Author Topic: Errors, Sacrifices, fielder's choices and other OBP quirks  (Read 1091 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline UMDNats

  • Posts: 13518
  • hire a-rod
Re: Re: Extend Lind
« Reply #25: June 19, 2017, 04:25:52 PM »
this has become the worst thread in this forum's history

Offline spidernat

  • Posts: 66843
  • The Lerners are Cheap AND Crooked
Re: Re: Extend Lind
« Reply #26: June 19, 2017, 04:30:02 PM »
Also, this could be very subjective because not every runner that reaches base reaches because he "hit the ball well" or because of speed. Slow runners reach base on errors as well because not all errors happen in the infield. Plus, just because a fast runner reached base on an error doesn't mean he reached because of his speed. Sometimes, the fielders are just sloppy (for whatever reason) and sometimes they just boot a ball.




Offline varoadking

  • Posts: 19291
Re: Re: Extend Lind
« Reply #27: June 19, 2017, 04:41:39 PM »
This is the best argument for not changing it.
Not that it in actuality the best stat to measure the ability for someone to get on base.

Don't go gettin' all crabby on me now...  ;)

Online skippy1999

  • Posts: 14729
Re: Re: Extend Lind
« Reply #28: June 19, 2017, 04:45:49 PM »
this has become the worst thread in this forum's history

Amen, where is JCA when we need him to break out the stat geek nonsense to it's own thread that I can ignore?

Offline varoadking

  • Posts: 19291
Re: Re: Extend Lind
« Reply #29: June 19, 2017, 04:49:27 PM »
Amen, where is JCA when we need him to break out the stat geek nonsense to it's own thread that I can ignore?

It's always about you, isn't it...  :whistle:

Online skippy1999

  • Posts: 14729
Re: Re: Extend Lind
« Reply #30: June 19, 2017, 04:54:24 PM »
It's always about you, isn't it...  :whistle:

:crackup:  sorry, I'll stop interrupting the all important "what if the blue Father's Day hat distracted the 1st baseman but it seemed like the ball was hit hard at him too, how is the batter's OBP going to take that into account???" dialogue  :lol:

Offline aspenbubba

  • Posts: 3570
Re: Re: Extend Lind
« Reply #31: June 19, 2017, 05:20:51 PM »
this has become the worst thread in this forum's history
Guess what , I agree. Who the hell hijacked this thread. I wanted to make comparisons of the risk /reward of extending Lind and comparing him to Chad Tracy's tenure here.

Online Ray D

  • Posts: 9023
Re: Re: Extend Lind
« Reply #32: June 19, 2017, 06:15:43 PM »
Guess what , I agree. Who the hell hijacked this thread.

Guilty.  (But then, you did like my post!)

Offline bluestreak

  • Posts: 2813
Re: Re: Extend Lind
« Reply #33: June 19, 2017, 06:16:03 PM »
Guess what , I agree. Who the hell hijacked this thread. I wanted to make comparisons of the risk /reward of extending Lind and comparing him to Chad Tracy's tenure here.

I take partial responsibility. Sorry.

Offline spidernat

  • Posts: 66843
  • The Lerners are Cheap AND Crooked
Re: Re: Extend Lind
« Reply #34: June 19, 2017, 06:21:08 PM »
I own a large share of the blame as well. I didn't even realize that this thread was about Lind until aspen brought it up. :lol:

Offline aspenbubba

  • Posts: 3570
Re: Re: Extend Lind
« Reply #35: June 19, 2017, 06:36:01 PM »
I own a large share of the blame as well. I didn't even realize that this thread was about Lind until aspen brought it up. :lol:
I take partial responsibility. Sorry.
Guilty.  (But then, you did like my post!)
Keeeeeeeeeriste, you guys remind me of my younger  brother who confessed to crimes he never did. I wasn't serious or asking JCA to give you a timeout. Lets talk about Lind and Chad Tracy comparisons. I didn't realize he has a two year contract , sorta. Way to go Rizzo.

Online JCA-CrystalCity

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 23946
  • Platoon - not just a movie, a baseball obsession
this seems a little looser than our standard stat giggity stuff so I'm keeping this thread together in out of town with a link in the clubhouse.

Online HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 18698
This is the best argument for not changing it.
Not that it in actuality the best stat to measure the ability for someone to get on base.

if it was changed, odds are the stat would end up getting recalculated for historical games - the box scores are already archived on sites like baseball reference, so redoing the stats shouldn't be impossible

Offline dracnal

  • Posts: 1001
if it was changed, odds are the stat would end up getting recalculated for historical games - the box scores are already archived on sites like baseball reference, so redoing the stats shouldn't be impossible

But HS.... Wouldn't that require algorithms?  How can we possibly expect Jason to take time out of his DL recovery period to provide them for us?

Offline GburgNatsFan

  • Posts: 17808
:)

But HS.... Wouldn't that require algorithms?  How can we possibly expect Jason to take time out of his DL recovery period to provide them for us?

Offline mitlen

  • Posts: 52203
  • We had 'em all the way.
Keeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeriste   :panic:





:)

Offline comish4lif

  • Posts: 2841
  • Too Stressed to care.
I pulled the career ROE (Reached on Error) data and compared it to career plate appearances to come up with a PA/ROE figure. I did about 2 dozen players - the popular current Nats, the NL leaders in SBs, the NL Leaders in HRs, and our favorite lumbering slugger.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1XvTfrJ_A4w9DkkMwSYoBGevIQ_vZiwRnzUg5f_grTsg/edit?usp=sharing

Turner basic ROEs every 40 PAs. But that is in a small sample of time. Next closest is the speedy Jose Lobaton at 94. On the other end is Brewers speedster Jonny Villar who ROEs every 224 PAs.

Offline spidernat

  • Posts: 66843
  • The Lerners are Cheap AND Crooked
I'm only a little surprised about Lobaton. I believe they did this for a 45 year period and Joe Girardi, Mike Stanley and Bob Horner ended up in the top 10. :lol: The reason I'm still a little surprised about Lobaton is that reaching on errors can definitely be caused by speed, which he does not possess, but also it is about players with a lot of PA's who don't strikeout a lot and put the ball in play to the left side of the infield. That doesn't really scream Lobaton.


Wait, Adam Dunn ranks 24th on that list you posted?

Offline nats2playoffs

  • Posts: 21463
I'm only a little surprised about Lobaton. I believe they did this for a 45 year period and Joe Girardi, Mike Stanley and Bob Horner ended up in the top 10. :lol: The reason I'm still a little surprised about Lobaton is that reaching on errors can definitely be caused by speed, which he does not possess, but also it is about players with a lot of PA's who don't strikeout a lot and put the ball in play to the left side of the infield. That doesn't really scream Lobaton.

Wait, Adam Dunn ranks 24th on that list you posted?
Adam Dunn had 19 stolen bases in 2002.
http://www.espn.com/mlb/player/stats/_/id/4808/adam-dunn



If you are going to count errors in OBP, just make everyone have a minimum 300 BA, a 400 OBP... and give all players Participation Trophies.

Offline bluestreak

  • Posts: 2813
I guess it depends on what you believe stats are for. If you think that they are designed to "reward" players for doing what you think is good, then you should keep errors out. If you think stats should reflect what actually happens in reality (namely, a person's knack for, you know, actually getting on base), then you should include it. Because at the end of the day if you're standing on first it doesn't really matter how you got there as far as winning the actual game is concerned.


Offline mitlen

  • Posts: 52203
  • We had 'em all the way.
I guess it depends on what you believe stats are for. If you think that they are designed to "reward" players for doing what you think is good, then you should keep errors out. If you think stats should reflect what actually happens in reality (namely, a person's knack for, you know, actually getting on base), then you should include it. Because at the end of the day if you're standing on first it doesn't really matter how you got there as far as winning the actual game is concerned.



Are you sayin' an offensive player should get credit/rewarded for a defensive lapse?    (serious question)

Offline bluestreak

  • Posts: 2813
Are you sayin' an offensive player should get credit/rewarded for a defensive lapse?    (serious question)

I don't think of stats as rewards. I think it should reflect reality, not what we determine is good play. If there is evidence that some players get on base more than others because of errors that is valuable information and should be included in the stat.

I think it's completely reasonable to think that stats are for determining end of season awards and the like.  I just think that they are primarily for determining how much a player is going to help you win the game. And getting on base via an error undoubtedly helps you win a game.

Offline spidernat

  • Posts: 66843
  • The Lerners are Cheap AND Crooked
I don't think of stats as rewards. I think it should reflect reality, not what we determine is good play. If there is evidence that some players get on base more than others because of errors that is valuable information and should be included in the stat.




A perfect game/no hitter can be seen as a stat and yet some people want batters to not attempt to get on base late in one of these games by bunting even when the player at the plate may have a, you know, knack for reaching base by bunting and there is evidence to prove that he can do that more than others. Talk about determining what is good play.

Offline comish4lif

  • Posts: 2841
  • Too Stressed to care.
I'm only a little surprised about Lobaton. I believe they did this for a 45 year period and Joe Girardi, Mike Stanley and Bob Horner ended up in the top 10. :lol: The reason I'm still a little surprised about Lobaton is that reaching on errors can definitely be caused by speed, which he does not possess, but also it is about players with a lot of PA's who don't strikeout a lot and put the ball in play to the left side of the infield. That doesn't really scream Lobaton.


Wait, Adam Dunn ranks 24th on that list you posted?
It's Not 24th all.time. I just pulled the current Nats, some NL speedster and sluggers and an old favorite like Dunn. Some players end up where you think they should, others do not.

Offline spidernat

  • Posts: 66843
  • The Lerners are Cheap AND Crooked
It's Not 24th all.time. I just pulled the current Nats, some NL speedster and sluggers and an old favorite like Dunn. Some players end up where you think they should, others do not.


Thanks for the clarification. I couldn't find any stats for ROE. :?