rolling sabermetrics and statistics thread

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed

because i'm tired of all the outdated annual threads on this board.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:

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=10027

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=10032

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=10037

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=10042

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=10045

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 (eight years ago) Permalink

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 (eight years ago) Permalink

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 (eight years ago) Permalink

two months pass...

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 (eight years ago) Permalink

(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 (eight years ago) Permalink

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 (eight years ago) Permalink

u got a link i can read?

call all destroyer, Tuesday, 20 April 2010 17:49 (eight years ago) Permalink

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 (eight years ago) Permalink

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 (eight years ago) Permalink

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 (eight years ago) Permalink

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 (eight years ago) Permalink

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 (eight years ago) Permalink

aka the "bullpen by committee"

The Cursed Return of the Dastardly Thermo Thinwall, Tuesday, 20 April 2010 21:06 (eight years ago) Permalink

zmg since when were high-leverage innings a Morbius creation!?!

_▂▅▇█▓▒░◕‿‿◕░▒▓█▇▅▂_ (Steve Shasta), Tuesday, 20 April 2010 21:18 (eight years ago) Permalink

didn't bobby cox have a 'platooned' closer last year with soriano and gonzalez

ciderpress, Tuesday, 20 April 2010 22:33 (eight years ago) Permalink

sort of -- it was like 70% Soriano/30% Gonzalez

millions now zinging will never lol (WmC), Tuesday, 20 April 2010 23:19 (eight years ago) Permalink

one month passes...

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 (eight years ago) Permalink

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 (eight years ago) Permalink

one month passes...

49 years later, Roger Maris wins AL runs scored title:

http://espn.go.com/blog/sweetspot/post/_/id/4513/the-truth-is-always-being-rewritten

kind of shrill and very self-righteous (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 27 July 2010 22:07 (eight years ago) Permalink

four weeks pass...

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 (eight years ago) Permalink

haven't you heard, the triple crown is now comprised of VORP, WAR, and WPA/LI

ciderpress, Thursday, 26 August 2010 18:40 (eight years ago) Permalink

WPA/LI: "Well Played, Albert (Lasting Impressions)"? I can't keep up.

clemenza, Thursday, 26 August 2010 18:46 (eight years ago) Permalink

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 (eight years ago) Permalink

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 (eight years ago) Permalink

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 (eight years ago) Permalink

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 (eight years ago) Permalink

Has a leverage index been developed for relief appearances? Inherited runners stranded/scored drives me bananas.

Andy K, Thursday, 26 August 2010 19:01 (eight years ago) Permalink

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 (eight years ago) Permalink

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 (eight years ago) Permalink

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 (eight years ago) Permalink

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 (eight years ago) Permalink

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

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 (eight years ago) Permalink

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 (eight years ago) Permalink

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 (eight years ago) Permalink

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 (eight years ago) Permalink

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 (eight years ago) Permalink

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 (eight years ago) Permalink

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 (eight years ago) Permalink

francoeur is a streaky hitter in that he has a lot of cold streaks

ciderpress, Thursday, 26 August 2010 19:49 (eight years ago) Permalink

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 (eight years ago) Permalink

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 (eight years ago) Permalink

who went to the pitchF/X summit in SF?

kind of shrill and very self-righteous (Dr Morbius), Monday, 30 August 2010 02:38 (eight years ago) Permalink

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 (eight years ago) Permalink

haha

no gut busting joke can change history (polyphonic), Monday, 30 August 2010 21:23 (eight years ago) Permalink

wau

call all destroyer, Friday, 3 September 2010 16:14 (eight years ago) Permalink

source?

kind of shrill and very self-righteous (Dr Morbius), Friday, 3 September 2010 16:57 (eight years ago) Permalink

one month passes...

players w/an OPS of 1.000 or more in 2000

Todd Helton
Manny Ramirez
Carlos Delgado
Barry Bonds
Jason Giambi
Gary Sheffield
Vladimir Guerrero
Frank Thomas
Sammy Sosa
Moises Alou
Jeff Bagwell
Nomar Garciaparra
Richard Hidalgo
Alex Rodriguez
Brian Giles
Jeff Kent
Mike Piazza
Troy Glaus
Edgar Martinez

players w/an OPS of 1.000 or more in 2010

Josh Hamilton
Miguel Cabrera
Joey Votto
Albert Pujols

('_') (omar little), Monday, 4 October 2010 06:32 (eight years ago) Permalink

jim thome and justin morneau deserve a mention on that too for partial seasons of 1.000+

ciderpress, Monday, 4 October 2010 16:41 (eight years ago) Permalink

probably the one I'd pick, if you're getting innings you're probably being pretty valuable to your team

k3vin k., Wednesday, 9 May 2018 03:53 (six months ago) Permalink

or you have a really bad manager, in a few cases. i definitely that in general more playing time is a positive indicator, especially IP for starting pitchers. for position players, it's a little more muddy. for every star like joey votto, stanton, or blackmon in the top 10 list of games played of 2017, there's also an alcides escobar, rougned odor, and (non-2018 version of) nick markakis.

obviously DLC (Karl Malone), Wednesday, 9 May 2018 04:04 (six months ago) Permalink

Shameless self-promotion: The Infield Shift has a tragic and hidden flaw and should be (mostly) shelved. @baseballpro https://t.co/lgVNAE5d3d

— Russell A. Carleton (@pizzacutter4) May 22, 2018

mookieproof, Tuesday, 22 May 2018 19:06 (five months ago) Permalink

two weeks pass...

Wow, look at the single season leaders in strike outs at the plate and how many are from the last decade or so.

Rob Deer is a contact hitter by comparison.

https://www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/SO_season.shtml

Rank Player (age that year) Strikeouts Year Bats
1. Mark Reynolds (25) 223 2009 R
2. Adam Dunn (32) 222 2012 L
3. Chris Davis (30) 219 2016 L
4. Chris Carter (26) 212 2013 R
5. Mark Reynolds (26) 211 2010 R
6. Chris Davis (29) 208 2015 L
Aaron Judge (25) 208 2017 R
8. Chris Carter (29) 206 2016 R
9. Drew Stubbs (26) 205 2011 R
10. Mark Reynolds (24) 204 2008 R
11. Kris Bryant (23) 199 2015 R
Chris Davis (27) 199 2013 L
Adam Dunn (30) 199 2010 L
Ryan Howard (27) 199 2007 L
Ryan Howard (28) 199 2008 L
16. Jack Cust (29) 197 2008 L
17. Joey Gallo (23) 196 2017 L
Mark Reynolds (27) 196 2011 R
19. Chris Davis (31) 195 2017 L
Khris Davis (29) 195 2017 R
Adam Dunn (24) 195 2004 L
Curtis Granderson (31) 195 2012 L
23. Adam Dunn (26) 194 2006 L
Mike Napoli (34) 194 2016 R
25. Trevor Story (24) 191 2017 R
26. Ryan Howard (34) 190 2014 L
27. Bobby Bonds (24) 189 1970 R
Adam Dunn (33) 189 2013 L
Danny Espinosa (25) 189 2012 B
30. Jose Hernandez (32) 188 2002 R
31. Bobby Bonds (23) 187 1969 R

earlnash, Tuesday, 5 June 2018 22:23 (five months ago) Permalink

steve carlton's best K/9 in any season was 8.7 (it was 7.1 for his career)

so far this season the average, among 93 qualifying pitchers, is 8.6

mookieproof, Tuesday, 5 June 2018 22:51 (five months ago) Permalink

read in a recent post that fangraphs will soon debut a K+ stat

k3vin k., Tuesday, 5 June 2018 23:24 (five months ago) Permalink

One thing I think about modern baseball is just how big the whole league is anymore. Dudes like the Big Unit, Dave Kingman or Richie Sexton were odd balls of their day being so tall and now every team has a bunch of guys 6-5 and taller.

earlnash, Tuesday, 5 June 2018 23:40 (five months ago) Permalink

many of them pitchers.

the ignatius rock of ignorance (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 5 June 2018 23:42 (five months ago) Permalink

https://imgur.com/a/NFXUl6u

Van Horn Street, Wednesday, 6 June 2018 01:16 (five months ago) Permalink

https://imgur.com/a/NFXUl6u

Van Horn Street, Wednesday, 6 June 2018 01:22 (five months ago) Permalink

I'm mad that Sixto Sanchez isn't 6'2"

challops trap house (Will M.), Wednesday, 6 June 2018 02:40 (five months ago) Permalink

Not sure if there would be an article out there on that but I’m interested in analysis about players who lose their ability or perhaps willingness to draw a walk as they age. Specifically thinking about someone like Albert Pujols, and whether or not it has mostly to do with pitchers challenging him more as his skills erode, thereby not pitching around him anymore + not IBBing him nearly as much (if ever!) I’m interested primarily bc of the many aging players who either retain those skills or sometimes even improve them over time (one example: Willie Mays drawing a career-best 112 walks in his age 40 season.)

My guess is there’s a lot related to bat speed and players having to cheat a bit more, which means they’re simply not going to be able to wait that extra split second anymore. But it’s interesting to me how some players completely lose a skill that seems to be one that would age well (and often and perhaps usually does!)

omar little, Sunday, 17 June 2018 20:17 (four months ago) Permalink

i think with pujols specifically it's that pitchers aren't afraid to challenge him anymore. same with the ghost of chris davis. i'm not so sure that they necessarily had a walk 'skill' so much as it was a by-product of their other skills

curtis granderson, on the other hand, has seen his walk rate go up even as his power fades. it is intersting

mookieproof, Sunday, 17 June 2018 21:01 (four months ago) Permalink

James once wrote about the Mays phenomenon--great hitters who lose their bat speed and become more selective to compensate.

clemenza, Sunday, 17 June 2018 22:41 (four months ago) Permalink

three weeks pass...

I saw this stat and read the list and had a good chuckle on how many of these guys I knew as players from baseball cards or reading the Sporting News all the time as a kid.

Yonder Alonso: Similar Batters through 30

Sid Bream (966.4)
Doug Mientkiewicz (959.4)
David Segui (955.0)
Mike Ivie (946.9)
John Mabry (941.7)
Casey Kotchman (940.1)
Nick Etten (939.0)
Gerald Perry (938.2)
Babe Dahlgren (937.0)
Todd Benzinger (936.7)

earlnash, Thursday, 12 July 2018 02:12 (four months ago) Permalink

I’m not sure how, but a cleveland reliever got a save tonight in a 19-4 win

k3vin k., Thursday, 12 July 2018 03:07 (four months ago) Permalink

Think if you pitch three innings or more it doesn't matter what the score is.

timellison, Thursday, 12 July 2018 05:28 (four months ago) Permalink

Today around the #statcast lab we worked on naming/defining a bunch of new metrics around reaction, burst, & route-running, and I'm very excited for them to be ready. We also kicked around what's driving the xwOBA-wOBA gap we're seeing, because that definitely seems like a thing.

— Mike Petriello (@mike_petriello) July 19, 2018

mookieproof, Friday, 20 July 2018 17:17 (three months ago) Permalink

the xwOBA-wOBA gap
😕

a shomin-geki poster with some horror elements (WilliamC), Friday, 20 July 2018 17:22 (three months ago) Permalink

it's league-wide, too, right?

this gap is going to be the end of us all

Karl Malone, Friday, 20 July 2018 17:27 (three months ago) Permalink

here is the draft schedule for the Boston Saberseminar

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1VID-J4MUyRtzsXv3o9Ie7pH029VVb8GJ6jJfFNGBnOY/edit#gid=0

the ignatius rock of ignorance (Dr Morbius), Friday, 20 July 2018 17:59 (three months ago) Permalink

...so former players Fernando Perez and Nate Freiman will be presenting.

the ignatius rock of ignorance (Dr Morbius), Friday, 20 July 2018 19:24 (three months ago) Permalink

https://imgur.com/a/Z04LVtf
is this becoming a thing??

francisF, Wednesday, 25 July 2018 01:39 (three months ago) Permalink

https://imgur.com/a/Z04LVtf

francisF, Wednesday, 25 July 2018 01:40 (three months ago) Permalink

god, i hope it becomes a thing.

Karl Malone, Wednesday, 25 July 2018 01:47 (three months ago) Permalink

*sigh*
https://image.ibb.co/byvn8o/Screen_Shot_2018_07_24_at_9_22_55_PM.png

francisF, Wednesday, 25 July 2018 01:48 (three months ago) Permalink

It was kinda bizarre listening to broadcasters extol the virtues of advanced stats for a half-inning; it was awesome, i don't know if it's a regular thing anyone does

francisF, Wednesday, 25 July 2018 01:54 (three months ago) Permalink

BABIP is kind of a weird one to use

a Mets fan who gave up on everything in the mid '80s (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 25 July 2018 01:55 (three months ago) Permalink

honestly if they could only pick 3, i'd take BB%, K%, and OPS. it's usually possible to get a decent idea of what kind of batter someone is by those measures alone

Karl Malone, Wednesday, 25 July 2018 04:10 (three months ago) Permalink

wRC+, OBP, ISO

k3vin k., Wednesday, 25 July 2018 04:15 (three months ago) Permalink

bWAR, fWAR, GWAR

challops trap house (Will M.), Wednesday, 25 July 2018 18:32 (three months ago) Permalink

babip is also not a weighted metric

ant banks and wasp (voodoo chili), Thursday, 26 July 2018 01:51 (three months ago) Permalink

ha good catch

k3vin k., Thursday, 26 July 2018 04:18 (three months ago) Permalink

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 (three months ago) Permalink

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 (three months ago) Permalink

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+.

https://thesportspost.com/mlb-saberseminar-boston-diversity-all/

a Mets fan who gave up on everything in the mid '80s (Dr Morbius), Monday, 6 August 2018 14:46 (three months ago) Permalink

two weeks pass...

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 (two months ago) Permalink

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 (two months ago) Permalink

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 (two months ago) Permalink

Wonder if the replacement level calculation gets updated every so often rather than changing automatically.

timellison, Friday, 24 August 2018 01:06 (two months ago) Permalink

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 (two months ago) Permalink

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 (two months ago) Permalink

4 bonus points for playing the game the way it was meant to be played

Karl Malone, Friday, 24 August 2018 02:13 (two months ago) Permalink

And that game in question was Euchre by clubhouse rules.

earlnash, Friday, 24 August 2018 03:16 (two months ago) Permalink

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 (two months ago) Permalink

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 (two months ago) Permalink

two weeks pass...

https://sabrstatanalysis.blog/2018/09/11/what-a-drag-it-is-getting-old

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 (two months ago) Permalink


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.