OT: baseball stats are out of control

[darwinbulldog]

Originally Posted by HRBAKER

The nerds are here to stay.

ESPN is just data mining ex post facto. Nerds would know better than to focus on such stupid combinations of factors.

[frankbmd]

Spaeth considers himself a clean up hitter posting 2.40 times per day (PPD).

With this effort he has started 366 threads for an average of .221 threads per day (TPD).

His threads vary from banal to several exhibiting modest insight for a .323 thread relevancy rate (TRR).

Often seemingly obsessed with Kansas City, he tries to divert attention from himself by changing his avatar every 57.2 days (ACR).

His spell checker functions well with a spelling error rate of 0.02% (SER).

His grammar scores above the 95th percentile of the typical high school graduate.

It is not known whether he is a "bi-dextrous poster" or a "hunt and pecker".

Interestingly his email "tongue" reverts to a primitive dialect perhaps from his childhood.

Capitalization and punctuation vanish.

This form of communication is believed to originate from the Missouri River valley, but this is merely speculation on my part.

A background check in KC came back with only the following "Peter who?"

[Peter_Spaeth]

Mr. MD, it appears my TRR is higher than your AHR (attempted humor rate, defined as percentage of posts that are actually funny divided by those where you are attempting to be funny).

[frankbmd]

Even the best of sluggers have to put up a few singles. No one ever knocks it out of the park every time.

[RGold]

Lex clavatatoris designati rescindenda est.

[GoldenAge50s]

Originally Posted by RGold

Lex clavatatoris designati rescindenda est.

I thought we were not allowed to swear on this Board

[CW]

Originally Posted by frankbmd

Spaeth considers himself a clean up hitter posting 2.40 times per day (PPD).

With this effort he has started 366 threads for an average of .221 threads per day (TPD).

His threads vary from banal to several exhibiting modest insight for a .323 thread relevancy rate (TRR).

Often seemingly obsessed with Kansas City, he tries to divert attention from himself by changing his avatar every 57.2 days (ACR).

His spell checker functions well with a spelling error rate of 0.02% (SER).

His grammar scores above the 95th percentile of the typical high school graduate.

It is not known whether he is a "bi-dextrous poster" or a "hunt and pecker".

Interestingly his email "tongue" reverts to a primitive dialect perhaps from his childhood.

Capitalization and punctuation vanish.

This form of communication is believed to originate from the Missouri River valley, but this is merely speculation on my part.

A background check in KC came back with only the following "Peter who?"

Frank... if I ever get the chance to meet you I am going to:

a) buy you the beverage of your choice, and

b) give you an awkward man-hug.

You deserve both.

[steve B]

I also have mixed feelings on the stats being so detailed.

As many have said, on the face of it stats like that are beyond silly.

But..........

When I went to the SABR conference in Boston a few years back someone from the Red Sox gave a talk about the system that generates those stats. At the time there were only a few teams using the same system, and they all exchanged video of all at bats with notes on the details. The system could sort by any combination of details. So stats like the ones quoted were possible.

On of the things that struck me was that they weighted the value of a particular but of information based on age. His example was a particular pitch that Manny Ramirez had a hard time hitting. The number of times he'd seen that pitch while at a count that was more risky for him -like 2-2 or 3-2 wasn't a big sample. Maybe 10-12 at bats. And they extended into the previous season. (No secrets divulged, the "new" data he showed was a year or two old.) The 6 or so at bats the year before were all strike outs, but the ones that were newer were mostly strikeouts but included a hit and home run. What he said was that the older data showed that Manny had a serious weakness, the new data showed that He knew and had been working on it.

They used the data for selecting pitches, and matchups, and for finding places where their own players needed work. The story behind the data was that Manny was told he was vulnerable to a certain pitch and he scoffed until he was shown the at bats. That afternoon he insisted on seeing just that pitch for almost all of BP. And continued asking to see it a lot more.

It's not perfect, but can help spot tendencies and areas where some extra practice might make a player a bit better.

Steve B

[itjclarke]

After watching this World Series and having previously watched the Giants win 2x WS playing very clean D, I think defensive prowess is way way undervalued by today's stats. There was a lot of discussion in a couple previous threads, and apparently are a lot of defensive stats/metrics that made great defenders- the Mark Belangers, Keith Hernandezes, and even Ozzie Smith look less impressive, even marginalized since even the best defenders were not worth a huge number of saved runs (calculated how?)... whereas anyone who saw them play and knows the game, knows in their hearts how great they were/are.

I'm not exactly sure how those are all calculated, but the 1st two innings tonight are why I think those stats miss it. The Giants hit Ventura prettyy hard in their first two innings-- Panik smashed on in the gap, Morse pounded one in the corner, etc, but Cain chased them down no problem. These weren't spectacular diving catches, but are catches many guys don't make. Who knows what happens if there's a guy on 2nd, even 3rd with 1 out in those innings, as opposed to no on and 2 out. Conversley, Giants have a huge miscue, where Peavy yells at Belt to throw home, when only play was at first. At one point it was a hit, eventually I think changed to a FC. Regardless, this is not recored as an error, but that gaffe may well have led to 5-6 more runs in the innings. Ishikawa also has a little trouble getting to some balls quickly (love the guy regardless), which maybe Cain catches, or at least cuts off quicker. Stats cannot fully measure the value of turning an extra base hit into an out (especially mentally for the pitcher and frustrated batters), and cannot fully predict how badly a potential misplay can spiral out of control (see 7 run inning).

If I'm a GM, I want fast outfielders like these Royals, and I do not for a 2nd allow defensive metric to dissuade me. Great catches, quick innings inspire your own team and can rip the hearts out of offenses... and if I'm Boch, I start Perez in left again for the same reason.

Changing topic to game 7... no predictions on winners/losers, but am totally confident the Giants put this behind them and come ready. It's just what they do. Will be an exciting night for sure.

[ctownboy]

IMHO, Bochy might be a great manager but.......

If he would have looked at the stats before the World Series started, he would have seen that the Royals' hitters tee off on Peavy. Knowing that, he would have switched Hudson and Peavy in the rotation.

That way, Peavy would have only had to face eight hitters and the pitcher in San Francisco instead of nine hitters in Kansas City. Also, he would only have had to face the Royals once instead of twice.

Peavy was bad in his first outing and horrendous in his second. If Bochy would have looked at the stats he could have seen this coming and done something to prevent it....

David

P.S. - Nice to see the Royals in the Series (instead of the Yankees or Red Sox) but am cheering for the Giants since I am an NL fan.

[itjclarke]

Originally Posted by ctownboy

IMHO, Bochy might be a great manager but.......

If he would have looked at the stats before the World Series started, he would have seen that the Royals' hitters tee off on Peavy. Knowing that, he would have switched Hudson and Peavy in the rotation.

That way, Peavy would have only had to face eight hitters and the pitcher in San Francisco instead of nine hitters in Kansas City. Also, he would only have had to face the Royals once instead of twice.

Peavy was bad in his first outing and horrendous in his second. If Bochy would have looked at the stats he could have seen this coming and done something to prevent it....

David

P.S. - Nice to see the Royals in the Series (instead of the Yankees or Red Sox) but am cheering for the Giants since I am an NL fan.

Think that's oversimplified a bit. If the decision is Peavy or Bumgarner, or a 2012 Cain, 2010 Lincecum then yes, maybe it's a simpler switch. However if you've watched Peavy and Hudson in the 2nd half, Peavy was the Giants' clear #2 going into October, while Hudson had been fading since before the break. I think everyone and their mom was hearing about the Peavy vs Royals head to head stats, and am sure Bochy considered all that, but stuck to his rotation.. And was also aided in his decision by having Petit as a long/emergency man today, and possibly Bum tomorrow.

Clearly the Peavy situation spiraled too fast for the Petit move to save it. I also think the big inning was aided as much by the misplay at first and Peavy's calling home when the only play was at first, as it was anything else. This is part of the point I'm making about how statistically subtle defensive lapses (no error even) can spiral into much larger problems. Both teams are very good, play the game right and IMO are deserving champs. Glad to see two clean, fundamental teams going at it... And still think a measurement for the true value of an outfield like KC's has probably not been devised yet.

Re- Bochy, I still think this is his best managerial job with the Giants. I'm not trying to say he's the best in game or anything like that (though think he deserves HOF consideration, and should be a lock if they win a 3rd), but think compared to 2010 and 2012, this year's rotation is night and day. Those teams both had 3-4 legitimate #1 or #2 type starters. This team has 1, then drops off with 3-4 fives. Also losing Pagan has forced him to adapt and get a lot more creative with lineups and creating run scoring ops. He's a pretty adaptable manager and think he's continually coaxing great performances out of role guys, who he uses in the right roll.