“The real game of baseball is coming back,” Nationals speedster Nyjer Morgan said. “It’s a beautiful thing.”

Alas, Jeff Duncan's opportunity came too early.

The 2009 Mets finished first in BA and stolen bases. They finished 3rd in SH and SF.

They finished 12th in r/g.

What a dramatic sea-change. It reminds me of those hell bent small ball years of the past like 1998, (0.74 SB per game in AL), or 1967 (0.42, again in the AL). It's a beautiful thing when you can make up a column based on air and devoid of any real research or insight.

I think it's fascinating how easily the human mind can adapt the events it sees into its chosen narrative.

You think, hey, steroid testing! I bet the dominance of HRs will end and there will be more small ball. You notice a few guys stealing, and since you weren't really paying attention to it before, it kind of seems like an increase.

I wish there was a life-reference.com so I could check it and confirm or disprove the narratives I invariably create in my head the way I can in baseball.

I think it's fascinating how easily the human mind can adapt the events it sees into its chosen narrative.

It's my feeling that apophenia is one of the most important concepts for people to grasp in the information age. The human tendency to see patterns where there aren't any explains so many things.

These were the top 10 teams in MLB in 2009 in r/g:

1 NYY 5.65
2 LAA 5.45
3 BOS 5.38
4 PHI 5.06
5 MIN 5.01
6 TBR 4.96
7 COL 4.96
8 TOR 4.93
9 MIL 4.85
10 TEX 4.84

Not one of those teams was worse than top 13 in Home Runs:

1 NYY 244
11 LAA 173
4 BOS 212
3 PHI 224
13 MIN 172
6 TBR 199
7 COL 190
5 TOR 209
10 MIL 182
2 TEX 224

The correlation with run-scoring and base-stealing is far weaker. However, only a few of the best offensive clubs were below average in stealing bases:

11 NYY 111
3 LAA 148
5 BOS 126
7 PHI 119
18 MIN 85
1 TBR 194
12 COL 106
26 TOR 73
28 MIL 68
2 TEX 149

The claim that we are entering a new small-ball era (ignoring the much smaller ballparks which help produce home runs) may be wrong. But it's not like the teams which steal a lot of bases are all Metsian. The Mets, of course, are Metsian.

As always, I enjoy the mistaken belief that little fast guys don't get any benefit from taking steroids.

That's why Marion Jones took them, after all: She wanted to hit more dingers.

Yankees since the beginning of their dynasty (1996) were:
7., 9., 2. (1998!), 10., 6., 2. (2001), 6., 5., 8., 6., 2. (2006), 4., 4., 7.
in the AL. So, mostly around average, with a few very strong seasons. They do pay attention to running. Interestingly, in 1998. and 2006. they were first in the league in runs scored, but in 2001 they were only 5th.

[2006-2009 SB and CS rates, listed separately]
What a dramatic sea-change. It reminds me of those hell bent small ball years of the past like 1998, (0.74 SB per game in AL), or 1967 (0.42, again in the AL). It's a beautiful thing when you can make up a column based on air and devoid of any real research or insight.

Perhaps if many people in baseball are noticing something, but your cursory look at two metrics over four years doesn't show it, it's the latter that is missing something, not the former being delusional.

SB attempts have been up the last four years, a reversal of a dramatic twenty-year long trend before that.

I wish there was a life-reference.com so I could check it and confirm or disprove the narratives I invariably create in my head the way I can in baseball.

No you don't.

SB attempts have been up the last four years, a reversal of a dramatic twenty-year long trend before that.

Can you possibly explain what possessed you to pile up one league's (SB+CS)/g on top of the other league's so that it appears there are twice as many attempts per game as there are? It makes it extremely difficult to tell what's going on.

And any reason to think that this "trend-busting" 09 is anything different than the random blips you see in 96, 98 and 00? (which appear to have been in the NL) And nice that your graph hides that there's been no recent uptick in the NL.

Voxter, thanks for the new word!

Can you possibly explain what possessed you to pile up one league's (SB+CS)/g on top of the other league's so that it appears there are twice as many attempts per game as there are? It makes it extremely difficult to tell what's going on.

I just threw it together real quick, and was more focused on the shape than the numbers. Anyway, try it again now, as I averaged the two leagues together. It's approximate because I'm using the historical totals from B-R, and just averaging the two league totals rather than weighting by games (there aren't enough sig figs to worry about that sort of thing).

I disagree and thing the trend was clear from the first graph, by the way. Part of my point was that if you look at the individual figures, it's harder to see the trend.

And any reason to think that this "trend-busting" 09 is anything different than the random blips you see in 96, 98 and 00? (which appear to have been in the NL)

I didn't say anything about 09 breaking a trend. I specifically said it was the last four years.

And nice that your graph hides that there's been no recent uptick in the NL.

Now you're just full of it. There has been the same uptick in both leagues (NL here). And, if anything, the original graph which stacked the leagues obscured the AL, but the NL's trend was easy to follow.

And even if the trend was just in one league, I don't see the problem with that. I really don't like the insinuation that I'm "hid[ing]" anything here.

The claim that we are entering a new small-ball era (ignoring the much smaller ballparks which help produce home runs) may be wrong. But it's not like the teams which steal a lot of bases are all Metsian. The Mets, of course, are Metsian.

Yankees since the beginning of their dynasty (1996) were:
7., 9., 2. (1998!), 10., 6., 2. (2001), 6., 5., 8., 6., 2. (2006), 4., 4., 7.

There's some confirmation bias in this though, because temas that are good at scoring runs are typically good at getting on base, and thus have many more opprtunities to steal. A better way of evaluating this would be something like SB attempts per PA.

#13 Or even better, SBA per time on first (most simply singles, walks and HBP)

There's a secondary issue too. Teams which are trailing by more than a couple of runs tend to cut back on the running game.

And stolen base attempts aren't precisely random. Frequency is up in the late innings of close games.