Filter posts by...
Tuesday, December 06, 2011
High school football player celebrates early, gets flagged for taunting, nullifying the touchdown. But, everyone agrees: the rule is the rule is the rule. George Orwell couldn’t have predicted this state of affairs actually becoming reality.
How about we apply this to baseball. That Kirk Gibson fist pump? HR rendered obsolete. Carlton Fisk jumping up and down, waving his hands, only to finally hold them up in triumph? That’s an out. Dave Henderson doing his piroutte? Back to the dugout. Prince Fielder calling his teammates over so he can use them as bowling pins? Another out.
And why not. If the rule is the rule is the rule, then these players are going to learn… the hard way… that you don’t celebrate until after you score, and you do so in a respectful manner.
Jeff Zimmerman makes the case.
Jason gives us some great data.
Our wonderful stats team pulled a report showing instances of a pitcher throwing at least 750 more pitches than the season before and found 1112 instances of pitchers that qualified since 1988, which was the first season that full pitch count data was available on the pull. As a whole, there was an average of 865 pitches thrown in the base season with 2205 thrown in the following season—an increase of 61 percent. The breakdown of the metrics for each season are represented in the table below.
And he shows that the FIP for the group in year 1 goes from 3.53 to 4.19 in year 2.
Except… there’s no control group. If you had a group of pitchers that had a 3.53 FIP in one year, you’d expect to see a higher FIP in the next year. That’s because a low FIP would imply more good luck than bad luck. And since luck is not persistent, then some of that good luck will go away.
Let’s try to figure out what we’d expect using regression. Jason noted 865 pitches, which would imply about 234 plate appearances. For a FIP regression, we’d probably want to add about 300 PA. So, we’d regress about 55%. The league FIP is probably around 4.4 for this time period. So, regressing 3.53 55% toward 4.4 gives us an estimate of 4.00 true talent FIP.
Jason is showing 4.19, so it’s still above what we’d expect.
So, there might be somethign to it, but we’d really need to look at it more carefully. I also didn’t see any minimum threshold settings either. So a pitcher that threw 20 innings one year and 120 innings another year would seem to qualify for the study.
I also didn’t see any control for reliever-starter, where you’d naturally get a jump, on the change of role alone.
Anyway, good start, but we need more.
Gabe documents the various divisions in NHL history that failed at adhering to geographical divisions. (Not that MLB was any better mind you. At least the NHL made changes at a quicker pace.)
Anyway, so with the four new conferences, we have some odd setup, notably the two Florida teams playing in the same conference as Montreal. As Gabe noted, you have to put them somewhere.
Neyer brings us news.
Werth in his MLB career has 877 innings in CF (almost 100 games), where he was +4 runs (or +6 runs per 162 games).
UZR loves him in the corners, with a UZR of +41 runs in 6414 innings, or an average of +9 runs per 162 games. A standard conversion would presume he’d be -1 run in CF.
Put the two together, and his translated CF performance was exactly 0 runs. Of course he’s 33 years old, and not an average of around 30 years old when we have those observations. That’s going to knock out probably 5 runs.
So, probably he’ll be -5 runs in 2012 in CF (and +5 in RF). Something like that. He’s a good enough fielder to be able to hold down CF for maybe the next two years, but after that, he won’t be able to handle it any longer.
A parallel is probably Alex Rios. Both around the same age, both excellent in RF for most of their careers, both tried in CF with a certain amount of success, and both destined to remain a fixture in the corner OF in their early to mid 30’s.
Presuming he signs a 10-yr deal, he gets paid 5MM$ for a win in 2012, and the cost for each win in subsequent years inflates at 5%, while his value diminishes by 0.5 wins, here’s the inference to make:
He signs for ____ , they value him for __ wins in 2012.
160MM$ -> 5 wins
190MM$ -> 5.5 wins
220MM$ -> 6 wins
250MM$ -> 6.5 wins
290MM$ -> 7 wins
Place your bets.
***
If you need a shorthand, each win is going to cost over the life of the deal 20% higher than it would cost in 2012. So, if you have the cost at 5MM$ per win in 2012, then it’s going to cost a weighted average of 6MM$ per win over the next 10 years.
So, that’s what you do:
Total lifetime wins
x cost per win in 2012
x 1.2
If you want a shorthand for Total lifetime wins:
wins in 2012 x 10 minus 22.5
Putting it together: if you have 6 wins in 2012, then lifetime wins over next 10 years is 6x10-22.5 = 37.5
And so, cost for those wins is
37.5 x 5 x 1.2 = 225MM$
Isn’t math great? Stay in school kids.
Monday, December 05, 2011
That’s what the NHL is now doing. That means two 7-team conferences and two 8-team conferences.
The first two rounds will feature 1 v 4 and 2 v 3 for each conference. Presumably, the four teams that come out of there won’t be stuck in an east/west setup like it currently is.
We’ve talked about this in the past for MLB, and it’s a great setup. I’m not sure how the schedule is going to shake out, but if you do 2 games against the 22 or 23 teams in the other 3 conferences, that leaves you with 36 games against the other 6 intra-conference teams or 38 games against the 7 other intra-conference teams.
Anyway, back in 1997-1998, the NHL had 4 divisions (two conferences) of 6 and 7 team divisions. So, the new setup is more of a throwback to that. But the wrinkle here is that we have no divisions, and instead it’s 4 conferences. (Presumably, as I read it.)
This really will open things up. The difference is most clear in the NBA, where the Lakers, Spurs, Mavs can never meet in the finals. Now, with the new setup, if the Canadiens and the Penguins are in different conferences, they can potentially meet in the Finals.
***
As for Conference names, I will propose:
Gretzky, Howe, Orr, Lemieux
As a bonus, the Oilers/Kings, Redwings, Bruins, Penguins are in separate conferences already.
Some updates on Fangraphs. Check out the various tabs in there. Tons of good stuff.
And, if you have suggestions, post them here. David is pretty much incomparable in terms of turnaround time of taking suggestions and implementing them.
The Fans see Tejada as an average-fielding SS and a bit above average at 2B (something Dewan and UZR would also suggest). Mark lays out the case that his “extreme” plays, his out of zone plays, or otherwise stand-out kind of plays, elevates him into a higher category.
Similarly, Fans are not impressed with Evans, but Mark suggests otherwise.
I love Dirk Hayhurst. Great insight, wonderful writing. Which stands in direct contrast to his latest blog post:
But there is more to victory then payroll size, production, and the quantifiable. There is the metaphysical, the emotional, and the delicate art of producing good team chemistry.
...
The great teams know how to manipulate this formula to the advantage of the players, and the proper mix can allow a spreadsheet laughing stock to triumph over a payroll powerhouse.
Yes, I agree with Dirk. Let’s call this the Willie Ballgame theory. Willie Bloomquist, every year, defines replacement level. He’s lucky to get a job when he does (though this year, he seems to have upped the ante). But a player that is a replacement level has very very limited MLB shelf life remaining. If you are a replacement level player today, and you are already in your mid 20s, you have a year or two left. But Willie Ballgame busts that trend. Rather than aging, letting his physical drop result in decreased production, he maintains the same level of production every year. Craig Counsell, John McDonald, to name a few, are other players (not necessarily replacement-level in the case of Counsell for his career), who maintain the same level of talent every year.
And, if you want to argue that the reason for that, that the reason that these guys can buck their forecasts and produce above expectation, is that there’s some intangible aspect to them, I can totally buy it.
And, if you want to argue that there’s some players who go the other way, who simply don’t learn, don’t try enough, and who are out of baseball far earlier than they should, that they always perform below expectation because there’s some intangible aspect to them, I can totally buy that too.
Indeed, if this is something real, then it would be a tremendous benefit to know that, to be able to identify such players. Indeed, it’s very possible a seasoned scout can look at two 20-yr old ballplayers, who put up the same production numbers, and come out with a far different evaluation because he can establish that one player is much more likely to adapt, while the other is more likely to die (metaphorically). I can certainly accept this premise.
By the time he was 30 years old, Counsell had come to bat a total of 961 times, albeit with a 4.5 WAR (average of 3.3 WAR per 700 PA). So, two things:
1. Why was he not given the chance earlier
2. Given that he was already 30 years old, and nowhere to go but down, the likelihood is we could expect out of him is another 7-8 wins for his career. But, he got another 16 wins, according to Fangraphs, and 15 wins according to Baseball-Reference.
And so, I was eager to hear from the insights of Dirk Hayhurst, as someone who was in the lion’s den, and could shed light here. Maybe provide evidence, even anecdotal. Some insight.
Instead, he presented his summary opinion with no evidence. It was disappointing to say the least that someone in the position to possibly know about how team chemistry affects a team, and perhaps know how to identify players that contributes to team chemistry, gave us nothing of the sort. And instead, he relied on the tried-but-true arguments from the mainstream media.
You can do better than that Dirk.
Veteran’s committee is setup to practically act in a “better late than never” scenario, and occasionally, even a “better too late than never”, like now. That’s what happens with the political system that we’ve come to know and love.
In my view, I’d setup the HOF process to have eligibility for players at age 45, and for 10 years. Elect two players per year. And after that, it’s over.
Please don’t say sh!t like that. This is the reason:
http://www.insidethebook.com/ee/index.php/site/comments/remaining_value_of_contracts/
If you want to evaluate Reyes’ deal, evaluate it in its entirety. Otherwise, you are giving the Marlins no credit for possibly getting him on a discount for the first three years, but then knocking them for the huge premium in the last two years. This is the implicit valuation of Reyes by the Marlins:
Year Wins $perWin $Value $Cost $Gain(Loss)
2012 4.44 $5.00 $22.2 $17.7 $4.5
2013 3.94 $5.25 $20.7 $17.7 $3.0
2014 3.44 $5.51 $19.0 $17.7 $1.3
2015 2.94 $5.79 $17.0 $17.7 $(0.6)
2016 2.44 $6.08 $14.8 $17.7 $(2.8)
2017 1.94 $6.38 $12.4 $17.7 $(5.3)
So, the Marlins of valuing him as a 4.44 win player in 2012, dropping by 0.5 wins each year. They also have the value of a win at 5MM$, and increasing that value by 5%.
The net result is that under these assumptions, Reyes will provide a net gain in the first 3 years, a net loss in the last 3 years, such that, overall, he’ll be worth 106MM$.
Now, you can go even further and turn this into present value dollars if you like.
But, never, ever, ever, talk about things like he’ll be a net negative in the last two years of his (or anyone’s) deal. That’s a “duh” statement. That’s because Reyes, like all people, are human, and their bodies will break down.
Sunday, December 04, 2011
Love it:
Clients use Youngs because he separates copper pennies from the chump change—the newer pennies that are only worth $0.01.
But in the weird world of penny hoarding, getting to the copper is a very big problem. It’s illegal to melt pennies an there is an obscure federal law that makes it illegal to transport more than $5 in pennies out of the country.
Penny hoarders know this of course, but they also know something else. In what could be the biggest legislation to hit the U.S. Mint in 50 years, officials are now looking at the composition of pennies and nickels and considering an overhaul. If the laws change and the mint decides to abolish the penny, people would be free to melt them down for the copper.
A penny saved, many times over, could be a whole lot earned.
(14)
Comments • 2011/12/06
•
News
There is one school of thought that having stronger penalties for fighting in the NHL will simply shift the infraction into something else, like stick fouls. And rather than fighting be a “red light district” limited in large part to a few players, the stick fouls, or whatever other aggressive fouls that will take its place, will then be distributed across a much larger group of players. In effect, the enforcers act as a few policemen to prevent anarchy.
The other school of thought is that the idea of fighting is barbaric, and it should be accompanied with harsh penalties. And, if, and when, the unintended consequences rear its ugly head, then we’ll deal with it then. That it’s more important to get on the right path, then to try to have this balance of terror in perpetuity.
***
What is also interesting is that by giving prominence to fighting, those fighters have to come from somewhere. And, as we can see in this powerful account of Derek Boogaard, it starts at a young age. We are, basically, growing enforcers from the outset. It is one thing for a good hockey player to have to defend himself in the course of a physical confrontation. And it’s another thing to cultivate an enforcer simply for his raison d’etre.
So, removing fighting may have an unintended consequence of stick fouls (and those may be even more dangerous than fighting), but it will have the intended consequence of no longer promoting, and thereby no longer needing to cultivate, fighting.
I think the players are smart enough, experience enough, that if challenged to create a climate, via the rule book, that eliminates fighting, and reduce unintended consequences, they’d be able to do that. And, I think having Brendan Shanahan head up, or appoint, a committee to that effect may have some fantastic results.
If you convince yourself that things can’t be better than it is, then you assure yourself that they won’t be. But, if you allow the possibility that things can get better, then you’ve opened up the door to a chance that it will get better.
Friday, December 02, 2011
Baseball is more fun on the sports page, than the business page.
Negro League story to be on the screen.
That’s the argument that Cook is making (and I’m not buying it):
Being able to expand the zone therefore isn’t random but part of a reward that comes with extra command (for pitchers) and a better fielding tool (for catchers) rather than sheer entropy and chance. An automated strike zone would largely nullify catcher defense, making only a strong arm and good blocking skills necessary and thus modifying the characteristics of the position. We’d see more Posadas and fewer Lucroys. And to channel my inner Helen Lovejoy, won’t anyone think of the Molinas? But is this what we want? Do we want to radically change the meaning of a position?
I would add that “selling the call” is part of all sports, but baseball and a few others also require the umpire to be not only an enforcer of the rules but a judge of intentions.
...
Likewise, in baseball some of the advantages that a battery gains are the deserved byproducts of skill, and an automated strike zone would eliminate this fascinating aspect of the duel at the plate. Also: part of the greatness of Mariano Rivera, Greg Maddux, and Roy Halladay comes from their ability to expand the zone, which isn’t just an umpire gift coming from nowhere but a component of their mitt-hitting talent. While it is certainly infuriating to see at times, the way such pitchers carve hitters and umpires alike by painting the strike zone has to be appreciated. For a long time, the duel between the batter and the battery has had certain dynamics and certain characteristics, and an automated strike zone would radically change that relationship. Personally, I have grown to appreciate pitchers and catchers who can control the strike zone. Baseball is a game of deception, and controlling the strike zone is a fine nuance that I’d hate to lose.
I’d be happy to lose all that. Put another way: if we always had the automated strike zone, would we then be happy to have human umpires that Livan Hernandez can sell?
Do we want John McEnroe to berate the chair ump and linesmen so that they get a bit more scared next time there’s a close call, or do we just LOVE the Hawk Eye that simply says yes or no?
Anyway, Cook does a good and balanced job to lay out the choices. And, if he gives the argument to keep the human ump as well as can be written. And if that’s the best, then I’m not convinced in the least.
Looks interesting. And as a bonus, new articles too.
I know I’ve often thought about doing a “Best of” of my blogs and articles, but it’s a fairly daunting task. So, good job to Ben and the gang for doing all the hard work on it.
I go out of my way to always do a proper eject of the flash drive, to the point that I will do a shutdown if for whatever reason I can’t get the eject done properly. Except today. I rushed, I pulled it out of my computer. And when I get into the office, the good news is that most of the folders were fine. The bad news is that the one folder that I always use was corrupted.
Now, I learned my lesson from last year when my flash drive just died to make sure I backup on a weekly basis, rather than sporadically. Anyway, I still wanted to know WHAT I lost, and if I have to bother doing an automated recovery, or simply manually recreating whatever I lost.
And this is the software I found from Get Data:
http://www.recovermyfiles.com/
What a fantastic piece of software. It scanned my flash drive, and reports on everything it could find, including giving me a preview of the files. Based on the preview alone, I can recreate what I needed in many of the cases. In addition, it shows dates, and so, I just had to look for the files last modified since my last backup. And you can even export the names of the files (and dates, etc).
And all that is free.
For 70$, you buy the Pro version, and it’ll recover all the data it can for you. In my case, since I made a recent backup, and whatever was not backed-up I can recreate manually, it’s not worth it. This time anyway. But, it may be useful in the future.
I also wanted to highlight this software for anyone who has experienced some corrupt drives, or may in the future.
I presume that there are other enterprise standard software for around that price. But this was the first one I found that gave you all the preview capabilities it did for free. And for that alone, I give it two thumbs up.
NOTE: This post is *not* an advertisement.
(15)
Comments • 2011/12/05
•
Web Admin
from Amazon
Recent comments
Older comments
Page 36 of 342 pages « First < 34 35 36 37 38 > Last »Complete Archive – By Category
Complete Archive – By Date