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because i'm tired of all the outdated annual threads on this board.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

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:

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 (nine 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 (nine 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 (nine 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


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:

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


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


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


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

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

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

the xwOBA-wOBA gap

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

here is the draft schedule for the Boston Saberseminar

the ignatius rock of ignorance (Dr Morbius), Friday, 20 July 2018 17:59 (eight months ago) Permalink former players Fernando Perez and Nate Freiman will be presenting.

the ignatius rock of ignorance (Dr Morbius), Friday, 20 July 2018 19:24 (eight months ago) Permalink
is this becoming a thing??

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

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

god, i hope it becomes a thing.

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


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


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


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

babip is also not a weighted metric

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

ha good catch

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

I created this tool that shows frequency of trade partners

— Dan Hirsch (@DanHirsch) July 28, 2018

This was kind of interesting.

earlnash, Sunday, 29 July 2018 21:42 (seven 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+.

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

And that game in question was Euchre by clubhouse rules.

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

Baseball Statisticians Unveil New Analytics Model Measuring Precise Amount Of Joy They Suck From The Game

— Onion Sports Network (@OnionSports) August 24, 2018

mookieproof, Friday, 24 August 2018 16:59 (seven 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 (seven months ago) Permalink

two weeks pass...

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 (six months ago) Permalink

two months pass...

useful link for the future:

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 (three months ago) Permalink

one month passes...

Quite interesting:

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 (two months ago) Permalink

one month passes...

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 month ago) Permalink

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 month ago) Permalink

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 month ago) Permalink

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 month ago) Permalink

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 month ago) Permalink

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 month ago) Permalink

nothing new here but

mookieproof, Saturday, 16 February 2019 21:47 (one month ago) Permalink

this is, hands down, my favorite statcast discovery so far

i looked at every two-pitch sequence (within PA but not across) in 2018 to see which combination is best at inducing swinging strikes

the result: throw the same exact pitch right before it!

— Alex Chamberlain (@DolphHauldhagen) February 21, 2019

mookieproof, Thursday, 21 February 2019 19:32 (one month ago) Permalink

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 month ago) Permalink

yeah i can see going changeup-changeup being a high risk/high reward scenario

mookieproof, Thursday, 21 February 2019 19:39 (one month ago) Permalink

good point, karl

k3vin k., Thursday, 21 February 2019 20:48 (one month ago) Permalink

explain that?

k3vin k., Thursday, 7 March 2019 17:21 (two weeks ago) Permalink

two weeks pass...

Enjoyed this:

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.

— Ben Lindbergh (@BenLindbergh) March 25, 2019

reggae mike love (polyphonic), Tuesday, 26 March 2019 02:02 (eleven hours ago) Permalink

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