Author Topic: Stats. Giggity!  (Read 6073 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline tomterp

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 27263
  • Hell yes!
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #50: August 14, 2012, 12:43:28 PM »
Zuckerman points out the Nats have scored more runs than any team in baseball since the All-Star break.    :shock:

Quote
As a matter of fact, did you know the Nationals have scored 170 runs since the All-Star break, most in the majors? Yes, you read that correctly. The Nationals have scored more times than any other team over the last month, an average of 5.2 runs per game. They've hit a collective .278 during that span while slugging .421.


http://www.natsinsider.com/2012/08/potent-lineup-deserves-praise.html

Offline Lintyfresh85

  • Posts: 33565
  • Lets go to work
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #51: August 14, 2012, 12:55:48 PM »
Zuckerman points out the Nats have scored more runs than any team in baseball since the All-Star break.    :shock:

http://www.natsinsider.com/2012/08/potent-lineup-deserves-praise.html


Cortisone for everyone!

Online JCA-CrystalCity

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 16866
  • Platoon - not just a movie, a baseball obsession
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #52: August 22, 2012, 10:50:08 AM »
Anyone know where you can find the % of a player's contact pulled, hit up the middle, an hit opposite field?  I looked at B-R and Fangraphs.  While they both have PAs/ABs with pull / CF / Oppo totals, they did not have % of contact each way.  I suppose one way to handle this is just to drop the data into an excell sheet, but, being old and not doing my own number crunching as part of my job since 1984, I don't work spread sheets well.

Offline Minty Fresh

  • Posts: 16160
  • ALL WAYS ARE MY WAYS!
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #53: August 22, 2012, 11:18:40 AM »
Anyone know where you can find the % of a player's contact pulled, hit up the middle, an hit opposite field?  I looked at B-R and Fangraphs.  While they both have PAs/ABs with pull / CF / Oppo totals, they did not have % of contact each way.  I suppose one way to handle this is just to drop the data into an excell sheet, but, being old and not doing my own number crunching as part of my job since 1984, I don't work spread sheets well.

www.i'mwaytooanalaboutstats.com

Offline Lintyfresh85

  • Posts: 33565
  • Lets go to work
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #54: August 22, 2012, 11:20:04 AM »
www.i'mwaytooanalaboutstats.com


That's a mod you talking to.

Watch out.

 :run:

Online JCA-CrystalCity

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 16866
  • Platoon - not just a movie, a baseball obsession
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #55: August 22, 2012, 11:43:15 AM »
But seriously, after the Boz piece about the change in hitting approach taught by Eckstein when we switched managers from Riggles to Johnson, you'd think it might show up in the numbers. If you can think of another way to test it, say so. 

Offline houston-nat

  • Posts: 15471
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #56: August 22, 2012, 11:53:33 AM »
Baseball Prospectus playoff odds: 100.0%
Odds of winning the division: 92.9%
http://www.baseballprospectus.com/odds/

Anyone know where you can find the % of a player's contact pulled, hit up the middle, an hit opposite field?  I looked at B-R and Fangraphs.  While they both have PAs/ABs with pull / CF / Oppo totals, they did not have % of contact each way.  I suppose one way to handle this is just to drop the data into an excell sheet, but, being old and not doing my own number crunching as part of my job since 1984, I don't work spread sheets well.


I might end up doing the math by hand. They list the amount of ABs and hits, after all, but I'd be afraid of screwing up the calculation by forgetting some aspect.

By the way, the Riggs/Johnson switch DOES show up in the success rates of our pull hitters, in terms of their averages and power numbers...

Online wpa2629

  • Posts: 15757
  • No Trade Clause
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #57: August 22, 2012, 12:47:16 PM »
All the Math Nerds on this board make me all warm and fuzzy - love your work fellas

I'm all Verklempt

Online PC

  • Posts: 38907
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #58: August 22, 2012, 12:49:52 PM »
You can't actually have playoff odds of 100% unless you've clinched a playoff spot. It's actually 99.??? until then.

Offline Minty Fresh

  • Posts: 16160
  • ALL WAYS ARE MY WAYS!
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #59: August 22, 2012, 12:58:22 PM »
You can't actually have playoff odds of 100% unless you've clinched a playoff spot. It's actually 99.??? until then.

Um, you can have any odds on anything.  It's up to the gambler to go with odds or against them.

Online PC

  • Posts: 38907
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #60: August 22, 2012, 01:46:08 PM »
It's even a bigger problem if you're betting. If one side of a bet has a 100% probability, how do you pay the bet if the other side wins?  The other side has no odds with which to calculate how much you'd win.

Offline Clever

  • Posts: 1092
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #61: August 24, 2012, 12:23:15 AM »
As far as I'm concerned the odds are zero until the magic number is zero.
 :evil:

Offline GMUNat

  • Posts: 5192
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #62: August 24, 2012, 01:08:10 AM »
It's even a bigger problem if you're betting. If one side of a bet has a 100% probability, how do you pay the bet if the other side wins?  The other side has no odds with which to calculate how much you'd win.

It's not 100%. It something like 99.99835%. So they would calculate the odds as 1/(1-.9999835). Or 1 in 60606 chance of missing the playoffs.

Offline Sharp

  • Posts: 3583
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #63: August 24, 2012, 08:09:34 AM »
It's not 100%. It something like 99.99835%. So they would calculate the odds as 1/(1-.9999835). Or 1 in 60606 chance of missing the playoffs.
On an unrelated note, poor Red Sox.

Offline Lintyfresh85

  • Posts: 33565
  • Lets go to work
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #64: September 07, 2012, 08:30:48 AM »
Desmond and Espinosa both at or over 4 WAR!

Zimmerman at 3.9. LaRoche at 3.1

What a stud infield!

:clap:

Offline Sharp

  • Posts: 3583
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #65: September 07, 2012, 08:47:47 AM »
Desmond and Espinosa both at or over 4 WAR!

Zimmerman at 3.9. LaRoche at 3.1

What a stud infield!

:clap:
Nationals infielders (not including catcher or pitcher): 15.2 fWAR
Astros' entire team (hitting and pitching): 15.3 fWAR

I admit I was hoping the Nats would edge them out.

Online JCA-CrystalCity

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 16866
  • Platoon - not just a movie, a baseball obsession
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #66: September 12, 2012, 04:01:00 PM »
If there is someone who works for Fangraphs who lurks or posts here, one of the other board members has been trying to submit to community research but has not been able to figure out how. I'd say it'd be Werth it.  PM me and I will pass this on without blowing your identity.

Offline Baseball is Life

  • Posts: 9398
  • Proud member of the Sunshine Squad.
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #67: September 12, 2012, 06:18:59 PM »
I've avoided reading this thread but I have to admit it's interesting. Probably won't come back though. :mg:

Offline GMUNat

  • Posts: 5192
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #68: September 12, 2012, 06:31:08 PM »
Nationals infielders (not including catcher or pitcher): 15.2 fWAR
Astros' entire team (hitting and pitching): 15.3 fWAR

I admit I was hoping the Nats would edge them out.

I think it would be interesting to see how the Nats would do if the rest of the non-infield was replacement level. Would they be as bad as the Astros.

Online Jordanz Meatballz

  • Posts: 3199
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #69: September 15, 2012, 07:47:56 PM »
This morning I imported a ton of data from Fangraphs into a database (anyone can do this, it's easy), and needless to say, I'm pretty bored.

Anyone have any obscure stats they'd like me to look up for them?  I originally did it to look at the best seasons by player-age, but I could probably look up about anything using queries.

Offline lastobjective

  • Posts: 4512
  • Natitude
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #70: September 15, 2012, 07:54:34 PM »
This morning I imported a ton of data from Fangraphs into a database (anyone can do this, it's easy), and needless to say, I'm pretty bored.

Anyone have any obscure stats they'd like me to look up for them?  I originally did it to look at the best seasons by player-age, but I could probably look up about anything using queries.
This might not be obscure, but of all the teams that have won the pennant, which had the lowest team batting average, and what was the team pitching stats? And vice versa, which WC team had the lowest team era and what was the team batting average?

Is that a query you can do :)? It's be interesting to see

Online Jordanz Meatballz

  • Posts: 3199
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #71: September 15, 2012, 07:57:53 PM »
This might not be obscure, but of all the teams that have won the pennant, which had the lowest team batting average, and what was the team pitching stats? And vice versa, which WC team had the lowest team era and what was the team batting average?

Is that a query you can do :)? It's be interesting to see

Sure.  All I need to do is make a table of all the pennant winners, which I'll start with, and then go from there.  Thanks for the idea.

Online Jordanz Meatballz

  • Posts: 3199
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #72: September 15, 2012, 09:48:36 PM »
Well, I think I was able to answer your question, but the answers aren't too meaningful because of the differences in environments.  This is for pennant winners (Keep in mind that the definition of pennant winners changed in 1969 with the institution of playoffs).

Pennant winners with lowest team batting average:


Pennant winners with lowest team ERA:

Offline welch

  • Posts: 8109
  • Griff says "Call young Mr. Souza"
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #73: September 15, 2012, 10:11:52 PM »
The '73 Mets had the most amazing season I've seen: finished 3 games over .500; slogged upward in the second half of the season, with Tug McGraw screaming "You gotta believe!!!" after every win; beat the Big (Bad) Red Machine in the NLCS. Lost to the great '70s Oakland team in 7 games.

The lists would probably have to be separated into pre-1920 and post-1920 teams.

'73 Mets team ERA: 3.26 (3rd in NL)  Team Ks: 1027 (1st in NL). Seaver pitched 290 innings, 251 strikeouts.

Offline lastobjective

  • Posts: 4512
  • Natitude
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #74: September 15, 2012, 10:20:35 PM »
Well, I think I was able to answer your question, but the answers aren't too meaningful because of the differences in environments.  This is for pennant winners (Keep in mind that the definition of pennant winners changed in 1969 with the institution of playoffs).

Pennant winners with lowest team batting average:
(Image removed from quote.)

Pennant winners with lowest team ERA:
(Image removed from quote.)


Thank you sooo much! Still interesting despite problems. Does fangraphs have adjusted ERA for the older teams? (ERA+ I think?)