The Unwritten Book is Finally Written!
An in-depth analysis of: The sacrifice bunt, batter/pitcher matchups, the intentional base on balls, optimizing a batting lineup, hot and cold streaks, clutch performance, platooning strategies, and much more. Read Excerpts & Customer Reviews
If you save 14 runs over 150 games, you’ve had a very good to great fielding season. Dewan’s DRS has Lawrie with having saved 14 runs so far this year.
The way fielding systems work is conceptually simple and obvious: how many plays did the player actually make, and how many plays would a league average player for that position PROBABLY make. That’s it, in a nutshell.
With batting stats, the league average player faces the same kind of conditions in virtually every park (with some slight exceptions like Coors and Petco). He faces the same kind of pitchers, all hittable pitches are thrown in a 2x2 foot box (or equivalent ellipse), and so on. Not identical, but similar enough that there’s not that much difference in the hitting conditions for hitters.
Fielders are not like that at all. A fielder is completely at the mercy of whatever batted ball distribution there happens to be. Indeed, he can see the exact same hitter-pitcher combination for 300 innings (imagine a never-ending batting practice), and he STILL might face a different distribution of batted ball, compared to another player at the same position facing the same hitter-pitcher combination.
So, for a fielder, he can end up looking really good if he: (a) actually gets to more balls than the average fielder did, and/or (b) makes it look like the average fielder PROBABLY would have gotten to fewer balls, IF WE KNOW what the batted ball distribution he faced.
Now, let’s go back to DRS. It not only shows Lawrie with having saved 14 runs already after only 309 innings this year, but he ALSO saved 14 runs last year playing only 380 innings. That’s 28 runs saved on 689 innings, or a rate of 59 runs saved per 162 games. (UZR is at 21 runs saved per 162 games for his career.)
Now the Blue Jays 3B are #2 in the league in assist. So, we know that Lawrie is making more plays than just about anyone else. The question is if he’s making those plays because he’s getting harder opportunities (lower baseline makes him look really good), and/or, because he’s actually making plays that no one else would make. That is, is the way DRS describing those opportunities somehow biased? Is Lawrie actually getting really easy opportunities, but DRS is making it look like they are much harder than they are?
As I said, UZR doesn’t have this extreme viewpoint, even though they are both looking at the same dataset. Is it something about how plays are tracked in Toronto or with Toronto TV feeds?
This is where I think it would be lovely if MGL/Dewan can give us a description of Lawrie’s career so far, and why MGL thinks that Lawrie’s performance is great Gold/Glove caliber, but Dewan thinks it’s otherworldly. Unless of course they are precluded from discussing this for whatever reason.
There’s two ways to approach using metrics: do you want to use the metric to illuminate something that is (possibly) transient, or do you want to use the metric to illuminate something something that is (possibly) persistent?
If the Marlins fans have this feeling that the bullpen has not been doing its job, or the writer of the story wants to explain to the fans that the bullpen has not been a good story to-date, then using Shutdowns and Meltdowns is a great way to go. The whole discussion is based on the past, something that is probably transient, and so, we’re not really looking for answers. We’re just looking to crystallize a story that has unfolded.
If we really care about the short-term future, where players will simply play to their own talent levels (plus whatever random variation that comes with it), we need metrics that better describe that persistent set of traits. Shutdowns and Meltdowns is not necessarily the best tool to use there.
Sometimes you need a Phillips, sometimes you need a flathead, and sometimes you need a hammer. Know what tool to use for the job you need.
Even if it is, does it really mean anything? Some players used to be famous for constantly changing their swings. Obviously, no one actually believes that Pujols talent is hanging on a batting stance thread, that would turn him from arguably the best hitter in the league to the worst in the league.
Great idea to check for performance of pitchers following an error. Obviously, this method is a bit crude, but it gets us started. Somebody want to expand on this, and simply look at wOBA of the pitcher following an error, and compare to their overall wOBA?
It should also be noted that GB pitchers get more errors behind them simply because they are GB pitchers. Errors per GB will far outstrip errors per FB. (That’s a big reason that Webb has a huge number of unearned runs and Johan Santana has a tiny number. )
Well, well, well, it seems that someone noticed that a certain cofounder of Facebook (Saverin) has renounced his US citizenship. There is a recent law called an Exit Tax that applies to ex-pats, and Severin is covered by that law. Severin was born in Brazil, so he could have been exempted from the exit tax had he moved out of the US five years ago. Or, he could have waited to declare renouncing his US citizenship had he waited for those five years to go by. (I have no idea when he left USA.)
Anyway, with Facebook’s looming IPO, his shares have to be valued “deemed” as sold the day before be renounced citizenship, with a mark-to-market value. HOW they are going to figure that out is unknown. Presumably, the future IPO might be considered, or, the IRS will hire an underwriter to figure it out. And the tax looks to be a hefty 30%.
It seems to me that Severin should have not made a move until the five years would have gone by. After all, the IPO goes, and he keeps his shares, there’s still no capital gains. He waits for the five years, renounces citizenship, and pays zero on the exit-tax.
That’s all I got, and maybe you Straight Arrow readers can educate us.
Pitchers deliver the ball over 0.7 miles per hour faster (relative to an 0-0 pitch) when they need one more strike to eliminate the batter, throw around 0.2 mph slower when grooving a 3-0 pitch, and throw roughly 0.2 mph harder on every other count.
...
I expected to see that pitchers throw harder in bases-empty situations because they can pitch from the windup; however, that does not seem to be the case, as they apparently reach for a little extra gas (+0.2 mph) when they are in a tight spot. Maybe the extra effort pitchers make with men on is enough to make up the difference between the full windup delivery and the set position, and then some.
...
However, while the month table, like the one we showed at the beginning of the article, indicates a strong (and expected) relationship between temperature and pitch speed, the one with times of the day illustrates something different, as there is an increase in speed in the coolest parts of the day.
Note that the identity of pitchers is already considered, so the fact that flame-throwing relievers are more likely to be on the mound at later hours is also an already neutralized factor in the model.
He also shows alot more, like the longer you pitch, the slower you pitch during the game. It’s not noticeable, about a quarter to half mph per pitch, but it’s there. If let’s say we treat 1 runs per 9IP as the result of losing 2-4 mph, then you’d lose 0.1 runs per 9IP due to fatigue (on the speed of the pitch). Add in (presumably) another bit of loss due to fatigue for movement, for pitch location, and familiarity of seeing the same batter, you end up with the effect we’ve seen, each time through the order. The interesting part is trying to quantify all these components that we know likely have an impact. That’s usually our job, to measure things, rather than to find things.
In Montreal, Tim Wallach was a frequent golfer, as was his playing partner and best buddy Terry Francona. Didn’t Maddux, Glavine, Smoltz play golf all the time?
Well, Big Brother is not putting it up with it any longer. I wonder if Josh Beckett playing Wii Golf is going to be a question of his team commitment, too.
Love him or hate him… you’ve got to love him or hate him! But more than that, respect him. For a guy that’s p-ssed off alot of people, he certainly has the most faithful crew imaginable. No one turns on him.
Let’s just say that we’re not surprised by the general tone in these posts (except for the choking part, which is always shocking, regardless of who it is).
The most accurate I heard is something along the lines of “maybe something like Zimm last year”. The least accurate are saying “160 innings” without actually quoting anyone from the Nats.
Zimm threw 161 innings last year, but, not every inning is the same is it? He faced 660 batters excluding IBB, but not every batter is the same is it? He threw 2458 pitches (excluding IBB), but… well, you get the idea. Zimm is a fastball-slider-curve pitcher, and, I dunno, it would seem that would be more taxing than if he were fastball-changeup. But, what do I know.
Anyway, Strasburg in his career has thrown 1955 pitches in 23 starts (still no IBB by the way… what’s the record for most pitches thrown, where none led to an IBB?), or 85 pitches per start. This year, he’s at 92 pitches per start. If we give him 2458 pitches (minus 554 he’s already thrown) and 90 pitches per start, that’s 21 starts remaining. He’s a fastball-curve-changeup pitcher… maybe that’s less taxing on the arm? What do I know. So, maybe he has 22 or 23 starts remaining? The Nationals have 132 games remaining. Divide by 5, and that’s 26-27 starts for each starter. It looks like he’ll have to miss about 4 starts?
Star talent like Stras are throwing 105-110 pitches per start. So, he’s already pitching 15-20% less than his peers. And, “reportedly”, he’ll be getting 15-20% fewer starts than his peers.
And the scout remarked that Posey’s at-bats are dropping off in quality in the later innings. The numbers bear it out. In the first three innings, Posey is a .361 hitter. He has struck out five times in 36 at-bats. In the fourth inning through the ninth, Posey is a .250 hitter. He has struck out 20 times in 64 at-bats. And if you take just the seventh through the ninth innings, Posey has 13 strikeouts in 30 at-bats, while drawing just one walk.
Two points:
1. If the scout says what he did WITHOUT looking at the outcomes, that Posey’s swings “look” slow, etc, then that’s one thing. If the scout however CONSULTS the outcome numbers, then that’s a completely different thing.
2. 5/36 in one instance and then 13/30 in another? Meaningless by itself. Again, combined with the scout’s view (but without the scout seeing the outcomes), then it could be modestly valuable.
For example, let’s say that the scout says that Posey’s got great mechanics, and he expect him to not K alot, that he should K say 3/36 times, and he ends up K-ing 5/36. We might therefore conclude his true talent in early innings is say 3.2/36 K rate.
And if the scout says that Posey has a lousy swing in the late innings, that he looks like he’d K 10/30, and he ends up K-ing 13/30, then we might say his true talent K rate in late innings is 10.3/30 or something.
But, without the scout’s observation, we are forced to conclude that Posey’s true talent K rate in early and late innings is virtually identical.
Again, that’s IF (and a big IF) the scout’s observation is INDEPENDENT of the outcomes. Which is going to be pretty hard to do, since the scout will get biased by the fact that Posey struck out.
Which is why HITf/x will be so powerful, that we’ll be able to tell if Posey is swinging harder than normal, earlier/later than normal (if Sportvision can start the clock on the bat earlier on the swing), etc.
...when Delnegro called a pitch that bounced in front of the catcher a strike, Bellamy went on the field to discuss it. “Joe said to him (Delnegro), ‘You’re cheating the kids. Before he knew it, the umpire punched him four times. His face was full of blood and I asked what happened? He said, ‘The umpire punched me.
“Mr. Delnegro’s position is that on the date of the alleged incident, while he was umpiring, one of the coaches (the alleged victim, Joseph M. Bellamy), became verbally abusive to the point of belligerence over a call that he had made. In an attempt to maintain order, Mr. Delnegro ejected the irate man from the game. “But rather than exit the field, Mr. Bellamy advanced upon Mr. Delnegro in a loud, aggressive and threatening manner, and actually made physical contact with Mr. Delnegro, such that Mr. Delnegro feared for his safety. “Accordingly, Mr. Delnegro intends to assert self-defense should the meritless charge against him be maintained.”
It looks like CJ referenced my 2010 article published in the 2011 THT Annual, and re-printed on the THT website over the weekend. And he doesn’t like the conclusion, not one bit! I’ve sent him an email, seeing if he’s interested in having a discussion with me, so I’ll keep you posted on that.
The article showed that no-Mo would cost the Yanks themselves less than two wins using empirical data, a more robust approach would suggest 2.5 to 3 wins. CJ simply said that he’s positive it’s not less than two wins (and presumably, he wouldn’t be happy with my official stance of 2.5-3 wins either).
I should note that I consider Mariano Rivera not only the best reliever ever (and I have no doubt that’s the same answer as the guy standing next to me would give, even if that guy is named Trevor Hoffman), but also that other than Pedro and RJ, the best possible reliever ever for a pitcher.
So, it’s not a question of how good Mo is. He’s #1, and with a bullet. The question is how much value can such a player have in the role that’s available to him. And my answer is 2.5-3 wins a year.
And that also happens to be the official position of the Yankees and Rivera himself, since he’s being paid at 15 million dollars a year, and wins are going for 5 to 6 million dollars each. And 15/5 and 15/6 gives us 2.5-3 wins a year.
And please, before someone says “but, you need it because...”, just play devil’s advocate, pretend MLB has paid you 500$ to come up with a solution, and propose your best one. Give me your best effort.
As if the Murray Chass quoting WAR wasn’t enough, as if Obama saying that marriage wasn’t the domain of opposite-gendered couples, now we have this:
Look at where Brendan Ryan is. Look at where he made that play. And he did make that play, as he wheeled around and threw to first ahead of Fielder, who is not actually that slow. In immediate response, Mike Blowers remarked “that’ll help his Ultimate Zone Rating” without a hint of sarcasm. The Mariners’ TV broadcast hasn’t only shown UZR in graphics. Tonight a broadcaster - an ex-ballplayer - mentioned UZR, entirely on his own. There were two amazing things about this play.
Progress is all around us. (Tongue is partly in cheek, for you guys who think I’m not having a bit of fun here.)
from Amazon
Recent comments
Older comments
Page 2 of 342 pages < 1 2 3 4 > Last »Complete Archive – By Category
Complete Archive – By Date