Lookout Landing: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Sports blogs for fans, by fans.
New Blog: RSL Soapbox for Real Salt Lake Fans!

On The Damon Steal

  • It was a very heads-up play. Not a lot of guys would've been paying attention to third base in that situation, but Damon was thinking the whole time, and earned himself a free 90 feet. There was no risk - he saw that the base was uncovered and knew he could outrun Feliz to the bag, so he helped his team without putting their odds of winning jeopardy.

  • Advancing to third base with two outs provides a boost, but a small one, as runners will generally score from second on any hit. The win probability added of the first steal was +4%, as Damon got himself into scoring position. The win probability added of the second steal was +1.6%. The steal of third did not dramatically improve the Yankees' odds of winning.

  • Damon's steal is being celebrated because it supposedly took away Brad Lidge's low slider, as throwing a low slider with a man on third runs the risk of allowing him to score on a wild pitch or passed ball. The very next pitch after Damon's steal was a low slider to Mark Teixeira. Lidge has thrown just 15 wild pitches the last three seasons, and this year Carlos Ruiz allowed only one passed ball. The low slider was still in play, and even if Lidge's chances of throwing it are lower with Damon on third than with Damon on second, it's not off the board, and as such, the hitter still needs to watch for it. Neither Teixeira nor Alex Rodriguez could go up to the plate certain that Lidge wouldn't throw a low slider, and because of that neither at bat would've been significantly changed.

  • If Lidge wouldn't want to throw a low slider with Damon on third, he also in theory wouldn't want to throw a low slider with Damon on first, since a WP or PB would put a runner in scoring position. Of course, Lidge did throw a low slider with Damon on first, but if people believe in the former, they also have to believe in the latter, meaning Damon's biggest accomplishment in the inning was not stealing third, but rather reaching first.

  • In the same quote, Yankees third base coach Rob Thomson describes the steal as "completely instinctive" while later explaining that it was something the team worked on in spring training. If it's something people practiced and something people learned, then by definition it can't be instinctive.

  • Had Alex Rodriguez gotten out instead of hitting a double, Damon's steal would be seen as more a curiosity and less a grand achievement. Damon, of course, would've scored from second on a double, and probably from first.

Far too often, it isn't sufficient for a play to be clever or helpful or intelligent. It has to be A Play, something dramatic, something legendary and worthy of celebration. The tendency to make something grand from something small may be the result of a landscape in which often only the loudest voices stand out, but it's misguided at best and misleading at worst, and the inclination to make too much of too little in order to draw attention ("Ruiz will be the x factor!") frequently only serves to shed light on something other than what is truly significant. Johnny Damon made a heads-up play, an unusual play that slightly improved the Yankees' chances of winning the game. Shouldn't that be enough?

0 recs  |  Comment 57 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

You've obviously never had to sell ad time on a summer sport to a TV network during football season

Johnny Damon made a heads-up play, an unusual play that slightly improved the Yankees’ chances of winning the game. Shouldn’t that be enough?

To us, yes. To the hype machine that has to be fed, nope. I’d love to see if that play would be as mythologized if Carlos Ruiz or Jayson Werth had done it, or if the Yankee Factor is at play here.

Nice Guys Finish Third - My semantics are a waste of time.

by pdb on Nov 2, 2009 1:15 PM PST reply actions   0 recs

Couldn't they just mythologize A-Rod's double or Bill Mueller's single instead?

It seems like there would be a million ways to write glowingly about Damon’s steal without calling it something more than it was.

by Jeff on Nov 2, 2009 1:17 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Yes, but if they celebrated ARod's double they would have to praise ARod

Better to celebrate a steal that didnt actually modify the outcome, becuase we all know that ARod is the anti-clutch.

by ARock on Nov 2, 2009 1:22 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

In this, as in all things overhype

blame the demands of a voracious 24 hour media machine that needs something to shout about.

Nice Guys Finish Third - My semantics are a waste of time.

by pdb on Nov 2, 2009 1:34 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

"Shouldn't that be enough?"

Yes it should be enough….but ‘Damon slightly increases Yankees chances of winning’ isnt an exciting story, and the reporters are being paid to tell us an exciting story, not to accurately convey the strategic effect of each baseball decision. So they take it and turn it into a good story, and who cares about the accuracy.

by ARock on Nov 2, 2009 1:21 PM PST reply actions   0 recs

Damon aside, I think you are underappreciating the psychological affect

Statistical analysis makes one avoid imagining what Lidge had to have been fighting in his head at that point, the thoughts he needed to ignore as statistically irrelevant distractions:

“I should have got Damon out with 2 strikes… but didn’t
“I should have coverred third…
" did someone teach me that?…
“Damon shouldn’t have even been there…
“what am I doing wrong
“am I doing something wrong..

Then he stopped making good pitches…

Anyway, as much as I was rooting against the Yankees, it was fun watching Damon. He reminded me off the great baserunning kids I’ve seen in Little League. “Really, they are just going to give it to me? Cool.” Those kinds of kids always made the opposing players feel like stupid. He seemed to delay longer than I would expect from someone who was really thinking about the effects of the shift ahead of time, as if he still could quite believe anyone would just leave a base uncovered.

by Mirror on Nov 2, 2009 1:36 PM PST reply actions   0 recs

See, that last bit should be how this is handled

Damon stealing third was fun. That’s it. It was a cool, fun thing to watch. It wasn’t a play for the ages.

As for the first bit, I just can’t buy that any Major League closer who’s already won a World Series would be that insecure.

by Jeff on Nov 2, 2009 1:40 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

I can't buy that any Major League player would be that insecure.

In a league where Willie Bloomquist repeatedly states his belief that he should start every day, there’s no way that a player is that fragile.

Nice Guys Finish Third - My semantics are a waste of time.

by pdb on Nov 2, 2009 1:42 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Remember Smoltz talking about a sports psychologist in the early 90s?

Smoltz had the core self-confidence to work on it. I recognize it can’t be quantified, but it does exist. From a Jan 9, 2009 farewell (!) article in Sports Illustrated:

“And I remember when he turned it around in ’91 with Dr. Llewellyn,” Fowler said. With Jack Llewellyn, the sports psychologist Smoltz began seeing after starting the 1991 season 2-12. Initially, all of Atlanta was skeptical. “Sigmund Fraud,” one local writer called Llewellyn.

“Smoltz probably caught a lot of grief about that,” Fowler said. Llewellyn even wore a red shirt while sitting in the stands behind home plate, to help Smoltz see red and re-focus. “But he had an exceptional mental strength, and it turned his career around. For any athlete to go to a shrink because he needed help, well, I think that’s one of the most admirable things I’ve ever seen.”

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/jack_wilkinson/01/08/wilkinson.smoltz/index.html

On the other hand, my son remarked that Lidge’s fast ball was topping out about 4 mph slower than it had against his post season National League opponents in a couple of those outings.

by Mirror on Nov 2, 2009 1:55 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Before break 2-11, after break 12-2.

Also, note before the break, he gives up more than 2 runs in 11 games.

After the break, he gives up more than 2 runs in 3 games.

One can argue with Smotz, his GM, and his sports psychologist that sports psychology is hooey, but I’ll bet Cox didn’t argue and didn’t care. With an improvement like that he can wear the women’s underwear on the outside of his uniform if he wants.

It wouldn’t surprise me if Lidge has consulted and worked with a sports psychologist… but it obviously isn’t a panacea or our lasting memory of Chuck Knobloch wouldn’t involve fans ducking along the first base line.

by Mirror on Nov 2, 2009 2:23 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

It does assume either a placebo or not a placebo or didn't matter

You are making the case that Smoltz would have (could have?) turned around without turning to a psychologist. [If true this actually makes my main point, that significant insecurity doesn’t necessarily prevent elite level performance.]

I am suggesting that someone like Smoltz who is conscious of his own loss of confidence and focus did in fact appear to benefit from trying to do something.

However (!), I was mostly just pointing out that there are Hall of Fame level players who feel insecure and consciously take steps to deal with it.

by Mirror on Nov 2, 2009 2:43 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

But you would need to invoke incomprehensible dishonesty

on Smoltz’s part to explain why he would say things explicitly conceding insecurity when he wasn’t actually insecure!

by Mirror on Nov 2, 2009 3:00 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

It doesn't matter that he felt insecure

Those game logs look an awful lot like his insecurity or lack thereof is decoupled from actual performance.

by Graham on Nov 2, 2009 3:03 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Maybe less a matter of insecurity as a matter of distraction

Insecurity is probably fairly common. This issue is whether the player allows it to be a distraction. The edge of effective/not effective for some good pitchers is so narrow., In this case, I think maybe the catcher got distracted from their best game plan as well.

by Mirror on Nov 2, 2009 2:36 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Are you skeptical that an "elite" player could be insecure or

sceptical that Lidge could be effected by insecurity?

Is it that by definition an elite player is psychologically sound and that any statistically significant fall-off in performance must be due to physical deterioration, like a robot wears out over time?

by Mirror on Nov 2, 2009 3:05 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

From Neil Best:
I was part of the media scrum around Lidge in the Phillies locker room after the game, and Lidge insisted the runner on third had no effect on his pitch selection. Hmm.

by Jeff on Nov 2, 2009 2:06 PM PST reply actions   0 recs

Brad Lidge is THE CLOSER!

duh

Nice Guys Finish Third - My semantics are a waste of time.

by pdb on Nov 2, 2009 2:56 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Oh yeah...

Are you serious or did I miss some news about Park?

by Kermit. on Nov 2, 2009 2:57 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

I'm not entirely serious

but I don’t know enough about Manuel to know how serious I am. He just seems very old-school, role-driven, and has faith that his guys will come through.

Nice Guys Finish Third - My semantics are a waste of time.

by pdb on Nov 2, 2009 3:15 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Keith Olberman

Just called it the Smartest Play in the History of the World Series on Countdown after showing the other top contenders.

Your favorite meme is dead

by Edanger6 on Nov 3, 2009 6:56 PM PST reply actions   0 recs

I hate him

Completely cancels out Rachel Maddow in terms of quality.

by vivaelpujols on Nov 3, 2009 11:15 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

I mean seriously, "the smartest play in the history of the world series"?

Using THT’s WPA Inquirer, and adjusting for the Yankees run environment (a little over 5.5 runs per game), Damon’s WPA was 2.73% for that play.

http://www.hardballtimes.com/thtstats/other/wpa_inquirer.php?view=compare&runs1=5.5&runs2=5.5&base1=4&base2=5&inning1=18&inning2=18&outs1=2&outs2=2&score1=0&score2=0

For comparison, a leadoff single in the top of the first is worth 3.36% WPA.

http://www.hardballtimes.com/thtstats/other/wpa_inquirer.php?view=compare&runs1=5.5&runs2=5.5&base1=8&base2=1&inning1=1&inning2=1&outs1=0&outs2=0&score1=0&score2=0

Was it smart? I don’t even think so. It was instinctive and showed good awareness; however, the chance of being caught stealing or getting injured basically nullifies the positive advantage of the steal.

by vivaelpujols on Nov 3, 2009 11:36 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

By reading a game thread of your own volition you agree to accept all liability for any and all damage done to your delicate sensibilities.
Start posting about the Mariners »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Max_small
FootbaLL IV (Nov 21st)
Small
The Sabermetrics of Cats

Recent FanPosts

Laughing_man_elmex_small
AFL Championship game thread
Smell-the-glove_small
OFFTOP 11/19 - The Hand of Fraud
Small
Tony Blengino interview on 710 AM ESPN Seattle's Hot Stove League
Ichirocameron_small
OTFPOTD 11/16: Recipes Edition
Small
Lookout Landing as a communtiy
Small
Royals determined to unload Callaspo...
Ichiro_small
Ackley and Triunfel on MLB TV right now
Small
Xbox LLive, Pt 3

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Sexy People

1_small Graham

Small Matthew

Small Jeff