Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Progressing Toward Better Stats Thread

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

  • Originally posted by Sultan_1895-1948 View Post
    Ok so just for an example. Maddux's away ERA is 3.36 (2.96 at home)....so 3.36/1.04 = 3.230

    From there, I need to get the NL league ERA from 1986 to 2008, and THAT'S the final number?
    Yes, that would be right. Now it is important to realize that modern pitching metrics do a lot to adjust pitching based on defense, and also based on even the opponents that a pitcher faces (teams).

    for example, if you look at the WAR data on BBRef, you see that Maddux has a 3.56 RA9 (total runs allowed per 9 innings, both earned and unearned). His opposition averaged 4.5 runs per game in those seasons. That would make his ERA+ 4.5/3.56 x 100 or 126. Then they show that he also had 0.11 saved by his defenses. That would boost his ERA to 3.67 versus 4.5 which would be a 123 ERA+. If we further adjust that by the road to overall ratio that you calculated we get a 120 effective ERA+ for Maddux.

    Mike Mussina meanwhile Allowed a 3.98, facied opponents who averaged 4.94 (124 RA+) had -8 defensive support which would push him to 4.94/3.90 or 127, and his road predicted ERA+ is 3.63 compared to his actual of 3.68 which would make him effectively 129 BUT we don't know if he faced the same offensive opposition on the road, and defensive support may also be better at home.


    But for starters yea, Road ERA/1.04 times the league ERA.

    Then there is the question of whether pitchers can pitch to their defensive strengths.

    Comment


    • Ok, did a handful of guys at the bottom of the first post, pre- league ERA numbers.

      So dividing away ERA by 1.04 is giving us expected OVERALL?

      Then do what with that? We can't multiply by league ERA or we get a huge number.
      Last edited by Sultan_1895-1948; 06-05-2014, 06:56 PM.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Sultan_1895-1948 View Post
        Ok, did a handful of guys at the bottom of the first post, pre- league ERA numbers.

        So dividing away ERA by 1.04 is giving us expected OVERALL?

        Then do what with that? We can't multiply by league ERA or we get a huge number.
        How about WHIP+? Instead of only relying on ERA+ to directly compare pitchers, WHIP+ could be used as well. OR use a pitcher's road WHIP to get expected/road predicted WHIP, similar to what was done for the hitters. In fact, that might be a better idea.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by layson27 View Post
          How about WHIP+? Instead of only relying on ERA+ to directly compare pitchers, WHIP+ could be used as well. OR use a pitcher's road WHIP to get expected/road predicted WHIP, similar to what was done for the hitters. In fact, that might be a better idea.
          Not a bad idea.

          Are you suggesting that expected relative ERA get added to expected relative WHIP the way SA and OPB were done, to create a final pitching number?

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Sultan_1895-1948 View Post
            Are you suggesting that expected relative ERA get added to expected relative WHIP the way SA and OPB were done, to create a final pitching number?
            No, but that's not a bad idea either. Makes sense.
            Last edited by layson27; 06-05-2014, 08:36 PM.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Sultan_1895-1948 View Post
              Ok, did a handful of guys at the bottom of the first post, pre- league ERA numbers.

              So dividing away ERA by 1.04 is giving us expected OVERALL?

              Then do what with that? We can't multiply by league ERA or we get a huge number.
              Divide the league ERA by the road ERA/1.04

              Comment


              • WHIP is a how stat and ERA+ is a what stat. ERA+ already captures all of the things WHIP cares about...and a bunch of things it misses. Adding them would be like adding Runs Created and hits. I don't see how this is beneficial.
                1885 1886 1926 1931 1934 1942 1944 1946 1964 1967 1982 2006 2011

                1887 1888 1928 1930 1943 1968 1985 1987 2004 2013

                1996 2000 2001 2002 2005 2009 2012 2014 2015


                The Top 100 Pitchers In MLB History
                The Top 100 Position Players In MLB History

                Comment


                • Thank you for the input Bo. We need others to chime in.

                  I've only done Walter and Grove so far. Even though Walter is only 1914-'27, I feel more confident than ever..my original thoughts confirmed, about moving Big Train down. A huge discrepancy in adjusted ERA+.

                  I think top ten, sorting by ERA+ might be more interesting than the hitters.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by brett View Post
                    I realized that I can compare the players' outs to the league rate of outs to figure out how many extra plate appearances a player like Ruth "earned for himself". Rbat already has a cost value of making outs. What I want to account for is that the low out producer is getting some of his extra plate appearances because he is saving outs.

                    So let's work through the math for Babe Ruth 1921, which I chose simply because it is the highest Rbat total in history at 116.

                    Rbat: 116 (above average)
                    PAs: 693
                    Batting outs: 336 (I will not look at Sacs or GIDPs at this point as they may be situational and also were not always official or kept stats. So I just take AB-H)

                    League runs: 6296
                    League PAs: 48698
                    League outs: 30280

                    The next part I am going to have to figure out how to put in into an algebraic equation later, but using plugging and checking I got that Ruth's 693 PAs were 103% higher because he made few outs. The average player would have gotten just 675.

                    (Basically and to within about 1 PA, The average player got 1.61 PAs per out. Multiplying by 336 outs that Ruth made, they would have gotten 540 PAs in the same number of outs that he got 693, however, only 1/9 of his 153 extra PAs would have gone to himself, so an average player in Ruth's spot would have only gotten 674-675 PAs while he got 693).

                    In 675 PAs the average player produced 87.3 Rbat.

                    Ruth had 116.

                    (116+87.3)/87.3= 2.33, or 233%, strikingly similar to his OPS+ of 238
                    Reading back through that post again, what you did was a lot of work but pretty telling.

                    Could you do that using only road numbers? Maybe for a Sandberg and a Mathews, so we can see two extremes.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Sultan_1895-1948 View Post
                      Reading back through that post again, what you did was a lot of work but pretty telling.

                      Could you do that using only road numbers? Maybe for a Sandberg and a Mathews, so we can see two extremes.
                      No, I can't directly do that with road numbers. The way to do it is to do it for overall numbers, and then multiply that by the ratio of their road predicted OPS+ to their actual OPS+.

                      Comment


                      • Ok, a few more pitchers done, at the bottom of the first post.

                        Gonna come back to it again...platoon.

                        Is there anything to be done about lefty pitchers facing righties about 70% of the time?

                        Comment


                        • Looking at a pitcher's road OPS against, would it be divided by 1.02 for overall, or 1.04?

                          Here's using 1.04 and using more stats league OPS number

                          Code:
                                    OVR     H       A       EXP     LG    OPSvs+
                          
                          Grove    .636   .638    .635    .6105    .793    129.8
                          Walter   .587   .557    .619    .5951    .697    117.1
                          Last edited by Sultan_1895-1948; 06-07-2014, 04:34 PM.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Sultan_1895-1948 View Post
                            Looking at a pitcher's road OPS against, would it be divided by 1.02 for overall, or 1.04?

                            Here's using 1.04 and using more stats league OPS number

                            Code:
                                      OVR     H       A       EXP     LG    OPSvs+
                            
                            Grove    .636   .638    .635    .6105    .793    129.8
                            Walter   .587   .557    .619    .5951    .697    117.1
                            OPS would be 1.02 but OPS+ would be 1.04. Its complicated though I think the ideal would be to find a pitcher's OPS+ versus and then their road predicted OPS+ against. You would get that by running their seasonal sOPS+ on the road weighted by innings. And then you divide that by 1.04. There are issues though because pitchers sequence differently. Ryan had a much better OPS+ than Seaver, but got hit so much worse with runners on base that his ERA+ is worse.

                            Comment


                            • Well thats nobody elses fault but his own LOL

                              That sounded like a few steps there. Do you mind running through one pitcher, to show the work?

                              Comment


                              • It's going to have to be tomorrow. It has to be done season by season the same way as with the first way we did OPS+.

                                I once wrote that Nolan Ryan was the greatest pitcher of all time-when he wasn't letting anyone get on base.

                                Comment

                                Ad Widget

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X