from Amazon
Friday, August 06, 2010
Margin of error on offense
Now, for instance, we know that a bases-loaded home run scores a lot more runs than the average home run. Others would look at that and consider the hitter should get more credit for being “clutch.” To my way of thinking, the players who deserve credit are the players who got on base for the hitter, thus increasing the value of the home run. So I tend to look at batting events independently of what happened before and what will happen after, and simply consider what the player did, isolated from his teammates.
If I understand him correctly, he’s saying that he will not do a delta RE approach. He doesn’t want to give +3.3 runs of credit for hitting a bases loaded HR with 2 outs. And he doesn’t want to give +1.0 runs of credit for hitting a bases empty HR. He just wants to give 1.4 runs of HR each time.
But then he gives us the margin of error on all the events, and for the HR he says 0.55 runs. Presumably, what he did was take the difference of each of the 24 run values of the HR (one for each of the 24 base out states), subtracted it from 1.4, weighted it by how often each occurred, and came up with a standard error of 0.55 runs. Here, let me try using the values I have in The Book (Table 5, page 23).... ok, I’m back… I get 0.53 runs. So, yes, that’s what he did.
Here’s my problem: Colin is saying that he wants to treat each event as if it was base/out neutral, but then gives us a margin of error for treating each event as base/out neutral. Therefore, why not simply use the run values by the 24 base/out states, and have ZERO margin of error?
That’s the part I don’t get. It’s great to see what the margin of error is, if you treat things as base/out neutral. So, I love it that he did that. I just don’t see why it needs to be done for players in the Retrosheet era.
Recent comments
Older comments
Page 1 of 344 pages 1 2 3 > Last »Complete Archive – By Category
Complete Archive – By Date