Next: Matt Maloney
From: Ron Johnson on
On May 30, 3:37 pm, Dan Szymborski <d...(a)baseballprimer.com> wrote:
> In article <1180506011.874274.45...(a)k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com>,
> coachros...(a)hotmail.com says...
>
> > On May 28, 3:09 am, Dan Szymborski <d...(a)baseballprimer.com> wrote:
>
> > > In other words, caring about how a particular hitter moves runners over
> > > with outs is akin to worrying about recovering the chewed gum in your
> > > ashtray when you find out your car is stolen.
>
> > Dont really understand that one at all. Of course, the ideal thing
> > would to move the runner along via a basehit, but if you cant, move
> > him along anyway you can.
>
> Because it happens so little and it's of such little value that it's
> irrelevant.

(I know Dan knows all of this. Just piggy-backing to his post)

It helps to look at it this way. With nobody on, all outs
are of equal value. Ditto with two outs.

That's a hefty chunk of all PAs.

And with the DP in order an out on a ball in play is very much
a mixed bag. Don't have the numbers handy, but something like
55% of ground ball outs are turned into DPs. And flyballs
that advance a runner from first are pretty rare.

Put it all together and what you're left with is PAs with
runners on second, second and third or third with fewer
than two outs. Somewhere around 9% of all PAs. And the
PAs with a runner with decent speed on second with one
out -- well a productive out really isn't that important.

Another way to look at this. We know that we can estimate
team runs scored to within about 20 runs most of the time
using the basic stats you can get from baseball-reference.

The biggest source of error is unquestionably clutch/timing
(depending on your religious views). I mean single/home run
is obviously better than home run/single.

Then you've got opposition errors. Scored as an 0-1
but in reality a baserunner with no outs. Happened
48 times to the Reds last year, and 87 times to
the Cubs. That's something on the order of 8
runs.

And you've got base running. It's no big deal, but
there are obviously a few runs a year at stake.
(I've only done a limited amount of work on this,
but from what I can tell the swing is about 7 runs
a year from best to worst. IOW somewhat similar
in magnitude to reached on errors)

Put simply, if Ks were important in modelling team runs
scored, our models wouldn't work. There's no room for
Ks to matter more than a couple of runs per team per
year.



From: coachrose13 on
On May 30, 3:37 pm, Dan Szymborski <d...(a)baseballprimer.com> wrote:
> In article <1180506011.874274.45...(a)k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com>,
> coachros...(a)hotmail.com says...
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 28, 3:09 am, Dan Szymborski <d...(a)baseballprimer.com> wrote:
> > > In article <1180251556.994061.294...(a)h2g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
> > > coachros...(a)hotmail.com says...
>
> > > > On May 27, 3:14 am, "Thomas R. Kettler" <tkett...(a)blownfuse.net>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > In article <1180246217.872889.186...(a)h2g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
>
> > > > > coachros...(a)hotmail.com wrote:
> > > > > > I dont like having a 200 a year strikeout player batting behind the
> > > > > > leadoff batter(assuming the lead-off is doing his job and getting on
> > > > > > base). Of course, Dunn will quite often, hit the long ball, or even
> > > > > > draw a walk, but I think far too often will strand the baserunner by
> > > > > > striking out or hitting a fly ball. A good #2 hitter, at the bare
> > > > > > minimum, should at least be able to move the runners along . I still
> > > > > > think you should bat him in the 6 hole, regardless. He can still drive
> > > > > > in a lot of runs from that spot, and when he is not hitting will not
> > > > > > hurt his team as much as if he were battting higher in the lineup. The
> > > > > > number 7 hitter, under ideal circumstances ( I know, I'm setting
> > > > > > myself up on that one!) is kind of like a lead-off hitter: his job is
> > > > > > primarily to get on base, so if Dunn is not hitting, it is kind of
> > > > > > like the top of the order after he hits(at least until the pitcher's
> > > > > > spot comes along!)
>
> > > > > There's a very good statistic for measuring how a batter moves runners.
> > > > > It is called the Slugging Average (SLG). Adam Dunn does that quite well
> > > > > with a career SLG=.514, 68th best of anyone ever in MLB. Also, a runner
> > > > > of 1st will advance on a walk which he draws roughly every 6th PA.
>
> > > > > Also, consider that Adam Dunn doesn't ground into many double plays.
>
> > > > Mostly because he stikes out so much, hits a lot of fly balls, and
> > > > bats left-handed, none of which usually moves the runner into scoring
> > > > position for the #3 hitter.
>
> > > You're overestimating how many productive outs a contact hitter makes in
> > > a year and how valuable a productive out is over a regular out.
>
> > > In the example of Freel being on 1st with nobody out, a walk is worth
> > > more than *5 times* that of a productive out relative to a non-
> > > productive out. A home run is worth almost *12 times* as much.
>
> > > If the choice was between Dunn making 0 productive outs a year and a
> > > league-leading player making in the mid-30s productive outs a year, the
> > > most negative possible scenario (and unrealistic as Dunn's made between
> > > 5 and 10 a year, a fairly average number), Dunn could wipe out an entire
> > > season of league-leading productive out-making with just 3 home
> > > runs or 7 walks.
>
> > No way of having a stat to tell how important moving runners along
> > is.You could move a runner over 10 times in a row and the hitter
> > behind you not drive him in a single time, or he could drive him in 10
> > times in a row. You would not get any stats to show you helped your
> > team,but anyone watching the game would know it. It's called teamwork!
> > Maybe Bill James could come up with something, but wait! He always
> > does AFTER the fact.
>
> That's an odd argument. You're essentially saying that using your
> mortgage payment for lottery tickets is a good idea because it COULD win
> 100 million dollars and you totally won't know until after the fact.


> Well, no, thats not what I am saying at all, essentially or otherwise, but if you say so......


> No, you won't know exactly what happens with any play in baseball - you
> go with what's likely.

EXACTLY! When you have Dunn at the plate, either with runners on or
not, you are far more likely to get a K than anything else, whether it
be a home run, base hit, walk, or even the dreaded "productive out"

And what's likely is that the amount of runners
> a batter advances on outs is so small and the advantage compared to a
> good play like the ones Dunn makes so miniscule that it doesn't matter
> in the realm of reality.
>
All I know is that when Dunn (or any at the plate) strikes out with
runners on base (as he will do far more often than he will do than
anything else) he has a very miniscule chance that he is going to do
anything at all during that at-bat to help his team win. Look at it
this way: if the Detroit TIgers could have struck out the Cardinals
during the WS last year instead of having the ball put in play back to
the mound and the Tiger's pitchers throwing the ball away, Detroit
would have won the World Series. You never know what is going to
happen when the defense has to make a play, even in the World Series.
The only stat I know in this instance to prove my point is that St.
Louis won the World Series.
> >
> In other words, caring about how a particular hitter moves runners over
> > > with outs is akin to worrying about recovering the chewed gum in your
> > > ashtray when you find out your car is stolen.
>
> > Dont really understand that one at all. Of course, the ideal thing
> > would to move the runner along via a basehit, but if you cant, move
> > him along anyway you can.
>
> Because it happens so little and it's of such little value that it's
> irrelevant.
>
Happens more often that you care to admit.
> --
> Dan Szymborski
> d...(a)baseballprimer.REMOVE.com
>
> "A critic who refuses to attack what is bad is
> not a whole-hearted supporter of what is good."
> - Robert Schumann- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -


From: coachrose13 on
On May 31, 6:02 pm, Ron Johnson <john...(a)ccrs.nrcan.gc.ca> wrote:
> On May 30, 3:37 pm, Dan Szymborski <d...(a)baseballprimer.com> wrote:
>
> > In article <1180506011.874274.45...(a)k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com>,
> > coachros...(a)hotmail.com says...
>
> > > On May 28, 3:09 am, Dan Szymborski <d...(a)baseballprimer.com> wrote:
>
> > > > In other words, caring about how a particular hitter moves runners over
> > > > with outs is akin to worrying about recovering the chewed gum in your
> > > > ashtray when you find out your car is stolen.
>
> > > Dont really understand that one at all. Of course, the ideal thing
> > > would to move the runner along via a basehit, but if you cant, move
> > > him along anyway you can.
>
> > Because it happens so little and it's of such little value that it's
> > irrelevant.
>
> (I know Dan knows all of this. Just piggy-backing to his post)
>
> It helps to look at it this way. With nobody on, all outs
> are of equal value. Ditto with two outs.
>
> That's a hefty chunk of all PAs.
>
> And with the DP in order an out on a ball in play is very much
> a mixed bag. Don't have the numbers handy, but something like
> 55% of ground ball outs are turned into DPs. And flyballs
> that advance a runner from first are pretty rare.
>
> Put it all together and what you're left with is PAs with
> runners on second, second and third or third with fewer
> than two outs. Somewhere around 9% of all PAs. And the
> PAs with a runner with decent speed on second with one
> out -- well a productive out really isn't that important.
>
> Another way to look at this. We know that we can estimate
> team runs scored to within about 20 runs most of the time
> using the basic stats you can get from baseball-reference.
>
> The biggest source of error is unquestionably clutch/timing
> (depending on your religious views). I mean single/home run
> is obviously better than home run/single.
>
> Then you've got opposition errors. Scored as an 0-1
> but in reality a baserunner with no outs. Happened
> 48 times to the Reds last year, and 87 times to
> the Cubs. That's something on the order of 8
> runs.
>
> And you've got base running. It's no big deal, but
> there are obviously a few runs a year at stake.
> (I've only done a limited amount of work on this,
> but from what I can tell the swing is about 7 runs
> a year from best to worst. IOW somewhat similar
> in magnitude to reached on errors)
>
> Put simply, if Ks were important in modelling team runs
> scored, our models wouldn't work. There's no room for
> Ks to matter more than a couple of runs per team per
> year.

MODELING??? I thought teams were actually trying to score runs. K's
only cost a team a couple of runs a year, huh? Stay with your fanasty
league all you want; I'll watch real baseball where it is ALWAYS more
important to put the ball in play than not.

From: Ron Johnson on
On Jun 1, 3:51 am, coachros...(a)hotmail.com wrote:
> On May 31, 6:02 pm, Ron Johnson <john...(a)ccrs.nrcan.gc.ca> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On May 30, 3:37 pm, Dan Szymborski <d...(a)baseballprimer.com> wrote:
>
> > > In article <1180506011.874274.45...(a)k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com>,
> > > coachros...(a)hotmail.com says...
>
> > > > On May 28, 3:09 am, Dan Szymborski <d...(a)baseballprimer.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > In other words, caring about how a particular hitter moves runners over
> > > > > with outs is akin to worrying about recovering the chewed gum in your
> > > > > ashtray when you find out your car is stolen.
>
> > > > Dont really understand that one at all. Of course, the ideal thing
> > > > would to move the runner along via a basehit, but if you cant, move
> > > > him along anyway you can.
>
> > > Because it happens so little and it's of such little value that it's
> > > irrelevant.
>
> > (I know Dan knows all of this. Just piggy-backing to his post)
>
> > It helps to look at it this way. With nobody on, all outs
> > are of equal value. Ditto with two outs.
>
> > That's a hefty chunk of all PAs.
>
> > And with the DP in order an out on a ball in play is very much
> > a mixed bag. Don't have the numbers handy, but something like
> > 55% of ground ball outs are turned into DPs. And flyballs
> > that advance a runner from first are pretty rare.
>
> > Put it all together and what you're left with is PAs with
> > runners on second, second and third or third with fewer
> > than two outs. Somewhere around 9% of all PAs. And the
> > PAs with a runner with decent speed on second with one
> > out -- well a productive out really isn't that important.
>
> > Another way to look at this. We know that we can estimate
> > team runs scored to within about 20 runs most of the time
> > using the basic stats you can get from baseball-reference.
>
> > The biggest source of error is unquestionably clutch/timing
> > (depending on your religious views). I mean single/home run
> > is obviously better than home run/single.
>
> > Then you've got opposition errors. Scored as an 0-1
> > but in reality a baserunner with no outs. Happened
> > 48 times to the Reds last year, and 87 times to
> > the Cubs. That's something on the order of 8
> > runs.
>
> > And you've got base running. It's no big deal, but
> > there are obviously a few runs a year at stake.
> > (I've only done a limited amount of work on this,
> > but from what I can tell the swing is about 7 runs
> > a year from best to worst. IOW somewhat similar
> > in magnitude to reached on errors)
>
> > Put simply, if Ks were important in modelling team runs
> > scored, our models wouldn't work. There's no room for
> > Ks to matter more than a couple of runs per team per
> > year.
>
> MODELING??? I thought teams were actually trying to score runs.

Right. But we work backwards from the runs scored and the
obseved events (including Ks)

Any time somebody proposes a new method of ranking players, the first
thing we do is test how well they work against team
runs scored.

> K's only cost a team a couple of runs a year, huh?

No. In fact Ks are insignificant to team runs scored. And have
been since the end of the dead ball era. Ks were important
to team runs scored back then (and probably in every level of
baseball below AAA). Not surprising, Error rates were
substantially higher. DP rates much lower.

> Stay with your fanasty
> league all you want; I'll watch real baseball where it is ALWAYS more
> important to put the ball in play than not.

How on earth would you know? Have you actually troubled to
check your assumptions?

The data's available. Grab the Lahman database from
baseball1.com. Load it into Excel (if you don't have
Excel and don't want to pay for it, R is freely
available) and run a multiple regression -- team
runs scored against the basic offensive stats.

I'm aware of more than a few published studies. They
all yield broadly similar results. It's a decade old, but you
can find a good discussion of Guy Tyler's study by
googling for Subject of "New Runs Created Formula"
Author Guy Tyler in rec.sport.baseball.analysis
(personally I checked. So did Jim Furtado and
others)

From: Kevin McClave on
On Thu, 31 May 2007 23:50:07 -0700, coachrose13(a)hotmail.com wrote:

>On May 30, 3:37 pm, Dan Szymborski <d...(a)baseballprimer.com> wrote:
>> In article <1180506011.874274.45...(a)k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com>,
>> coachros...(a)hotmail.com says...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > On May 28, 3:09 am, Dan Szymborski <d...(a)baseballprimer.com> wrote:
>> > > In article <1180251556.994061.294...(a)h2g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
>> > > coachros...(a)hotmail.com says...
>>
>> > > > On May 27, 3:14 am, "Thomas R. Kettler" <tkett...(a)blownfuse.net>
>> > > > wrote:
>> > > > > In article <1180246217.872889.186...(a)h2g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
>>
>> > > > > coachros...(a)hotmail.com wrote:
>> > > > > > I dont like having a 200 a year strikeout player batting behind the
>> > > > > > leadoff batter(assuming the lead-off is doing his job and getting on
>> > > > > > base). Of course, Dunn will quite often, hit the long ball, or even
>> > > > > > draw a walk, but I think far too often will strand the baserunner by
>> > > > > > striking out or hitting a fly ball. A good #2 hitter, at the bare
>> > > > > > minimum, should at least be able to move the runners along . I still
>> > > > > > think you should bat him in the 6 hole, regardless. He can still drive
>> > > > > > in a lot of runs from that spot, and when he is not hitting will not
>> > > > > > hurt his team as much as if he were battting higher in the lineup. The
>> > > > > > number 7 hitter, under ideal circumstances ( I know, I'm setting
>> > > > > > myself up on that one!) is kind of like a lead-off hitter: his job is
>> > > > > > primarily to get on base, so if Dunn is not hitting, it is kind of
>> > > > > > like the top of the order after he hits(at least until the pitcher's
>> > > > > > spot comes along!)
>>
>> > > > > There's a very good statistic for measuring how a batter moves runners.
>> > > > > It is called the Slugging Average (SLG). Adam Dunn does that quite well
>> > > > > with a career SLG=.514, 68th best of anyone ever in MLB. Also, a runner
>> > > > > of 1st will advance on a walk which he draws roughly every 6th PA.
>>
>> > > > > Also, consider that Adam Dunn doesn't ground into many double plays.
>>
>> > > > Mostly because he stikes out so much, hits a lot of fly balls, and
>> > > > bats left-handed, none of which usually moves the runner into scoring
>> > > > position for the #3 hitter.
>>
>> > > You're overestimating how many productive outs a contact hitter makes in
>> > > a year and how valuable a productive out is over a regular out.
>>
>> > > In the example of Freel being on 1st with nobody out, a walk is worth
>> > > more than *5 times* that of a productive out relative to a non-
>> > > productive out. A home run is worth almost *12 times* as much.
>>
>> > > If the choice was between Dunn making 0 productive outs a year and a
>> > > league-leading player making in the mid-30s productive outs a year, the
>> > > most negative possible scenario (and unrealistic as Dunn's made between
>> > > 5 and 10 a year, a fairly average number), Dunn could wipe out an entire
>> > > season of league-leading productive out-making with just 3 home
>> > > runs or 7 walks.
>>
>> > No way of having a stat to tell how important moving runners along
>> > is.You could move a runner over 10 times in a row and the hitter
>> > behind you not drive him in a single time, or he could drive him in 10
>> > times in a row. You would not get any stats to show you helped your
>> > team,but anyone watching the game would know it. It's called teamwork!
>> > Maybe Bill James could come up with something, but wait! He always
>> > does AFTER the fact.
>>
>> That's an odd argument. You're essentially saying that using your
>> mortgage payment for lottery tickets is a good idea because it COULD win
>> 100 million dollars and you totally won't know until after the fact.
>
>
>> Well, no, thats not what I am saying at all, essentially or otherwise, but if you say so......
>
>
>> No, you won't know exactly what happens with any play in baseball - you
>> go with what's likely.
>
>EXACTLY! When you have Dunn at the plate, either with runners on or
>not, you are far more likely to get a K than anything else, whether it
>be a home run, base hit, walk, or even the dreaded "productive out"
>
> And what's likely is that the amount of runners
>> a batter advances on outs is so small and the advantage compared to a
>> good play like the ones Dunn makes so miniscule that it doesn't matter
>> in the realm of reality.
>>
>All I know is that when Dunn (or any at the plate) strikes out with
>runners on base (as he will do far more often than he will do than
>anything else) he has a very miniscule chance that he is going to do
>anything at all during that at-bat to help his team win. Look at it
>this way: if the Detroit TIgers could have struck out the Cardinals
>during the WS last year instead of having the ball put in play back to
>the mound and the Tiger's pitchers throwing the ball away, Detroit
>would have won the World Series. You never know what is going to
>happen when the defense has to make a play, even in the World Series.
>The only stat I know in this instance to prove my point is that St.
>Louis won the World Series.
>> >
>> In other words, caring about how a particular hitter moves runners over
>> > > with outs is akin to worrying about recovering the chewed gum in your
>> > > ashtray when you find out your car is stolen.
>>
>> > Dont really understand that one at all. Of course, the ideal thing
>> > would to move the runner along via a basehit, but if you cant, move
>> > him along anyway you can.
>>
>> Because it happens so little and it's of such little value that it's
>> irrelevant.
>>
>Happens more often that you care to admit.

Coachrose13...you're out of your league with Ron (and Dan). I say that as
someone who is in the same boat, so take it for what it's worth.

At any rate, a friendly bit of advice, listen to what they have to say,
because you will learn something if you're open to it...and it won't
always jibe with your traditional thoughts on things. In fact,
"traditional wisdom" on a lot of baseball truisms is flat out incorrect.

******************************************************************
Kevin McClave

"To justify himself, each relies on
the other's crime." ~Albert Camus
******************************************************************
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
Next: Matt Maloney