Buy The Book
In this blog entry, Charlie Pavitt looks at hypothesis testing and clutch. I made a couple of comments in that thread, most notably that you can achieve a correlation coefficient of .999 if two things have even the slightest possible relationship.
In the BTF thread linking to the Pavitt entry, Wille Keeler asked:
Following up on my post in this thread, I present a useful shortcut to coming up with custom Linear Weights using only OBP. You are encouraged to tweak the various shortcuts to come up with something better. Or to use this as a basis, to come up with your own shortcuts using SLG and BA as well.
We know we have a problem with the triple. Here is an adjustment that “works” from OBP of .100 to .999. From an OBP of .000 to .100 (i.e., less than 0.10 runs per game) the run value of the triples is bounded at no lower than .500, when it should drop below that level, eventually to zero. But, I think we can live with that.
Anyway, the change is not elegant, but it works. This is what you have to do:
I was given some softball league stats for a reader, which looked like this for BA/OBP/SLG:
.440/.500/.565
Basically, lots of singles and walks, and a few extra base hits sprinkled in. The data looks like it’s a 7-inning league, with an average of 12.4 runs scored per game.
When I ran it through BaseRuns, I got 9.1 runs per game, which is a hefty difference.
Boring and with math gyrations that I typically don’t like, here’s how I see it:
I’m just playing around with BaseRuns, Linear Weights, and Runs Created.
Patriot, on his site, describes the nuts and bolts of BaseRuns, including presenting the ultra-cool (cool, in SABR-speak, anyway) Baseruns spreadsheet…
http://gosu02.tripod.com/id108.html
...which SABRMatt uses. He presents us with the Linear Weights values for 1957-2005, as well as the corresponding B components for the BaseRuns equation:
http://www.baseball-fever.com/showpost.php?p=648256&postcount=142
You can follow that still-developing thread in its entirety here:
http://www.baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?t=48386&page=6
There is a world of difference between a framework, and an implementation. A framework is a structure that defines how all its components interact. An implementation is using the framework to create a solution. If you don’t like the solution, it’s not the framework’s fault (necessarily), but the implementation. Java can be a framework, while MLB.com is an implementation of Java.
Now, Charlie Pavitt tries to defend Linear Weights to Bill James.
http://www.philbirnbaum.com/pavittonwinshares.html
He says:
Linear Weights, in sharp contrast with both, wants to be able to compare players’ performance for a given year in an environment free of contexts such as team wins or team strategy.
Now…
I took the Ruane LWTS, year by year data on Retrosheet, and grouped them by run environment, to get this:
May 16 23:35
Now you frame it, now you don’t
May 16 22:50
Dodgers’ win reversed because Mattingly did not attest to proper score!
May 16 20:44
How to beat the shift
May 16 20:02
Sponsoring MLB jerseys
May 16 16:56
Did Manny Pacquaio actually quote Leviticus?
May 16 16:06
Does changing your pitch frequency lead to substantial change in results?
May 16 14:18
Extra Innings: One-minute review
May 16 14:16
This particular criticism of UZR is unfounded
May 16 13:21
Psst… wanna intern for the Astros?
May 16 12:23
Arena wars
THREADS
May 16, 2012
Now you frame it, now you don’t
May 16, 2012
Dodgers’ win reversed because Mattingly did not attest to proper score!
May 16, 2012
Does changing your pitch frequency lead to substantial change in results?
May 16, 2012
Sponsoring MLB jerseys
May 15, 2012
Andre The Hawk Dawson speaks
May 15, 2012
Euro 2012 Preview
May 15, 2012
How to beat the shift
May 15, 2012
Will Pujols end the season with at least 30 HR and .500 SLG?
May 15, 2012
Kershaw v Strasburg, part 2
May 15, 2012
Did Manny Pacquaio actually quote Leviticus?
Recent comments
Older comments
Page 12 of 342 pages « First < 10 11 12 13 14 > Last »Complete Archive – By Category
Complete Archive – By Date