Steal success rate counts attempts, not every time on base

Compute the attempt-based rate

Imagine Runner A records twelve stolen bases and is caught stealing three times. The simplified attempt count is 12+3=15. Success rate is 12/15=.800, or 80 percent. Dividing twelve by the runner’s fifty times on base would answer a different question.

Now compare Runner B, with eight steals and no caught stealings. B’s rate is 8/8=100 percent in that sample, while A has the larger successful-steal count. Neither number alone establishes which runner attempted more, took more risks or provided more overall value.

Use the official event labels

A runner advancing on a wild pitch or passed ball is not automatically credited with a stolen base. Similarly, every out involving a runner near a base is not necessarily a caught stealing. MLB’s categories distinguish those situations.

If a highlight shows a runner moving from first to second, the movement itself is insufficient evidence for the SB column. Check the play-by-play classification. The same physical destination can result from a steal, a hit, an error or another event, each with different statistical treatment.

Keep runner and catcher measures distinct

A catcher’s caught-stealing percentage describes successful prevention of attempted steals against that catcher. The runner’s stolen-base percentage describes successful attempts by the runner. Those perspectives are related but are not interchangeable player statistics.

For an original example from one runner’s record, fifteen attempts with three failures produce a 20 percent failure rate and an 80 percent success rate. That complement works because both calculations use the same fifteen-attempt sample. It does not justify taking a catcher’s rate against many opponents and treating it as the exact opposite of one runner’s rate from a different set of games.

When evaluating a replay or comparing tables, record the subject, date range, steals, caught stealings and denominator. A perfect percentage from a small number of attempts is still a small sample. Stating both the rate and the counts makes the claim precise without inventing a prediction about the next attempt.

Related questions