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
If you are a media member and would like a review copy of The Book, please contact Kevin Cuddihy of Potomac Books.

Buy The Book from Amazon

MOST RECENT ARTICLES
MAIL : You ask | We say

Advanced


THE BOOK--Playing The Percentages In Baseball

Filter posts by...

 

Saturday, November 03, 2007

PAP

By Tangotiger, 11:10 PM

PAP talk:

TSP:Do people still use the Pitcher Abuse Point System as a way to measure wear & tear on a pitcher?

Will Carroll:Absolutely. It’s the best available proxy. I’m working on a research project now that might give us a closer, game-to-game proxy, but until we can do needle biopsies or get the results of functional strength testing made public, PAP is the best system.

TSP:Why do you think it isn’t talked about more? If not why did it fail as a measurement of abuse on a pitcher’s arm?

Will Carroll:I’m not sure any statistical tool has ever had more of an effect on the game than PAP. If you look at the usage stats, we just don’t have high PAP starts any more because it measured it so well and pointed it out to the general public. Now, it’s likely something of an overreaction - some pitchers could go further and throw more, just as some could get more efficient and go deeper into games on the same pitch count.

It’s hard to take what Will says at face value.  Will’s obviously an insider.  But, he’s also very pro-BP.  So, it’s hard to know if he’s shilling, or if he’s painting an accurate picture.  I don’t mean to disparage Will, as he’s a very good guy, and I email with him every now and then.  But, I will take MGL down if I have to, and MGL would do the same against me.  I wouldn’t have it any other way.  Any fight above the belt is a fair fight.  A little bloody fight is good for the soul.  I’d like to see Will analyze PAP real hard, ask tough questions, and give some counterpunches to PAP.  Then, I’ll start to believe him more.  This is my personal opinion, and in no way means that I’m right.

I don’t know if the front offices used the results of PAP itself, or if it was simply using pitch counts on their own.  I will say that PAP has never been publicly tested on the 1970s pitchers, even though we have some good pitch count estimators out there.  I would guess that PAP would be disproven if it was tested against the 1970s pitchers.

(50) Comments • 2007/11/06 • SabermetricsPitchers
Page 1 of 1 pages

Latest...

COMMENTS

Dec 01 20:53
Sabermetric Moves of the 2009 Pre-Season

Dec 02 08:47
Rob Neyer touts wOBA

Dec 02 07:55
wOBA year-by-year calculations

Dec 02 07:54
The History of the wOBA, part 1

Dec 02 05:54
The 3-0 count

Dec 02 04:05
Michael Farber

Dec 02 02:30
“Why in my day…”

Dec 02 00:33
Get Rice in the Hall already

Dec 01 19:14
Multi-game sports table

Dec 01 19:01
What was Pedro worth?

THREADS

November 03, 2007
PAP