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
Javier Vasquez and Boone Logan for Melky Cabrera, Mike Dunn, Arodys Viscaino, and cash.
Someone will have to run through the numbers, but I think the best prospect in that group is Viscaino, and Melky is under control for 3 years(?). Braves will save about 8 mil next year, enough, you'd think, to sign a league average bat. Looks like a win-win to me, but like I said, I'd like to see someone run through the surplus value.
I remember Koskie as a great fielder who made lots of "web gems" way before I had heard of UZR, or ZR for that matter. I remember complaining when he didn't win the gold glove. I think he was underrated offensively in Minnesota - I remember a lot of people complaining about him for some reason. I think his approach (I feel like he took more than his share of called 3rd strikes) bothered people.
So I think its partly offensive, but mostly not understanding position adjustments and fielding runs. It's not that we didn't know he was a really good fielder, we just didn't know how much value that had.
Have you considered combining projection systems and seeing how that stacks up? I just wonder if a combination of them will fare better than any of them individually.
The funny thing about lists like this is looking towards the bottom. Seeing Melvin Mora two spots from Hanley Ramirez, or Jarrod Washburn two spots from Matt Holliday.
I guess there's something to be said for being average for 10 years and have those years all be in the same decade. I'm just not sure what that something is.
For health reasons, I stay off message boards like ESPN's, but I decided to peruse a little bit just too see what people were pissed off the most about. The names I saw the most were Ryan Howard, Corey Koskie, Justin Morneau, and Mariano Rivera. Obviously Rivera for only being 25 or whatever, Koskie for being on the list, and Morneau and Howard for being off of it.
Anyone have any legitimate qualms?
"Blicks" did a good analysis using Sky Kalkman's trade value calculator. It's a fan post on beyondtheboxscore. He has the Mariners up 6 mil, the Blue Jays up 18 mil, and the Phillies down 23 mil.
Now, if you add in the extension, and figure he'll be about 6 WAR per season while making 20 mil, that's 21 mil of surplus for the Phillies, bringing them close to even.
As far as I'm concerned, it was an ok trade for the phillies, and a good trade for the blue jays and mariners.
In order for someone's value (in terms of WAR) to go up by being platooned, they would need to be below replacement level overall against LHP (for a LHB). It is pretty unlikely that Granderson is, considering defense and SSS issues. It obviously would add value to the TEAM if they signed someone who is more valuable than Granderson against LHP, but probably not that much. The Yankees certainly could make their team better by signing someone like Cameron, but they have other holes to fill before they spend 8 million dollars on a platoon partner. Not to mention the other issues that MGL brought up.
That being said, it certainly might make sense to pinch hit for him in certain situations if you have a good RHB on the bench, and to make sure his days off are against LHP. Other than that, throw him out there every day and watch as he magically accrues 4 WAR while hitting poorly against LHPs.
I like rotten tomatoes, but it needs to be adjusted for the person. I've been thinking about doing a system for adjusting the number based on plot.
Something like
Action movie - Add 10 points
Comedy - Add 10 points
Historical - subtract 10 points
Set in Iraq - subtract 20 points
Good reviews based on "strong visuals" - subtract 10
etc. Doing things like this, I can predict the movies I'm going to like pretty well.
Some random thoughts to add, I think a lot of people are confused by the process, since the 4.5 mil/WAR or whatever calculation is based on free agent salaries that have been given out in the past, but they see Placido Polanco sign for 3 years, 18 mil. Even a very steep aging curve would put him at much more than 18 mil given that calcualation. Jason Bay, on the other hand, will probably be paid way more than he's worth using that calculation.
This also shows that paying 4.5 per win is usually not a good idea, as there are players who sign for much less than that. You could probably sign Ben Sheets and Rich Harden for the cost of John Lackey, and be looking at LESS risk, because it would be fewer years and two players.
I understand what's going on here, we're taking what an average free agent gets per win, but distributing it correctly, based on actual production. I'm just not sure how to explain that. Here in Minnesota, people like to say that picking up Cuddyer's option was a good move, because comparable left fielders make similar money. Even if that was true, and I don't think it is, that doesn't mean that he's worth that much money.
The only teams that can really pay that much for a Bay/Cuddyer type are teams with no other holes in their lineup. If you can sign Polanco for significantly less than Cuddyer, it doesn't matter if that is the going rate for a mediocre outfielder, its still poor use of your money.
Anyway, just some ramblings about stuff I've been hearing (reading) lately. If there's a good way for me to explain that, let me know.
Sort of on the same subject - A couple of weeks ago, I did some simple calculations to see if a 4.70 FIP flyball pitcher (Jarrod Washburn) would be much worse than a 4.70 FIP groundball pitcher. At the very most, Washburn gives up an extra 50 fly balls. An average defense catches 39 of them, a really bad defense (Young, Cuddyer, Span) probably catches 37. Add in the fact that he also wouldn't be taking advantage of the Twins good infield defense (Morneau, Punto, Hardy, possibly Crede) and you maybe get 5 outs.
And this is a pretty remarkable scenario - an extreme flyball pitcher compared to an extreme groundball pitcher, an extremely good infield defense and an extremely bad outfield defense. Signing a pitcher based on your ballpark might work - signing Washburn to pitch is Safeco is a better idea than signing him to pitch in Coor's, but the strengths and weaknesses of your defense probably don't matter much at all.
What I don't get, is how WPA/LI helps us in the Clemens situation. It doesn't take luck or fielding out of the equation. Wouldn't Dickson still come out on top?
It took it being explained to me quite a few different ways to get it. I think something along these lines worked though.
WPA gives you credit for doing the right things in the right situation - a bunt might be a good move in certain situations with certain scores. It weights any contribution that you have by how much it will help you win the game. What it also does, is weight important plate appearances more than unimportant ones.
What WPA/LI does, is take away the second of the two. It puts all pa's on the same scale, but still gives you more credit for things that will help you win the game, based on the score/inning/ base-out state.
So it takes into account "situational hitting", but gets rid of "clutch".
How is this different than RE24? The end of game is a good example. Bunting could be another one. A bunt in the first inning is most likely going to have a worse WPA/LI than a bunt in a late inning tie game with the same base-out state. With RE24, they'll be the same.
Remember WPA - WPA/LI = Clutch.
Hope that helps.
Wow, if Adrian Beltre signs one year 6 mil contract, and the Twins aren't the ones signing the deal, I will not be happy. I've been pretty lukewarm on signing him, but I was thinking something like 3 years, 25 mil. That would be a steal.
I also agree that figgins will get more than that.
Whether or not these numbers make sense is one thing, but he did say that he relied completely on the last two season of WAR. What I don't get is what type of $/WAR he's expecting. Beltre was 6.5 WAR for 2008 and 2009. We're expecting him to sign for 2 mil per war?
Figgins has been 8.5 war, so he'd be in the same range. I'm assuming he's not using a straight $/WAR conversion, but what is he using?
Yeah, its hard to call out the Mariners at this point. Every other move they've made seems sound, and its not like they are unaware of his poor production. I very much doubt the small loss in productivity in 2010 will outweigh the benefits. The mariners likely won't be in the playoffs next year (though it's possible), so giving fans a reason to come to the ball park for a small price seems reasonable.
The funny thing is, if it was the Royals doing this, we'd (I'd) probably have a different opinion. There are a few clubs that just deserve the benefit of the doubt, I guess.
Yeah, I don't understand Wake taking that deal. He's been worth more than the option every one of the past 8 years, but he takes a 2 year deal at only 2.5 per. He must have really wanted to stay in Boston, and they must have made him believe he had to sign that to stay there.
I think a reasonable projection for both players would be 7 WAR, and about 15 mil. I think its about a wash, unless you think that 7 WAR is more valuable in 2 seasons than in 4. For the Twins I would think it would be, because these next two seasons are a very good chance to make the playoffs. After that, a large percentage of their core will get more expensive, and the division will undoubtedly get better.
What MGL said, plus you need to take into account that these aren't independent metrics. As hard as we try not to be, we are definitely influenced by UZR when doing the surveys. So, someone who is overrated by UZR would most likely also be overrated by the fans just because he is overrated by UZR. I personally wouldn't use +/-, since they are using the same data and similar methodology. So .50*UZR +.30*Fans + .20*Average sounds good to me.
I don't think slg/obp ratio is the way to do it. Many of the high obp guys were also high power guys. obp/war would be better... showing what proportion of their total value came from obp.
"How could I possibly justify throwing a curve ball on that pitch and that pitch only"
Because it will make the fastball better on the next pitch? You have to add the marginal values for every pitch in the at bat, or really for every pitch in the game. If by throwing one crappy curveball you make every fastball you throw after that better, it might be worth the risk. If you do away with the curveball completely, even if it sucks, it might bring down the fastball value enough to make you worse overall.
I understand game theory, but throwing a pitch isn't only about the value of that pitch, its about the effects it will have on all the other pitches. If you want to send me the link to the study you're talking about, I'd be happy to read it and be proved wrong.
Spike - “I don’t know what Teixeira’s defensive stats look like but I do know that he seems to be a vacuum at first base.”
There's nothing wrong with this statement.
mgl - "Show me a pitch from any pitcher that is worse than any other pitch from that pitcher and I’ll tell you to tell him to throw it less often until it becomes as good as the initially better pitch. If it never does, then he should never throw it!"
I don't think that's exactly right. I think the optimal distribution can have uneven values for pitches. I could be wrong though, but someone who knows more about economics than me explained it to me once. I think, as a general rule, if there's a large discrepency between pitches, its probably better to throw the one with the higher value more often, but I don't think that's absolute.
I think the pitcher is more important than the opposing team when looking at BIP. Someone like Burnett (8.5 k/9, 4.2 bb/9), for instance, makes defense less important that someone like pettitte (6.4 k/9, 3.5 bb/9), although probably not by much in this instance.
Guy, I have a feeling that Ichiro is just going to be one of those guys who you will have to use your gut for. The speed score thing is interesting though. Maybe not necessarily that he has such a high speed score, but that it hasn't dropped as he's aged. UZR might help in that regard also.
One thing to think about, and I don't think this is what the article was referring to, is that all doubles are not created equal.
A double by Adam Dunn is obviously crushed an will score a man from first most of the time. A really slow guy might end up with a single on a hit that would score someone from first.
A Carl Crawford double might also be hit to the wall, but it might be a ball that is in between the fielders and wouldn't score a person from first.
Also, grounding out to the right side every time a runner is on second will have a little less negative value than a regular groundout. Someone from Minnesota trying to impress their manager and get high fives from their team mates might try to ground out to the right side in these situations, and thereby lower his wOBA, but provide a small amount of value for moving the runner up.
I'm sure there are other examples like this, but they are probably close to meaningless overall. The only way, as far as I can tell, for two guys with equal wOBA, fielding, and basrunning to have a significant difference in value would be a sustained difference in clutch value.
I was just thinking on sunday when in the Metrodome how fans think routine flyouts are homeruns off the bat. The problem is that they are watching the ball instead of the player. If they watched the outfielder (and in some cases, the batter) they'd know right away if the ball had potential to be an XBH. I wonder if they did have an angle on tv that showed the flight of the ball all the time if fans would get similarly fooled, or if they'd start to be able to tell off the bat.
Shouldn't the strategy be to create better component factors that take into account a player's batted ball profile?
Because we don't really understand what it is exactly that makes the home team win 54% of the time, we definitely don't know why it affects some players more than others. Maybe its adopting a style of hitting that fits your ball park, maybe its just feeling more comfortable at home and playing better because of it. It's most likely a combination of many of these factors, just probably in different proportions for different players. I think if you use home/road splits, we don't really know what we're measuring.
Tango, I can't see this page quite right. It is very likely that this is my computer's fault, because it is very old and needs an upgrade. Just thought I would mention it in case it wasn'tjust me. Also, I wanted to mention it because I'm missing the first word or two in all of Kincaid's sentences. So basically I'm just giving myself an excuse if I read something wrong/didn't read something. Anyway, Kincaid, I agree with pretty much everything you said. What I was saying was worded poorly. I was basically saying that clutch had a much smaller measurement error than UZR. I said it in such a way that sounded like clutch had no measurement error, and that was wrong. I just a} am trying to think of ways to separate skill and luck without taking away the things that make baseball so damn fun to watch, and b} make my case for Mauer as MVP. So, in conclusion, I'm better at conceding points than I am at making them.
Brent,
that's just what I was thinking. As a twins fan, I've always been annoyed with the talk about Mauer being better because he has Morneau hitting behind him. I've always argued that a pitcher pitching around Mauer would only make him more valuable. He would find himself in better counts and walk more often. It would be great, though, to see an analysis of what would be expected of him with and without Morneau behind him.
Yes. This is a perfect example of why WPA is a great stat. One of the best things to come out of sabermetrics. It doesn't answer any of the questions that we are usually looking for with our metrics, but it does tell us a lot. Not who should win MVP, or who the best player is. It measures pure baseball awesomeness in a way that no other statistic could.
Denard Span led the league last year in PPA, which is playoff probability added. He seemed like a perfect example of why that stat was even more ridiculous than WPA and meant less about how good a player is. I won't disagree with either of those points, but Denard Span contributed to a couple of my high points of last summer, and the absolute best point of my baseball life. WPA, and PPA, which, I agree, is kind of ridiculous, but still a fun stat, measure something that no other stat has ever come close to measuring. Except RBI's. That came pretty close.
Just curious, when was Rosenthal's article published? Was it a response to the FJM articles written at deadspin?
http://deadspin.com/5360509/expository-writing
At least then it makes sense. As much as I like FJM, they are doing a lot of the things he's talking about.
Also, and I know people will disagree with me on this, but I think that Greinke's HR/FB rates should be regressed some. I know the arguements, MVP is how you performed this year, not how you're projected to perfrom. I just believe that his low HR/FB is a product of luck, and if he performed the exact same over the course of another season, would go up.
Using one season clutch makes sense, because that's actually how a player has performed in a clutch, minus BABIP luck. One season UZR, on the other hand, is a little different. We don't know that Ben Zobrist is 23 runs above average in the field. We have a limited sample and need to regress that number. I also find it hard to believe that Derek Jeter is now 5 runs above average in the field. His number should be regressed back to his career norm.
This will always be a problem with MVP. Some people say, pitchers have their award, give the MVP to a hitter. Other's just believe that a player can't be as valuable if he doesn't play every day (which is why some of them actually will vote for a closer, because they play more often, and in a large percentage of your wins. I know, stupid.), and others agree with you, that MVP means most valuable player, and whatever position the most valuable player should get it.
Its hard not to agree with you, it says nothing in the rules that a batter has to win it, and until it does, the most valuable player should be the most valuable player, not the most valuable hitter.
As far as this year's MVP debate, I think Mauer and Greinke are really the only two candidates. I think (and I have absolutely no evidence to back this up) that Mauer's defense brings the WAR closer and makes it pretty close between the two. But I'm biased, and Mauer hasn't been quite as good as usual at throwing out runners this year, so that's probably not true.
Javier Vasquez and Boone Logan for Melky Cabrera, Mike Dunn, Arodys Viscaino, and cash. Someone will have to run through the numbers, but I think the best prospect in that group is Viscaino, and Melky is under control for 3 years(?). Braves will save about 8 mil next year, enough, you'd think, to sign a league average bat. Looks like a win-win to me, but like I said, I'd like to see someone run through the surplus value.
Corey Koskie v Justin Morneau (StevenEll) —
I remember Koskie as a great fielder who made lots of "web gems" way before I had heard of UZR, or ZR for that matter. I remember complaining when he didn't win the gold glove. I think he was underrated offensively in Minnesota - I remember a lot of people complaining about him for some reason. I think his approach (I feel like he took more than his share of called 3rd strikes) bothered people. So I think its partly offensive, but mostly not understanding position adjustments and fielding runs. It's not that we didn't know he was a really good fielder, we just didn't know how much value that had.
Forecasters Challenge 2010 (StevenEll) —
Have you considered combining projection systems and seeing how that stacks up? I just wonder if a combination of them will fare better than any of them individually.
Best Players of the 2000-09 decade (StevenEll) —
The funny thing about lists like this is looking towards the bottom. Seeing Melvin Mora two spots from Hanley Ramirez, or Jarrod Washburn two spots from Matt Holliday. I guess there's something to be said for being average for 10 years and have those years all be in the same decade. I'm just not sure what that something is.
Best Players of the 2000-09 decade (StevenEll) —
For health reasons, I stay off message boards like ESPN's, but I decided to peruse a little bit just too see what people were pissed off the most about. The names I saw the most were Ryan Howard, Corey Koskie, Justin Morneau, and Mariano Rivera. Obviously Rivera for only being 25 or whatever, Koskie for being on the list, and Morneau and Howard for being off of it. Anyone have any legitimate qualms?
Sabermetric moves of the 2010 pre-season (StevenEll) —
"Blicks" did a good analysis using Sky Kalkman's trade value calculator. It's a fan post on beyondtheboxscore. He has the Mariners up 6 mil, the Blue Jays up 18 mil, and the Phillies down 23 mil. Now, if you add in the extension, and figure he'll be about 6 WAR per season while making 20 mil, that's 21 mil of surplus for the Phillies, bringing them close to even. As far as I'm concerned, it was an ok trade for the phillies, and a good trade for the blue jays and mariners.
Sabermetric moves of the 2010 pre-season (StevenEll) —
Eli, Yeah I was thinking about that too. If he did, great job, they both look like they came out ahead in this deal.
Sky, take 2 on dollar values of free agent wins (StevenEll) —
So what's the deal then? Were our projections for the free agents way off? Or was 4.5 mil wrong going in?
Sabermetric moves of the 2010 pre-season (StevenEll) —
In order for someone's value (in terms of WAR) to go up by being platooned, they would need to be below replacement level overall against LHP (for a LHB). It is pretty unlikely that Granderson is, considering defense and SSS issues. It obviously would add value to the TEAM if they signed someone who is more valuable than Granderson against LHP, but probably not that much. The Yankees certainly could make their team better by signing someone like Cameron, but they have other holes to fill before they spend 8 million dollars on a platoon partner. Not to mention the other issues that MGL brought up. That being said, it certainly might make sense to pinch hit for him in certain situations if you have a good RHB on the bench, and to make sure his days off are against LHP. Other than that, throw him out there every day and watch as he magically accrues 4 WAR while hitting poorly against LHPs.
Movies: Taken (Liam Neeson) (StevenEll) —
I like rotten tomatoes, but it needs to be adjusted for the person. I've been thinking about doing a system for adjusting the number based on plot. Something like Action movie - Add 10 points Comedy - Add 10 points Historical - subtract 10 points Set in Iraq - subtract 20 points Good reviews based on "strong visuals" - subtract 10 etc. Doing things like this, I can predict the movies I'm going to like pretty well.
Explaining the win to dollar translation (StevenEll) —
Some random thoughts to add, I think a lot of people are confused by the process, since the 4.5 mil/WAR or whatever calculation is based on free agent salaries that have been given out in the past, but they see Placido Polanco sign for 3 years, 18 mil. Even a very steep aging curve would put him at much more than 18 mil given that calcualation. Jason Bay, on the other hand, will probably be paid way more than he's worth using that calculation. This also shows that paying 4.5 per win is usually not a good idea, as there are players who sign for much less than that. You could probably sign Ben Sheets and Rich Harden for the cost of John Lackey, and be looking at LESS risk, because it would be fewer years and two players. I understand what's going on here, we're taking what an average free agent gets per win, but distributing it correctly, based on actual production. I'm just not sure how to explain that. Here in Minnesota, people like to say that picking up Cuddyer's option was a good move, because comparable left fielders make similar money. Even if that was true, and I don't think it is, that doesn't mean that he's worth that much money. The only teams that can really pay that much for a Bay/Cuddyer type are teams with no other holes in their lineup. If you can sign Polanco for significantly less than Cuddyer, it doesn't matter if that is the going rate for a mediocre outfielder, its still poor use of your money. Anyway, just some ramblings about stuff I've been hearing (reading) lately. If there's a good way for me to explain that, let me know.
Explaining the win to dollar translation (StevenEll) —
This is great. It doesn't really enhance my understanding of the numbers much, but enhances my ability to explain it to someone else by a lot.
Psst... wanna work as an MLBAM stringer? (StevenEll) —
Yes. I do. Let me know when they are looking for people in Minneapolis.
Pitching to contact and FIP (StevenEll) —
Sort of on the same subject - A couple of weeks ago, I did some simple calculations to see if a 4.70 FIP flyball pitcher (Jarrod Washburn) would be much worse than a 4.70 FIP groundball pitcher. At the very most, Washburn gives up an extra 50 fly balls. An average defense catches 39 of them, a really bad defense (Young, Cuddyer, Span) probably catches 37. Add in the fact that he also wouldn't be taking advantage of the Twins good infield defense (Morneau, Punto, Hardy, possibly Crede) and you maybe get 5 outs. And this is a pretty remarkable scenario - an extreme flyball pitcher compared to an extreme groundball pitcher, an extremely good infield defense and an extremely bad outfield defense. Signing a pitcher based on your ballpark might work - signing Washburn to pitch is Safeco is a better idea than signing him to pitch in Coor's, but the strengths and weaknesses of your defense probably don't matter much at all.
Suppose you had a game-by-game Cy Young award (StevenEll) —
What I don't get, is how WPA/LI helps us in the Clemens situation. It doesn't take luck or fielding out of the equation. Wouldn't Dickson still come out on top?
Suppose you had a game-by-game Cy Young award (StevenEll) —
It took it being explained to me quite a few different ways to get it. I think something along these lines worked though. WPA gives you credit for doing the right things in the right situation - a bunt might be a good move in certain situations with certain scores. It weights any contribution that you have by how much it will help you win the game. What it also does, is weight important plate appearances more than unimportant ones. What WPA/LI does, is take away the second of the two. It puts all pa's on the same scale, but still gives you more credit for things that will help you win the game, based on the score/inning/ base-out state. So it takes into account "situational hitting", but gets rid of "clutch". How is this different than RE24? The end of game is a good example. Bunting could be another one. A bunt in the first inning is most likely going to have a worse WPA/LI than a bunt in a late inning tie game with the same base-out state. With RE24, they'll be the same. Remember WPA - WPA/LI = Clutch. Hope that helps.
Ken Davidoff ranks the free agents using WAR (StevenEll) —
Wow, if Adrian Beltre signs one year 6 mil contract, and the Twins aren't the ones signing the deal, I will not be happy. I've been pretty lukewarm on signing him, but I was thinking something like 3 years, 25 mil. That would be a steal. I also agree that figgins will get more than that. Whether or not these numbers make sense is one thing, but he did say that he relied completely on the last two season of WAR. What I don't get is what type of $/WAR he's expecting. Beltre was 6.5 WAR for 2008 and 2009. We're expecting him to sign for 2 mil per war? Figgins has been 8.5 war, so he'd be in the same range. I'm assuming he's not using a straight $/WAR conversion, but what is he using?
Sabermetric moves of the 2010 pre-season (StevenEll) —
Yeah, its hard to call out the Mariners at this point. Every other move they've made seems sound, and its not like they are unaware of his poor production. I very much doubt the small loss in productivity in 2010 will outweigh the benefits. The mariners likely won't be in the playoffs next year (though it's possible), so giving fans a reason to come to the ball park for a small price seems reasonable. The funny thing is, if it was the Royals doing this, we'd (I'd) probably have a different opinion. There are a few clubs that just deserve the benefit of the doubt, I guess.
Tim Wakefield (StevenEll) —
Yeah, I don't understand Wake taking that deal. He's been worth more than the option every one of the past 8 years, but he takes a 2 year deal at only 2.5 per. He must have really wanted to stay in Boston, and they must have made him believe he had to sign that to stay there.
Sabermetric moves of the 2010 pre-season (StevenEll) —
I think a reasonable projection for both players would be 7 WAR, and about 15 mil. I think its about a wash, unless you think that 7 WAR is more valuable in 2 seasons than in 4. For the Twins I would think it would be, because these next two seasons are a very good chance to make the playoffs. After that, a large percentage of their core will get more expensive, and the division will undoubtedly get better.
Regressing UZR toward the Fans' Scouting Report (StevenEll) —
What MGL said, plus you need to take into account that these aren't independent metrics. As hard as we try not to be, we are definitely influenced by UZR when doing the surveys. So, someone who is overrated by UZR would most likely also be overrated by the fans just because he is overrated by UZR. I personally wouldn't use +/-, since they are using the same data and similar methodology. So .50*UZR +.30*Fans + .20*Average sounds good to me.
Buzz blogs Moneyball (StevenEll) —
I don't think slg/obp ratio is the way to do it. Many of the high obp guys were also high power guys. obp/war would be better... showing what proportion of their total value came from obp.
What can happen if you manage (or pitch) like Buck Martinez... (StevenEll) —
"How could I possibly justify throwing a curve ball on that pitch and that pitch only" Because it will make the fastball better on the next pitch? You have to add the marginal values for every pitch in the at bat, or really for every pitch in the game. If by throwing one crappy curveball you make every fastball you throw after that better, it might be worth the risk. If you do away with the curveball completely, even if it sucks, it might bring down the fastball value enough to make you worse overall. I understand game theory, but throwing a pitch isn't only about the value of that pitch, its about the effects it will have on all the other pitches. If you want to send me the link to the study you're talking about, I'd be happy to read it and be proved wrong.
What can happen if you manage (or pitch) like Buck Martinez... (StevenEll) —
Spike - “I don’t know what Teixeira’s defensive stats look like but I do know that he seems to be a vacuum at first base.” There's nothing wrong with this statement. mgl - "Show me a pitch from any pitcher that is worse than any other pitch from that pitcher and I’ll tell you to tell him to throw it less often until it becomes as good as the initially better pitch. If it never does, then he should never throw it!" I don't think that's exactly right. I think the optimal distribution can have uneven values for pitches. I could be wrong though, but someone who knows more about economics than me explained it to me once. I think, as a general rule, if there's a large discrepency between pitches, its probably better to throw the one with the higher value more often, but I don't think that's absolute.
Reader question of the day: Cabrera v Garnder (StevenEll) —
I think the pitcher is more important than the opposing team when looking at BIP. Someone like Burnett (8.5 k/9, 4.2 bb/9), for instance, makes defense less important that someone like pettitte (6.4 k/9, 3.5 bb/9), although probably not by much in this instance.
Incorporating guts into a forecast (StevenEll) —
Guy, I have a feeling that Ichiro is just going to be one of those guys who you will have to use your gut for. The speed score thing is interesting though. Maybe not necessarily that he has such a high speed score, but that it hasn't dropped as he's aged. UZR might help in that regard also.
Working the count, for the team (StevenEll) —
One thing to think about, and I don't think this is what the article was referring to, is that all doubles are not created equal. A double by Adam Dunn is obviously crushed an will score a man from first most of the time. A really slow guy might end up with a single on a hit that would score someone from first. A Carl Crawford double might also be hit to the wall, but it might be a ball that is in between the fielders and wouldn't score a person from first. Also, grounding out to the right side every time a runner is on second will have a little less negative value than a regular groundout. Someone from Minnesota trying to impress their manager and get high fives from their team mates might try to ground out to the right side in these situations, and thereby lower his wOBA, but provide a small amount of value for moving the runner up. I'm sure there are other examples like this, but they are probably close to meaningless overall. The only way, as far as I can tell, for two guys with equal wOBA, fielding, and basrunning to have a significant difference in value would be a sustained difference in clutch value.
PITCHf/x (nee: FoxTrax Puck) (StevenEll) —
I was just thinking on sunday when in the Metrodome how fans think routine flyouts are homeruns off the bat. The problem is that they are watching the ball instead of the player. If they watched the outfielder (and in some cases, the batter) they'd know right away if the ball had potential to be an XBH. I wonder if they did have an angle on tv that showed the flight of the ball all the time if fans would get similarly fooled, or if they'd start to be able to tell off the bat.
At what point would you prefer road stats only? (StevenEll) —
Shouldn't the strategy be to create better component factors that take into account a player's batted ball profile? Because we don't really understand what it is exactly that makes the home team win 54% of the time, we definitely don't know why it affects some players more than others. Maybe its adopting a style of hitting that fits your ball park, maybe its just feeling more comfortable at home and playing better because of it. It's most likely a combination of many of these factors, just probably in different proportions for different players. I think if you use home/road splits, we don't really know what we're measuring.
The arguments AGAINST Mauer (sTEVENeLL) —
Tango, I can't see this page quite right. It is very likely that this is my computer's fault, because it is very old and needs an upgrade. Just thought I would mention it in case it wasn'tjust me. Also, I wanted to mention it because I'm missing the first word or two in all of Kincaid's sentences. So basically I'm just giving myself an excuse if I read something wrong/didn't read something. Anyway, Kincaid, I agree with pretty much everything you said. What I was saying was worded poorly. I was basically saying that clutch had a much smaller measurement error than UZR. I said it in such a way that sounded like clutch had no measurement error, and that was wrong. I just a} am trying to think of ways to separate skill and luck without taking away the things that make baseball so damn fun to watch, and b} make my case for Mauer as MVP. So, in conclusion, I'm better at conceding points than I am at making them.
What if Pujols saw Juan Pierre's pitch distribution? (StevenEll) —
Brent, that's just what I was thinking. As a twins fan, I've always been annoyed with the talk about Mauer being better because he has Morneau hitting behind him. I've always argued that a pitcher pitching around Mauer would only make him more valuable. He would find himself in better counts and walk more often. It would be great, though, to see an analysis of what would be expected of him with and without Morneau behind him.
WPA captures the essence of baseball (StevenEll) —
Yes. This is a perfect example of why WPA is a great stat. One of the best things to come out of sabermetrics. It doesn't answer any of the questions that we are usually looking for with our metrics, but it does tell us a lot. Not who should win MVP, or who the best player is. It measures pure baseball awesomeness in a way that no other statistic could. Denard Span led the league last year in PPA, which is playoff probability added. He seemed like a perfect example of why that stat was even more ridiculous than WPA and meant less about how good a player is. I won't disagree with either of those points, but Denard Span contributed to a couple of my high points of last summer, and the absolute best point of my baseball life. WPA, and PPA, which, I agree, is kind of ridiculous, but still a fun stat, measure something that no other stat has ever come close to measuring. Except RBI's. That came pretty close.
"Saberists dismiss those who disagree as ignorant dolts" (StevenEll) —
Just curious, when was Rosenthal's article published? Was it a response to the FJM articles written at deadspin? http://deadspin.com/5360509/expository-writing At least then it makes sense. As much as I like FJM, they are doing a lot of the things he's talking about.
The arguments AGAINST Mauer (StevenEll) —
Also, and I know people will disagree with me on this, but I think that Greinke's HR/FB rates should be regressed some. I know the arguements, MVP is how you performed this year, not how you're projected to perfrom. I just believe that his low HR/FB is a product of luck, and if he performed the exact same over the course of another season, would go up.
The arguments AGAINST Mauer (StevenEll) —
Using one season clutch makes sense, because that's actually how a player has performed in a clutch, minus BABIP luck. One season UZR, on the other hand, is a little different. We don't know that Ben Zobrist is 23 runs above average in the field. We have a limited sample and need to regress that number. I also find it hard to believe that Derek Jeter is now 5 runs above average in the field. His number should be regressed back to his career norm.
Should a pitcher have a fair chance at the MVP? (StevenEll) —
This will always be a problem with MVP. Some people say, pitchers have their award, give the MVP to a hitter. Other's just believe that a player can't be as valuable if he doesn't play every day (which is why some of them actually will vote for a closer, because they play more often, and in a large percentage of your wins. I know, stupid.), and others agree with you, that MVP means most valuable player, and whatever position the most valuable player should get it. Its hard not to agree with you, it says nothing in the rules that a batter has to win it, and until it does, the most valuable player should be the most valuable player, not the most valuable hitter. As far as this year's MVP debate, I think Mauer and Greinke are really the only two candidates. I think (and I have absolutely no evidence to back this up) that Mauer's defense brings the WAR closer and makes it pretty close between the two. But I'm biased, and Mauer hasn't been quite as good as usual at throwing out runners this year, so that's probably not true.