THE BOOK cover
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

Buy The Book from Amazon


SABR101 required reading if you enter this site. Check out the Sabermetric Wiki. And interesting baseball books.
MOST RECENT ARTICLES
MAIL : You ask | We say

Advanced


THE BOOK--Playing The Percentages In Baseball

Filter posts by...

 

Friday, August 05, 2011

Indirect v direct standardization

By Tangotiger, 07:57 AM

Great piece by Max.

So, let me reiterate the issue. When using indirect standardization (i.e., when using whatever existing fielding metric), you are entitled to say that both Player A (+20 plays) and Player B (+22) performed better than the average shortstop, but there is no way you can infer Player B performed two plays better than Player A.
...

I believe fielding metrics should shift to the direct standardization method when data become more objective, detailed and unbiased. Until then the indirect standardization is an improvement over no standardization at all when players face different set of opportunities (but that’s when improper ranking might come out).

Indeed, back in the original UZR, MGL used direct and then switched to indirect after comments at the old Baseball Boards.

(4) Comments • 2011/08/08 • SabermetricsFieldingStatistical_Theory
Page 1 of 1 pages

Latest...

COMMENTS

May 26 01:11
Largest demonstration in Canadian history?

May 25 23:40
“Why Kickstarter works”

May 25 19:41
What sabermetrics is NOT

May 25 19:41
Pete Palmer’s new book: Basic Ball

May 25 16:59
Howard Stern

May 25 15:12
Do pitcher’s reach back for velocity when needed?

May 25 12:51
Chad Curtis

May 25 11:26
Lack of hustle during a game

May 25 10:58
Rooting for laundry

May 25 02:38
NFLPA lawsuit against collusion

THREADS

August 05, 2011
Indirect v direct standardization