Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Progressing Toward Better Stats Thread

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by layson27 View Post
    Keeping in mind Joe D's actual road OPS+ is 165, I'd say that's a very close approximation.
    See it works! We just calculated OPS+ two different ways and got the same answer.

    We found a player's (road) slugging and on base relative to the actual league numbers and then adjusted pitchers out and
    We took road s-OPS+ (with pitchers) season by season, weighted by plate appearances and then factored pitchers out.

    And I think the league OPS+ was more like .935 which would give us 166.4

    There is a tiny percent we didn't account for and that is that he should have hit in YS on the road a fraction of the time, and there's your other point and a fraction.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by brett View Post
      See it works! We just calculated OPS+ two different ways and got the same answer.

      We found a player's (road) slugging and on base relative to the actual league numbers and then adjusted pitchers out and
      We took road s-OPS+ (with pitchers) season by season, weighted by plate appearances and then factored pitchers out.

      And I think the league OPS+ was more like .935 which would give us 166.4

      There is a tiny percent we didn't account for and that is that he should have hit in YS on the road a fraction of the time, and there's your other point and a fraction.
      We'll have to wait and see if Mantle's "expected OPS+" matches his 166 road OPS+.
      And as I recall Williams' & Gehrig's road OPS+ were almost identical as well.

      Comment


      • I'm confused.

        Multiple directions we're going in now, but I wanna make sure, this one direction will lead to something.

        Bret...if I complete the right side of the chart I just posted, the one having to do with OBP, we will have ADJUSTED RELATIVE, or I guess just relative, SA and OBP. What can you do with those two final numbers?

        Also...for SLGeff.....the final number doesn't look clean or easily understood. Is there a way to put it into BA form or something?

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Sultan_1895-1948 View Post
          I'm confused.

          Multiple directions we're going in now, but I wanna make sure, this one direction will lead to something.

          Bret...if I complete the right side of the chart I just posted, the one having to do with OBP, we will have ADJUSTED RELATIVE, or I guess just relative, SA and OBP. What can you do with those two final numbers?

          Also...for SLGeff.....the final number doesn't look clean or easily understood. Is there a way to put it into BA form or something?
          For the first one, you take relative slugging plus relative OB minus 1. Then multiply the answer by your league OPS+ for the player's career. (and then multiply by 100 to make it an OPS+ type score)

          It would be "road predicted OPS+" or just predicted OPS+

          So a 1.63 relative slugging 1.16 relative OB%, you get 2.78. Subtract 1 to get 1.78. Multiply by the league OPS+ say .941 to get 1.67498. Then multiply 100 to get 167 (here you should round off to three digits.

          For SLGeff let me get back to you in 5 minutes.

          Comment


          • For slugging efficiency, on the one hand, I think people who have looked at stats of players know that if you can put up more than 1 total base per out, you are having a great season. For example in '98 McGwire had 383 total bases and 357 outs.

            In the past I have recommened not using rates per 27 outs because a player doesn't get 27 outs. If we though assume that a team has 459 outs per spot in the lineup in a 162 game season (162 x 25.5/9) we could multiply slugging efficiency by 459. Then it would look like a total base total for a full season. Total bases per 459 outs. 400 is awesome. Or if you double it it would be similar to an OPS+ score and probably mean about the same thing.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by brett View Post
              For slugging efficiency, on the one hand, I think people who have looked at stats of players know that if you can put up more than 1 total base per out, you are having a great season. For example in '98 McGwire had 383 total bases and 357 outs.

              In the past I have recommened not using rates per 27 outs because a player doesn't get 27 outs. If we though assume that a team has 459 outs per spot in the lineup in a 162 game season (162 x 25.5/9) we could multiply slugging efficiency by 459. Then it would look like a total base total for a full season. Total bases per 459 outs. 400 is awesome. Or if you double it it would be similar to an OPS+ score and probably mean about the same thing.
              Awesome Brett.

              I like how you're thinking outside the box.

              The first way makes sense, except the subtracting 1 and all that, but it's probably a stat thing over my head.

              For the SLGeff....I would really like to keep it to what the player and league did. Not sure about extrapolating that out to a whole season worth of outs for the one player. I do like the idea of getting a TB type figure but wouldn't we divide that by their actual AB to get something else? Or are we then back and square one.

              Man, how does this stuff not give you a headache.

              I'm through 1940 for AL and NL on the new SLGeff chart, since I have to re-do it. Only Ruth done so far...his Adjusted relative is 2.04. Very close to his actual OPS+

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Sultan_1895-1948 View Post
                Awesome Brett.

                I like how you're thinking outside the box.

                The first way makes sense, except the subtracting 1 and all that, but it's probably a stat thing over my head.

                For the SLGeff....I would really like to keep it to what the player and league did. Not sure about extrapolating that out to a whole season worth of outs for the one player. I do like the idea of getting a TB type figure but wouldn't we divide that by their actual AB to get something else? Or are we then back and square one.

                Man, how does this stuff not give you a headache.

                I'm through 1940 for AL and NL on the new SLGeff chart, since I have to re-do it. Only Ruth done so far...his Adjusted relative is 2.04. Very close to his actual OPS+
                Oh there it is. Adjusted relative slugging efficiency is similar to OPS+.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by bluesky5 View Post
                  The numbers. I certainly noticed the tinted pictures though. They make the cluttered effect you get with all the numbers on a spreadsheet dissipate completely. A very nice touch. :applaud:



                  Not sure if you were joking or not but I was shocked he beat him so handily too.

                  Interesting that in Musial's career he hit more HR: +29 and doubles: +61 at home than on the road but in his five best seasons he was way better on the road [except '51]. Can someone help me out here: did they change the dimensions at Sportsman's Park during Musial's tenure?
                  I wasn't joking, well the reference to Modern English was an attempt at one but I see it had an audience of none.

                  Back to the main point. This is some very interesting data. keep up the good work.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Sultan_1895-1948 View Post
                    Go easy Herr. I was kinda surprised too, even knowing Stans abilities. It was a whooping.
                    You are always defending these new guys against my old favorites.

                    HAHAHAHA!!! See how easy that happens?
                    "It ain't braggin' if you can do it." Dizzy Dean

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by brett View Post
                      For the first one, you take relative slugging plus relative OB minus 1. Then multiply the answer by your league OPS+ for the player's career. (and then multiply by 100 to make it an OPS+ type score)

                      It would be "road predicted OPS+" or just predicted OPS+

                      So a 1.63 relative slugging 1.16 relative OB%, you get 2.78. Subtract 1 to get 1.78. Multiply by the league OPS+ say .941 to get 1.67498. Then multiply 100 to get 167 (here you should round off to three digits.
                      So for Ruth, we have 3.22 minus one, so 2.22 times .94 x 100 = 208.68

                      Would that be 209 or 208?

                      Also, it seems that looking at a players league avg for their careers in raw OPS, would tell us much more about their hitting environment than OPS+. We would get more fluctuation because as you know, it's pretty much gonna be 94 or 95 for every player (except 1973-current AL).

                      If there's something we can do with that, can we look at the "more stats" OPS number, or is another data base required?

                      Comment


                      • JoeDbest10.jpg



                        SimmonSheffieldBest5.jpg
                        ----------------------------------------------
                        Last edited by Sultan_1895-1948; 05-26-2014, 04:52 PM.

                        Comment


                        • For those curious about Mr. Boggs............

                          BoggsBest10.jpg

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Sultan_1895-1948 View Post
                            So for Ruth, we have 3.22 minus one, so 2.22 times .94 x 100 = 208.68

                            Would that be 209 or 208?

                            Also, it seems that looking at a players league avg for their careers in raw OPS, would tell us much more about their hitting environment than OPS+. We would get more fluctuation because as you know, it's pretty much gonna be 94 or 95 for every player (except 1973-current AL).

                            If there's something we can do with that, can we look at the "more stats" OPS number, or is another data base required?
                            You would need to get raw yearly OPS averages. The "more stats" OPS numbers are park adjusted, just like the slugging & OBP numbers.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Sultan_1895-1948 View Post
                              So for Ruth, we have 3.22 minus one, so 2.22 times .94 x 100 = 208.68

                              Would that be 209 or 208?

                              Also, it seems that looking at a players league avg for their careers in raw OPS, would tell us much more about their hitting environment than OPS+. We would get more fluctuation because as you know, it's pretty much gonna be 94 or 95 for every player (except 1973-current AL).

                              If there's something we can do with that, can we look at the "more stats" OPS number, or is another data base required?
                              209.

                              No the only reason to use the 94 or 95 is to take pitchers out of the league. OPS+ for a player is compared to non-pitchers, but the league OPS+ includes pitchers which is why it is a little less than 100. We just want to multiply by the .93 or .94 to remove the pitcher's defecit from the league an bring it back to 100. OPS+ for non pitchers is already adjusted to the run environment to make it 100 in all seasons.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Sultan_1895-1948 View Post
                                For those curious about Mr. Boggs............

                                [ATTACH]139056[/ATTACH]
                                If we ever get the complete data I believe that we will find that Boggs relative OB% did not drop much on the road, but he lose 16-17 points off his OPS+ when adjusted. That is over half his Rbat, maybe 25 WAR. It drops him from 90ish to 65ish.

                                Also he is rated as much as 150 defensive runs worse in PCA. If that is right he'd be a 50 war player. I think he deserves some credit for learning to take advantage of his park, but I think he's around a top 60 player rather than a top 30 player.

                                Comment

                                Ad Widget

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X