And dew, because you seem incapable of understanding this, I'll explain the meaning behind joining that dubious list of clubs as plainly as I can:
Since 2000, 30 MLB organizations have played 10 full seasons, making for 300 individual seasons played by the whole of MLB teams. Of those 300 individual seasons (herein labeled "teams"), only 5 teams (1.7%, though it will be 2% when the Sox join this club at the end of the season) have managed to have at least 200 SB opportunities but ended up costing themselves at lest one marginal win with how many times they got caught.
This small fraction of teams aren't the worst base-stealers of the decade, and many of them haven't come close to costing themselves the number of runs/wins other atrocious teams have by racking up huge totals in the CS column. However, the difference between those really bad stealing teams and these bad stealing teams is that for whatever reason, those really bad teams didn't try to steal more. As we have seen, teams can certainly rack up 200+ steal attempts in a given season, possibly even 250+ if they tried, but even those awful running teams didn't see fit to try to swipe bases at that rate. That implicitly means that at some point, those horrid running teams (we're talking -2 wins here) looked at a given base-out situation and nixed the idea of stealing a base, while that small sub-set of teams plugged along despite seeing from the dugout how many times they left their team in a far worse situation.
That kind of ignorance and defiance deserves to be set aside and specifically criticized at least as much as those teams that were just all-out bad at stealing bases. I'll let you make the rest of the connections here, but the starting point is: who can we reasonably attribute responsibility to for a team that steals whatever number of bases? The manager.
|