Author Topic: Stats. Giggity!  (Read 18040 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline houston-nat

  • Posts: 18559
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #125: June 04, 2013, 05:01:26 PM »
I'll never forgive them for the one that got away on the White Whale Werth.
I ended up determining that that was my fault, I clicked the wrong button and it never got sent for review. Poo. Wish I could keep blaming somebody else.

Offline blue911

  • Posts: 17490

Offline JCA-CrystalCity

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 21415
  • Platoon - not just a movie, a baseball obsession
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #127: December 18, 2013, 10:18:51 AM »
Interesting to see Jose Lobaton that high considering the Rays went out and brougth in Hanigan to go with JMolina.  He's not an old veteran, but he had a decent offensive year last year and is likely to be traded.  here's a little something from a TB board linked from Lobaton's B-R page:
http://rayscoloredglasses.com/2013/12/17/analyzing-trade-market-jose-lobaton-tampa-bay-rays/
Quote
Washington Nationals: Wilson Ramos has shown the ability to be a strong starting catcher in the major leagues, but just once in his major league career has he played in more than 100 games and having insurance behind him should be a priority for the Nationals. Their current options are Jhonatan Solano and Sandy Leon, but Solano can neither hit nor field and Leon could use more seasoning in the minor leagues. Lobaton would represent a solid option to be Ramos’ backup and potential fill-in should he get hurt. The Nationals desperately need a quality backup, and Lobaton will be worth a look.


Online HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 17884
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #128: December 18, 2013, 10:20:24 AM »
Dan Brooks provided these links for catcher analysis.


Pitch Framing: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ArJe7bwAZkuSdElkelNqTDNYckVqdXRzTktxVnprcHc#gid=0


confirmation of my bias against suzuki, so it must be correct

Offline blue911

  • Posts: 17490
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #129: December 18, 2013, 11:05:41 AM »
confirmation of my bias against suzuki, so it must be correct

I'm assuming that the spreadsheet is a product of Ben Lindbergh's work. If that is true, then the correct answer is that teams get less borderline strikes called when Suzuki is catching. There's still a lot of noise in the data.

Offline PC

  • Posts: 47236
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #130: December 18, 2013, 01:09:58 PM »
John Buck is no better than Suzuki  and Buck is a foreigner in the clubhouse.

Offline JCA-CrystalCity

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 21415
  • Platoon - not just a movie, a baseball obsession
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #131: December 18, 2013, 02:08:02 PM »
John Buck is no better than Suzuki  and Buck is a foreigner in the clubhouse.
meaning he's cold as ice or he's hot blooded?

Offline PebbleBall

  • Posts: 3419
  • Now that right there is baseball.
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #132: December 18, 2013, 02:11:45 PM »
remember when Cristian Guzman fixed his double vision?

Offline GburgNatsFan

  • Posts: 15848
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #133: December 18, 2013, 02:29:16 PM »
 :rimshot:

(BTW, the drummer needs a cigarette hanging out of his mouth. I'm thinking back to the Faces "A Nod is as good as a Wink" album cover. JCA, mitlen Tomterp and maybe varoadking will get that reference.)
meaning he's cold as ice or he's hot blooded?

Offline Terpfan76

  • Posts: 3912
  • ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #134: December 18, 2013, 03:41:33 PM »
meaning he's cold as ice or he's hot blooded?

Nope, he's a Dirty White Boy

Online varoadking

  • Posts: 13155
  • Bear down
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #135: December 18, 2013, 06:06:00 PM »
:rimshot:

(BTW, the drummer needs a cigarette hanging out of his mouth. I'm thinking back to the Faces "A Nod is as good as a Wink" album cover. JCA, mitlen Tomterp and maybe varoadking will get that reference.)

yes indeed...  :metal:

Online comish4lif

  • Posts: 2769
  • Too Stressed to care.
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #136: December 19, 2013, 11:57:59 AM »
FYI  - baseballprospectus.com is supposed to be free today and tomorrow (Dec 19-20).

Offline JCA-CrystalCity

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 21415
  • Platoon - not just a movie, a baseball obsession
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #137: December 19, 2013, 01:56:39 PM »
should be in the "all i want for ..." thread

Offline JCA-CrystalCity

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 21415
  • Platoon - not just a movie, a baseball obsession
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #138: December 27, 2013, 11:30:57 AM »
http://regressing.deadspin.com/a-decade-after-moneyball-have-the-as-found-a-new-mark-1489963694

Discussing the As effort to construct an extreme fly ball  offense.

Online HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 17884
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #139: December 27, 2013, 11:46:10 AM »
I think the best rebuttal to the extreme fly ball theory is contained in the article itself



there seems to be little correlation to an actually productive offense

Offline JCA-CrystalCity

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 21415
  • Platoon - not just a movie, a baseball obsession
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #140: December 27, 2013, 12:14:25 PM »
Well, Oakland and Boston are two nice starters, but Detroit seems to be a counterpoint.  The author points out handedness and patience are more important than the fly ball effect but Seattle not only was 3d in fly ball hitter PAs, but also in PAs with the platoon advantage (67%) and 6th in P/PA.

Detroit accumulated just plain old good hitters, but at quite a budget. Red Sox were a high budget team, but also took advantage of fly ball hitters and handedness for the positions not filled by "stars" like Ortiz, Pedroia, and Ellsbury (Nava / Gomes, slotting in Carp for Napoli, switch hitters like Salty, Nava, and for part of the year Victorino).

Online HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 17884
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #141: December 27, 2013, 12:17:41 PM »
Washington is fifth with an average offense, the white sox are sixth. to the extent there is any relationship to.runs scored,  it seems just as likely to.be random.as not

Offline welch

  • Posts: 10729
  • Send the Tardis back for Bucky
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #142: December 28, 2013, 09:04:38 PM »
Washington is fifth with an average offense, the white sox are sixth. to the extent there is any relationship to.runs scored,  it seems just as likely to.be random.as not

It felt like the Nats could not score runs last season. So many games lost by a run when the Nats put runners on second and third with nobody out, but got nothing.

Two thngs missing in the fly-ball theory:

- Makes no accounting of strikeouts. If a sacrifice is bad because it gives up a third of an inning, a K is much worse because it doesn't even advance a base-runner.

- If stikeout pitchers are higher-value, and, yes, that contradicts the ignoring of Ks by a batter, why belittle "pitch-to-contact" pitchers?

Online GMUNat

  • Posts: 5240
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #143: December 29, 2013, 08:42:33 PM »
- If stikeout pitchers are higher-value, and, yes, that contradicts the ignoring of Ks by a batter, why belittle "pitch-to-contact" pitchers?
Because K's for a pitcher are vastly superior to pitch to contact. A K is almost a guarantee of an out. With contact, you are relying on your defense to make a stop and typically the defense gets 70% of the balls, so .300 of the time its a hit. Plus K's are even more important with men on base since you can't advance them on the K.

Offline Terpfan76

  • Posts: 3912
  • ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #144: December 30, 2013, 07:56:56 AM »
Because K's for a pitcher are vastly superior to pitch to contact. A K is almost a guarantee of an out. With contact, you are relying on your defense to make a stop and typically the defense gets 70% of the balls, so .300 of the time its a hit. Plus K's are even more important with men on base since you can't advance them on the K.

Sure you can, third strike gets away from the catcher allowing runner to advance or even score... Strike out pitchers tend to throw a lot more pitches though. Greg Maddux made a career of pitching to contact.

Offline blue911

  • Posts: 17490
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #145: December 30, 2013, 09:24:14 AM »
An infield pop-up is superior to a strikeout in the overall scheme of things. The problem lies in it isn't a controllable act.

Online Ray D

  • Posts: 7355
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #146: December 30, 2013, 09:49:40 AM »
An infield pop-up is superior to a strikeout

Well, you can steal a base on a strikeout. Can't on a popup.

Offline UMDNats

  • Posts: 12914
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #147: December 30, 2013, 10:19:03 AM »
Sure you can, third strike gets away from the catcher allowing runner to advance or even score... Strike out pitchers tend to throw a lot more pitches though. Greg Maddux made a career of pitching to contact.

Is there proof to back this up? I'd like to see some actual evidence to this claim I always see. Just wonder if this is actually true or just a mindfact.

Online Ray D

  • Posts: 7355
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #148: December 30, 2013, 10:52:48 AM »
Is there proof to back this up? I'd like to see some actual evidence to this claim I always see. Just wonder if this is actually true or just a mindfact.
Depends on what you're comparing.   if you pitch a complete game shutout and strikeout 15, chances are you threw far fewer pitches than the average pitches per nine innings, because you probably were having a very good day, few walks,  and few runners reached base.  But suppose instead that you threw the same complete game shutout, same number of walks and runners, except you had two strikeouts.  Very likely the latter had fewer pitches.   There may be no data to prove that, it just seems like common sense.



Offline UMDNats

  • Posts: 12914
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #149: December 30, 2013, 11:08:24 AM »
Depends on what you're comparing.   if you pitch a complete game shutout and strikeout 15, chances are you threw far fewer pitches than the average pitches per nine innings, because you probably were having a very good day, few walks,  and few runners reached base.  But suppose instead that you threw the same complete game shutout, same number of walks and runners, except you had two strikeouts.  Very likely the latter had fewer pitches.   There may be no data to prove that, it just seems like common sense.


sure, but pitch-to-contact doesn't necessarily mean you're  getting quick outs all the time. in certain situations, like the one you presented, yeah, but i mean as a whole.

like, do guys with higher K/9s ("strikeout pitchers") throw more pitches than guys with lower K/9s ("pitch to contact")? i'm going to do some research and see if i can answer this for my own personal knowledge