Adam Dunn
in [Cincinnati Reds]
|
Next: Matt Maloney
From: RJA on 2 Jun 2007 15:24 "RJA" <rja(a)nospam.cinci.rr.com> wrote in message news:4661ba44$0$30634$4c368faf(a)roadrunner.com... > > "Ron Johnson" <johnson(a)ccrs.nrcan.gc.ca> wrote in message > news:1180801180.085792.6690(a)m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com... >> On Jun 2, 10:37 am, "Bob Braun" <oxspo...(a)hotandsunnymail.com> wrote: >>> "Ron Johnson" <john...(a)ccrs.nrcan.gc.ca> wrote in message >>> >>> news:1180722245.198328.125780(a)g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com... >>> >>> >> Situational hitting is a lost art, and >>> >> it's often times not discernable on a stat sheet. >>> >>> > Well we've got PBP data going back to the mid 50s (and beyond. >>> > We have most of 1911 for instance) >>> >>> So in 1974 I lined out to the second baseman, with a runner at second >>> and >>> nobody out. The runner was caught off the bag for a DP. >>> >>> Your data will show that I was attempting to move the runner? >> >> Well no. Just the results. We don't care about intent. >> Any more than we care about the intent we a guy gets >> sawed off and bloops something over an infielder's head. >> >> If they were *trying* to move runners along with greater >> frequency in the 60s but weren't succeeding often enough >> to matter (bear in mind that in the 60s, there were >> fewer opportunities to make a productive out. Fewer >> baserunners, a few more sac bunts) it's obviously >> of no particular importance. > > I have some questions that you might have stats for. > > 1) What percentage of at bats in which the ball is put in play result in > only 1 out? My bad. This one should read 1 out or less. > 2) What percentage of at bats which result in a K result in only 1 out > (99% + I assume) > 3) What percentage of balls in play move a runner? > 4) What percentage of Ks move a runner? > > That's all I need right now. > >
From: Ron Johnson on 2 Jun 2007 16:25 On Jun 2, 2:46 pm, "RJA" <r...(a)nospam.cinci.rr.com> wrote: > "Ron Johnson" <john...(a)ccrs.nrcan.gc.ca> wrote in message > > news:1180801180.085792.6690(a)m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com... > > > > > On Jun 2, 10:37 am, "Bob Braun" <oxspo...(a)hotandsunnymail.com> wrote: > >> "Ron Johnson" <john...(a)ccrs.nrcan.gc.ca> wrote in message > > >>news:1180722245.198328.125780(a)g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com... > > >> >> Situational hitting is a lost art, and > >> >> it's often times not discernable on a stat sheet. > > >> > Well we've got PBP data going back to the mid 50s (and beyond. > >> > We have most of 1911 for instance) > > >> So in 1974 I lined out to the second baseman, with a runner at second and > >> nobody out. The runner was caught off the bag for a DP. > > >> Your data will show that I was attempting to move the runner? > > > Well no. Just the results. We don't care about intent. > > Any more than we care about the intent we a guy gets > > sawed off and bloops something over an infielder's head. > > > If they were *trying* to move runners along with greater > > frequency in the 60s but weren't succeeding often enough > > to matter (bear in mind that in the 60s, there were > > fewer opportunities to make a productive out. Fewer > > baserunners, a few more sac bunts) it's obviously > > of no particular importance. > > I have some questions that you might have stats for. > > 1) What percentage of at bats in which the ball is put in play result in > only 1 out? (Sorry, can't locate all of my resources right now. I'm disorganized at the best of times and had to move a whole pile of stuff quickly in response to some plumbing problems) Outs on ball in play or balls in play? Do you want to include sacs in the totals? I can tell you that in the NL in 1995 there were 2935 groundball outs with a runner on first and fewer than 2 outs. Resulting in 1,692 ground into DPs (yes, 2,075 DPs. The remained ae lineout or outfield assists or ...) > 2) What percentage of at bats which result in a K result in only 1 out (99% > + I assume) Well there are CS + K. Not that common, but. > 3) What percentage of balls in play move a runner? Baseball Prospectus tracked this for ESPN in 2004. See: http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/stats/productive They're not exactly answering the question asked, the definition they're using: "a fly ball, grounder or bunt advances a runner with nobody out; when a pitcher bunts to advance a runner with one out (maximizing the effectiveness of the pitcher's at-bat), or when a grounder or fly ball scores a run with one out." Of course the Hardball Times has a couple of articles on the subject. Neither up to their normal standards in my opinion. > 4) What percentage of Ks move a runner? One of the Stats scoreboards has a list of rarest results. It was up there on the list. > That's all I need right now.
From: RJA on 2 Jun 2007 17:27 "Ron Johnson" <johnson(a)ccrs.nrcan.gc.ca> wrote in message news:1180815938.977518.114830(a)m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com... > On Jun 2, 2:46 pm, "RJA" <r...(a)nospam.cinci.rr.com> wrote: >> "Ron Johnson" <john...(a)ccrs.nrcan.gc.ca> wrote in message >> >> news:1180801180.085792.6690(a)m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com... >> >> >> >> > On Jun 2, 10:37 am, "Bob Braun" <oxspo...(a)hotandsunnymail.com> wrote: >> >> "Ron Johnson" <john...(a)ccrs.nrcan.gc.ca> wrote in message >> >> >>news:1180722245.198328.125780(a)g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com... >> >> >> >> Situational hitting is a lost art, and >> >> >> it's often times not discernable on a stat sheet. >> >> >> > Well we've got PBP data going back to the mid 50s (and beyond. >> >> > We have most of 1911 for instance) >> >> >> So in 1974 I lined out to the second baseman, with a runner at second >> >> and >> >> nobody out. The runner was caught off the bag for a DP. >> >> >> Your data will show that I was attempting to move the runner? >> >> > Well no. Just the results. We don't care about intent. >> > Any more than we care about the intent we a guy gets >> > sawed off and bloops something over an infielder's head. >> >> > If they were *trying* to move runners along with greater >> > frequency in the 60s but weren't succeeding often enough >> > to matter (bear in mind that in the 60s, there were >> > fewer opportunities to make a productive out. Fewer >> > baserunners, a few more sac bunts) it's obviously >> > of no particular importance. >> >> I have some questions that you might have stats for. >> >> 1) What percentage of at bats in which the ball is put in play result in >> only 1 out? > > (Sorry, can't locate all of my resources right now. > I'm disorganized at the best of times and had to move > a whole pile of stuff quickly in response to some > plumbing problems) Alright, well let us know when you get a chance then. > Outs on ball in play or balls in play? Do you > want to include sacs in the totals? I want something, anything, to make me understand how a K is the same as a ball in play in most situations so I'm asking questions. I'm not saying it's wrong, but I sure as hell would like to understand it. I can agree that with a man on first it's risky, but other than that I don't see it at all. The ball in play can lead to many things which are better than a strikeout in run scoring opportunities. I see way more good things happening than bad things, especially with RISP and less than 2 out and even with 2 out. > I can tell you that in the NL in 1995 there were > 2935 groundball outs with a runner on first and > fewer than 2 outs. Resulting in 1,692 ground into > DPs (yes, 2,075 DPs. The remained ae lineout or > outfield assists or ...) > >> 2) What percentage of at bats which result in a K result in only 1 out >> (99% >> + I assume) > > Well there are CS + K. Not that common, but. > >> 3) What percentage of balls in play move a runner? > > Baseball Prospectus tracked this for ESPN in 2004. See: > > http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/stats/productive > > They're not exactly answering the question asked, > the definition they're using: "a fly ball, > grounder or bunt advances a runner with nobody > out; when a pitcher bunts to advance a runner > with one out (maximizing the effectiveness of > the pitcher's at-bat), or when a grounder or fly > ball scores a run with one out." > > Of course the Hardball Times has a couple of articles > on the subject. Neither up to their normal > standards in my opinion. > >> 4) What percentage of Ks move a runner? > > One of the Stats scoreboards has a list of rarest > results. It was up there on the list. > >> That's all I need right now. > >
From: Ron Johnson on 2 Jun 2007 18:41 On Jun 2, 5:27 pm, "RJA" <r...(a)nospam.cinci.rr.com> wrote: > "Ron Johnson" <john...(a)ccrs.nrcan.gc.ca> wrote in message > > news:1180815938.977518.114830(a)m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com... > > > > > On Jun 2, 2:46 pm, "RJA" <r...(a)nospam.cinci.rr.com> wrote: > >> "Ron Johnson" <john...(a)ccrs.nrcan.gc.ca> wrote in message > > >>news:1180801180.085792.6690(a)m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com... > > >> > On Jun 2, 10:37 am, "Bob Braun" <oxspo...(a)hotandsunnymail.com> wrote: > >> >> "Ron Johnson" <john...(a)ccrs.nrcan.gc.ca> wrote in message > > >> >>news:1180722245.198328.125780(a)g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com... > > >> >> >> Situational hitting is a lost art, and > >> >> >> it's often times not discernable on a stat sheet. > > >> >> > Well we've got PBP data going back to the mid 50s (and beyond. > >> >> > We have most of 1911 for instance) > > >> >> So in 1974 I lined out to the second baseman, with a runner at second > >> >> and > >> >> nobody out. The runner was caught off the bag for a DP. > > >> >> Your data will show that I was attempting to move the runner? > > >> > Well no. Just the results. We don't care about intent. > >> > Any more than we care about the intent we a guy gets > >> > sawed off and bloops something over an infielder's head. > > >> > If they were *trying* to move runners along with greater > >> > frequency in the 60s but weren't succeeding often enough > >> > to matter (bear in mind that in the 60s, there were > >> > fewer opportunities to make a productive out. Fewer > >> > baserunners, a few more sac bunts) it's obviously > >> > of no particular importance. > > >> I have some questions that you might have stats for. > > >> 1) What percentage of at bats in which the ball is put in play result in > >> only 1 out? > > > (Sorry, can't locate all of my resources right now. > > I'm disorganized at the best of times and had to move > > a whole pile of stuff quickly in response to some > > plumbing problems) > > Alright, well let us know when you get a chance then. > > > Outs on ball in play or balls in play? Do you > > want to include sacs in the totals? > > I want something, anything, to make me understand how a K is the same as a > ball in play in most situations so I'm asking questions. Gotcha. Here's the deal. Including Ks in regression of team runs scored does not decrease the standard error. That said, Jim Furtado took a look at the matter by tracking Ks, non K outs, DPs Sac and sac flies separately. Here's what he got: (No idea how this'll all come out in terms of format. Out Events XR Coefficient Frequency (1998 AL) CS -.32 754 GIDP -.37 1772 SH .04 538 SF .37 711 K -.098 14438 Non-K Out -.090 42702 TOTAL 60915 Note that Jim didn't break down non-K outs to runners advancing and runners holding. Still, you can make a reasonable estimate of the frequency that a runner advances on an out given the values for SH and SF. Something close to 1.6% of all non-K generic outs give you a base for an out. No surprise that it's a low number since over 70% of PAs come with either two out or nobody on. Now there's a big problem for anybody understand statistics. We're talking differences in the thousandth of runs (between K and non-K outs) and the standard error is around 20 runs per 162 games (per team) In other words any minor gain is precision from breaking down the events is swamped by the noise. There's another issue. While I have no problem with DPs in modeling team runs scored, I regard any method that includes DPs for a player without adjusting for opportunities as a minor method error. Net DPs (IE DPs above what would be expected given the frequency that the DP is in order) fine, but that information isn't always available (or at least hasn't been available until recently) > I'm not saying > it's wrong, but I sure as hell would like to understand it. Basically what it boils down to is this. The gain from getting a base is substantially less than the cost of a DP. You throw in reached on errors and the ratio of events is such that it basically comes out in the wash. Note that it wasn't true before about 1920. It's certainly not true in A ball. Not sure about AA and I'm moderately confident it's true of AAA. It's certainly not true at the highest levels most of us ever reached. > I can agree > that with a man on first it's risky, but other than that I don't see it at > all. Thing is that PAs with a runner on first are so much more common than other situations. And one out, runner on second a runner advancement isn't worth much. > The ball in play can lead to many things which are better than a > strikeout in run scoring opportunities. I see way more good things > happening than bad things, especially with RISP and less than 2 out > and even with 2 out. Sometimes the discussion moves two ways. All anybody is asserting is that Ks are no worse than non-K outs. K versus ball in play (which includes the chance of a hit) is a whole different thing. The Reds wouldn't score more runs if they replaced Dunn with a guy with the same BA/OBP/SLG who never struck out. The Reds would score a ton more runs if Dunn could pull the trigger more often and retain the same (very high) level of results on his balls put in play. But there's no reason to think that's possible. It's kind of like saying Jason Tyner would be a great player if he could hit 30 HR (and keep the decent OBP he's shown in recent years)
From: Kevin McClave on 2 Jun 2007 22:45
On Sat, 2 Jun 2007 20:17:08 -0400, "RJA" <rja(a)nospam.cinci.rr.com> wrote: >Like Joe Nuxhall says, "If you swing the bat, >you're dangerous." Ozzie Guillen believed him. ****************************************************************** Kevin McClave "To justify himself, each relies on the other's crime." ~Albert Camus ****************************************************************** |