http://www.insidethebook.com/ee/ A discussion of sabermetrics, hosted by the authors of "The Book" en tangotiger@yahoo.com Copyright 2009 2009-06-25T19:38:00-05:00 http://www.insidethebook.com/ee/index.php/site/comments/psst_wanna_work_for_fangraphscom_part_2/ The Fangraphs train keeps rolling along, as David offers even more paid positions.  Since the readership here and there overlap, I doubt my name means anything, but, who knows… Sabermetrics, MLB_Management 2009-06-25T19:38:00-05:00 http://www.insidethebook.com/ee/index.php/site/comments/linear_weights_by_pitch_movement/ Dave Allen strikes again, this time from Fangraphs: Sabermetrics, Ball_Tracking 2009-06-25T19:34:00-05:00 http://www.insidethebook.com/ee/index.php/site/comments/david_wright/ Lots of MSM chatter about the non-MSM BABIP.  Love it!  I made these two posts at Primer: Although I don’t know why I think this, for some reason I have it stuck in my head that Wright’s high BABIP is likely a statistical fluke, while his high K rate and lack of power are likely something to worry about. Can someone explain to me why I am wrong? You are not wrong. Every metric has a certain amount of noise to it. For something like K/PA, it has very little amount of noise. For something like BABIP, it has alot of noise. The important thing is that this is not an either-or situation. Thus, if I accept the premise that the metric of K/PA has very little noise—which I do—then the version of it I would accept as the most quiet in David Wright’s case is the one that has 2312 PAs of information to silence the noise. What I was trying to say is that the metric K/PA allows you to weight recent performance more heavily. If, for example, the “standard” weights for the last 3 years is 5/4/3, then you would weight BABIP as 4.5/4/3.5, and you would weight K/PA as 7/4/1 (or some such). You NEVER ignore any past performance.  What you do is weight them based on their persistency to forecast the future. Since players are human beings, then we want a metric that more closely aligns to his current conditioning, strength, and speed.  K/PA has limited noise, and so, you weight his recent performance more. If players were NOT humans, then you would have no reason to weight recent performance more, and you’d stick with his career totals. Sabermetrics, Forecasting 2009-06-24T19:40:00-05:00 http://www.insidethebook.com/ee/index.php/site/comments/batting_order_and_the_pitcher/ I reply to a thread at Primer: Batting the pitcher 8th, or moving everyone down a spot in the order and putting the guy you originally decided to bat 9th (when you moved the pitcher to 8th), into the 1 spot? If this is the choice, it’s a no-brainer, and it’s the former.  In no way can you put one of the worst hitters on the team at the top of the order. *** As for the general issue, my research in The Book (see it for free on Amazon’s Look Inside) using Markov chains is that moving the pitcher from 9 to 8 will add roughly 2 runs in a 162 game season.  MGL’s research via his simulator is that it’s a break-even or a slight advantage to keeping the pitcher in the 9th slot. *** The most egregious thing you can do is move the pitcher to the cleanup slot.  This would cost you 0.1 runs per game (about 16 runs in a season).  Basically, moving the pitcher up the order costs you around 4 runs per slot.  Move pitcher from 8 to 7 to 6 to 5 to 4 and remove 4 runs each rung.  That’s the impact of a batting order.  And remember, this is by far the worst hitter on the team.  That’s the impact here. I presume most people would think that moving the pitcher to the cleanup slot would cost you half a run a game. Sabermetrics, Batting_Order 2009-06-24T15:48:00-05:00 http://www.insidethebook.com/ee/index.php/site/comments/blogosphere_question_of_the_day_06_24_or_why_should_ops_die/ Inside The Book blog reader asks his blog readers this question: I was catching up on the issues of By the Numbers and read the following quote in the the November 2008 issue: “An OPS of .800 will always generate more runs than an OPS of .700, given the same amount of playing time.” I know the above statement is not always true, but do you?  I want to give out a prize and decided that I the first person to prove that it is false, using math, will get to choose the first team I will study in depth with my new disabled list database.  I know it is not much, but that is all I can really offer.  Hopefully there will be more of these to come in the future. One of his readers already gave out the answer, and not the theoretical mumbo-jumbo I am about to give below.  He actually found real-life examples (though I suspect that maybe SB was in there, or park factors, or something).  It’s for this reason that I want OPS to die a quick death among serious analysts (as well as its offshoot, the less obscene OPS+).  It can survive for quick things.  Anway here’s my answer: Sabermetrics, Linear_Weights 2009-06-24T15:09:00-05:00 http://www.insidethebook.com/ee/index.php/site/comments/uzr_in_msm/ This time, it’s the Star-Ledger in NJ: UZR is broken into different components that account for errors and other factors. In Teixeira’s case, his dropoff is tied almost entirely to his decline in the portion of UZR that accounts specifically for range. In 2008, Teixeira saved 9.4 runs just on his range. This season, he’s cost his team runs, posting a -3.6. That said, even advanced defensive statistics such as UZR have their blind spots. And when it comes to first basemen, and Teixeira specifically, the statistic doesn’t measure one of the most important areas of contribution: scooping balls and tracking wayward throws. It bothers me to no end that Fangraphs and other sites report numbers to one decimal place.  It implies a level of precision that simply does not exist.  If a UZR of +4.6 really means +4.6 +/- 2.1 (or whatever), then I’d show it as +5 and be done with it. Sabermetrics, Fielding 2009-06-23T20:05:01-05:00 http://www.insidethebook.com/ee/index.php/site/comments/canadian_banking_system/ Non-sports post: Blogging 2009-06-23T18:53:00-05:00 http://www.insidethebook.com/ee/index.php/site/comments/flip_flop_fly_ball/ Cool graphics site. Hat tip: Craig. Sabermetrics, History 2009-06-23T18:37:00-05:00 http://www.insidethebook.com/ee/index.php/site/comments/nhl_draft_analysis_and_spreadsheet_1994_2009/ I love the internet. Sabermetrics, Minors_College, Other Sports, Hockey 2009-06-23T14:30:00-05:00 http://www.insidethebook.com/ee/index.php/site/comments/barry_code/ Hat tip: Patriot as he highlights a site dedicated to Barry Codell, inventor of what has been popularized as Total Average.  This is what baseball analysis would look like if Linear Weights didn’t take hold.  And here is their glossary of what can essentially be described as “let’s add and divide numbers”.  Codell paved the way.  This site has gone to great lengths to make a religion out of it.  Pluto is also a dwarf planet, unless you also accept Eris as the tenth planet.  You can’t stick with just nine planets. Sabermetrics, Linear_Weights 2009-06-23T14:01:00-05:00