Whoops: A Continuing Series (Manufactured Runs)

Bill Ladson wants everyone to get this through their thick skulls once and for all:

"I've said this many times. This team is still not good enough to rely just on the long ball. I would like to see it do the little things -- hit and run, sacrifice bunt and steal bases, for example -- to win games."

Although their failings were manifold, I strongly doubt that the inability to manufacture runs was a fatal flaw for the 2010 Nationals.  Let's consult the numbers.

Fatal flaws: MacBeth was ambitious; were the Nats overly reliant on HRs?

Attempts at manufacturing runs:

SB: Stolen base    SH: Sacrifice hits (bunts)    SF:  Sacrifice fly balls (Source: baseball-reference.com)

Actual manufactured runs:

MR definition: 1) run that is created with no hits; 2) run that scores on a HR is never counted; 3) run that is driven in by a double or a triple is scored as a manufactured run only if two of the four bases result from advancing on sacrifice bunt, stolen base, hit and run, or runner goes to third. (Source: The Bill James Handbook 2011)

The Nats were fourth in the league in sacrifices and well above the league average in percentage of manufactured runs.  The team was clearly not relying on the long ball last year and this past offseason their biggest HR threat left via free agency.

I have no idea who Ladson could possibly be talking to the 'many times' he has preached the folly of relying solely on HRs, because I literally don't know anyone who thinks the team can/should/has done that.  The Nationals have far too many actual concerns to be campaigning against imaginary ones.