Author Topic: Stats. Giggity!  (Read 39668 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online Slateman

  • Posts: 63377
  • THE SUMMONER OF THE REVERSE JINX
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #250: May 12, 2014, 09:45:55 AM »
So are there any stats available in regards to margin of victory or margin of defeat? Wondering if any other ~.500 team has been blown out as much as the Nationals.

Offline PC

  • Posts: 47236
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #251: May 22, 2014, 11:17:05 AM »
I have a stat!  I have a stat!

I’ve been keeping a sheet of the Nationals starters and the opposing starters for every series.  It occurred to me that the Nationals seem to have gone up against a lot of very good starters or, at least, a lot of starters with low ERAs.  So rather than speculating, I decided to actually find out.  Thanks to baseball-reference, Excel and C#, I did.

First I wanted to see what the ERA (the barometer I used because I know the formula) for the opposing starters against each MLB team.  For the Nationals, that would be Dillon Gee vs. the Nationals, Bartolo Colon vs. the Nationals, Zack Wheeler vs. the Nationals, the first three opposing starters of the Nationals this season…up until yesterday’s game against Alfredo Simon and I did that every team.  What did I discover?

I discovered that the Nats’ opposing starters do indeed have a very low ERA in games started against the Nationals.  It’s the second lowest in baseball at 2.79.  This should surprise no one who’s watch the Nationals at-bats.  In addition to this, I needed to see what those opposing starters ERA were against everyone else they started, excluding each team.  So, for the Nationals that would be every start Dillon Gee made excluding the Nationals, every start Bartolo Colon made excluding the Nationals starts. Same with Zack Wheeler and every other opposing starter up to Alfredo Simon, yesterday.  As it turns out, it appears to be true that the Nationals have had a lot of good opposing starters as the ERA for them in starts excluding the Nationals is also the second lowest in baseball at 3.33.  So the opposing starters aren’t as dominant in their non-Nationals starts but, relatively, they’re still really good.

The team with the lowest opposing starters ERA is the Padres at 2.60.  Not surprising as the Padres are terrible offensively.  The team with the highest opposing starters ERA is the Rockies at 5.86.  Yes, the Rockies are brutal to opposing starting pitchers.  The highest opposing starter ERA in the AL is the A’s at 5.40.  The Rockies opposing starter ERA is the highest in baseball despite the fact that one or two of those at-bats per game is the Rockies starting pitcher.

The team with the lowest opposing starters ERA excluding the team is the Pirates at 3.29.  There’s less range for this stat because you’re excluding one start from many opposing starter starts.  Stephen Strasburg, for example, has had 10 starts.  For this particular stat, his impact on any one of those opponents is almost the same.  Excluding any one opponent from the list leaves totals that are almost the same, regardless of which opponent you exclude because there would be 9 starts left to include.  And there will be even less of impact as the season goes on.  Excluding one start from 20 starts will leave 19 left as opposed to the nine left now.  Anyway, the highest opposing starter ERA excluding that team belongs to the Royals at 4.30.  The highest opposing starter ERA excluding that team in the NL is the Giants at 3.80.  If you wanted to be a little hesitant about jumping on the Rockies bandwagon, you could look at these stats.  As mentioned previously, the Rockies have the highest opposing starter ERA at 5.86 but those same opposing starters excluding starts against the Rockies is 13th in the NL.  Those opposing starters are reamed by the Rockies but they’re not that good against everyone else either.  Perhaps the Rockies have been going up against more than their fair share of #4s and #5s.

The Braves, what about the Braves???  Well, their opposing starters have the third lowest ERA right behind the Nationals against them at 2.91.  Since their offense isn’t world beaters either, this is not shocking.  Their opposing starter ERA excluding Braves starts is 10th in the NL so they’re slightly better against worse starters than the Nationals.

Offline houston-nat

  • Posts: 19050
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #252: May 22, 2014, 11:23:35 AM »
That's all pretty darn interesting. So the takeaway is twofold: (1) we have been facing a lot of really good starting pitchers, and although they fare well against us, they fare nearly as well against everyone else; (2) the fact that our offense is close to league average according to most stats is because we just destroy enemy bullpens.

Online JCA-CrystalCity

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 40031
  • Platoon - not just a movie, a baseball obsession
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #253: May 22, 2014, 11:42:39 AM »
Nice work, PC. 

Offline Squab

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 4528
  • me lookin at the bullpen
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #254: May 22, 2014, 10:51:18 PM »
That's cool stuff.

Online imref

  • Posts: 43164
  • Re-contending in 202...5?

Offline PC

  • Posts: 47236
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #256: June 06, 2014, 12:20:22 PM »
I’ve got an update!

I ran the numbers again with the two weeks that have happened since I did the first run. 

The Nationals have dropped from 2nd to 3rd in opposing starter ERA, replaced by Philadelphia at #2 which shouldn’t surprise anyone who watched the Nationals-Phillies series.  We’re still #2 in opposing starter ERA in non-team starts but where we were comfortably #2 before, we’re likely about to drop from that spot.  The “perfect” team would be one that has a high opposing starter ERA but a low opposing starter ERA in non-team starts.  That would mean that the team beats up on opposing starters while those same starters do very well in starts not against that team.  Right now, the most “perfect” teams are three AL teams, the As, the Blue Jays and, surprisingly, the Angels.

If they’re the most “perfect” teams, San Diego is the most “imperfect”.  Their opposing starter ERA is lowest in all of baseball which means the Padres don’t score but those same opposing starters ERA are 14th in the NL in their non-Padre starts so they’re very good against the Padres but not good in starts against everyone else.  The Braves are pretty imperfect too.  Their opposing starter ERA is 4th lowest in the NL but those same opposing starters ERA, in non-Braves starts is highest in the NL.

One more thing, the Rockies, I posted that before you jump on their bandwagon, you should take into consideration that while their opposing starter ERA was terrible (which means the Rockies score a lot against their opposing starters) those same opposing starters were bad even in the non-Rockies starts.  Well, the opposing starter ERA in non-Rockies starts has improved…and the Rockies have started to lose.  The next team to look out for in this respect is the Giants.  Their opposing starter ERA is 14th in the NL (behind only the Rockies).  Yes, the Giants do score a lot but those same starters ERA in non-Giants starts is 12th in the NL so they’re not that great against everyone else either. Now, maybe it’s the Giants who’ve gotten more than their fair share of #4 and #5 opposing starters.

Offline Jordanz Meatballz

  • Posts: 4996
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #257: June 06, 2014, 01:46:58 PM »
Cool stat, I think you're onto something.

Offline PC

  • Posts: 47236
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #258: June 15, 2014, 10:35:25 AM »
My statistics “thing” this season is opposing starting pitcher but remember what my statistics thing was in 2010?  It was three city road trips.  I looked at how many each team had plus how many home series each team had where their opponent was finishing a three city road trip, ie, the beneficiary of someone else’s three city road trip.

I knew, I knew when this road trip started that the Cardinals series would be the third city of a three city road trip.   I foolishly hoped that they be able to overcome it but “overcoming” like this isn’t the Nationals way, at least so far this season.

Going macro, I decided to look at each team’s TCRT status for this season.  First, the record of the TCRT teams so far this season is 19-24-3.  That’s 19 teams winning their final series of a three city road trip, 24 losing and 3 ties.

As far as numbers go, most teams have three or four TCRT, the Nationals have four, this current one, one that ends with the Dodgers and two (TWO) that end with the Marlins.  That’s both remaining Marlins road series will be the end of three city road trips for the Nationals.  There a few teams with five of these trips, the As (who’ve had four of them already and are 1-3 in the final series of their trips), the Red Sox, the Angels, the Dodgers, the Marlins and the Rays.  The three city road trip lottery winner is the Twins who have just one this entire season.  Their only three city road trip this season, the Twins are in the middle of it right now.  The loser is the Blue Jays who have six three city road trips.

One of the exaggerating effects of the TCRT is not just the three cities but the actual length in total games.  The extreme is an eleven game three city road trip (the Nats final TCRT that ends with the Marlins is eleven games).  The Marlins, on the other hand, have five of them but one was just seven games, two two game series and a three game series.

The flip side of the three city road trip is the home team that awaits the three city tripper for that final series, ie St. Louis right now.  First, the Nationals have four of these series also, having already had two of them.  The Nationals’ series against the Dodgers and the Rangers were both the end of three city road trips for those teams.  The two remaining for the Nationals are Arizona and Philadelphia.   The loser on this side is the White Sox.  They have just one home series against a team finishing a three-city road trip.  There are a few big winners on this side.  The Rangers have six home series against opponents finishing three city road trips (one is the Braves).  The Giants also have six of these series but the big overall winner on both sides is the Royals.  They have just two three city road trips and SEVEN home series when they’re playing a team finishing a three city road trip.  I had to double check to make sure that was right and it is.

Offline Optics

  • Posts: 9233
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #259: June 15, 2014, 10:39:37 AM »
Those are some really interesting facts, especially the part about hosting the team that's playing its third straight road series. You mentioned for us it was the Dodgers and Rangers, and we won both those series.

It does kinda suck to find out we have three more of these long road trips though, but I suppose over the course of 162 games that's just the cost of doing business. And we have done well in this one, outside of St. Louis(where we never win even if we have three days off to prepare).

Offline PC

  • Posts: 47236
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #260: June 23, 2014, 02:20:22 PM »
I've run the numbers again up through yesterday and the Nationals opposing starter ERA is #3 (Atlanta is #2) and the opposing ERA in non-National starts has risen to #1.

San Diego may have achieved total "imperfection".  Their opposing starter ERA is far and away #1 in the NL and all of MLB.  That ERA is 2.58.  No other team opposing starter ERA is anywhere near that.  Atlanta at #2 is 3.28.  That's as close as it gets to San Diego.  Given how low that ERA is, you'd think that San Diego must constantly go up against the very best starters in baseball....except they don't.  Those opposing starter ERA in non-Padres starts is DEAD LAST in the NL.  How is that even possible to be that bad against opposing starters who, on the whole, are terrible?

Remember when I threw statitical shade on the Rockies and then the Giants?  I have a new target, the Brewers of Milwaukee.  Milwaukee's opposing starter ERA is 4th worst in the NL.  Yes, the Brewers do score but those same opposing starter ERAs in non-Brewer starts is 14th in the NL.  San Diego's opposing starter ERA in non-Padre starts just nips them...and we've already discussed the Padres.  Now maybe the Brewers are filling their dance card with a bunch of #4 and #5 starters...

Offline comish4lif

  • Posts: 2934
  • Too Stressed to care.
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #261: June 23, 2014, 03:03:42 PM »
The Padres are #1 because they have a terrible group of hitters. It has little to do with the opposing pitchers. Sure, it doesn't help facing the Dodgers and Giants intra-division. But that ballpark hurts them and they are a poor hitting team.

Online The Chief

  • Posts: 31799
    • http://www.wnff.net
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #262: June 23, 2014, 03:05:53 PM »
Sum this thread up for me in 10 words or less.

Offline Vega

  • Posts: 5516
  • Party’s Over
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #263: June 23, 2014, 03:13:36 PM »
The Padres are #1 because they have a terrible group of hitters. It has little to do with the opposing pitchers. Sure, it doesn't help facing the Dodgers and Giants intra-division. But that ballpark hurts them and they are a poor hitting team.
The Pads have done a remarkable job of acquiring noodle-bat retreads and prospects who bust hard. Cameron Maybin and Seth Smith are the only semi-functional offensive players they have.
Sum this thread up for me in 10 words or less.
WAR and platoons.

Offline dracnal

  • Posts: 1696
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #264: June 23, 2014, 05:12:02 PM »
http://www.sbnation.com/longform/2014/6/18/5818380/effective-velocity-pitching-theory-profile-perry-husband

Here's a pretty good read on Effective Velocity for those that haven't seen it.  Interesting theory. Sounds like you need a catcher that gets the system as well as pitchers that believe in it to get full value.

Offline Minty Fresh

  • Posts: 20386
  • BOOM!
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #265: June 24, 2014, 10:08:43 AM »
Sum this thread up for me in 10 words or less.

I think the title says it all...

Offline Squab

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 4528
  • me lookin at the bullpen
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #266: June 24, 2014, 11:30:59 AM »
Sum this thread up for me in 10 words or less.

People who think you need more than the "eye test."



Offline PC

  • Posts: 47236
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #269: June 24, 2014, 01:57:43 PM »
That's a terrible article.

First, the premise is flawed.  There are far more bad teams than good ones so just beating the bad teams is likely good enough to win the NL East (or make the playoffs)  Also, if you're going to present one team's OPS against winning and losing teams then you need to present the same numbers for all winning teams.  I'm guessing most winning teams do much better against losing teams than winning ones.

Offline Baseball is Life

  • Posts: 20393
  • Proud member of the Sunshine Squad.
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #270: June 24, 2014, 02:03:47 PM »
People who think you need more than the "eye test."

I prefer the "smell test" myself. As in, "this team stinks."

Offline TigerFan

  • Posts: 3890
  • A split allegiance is still an allegiance
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #271: June 24, 2014, 03:28:52 PM »
I prefer the "smell test" myself. As in, "this team stinks."

Who you talking about Willis?

Offline cmdterps44

  • Posts: 15551
  • Future
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #272: June 25, 2014, 10:14:35 AM »
So can anyone link me the actual stat that MASN showed some days ago about the Nats' record when Span and Rendon score at least a run? I compared their Game Logs and it seems like the Nats' are 22-0 when they both score at least a run but IIRC, I remember the Nats' had at least two losses.

Offline houston-nat

  • Posts: 19050
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #273: June 26, 2014, 11:47:56 PM »
I just submitted a piece to FanGraphs Community Research, inspired by Bob and FP's conversation tonight. Look for it hopefully in the next 3-4 days.

This will be my 10th FanGraphs Community article.

Online JCA-CrystalCity

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 40031
  • Platoon - not just a movie, a baseball obsession
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #274: June 27, 2014, 08:11:33 AM »
I just submitted a piece to FanGraphs Community Research, inspired by Bob and FP's conversation tonight. Look for it hopefully in the next 3-4 days.

This will be my 10th FanGraphs Community article.
Man should be getting  :$$$: