 9 winning percentages across all of the years over which I estimated Player won-lost records (1916 - 2019). Correlations range in value from -100% to +100%. A correlation of +100% would mean that Component 8 and Component 9 winning percentages were perfectly proportional. A correlation of -100% would mean that Component 8 and 9 winning percentages moved in precisely opposite directions. A correlation of 0% would mean that Component 8 and 9 winning percentages are entirely unrelated.
Batters:
-2.56%
Baserunners:
-0.58%
Fielders:
1.57%
In general, all of these correlations are extremely small, suggesting - somewhat surprisingly, perhaps - that Component 8 and Component 9 are essentially uncorrelated, and are, therefore, likely measuring distinct skills
Alternately, this apparent lack of correlation could be the result of offsetting correlations.
On the one hand, good baserunners tend to be good at all aspects of baserunning, and it makes sense that outfielders with good throwing arms would be good at everything which involves throwing. This would suggest a strong positive correlation between Components 8 and 9.
On the other hand, the logic which I laid out above - (1) that fielders who have the best throwing arms deter base advancement and therefore have less opportunity to throw out baserunners, or (2) that aggressive baserunning may lead to higher-than-average Component 8 losses and Component 9 wins - would suggest a negative correlation between Components 8 and 9.
If, in fact, both hypotheses are true, perhaps that explains the apparent lack of correlation - the positive and negative factors essentially cancel one another out.
Relationship between Component 8 and Component 9 Winning PercentagesIn order to determine how to divide responsibility for Components 8 and 9 between batters and baserunners, I constructed a series of persistence equations which modeled Component 8 winning percentage on even-numbered plays as a function of Component 8 winning percentage for odd-numbered plays (and ditto for Component 9).
(Component Win Pct)Even = b•(Component Win Pct)Odd + (1-b)•(WinPct)Baseline
where (WinPct)Baseline represents a baseline winning percentage toward which Component winning percentages regress over time. For this experiment I added an extra term at the end of the equation,c•(Component 9 Win Pct)Odd for the Component 8 equation, and
c•(Component 8 Win Pct)Odd for the Component 9 equation
The numbers in parentheses are t-statistics. T-statistics measure the significance of b and c, that is, the confidence we have that b and/or c are greater than zero. The general rule of thumb used by most statisticians is that if a t-statistic is greater than 2, then we can be at least 95% certain that the true value of the underlying variable is greater than zero (given that certain statistical assumptions regarding our model hold). The value of (WinPct)Baseline, the baseline winning percentage toward which winning percentages regress over time, is set equal to 0.500 by construction.
Persistence of Components 8 and 9 Winning Percentage: Left Fielder
Component 8: WinPct8Even = (28.35%)*WinPct8Odd + (71.65%)*0.5000 + (7.43%)*WinPct9Odd
(31.90) (5.540)
Component 9: WinPct9Even = (14.41%)*WinPct9Odd + (85.59%)*0.5000 + (3.29%)*WinPct8Odd
(16.01) (6.813)
Persistence of Components 8 and 9 Winning Percentage: Center Fielder
Component 8: WinPct8Even = (41.56%)*WinPct8Odd + (58.44%)*0.5000 + (20.40%)*WinPct9Odd
(44.28) (13.32)
Component 9: WinPct9Even = (17.90%)*WinPct9Odd + (82.10%)*0.5000 + (-0.33%)*WinPct8Odd
(16.82) (-0.610)
Persistence of Components 8 and 9 Winning Percentage: Right Fielder
Component 8: WinPct8Even = (29.65%)*WinPct8Odd + (70.35%)*0.5000 + (15.13%)*WinPct9Odd
(32.68) (10.59)
Component 9: WinPct9Even = (10.04%)*WinPct9Odd + (89.96%)*0.5000 + (2.57%)*WinPct8Odd
(9.990) (4.944)
Persistence of Components 8 and 9 Winning Percentage: Baserunner on First Base
Component 8: WinPct8Even = (41.54%)*WinPct8Odd + (58.46%)*0.5000 + (-2.60%)*WinPct9Odd
(106.9) (-4.194)
Component 9: WinPct9Even = (40.08%)*WinPct9Odd + (59.92%)*0.5000 + (4.09%)*WinPct8Odd
(101.9) (21.22)
Persistence of Components 8 and 9 Winning Percentage: Baserunner on Second Base
Component 8: WinPct8Even = (37.25%)*WinPct8Odd + (62.75%)*0.5000 + (-8.67%)*WinPct9Odd
(89.64) (-11.58)
Component 9: WinPct9Even = (17.31%)*WinPct9Odd + (82.69%)*0.5000 + (1.10%)*WinPct8Odd
(37.79) (7.040)
Persistence of Components 8 and 9 Winning Percentage: Baserunner on Third Base
Component 8: WinPct8Even = (73.55%)*WinPct8Odd + (26.45%)*0.5000 + (3.27%)*WinPct9Odd
(219.1) (6.934)
Component 9: WinPct9Even = (-5.41%)*WinPct9Odd + (105.41%)*0.5000 + (2.26%)*WinPct8Odd
(-9.409) (8.617)