because i'm tired of all the outdated annual threads on this board. baseball prospectus has a new pitching metric, SIERA, and you can read all about it for free in these five articles:
tom tango and matt swartz (one of the two guys who came up with this) have a LENGTHY exchange about it here that i'm still working my way through: http://www.insidethebook.com/ee/index.php/site/comments/siera/#comments
i am not even close to comprehending of a lot of the math involved but their explanation of the stat is pretty readable. if it works, it's probably some of the most interesting stuff bpro has done in a while.
― call all destroyer, Saturday, 13 February 2010 16:10 (ten years ago) link
I just heard about SIERA this week...
Sorry, just started a new annual thread a minute ago; guess the specific book issues can go in there.
― Fusty Moralizer (Dr Morbius), Saturday, 13 February 2010 17:54 (ten years ago) link
yeah i was thinking we could use this one for any interesting statistical stuff no matter what the source
― call all destroyer, Saturday, 13 February 2010 17:55 (ten years ago) link
Adam (Minneapolis)Could you ever see a team going completely by the numbers? That is to say, being an "every day player" would be meaningless because the team would play the statistical matchups every day no matter what in an effort to maximize output.
Rob Neyer (12:52 PM)You mean like Casey Stengel in the 1950s? No, I don't see that happening anytime soon. Too many relievers on the roster, too many guys who would be unhappy with irregular playing time.
― kind of shrill and very self-righteous (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 20 April 2010 17:47 (nine years ago) link
(You guys have read about how Stengel used to use pitchers? Today's MSM would have a collective stroke.)
― kind of shrill and very self-righteous (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 20 April 2010 17:48 (nine years ago) link
i always figured no one will actually do closer by committee these days because guys come up with the expectation of having a set role.
― call all destroyer, Tuesday, 20 April 2010 17:49 (nine years ago) link
u got a link i can read?
yeah, you'd have to insert a fatigue factor as well... haha, this sounds like MLB THE SHOW (nb: Dr. Morbius, this is a videogame).
― _▂▅▇█▓▒░◕‿‿◕░▒▓█▇▅▂_ (Steve Shasta), Tuesday, 20 April 2010 17:49 (nine years ago) link
yes, I HEARD OF IT
cad, read the Robert Creamer bio of Stengel (or for the pre-Yankee years, S. Goldman's)
I belong to the "Your role is to pitch when you're needed" school.
― kind of shrill and very self-righteous (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 20 April 2010 19:32 (nine years ago) link
it'd be interesting to see an org try to adopt it from the low minors on up. you'd still have issues with outside guys though.
― call all destroyer, Tuesday, 20 April 2010 19:40 (nine years ago) link
dudes with dreams of a 10 figure contract to rack up saves would take umbrage with such a system
― mayor jingleberries, Tuesday, 20 April 2010 20:00 (nine years ago) link
huh - i was thinking about this last night. i think all it will take is a team with morbs' (superior) "Your role is to pitch when you're needed" system to win the ws and we might see the floodgates open.
― The Cursed Return of the Dastardly Thermo Thinwall, Tuesday, 20 April 2010 21:05 (nine years ago) link
aka the "bullpen by committee"
― The Cursed Return of the Dastardly Thermo Thinwall, Tuesday, 20 April 2010 21:06 (nine years ago) link
zmg since when were high-leverage innings a Morbius creation!?!
― _▂▅▇█▓▒░◕‿‿◕░▒▓█▇▅▂_ (Steve Shasta), Tuesday, 20 April 2010 21:18 (nine years ago) link
didn't bobby cox have a 'platooned' closer last year with soriano and gonzalez
― ciderpress, Tuesday, 20 April 2010 22:33 (nine years ago) link
sort of -- it was like 70% Soriano/30% Gonzalez
― millions now zinging will never lol (WmC), Tuesday, 20 April 2010 23:19 (nine years ago) link
not really SABR but interesting stat:
Through the first 1/3 of the 2010 season, the AL East has four of the best five records in the league.
If the season were to end today, there would be 2 teams in the AL East NOT advancing to the playoffs despite better records than all but one other team in the league.
Tampa, Yanquis, Toronto and Boston are all on pace for 90-win seasons.
― _▂▅▇█▓▒░◕‿‿◕░▒▓█▇▅▂_ (Steve Shasta), Tuesday, 1 June 2010 16:44 (nine years ago) link
more small sample size fun: 12 of the 16 starting catchers in the NL currently have an above average batting line by OPS+
― ciderpress, Wednesday, 2 June 2010 05:44 (nine years ago) link
49 years later, Roger Maris wins AL runs scored title:
― kind of shrill and very self-righteous (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 27 July 2010 22:07 (nine years ago) link
I'll post this here, even though it has partly to do with some back-and-forth on the Pujols thread. Bear with me--and when you jump all over me, please remember that I bought my first Zander Hollander guide in 1970. I've been there and back, and back again.
There's a blogger in San Francisco I read, Steve Rubio (a Prospectus writer when it was still fairly new, I think), and the other day he linked to the following from Jennifer Doyle, who seems to mostly write about soccer. I love what she says, and she captures some of my own feelings when I get into old-vs.-new-stat discussions on this board:
"Beware of sports writers who pretend to mastery of the facts. I come across a different version of these people in academia--they can recite a bunch of dates, or quote Hegel, and for this reason they seem to think that they've figured it all out. The ones who listen, however, who have a good sense of humor and know how to hold contradiction in their head without trying to resolve it--those are the ones who are most likely to say something interesting, something insightful, something new...Reader, beware of the sense of mastery which comes at the cost of a sense of wonder."
I have no problem at all with VORP and WAR and the like, as long as you view them as just more pieces of the puzzle. But I sometimes get the feeling that when someone throws VORP at me, it's like when someone yells "Challops!" on ILM, or "Muslim!" in Palin World--it's meant to end the discussion, not add to it. Obviously, we're a million miles ahead of the days when people used to think Steve Garvey was the best hitter in baseball because he'd go bat 700 times and knock in 100 runs. (Pointing out, however, that even James revised his thinking on Garvey when he reissued the Historical Abstract--one of many reasons I like James so much more than his disciples.) I wouldn't want baseball arguments to return to that level of thinking. But to echo Doyle's last sentence above, if your belief in the infallibility of VORP and WAR lead you to shrug your shoulders at the prospect of Pujols or Votto winning the Triple Crown, that's a place I don't want to end up.
I'll have more to say on this in my upcoming book, VORP: The God That Failed.
― clemenza, Thursday, 26 August 2010 18:22 (nine years ago) link
haven't you heard, the triple crown is now comprised of VORP, WAR, and WPA/LI
― ciderpress, Thursday, 26 August 2010 18:40 (nine years ago) link
WPA/LI: "Well Played, Albert (Lasting Impressions)"? I can't keep up.
― clemenza, Thursday, 26 August 2010 18:46 (nine years ago) link
win probability added divided by leverage index
it's generally about the same as the batting component of WAR though, so not very useful. plain WPA is more interesting and kind of like the sabermetric equivalent of RBIs.
― ciderpress, Thursday, 26 August 2010 18:49 (nine years ago) link
Thanks. I'm dying to find out what Ray Oyler's Leverage Index was for 1969--not very good, I'm guessing.
― clemenza, Thursday, 26 August 2010 18:52 (nine years ago) link
clemenza otm. James revolutionized my thinking during the mid/late 80s, but my enthusiasm for the game waned in the 90s when it seemed like the New Math was press-ganged into service to fantasy baseball. In the late 90s I sort of got my mojo back by actually watching a lot of baseball instead of reading about a lot of baseball. Sabermetrics are good corrective lenses, but I had to remember to use them to watch baseball games, not read box scores. I get a lot more fun out of the game that way.
― My totem animal is a hamburger. (WmC), Thursday, 26 August 2010 18:55 (nine years ago) link
leverage index is just a value which quantifies how "important" any single plate appearance is to winning that game
so bases loaded, 2 outs in a tie game would have a really high value whereas bases empty in a blowout would be really low
― ciderpress, Thursday, 26 August 2010 18:59 (nine years ago) link
Has a leverage index been developed for relief appearances? Inherited runners stranded/scored drives me bananas.
― Andy K, Thursday, 26 August 2010 19:01 (nine years ago) link
Admission I'd rather not make: I'm still stuck in a place where I follow baseball primarily through the lens of statistics (more traditional statistics, but statistics nonetheless). Getting back to actually watching more baseball is my next therapeutic goal. (Part of this does have to do with the overload of baseball on TV. Somewhere along the way, it just became too much.)
― clemenza, Thursday, 26 August 2010 19:02 (nine years ago) link
well yeah it works both ways
if a game situation is a 1.5 LI for the hitter (1.0 is average) then it's a 1.5 for the pitcher too by definition
― ciderpress, Thursday, 26 August 2010 19:03 (nine years ago) link
tbh i'm a math nerd and i love all the baseball stats stuff but i think sabermetrics folks tend to have too much confidence in their own metrics, there's not nearly enough self-evaluation in the "field".
i think the offense stats are pretty close to complete but there's still so much we don't understand about pitching, let alone defense or player development
― ciderpress, Thursday, 26 August 2010 19:06 (nine years ago) link
I think there is plenty of self-evaluation in the field; the BP guys debate stuff all the time, and most if not all recognize that these metrics are imperfect tools.
(not that I have the time to read all the articles or watch a game every day, understand)
― kind of shrill and very self-righteous (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 26 August 2010 19:09 (nine years ago) link
Agreed. And just to really horrify VORP disciples, I think you can even learn something from Joe Morgan when it comes to "in the field" stuff. I realize Morgan is considered a human punchline by most everyone who's been influenced by James, but if you can look past the many blind spots that someone of his generation probably carries around (having to do with character, clutch play, the value of a .300 average in and of itself, etc.), there are going to be some things that he's learned about the game that I just don't believe you can arrive at through abstract statistical analysis. So treat him skeptically, for sure, but don't try to ridicule him out of extistence. (When the influence of James on me was at its peak in the late '80s/early '90s, Kubek used to drive me up the wall for the same reasons.)
― clemenza, Thursday, 26 August 2010 19:19 (nine years ago) link
So treat him skeptically, for sure, but don't try to ridicule him out of extistence.
Not sure I can follow you this far.
― My totem animal is a hamburger. (WmC), Thursday, 26 August 2010 19:24 (nine years ago) link
Morgan does not deserve to have the most prestigious color commentary job for baseball in the world. That doesn't mean he's never insightful. But the fact that he has insights into baseball is meaningless. He lacks the ability to express those insights or the work ethic to learn about the teams he's watching. Orel Hershiser is a far better analyst. Keith Hernandez is another guy I've enjoyed. Neither of those guys is a stats guy, but both actually do the legwork to bring some on-the-field insight to the presentation.
Also, while I have my issues with Morgan, there are plenty of guys who are worse. Rob Dibble springs to mind.
― no gut busting joke can change history (polyphonic), Thursday, 26 August 2010 19:26 (nine years ago) link
Orel Hershiser is a far better analyst.
Which reminds me, John Smoltz has been an absolute treat this year since he sorta retired.
― My totem animal is a hamburger. (WmC), Thursday, 26 August 2010 19:34 (nine years ago) link
Keith Hernandez is listenable mostly for the crazy shit he comes out with. He calls Jeff Francoeur "a streaky hitter."
― kind of shrill and very self-righteous (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 26 August 2010 19:38 (nine years ago) link
I probably haven't listened closely enough to Morgan to be defending him. The back-and-forth between Miller and him is easy enough on my ears that I've never quite understood the intensely negative feelings about him that I keep encountering, but maybe that's all credit to Miller. And I have the additional bias that the mid-'70s Reds were my favourite team. This goes back a ways, but I used to think Palmer, Seaver, and Reggie were great in the booth. As analysts, I can't remember. I just liked them.
― clemenza, Thursday, 26 August 2010 19:39 (nine years ago) link
to clemenza, i don't know dude, you seemed pretty "blinders-on" when discussing Bonds' achievements and were in the process of pooh-poohing him on the Pujols thread so........... idk, was tbh hard to take you seriously in your short shrift dismissal of him as a legit triple crown candidate given the 232 BBs that got in the way of him chasing such a "retro-cool" counting achievement (all the while destroying almost every offensive record in the process).
but kudos to all y'all who were reading bill james in the summer of love~~~
i don't mind Morgan and Miller, because they're both local guys. Morgan seems way worse on the page then in the booth ime.
― _▂▅▇█▓▒░◕‿‿◕░▒▓█▇▅▂_ (Steve Shasta), Thursday, 26 August 2010 19:45 (nine years ago) link
francoeur is a streaky hitter in that he has a lot of cold streaks
― ciderpress, Thursday, 26 August 2010 19:49 (nine years ago) link
Steroids notwithstanding, I really wasn't discounting the magnitude of Bonds's statistical achievements--just that I thought the walks ruled out him ever having a realistic shot at the Triple Crown. Not just in terms of RBI, but, I thought, also in BA. But Ciderpress's math made me realize that he in fact likely would have won one, maybe even two. Which was your point to begin with--you were right, I was wrong. What I didn't appreciate, though, was pulling out VORP as kind of a gotcha moment, like I'd just been teleported out a 1974 issue of Baseball Digest. (Not to knock BD, which I used to love.) Again, I've been reading James forever.
― clemenza, Thursday, 26 August 2010 19:58 (nine years ago) link
That's cool, just like I said, you appeared to be full blinders in your take on Bonds achievements.
Also, VORP was introduced 9 years ago by Keith Woolner. Bill James has always preferred win-shares and runs-created in my 10 years of being familiar with SABR. IIRC.
― _▂▅▇█▓▒░◕‿‿◕░▒▓█▇▅▂_ (Steve Shasta), Thursday, 26 August 2010 20:11 (nine years ago) link
who went to the pitchF/X summit in SF?
― kind of shrill and very self-righteous (Dr Morbius), Monday, 30 August 2010 02:38 (nine years ago) link
i liked this little bit from the pitchFX summary on bpro:
5:39: Brad Hawpe play: starts with a >80% chance of catching the ball, but freezes in place and fails to make the play. Difficult to represent visually, because the out probability plummets while Hawpe stands in place and time elapses. In a different Hawpe play, his first step gives him a lower probability of catching the ball, since he broke in the wrong direction. Rumor has it no Rockies reps are in attendance, but they’re not missing out, since they’ve enjoyed a front-row seat for this sort of action for the last several years.
― ciderpress, Monday, 30 August 2010 20:05 (nine years ago) link
― no gut busting joke can change history (polyphonic), Monday, 30 August 2010 21:23 (nine years ago) link
― no gut busting joke can change history (polyphonic), Friday, 3 September 2010 16:12 (nine years ago) link
― call all destroyer, Friday, 3 September 2010 16:14 (nine years ago) link
― kind of shrill and very self-righteous (Dr Morbius), Friday, 3 September 2010 16:57 (nine years ago) link
― no gut busting joke can change history (polyphonic), Friday, 3 September 2010 18:42 (nine years ago) link
players w/an OPS of 1.000 or more in 2000
Todd HeltonManny RamirezCarlos DelgadoBarry BondsJason GiambiGary SheffieldVladimir GuerreroFrank ThomasSammy SosaMoises AlouJeff BagwellNomar GarciaparraRichard HidalgoAlex RodriguezBrian GilesJeff KentMike PiazzaTroy GlausEdgar Martinez
players w/an OPS of 1.000 or more in 2010
Josh HamiltonMiguel CabreraJoey VottoAlbert Pujols
― ('_') (omar little), Monday, 4 October 2010 06:32 (nine years ago) link
jim thome and justin morneau deserve a mention on that too for partial seasons of 1.000+
― ciderpress, Monday, 4 October 2010 16:41 (nine years ago) link
Got curious so searched for baseball's best inning-eaters and came across these numbers on a fantasy baseball site.
Starters throwing a heavyweight innings workload over a season are a declining breed. The number of starters pitching at least 180 innings has dropped year-on-year.
2014: 66 starters 2015: 56 starters 2016: 45 starters 2017: 35 starters
The trend is dramatic, and although it is unlikely to fall by another 10 this season, it is also unlikely to increase. So in 2018, there are only likely to be 30-35 heavyweight starters.
Looking up the top innings pitched numbers in MLB, there is a decent chance that the number might not hit 30 starters throwing 180 innings.
― earlnash, Friday, 27 July 2018 00:37 (one year ago) link
I created this tool that shows frequency of trade partnershttps://t.co/ncInXyCYKa pic.twitter.com/fPHGMWSlIc— Dan Hirsch (@DanHirsch) July 28, 2018
This was kind of interesting.
― earlnash, Sunday, 29 July 2018 21:42 (one year ago) link
From Day 1 of Saberseminar... BP has a new stat for you!
The highlight of the morning, however, did not focus as much on pitching. Instead it was a presentation by Jonathon Judge on a companion stat to DERA, Deserved Runs Created. DRC should appear on Baseball Prospectus in the next couple of weeks. And, it promises to be one of the best comprehensive hitting stats for overall offensive output. In particular, the DRC+ version (adjusted for parks) looks to be particularly useful. Judge was also quick to back up the data by showing the reliability of the stat for players switching teams as compared with alternative measures such as wOBA or wRC+.
― a Mets fan who gave up on everything in the mid '80s (Dr Morbius), Monday, 6 August 2018 14:46 (one year ago) link
― a Mets fan who gave up on everything in the mid '80s (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 7 August 2018 06:35 (one year ago) link
I check the WAR leaderboard on Baseball Reference every two or three days, mostly with an eye towards the awards. Something I will never understand (i.e., not the first time I've encountered this): Scherzer's dropped by 0.3 from a couple of days ago without making a start.
― clemenza, Thursday, 23 August 2018 15:44 (one year ago) link
Is it possible that it's a case of the R in WAR getting better?
― challops trap house (Will M.), Thursday, 23 August 2018 15:50 (one year ago) link
I think I mentioned that as a possible explanation when I brought this up a few years ago. But the replacement level changing by a third of a win in a couple of days seems like a pretty wild swing.
― clemenza, Thursday, 23 August 2018 15:54 (one year ago) link
Wonder if the replacement level calculation gets updated every so often rather than changing automatically.
― timellison, Friday, 24 August 2018 01:06 (one year ago) link
could be other things getting updated, too, like park factors? i'm not sure. if the replacement level for calculation for pitchers was updated, wouldn't that affect all pitchers WAR?
― Karl Malone, Friday, 24 August 2018 01:11 (one year ago) link
Maybe on days when you're not playing, they factor in intangibles. Were you offering your teammates moral support from the bench, or did you spend the game in the clubhouse getting a massage? Were you out there for yesterday's bench-clearing brawl? Did you make yourself available for autographs before the game, or did you tell some seven-year old to take a hike?
― clemenza, Friday, 24 August 2018 01:34 (one year ago) link
4 bonus points for playing the game the way it was meant to be played
― Karl Malone, Friday, 24 August 2018 02:13 (one year ago) link
And that game in question was Euchre by clubhouse rules.
― earlnash, Friday, 24 August 2018 03:16 (one year ago) link
Baseball Statisticians Unveil New Analytics Model Measuring Precise Amount Of Joy They Suck From The Game https://t.co/4ljqgrBotM pic.twitter.com/lFpw3jOchd— Onion Sports Network (@OnionSports) August 24, 2018
― mookieproof, Friday, 24 August 2018 16:59 (one year ago) link
guest Onion editor Goose Gossage
― a Mets fan who gave up on everything in the mid '80s (Dr Morbius), Friday, 24 August 2018 17:16 (one year ago) link
good old players are disappearing . . . since roughly around the time that steroid testing really kicked in
and yet further CBA ramifications
― mookieproof, Tuesday, 11 September 2018 20:01 (one year ago) link
useful link for the future: http://tangotiger.com/index.php/site/article/re288-run-expectancy-by-the-24-base-out-states-x-12-plate-count-states-recu
the first image is the good old run expectancy chart, broken out by pitch counts:
the second is the same data presented in a different way, relative to the 0-0 count. it took me a second to figure out wtf was going on, but you start with the number of outs and the position of the runners on base. then move to the 0-0 column. from there, it tells you how every subsequent pitch to that batter affects the run expectancy.
― Karl Malone, Monday, 3 December 2018 03:01 (one year ago) link
Was Jack Kralick the best pitcher in the American League in 1961? WAR says yes (bWAR, anyway), James says "Are you kidding?"
― clemenza, Friday, 4 January 2019 16:23 (one year ago) link
Baseball Prospectus followers: did they ever publish the detailed mechanics/formulae/algorithms of DRC+, like they said they'd do back in December? Couldn't immediately find it in the archive, and although I'm not a subscriber, it seems that is not the reason, as the titles of other subscriber-only articles do show up.
― anatol_merklich, Wednesday, 6 February 2019 20:58 (one year ago) link
There was a good reddit thread where JJudge mentioned some more info was coming...
― Jersey Al (Albert R. Broccoli), Wednesday, 6 February 2019 21:09 (one year ago) link
― Jersey Al (Albert R. Broccoli), Wednesday, 6 February 2019 21:10 (one year ago) link
given the monumental wealth of statistical information available now, and advances in AI, surely 95+% of managerial decisions could be outsourced to a real-time computer? and if this is true, wouldn't it be borderline negligent not to?
― illegal economic migration (Tracer Hand), Saturday, 16 February 2019 11:09 (one year ago) link
some of them have been outsourced, to the degree that the field manager is expected to share the org's philosophy more specifically than ever.
― a Mets fan who gave up on everything in the mid '80s (Dr Morbius), Saturday, 16 February 2019 14:23 (one year ago) link
Sabrites have said for awhile that allocation of playing time is more crucial than in-game tactics, and the front office has more to say about that too.
― a Mets fan who gave up on everything in the mid '80s (Dr Morbius), Saturday, 16 February 2019 14:27 (one year ago) link
According to a friend who works for a team, most teams have their own proprietary algorithms and analytics departments. He likens SABR/FanGraphs intel to an open source resource like wikipedia.
― Jersey Al (Albert R. Broccoli), Saturday, 16 February 2019 18:06 (one year ago) link
nothing new here but https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/13/sports/sean-forman-sports-reference.html
― mookieproof, Saturday, 16 February 2019 21:47 (one year ago) link
this is, hands down, my favorite statcast discovery so fari looked at every two-pitch sequence (within PA but not across) in 2018 to see which combination is best at inducing swinging strikesthe result: throw the same exact pitch right before it! pic.twitter.com/8KZ8aaiGMM— Alex Chamberlain (@DolphHauldhagen) February 21, 2019
― mookieproof, Thursday, 21 February 2019 19:32 (one year ago) link
i'd also be curious to see the analysis of the bad results of the throwing the same exact pitch twice. in other words, it leads to higher swinging strikes more often than other combinations, but maybe it also leads to a higher HR% or harder contact, etc - either it completely fools people or they're primed to wail on it. dunno, just guessing
― Karl Malone, Thursday, 21 February 2019 19:34 (one year ago) link
yeah i can see going changeup-changeup being a high risk/high reward scenario
― mookieproof, Thursday, 21 February 2019 19:39 (one year ago) link
good point, karl
― k3vin k., Thursday, 21 February 2019 20:48 (one year ago) link
― mookieproof, Thursday, 7 March 2019 16:47 (one year ago) link
― k3vin k., Thursday, 7 March 2019 17:21 (one year ago) link
Also wrote @ringer about how the rise of the opener is changing WAR, whether working as an opener or a bulk guy could affect a pitcher's earnings, and why unlike a lot of traditional stats, WAR never stays the same.https://t.co/cAswNEVH6c— Ben Lindbergh (@BenLindbergh) March 25, 2019
― reggae mike love (polyphonic), Tuesday, 26 March 2019 02:02 (one year ago) link
Pre-move excavation...Found this list of the greatest hitters ever I drew up in 1976 or 1977, a couple of years after I bought my first Big Mac (and around the time I owned my first calculator). The very elegant formula I used is at the top. Keep in mind that a) I would have been 14 or 15, and b) I was still at least five years away from any awareness of Bill James or Thomas Boswell or anyone.
The bad: 1) The randomness of the formula. There's an attempt to weigh the different elements (10 x HR vs. 1 x SB), but the final number (Ted Williams - 65.12) connects to nothing.
2) Strikeouts four times as important as walks! So Joe Sewell comes out ahead of Hank Aaron and Willie Mays. Um...I have no words of defense.
3) Runs and RBI front and center.
3) I'm not even sure the formula works. I remember finding this a couple of decades ago, and when I tried to calculate a couple of hitters, their overall rating didn't match what was on the paper. I suspect I calculated parts of the formula in some order that didn't follow correct order of operations.
The good: 1) An awareness that batting average and HR weren't everything.
2) Did I mention I was 14 or 15?
I'm very impressed with the printing in view of my illegible scrawl nowadays.
― clemenza, Saturday, 2 November 2019 19:26 (five months ago) link
I don't know who the mystery player is at 51.05...
― clemenza, Saturday, 2 November 2019 19:27 (five months ago) link
I suspect I calculated parts of the formula in some order that didn't follow correct order of operations.
You did! You just went left to right when there is a multiplication in the middle.
― timellison, Saturday, 2 November 2019 21:48 (five months ago) link
I don’t see strikeouts in the formula! Also, it penalizes walks I guess? Dammit 13 year old Clemens’s, wtf??jk of course. This was a noble effort. esp knowing that you had to hand calculate everything. Weren’t you afraid you missed some players? (Unless...you didn’t do every player of all time...did you?)
― at home in the alternate future, (Karl Malone), Saturday, 2 November 2019 23:55 (five months ago) link
Sorry, my phone autocorrected you to the rocket
Or wait, it’s adding for walks, and then subtracting 250
― at home in the alternate future, (Karl Malone), Saturday, 2 November 2019 23:56 (five months ago) link
That's supposed to be 2 x SO - 1/2 x BB; strikeouts looks like 50. An ILX'or I'm Facebook friends with figured out how to make the numbers work out...Mike Trout comes in at 43-something, just below Mantle. The guy just strikes out too damn often, and I'm surprised the Angels don't cut him loose.
― clemenza, Sunday, 3 November 2019 04:20 (five months ago) link
give me ed delahanty over any of these bozos
― at home in the alternate future, (Karl Malone), Sunday, 3 November 2019 04:24 (five months ago) link
Weren’t you afraid you missed some players?
I also found pages of the final totals (not sure what to call it...CI, the Clemenza Index) for an alphabetized list of anybody who had a good career. I was working from the '74 edition of the Mac, not the first '69 edition; Aaron was still active, so I'm not sure what my cut-off date was (more likely, I had a minimum AB requirement).
Ed definitely makes the all-drinking team, from what I remember.
― clemenza, Sunday, 3 November 2019 04:25 (five months ago) link
in 1895, delahanty scored 149 runs in 116 games. he hit a healthy .404 but came in second in the batting race behind jesse burkett at .409
― at home in the alternate future, (Karl Malone), Sunday, 3 November 2019 04:26 (five months ago) link
it's a really cool list - awesome that you kept it!
despite my misreading of the equation, it is also very very neatly printed.
― at home in the alternate future, (Karl Malone), Sunday, 3 November 2019 04:27 (five months ago) link
Would have generated a few posts on the ILB police blotter thread:
"Delahanty died when he was swept over Niagara Falls in early July 1903. He was apparently kicked off a train by the train's conductor for being drunk and disorderly. The conductor said Delahanty was brandishing a straight razor and threatening passengers after he consumed five whiskies. After being kicked off the train, Delahanty started his way across the International Railway Bridge connecting Buffalo, New York with Fort Erie (near Niagara Falls) and fell or jumped off the bridge (some accounts say Ed was yelling about death that night). Whether "Big Ed" died from his plunge over the Falls or drowned on the way to the Falls is uncertain. His body was found at the bottom of Niagara Falls two weeks after his death."
― clemenza, Sunday, 3 November 2019 04:32 (five months ago) link
don't ask why i felt compelled to make this, but might as well share. this is the top 5 wRC+ for each year of the 1950's. i wanted to see which player seasons were way ahead of their peers, relatively. williams in '54 and williams and mantle in '57 both stand out
also, i have to share this as well because it is crazy how the charts in Excel wannabe clone Numbers are hard to customize and offers all the wrong options...unless you go into 3D graph mode, in which case everything is possible
― But guess what? Nobody gives a toot!😂 (Karl Malone), Thursday, 23 January 2020 01:10 (two months ago) link
Surprised there's such a difference between Mantle's '56 and '57--his bWAR is the same for the two seasons. I know it's relative to the league, but still.
― clemenza, Thursday, 23 January 2020 15:15 (two months ago) link
heh, the chart i made is confusing as all hell. it's so confusing even i can't figure out wtf is going on!
but basically, the top line represents the first place finisher in wRC+ for the year. it happens to be williams in both '54 and '57, which makes it look like the entire top line is williams. but in '55, for example, the first place wRC+ was mantle, at 179.
...i know, that's really confusing! i only did it that way because i wanted to see the discrepancy between the top 5 finishers each year, to look for outliers.
mantle's '56 was actually very close to '57, by wRC+. it was 202 in 1956 (twice as good as the average hitter!!), which was first place in the league, and 217 in 1957, second only to williams.
― But guess what? Nobody gives a toot!😂 (Karl Malone), Thursday, 23 January 2020 16:36 (two months ago) link
*fingers crossed behind back*
i will never make another ill-advised graph again
C'mon, the 3D one even casts a shadow--worth the price of admission alone.
― clemenza, Thursday, 23 January 2020 21:28 (two months ago) link
not exactly sabermetrics, but: the details behind pitch classification
― mookieproof, Monday, 3 February 2020 16:33 (two months ago) link