How many stolen bases would Rickey Henderson have had today?

craig44

Under the current rules, i bet Ricky may have had 15-20% more steals. I dont think the few inches shorter bases would have made much of a difference, but the pitch clock and limit on throws to first sure would have.

Vince Coleman and Tim Raines would have loved it too!

Basebal21

Shorter bases makes a huge difference. Adding the oven mitts youre cutting off like 4 to 6 inches off the base paths which is usually the difference between safe and out. Those 300 something caught stealings in his career most would have turned into success. He would run more too with it.

I would bet he would have had at least 1 if not 2 200+ seasons

galaxy27

130 swipes in '82 is still unintelligible to me

almost one a game on average

he was wrecking games all season long

DocBenjamin

Can't do the math, but rarely was there a more exciting player to watch.

Darin

Not any more than back then. He was pretty much stealing every chance he got anyway. The best thing he could have done was improve his success rate into the Tim Raines, Willie Wilson range.

Basebal21

@Darin said:
Not any more than back then. He was pretty much stealing every chance he got anyway. The best thing he could have done was improve his success rate into the Tim Raines, Willie Wilson range.

So youre saying that he was never once thrown out by less than three inches? Never once were more than two pick off attempts made on him? Never once would replay have over turned an out call?

Theres no chance he wouldnt have had more, the only question is how many more

Darin

@Basebal21 said:

@Darin said:
Not any more than back then. He was pretty much stealing every chance he got anyway. The best thing he could have done was improve his success rate into the Tim Raines, Willie Wilson range.

So youre saying that he was never once thrown out by less than three inches? Never once were more than two pick off attempts made on him? Never once would replay have over turned an out call?

Theres no chance he wouldnt have had more, the only question is how many more

No, I’m saying that overall catchers now are better at throwing out base stealers. Players are also generally faster now so it doesn’t show up in catchers caught stealing percentages.
To be concise I’m saying better cannon arms on catchers negates everything you said about being thrown out by inches etc. The replay thing isn’t an issue, you think he was never called safe when he was actually out.

Basebal21

@Darin said:

@Basebal21 said:

@Darin said:
Not any more than back then. He was pretty much stealing every chance he got anyway. The best thing he could have done was improve his success rate into the Tim Raines, Willie Wilson range.

So youre saying that he was never once thrown out by less than three inches? Never once were more than two pick off attempts made on him? Never once would replay have over turned an out call?

Theres no chance he wouldnt have had more, the only question is how many more

No, I’m saying that overall catchers now are better at throwing out base stealers. Players are also generally faster now so it doesn’t show up in catchers caught stealing percentages.
To be concise I’m saying better cannon arms on catchers negates everything you said about being thrown out by inches etc. The replay thing isn’t an issue, you think he was never called safe when he was actually out.

Average pop time for a catcher today is over 2.0 seconds. Elite is anything under 2.0. That difference is less than 3 inches between the two. Batters steal bases off the pitcher not the catcher generally. Theres no chance that Henderson wouldnt have more steals with a pitcher who can only pick off twice and theres a clock when he has to throw with 3 inch shorter base paths even ignoring the replay

bgr

I think that the impact of the changes; larger bases (shorter base paths), limit on disengagements per batter (throws to first), blocking rules which don’t appear to be called well, and the pitch clock giving the runner a better idea when they can extend… make it difficult to identify which change has the largest impact.

I think anyone confident enough to assert what has the largest impact might not be promoting pure conjecture.

I think Henderson would have less stolen bases in today’s game. The value of the stolen bases in certain situations in the game is better understood now, and I think this would translate to fewer opportunities. However, if he was allowed to run at will, I believe the rule changes would increase his total dramatically. Across the league catchers have gotten quicker getting the ball to 2nd (pop time), but I also suspect base runners have also used analytics to identify advantages against pitchers which negates that.

So yeah. I think he would steal less because the game has changed in how it looks at the value of a stolen base. I think he could steal a lot more with these rules and the same mentality during his day.

Basebal21

Henderson played the majority of his career in the 80s and 90s. There havent been significant changes in pop times since then. The reason people stopped running was because analytics say if theres not at least an 80 percent chance of success you just dont.

Even Yaddie who was considered the best of the best only threw out about 40% of base stealers before the rule changes. SBs have sky rocketed since the rule changes, Henderson would have been allowed to run at will like Acuna was last year. The analytics would have had his success rate far above 80 percent with todays rules

bgr

@Basebal21 said:
Henderson played the majority of his career in the 80s and 90s. There havent been significant changes in pop times since then. The reason people stopped running was because analytics say if theres not at least an 80 percent chance of success you just dont.

Even Yaddie who was considered the best of the best only threw out about 40% of base stealers before the rule changes. SBs have sky rocketed since the rule changes, Henderson would have been allowed to run at will like Acuna was last year. The analytics would have had his success rate far above 80 percent with todays rules

I stand corrected. I was wrong I guess. He would have had way more stolen bases.

1948_Swell_Robinson

@Basebal21 said:
Henderson played the majority of his career in the 80s and 90s. There havent been significant changes in pop times since then. The reason people stopped running was because analytics say if theres not at least an 80 percent chance of success you just dont.

Even Yaddie who was considered the best of the best only threw out about 40% of base stealers before the rule changes. SBs have sky rocketed since the rule changes, Henderson would have been allowed to run at will like Acuna was last year. The analytics would have had his success rate far above 80 percent with todays rules

Acuna wasn't allowed to run at will last year. When he was on base he had 336 stolen base opportunities. Stolen base opportunities are the times you are on first or second base and the next base is open in front of you.

Of those 336 opportunities he stole 73 bases and was caught 14 times. So there were 249 times he was on base with a chance and he didn't try.

In 1982 Rickey Henderson had 225 stolen base opportunities. He stole 130 bases and got caught 42 times. So there were 53 times he was on base where he didn't try.

Teams now are still hyper aware of the negative effect of a caught stealing even when the success rate jumped with the new rules, so they are still less inclined to run. They are even more less inclined to run against the best battery tandems while on base. So it isn't as if they just decided to run more that their success would stay the same, because that means they would have to be just as successful against the best battery tandems as they are against the worst.

Henderson would be suppressed from attempting just like anyone else in that regard, especially if he had elite sluggers hitting behind him like Acuna did. So it is partly situational depending on the team in conjunction with league wide philosophy. Even Henderson ran less when he went to the Yankees compared to the A's.

From 1980-84 with Oakland Henderson attempted to steal on 48% of his opportunities at a success rate of 78%
From 1985-1988 with New York Henderson attempted to steal on 40% of his opportunities at a success rate of 86%

So the Yanks treated Henderson more like a team would now compared to what Oakland did then. The more Henderson ran meant the more he had to try agains the best in the league at preventing stealing...so his success rate was lower. The Yanks were smarter with him.

Mistlin

He'd have considerably less, obviously.

Basebal21

@1948_Swell_Robinson said:

@Basebal21 said:
Henderson played the majority of his career in the 80s and 90s. There havent been significant changes in pop times since then. The reason people stopped running was because analytics say if theres not at least an 80 percent chance of success you just dont.

Even Yaddie who was considered the best of the best only threw out about 40% of base stealers before the rule changes. SBs have sky rocketed since the rule changes, Henderson would have been allowed to run at will like Acuna was last year. The analytics would have had his success rate far above 80 percent with todays rules

Acuna wasn't allowed to run at will last year. When he was on base he had 336 stolen base opportunities. Stolen base opportunities are the times you are on first or second base and the next base is open in front of you.

Of those 336 opportunities he stole 73 bases and was caught 14 times. So there were 249 times he was on base with a chance and he didn't try.

In 1982 Rickey Henderson had 225 stolen base opportunities. He stole 130 bases and got caught 42 times. So there were 53 times he was on base where he didn't try.

Teams now are still hyper aware of the negative effect of a caught stealing even when the success rate jumped with the new rules, so they are still less inclined to run. They are even more less inclined to run against the best battery tandems while on base. So it isn't as if they just decided to run more that their success would stay the same, because that means they would have to be just as successful against the best battery tandems as they are against the worst.

Henderson would be suppressed from attempting just like anyone else in that regard, especially if he had elite sluggers hitting behind him like Acuna did. So it is partly situational depending on the team in conjunction with league wide philosophy. Even Henderson ran less when he went to the Yankees compared to the A's.

From 1980-84 with Oakland Henderson attempted to steal on 48% of his opportunities at a success rate of 78%
From 1985-1988 with New York Henderson attempted to steal on 40% of his opportunities at a success rate of 86%

So the Yanks treated Henderson more like a team would now compared to what Oakland did then. The more Henderson ran meant the more he had to try agains the best in the league at preventing stealing...so his success rate was lower. The Yanks were smarter with him.

Its not an auto attempt just being on base. Theres a number of factors and timing things that come into play. Whenever Acuna thought he could make it or thought he had a good jump he tried. If he wasnt feeling great, didnt have a good read on the timing, wasnt getting a good jump he didnt. The Braves werent stopping him. Good base stealers dont just blindly run every time.

As for Henderson a bunch of his CS would turn into a SB with todays rules. He certainly ran a lot and was very successful with it. Today he could have gotten bigger leads, his timing would be better knowing when they have to throw it and pitchers cant just pick off over and over. Then add in that the bases are shorter and he could shorten them even more with the oven mitt someone that aggressive whose good at it and he would have stolen more.

Its not a coincidence that there were 3500 stolen bases last year with the over 4 inch reduction in the base paths. That was over 1000 more than 2021. This year theres already over 2800 SBs with a month to go and one of the best base stealers in Acuna played less than 50 games before his knee injury.

There was an all time best success rate in stolen bases the first year the rules changed, that could even be broken this year again.

craig44

I wonder how effective Acuna will be on the bases after recovering from the 2nd blown out knee?

1948_Swell_Robinson

@Basebal21 said:

@1948_Swell_Robinson said:

@Basebal21 said:
Henderson played the majority of his career in the 80s and 90s. There havent been significant changes in pop times since then. The reason people stopped running was because analytics say if theres not at least an 80 percent chance of success you just dont.

Even Yaddie who was considered the best of the best only threw out about 40% of base stealers before the rule changes. SBs have sky rocketed since the rule changes, Henderson would have been allowed to run at will like Acuna was last year. The analytics would have had his success rate far above 80 percent with todays rules

Acuna wasn't allowed to run at will last year. When he was on base he had 336 stolen base opportunities. Stolen base opportunities are the times you are on first or second base and the next base is open in front of you.

Of those 336 opportunities he stole 73 bases and was caught 14 times. So there were 249 times he was on base with a chance and he didn't try.

In 1982 Rickey Henderson had 225 stolen base opportunities. He stole 130 bases and got caught 42 times. So there were 53 times he was on base where he didn't try.

Teams now are still hyper aware of the negative effect of a caught stealing even when the success rate jumped with the new rules, so they are still less inclined to run. They are even more less inclined to run against the best battery tandems while on base. So it isn't as if they just decided to run more that their success would stay the same, because that means they would have to be just as successful against the best battery tandems as they are against the worst.

Henderson would be suppressed from attempting just like anyone else in that regard, especially if he had elite sluggers hitting behind him like Acuna did. So it is partly situational depending on the team in conjunction with league wide philosophy. Even Henderson ran less when he went to the Yankees compared to the A's.

From 1980-84 with Oakland Henderson attempted to steal on 48% of his opportunities at a success rate of 78%
From 1985-1988 with New York Henderson attempted to steal on 40% of his opportunities at a success rate of 86%

So the Yanks treated Henderson more like a team would now compared to what Oakland did then. The more Henderson ran meant the more he had to try agains the best in the league at preventing stealing...so his success rate was lower. The Yanks were smarter with him.

Its not an auto attempt just being on base. Theres a number of factors and timing things that come into play. Whenever Acuna thought he could make it or thought he had a good jump he tried. If he wasnt feeling great, didnt have a good read on the timing, wasnt getting a good jump he didnt. The Braves werent stopping him. Good base stealers dont just blindly run every time.

As for Henderson a bunch of his CS would turn into a SB with todays rules. He certainly ran a lot and was very successful with it. Today he could have gotten bigger leads, his timing would be better knowing when they have to throw it and pitchers cant just pick off over and over. Then add in that the bases are shorter and he could shorten them even more with the oven mitt someone that aggressive whose good at it and he would have stolen more.

Its not a coincidence that there were 3500 stolen bases last year with the over 4 inch reduction in the base paths. That was over 1000 more than 2021. This year theres already over 2800 SBs with a month to go and one of the best base stealers in Acuna played less than 50 games before his knee injury.

There was an all time best success rate in stolen bases the first year the rules changed, that could even be broken this year again.

Henderson stolen base success rate would increase under these rules, but it sounds like you are overestimating how much it would...so I have to ask, what do you think his rate would be under the new rules? Is the 200 stolen base claim hyperbole or is it what you think is reality?

So if you think Henderson would steal 200 bases when he was only stealing 100 in 1980....then what would Willie Wilson steal if he stole 80 bases? Wouldn't he steal 160 then? Miguel Dilone stole 61, so does that turn in 120?

In order for Henderson to steal 200 bases in 1982, that means he would have to run on every one of the 225 oppotunities he had....which isn't possible because some of those opportunities came in a lopsided score where it would be ruled indifference. Some would come in scores where the team wouldn't run due to the 'unwritten' rules. And he would still get caught even under the new rules. Henderson was successful 78% of the time when he ran at that volume already. The percent under the new rules hasn't gone up as much as you think where it would turn a 78% runner into a 95% runner who runs against even the best tandems in the league. You do realize that less attempts are made agains the very best battery tandems, right? Especially in this era.

Without a doubt, his volume of attempts would certainly decrease today, just like it does for everyone...how much would depend on which team he is on. On the 2024 Reds not as much. On the 2023 Braves when everyone in the lineup was hitting 20-50 HR's, like Acuna, it certainly would decrease because they know a runner is going to score from first on a home run and often do not want to risk the out trying to steal second....which is why Acuna was limited.

To be clear Acuna was not allowed to run wild like you said. You were wrong. Sometimes just say "Yeah I didn't realize he had that many chances to run but they didn't let him loose as much as I thought."

Again, Henderson attempts volume would decrease, JUST LIKE EVERYONE ELSE IN MLB TODAY. He would not be stealing anywhere close to 200 bases, and if you think he would then that means the guys who stole 80 back then would be stealing 150 today, and if you keep going with that exercise, then that means guys stealing 35 bases would be 55-70. Dawson who was 19th in MLB in stolen bases in 1980 with 34 would be the league leader today.

Your numbers don't add up.

Please tell me, go to 1980 and 1982 and look at the top 25 in MLB in stolen bases and tell me what the new percentages of success rate would be under the new rules for each of those players, and then also tell me what you think their new stolen base totals would be.

I will tell you, if you come back with "Henderson would increase his totals by 100%, but the others only by ten percent," then I will know which way the discussion is going...much like the 'marine layer' and 'park overlay' claims went for you.

1948_Swell_Robinson

So lets do this exercise. @Basebal21 you say Henderson would steal 200 bases playing this year, which would be 51% more than his best stolen base season in 1982, and 100% more than his 1980 season.

First, it would not happen because no team would allow him to run that much to begin with. His success rate would uptick with the rule changes, but that would be more than offset by the fact that MLB teams do not let their players run enough to do that. They simply don't.

Henderson wouldn't even steal 100 in his best year(unless he was on some awful team with nobody in the lineup and the team just wanted a record).

But lets do the exercise. If Henderson would go up 50% or 100%, then wouldn't all the other guys right below him also see an increase? Lets look at 1980 and just stick with a 50% increase in stolen bases playing today under the new rules.

That means you are saying Henderson would steal 150 bases playing today(or last year) when the top guy in the league only had 73 last year and this year the top will most likely by about 73 again. But Henderson would steal that many more bases than the best in MLB now??

Ok, great, Rickey is the greatest, so I guess he would...but in 1980 Ron LeFlore stole 97 and Omar Moreno stole 96, Dave Collins stole 79, and Willie Wilson stole 79. So are you saying with a straight face that those four guys would also steal more baes than anyone today as well?

Not only are you saying that those four guys would steal more bases than anyone playing today but you are saying that LeFlore would steal 145 and Moreno would steal 144 playing today.

Forget the fact that their OB% would be lower against this better pitching(including Henderson), we will just stick with the exercise.

Rickey was not a God.

From 1980 to1984 Henderson stole at a 78% success rate and ran on 48% of his opportunities.
Moreno from 1978-1980 in his prime stole at a 76% success rate and ran on 49% of his opportunities.

So they both read and went at the same rate and nearly at the same success rate.

So f you believe Henderson would steal 50% more bases today, then there is no reason to believe that number would be any different for Moreno and everyone else in the top 10 list shown above....just add 50% to each of their totals based on your premise.

It simply doesn't add up.

Basebal21

@1948_Swell_Robinson said:

@Basebal21 said:

@1948_Swell_Robinson said:

@Basebal21 said:
Henderson played the majority of his career in the 80s and 90s. There havent been significant changes in pop times since then. The reason people stopped running was because analytics say if theres not at least an 80 percent chance of success you just dont.

Even Yaddie who was considered the best of the best only threw out about 40% of base stealers before the rule changes. SBs have sky rocketed since the rule changes, Henderson would have been allowed to run at will like Acuna was last year. The analytics would have had his success rate far above 80 percent with todays rules

Acuna wasn't allowed to run at will last year. When he was on base he had 336 stolen base opportunities. Stolen base opportunities are the times you are on first or second base and the next base is open in front of you.

Of those 336 opportunities he stole 73 bases and was caught 14 times. So there were 249 times he was on base with a chance and he didn't try.

In 1982 Rickey Henderson had 225 stolen base opportunities. He stole 130 bases and got caught 42 times. So there were 53 times he was on base where he didn't try.

Teams now are still hyper aware of the negative effect of a caught stealing even when the success rate jumped with the new rules, so they are still less inclined to run. They are even more less inclined to run against the best battery tandems while on base. So it isn't as if they just decided to run more that their success would stay the same, because that means they would have to be just as successful against the best battery tandems as they are against the worst.

Henderson would be suppressed from attempting just like anyone else in that regard, especially if he had elite sluggers hitting behind him like Acuna did. So it is partly situational depending on the team in conjunction with league wide philosophy. Even Henderson ran less when he went to the Yankees compared to the A's.

From 1980-84 with Oakland Henderson attempted to steal on 48% of his opportunities at a success rate of 78%
From 1985-1988 with New York Henderson attempted to steal on 40% of his opportunities at a success rate of 86%

So the Yanks treated Henderson more like a team would now compared to what Oakland did then. The more Henderson ran meant the more he had to try agains the best in the league at preventing stealing...so his success rate was lower. The Yanks were smarter with him.

Its not an auto attempt just being on base. Theres a number of factors and timing things that come into play. Whenever Acuna thought he could make it or thought he had a good jump he tried. If he wasnt feeling great, didnt have a good read on the timing, wasnt getting a good jump he didnt. The Braves werent stopping him. Good base stealers dont just blindly run every time.

As for Henderson a bunch of his CS would turn into a SB with todays rules. He certainly ran a lot and was very successful with it. Today he could have gotten bigger leads, his timing would be better knowing when they have to throw it and pitchers cant just pick off over and over. Then add in that the bases are shorter and he could shorten them even more with the oven mitt someone that aggressive whose good at it and he would have stolen more.

Its not a coincidence that there were 3500 stolen bases last year with the over 4 inch reduction in the base paths. That was over 1000 more than 2021. This year theres already over 2800 SBs with a month to go and one of the best base stealers in Acuna played less than 50 games before his knee injury.

There was an all time best success rate in stolen bases the first year the rules changed, that could even be broken this year again.

Henderson stolen base success rate would increase under these rules, but it sounds like you are overestimating how much it would...so I have to ask, what do you think his rate would be under the new rules? Is the 200 stolen base claim hyperbole or is it what you think is reality?

So if you think Henderson would steal 200 bases when he was only stealing 100 in 1980....then what would Willie Wilson steal if he stole 80 bases? Wouldn't he steal 160 then? Miguel Dilone stole 61, so does that turn in 120?

In order for Henderson to steal 200 bases in 1982, that means he would have to run on every one of the 225 oppotunities he had....which isn't possible because some of those opportunities came in a lopsided score where it would be ruled indifference. Some would come in scores where the team wouldn't run due to the 'unwritten' rules. And he would still get caught even under the new rules. Henderson was successful 78% of the time when he ran at that volume already. The percent under the new rules hasn't gone up as much as you think where it would turn a 78% runner into a 95% runner who runs against even the best tandems in the league. You do realize that less attempts are made agains the very best battery tandems, right? Especially in this era.

Without a doubt, his volume of attempts would certainly decrease today, just like it does for everyone...how much would depend on which team he is on. On the 2024 Reds not as much. On the 2023 Braves when everyone in the lineup was hitting 20-50 HR's, like Acuna, it certainly would decrease because they know a runner is going to score from first on a home run and often do not want to risk the out trying to steal second....which is why Acuna was limited.

To be clear Acuna was not allowed to run wild like you said. You were wrong. Sometimes just say "Yeah I didn't realize he had that many chances to run but they didn't let him loose as much as I thought."

Again, Henderson attempts volume would decrease, JUST LIKE EVERYONE ELSE IN MLB TODAY. He would not be stealing anywhere close to 200 bases, and if you think he would then that means the guys who stole 80 back then would be stealing 150 today, and if you keep going with that exercise, then that means guys stealing 35 bases would be 55-70. Dawson who was 19th in MLB in stolen bases in 1980 with 34 would be the league leader today.

Your numbers don't add up.

Please tell me, go to 1980 and 1982 and look at the top 25 in MLB in stolen bases and tell me what the new percentages of success rate would be under the new rules for each of those players, and then also tell me what you think their new stolen base totals would be.

I will tell you, if you come back with "Henderson would increase his totals by 100%, but the others only by ten percent," then I will know which way the discussion is going...much like the 'marine layer' and 'park overlay' claims went for you.

I'll start with Acuna. The idea that somehow the Braves stopped Acuna from running is just a misunderstanding of how professional baseball works.

Acuna plays in the Venezuelan winter league, do you think the Braves are happy about that? They cant stop him when hes healthy

The simple fact is that guys with 9 figure contracts can run when they want. Othani runs when he wants and hist leadoff over Betts because he wants to, Acuna can run when he wants etc, He didnt just run every single time because he picked his spots.

As far as Henderson and the stolen bases in general. 2003 has the highest percentage of successful steal in history at over 80%. Never before had that happened.

The distance to first base is 3 inches shorter now than then which creates more chances. Yes he probably would have had a 200 with the new rules especially with the oven mitt to cut it 5 6 inches but we will never know. Pop times are basically the same right around 2. If he had played in 1910 thatd be a different story

Basebal21

@craig44 said:
I wonder how effective Acuna will be on the bases after recovering from the 2nd blown out knee?

Its tough for sure. It was both so thats kinda a good sign it wasnt the same. I would hope he calms it down, but I also wouldnt want him playing in the Venezuelan winter league if I was a Braves fan but he does when healthy

bgr

Marine layer. That one gets me chuckling every time.

I like the approach to bound the limits based on opportunities.

2023 had only a 9.4% increase in stolen bases over 1990. A quick glance tells me that 3200 is probably close to the mean for 1980-2000.

2023 had 1.7 attempts per team game which was above the average since 1950 of 1.6.

Team success percentages vary wildly with some teams as low as 60% and others as high as 88% in a given season. So there is a lot of noise in the system already and we won’t know anything looking year by year yet. That said the success rates are not dramatically up in the past 30 years. I saw an article stating that 2023 showed an increase of 75% to 81% but that appears to be taking 2013-2022 average and comparing it to 2023 alone. 2012 and 2011 were both 3200+. There are ebbs and flows.

I can’t draw a conclusion here yet but teams are running more and we’re on pace for 3584 stolen bases this season at the current rate.

So far the increases in both success rate and attempts are within a standard deviation. Which means we have no real conclusive evidence because we have seen the same changes before without the variables considered here.

I certainly agree that the rule changes help players steal bases at a higher rate of success. Because of this I think teams will continue to try to steal more bases.

But. I’m not sure he would be stealing more bases. The only guy who I think is running at will (so to speak) is EDLC. I was looking at his base running stats and I think he attempts nearly 60% of his chances. If Henderson was in a situation like that perhaps he could steal 190… maybe even touch 200 in a season. Henderson was on base way more than EDLC. He likely has years with 300+ opportunities, especially when he was on those As teams. I think it’s more likely he would have had far fewer attempts given the league averages.

1948_Swell_Robinson

@Basebal21 said:

@1948_Swell_Robinson said:

@Basebal21 said:

@1948_Swell_Robinson said:

@Basebal21 said:
Henderson played the majority of his career in the 80s and 90s. There havent been significant changes in pop times since then. The reason people stopped running was because analytics say if theres not at least an 80 percent chance of success you just dont.

Even Yaddie who was considered the best of the best only threw out about 40% of base stealers before the rule changes. SBs have sky rocketed since the rule changes, Henderson would have been allowed to run at will like Acuna was last year. The analytics would have had his success rate far above 80 percent with todays rules

Acuna wasn't allowed to run at will last year. When he was on base he had 336 stolen base opportunities. Stolen base opportunities are the times you are on first or second base and the next base is open in front of you.

Of those 336 opportunities he stole 73 bases and was caught 14 times. So there were 249 times he was on base with a chance and he didn't try.

In 1982 Rickey Henderson had 225 stolen base opportunities. He stole 130 bases and got caught 42 times. So there were 53 times he was on base where he didn't try.

Teams now are still hyper aware of the negative effect of a caught stealing even when the success rate jumped with the new rules, so they are still less inclined to run. They are even more less inclined to run against the best battery tandems while on base. So it isn't as if they just decided to run more that their success would stay the same, because that means they would have to be just as successful against the best battery tandems as they are against the worst.

Henderson would be suppressed from attempting just like anyone else in that regard, especially if he had elite sluggers hitting behind him like Acuna did. So it is partly situational depending on the team in conjunction with league wide philosophy. Even Henderson ran less when he went to the Yankees compared to the A's.

From 1980-84 with Oakland Henderson attempted to steal on 48% of his opportunities at a success rate of 78%
From 1985-1988 with New York Henderson attempted to steal on 40% of his opportunities at a success rate of 86%

So the Yanks treated Henderson more like a team would now compared to what Oakland did then. The more Henderson ran meant the more he had to try agains the best in the league at preventing stealing...so his success rate was lower. The Yanks were smarter with him.

Its not an auto attempt just being on base. Theres a number of factors and timing things that come into play. Whenever Acuna thought he could make it or thought he had a good jump he tried. If he wasnt feeling great, didnt have a good read on the timing, wasnt getting a good jump he didnt. The Braves werent stopping him. Good base stealers dont just blindly run every time.

As for Henderson a bunch of his CS would turn into a SB with todays rules. He certainly ran a lot and was very successful with it. Today he could have gotten bigger leads, his timing would be better knowing when they have to throw it and pitchers cant just pick off over and over. Then add in that the bases are shorter and he could shorten them even more with the oven mitt someone that aggressive whose good at it and he would have stolen more.

Its not a coincidence that there were 3500 stolen bases last year with the over 4 inch reduction in the base paths. That was over 1000 more than 2021. This year theres already over 2800 SBs with a month to go and one of the best base stealers in Acuna played less than 50 games before his knee injury.

There was an all time best success rate in stolen bases the first year the rules changed, that could even be broken this year again.

Henderson stolen base success rate would increase under these rules, but it sounds like you are overestimating how much it would...so I have to ask, what do you think his rate would be under the new rules? Is the 200 stolen base claim hyperbole or is it what you think is reality?

So if you think Henderson would steal 200 bases when he was only stealing 100 in 1980....then what would Willie Wilson steal if he stole 80 bases? Wouldn't he steal 160 then? Miguel Dilone stole 61, so does that turn in 120?

In order for Henderson to steal 200 bases in 1982, that means he would have to run on every one of the 225 oppotunities he had....which isn't possible because some of those opportunities came in a lopsided score where it would be ruled indifference. Some would come in scores where the team wouldn't run due to the 'unwritten' rules. And he would still get caught even under the new rules. Henderson was successful 78% of the time when he ran at that volume already. The percent under the new rules hasn't gone up as much as you think where it would turn a 78% runner into a 95% runner who runs against even the best tandems in the league. You do realize that less attempts are made agains the very best battery tandems, right? Especially in this era.

Without a doubt, his volume of attempts would certainly decrease today, just like it does for everyone...how much would depend on which team he is on. On the 2024 Reds not as much. On the 2023 Braves when everyone in the lineup was hitting 20-50 HR's, like Acuna, it certainly would decrease because they know a runner is going to score from first on a home run and often do not want to risk the out trying to steal second....which is why Acuna was limited.

To be clear Acuna was not allowed to run wild like you said. You were wrong. Sometimes just say "Yeah I didn't realize he had that many chances to run but they didn't let him loose as much as I thought."

Again, Henderson attempts volume would decrease, JUST LIKE EVERYONE ELSE IN MLB TODAY. He would not be stealing anywhere close to 200 bases, and if you think he would then that means the guys who stole 80 back then would be stealing 150 today, and if you keep going with that exercise, then that means guys stealing 35 bases would be 55-70. Dawson who was 19th in MLB in stolen bases in 1980 with 34 would be the league leader today.

Your numbers don't add up.

Please tell me, go to 1980 and 1982 and look at the top 25 in MLB in stolen bases and tell me what the new percentages of success rate would be under the new rules for each of those players, and then also tell me what you think their new stolen base totals would be.

I will tell you, if you come back with "Henderson would increase his totals by 100%, but the others only by ten percent," then I will know which way the discussion is going...much like the 'marine layer' and 'park overlay' claims went for you.

I'll start with Acuna. The idea that somehow the Braves stopped Acuna from running is just a misunderstanding of how professional baseball works.

Acuna plays in the Venezuelan winter league, do you think the Braves are happy about that? They cant stop him when hes healthy

The simple fact is that guys with 9 figure contracts can run when they want. Othani runs when he wants and hist leadoff over Betts because he wants to, Acuna can run when he wants etc, He didnt just run every single time because he picked his spots.

As far as Henderson and the stolen bases in general. 2003 has the highest percentage of successful steal in history at over 80%. Never before had that happened.

The distance to first base is 3 inches shorter now than then which creates more chances. Yes he probably would have had a 200 with the new rules especially with the oven mitt to cut it 5 6 inches but we will never know. Pop times are basically the same right around 2. If he had played in 1910 thatd be a different story

Wrong.

And you do not realize that the more you steal the more you have to steal against the best at defending it in the league and your chances go DOWN, which is why the attempts aren't made because teams aren't going to run with a 60% chance of making it when the next two guys hit 40 HR a year.

Nobody in MLB is allowed to even attempt 100 steals and you are saying five guys from 1980 would come in and get from 145-160 SUCCESSFUL attempts, lol. Why on earth would MLB teams in 2024 allow those guys to attempt to steal 175 times but NOBODY ELSE over 90 times?

It would take a situation like I said, where a team with a crap lineup just wants a guy to run almost every time he is on. So far no team has attempted that. They could, but they haven't. If they do, then I will change my mind....and it wouldn't even need to be the best base stealer ever. It could be any good base stealer.

And yes, the pop times around the league are better now than they were in 1980. Everything is more refined defensively and with stronger arms. So while in theory the rule changes would help players from then, the fact that the pitchers and defense are better would negate that and then some...which is why nobody attempts 90 steals a year let alone 220,

Basebal21

@1948_Swell_Robinson said:
And you do not realize that the more you steal the more you have to steal against the best at defending it in the league and your chances go DOWN, which is why the attempts aren't made because teams aren't going to run with a 60% chance of making it when the next two guys hit 40 HR a year.

Are there pinch catchers now? Pitchers that come in just to be quick on a pitch out? Was some massive rule change made I missed?

The players on the other team dont change because someone stole more bases.

Nobody in MLB is allowed to even attempt 100 steals and you are saying five guys from 1980 would come in and get from 145-160 SUCCESSFUL attempts, lol. Why on earth would MLB teams in 2024 allow those guys to attempt to steal 175 times but NOBODY ELSE over 90 times?

You keep saying allowed when the proper word is decided. Its not high school or the 1950s any more. Anyone with a 9 figure contract runs when they want. If they want to they do, if they dont want to they dont.

It would take a situation like I said, where a team with a crap lineup just wants a guy to run almost every time he is on. So far no team has attempted that. They could, but they haven't. If they do, then I will change my mind....and it wouldn't even need to be the best base stealer ever. It could be any good base stealer.

And yes, the pop times around the league are better now than they were in 1980. Everything is more refined defensively and with stronger arms. So while in theory the rule changes would help players from then, the fact that the pitchers and defense are better would negate that and then some...which is why nobody attempts 90 steals a year let alone 220,

Wrong is certainly true

Wrong is certainly true I agree with that. The minuscule change in pop times is more than wiped out by the shorter base paths and rule changes

bgr

Totally missed the nuance in 1948s percentiles. Bravo.

1948_Swell_Robinson

@basebal21 All gibberish as usual lol. At least you agreed you are wrong...again.

Allowed or decided makes no difference. Whether it is the organization leadership deciding or the player deciding based on the teams scouting report and knowledge of the times, again makes no difference, because.

The fact is THEY DO NOT TRY TO ATTEMPT THAT MANY STEALS because they already know the cost/benefit of doing so, hence why NOBODY is ALLOWED to try 200 steals in 2024....and certain nobody coming from 1980 would be coming in and be allowed to attempt 220 steals, let alone five of six guys form then doing so, especially knowing that the pop times are better now, and the pitchers are better now, so you can throw those old SB% out the window.

SO again, you are wrong as usual. Now, if a team does sometime in the near future allow someone to attempt 220 steals, then you will be right, but so far after two seasons you are 0 for 2, because no team has ALLOWED anyone to even come close that because they know the cost/benefit of it far more than you do.

I think that marine layer must be getting to you because you can't understand that teams run at the most optimal times, and the more you run, the less optimal the opportunities become, and then they are no longer worth the risk. It is fairly simple. Hence why organizations do not have single players attempt that many steals.

1948_Swell_Robinson

@bgr Henderson would be lucky to draw 65 walks a year in 2024. That crouch trick simply would not work now and with umpires calling the top of the zone now, with pitchers throwing harder and with better command, they would be abusing that top of the zone on him.

To assume he would even have 300 chances in 2024 isn't realistic, let alone some organization giving him a green light 200 times with a 50 HR guy having to take a cock shot in 150 of his at bats while Henderson tries to manufacture a record, and then the hitter is sitting down in the count and now you hampered your money makers..

So in a hypothetical, if we were to pick a batter from the 1980's to plunk into 2024 to try and steal 220 times(even though nobody else in the league is allowed to steal more than 90, lol), might as well pick Tim Raines because he was a better base stealer than Henderson anyway...and he got on base without having to use a crouch trick.

Henderson got that record in 1982 by simply running on almost every opportunity...so to me it is a bit of a manufactured record anyway since a number of guys in any era if given the chance to run every time would get 130 as well. The funny thing is, it would be great if @Basebal21 turned out to be right for once and some team in two years did give some guy 200 steal attempts and that guy broke Henderson's stolen base record.

countdouglas

.

bgr

@1948_Swell_Robinson said:
@bgr Henderson would be lucky to draw 65 walks a year in 2024. That crouch trick simply would not work now and with umpires calling the top of the zone now, with pitchers throwing harder and with better command, they would be abusing that top of the zone on him.

To assume he would even have 300 chances in 2024 isn't realistic, let alone some organization giving him a green light 200 times with a 50 HR guy having to take a cock shot in 150 of his at bats while Henderson tries to manufacture a record, and then the hitter is sitting down in the count and now you hampered your money makers..

So in a hypothetical, if we were to pick a batter from the 1980's to plunk into 2024 to try and steal 220 times(even though nobody else in the league is allowed to steal more than 90, lol), might as well pick Tim Raines because he was a better base stealer than Henderson anyway...and he got on base without having to use a crouch trick.

Henderson got that record in 1982 by simply running on almost every opportunity...so to me it is a bit of a manufactured record anyway since a number of guys in any era if given the chance to run every time would get 130 as well. The funny thing is, it would be great if @Basebal21 turned out to be right for once and some team in two years did give some guy 200 steal attempts and that guy broke Henderson's stolen base record.

I merely indicated that, there is a possibility, however unlikely, given a perfect storm of circumstance.

But. I’m not sure he would be stealing more bases. The only guy who I think is running at will (so to speak) is EDLC. I was looking at his base running stats and I think he attempts nearly 60% of his chances. If Henderson was in a situation like that perhaps he could steal 190… maybe even touch 200 in a season. Henderson was on base way more than EDLC. He likely has years with 300+ opportunities, especially when he was on those As teams. I think it’s more likely he would have had far fewer attempts given the league averages.

The part between the assessment I make in bold only allows for the possibilities we cannot predict accurately and the uncertainty which prevents an reliable prediction. I won't say that Henderson's crouch wasn't exaggerated, but hard to argue his stance was unproductive when he was top 10 in OPS and led the league in OPS+ at least once. Whether or not Henderson would be able to put baseball on it's heels today, I don't know, but baseball had a difficult time adapting to him, and if you're making them cry about your stance, you're winning.

1948_Swell_Robinson

@bgr said:

@1948_Swell_Robinson said:
@bgr Henderson would be lucky to draw 65 walks a year in 2024. That crouch trick simply would not work now and with umpires calling the top of the zone now, with pitchers throwing harder and with better command, they would be abusing that top of the zone on him.

To assume he would even have 300 chances in 2024 isn't realistic, let alone some organization giving him a green light 200 times with a 50 HR guy having to take a cock shot in 150 of his at bats while Henderson tries to manufacture a record, and then the hitter is sitting down in the count and now you hampered your money makers..

So in a hypothetical, if we were to pick a batter from the 1980's to plunk into 2024 to try and steal 220 times(even though nobody else in the league is allowed to steal more than 90, lol), might as well pick Tim Raines because he was a better base stealer than Henderson anyway...and he got on base without having to use a crouch trick.

Henderson got that record in 1982 by simply running on almost every opportunity...so to me it is a bit of a manufactured record anyway since a number of guys in any era if given the chance to run every time would get 130 as well. The funny thing is, it would be great if @Basebal21 turned out to be right for once and some team in two years did give some guy 200 steal attempts and that guy broke Henderson's stolen base record.

I merely indicated that, there is a possibility, however unlikely, given a perfect storm of circumstance.

But. I’m not sure he would be stealing more bases. The only guy who I think is running at will (so to speak) is EDLC. I was looking at his base running stats and I think he attempts nearly 60% of his chances. If Henderson was in a situation like that perhaps he could steal 190… maybe even touch 200 in a season. Henderson was on base way more than EDLC. He likely has years with 300+ opportunities, especially when he was on those As teams. I think it’s more likely he would have had far fewer attempts given the league averages.

The part between the assessment I make in bold only allows for the possibilities we cannot predict accurately and the uncertainty which prevents an reliable prediction. I won't say that Henderson's crouch wasn't exaggerated, but hard to argue his stance was unproductive when he was top 10 in OPS and led the league in OPS+ at least once. Whether or not Henderson would be able to put baseball on it's heels today, I don't know, but baseball had a difficult time adapting to him, and if you're making them cry about your stance, you're winning.

They just didn't call the high strike back then and he more than took advantage of it then. You are right, we don't know how bad it would be now. I do know they would call the high strike far more now than back then and it would certainly affect his base on balls(which was his primary skill in getting on especially early in career).

I do know how many stolen bases he would be allowed to take though. The teams are showing everyone right now how many they allow the best base stealers in the league...and it isn't 200 attempts by any stretch.

1948_Swell_Robinson

@bgr I agree that some team might try and do something like that. If they have a bad lineup and a couple of speed burners who are decent at getting on. They may just run every single time they have. What would they have to lose. Would not be a bad idea to generate some news and maybe get a few fans to see it transpite

bgr

@1948_Swell_Robinson said:
@bgr I agree that some team might try and do something like that. If they have a bad lineup and a couple of speed burners who are decent at getting on. They may just run every single time they have. What would they have to lose. Would not be a bad idea to generate some news and maybe get a few fans to see it transpite

We'll never know unfortunately. I just read elsewhere that baseball is dying.

Basebal21

@1948_Swell_Robinson said:

@basebal21 All gibberish as usual lol. At least you agreed you are wrong...again.

Allowed or decided makes no difference. Whether it is the organization leadership deciding or the player deciding based on the teams scouting report and knowledge of the times, again makes no difference, because.

The fact is THEY DO NOT TRY TO ATTEMPT THAT MANY STEALS because they already know the cost/benefit of doing so, hence why NOBODY is ALLOWED to try 200 steals in 2024....and certain nobody coming from 1980 would be coming in and be allowed to attempt 220 steals, let alone five of six guys form then doing so, especially knowing that the pop times are better now, and the pitchers are better now, so you can throw those old SB% out the window.

SO again, you are wrong as usual. Now, if a team does sometime in the near future allow someone to attempt 220 steals, then you will be right, but so far after two seasons you are 0 for 2, because no team has ALLOWED anyone to even come close that because they know the cost/benefit of it far more than you do.

I think that marine layer must be getting to you because you can't understand that teams run at the most optimal times, and the more you run, the less optimal the opportunities become, and then they are no longer worth the risk. It is fairly simple. Hence why organizations do not have single players attempt that many steals.

Allowed and decided are two major differences. Someone could decide they want to do something but if they arent allowed and listen thats the end of that. You seem to think that a coach can just say no and thats how it works, it doesnt. Multiple teams have fired coaches for trying that.

It is the player that decides. Theres professional pinch runners like Gore that sure you can say no to him. Theres not a single star player that is treated like a high school player saying what theyre allowed to do. There are conversations about things but yes allowed is the wrong word.

Right now the major base stealers are also power hitters. You dont get to play or even promoted if you arent.

1948_Swell_Robinson

@Basebal21 said:

@1948_Swell_Robinson said:

@basebal21 All gibberish as usual lol. At least you agreed you are wrong...again.

Allowed or decided makes no difference. Whether it is the organization leadership deciding or the player deciding based on the teams scouting report and knowledge of the times, again makes no difference, because.

The fact is THEY DO NOT TRY TO ATTEMPT THAT MANY STEALS because they already know the cost/benefit of doing so, hence why NOBODY is ALLOWED to try 200 steals in 2024....and certain nobody coming from 1980 would be coming in and be allowed to attempt 220 steals, let alone five of six guys form then doing so, especially knowing that the pop times are better now, and the pitchers are better now, so you can throw those old SB% out the window.

SO again, you are wrong as usual. Now, if a team does sometime in the near future allow someone to attempt 220 steals, then you will be right, but so far after two seasons you are 0 for 2, because no team has ALLOWED anyone to even come close that because they know the cost/benefit of it far more than you do.

I think that marine layer must be getting to you because you can't understand that teams run at the most optimal times, and the more you run, the less optimal the opportunities become, and then they are no longer worth the risk. It is fairly simple. Hence why organizations do not have single players attempt that many steals.

Allowed and decided are two major differences. Someone could decide they want to do something but if they arent allowed and listen thats the end of that. You seem to think that a coach can just say no and thats how it works, it doesnt. Multiple teams have fired coaches for trying that.

It is the player that decides. Theres professional pinch runners like Gore that sure you can say no to him. Theres not a single star player that is treated like a high school player saying what theyre allowed to do. There are conversations about things but yes allowed is the wrong word.

Right now the major base stealers are also power hitters. You dont get to play or even promoted if you arent.

Nah.

In 2024, Henderson, after being abused by 98 in the top of the zone on a daily basis, Henderson hits .266 with 65 walks a year for six years until his power develops, then he hits a little higher and hits more home runs. Steals about 55 bases a year with an 83% success rate after seeing better pop times than he is used to.

The league in 2021/2022 to 2023/204 went from 75% success rate to 79% success rate, so Henderson only sees that similar bump.

1948_Swell_Robinson

@bgr said:

@1948_Swell_Robinson said:
@bgr I agree that some team might try and do something like that. If they have a bad lineup and a couple of speed burners who are decent at getting on. They may just run every single time they have. What would they have to lose. Would not be a bad idea to generate some news and maybe get a few fans to see it transpite

We'll never know unfortunately. I just read elsewhere that baseball is dying.

That sentiment has been said for multiple and multiple decades. I guess if they keep saying it they will get it right once.