FAQ and Forum on Advanced Stats

[southsider2k5]

MLB Pipeline ‏@MLBPipeline 1h1 hour ago

 

Top #13 picks in @MLBDraft history, by WAR: M.Ramirez, 69.2 Tanana, 57.9 Konerko, 28.1 Templeton, 27.6 G.Nolan, 25.9 A.Hill, 23.8 Sale, 22.9

[Rowand44]

Go number 13!

[witesoxfan]

10 years of team performance versus projections

 

This is an awesome article and those who question projections should find this to be a fairly informative read. They are imperfect and are not always right, but they aren't incredibly wrong, especially considering it's something that has yet to happen.

 

Also of note...dis graph

 

 

Over the last 5 years, the White Sox have actually underperformed their projections by 1 game, which means they've been pretty much spot on.

[southsider2k5]

10 years of team performance versus projections

 

This is an awesome article and those who question projections should find this to be a fairly informative read. They are imperfect and are not always right, but they aren't incredibly wrong, especially considering it's something that has yet to happen.

 

Also of note...dis graph

 

 

Over the last 5 years, the White Sox have actually underperformed their projections by 1 game, which means they've been pretty much spot on.

 

Interesting to see the Cubs and Red Sox as two of the bottom 3.

[Dick Allen]

10 years of team performance versus projections

 

This is an awesome article and those who question projections should find this to be a fairly informative read. They are imperfect and are not always right, but they aren't incredibly wrong, especially considering it's something that has yet to happen.

 

Also of note...dis graph

 

 

Over the last 5 years, the White Sox have actually underperformed their projections by 1 game, which means they've been pretty much spot on.

If I underestimate their win total by 10 this year, then overestimate their win total by 10 next year, would you consider me spot on?

[witesoxfan]

If I underestimate their win total by 10 this year, then overestimate their win total by 10 next year, would you consider me spot on?

 

If you did this for a few years for multiple teams, yes I would, and that maybe there was a flaw in your ability to project it per season but that, given a 324 game stretch, you were spot on, I'd say your analysis was very good and would be interested in reading how you came to those conclusions.

 

 

[Dick Allen]

If you did this for a few years for multiple teams, yes I would, and that maybe there was a flaw in your ability to project it per season but that, given a 324 game stretch, you were spot on, I'd say your analysis was very good and would be interested in reading how you came to those conclusions.

If I made a 2 year projection at the beginning, I would agree, but year to year with teams that change, to say spot on is silly. Once you are innaccurate, to look spot on, you can't get more accurate, but be innaccurate some more. The projections are fun to look at, and brings up discussion, but to say they are accurate isn't right. It is OK advanced stats is no more accurate in telling you how a season will unfold, than any ither way. If you knew, it would be boring.

 

 

Edited February 28, 2015 by Dick Allen

[chitownsportsfan]

If I made a 2 year projection at the beginning, I would agree, but year to year with teams that change, to say spot on is silly. Once you are innaccurate, to look spot on, you can't get more accurate, but be innaccurate some more. The projections are fun to look at, and brings up discussion, but to say they are accurate isn't right. It is OK advanced stats is no more accurate in telling you how a season will unfold, than any ither way. If you knew, it would be boring.

 

 

Who do you think is the best player in baseball and the 2nd best?

[Eminor3rd]

This could be huge, if it stands up to scrutiny: http://www.hardballtimes.com/fip-in-context/

[shysocks]

This could be huge, if it stands up to scrutiny: http://www.hardballtimes.com/fip-in-context/

I could stare at the final numbers all day but of course the first thing I did was look up Sox guys. Sale is a boss, as the article mentioned.

 

One observation - the only guys to sit under 70 (two standard devs., so theoretically the top 2% of pitchers) in each of the four years are Greg Holland, Kenley Jansen, Koji Uehara, Craig Kimbrel, and David Robertson. Duke also fared well last year which makes me think maybe the Sox have something like this internally.

 

Also, holy **** 2012 Craig Kimbrel.

[witesoxfan]

This is good stuff.

[chitownsportsfan]

This is good stuff.

 

I love the hardball times. cFIP makes sense, it's not perfect but it's better than FIP it seems.

[caulfield12]

22. Cincinnati Reds (76-86; Previous: 21) – It’s not so much that Brandon Phillips thinks on-base percentage is overrated, but that he believes MLB Network made it up.

[chitownsportsfan]

22. Cincinnati Reds (76-86; Previous: 21) – It’s not so much that Brandon Phillips thinks on-base percentage is overrated, but that he believes MLB Network made it up.

 

in the immortal words of Jeff Franceur "if it's so important, why don't they put it on the scoreboard?"

 

Sorry to tell Jeff I bet in the 5 years since he made that comment over half the teams have added OBP onto the scoreboard quick stats.

Edited April 3, 2015 by chitownsportsfan

[witesoxfan]

22. Cincinnati Reds (76-86; Previous: 21) – It’s not so much that Brandon Phillips thinks on-base percentage is overrated, but that he believes MLB Network made it up.

 

Thank you for bumping this thread.

 

Brandon Phillips has never been a player who has been about OBP. He is merely a player who hit for a good average with a lot of power and hit pitches he could hit hard (or, rather, pitches he believed he could hit hard; this is the mantra of every hitter who has ever played the game of baseball). During a player's younger days, he is able to have the strength, quickness, and flexibility to hit those pitches. As he ages, all 3 of those deter and they are no longer able to do so. Some players adapt to this, and learn to hit pitches they can hit and layoff others, while others do not. Brandon Phillips may be an example of a guy who has not learned how, or is instead learning how to deal with it. It does not mean he is a bad player, nor it does not mean he is no longer capable of being a high-ish ceiling player. He has been a good player every year of his Cincinnati Reds' career, and last year was no different, so criticizing him, among the plethora of holes they have throughout that team, seems to be picking on someone who deserves not to be picked on other than the fact that he has a bit of a b**** of a contract (because the likelihood of him living up to $39 million over the next 3 years seems to be dim given that he's 34 in June and at some point, he has to stop playing great defense and hitting for good power).

 

Brandon Phillips is a good player. Please (whatever the hell publication that was), don't pick on Brandon Phillips.

[shysocks]

Thank you for bumping this thread.

 

Brandon Phillips has never been a player who has been about OBP. He is merely a player who hit for a good average with a lot of power and hit pitches he could hit hard (or, rather, pitches he believed he could hit hard; this is the mantra of every hitter who has ever played the game of baseball). During a player's younger days, he is able to have the strength, quickness, and flexibility to hit those pitches. As he ages, all 3 of those deter and they are no longer able to do so. Some players adapt to this, and learn to hit pitches they can hit and layoff others, while others do not. Brandon Phillips may be an example of a guy who has not learned how, or is instead learning how to deal with it. It does not mean he is a bad player, nor it does not mean he is no longer capable of being a high-ish ceiling player. He has been a good player every year of his Cincinnati Reds' career, and last year was no different, so criticizing him, among the plethora of holes they have throughout that team, seems to be picking on someone who deserves not to be picked on other than the fact that he has a bit of a b**** of a contract (because the likelihood of him living up to $39 million over the next 3 years seems to be dim given that he's 34 in June and at some point, he has to stop playing great defense and hitting for good power).

 

Brandon Phillips is a good player. Please (whatever the hell publication that was), don't pick on Brandon Phillips.

Hey wait you're alive

[LDF]

 

ok, i need a little info to help me sort out this thing i am having a problem with. can someone, using the advance stat formula or whatever you use, can some one figure out the sox standings in the central with det and cle. i don't know if that can be done or not. i am not too knowledgeable with all that advance stat lingo.

 

my problem is, am i being too much of a white sox homier that i can't see the truth. i keep reading on how many are picking det to win and sox coming in 3rd in the central. with price being a better pitcher than sale.

[Eminor3rd]

ok, i need a little info to help me sort out this thing i am having a problem with. can someone, using the advance stat formula or whatever you use, can some one figure out the sox standings in the central with det and cle. i don't know if that can be done or not. i am not too knowledgeable with all that advance stat lingo.

 

my problem is, am i being too much of a white sox homier that i can't see the truth. i keep reading on how many are picking det to win and sox coming in 3rd in the central. with price being a better pitcher than sale.

 

It's complicated and fuzzy. It's really anyone's race. Any of the four AL Central contenders can dominate if "everything goes according to plan," but none of them are well equipped to deal with any significant issues, such as a key injury or two or a star player not living up to expectations. So the team that wins will be the one that mostly "does what they think they'll do."

 

The Sox biggest issues are that (1) John Danks and Hector Noesi both suck, seriously, no matter how much we want them not to suck, so they're going to have to perform significantly better than what they are likely to perform in order to not hold us back (which definitely CAN but probably won't happen), (2) we're a "stars and scrubs" team, in that we rely heavily on our core players to provide transcendent, elite level performance in order to be successful, so if one of them sucks or gets hurt, we see a huge dropoff in production in the replacement (and just by the law of averages, usually SOMEONE gets hurt), and (3) players that do what Avisail Garcia has done are usually terrible, so he's not projected well. We know he's got the tools and he could very well buck the trends, but we have to admit that historical precedent shows us that it's unlikely he does so.

 

It's a vague answer, but it's also the beautiful part of this sport. Anyone can take this thing. Just rest assured that this team has a real shot this year, because that's what matters most.

 

Don't stress, LDF, it's baseball time!

[LDF]

It's complicated and fuzzy. It's really anyone's race. Any of the four AL Central contenders can dominate if "everything goes according to plan," but none of them are well equipped to deal with any significant issues, such as a key injury or two or a star player not living up to expectations. So the team that wins will be the one that mostly "does what they think they'll do."

 

The Sox biggest issues are that (1) John Danks and Hector Noesi both suck, seriously, no matter how much we want them not to suck, so they're going to have to perform significantly better than what they are likely to perform in order to not hold us back (which definitely CAN but probably won't happen), (2) we're a "stars and scrubs" team, in that we rely heavily on our core players to provide transcendent, elite level performance in order to be successful, so if one of them sucks or gets hurt, we see a huge dropoff in production in the replacement (and just by the law of averages, usually SOMEONE gets hurt), and (3) players that do what Avisail Garcia has done are usually terrible, so he's not projected well. We know he's got the tools and he could very well buck the trends, but we have to admit that historical precedent shows us that it's unlikely he does so.

 

It's a vague answer, but it's also the beautiful part of this sport. Anyone can take this thing. Just rest assured that this team has a real shot this year, because that's what matters most.

 

Don't stress, LDF, it's baseball time!

 

oh i know it is B-time and i can't freaking wait for the sox to shove all the crap down those so called pro's throat.

 

i was just getting pissed at the lack of love for the sox side. dang, i guess i should have gotten used to it with the sCrubs on the north side.

 

many thanks and i appreciate it.

[OmarComing25]

It's complicated and fuzzy. It's really anyone's race. Any of the four AL Central contenders can dominate if "everything goes according to plan," but none of them are well equipped to deal with any significant issues, such as a key injury or two or a star player not living up to expectations. So the team that wins will be the one that mostly "does what they think they'll do."

 

The Sox biggest issues are that (1) John Danks and Hector Noesi both suck, seriously, no matter how much we want them not to suck, so they're going to have to perform significantly better than what they are likely to perform in order to not hold us back (which definitely CAN but probably won't happen), (2) we're a "stars and scrubs" team, in that we rely heavily on our core players to provide transcendent, elite level performance in order to be successful, so if one of them sucks or gets hurt, we see a huge dropoff in production in the replacement (and just by the law of averages, usually SOMEONE gets hurt), and (3) players that do what Avisail Garcia has done are usually terrible, so he's not projected well. We know he's got the tools and he could very well buck the trends, but we have to admit that historical precedent shows us that it's unlikely he does so.

 

It's a vague answer, but it's also the beautiful part of this sport. Anyone can take this thing. Just rest assured that this team has a real shot this year, because that's what matters most.

 

Don't stress, LDF, it's baseball time!

 

Regarding the first issue, where does Rodon fit in here? I agree that if we're relying on Danks and Noesi for the whole season we're probably doomed, but if Rodon can come in and hold down the #4 spot we should fare much better, at least that's the hope. I see that ZIPS projects Rodon to strikeout everybody but to have a ton of control issues. How should we take projections on guys that have no ML experience?

[Eminor3rd]

Regarding the first issue, where does Rodon fit in here? I agree that if we're relying on Danks and Noesi for the whole season we're probably doomed, but if Rodon can come in and hold down the #4 spot we should fare much better, at least that's the hope. I see that ZIPS projects Rodon to strikeout everybody but to have a ton of control issues. How should we take projections on guys that have no ML experience?

 

IMO, we should take them as really high variance guesses. I think that, in a way, things like the Rodon projection are the "x factors" in that they can skew the team wildly in each direction. He could really be the difference between being dragged down by a bad back-end or being vaulted to the post-season by an unexpected ace that gets use two or three extra wins in a tight division.

 

Awkwardly timely, here's this article about the "most vulnerable rotations," essentially an attempt to quantify rotation depth this year: http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-most-vu...tations-in-mlb/

[caulfield12]

IMO, we should take them as really high variance guesses. I think that, in a way, things like the Rodon projection are the "x factors" in that they can skew the team wildly in each direction. He could really be the difference between being dragged down by a bad back-end or being vaulted to the post-season by an unexpected ace that gets use two or three extra wins in a tight division.

 

Awkwardly timely, here's this article about the "most vulnerable rotations," essentially an attempt to quantify rotation depth this year: http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-most-vu...tations-in-mlb/

 

 

I guess there's my good argument for Dick Allen about the Royals, haha.

 

That Finnegan's one of the top 3-4 guys waiting there in the wings, along with Medlen, Hochevar, Kyle Zimmer, etc.

[bmags]

Jason Marquis is on the white sox?

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

Statcast makes it debut tonight on MLB network. What is statcast ? http://m.mlb.com/news/article/119234412/st...als-mlb-network . Basically it tracks everything happening on the field at all times. So supposedly defense can now be quantifiable. So if you are interested in seeing it in action DVR the Nats/Cards game tonight.

 

Other articles on it http://www.sportingnews.com/mlb/story/2015...anals-cardinals

http://www.foxsports.com/mlb/story/statcas...-network-042115

http://abcnews.go.com/Sports/wireStory/dat...uesday-30458034

 

[witesoxfan]

Statcast makes it debut tonight on MLB network. What is statcast ? http://m.mlb.com/news/article/119234412/st...als-mlb-network . Basically it tracks everything happening on the field at all times. So supposedly defense can now be quantifiable. So if you are interested in seeing it in action DVR the Nats/Cards game tonight.

 

Other articles on it http://www.sportingnews.com/mlb/story/2015...anals-cardinals

http://www.foxsports.com/mlb/story/statcas...-network-042115

http://abcnews.go.com/Sports/wireStory/dat...uesday-30458034

 

I will admit being a lazy drunk watching the game, but fielding has always been quantifiable. As has hitting, as has pitching. Lazy as I am, I will merely say that what sabermetrics is trying to do is to try and find better ways to quantify it.