tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16973584946139022782024-02-06T19:53:37.656-08:00Base Ball Web Logsimonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08053789051385270752noreply@blogger.comBlogger19125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1697358494613902278.post-24908408376326832052014-05-24T09:45:00.002-07:002014-05-24T09:45:58.466-07:00The Fracticality of BaseballThis afternoon I was struck by a thought. Maybe it's far off from what I usually write about; maybe not.<br />
<br />
Baseball has a rhythm to it, a natural timing, a flow.<br />
<br />
It's a different flow than other sports.<br />
<br />
Hockey has a furious pace, and can change instantly. A team can go from a scoring chance to being scored upon in mere seconds. Football is 5 seconds of mania followed by 30 seconds of getting up and walking around and preparing for the next play. Basketball is near-constant motion, but it's different too. There's so much scoring that a make or a miss is part of the flow.<br />
<br />
Critics of baseball say that it's boring and that nothing happens and that mostly there is standing around. The pitcher toes the rubber. Looks in. Gets the signal. Gets set. Winds up. And unleashes a baseball faster than a human should be able to throw a projectile of any kind. The catcher returns the ball to the pitcher, and the play begins again.<br />
<br />
Most of the time, the ball is not hit in play.<br />
<br />
But then, it is!<br />
<br />
What follows next is a furious flurry of motion: fielders charging or chasing the ball as the batter sprints down the first base line. Most of the time, he is out at first. Sometimes, he is not! The ball is in the corner as the batter rounds first! Or, maybe the hard hit ball goes over the fence!<br />
<br />
The ball ends up back at the pitcher. Who walks to the rubber, gets the sign, gets set.<br />
<br />
Baseball is anticipation, marked by special moments in time. The action is so wonderful because it comes from the calm on the field. The sport is set up so that batters mostly fail; this makes success special.<br />
<br />
In a game of baseball, it's true: mostly there is standing. The amount of so-called "action" is small, and irregularly spaced: we don't know when the line drive will be caught, or when it will go through the gap and to the wall. We don't know when we will see the greatest play of the day. Or something we have never seen before.<br />
<br />
That's within a span of three or four hours. If we zoom in to any single inning, say 20 minutes, the ratio of action to inaction stays about the same. A few hits, maybe. Some foul balls which might look good for a moment or two. Maybe even a run. Or a home run. Maybe something we have never seen before.<br />
<br />
Zoom in again. To a single pitch. 30 seconds. If we are following closely and know the pitcher, we might think we know what's coming, but really, we don't. All of the possible outcomes of a batted ball are still possible, from home run to double play to strikeout to spectacular diving catch. With the right pitcher on the mound, we might see a quality of pitch we thought impossible; the 105 mph fastball; the 80 mph angry knuckler; the 50 mph Zack Greinke slow curve. The gyroball. We might see something we have never seen before.<br />
<br />
Zoom out again. To a homestand; a road trip. Periods of unremarkable punctuated by moments of unpredictable with the chance to witness the unforgettable. A 9th inning comeback. Back to back home runs. GIDP with the bases loaded. A squeeze bunt. A double steal. A home run, robbed by the centerfielder.<br />
<br />
Zoom out some more. Now it's a week of 30 teams playing a hundred games. Mostly 1-4s, quality starts, usual saves, blowout victories. But among the masses, there are again those shooting star events. They are only predictable in that you know something somwhere is going to happen. Is it a player hitting home runs in 5 straight games? A no-hitter? A shortstop batting .700 for the week? Amidst the regular, there is always a trickle of irregular.<br />
<br />
Zoom out even more. Now it is a whole season. The sample sizes are larger now; the remarkable events longer and larger. That filthy splitter that was so noticeable during that one at bat now fades into the mass of hundreds and thousands of filthy pitches. That first-time 20 game winner. That 32 game hitting streak! The team with 7 players hitting 20 home runs. The contender falling from first to third and missing the playoffs. That upstart playing .800 ball in September to seize the wild card! Moments from all teams over all months. Surely there is something we have quite never seen before.<br />
<br />
Zoom out again. (Again?)<br />
<br />
To my lifetime of watching and following baseball. It's impossible to remember it all, but without the regular there would be no irregular. Those moments: Randy Johnson vs. Ichiro to lead off the all star game. Mark McGwire hitting #62. Joe Carter hitting The Home Run. Game 6 of the 2011 world series. Kerry Wood striking out 20. Pedro Martinez in 1999 and 2000. Mike Trout in 2012. Barry Bonds breaking baseball by being too good. These special moments or games or seasons that stand out, out of the thousands of individual games that each contain thousands of individual moments.<br />
<br />
I'm not done there. Baseball is alone in its timelessness, in the way that the numbers and letters on the back of a basebal card, in a box score, or now on fangraphs and baseball reference can make moments and seasons from long ago come alive. Zoom out to the history of the game, since it coalesced into the modern format just as the year was turning to 1900, and even beyond. Baseball fans know and recognize those seasons and eras and moments, good and bad, that have defined the game over 114+ years in the same way that a key strikeout, diving catch and three run home run can define a single game. The Black Sox scandal. Babe Ruth restoring the faith and interest in the game by hitting large home runs and living larger. His called shot. Lou Gehrig's sudden retirement from the disease that would bear his name. Satchel Paige, Josh Gibson, and the story of black players who would never be allowed to reach the major leagues. Joe DiMaggio and 56. Jackie Robinson! Bobby Thompson and the Shot Heard Round the World! Willie Mays sprinting away from home plate to catch a ball 450 feet away, then whirling to throw to the infield. Roger Maris and Mickey Mantle and the quest for 61 in 61. Sandy Koufax dominating the 60s from atop the mound at Dodger Stadium. Bob Gibson 1.12 ERA. The Big Red Machine. Cal Ripken and The Streak. Sammy Sosa and Mark McGwire. Barry Bonds. It's too early to tell what will emerge from our era as The Story, The Thing That We Will Remember.<br />
<br />
In the same time window, we see both the Pete Rose Good, and the Pete Rose Bad. With a different time perspective, it's not unlike a single desperate inning of ball. Down a run. Two outs. Time is running out, but it ain't over til it's over. The batter works the count. Fouls off pitches. Draws a walk! Hope is alive! And then that runner is promptly picked off first. Game over.<br />
<br />
Baseball is fractal in time. Whether you are looking at 100 years of history, or one at bat, there are these qualities that emerge the same. Inaction vs. action. A flash of brilliance. Something we have seen a thousand times before happening again. The chance to see something you have never seen before.simonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08053789051385270752noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1697358494613902278.post-53053789649613271072014-04-24T19:36:00.001-07:002014-04-24T19:37:07.952-07:00A sense of justice? <div dir="ltr">
Recently I wrote a giant post about Pedro Martinez. If you made it to the end of that one, you are a special breed. It was about how he was amazing in 99-2000, and, how did he lose 6 games in 2000? </div>
<div dir="ltr">
<br /></div>
<div dir="ltr">
As a part of that, I went back and watched game 5 of the 1999 ALDS where an injured Pedro came in to pitch 6 innings of no hit relief to save the game for the Red Sox. </div>
<div dir="ltr">
<br /></div>
<div dir="ltr">
As I always tend to do, here is the thought process: <br />
1. Pedro was amazing for the Red Sox for almost all of seven seasons.<br />
2. The Indians were damn good in 1999 and that lineup especially was ridiculous. This was Manny's 165 RBI season. And this was <i>after </i>Albert Belle had left the team. <br />
3. One thing that sticks out about those 90's Indians teams is their complete lack of a great starting pitcher. They had some good ones, but basically they were a supreme lineup and pitching was an afterthought. The only season over a 5 fWAR was Charles Nagy in 1996 with 5.7 (he went 17-5).<br />
4. What did the sox actually give up for Pedro? And why did the Indians NOT give that up for him? <br />
5. In his prime Pedro 1999 plus 1000-run Indians lineup equals... 27-2 season? How good could it get? <br />
6. I feel like I can list off a lot of the greatest ever pitching seasons. And I feel also like I sort of know who a lot of the dominant offensive teams were. But never that I can recall has there been a dominant pitcher at his peak, pitching for a dominant offense. <br />
7. Has there ever been such a combination? <br />
8. What did/would happen if there was? </div>
<div dir="ltr">
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br /></div>
<div dir="ltr">
The easiest thought to answer is the trade: The Red Sox traded Carl Pavano and Tony Armas Jr. to the Expos for one year of Martinez, then signed him to a 6 year $75M extension that made him (briefly) the highest paid player in baseball. In return, he delivered 53.8 bWAR / 55.3 fWAR - a total bargain.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
<br /></div>
<div dir="ltr">
This post is not about Pedro though. It's about what happens when a dominant starting pitcher has an amazing season for a dominant offensive team.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
<br /></div>
<div dir="ltr">
And the answer is... well, we don't really know. Because it has never really happened.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
<br /></div>
<div dir="ltr">
We are 113+ years into "modern" baseball, and this particular situation has never presented itself in full. And basically, what I am thinking of would be a W-L record that is off the charts for a top-line pitcher, like Mashohira Tanaka's 24-0 record in Japan last year. We look down on W-L because it doesn't tell the whole story for a pitcher. Except when it does (relax; another post, Simon.)</div>
<div dir="ltr">
<br /></div>
<div dir="ltr">
There are a few different ways I could do this, but the two important questions seem to be:</div>
<div dir="ltr">
1. How do I decide how good an offensive team is?</div>
<div dir="ltr">
2. How do I decide how good a pitcher is, independent of his team?</div>
<div dir="ltr">
<br /></div>
<div dir="ltr">
For both, I am going to use Fangraphs WAR. I choose fWAR because it ignores more of the "luck" of pitching that bWAR includes. I will use it for offensive team rankings because it includes defence, which should help boost the team's run differential (a metric which fluctuates wildly with era) and improve the pitcher's chances of a win.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
<br /></div>
<div dir="ltr">
By fWAR, there are 65 teams that have had a team batting WAR greater than 35.0. There are 85 pitchers that have had a fWAR greater than 8.0. Zero of those pitchers were on one of those 65 greatest offensive teams.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
<br /></div>
<div dir="ltr">
There are 234 teams that have had an offensive WAR greater than 30.0. Five of those teams have had a pitcher with an offensive WAR greater than 8.0:</div>
<div dir="ltr">
Christy Mathewson (9.9) went 37-11 with the 1908 New York Giants (34.3)</div>
<div dir="ltr">
Vida Blue (8.7) went 24-8 with the 1971 Oakland Athletics (32.8)</div>
<div dir="ltr">
Greg Maddux (8.0) went 19-4 with the 1997 Atlanta Braves (31.8)</div>
<div dir="ltr">
Stan Coveleski (8.1) went 24-14 with the 1920 Cleveland Indians (31.8)</div>
<div dir="ltr">
Roger Clemens (9.7) went 18-12 with the 1988 Boston Red Sox (31.7)</div>
<div dir="ltr">
<br /></div>
<div dir="ltr">
I'm getting to the point where this isn't really showing what I thought it might. Great pitchers having great seasons for great offensive teams... well, maybe they don't necessarily have great W-L records. Maybe within those good offensive teams there is enough random pitcher-to-pitcher variability in run support that looking at run support and consistency of run support might be a better way to find pitchers with much better W-L records than they maybe deserve.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
<br /></div>
<div dir="ltr">
In any case, never has an outstanding pitching season been paired with an outstanding offensive team. I hope I live long enough to one day see it happen.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
<br /></div>
<div dir="ltr">
This post did get me thinking about other things, which I may or may not write about:</div>
<div dir="ltr">
1. Pitching WAR vs Batting WAR, and how it relates to, you know, actually winning</div>
<div dir="ltr">
2. What's more important, pitching or batting?</div>
<div dir="ltr">
3. WAR/200 IP tells a different story of "most dominant pitcher ever" *cough*pedro*cough*</div>
<div dir="ltr">
4. Steve Carlton won a ridiculous percentage of his team's games in 1972</div>
<div dir="ltr">
5. There's something weird about Bert Blyleven's career. His 1973 season is fangraphs #3 WAR season ever, for a decent offensive team. And he had a mediocre 20-17 record. How do you do that?</div>
<div dir="ltr">
<br /></div>
simonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08053789051385270752noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1697358494613902278.post-4719433688506981972014-04-18T07:09:00.002-07:002014-04-24T19:37:33.236-07:00Third Time's the Charm<div dir="ltr">
This is the third time I have started writing this blog post, and it's starting to get annoying. I am in a car passing the time. I started writing twice on my phone and I guess don't know how to properly use the app yet so both of my drafts are gone. This attempt is on the iPad - hopefully it works. If you are reading this, it worked.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
<br /></div>
<div dir="ltr">
Okay. The title of this post <i>should</i> be and originally was: PedroBot2000.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
<br /></div>
<div dir="ltr">
This (of course) refers to the great Pedro Martinez, pitching what was his greatest season, in 2000. He went 18-6 with a 1.74 ERA. You could make the argument (and I'm not sure I would, but I also haven't looked closely enough) that this was the greatest pitching season there has ever been.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
<br /></div>
<div dir="ltr">
Quickly, I'll list some of the greatest single season pitching performances I can think of, in chronological order, not in the order I am thinking of them.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br /></div>
<div dir="ltr">
Old Hoss Radbourn, 1884</div>
<div dir="ltr">
Christy Mathewson, 1905</div>
<div dir="ltr">
Smokey Joe Wood, 1912</div>
<div dir="ltr">
Walter Johnson, 1912 or 1913</div>
<div dir="ltr">
Lefty Grove, 1931</div>
<div dir="ltr">
Sandy Koufax... Pick one from the mid 1960s</div>
<div dir="ltr">
Bob Gibson, 1968</div>
<div dir="ltr">
Steve Carlton, 1972</div>
<div dir="ltr">
Ron Guidry, 1978</div>
<div dir="ltr">
Dwight Gooden, 1985</div>
<div dir="ltr">
Roger Clemens, 1986</div>
<div dir="ltr">
Greg Maddux, 1994 or 1995,</div>
<div dir="ltr">
Steroid Roger Clemens, 1997</div>
<div dir="ltr">
Randy Johnson, 2001 or 2002</div>
<div dir="ltr">
Clayton Kershaw, 2013 (he was pretty freaking good)</div>
<div dir="ltr">
<br /></div>
<div dir="ltr">
And yes, Pedro. 1997, 1999, 2000, 2002. Even 2003. His 7 year peak is ridiculous. But 2000 stands out for a few reasons:</div>
<div dir="ltr">
1. A 1.74 ERA during the middle of the steroid era works out to a creepy-good 291 ERA+, the best of all time (or since 1880 which doesn't count in my books). That means he was 191% better than league average. Clayton Kershaw just won his second straight Cy Young award with a 194 ERA+. In the last 10 years, only two starters have gone over 200: Zack Greinke in 2009 (205) and Steroid Roger Clemens in 2005 (226)</div>
<div dir="ltr">
2. Hs WHIP was 0.737. That's the best ever for a starting pitcher. It's not that close, either. Only two others have gone below 0.8: Walter Johnson in 1913 and Guy Hecker in 1882. That's not normalized to era, so we can give Pedro extra credit for doing it in the crazy offensive era of 2000. </div>
<div dir="ltr">
3. His 2000 season is something that I can remember and appreciate. I watched Pedro do incredible and amazing things during this time and it was like nothing I have seen before or since. With Greg Maddux, his genius was in getting hitters to <i>just</i> miss and hit pop outs or meek groundouts. With Randy Johnson and Roger Clemens, they would attack hitters and occasionally lose. Pedro made batters look like children. He could see the holes in any swing, and attack mercilessly so it felt like they just did not have a chance. I felt like if he wanted the ball to move in a new way, he could just invent it on the spot. </div>
<div dir="ltr">
4. Pedro put up an 11.7 bWAR. Wow. There have been only 8 seasons since 1900 with better totals, and only 3 since Deadball ended: Steve Carlton 1972 (12.0), Dwight Gooden 1985 (12.2), and Steroid Roger Clemens 1997 (11.9). WAR is a counting stat; think of it as a product of quantity x quality. Clemens pitched 264 innings in 1997. Gooden pitched 276.2 innings in 1985*. Carlton pitched 346.1 innings in 1972. Pedro pitched 217 innings in 2000. To have a similar WAR in so many fewer innings, the quality would have to have been (and was) that much higher.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
<br /></div>
<div dir="ltr">
Pedro was so good that year that I want to go through the process of looking at his season closely, but in a different way: the perfect pitcher, the PedroBot2000. Pedro went 18-6 in 29 starts. How on earth did Pedro lose 6 games? He gave up 42 ER in 217 IP. How on earth did he give up any runs, let alone 42 of them?? Apparently Tanaka, the new Japanese pitcher for the Yankees, went 24-0 during a single Japanese season. How come this wasn't Pedro in 2000? And what would it have taken for something like that to happen?</div>
<div dir="ltr">
Game 1: vs Jamie Moyer, a 2-0 victory over Seattle. </div>
<div dir="ltr">
7IP, 2H (both singles) 2BB, 11K, 0ER, Game Score = 82. 108 pitches.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
Pedro: (1-0) 0.00 ERA</div>
<div dir="ltr">
A well deserved win. </div>
<div dir="ltr">
<br /></div>
<div dir="ltr">
2. Vs Kent Bottenfield, a 5-2 win over Anaheim. </div>
<div dir="ltr">
7.1 IP, 5H, 1BB, 12K, 1ER, GSc 75. 111 pitches.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
Pedro (2-0), 0.63 ERA</div>
<div dir="ltr">
PedroBot2000 leaves the game with one out in the 7th and runners on first and second. Derek Lowe comes in and promptly gives up an RBI single before retiring the next two batters. The run is charged to PedroBot2000, his first ER.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
<br /></div>
<div dir="ltr">
3. Vs Tim Hudson, a 14-2 win over Oakland.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
7 IP, 5H, 1BB, 9K, 2ER, GSc 67. 93 pitches.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
Pedro (3-0), 1.27 ERA</div>
<div dir="ltr">
Pedro gives up a home run to Olmedo Saenz to start the 2nd. Up 6-1 in the 3rd, he gives up another run on HBP-1B-1B. He then goes another 4 shutout innings, leaving after 7, up 14-2. Rough start for Tim Hudson!</div>
<div dir="ltr">
<br /></div>
<div dir="ltr">
4. Vs Rick Helling, 6-3 win at Texas.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
7IP, 5H, 1BB, 8K, 3R, 2ER, GSc 64, 103 pitches.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
Pedro (4-0), 1.59 ERA.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
After skipping a start, Pedro returns to beat the Rangers. In the bottom of the 2nd, Gabe Kapler reaches on E3, two runs score (one earned). In the 6th, Pedro gives up a solo HR to Ruben Mateo. The Red Sox score enough to win. </div>
<div dir="ltr">
<br /></div>
<div dir="ltr">
5. Vs Charles Nagy, 2-1 win over Cleveland's juggernaut lineup.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
7IP, 5H, 3BB, 10K, 0ER, GSc 74, 107 pitches.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
Pedro (5-0), 1.27 ERA. So far so good.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
Pedro shuts down the Indians over 7 innings, working out of a couple of jams. One thing I am noticing from doing this is how the Red Sox used their closer, Derek Lowe, that season. I hit his gave, he relieved Pedro in the 8th after Pedro hit the first batter of the inning. A two out save. This isn't the first time this pattern has appeared, either. Two out saves seem old fashioned, but this was only 14 years ago.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
<br /></div>
<div dir="ltr">
6. Vs Steve Traschel, 1-0 loss to Tampa bay (ouch).</div>
<div dir="ltr">
9IP, 6H, 1BB, 17K, 1ER, GSc 87, 130 pitches.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
Pedro L (5-1), 1.22 ERA</div>
<div dir="ltr">
Pedro records the first 6 outs by strikeout. In the 8th inning, a single, stolen base, and single leads to the game's only run. Sometimes baseball happens this way and Steve Traschel pitches a 3 hit shutout against you, but this first of 6 losses was clearly not on Pedro.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
<br /></div>
<div dir="ltr">
7. Vs Sidney Ponson, 2-0 win over Baltimore.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
9.0 IP, 2H, 0BB, 15K, 0ER, GSc 98, 113 pitches.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
Pedro W (6-1), 1.01 ERA.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
Since the end of 2000, there have been 11 games with a game score of 98 or better. 5 of those 11 were perfect games. This was Pedro's first of two 98s in 2000, an utterly dominant pitching performance. Pedro gave up both singles in the 5th inning; there were no base runners in any other inning.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
<br /></div>
<div dir="ltr">
8. Vs Chris Carpenter, 8-0 win over Blue Jays</div>
<div dir="ltr">
7.0 IP, 3H, 2BB, 6K, 0ER, GSc 75, 91 pitches.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
Pedro W (7-1), 0.90 ERA</div>
<div dir="ltr">
Pedro makes short work of the blue jays, needing only 91 pitches to get through 7. I haven't been loggi ng HBP, but Pedro hit 2 in this game. that was kind of his thing for a while.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
<br /></div>
<div dir="ltr">
9. Vs Chris Carpenter, 3-2 loss to the Blue Jays</div>
<div dir="ltr">
8.0 IP, 7H, 3BB, 7K, 3ER, GSc 60, 115 pitches.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
Pedro L (7-2), 1.19 ERA</div>
<div dir="ltr">
This is by far Pedro's worst start up to this point in the season. He gets torched for three whole runs by the blue jays and takes the loss. The first run scores on a wild pitch. The second run scores on a sacrifice fly. The third run scores on a Tony Batista solo shot. Tough loss. S far Pedro has not thrown a non-"quality start".</div>
<div dir="ltr">
<br /></div>
<div dir="ltr">
10. Vs Roger Clemens, 2-0 victory over the Yankees, at Yankee Stadium.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
9.0 IP, 4H, 1BB, 9K, 0ER, GSc 87, 128 pitches.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
Pedro W (8-2), 1.05 ERA</div>
<div dir="ltr">
Now this would have been a fun game to be at. Pedro out-duels Roger Clemens, who struck out 13 and did not walk a batter in throwing a complete game in the loss. The game was scoreless until Trot Nixon took Clemens deep with two outs in the top of the 9th. In the bottom, Pedro hit Chuck Knoublach, and allowed a single to Derek Jeter. Then he hit Posada with two outs to load the bases enforce getting Tino Martinez to ground out to end the game. Seriously, I wonder if this is in the MLB.tv archives...</div>
<div dir="ltr">
<br /></div>
<div dir="ltr">
11. Vs Bartolo Colon, 3-0 victory over the Indians.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
8.0 IP, 1H, 1BB, 10K, 0ER, GSc 89, 101 pitches.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
Pedro W (9-2), ERA 0.95</div>
<div dir="ltr">
After skipping a start, Pedro lowers his ERA under 1 on June 8 with a gem against the Indians, in another pitchers duel. The game was scoreless until the bottom of the 7th. The Red Sox scored 1 in the 7th and 2 in the 8th to pull out the win. Pedro gave up one double. This caps a 5 game stretch of giving up 0ER four times. </div>
<div dir="ltr">
At this point, Pedro has not yet received a no decision. He could easily be 10-1 or even 11-0 at this point. Of course, he could have also been 0-5 in 11 starts too. Baseball. But still, through 11 starts, he has allowed runs 5 times and allowed no runs 6 times.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
<br /></div>
<div dir="ltr">
12. Vs Roger Clemens, 2-1 loss at New York Yankees.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
6.0 IP, 6H, 2BB, 7K, 1ER, GSc 61, 100 pitches.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
Pedro ND, (9-2), 0.99 ERA</div>
<div dir="ltr">
In the bottom of the first, Pedro loads the bases with a hit by pitch and then walks in a run. Ouch. Clemens leaves the game after the first inning. Ramiro Mendoza comes in and pitches well. Nomad ties the game with a home run. Pedro leaves with the score tied. Tim Wakefield gives up the winning run on a solo HR to Tino Martinez in the 8th. Hard luck no decision for Pedro.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
<br /></div>
<div dir="ltr">
13. Vs Andy Pettite, 3-0 loss to the Yankees</div>
<div dir="ltr">
8.0 IP, 5H, 1BB, 9K, 3ER, GSc 68, 117 pitches.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
Pedro L (9-3), 1.18 ERA</div>
<div dir="ltr">
Pedro has faced the Yankees lineup in 3 of 4 starts. This time he gets Andy Pettite, who gets the best of him. All three runs in this game come from solo home runs: Jeter in the 4th, Bernie Williams in the 7th, and Paul O'Neil in the 8th. Stupid Yankees.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
<br /></div>
<div dir="ltr">
14. Vs Chris Carpenter, 6-5 loss to the blue jays, in 13 innings.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
6.2 IP, 6H, 1BB, 10K, 5R, 4ER, GSc 53, 134 pitches.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
Pedro ND (9-3)</div>
<div dir="ltr">
Imagine what would happen in 2014 if a manager sent his 5'11", 175 lb ace pitcher out for 134 pitches when he did not have anything close to a no hitter going? H would be universally blasted by media and hung out to dry. How the game has changed.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
Anyways, Shannon Stewart gets the jays in the board in the first with a solo home run. A HBP, error and a double score an unearned run in the 3rd. Tony Batista hits a solo home run in the 5th; Carlos Delgado adds a two run shot in the 7th. All four earned runs come on three home runs. If you are keeping score at home, it's 7ER on 6HR in two games, as the only earned runs allowed. I'm not sure if this is an indicator of talent or not. I think it speaks more to Pedro's apparent ability to keep runners off base, although HBP continues to be a problem! Then again, maybe he's just hitting guys he wants to pitch around instead of bothering to walk them. I've heard him (I think) say something like if you are going to walk a guy, why not just hit him and save a few bullets in your arm. Haha, Pedro.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
<br /></div>
<div dir="ltr">
15. Vs Bobby Jones, 4-3 victory over the New York mets</div>
<div dir="ltr">
7.0 IP, 5H, 1BB, 10K, 2ER, GSc 68, 104 pitches.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
Pedro ND (9-3), 1.51 ERA</div>
<div dir="ltr">
This start took place 18 days after his last start. Pedro hit the 15 day DL after his blue jays start. Apparently he had been feeling "tight" before that start, and the tightness persisted after his 134 pitch outing. Well.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
In this game, the mets scored one run in the second on back to back doubles, and another in the 7th on a Jay Payton solo home run. Pedro left the game after 7 with the game tied. The mets took the lead before the sox walked it off in the bottom of the 9th off of Armando Benitiez. All of these old names! What a trip down memory lane. Pedro certainly pitched well enough for the win, but picks up a no decision here.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
<br /></div>
<div dir="ltr">
16. Vs Javier Vasquez, 3-1 victory over the Montreal Expos</div>
<div dir="ltr">
8.0 IP, 5H, 3BB, 12K, 1ER, GSc 77, 128 pitches</div>
<div dir="ltr">
Pedro W (10-3), 1.49 ERA</div>
<div dir="ltr">
Pedro gave up a triple and a double in the 7th inning to bring in Montreal's only run and tie the game. Boston went ahead in the bottom of the inning to give Pedro the win. Of the three walks issued, two were to Vladmir Guerrero, who is not exactly known for his patience. It's interesting to me to think that part of the approach against the weak Montreal team would be to pitch around the only dangerous hitter in their lineup. Guerrero hit .345 with 44 home runs that year. 23 of his 58 BBs were intentional.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
<br /></div>
<div dir="ltr">
17. vs Mike Sirotka, 1-0 victory against the White Sox</div>
<div dir="ltr">
9.0 IP, 6H, 0BB, 15K, GSc 90, 131 pitches.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
Pedro W (11-3)</div>
<div dir="ltr">
The Red Sox won this game on an unearned run charged to Sirotka, who also threw a complete game. Pedro was dominant, clearly. He got 7 of his last 9 outs by strikeout. By game score, this was his third best start all year, and his third of four shutouts he would pitch.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
<br /></div>
<div dir="ltr">
18. vs Mark Mulder, 4-1 win over Oakland.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
7.0 IP, 4H, 1BB, 11K, 1ER, GSc 75, 109 pitches.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
Pedro W (12-3), 1.38 ERA</div>
<div dir="ltr">
Terrence Long led off the bottom of the first with a home run. That was the last run Oakland would score, not getting much going. Again, all the offence against Pedro came from the home run. Nomar hit a 2 run home run in this game. It is at this point that I am noticing that Boston in 2000 was not a very good team. They were in that they won 85 games and finished second in the AL East, but they were not deep and had few contributors. Nomar collected 7.4 WAR. Carl Everett added 4.6, and Trot Nixon 2.4. No other player was over 2. Only two others (Jason Varitek and Troy O'Leary) were over 1. That's not very good. Pitching wise, Pedro tallied 11.7 WAR, followed by the closer, Derek Lowe, with 3.5. Only two other pitchers reached 2.0: Tomo Ohka with 2.3 in 12 starts, and Rich Garces with 2.0 in a setup role. Not deep.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
<br /></div>
<div dir="ltr">
Boston finished first in the AL by a large margin, with a team ERA of 4.23. Take Pedro off the staff, and that jumps to 4.67, which would have been fourth. I might come back to this later. Turns out this is NOT a short post driven by my use of mobile devices, as I am home now and continuing on a real computer!</div>
<div dir="ltr">
<br /></div>
<div dir="ltr">
19. vs Freddy Garcia, 5-2 victory over Seattle.<br />
9.0 IP, 5H, 2BB, 7K, 2ER, GSc 74, 119 pitches.<br />
Pedro W (13-3), 1.42 ERA<br />
Pedro throws a complete game, gives up two runs, and his ERA goes up! Oops. The Red Sox go up 4-0 in the first, so Pedro cruises for the rest of the game. The Mariners mount a rally in the 8th inning, with 3 of their 5 hits in the game, to score two runs. Finally some good run support early!<br />
<br />
20. vs Ramon Ortiz, 2-1 loss to Anaheim.<br />
8.0 IP (CG), 3H, 2BB, 9K, 2 ER, GSc 77, 112 pitches.<br />
Pedro L (13-4), 1.46 ERA<br />
Another 2-run complete game, another increase in ERA. This is the fourth time this year that Pedro has thrown a complete game against a complete game by the opposing pitcher. He is 2-2 in these games. Ramon Ortiz throws a 2 hit one run gem to lower his ERA to 5.17. Pedro gives up a home run to Tim Salmon in the bottom of the second to go down 1-0. The other two hits are singles in the fourth inning. A single followed by a groundout to 1B where the red sox don't turn a double play*; the runner advances to second and is driven home by Garret Anderson. The red sox score one in the 5th, but it is not enough. Pedro loses a tough one!<br />
<br />
<i>*The batter is Mo Vaughn. How perfectly must he have hit his groundout to 1B so that they did not have time to throw to second to get the lead runner and throw back to first to get slow Mo?</i><br />
<br />
21. vs. Dave Eiland, 7-3 victory over Tampa Bay<br />
4.0 IP, 6H, 0BB, 6K, 3ER, GSc 44, 63 pitches.<br />
Pedro ND (13-4), 1.59 ERA<br />
This seems to have been a pretty exciting game (for the red sox). Boston fell behind early when Pedro gave up a 3-run home run to Miguel Cairo in the top of the 3rd inning. He left after 4 innings with some shoulder stiffness. Finally the sox decide not to roll the dice with their ace, coming off games with 128, 131, 109, 119 and 112 pitches since coming back from the DL, including complete games in the previous two games. In any case, the sox, down 3-0, come back to tie the game. In the bottom of the ninth, the Tampa Bay Devil Rays decide to intentionally walk Nomar AND Carl Everett to get to Rico Brogna with the bases loaded. And of course, Rico takes Billy Taylor yard for the walk off grand slam. I love when the intentional walk fails! Pedro snaps his streak of games with a Game Score of at least 50. More on this later, as long as I remember.<br />
<br />
22. vs Matt Perisho, 9-0 victory over the Texas Rangers.<br />
7.0 IP, 3H, 0BB, 10K, 0ER, GSc 81, 89 pitches.<br />
Pedro W (14-4), 1.53 ERA<br />
The sox ease Pedro back in, pulling him in this blowout win after only 89 pitches. Pedro cruises through the lineup, not walking a batter and striking out 10. It looks as though the extra rest from a less strenuous previous start did him some good! The game is 9-0 by the fourth inning, with zeros the rest of the way.<br />
<br />
23. vs. Mac Suzuki, 9-7 win over Kansas City.<br />
8.0 IP, 8H, 0BB, 6K, 6ER, GSc 48, 112 pitches.<br />
Pedro ND (14-4), 1.77 ERA<br />
This is the first (and only) start of the year where Pedro gives up more than 4 ER. The Royals get started early, scoring five runs on four singles and two doubles in the bottom of the first inning. Mike Sweeney adds a solo home run in the bottom of the second. Pedro then faces the minimum number of batters for the next six innings (a double play cancels a 5th inning leadoff single). That is how you give up six runs and get left in the game to finish eight innings on only 112 pitches. Remarkably, the red sox tie the game 6-6 and send it to extra innings. They score three runs in the top of the 10th, and Derek Lowe closes it out. Pedro breathes a sign of relief that his team wins his worst start of the season!<br />
<br />
24. vs. Dave Eiland, 8-0 over Tampa Bay.<br />
9.0 IP, 1H, 0BB, 13K, GSc 98, 110 pitches.<br />
Pedro W (15-4), 1.68 ERA<br />
After his worst start of the year, Pedro bounces back with maybe his best. He cruises through the Tampa Bay lineup. He has a perfect game through eight innings with 13 strikeouts. In the 9th, John Flaherty singles to lead off the inning, ending the perfect game and no hit bid. Pedro retires the next three batters to close out the shutout. I know that Tampa Bay was bad in 2000, but still, this was a dominant start.<br />
<br />
25. vs. Jamie Moyer, 5-1 win over Seattle.<br />
8.0 IP, 6H, 1BB, 11K, 1ER, GSc 76, 121 pitches.<br />
Pedro W (16-4), 1.66 ERA<br />
The Red Sox score 5 in the bottom of the third to give Pedro all the run support he needs. The lone run against Martinez comes on a Mike Cameron home run in the top of the 7th. Other than that, Pedro works out of a couple jams but strikes out 11 Mariners, including A-Rod thrice. Dan Wilson went 0-4 4K- congrats! As of this September 4 game, Boston is 71-63, 6 games back of the Yankees in the AL East.<br />
<br />
26. vs. Andy Pettite, 5-3 loss against the Yankees.<br />
7.0 IP, 4H, 2BB, 9K, 3ER, GSc 64, 119 pitches.<br />
Pedro L (16-5), 1.74 ERA<br />
Pedro allowed his first hit to David Justice in the 4th with two outs before retiring the side. He allowed another hit to Derek Jeter in the 6th, but got out of the inning with a double play. Finally, in the 7th inning, with the sox up 1-0, a single and a walk led to a two-out three-run home run by Scott Brosius. One mistake ruined what might have ended up as another fantastic start.<br />
<br />
27. vs. Charles Nagy, 7-4 victory over the Indians<br />
7.0 IP, 4H, 1BB, 10K, 3ER, GSc 66, 112 pitches.<br />
Pedro W (17-5), 1.81 ERA<br />
Pedro pitches four perfect innings before getting into trouble in the 5th, on a walk then two run home run by David Segui. Three singles around three strikeouts in the 7th lead to another run, but by then the sox are up 7-2 and cruise to the 7-4 win. Pedro dominated Cleveland in the 1999 playoffs, and appears to have their number again in 2000*. Then again, in those two years he dominated pretty much everyone!<br />
<br />
<i>*I spoke too soon</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
28. vs. Steve Woodard, 2-1 loss to Cleveland<br />
8.0 IP, 5H, 1BB, 9K, 1ER, GSc 76, 124 pitches<br />
Pedro L (17-6), 1.78 ERA<br />
Well, I was wrong about <i>completely</i> dominating Cleveland in 2000. The Indians get the better of Pedro this time, but that is mostly due to Steve Woodard (Steve Woodard?) shutting down the Red Sox for six innings, and the bullpen holding on. Pedro gets off to a rough start, giving up three singles to lead off the game without recording an out, leading to the game's first run. Pedro settles down and pitches 4 perfect innings before a lone single in the 6th. Despite allowing two more baserunners, Pedro faces the minimum 6 batters before leaving after the 8th, down 1-0. Cleveland gets one more run against Derek Lowe, and the sox can only manage one in the bottom of the 9th of Bob Wickman.<br />
<br />
Okay, last start. Is anyone still reading?<br />
<br />
29. vs. Kevin Beirne, 4-3 victory over the Chicago White Sox<br />
5.0 IP, 1H, 0BB, 6K, 0ER, GSc 71, 60 pitches<br />
Pedro W (18-6), 1.74 ERA<br />
By this point, I'm guessing Boston has conceded the Wild Card race and is just putting Pedro out there to pick up the W, which he does with ease. The game score of 71 for a 5 inning start ties for the 9th best score for a 5 inning outing, with 74 as the best ever. Only two of these games were no hitters, and both of those were games that ended after 5 innings. None of the games were perfect (0H, 0BB).<br />
<br />
So. Where does that leave us?<br />
Well, some of my impressions include:<br />
1. Pedro was remarkably consistent. I believe he gave up more than three runs only twice. That's amazing.<br />
2. He pitched less than 6 innings only twice, in that last 5 inning start, and in the 4 inning start where he came out with injury. That's consistency too. That's 25/29 "quality starts".<br />
3. The pitch counts in 2000 were allowed to be a lot higher than they are now. Pedro would not have averaged as many pitches per start... but maybe he would have been able to make all of his starts.<br />
4. I want to see how many games Pedro pitched something like: 7.0 IP, 5H, 1BB. That seems to be the most common line he put together. Depending on luck, the strikeouts and runs change, but those numbers appeared quite a bit, plus or minus.<br />
5. 17/29 starts, Pedro allowed fewer baserunners than innings (13-3). 3/29 he allowed the same number (2-0), and 9/29 times he allowed more baserunners than innings (3-3).<br />
6. The Red Sox averaged 4.51 runs during Pedro's starts. In 2000, that was bad. The league averaged 5.30 runs per game, and the sox themselves averaged 4.89. Tampa Bay finished last in the league with 4.55 runs per game. So, the sox offence behind Pedro was worse than the worst offence in the league.<br />
<br />
The league hit .167/.213/.259 against Pedro for the season. That average is the best for qualified starting pitchers since 1901 (and maybe ever).<br />
<br />
But...<br />
in chasing down some of these summary stats using an actual computer (where it's not so awkward as an iPad or phone), I made my way to fangraphs. As you may know, fangraphs uses a different (I think simpler) method for calculating pitcher WAR and how good of a season a pitcher has had. It uses FIP (fielding independent pitching), which depends on only the walks, strikeouts, and home runs allowed by a pitcher. Then it does some math and comes out with WAR based on era and context and how good "replacement players" were supposed to be at that time.<br />
<br />
Fangraphs lists Pedro's 1999 as better than his 2000, by FIP and by WAR. Superficially, it's easy to see why: both seasons were dominant. Of the four stats that really matter for determining WAR (K, BB, HR, IP), and considering that the context of both seasons were about the same:<br />
<br />
1999: 213.1 IP, 37 BB, 313 K, 9 HR<br />
2000: 217.0 IP, 32 BB, 284 K, 17 HR<br />
<br />
1999 has a few more walks, a few more strikeouts, but about half the number of home runs in about the same number of innings pitched. Fangraphs credits 1999 Pedro with the 4th best FIP ever (1.39 - imagine it is on an ERA scale). The only other seasons in the top 40 FIP since 1919 are 1984 (not 1985) Dwight Gooden (18th - 1.69) and 1968 Bob Gibson (29th - 1.77).<br />
<br />
Now I'm really off on a tangent. And since it was kind of exhausting and a little boring to do (and probably to read) the game by game of 2000, I'm not doing that again for 1999. No!<br />
<br />
I think that the difference between 1999 and 2000 may boil down to some chance and luck. How about that?<br />
<br />
Batting average on balls in play (BABIP) varies from year to year, for both hitters and pitchers. Some hitters and pitchers have shown an ability to keep this high or low consistently, but for the most part it fluctuates and has a lot of impact on whether a player appears to have a good season or not. Is the player hitting line drives into the gaps or at fielders? Hitting ground balls through holes or where they can be turned into outs?<br />
<br />
Pedro's BABIP in 1999 was .325, the highest of his career for any full season.<br />
Pedro's BABIP in 2000 was .237, the lowest of his career for any full season.<br />
<br />
Together, they average out to .281. His career BABIP is .282.<br />
<br />
BABIP is calculated like this:<br />
(Hits - HR) / (AB - SO - HR + SF)<br />
<br />
1999: (160 - 9) / (780 - 313 - 9 + 6) = (151) / (464)<br />
<br />
2000: (128 - 17) / (768 - 284 - 17 + 1) = (111) / (468)<br />
<br />
In 1999, Pedro's HR/9 was 0.38 (home runs allowed per 9 innings). In 2000, his HR/9 was 0.71. His career average was 0.76. In general, his stats from 1997 - 2003 (with the exception of 1998, his first year with the red sox) show a relationship between BABIP and HR/9. Lower BABIPs go with higher HR/9, and vice versa. This makes sense. Balls that leave the park are not counted in BABIP since they are technically out of play.<br />
<br />
Let's reverse the home run totals from 1999 and 2000 and see what we get. We are just changing the number of hits that instead went over the fence.<br />
<br />
1999: (160 - 17) / (780 - 313 - 17 + 6) = (143) / (456) = .314<br />
2000: (128 - 9) / (768 - 264 - 9 + 1) = (119) / (476) = .250<br />
<br />
There is a change. Not a huge change, but a change. What I am suggesting is that 1999 Pedro's very low HR rate, combined with his excellent strikeout and walk rates, causes his 1999 FIP to be lower than his 2000 FIP and therefore considered better by Fangraphs. Fangraphs says that he had an unlucky BABIP in 1999, and doesn't care about hits allowed when considering his season. Pedro had almost the same season in 2000, but managed to give up 32 fewer hits and 7 fewer runs while allowing 8 more home runs with a career low BABIP and career normal HR rate.<br />
<br />
This is getting confusing. The reason for this long long long post was to marvel at the brilliance of PedroBot2000.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Three months later, I'm just going to post this monster so that I can get on to other stuff - I still can't get past having an unfinished post and working on another one.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br /></div>
<div dir="ltr">
<br /></div>
<div dir="ltr">
<br /></div>
<div dir="ltr">
<br /></div>
simonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08053789051385270752noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1697358494613902278.post-91016408428146691692013-12-31T13:23:00.001-08:002013-12-31T13:23:57.605-08:00My 2014 HOF Ballot**I don't have an actual HOF vote.<br />
<br />
<br />
The 2014 Baseball Hall of Fame Ballot looks like this:<br />
<a href="http://www.baseball-reference.com/awards/hof_2014.shtml">http://www.baseball-reference.com/awards/hof_2014.shtml</a><br />
<br />
There are three managers that have already been voted in by some sort of Veteran's Committee: Bobby Cox, Tony LaRussa, and Joe Torre. Good for them - it's pretty fuzzy trying to judge which managers deserve to be in the HOF, as far as I am concerned.<br />
<br />
There are 17 players who<br />
a) Received at least 5% of the vote last year<br />
b) Received lower than the 75% they would need to get elected - nobody got elected last year<br />
c) Have been on the ballot for less than 15 years<br />
<br />
As such they remain on the ballot this year:<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg68sVp5LhjcA1wU94eXoeqqtONTYljcyj1KARdPQOCvuEHqxkIUkQp1M4F0kjqYWSTwW0VZ2CfbYm_Utg9BcpWtPc1kciXIE0XjwTeG3hiLyTV9H6OyOP5OSRWgfXVxHiJ2crDKp39lLCO/s1600/Leftovers1.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg68sVp5LhjcA1wU94eXoeqqtONTYljcyj1KARdPQOCvuEHqxkIUkQp1M4F0kjqYWSTwW0VZ2CfbYm_Utg9BcpWtPc1kciXIE0XjwTeG3hiLyTV9H6OyOP5OSRWgfXVxHiJ2crDKp39lLCO/s1600/Leftovers1.png" /></a></div>
<br />
The headers are:<br />
YoB = Years on ballot as of this year - for example, this is Fred McGriff's 5th year on the ballot.<br />
%vote = percentage of votes received last time<br />
HOFm = bbref's Bill James Hall of Fame Monitor score, where over 100 is a likely HOF<br />
HOFs = bbref's Bill James Hall of Standards, where 50 is an average HOF<br />
Yrs = years in the big leagues<br />
WAR = career Wins Above Replacement<br />
WAR7 = The total WAR of the best consecutive 7 year period of that player's career<br />
JAWS = (WAR + WAR7) / 2 --> A HOF standards scale developed by Jay Jaffe which attempts to combine longevity and peak to compare a player to existing HOF standards at his position. If a player's JAWS is better than the existing mean standard, he probably belongs in the Hall.<br />
Jpos = The average JAWS score for that player's main position (eg. first basemen = 54.0)<br />
<br />
Okay.<br />
<br />
There are also 19 new players on the ballot. They are nominated by some HOF committee and are players that have had at least good careers that have been retired or inactive for at least 5 years. There are players here that do not have a chance of being elected, but someone has decided that they deserve to have some sort of honour of being on the ballot. Good for them - to make this list, a player was probably a solid major leaguer for at least 10 seasons, which is not a small deal.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjj7UafNqKerkV_vHBFys44TLO-ICb3V2i5GvZavCdANBmp8Zi8DSB7rVp8uOCyhbbb1e6r1c5xl2NYX-gL9_nSraqU83VY4npRzhm0pZEpsOl5H77m0cmwJiZLs3SEBg9dWLynMc11xOMN/s1600/Newcomers1.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjj7UafNqKerkV_vHBFys44TLO-ICb3V2i5GvZavCdANBmp8Zi8DSB7rVp8uOCyhbbb1e6r1c5xl2NYX-gL9_nSraqU83VY4npRzhm0pZEpsOl5H77m0cmwJiZLs3SEBg9dWLynMc11xOMN/s1600/Newcomers1.png" /></a></div>
<br />
This year is a crazy good year for new entries. While Sean Casey and JT Snow have a serious uphill battle to get into the hall, I would be more surprised if one of the players at the top of the list is NOT selected.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br /><br />
Alright. So here is my ballot of 10 names that I would submit if I was a BWAA voter. Voters are allowed to list up to 10 players.<br />
1. Greg Maddux<br />
2. Mike Mussina<br />
3. Frank Thomas<br />
4. Tom Glavine<br />
5. Craig Biggio<br />
6. Tim Raines<br />
7. Alan Trammel<br />
8. Edgar Martinez<br />
9. Curt Schilling<br />
10. Fred McGriff<br />
<br />
Let's get right into the omissions first. Notable omissions from my list include Roger Clemens, Barry Bonds, Rafael Palmeiro, Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa; and Jeff Bagwell and Mike Piazza. Depending on who you are, Jack Morris might be worthy of mention here.<br />
<br />
Clemens, Bonds, Palmeiro, McGwire and Sosa have, as far as I am concerned, been shown beyond a reasonable doubt to have taken steroids during their careers. This had two effects:<br />
1. It allowed them to extend their primes far beyond natural aging curves, into their late 30s and even early 40s.<br />
2. It alowed them to either throw harder or have more bat speed than they would have otherwise had, tilting the game out of its natural equilibrium.<br />
<br />
Bagwell and Piazza have had rumblings of steroid use, and so, because it is an option available to me as a voter, I choose to wait before voting for them, especially when there are so many other worthy candidates. I do not say that they did or did not take steroids. I'm saying I don't know that they didn't with as much confidence as I would like to have.<br />
<br />
To elaborate, my feelings on this matter are based mostly on this rationale. There are lots of ways to get a player INTO the HOF, but there is no way to get them OUT once they are in.<br />
<br />
Until they are elected, Bagwell and Piazza's names will come up every year, and we will debate their cases based on the best information available to us at the time. If they are not elected by the writers, they will be reviewed by Veterans Committees. Eeventually I could see a big group of Steroid Era players getting elected together, if the current stalemate around voting continues. Anyways, players who truly belong in the HOF eventually get in. The current "Best Player Not In the HOF" cases (Pete Rose and Shoeless Joe excluded) revolve around players from the 60s, 70s and 80s. Eventually, I believe that these omissions will get resolved and that the most deserving cases (see Whitaker, Lou) will get in. I think we are too close to the steroid era to see it clearly, still. I am okay with waiting another 10, 15, 20 years to obtain the historical perspective that I think we need to see such an aberrant time period properly. It's not about keeping these players who I don't know about out forever. It's about waiting and allowing all evidence and perspective to emerge, then deciding.<br />
<br />
I was on a jury last year, and the experience of having to decide the truth of the case, and guilt "beyond a reasonable doubt" was extremely valuable. If I think a player did NOT use steroids, beyond a reasonable doubt, then I am comfortable in voting for them. Currently, Bagwell and Piazza do not pass this test for me.<br />
<br />
It's clear that I do not want steroid users in the HOF. I don't. I don't want them to have plaques and I don't think that they should be included among the collection of Greatest Players Ever. Baseball is a game unlike any other in that the dimensions of the playing field, the limits of human ability, and the statistics that players are able to produce are completely linked and related. Those statistics dictate a lot about game play, strategy and the time it takes to play a game. Bear with me here.<br />
<br />
Suppose the basepaths were extended by 2%. That's all. 2%. Now the bases are 91' 9.5" apart. How many plays are close enough at first that that extra 2 feet makes a significant difference? It becomes harder to get a hit. It becomes farther for a player to steal a base. The extra 1.8 feet for a runner vs. the extra 2.5 feet for a catcher favours the catcher. Do we make the distance to the pitchers' mound longer too? Now a hitter has extra time to react to pitches, tilting the game back to the hitter.<br />
<br />
What if the distances are reduced by 2 feet? 88 feet instead of 90. Now the game favours hitters more. Base hits get beat out more often. It is easier to steal bases. Speed is more valued. A .300 hitter is no longer special. It is harder to get outs. Games take much longer.<br />
<br />
The most beautiful equilibrium in the game of baseball comes, I think, from the stolen base. Run expectancies are set up such that that if a stolen base is successful more than about 75% of the time, then it is a worthwhile play. The limits of human ability are set up such that in the time it takes for the pitcher to throw the ball 60'6" as hard as he can to the catcher, who then throws the ball as quickly and as hard as he can to second base, is almost exactly the same time as a runner takes to get to second base, given that the runner is able to lead off of first base such that he can return to first safely given the quickest pickoff move the pitcher is able to perform. And that runner, arriving at the same time as the ball, is safe about 75% of the time, in general. It is completely remarkable that the dimensions of the game, the limits of human ability, and the odds and statistics inherent to in-game strategy can line up so perfectly.<br />
<br />
Steroids changed the human ability side of the equation. Suddenly, a batter could be stronger than ever before. Wait longer to start the swing to save precious milliseconds of decision time. After starting the swing, control the bat more completely than ever before. And during contact, hit that ball with more force than was ever possible. The fly ball will travel over the fence more easily. The ground ball will get by infielders more easily. The line drive will blast past everyone faster, except maybe the pitcher if it is aimed right at him. That same hitter also does not age normally, and at 38 plays as if he is 28.<br />
<br />
Then again, the pitcher on steroids throws harder and recovers more quickly. And also throws hard deep into his career, avoiding injury and time on the disabled list.<br />
<br />
Steroids broke the game because they disrupted its natural equilibrium, and that offends me. Other forms of cheating do not offend me nearly as much. Cheating confined to the playing field is, in my opinion, fair game because the offended party may call out that player on cheating. Amphetamines, while certainly performance enhancing, appear to disrupt the game in a different and more minor way - improving concentration and allowing a player to play his or her best more frequently, without allowing that player to go beyond his or her natural "best". Tommy John surgery, as currently performed, does not appear to allow players to go beyond natural limits after surgery. The fastest pitch the human arm is able to bear seems to be about 101-102mph. Players throwing harder than this (see Zumaya, Joel) have broken down eventually (watch out, Aroldis Chapman!). Pitchers who throw 98 do not return from surgery throwing 106.<br />
<br />
Moving on.<br />
<br />
I have only heard one good argument for Jack Morris to be in the HOF that I truly liked, but it was not enough of a plus to make me think that he was more than a good pitcher on great teams who compiled a more impressive W-L record than he deserved (see my work on Wx-Lx). THe good argument was that he pitched 8+ innings a lot, saved a team's bullpen, and that managers loved having him on their teams as the #1 ace type guy. It's hard to have these discussions without feeling like I am putting these players down, but Jack Morris just doesn't make the cut, for me. However, I suspect that the best thing that will happen to Morris is to get off of the BWAA ballot after this year so that he can be elected by some incarnation of a Veteran's Committee made out of Baseball Men.<br />
<br />
Those are my omissions from the ballot, explained as best I think I can. I know there are voters (real and make believe) who agree or disagree with my stance on steroids. I think that the two camps are both currently populated well enough that these players will receive more than 5% and less than 75% of votes for the foreseeable future.<br />
<br />
<br />
Now for the better part. Here are the players that I want to vote for, and a little reason why.<br />
<br />
<br />
1. Greg Maddux<br />
Maddux was an artist on the mound and should be a unanimous selection. In a jam on the mound, his advice to younger pitchers was to throw slower, and slower and slower, which clearly worked for him. Maddux has an argument for the greatest pitcher of all time, combining an insanely good peak with a long and sturdy career. He did his best work in the heart of the steroid age with four consecutive Cy Young awards 1992-1995, losing a dozen or more starts to the strike. Maddux got hitters to beat themselves, once throwing a 9 inning complete game on only 76 pitches. He threw 9 inning complete games on less than 100 pitches 28 times, which is a fun stat.<br />
<br />
<br />
2. Mike Mussina<br />
I think that Mussina might be the most underrated pitcher of his generation. I can't believe how little hall buzz he has gotten. In the era of juicy Clemens and Pedro, he did not win any Cy Young awards. He pitched a lot and he pitched very well, with most of his starts happening in the jacked up AL East. Mussina was still pitching well when he retired, walking away after his 131 ERA+ 20-win age 39 season He's not a spectacular hall of famer, but he is solidly average among the all time greats. He gets my vote.<br />
<br />
<br />
3. Frank Thomas<br />
For the first eight years (1990-1997) of his career, Thomas was a shooting star, heading straight for the title of Greatest Right Handed Hitter of All Time (GRHHAT). His 1991-1997 <i>average</i> was .330/.452/.604, good for an OPS+ of 182, with 36 home runs, and a K/BB ratio of 75/119. At age 30, Thomas came back to earth somewhat. His last great season was at age 32 (.328/.436/.625, 43HR), although he was still good for a 130 OPS+ for the remainder of his career, fighting through injuries to have low-BA productive seasons with Oakland and Toronto at 38 and 39. During the last couple of years, as we have collectively gone bonkers over Miguel Cabrera (deservedly so - 160 OPS+ over last 9 years and 177 OPS+ over last four), it would behoove us to remember the first eight years of Frank Thomas (182 OPS+) and the first ten years of Albert Pujols (172 OPS+) as examples of GRHHAT candidates we have seen over the last 25 years.<br />
<br />
<br />
4. Tom Glavine<br />
I separated Glavine from Maddux on this list on purpose, for two reasons. One, Maddux was way better than Glavine, which speaks more to the greatness of Maddux than to any shortcomings of Glavine. And two, they are often linked in memory, both because they pitched for the same team and in similar ways, but I wanted to separate them and focus on each. Tom Glavine pitched a lot of games for a lot of very good Atlanta Braves teams. He won a well earned Cy Young in 1991 and a more questionable award in 1998, with his peak age 26-30 years coinciding with Maddux being legendary. His career is much more similar to Mussina than to Maddux - a long collection of very good years without injury leading to a very impressive career. Through his age 39 season, Glavine was 275-184, a lot more similar to Mussina's 270-153 than Glavine's final 305-203 record. A very solid hall of fame starting pitcher, one of three such pitchers on my list.<br />
<br />
<br />
5. Craig Biggio<br />
The dirty word concerning Biggio's HOF case has been that he was a "compiler" - that is, he was an effective player for a very long time and stumbled his way into 3000 hits in order to get into the hall of fame. How about this instead: he was a significant offensive contributor to the Houston Astros for 19 years (and a poor contributor for his last year) who played three different and very difficult defensive positions depending on the needs of his team.<br />
<br />
Here is the list of players who logged more than 250 games at C and have more than 2500 hits:<br />
Craig Biggio<br />
Ivan Rodriguez<br />
<br />
Here is the list of players who logged more than 250 games at CF and have more than 3000 hits:<br />
Ty Cobb<br />
Hank Aaron<br />
Stan Musial<br />
Tris Speaker<br />
Willie Mays<br />
Robin Yount<br />
Craig Biggio<br />
Rickey Henderson<br />
Al Kaline<br />
<br />
Here is the list of players who logged more than 250 games at 2B and have more than 3000 hits:<br />
Pete Rose<br />
Paul Molitor<br />
Eddie Collins<br />
Craig Biggio<br />
Rod Carew<br />
<br />
There are only four players who have ever played more than 250 games each at 2B and CF. None of these players ever played catcher. Only one of these players (Derrel Thomas, career OPS+ = 84) ever played catcher (6 games).<br />
<br />
Craig Biggio is one of the most unique players to ever play the game. An important offensive contributor who handled three very different and difficult defensive positions, he is above my HOF line.<br />
<br />
<br />
6. Tim Raines<br />
Although lately he has been most often compared to Tony Gwynn lately, I think that it is largely for the HOF argument: how come Gwynn cruised in while Raines is still waiting? I think that Tim Raines was more of a poor man's Rickey Henderson. But here's the thing - Henderson is a slam dunk no doubt first ballot inner circle hall of famer. Very few players <i>ever</i> compare favorably to Rickey. So I say a poor man's Rickey - in the way that Ken Griffey Jr. was kind of a poor man's Willie Mays. But since they were contemporaries, and Raines had maybe some bad luck (/ bad decisions) during his career, he is completely overshadowed.<br />
<br />
While not the most prolific, an argument could be made for Raines as the <i>best </i>basestealer ever, with a terrific 84.7% success for his 808 SBs. Among those with more than 300 SB, he is only behind Carlos Beltran in SB%. His .294/.385/.425 line is not so different from Rickey's .279/.401/.419, albeit with 3000 fewer PA.<br />
<br />
Raines spent his peak seasons in Montreal, away from the spotlight. He was a terrific leadoff hitter who I think is worthy of the Hall of Fame.<br />
<br />
<br />
7. Alan Trammel<br />
I was around only for the end of Trammel and Whitaker's careers, so when I was younger I tended to think them overrated - they weren't really all THAT great. Upon further review, maybe they were that great. Trammel in particular was overshadowed for basically his entire career by Cal Ripken Jr., one of those inner circle HOF types. He also has that typical aging middle infielder thing that Roberto Alomar had, where he was basically done after 35. Anyways, he was, in general, a terrific fielding SS who contributed significantly at the plate, providing a lot of overall value to those successful 1980s tigers teams. For whatever reason, the 1980s aren't getting a lot of love in the HOF voting. Trammel deserves to be in.<br />
<br />
<br />
8. Edgar Martinez<br />
One of the baseball things that I have managed to teach my wife is that a player who is slashing at least .300/.400/.500 is a nice player to have around. Of players with at least 7000 plate appearances, there are 17 such players in MLB history - that's it. Edgar Martinez is one of those 17. If we improve the criteria to .310/.410/.510, Martinez becomes one of 12. He was a great hitter. Martinez mostly played DH because the Mariners decided that was where he provided the most value. I have no doubt that he could have been a sub par first basement and put up similar numbers. All of that DH time is accounted for in the WAR stats, and the WAR says to me that he deserves to be in. In a similar way that Barry Larkin is a hall of famer for his spectacular skill despite playing only a few full seasons during his career, I vote for Edgar Martinez to become the first mostly-DH to be in the hall.<br />
<br />
<br />
9. Curt Schilling<br />
Schilling had a weird career, but it was excellent and I think deserving of a vote. He had some ups and downs, but once he put it all together, we have rarely seen such a combination of such dominant power and control from a starting pitcher. His 2001 and 2002 seasons are spectacular: 22-6 and 23-7 with 609 total strikeouts against just 65 walks. Both times he finished second in the Cy Young voting to an even better Randy Johnson (another pitcher who took a while to figure it out). Schilling's good seasons with the Phillies were overshadowed by the team (and his win loss record) being really bad almost every season except 1993. His great seasons were so good - and his good seasons often enough - that I give Schilling my HOF vote. His playoff record is also amazing, and it's not just the bloody sock. As a Toronto Blue Jays fan in 1993, I hated Schilling in that world series.<br />
<br />
<br />
10. Fred McGriff<br />
Of all the things ruined by the steroid age - innocence, BALCO, androstendione, Jose Canseco's marriages and good reputation, Jose Canseco's poor reputation, Ken Caminiti - one of the most underrated, I think, is Fred McGriff's chances for the HOF. McGriff was a prime 80s slugger, blasting THIRTY home runs or more in SEVEN straight years from 1989-1994. Starting in 1995 in his age 31 season, through his age 38 2002 season, McGriff hit 27, 28, 22, 19, 32, 27, 31, and 30 HR. So... he started to decline normally. He held on for a couple more years to try to get to 500 HRs, but he was essentially done. That, of course, was when 500HR was one of those magic HOF numbers.<br />
I think that McGriff is hurt by basically having half of his career pre-1993, and half post-93, because those two eras are so different.<br />
<br />
1987-1992, McGriff hit .279/.391/.528, good for a .919 OPS and 154 OPS+<br />
1994-2002, McGriff hit .290/.373/.501, good for a .873 OPS and 125 OPS+<br />
<br />
Yes, from age 31 on, McGriff was not quite as effective. However, the league around him changed so much that his consistent excellence was left behind. OPS+ adjusts OPS for changes in era and ballpark. In 1990, his .930 OPS was worth 153 OPS+. 2001, his .930 OPS was worth only 144 OPS+.<br />
<br />
McGriff was rated to be a bad defensive first baseman, which really hurts when considering WAR. However, context-adjusted WAR does not credit McGriff for staying the same when the league changed around him. Viewed in the context of the late 90s, McGriff's numbers are not special. Viewed in the context of the 80s and early 90s, his numbers are pretty spectacular. I choose to do the latter. McGriff gets my vote.<br />
<br />
<br />
*They would not give me an actual HOF vote - obviously.<br />
<br />
<br />simonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08053789051385270752noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1697358494613902278.post-19142181725412018012013-09-07T13:44:00.001-07:002013-09-07T13:53:55.778-07:00Wx - Lx Records: Part 2In this post, which in retrospect I will call Part 1, I introduced the idea of using RE24 and REW to get an idea of what pitchers' "true" win-loss records should be. This is an attempt to reduce or eliminate the effect of team offence on what is deserving of a win, a loss, or a no decision, without removing the start-to-start luck experienced by the pitcher.<br />
<br />
If a pitcher gets lucky and has a great season despite allowing an alarming number of base runners and warning track fly balls, that pitcher is deserving of wins, as they currently stand, despite the fact that you may not want that pitcher to lead your staff next year. If that same pitcher ends up with a lot of losses and no decisions because his team's offence only averages 2 runs per game- those are the kind of W-L fluctuations I am trying to see past.<br />
<br />
One of my sharp readers commented that in the hitters post, I was comparing Wx-Lx for hitters with W-L for pitchers. Good point.<br />
<br />
In this post I want to put some big tables of Wx-Lx for pitchers, then:<br />
a) see if it still makes sense<br />
b) see whose W-L records may not be as great as they seem<br />
<br />
a) and b) are related - part of the Wx-Lx making sense is who would benefit and who would not from this alternative scoring system.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br /><br />
<br />
I'm also limiting the data to post-1950 because REW doesn't exist much before that.<br />
<br />
So, here are some lists. I'd love to give a big sortable table, but I don't know how.<br />
<br />
The not-obvious columns are:<br />
<b>Rk </b>- Rank of most number of wins since 1950<br />
<b>Rk x</b> - Rank of most number of xWins since 1950<br />
<b>REW </b>- base out wins added<br />
<b>Wx</b> - xWins<br />
<b>Lx</b> -xLosses<br />
<b>dWx</b> - difference between Wins and xWins. A positive number means more xWins. A negative number means more Wins.<br />
<b>dLx </b>- difference between Losses and xLosses. A positive number means more xLosses. A negaitve number means more Losses.<br />
<b>diff </b>- the difference between the Win-Loss spread and the xWin-xLoss spread. By spread, I essentially mean the difference in games over (or under) .500: wins minus losses. A positive diff means that the Wx-Lx record is better than W-L. A negative diff means that W-L is better than Wx-Lx.<br />
<br />
1. Most (actual) Wins since 1950<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhGvTbZ_D-SWc8KYTne4ocjdU-E_r2RDCjb-VzAUkWzUky5Esb8w64lM2LFhyphenhyphenyNhJ0zkChyphenhyphen3F79LFTMNi8ngDNfD8kbtl7UI_W1KBhhXvSjTCzr_qdWz08ktQ9rkPOxM2XTim6yzOZqY7XP/s1600/Wins_Top25.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhGvTbZ_D-SWc8KYTne4ocjdU-E_r2RDCjb-VzAUkWzUky5Esb8w64lM2LFhyphenhyphenyNhJ0zkChyphenhyphen3F79LFTMNi8ngDNfD8kbtl7UI_W1KBhhXvSjTCzr_qdWz08ktQ9rkPOxM2XTim6yzOZqY7XP/s1600/Wins_Top25.PNG" /></a></div>
<br />
2. Most xWins since 1950<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgYWyPxsUoMRrTtOPgOgcKGwCero03nYCEpBUMeiUYQyREcp6VrTpu2QmOhivnQUXS_7bp0SEMbp43e0SUwjg-ddtlSBop7wh3CTaklCbfjyQzg4wJ00ZBl9XUj_FigDWiWTTH5RI5O83Qn/s1600/Wx_Top25.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgYWyPxsUoMRrTtOPgOgcKGwCero03nYCEpBUMeiUYQyREcp6VrTpu2QmOhivnQUXS_7bp0SEMbp43e0SUwjg-ddtlSBop7wh3CTaklCbfjyQzg4wJ00ZBl9XUj_FigDWiWTTH5RI5O83Qn/s1600/Wx_Top25.PNG" /></a></div>
<br />
The top 8 pitchers are the same for both. Actually, the top 14 pitchers are the same for both. The order is shifted slightly. Here are some things from these tables that stand out for me:<br />
<br />
A. Jim Kaat has only 3.9 REW. 4530 innings is a lot for a guy who may have been, overall, an average pitcher. I guess 16 gold gloves go a long way towards keeping a guy on the mound.<br />
B. Greg Maddux is 1 W ahead of Roger Clemens, but 15 Wx behind. I will get more into why I think this is later, but it's interesting that it's not as close.<br />
C. Three players are different between the two lists. The players removed from the W list are Andy Pettite, Jack Morris, and Juan Marichal. The players added are Jim Bunning, Jerry Koosman and John Smoltz.<br />
D. The only way to get to 300+ wins is to pitch a LOT of innings. A lot of these guys are over 5000 innings. That is twenty years of 250IP per year, or twenty-five years of 200IP. If someone wants you to pitch for that long, you have a great chance of getting to 300 wins, of either kind. Since 1901, there have been 9 pitchers who have thrown 5000 innings, and all of them have 300 wins.<br />
E. I'm angry that Roger Clemens took PEDs and upset that we don't get to see where he would have been without them, because he had a spectacular start to his career.<br />
<br />
3. Of the 200 pitchers who have the most wins since 1950, these are the pitchers with the highest REW:<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi0WJ6rIWqcHCvgPSVubPfrI8OXBuORuX0T1LCMyof_yF-MTkzQ-G4e3ShsF2xIQKrJAbSl_GK1DMIFBrSpS_WrYG389IGdWonSnKBYl_reaOyUX8PBST198YOCoFK7fcH42HY7Xhg9mPhl/s1600/REW_Top25.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi0WJ6rIWqcHCvgPSVubPfrI8OXBuORuX0T1LCMyof_yF-MTkzQ-G4e3ShsF2xIQKrJAbSl_GK1DMIFBrSpS_WrYG389IGdWonSnKBYl_reaOyUX8PBST198YOCoFK7fcH42HY7Xhg9mPhl/s1600/REW_Top25.PNG" /></a></div>
<br />
Things that stand out to me:<br />
A. How ridiculously good was Pedro Martinez? Really, really, really ridiculously good. His 56.5 REW was put up in just 2827 innings, compared to the other guys on this list. For comparison's sake, Roy Halladay has been terrific over the last 10 years and has been considered one of the "best of the era" kind of guys, but in similar innings he is a full 20 REW behind Pedro. 20 REW is a good career. Pedro's true W-L gives him full and accurate credit for his brilliance, by the way.<br />
<br />
B. I think that Kevin Brown was much better than he has been given credit for. I think that some veterans committee will put him in the hall of fame, eventually.<br />
<br />
C. By this measure, Johan Santana has not been so different from Sandy Koufax.<br />
<br />
D. Who is Billy Pierce? Looks like he was a bit of longevity away from the hall. He twice led MLB in REW for bad White Sox teams, going 18-12 and 15-10 (that one with 200 ERA+).<br />
<br />
E. What took so long to get Bert Blyleven in the hall. Seriously. I know he became the poster boy for stathead hall of fame cases, but it was pretty much just his poor W-L record maintaining this aura of mediocrity around him. More on that later.<br />
<br />
<br />
Now, I want to see whose records are improved or hurt by a transition from W-L to Wx-Lx.<br />
<br />
4. Here are the top 25 most improved by W-L to Wx-Lx:<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiqTWPBTtDK5xzEH7NL0vctg90JxIEI13q4fOyLJj5lwtW4mgaxX13EvxuxHGs9PpGYEDyP1omhYL1MwW3nT4WwsP1BBklAjFt0eQBE5g3pmw4-mCYR4yFGALl6L3PDCk-sO4aftL8N78bP/s1600/diff_Top25.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiqTWPBTtDK5xzEH7NL0vctg90JxIEI13q4fOyLJj5lwtW4mgaxX13EvxuxHGs9PpGYEDyP1omhYL1MwW3nT4WwsP1BBklAjFt0eQBE5g3pmw4-mCYR4yFGALl6L3PDCk-sO4aftL8N78bP/s1600/diff_Top25.PNG" /></a></div>
<br />
Things that stand out to me:<br />
<br />
A. Mike Morgan seemed like he was bad, but maybe he was just average. Oh.<br />
<br />
B. Bob Friend pitched almost exclusively for the Pirates, with brief stints with both the Yankees and Mets coming in his age 35 1966 season before retiring. In his first 7 seasons, the Pirates finished 7th or 8th out of 8 teams. He went 73-94 with a 103 ERA+. Then the pirates finished 2nd in 1958, and Friend 22-14, leading the league in wins. The Bucs slipped to 4th in 1959 (Friend 8-19), then back to 1st in their world series-winning 1960 season (Friend 18-12). The Pirates finished in the middle of the pack for the rest of Friend's career, and he went 70-79 for them with a 116 ERA+. My point is that, overall, he was a slightly above average pitcher. His pitching deserved a fairly mediocre 207-194 record more than it deserved the stinky 197-230 record he ended up with. But he spent nearly his whole career with a terrible team, and his record mirrored that of his team almost the entire time*. He was pretty average, so he fared how his team fared. Since the whole point of this was to try to remove the pitcher from team context, I would say that this is an example of its effectiveness.<br />
<br />
<i>*The lone exception may have been 1955, when he went 14-9 and led the league with a 2.83 ERA. </i><br />
<br />
C. Bert Blyleven. If Blyleven had ended up with a 316-237 record instead of 287-250, he would have been a first ballot hall of famer and all time legend. Instead, he lingered on the ballot and finally got in to the hall based on the emergence of the internet and the education of the majority of voters that wins and losses are not the whole story. His 39.5 REW is the 12th highest since 1950. Although in-depth cases of his situation have surely been done all over the internet, I will take a look at his stats and his team stats.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjsdt7IadwhLuVOsJ8lWttFSlUVyjpuZeeewzMF9Rjc6MCR8ZkSN5Jj1JgIGDdehp2P5TLyrNAC5P-B2l-ZiY79VdIxPEC8GHqdY6ZMf58yCltEQeqmTX2IUcdJkJJEKkPw8290cWZo95fn/s1600/Blyleven1.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjsdt7IadwhLuVOsJ8lWttFSlUVyjpuZeeewzMF9Rjc6MCR8ZkSN5Jj1JgIGDdehp2P5TLyrNAC5P-B2l-ZiY79VdIxPEC8GHqdY6ZMf58yCltEQeqmTX2IUcdJkJJEKkPw8290cWZo95fn/s1600/Blyleven1.PNG" /></a></div>
Team stats are in blue. RS/G and RA/G are runs scored and runs against per game, respectively. Those values in white are for the games Blyleven pitched (RS) or the amount of runs (total) he allowed (runs against).<br />
<br />
Okay, so I've been looking at this for a while, and I can't really figure it out. This time, the team performances aren't that bad.Except for a couple of cases (1976, 1980), the runs his team scored for him are not bad. What I think is interesting is that this difference basically is concentrated over the first half of his career. From 1981 onwards, his Wx-Lx record (129-107) matches his W-L (131-109) almost exactly. I don't really feel like getting into the game logs today, but there has to be something strange about the way runs were scored in his starts during the first half of his career. Maybe he was one of those guys who was either dominant or average? In any case, I am getting away from things. Back to #4D, things I notice about the list of players who receive an improvement from W-L to Wx-Lx.<br />
<br />
D. In almost all of these cases, it is subtracting losses more than receiving lots of extra wins that is the main factor in this difference. That says to me that these pitchers were saddled with losses when their bad teams struggled to score during their starts more than they received no decisions when their teams blew bad leads. Something that I find very interesting is that this model seems to work despite me using 9.0 innings pitched per start as a metric to determine the number of overall decisions a pitcher should be awarded*. This seems to suggest that starting pitchers overall earn decisions at the rate of about 1 decision per 9 innings pitched. A pitcher who starts 9 games and averages 7 IP per start will average about 7 decisions. A pitcher who starts 36 games at 7 IPS will average about 28 decisions (24-4 / 20-8 / 18-10 / 14-14 / etc)<br />
<br />
<i>*It's not perfect - in this sample of the 200 pitchers with the highest W totals since 1950, the pitcher averaged 7.2 fewer Wx-Lx decisions than W-L decisions - but it's close, and it is a round number. Adjusting this parameter to get the number of decisions to match resulted in an innings per start of about 8.75. </i><br />
<br />
E. Relief pitchers break my model. Hoyt Wilhelm, Dennis Eckersley and John Smoltz are all on this list, and they the few pitchers with enough wins to make the list who spend a significant portion of their careers in relief. In the case of Smoltz and Eckersley, they were called upon to finish the game mostly with their team ahead. When closers earn wins, it is usually vulture wins - blown saves with their team coming out ahead before they come out of the game. Anyways, I think the rate of wins and losses earned per inning is different for relief pitchers - closers in particular - so I think that this model is applicable to starting pitchers only.<br />
<br />
5. Here are the 25 pitchers who were most hurt by a change from W-L to Wx-Lx.<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhT2DpGItXJM9o4xbb2usuiazz2t4DBFBoHNWxOMxdZ_TDkH0kaV0OyUy64SRjy3W6ya8H4-YMexUz0JXDLsUxMIGcDc0D0dnMHD_cwg5rO7WPiOjo4o-4vMJZHf7BuNgzSRwwSizQU0GYE/s1600/diff_Bot25.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em; text-align: center;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhT2DpGItXJM9o4xbb2usuiazz2t4DBFBoHNWxOMxdZ_TDkH0kaV0OyUy64SRjy3W6ya8H4-YMexUz0JXDLsUxMIGcDc0D0dnMHD_cwg5rO7WPiOjo4o-4vMJZHf7BuNgzSRwwSizQU0GYE/s1600/diff_Bot25.PNG" /></a><br />
<br />
Things that stand out to me:<br />
<br />
A. I could have guessed - Andy Pettite at the top of the list. No pitcher has gotten more mileage from being merely good than Pettite, who was fortunate enough to break in with the Yankees at about the same time they got their mojo back. 255-151 is great, amazing stuff. 208-157 is a nice career, but there is no need to mention Pettite and the HoF in the same sentence. That's the difference here.<br />
<br />
B. A lot of the pitchers on this list are very good pitchers, or are <i>regarded</i> as very good pitchers, anyways. On the previous list there were a lot more guys I had never heard of, bad pitchers improved to .500, etc. Here, there are some pitchers who I consider to be great who Wx-Lx shows not to be bad, but to be maybe a little less great. That's interesting. Do I consider them to be great because they are? Or because they had the extra advantage of a pretty W-L record, which often led to the hall of fame?<br />
<br />
C. Jack Morris is on the list. If Bert Blyleven is the internet poster boy for Wins obscuring a brilliant career, then Jack Morris is at the other end of the spectrum, with an internet reputation for W-L record that looks way better than it ought to have been. Morris's (254-186) is transformed to a less impressive (226-199). As for his reputation for pitching to the score, well, that might be for another post. But for a quick summary: it's easy to create Wx-Lx with WPA instead of REW. WPA cares about the game situation - extra points are added late in close games, and actions matter far less early in games or when the score is not close. Morris's WPA Wx-Lx is (227-198), about the same as REW, and far off his regular W-L total.<br />
<br />
D. Aaron Sele <i>seemed</i> like a .500 pitcher when I was following his career. His Wx-Lx makes me happy.<br />
<br />
E. Mike Mussina was a great pitcher - his 41.9 REW in just over 3500 innings is terrific and 10th since 1950. Even so, his win totals were apparently inflated - he pitched for very good Orioles and then Yankees teams. I still think he should sail into the hall of fame. After his 4-5 rookie season, Mussina finished under .500 just once - 11-15 for Baltimore in 2000. Despite an ERA+ of 125, the Orioles managed just 3.4 runs per game in his starts. His Wx-Lx that year was 17-10. Everyone wins some and loses some (except maybe Andy Pettite).<br />
<br />
F. Similar to Mussina, Wx-Lx reduces Whitey Ford from one of the greatest winning percentages ever to merely an outstanding record. The 50s and early 60s were a good time to be a Yankees pitcher.Tim Hudson is another one of these - an outstanding record now seems like more of a product of being a good to great pitcher on outstanding A's and Braves teams.<br />
<br />
G. I could go on, but the names I recognize in this list all have the same kind of feeling to me. Kind of an "Oh, yeah he didn't seem to be as good as that W-L record" feeling. Kenny Rogers. David Wells. CC Sabathia. Jamie Moyer. Bob Welch.<br />
<br />
6. Okay, last one. Of those top 200 in Wins, here are the players best predicted by the model, that is, who have the smallest difference between their actual W-L records and their Wx-Lx records:<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgIHkaDQGrvWZvGbKyW8UsbZlE0Zb_q4Ms52p-P88jPnbEj0nG-3VbwsAFGLrU5e46aRy7YVxcf9f2Ji73F4nei0i-GwKhNorx4LEfIiMXLPMXnfqDGI8_tMCoURTzu8WKvef_KjVvQ96vY/s1600/diff_SmallestDiff25.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgIHkaDQGrvWZvGbKyW8UsbZlE0Zb_q4Ms52p-P88jPnbEj0nG-3VbwsAFGLrU5e46aRy7YVxcf9f2Ji73F4nei0i-GwKhNorx4LEfIiMXLPMXnfqDGI8_tMCoURTzu8WKvef_KjVvQ96vY/s1600/diff_SmallestDiff25.PNG" /></a></div>
<br />
Things that stand out to me:<br />
<br />
A. Well, the message here is that, if you remember these guys, xWins and xLosses shouldn't change too much about what you think of their win loss records.<br />
<br />
B. Don Sutton earned a bit of a reputation as a compiler because he did not necessarily have a brilliant peak, but maybe there is something brilliant about being a 5000 IP compiler.<br />
<br />
C. I still have a huge baseball crush on Pedro.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
I don't know how to put a spreadsheet up here, so message me if you want to sort out and look at the numbers yourself - although it's very easy to calculate for any career or season:<br />
<br />
Wx = IP / 9.0 / 2 + REW<br />
Lx = IP / 9.0 / 2 - REWsimonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08053789051385270752noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1697358494613902278.post-90456351425414269752013-09-06T05:35:00.001-07:002013-09-06T10:27:34.949-07:00W - L for Hitters (Part 2)In <a href="http://baseballweblog.blogspot.ca/2013/09/w-l-for-hitters.html">Part 1</a>, I introduced the concept of win-loss records for hitters that are within the same range as real pitchers' win-loss records. I built many tables of single season win-loss records.<br />
<br />
Now I will look at a few selected players' career totals, in a few different categories: no-doubt hall of fame type players (Willie Mays, Hank Aaron, Frank Robinson, Mickey Mantle, Rickey Henderson, Barry Bonds); mid-level hall of fame types (Cal Ripken, Pete Rose, Robin Yount, Paul Molitor); borderline cases from the last few years (Craig Biggio, Jim Rice, Andre Dawson, Kirby Puckett); and current players who I think might be interesting (Albert Pujols, Miguel Cabrera, Vernon Wells, Adrian Beltre, Adam Dunn). I will then pick a couple of comparable pitchers based on their real win-loss records.<br />
<br />
Let's start with the all time stat-masters.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<br />
Willie Mays (322-131)<br />
Comparable pitchers: Lefty Grove (300-141). I think we are going to be seeing a lot of Lefty with this group.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgBLVdynM9nQxrWCiQ2wcGwKieWMD8yNYlJAfbelTvMKzMgu19reaXhMciHddSYzOi8hsILtUdml_FEZ5N8bK7bnR6v-SwaO7kjJtYVOsWb_soqL0oHcocrrUtD_vLf3iCkB84cLqitx8LC/s1600/Mays.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgBLVdynM9nQxrWCiQ2wcGwKieWMD8yNYlJAfbelTvMKzMgu19reaXhMciHddSYzOi8hsILtUdml_FEZ5N8bK7bnR6v-SwaO7kjJtYVOsWb_soqL0oHcocrrUtD_vLf3iCkB84cLqitx8LC/s1600/Mays.PNG" /></a></div>
<br />
Hank Aaron (358-161)<br />
Comparable pitchers: Lefty Grove (300-141), Randy Johnson (303-166), Roger Clemens (354-184)<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiE2rEvD4bpKMRTr91WE3jUuFxtrUlQUzAGCMebZVCRONJy1bYhH3YHpGdxqsEsdnpal4wA0bOU0mrfoA6gbQAdcDd9Lu-FdycfPMnWQYd2LZDILdmHtsAy1PM-O9L_GOCJF5WC_uBceAQ_/s1600/Aaron.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiE2rEvD4bpKMRTr91WE3jUuFxtrUlQUzAGCMebZVCRONJy1bYhH3YHpGdxqsEsdnpal4wA0bOU0mrfoA6gbQAdcDd9Lu-FdycfPMnWQYd2LZDILdmHtsAy1PM-O9L_GOCJF5WC_uBceAQ_/s1600/Aaron.PNG" /></a></div>
<br />
Barry Bonds (362-103)<br />
Comparable Pitchers: None, but for the sake of argument, the same as above. The totals are split into pre-PED Barry 1986-1998 RIP, and PED Barry 1999-2007. Pre-PED Barry went 222-83, comparable to real person Pedro Martinez (219-100). PED Barry went 139-19. He broke baseball. The closest comparisons in the last 50 years are Justin Verlander (136-75) and Johan Santana (139-78), who both have more than 3 times as many losses as PED Barry.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhtod0CgeugSF8VktSChEKVqUtqa0879Q0FSbgKjnEcwl4Mrl0ZWyzd-7LYW6GWLk7B6X9yNkf_4FQqxajea9qa3wywibbVW6aQT87QtYfw2rA2Zw_Icjd14h-GLeP0SOh9rzheFRKpiQzP/s1600/Bonds.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhtod0CgeugSF8VktSChEKVqUtqa0879Q0FSbgKjnEcwl4Mrl0ZWyzd-7LYW6GWLk7B6X9yNkf_4FQqxajea9qa3wywibbVW6aQT87QtYfw2rA2Zw_Icjd14h-GLeP0SOh9rzheFRKpiQzP/s1600/Bonds.PNG" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
Rickey Henderson (300-170)<br />
Comparable pitchers: Randy Johnson (303-166)<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi2CNWJXRRgoDODxvic9ribXpvqRepBqlkE50PdAI0Ux95e7nRCmpuA15ZjWFRzvQCbRuGg7MpxLh7pp_pjn8650UBPdRz5GubMc6egAG07RwPzivQ-yldxkLuwNx1oQStDZ0qd7h-L7-DZ/s1600/RH.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi2CNWJXRRgoDODxvic9ribXpvqRepBqlkE50PdAI0Ux95e7nRCmpuA15ZjWFRzvQCbRuGg7MpxLh7pp_pjn8650UBPdRz5GubMc6egAG07RwPzivQ-yldxkLuwNx1oQStDZ0qd7h-L7-DZ/s1600/RH.PNG" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
Frank Robinson (296-133)<br />
Comparable pitchers: Lefty Grove (300-141). I'm thankful Grove exists for this group.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgMdC8ja8fyFIFGYx-zM6zu670B3wFQcHU3i3uX6pEDCt_0gaaGzbYbB8EEo2QuoEy8ud4i_9HSPo0UPhKGHkUIVZfpyyIF9PcbabAr-v5EzghtiTUGM1pTq5oXB8-3yzXDlMIz_6_bwQi9/s1600/FRob.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgMdC8ja8fyFIFGYx-zM6zu670B3wFQcHU3i3uX6pEDCt_0gaaGzbYbB8EEo2QuoEy8ud4i_9HSPo0UPhKGHkUIVZfpyyIF9PcbabAr-v5EzghtiTUGM1pTq5oXB8-3yzXDlMIz_6_bwQi9/s1600/FRob.PNG" /></a></div>
<br />
The point of doing this with pitchers was to remove the luck of team performance from the W-L equation. We maintained luck from individual performance though - depending on the base/out situation, the same hits are worth different values of REW. But overall, we have reduced luck so we expect there to be fewer outliers. We see here that legendarily good players don't have bad seasons, except maybe at the tail end of their careers. There is more consistency to won loss records.<br />
<br />
However, I do think that converting to these numbers helps to identify great seasons from good seasons in an accessible way. 16-11? Good season. 19-7? Great season! 21-7? Incredible season! 23-0? Nope, that's not allowed because then baseball is broken.<br />
<br />
In these greatest of great players, there is also a limit to the degree with which actual pitching records match up. And I think that this is okay. Willie Mays's 322-131 Wx-Lx record is unparalleled by pitchers, which makes some sense to me. I am okay saying that his career was better than any of theirs, that he contributed more to wins and less to losses than any pitcher. He was a terrific baseball player who played every day.<br />
<br />
Now let's look at some solid hall of fame types*.<br />
<br />
<i>*I have to write </i>types <i>because I want to include Pete Rose.</i><br />
<br />
Cal Ripken (261-230) - Remember that a lot of Cal's defensive value is not presented here.<br />
Comparable pitchers: Ted Lyons (260-230), Jim Kaat (283-237), Fergie Jenkins (284-226)<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgzVIaJKPUiEL2-Y1S1TZg5-QhZBYZx3M8UqSjuajelOzy8zLzLPd5so8T1bYtpPInoIpLrrTkiytweeihnCJFE8ZQm8yLQ95__czR8vnULkxucvozm_6dUocalIz0OTY2xJAmtNtJuJpub/s1600/Ripkenj.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgzVIaJKPUiEL2-Y1S1TZg5-QhZBYZx3M8UqSjuajelOzy8zLzLPd5so8T1bYtpPInoIpLrrTkiytweeihnCJFE8ZQm8yLQ95__czR8vnULkxucvozm_6dUocalIz0OTY2xJAmtNtJuJpub/s1600/Ripkenj.PNG" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
Pete Rose (369-247)<br />
Comparable Pitchers: Warren Spahn (363-245), Greg Maddux (355-227), Steve Carlton (329-244)<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiR42eKNeSzYg0efaYCmtSpR_Dj_CHu633r0q6vCPWWgqYtP25bw_Gl0SRYYr6iLg-6GJJnRDiHeS961KHgx_Z3FIANu4qxXcTBS8S90xCOUaT-FWhISLRS1m1xvKfkzX8FXTFh1SXD6X6B/s1600/Rose.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiR42eKNeSzYg0efaYCmtSpR_Dj_CHu633r0q6vCPWWgqYtP25bw_Gl0SRYYr6iLg-6GJJnRDiHeS961KHgx_Z3FIANu4qxXcTBS8S90xCOUaT-FWhISLRS1m1xvKfkzX8FXTFh1SXD6X6B/s1600/Rose.PNG" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
Robin Yount (258-201)<br />
Comparable Pitchers: Jack Morris (254-186), Jamie Moyer (269-209), Dennis Martinez (245-193)<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjCf_HEU9QtxpSGT2Gwd9a2qwAId4qSS3uTCLSiXWUjUtENb3O6hyphenhyphenDloQdfQoaZ3Wwn48ccCC5Uf4BTqEiZNsLxjhji_1D_gbUECj0Mc3r2abG1UNmlwFm1nvBkMdlBHWaBdgzjjfFDd31C/s1600/Yount.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjCf_HEU9QtxpSGT2Gwd9a2qwAId4qSS3uTCLSiXWUjUtENb3O6hyphenhyphenDloQdfQoaZ3Wwn48ccCC5Uf4BTqEiZNsLxjhji_1D_gbUECj0Mc3r2abG1UNmlwFm1nvBkMdlBHWaBdgzjjfFDd31C/s1600/Yount.PNG" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
Paul Molitor (266-185)<br />
Comparable pitchers: Jack Morris, (254-186), Bob Feller (266-162), Bob Gibson (251-174), Dennis Martinez (245-193)<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhtOo0-g-IahEvnP3PbwA2aZ9w13fuAc0M_5oXWoRUazbKNmaYmJ7WIJkm0PjFnwB1-EEC52RXM2ibSZd-7TMda_1nVommChUeJxxQaWgl9g33Duv2tUFQdNThef3b4BtvU8-y8j9Clp4Xp/s1600/Molitor.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhtOo0-g-IahEvnP3PbwA2aZ9w13fuAc0M_5oXWoRUazbKNmaYmJ7WIJkm0PjFnwB1-EEC52RXM2ibSZd-7TMda_1nVommChUeJxxQaWgl9g33Duv2tUFQdNThef3b4BtvU8-y8j9Clp4Xp/s1600/Molitor.PNG" /></a></div>
<br />
With these players, it becomes clear that this statistic does not capture defence. So, for players whose value is primarily derived from defence, their Wx-Lx record is not going to shine. Other than one spectacular season and two or three more very good seasons, Cal Ripken was a .500 player, by this measure. Which we <i>know</i> is not really true - but it's because this metric does not take into account that he played a good shorstop and then probably an adequate third base. I wasn't going to add any more players, but now I want to look at both Brooks Robinson and Ozzie Smith, two hall of famers who would not be there without a significant defensive contribution.<br />
<br />
I wanted to include Pete Rose because he leads all time in things like games played and plate appearances, which in this case is analogous to leading in "innings pitched" and therefore number of decisions. While he does not approach Walter Johnson / Cy Young territory, he is in the tier below in terms of decisions with his comparables. I think it makes sense. He was a great player for a long time, and a good player for a long time, and if nothing else, he is known for (as a batter/baserunner) doing whatever it took to win - what RE24 tries to identify.<br />
<br />
The comparables I chose for Yount and Molitor show, I think, that with pitching wins and losses, it matters how you got those wins. Gibson and Feller won dominantly; Dennis Martinez and Jack Morris, less so. Which makes me interested now in career Wx-Lx for some pitchers, and how far off these would be from their actual W-L. I smell another post on this theme.<br />
<br />
Here is Brooks Robinson (225-208)<br />
Comparable pitchers: Jerry Koosman (222-209), Joe Niekro (221-204), Mickey Lolich (217-191)<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgz_UzCecgyTg49l8hiSJCc8A5SXxlypWBEv3BoO_sirt44emtOBak7gdtODn1jSmSgUCNwYQ4WteeTmCJ65JRGDEdhyphenhyphenH2XMYiG1fXZ9gV8b6eOFiXVIh6Utc_Eb-qkEabmuLcJbLMXY9jS/s1600/BRob.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgz_UzCecgyTg49l8hiSJCc8A5SXxlypWBEv3BoO_sirt44emtOBak7gdtODn1jSmSgUCNwYQ4WteeTmCJ65JRGDEdhyphenhyphenH2XMYiG1fXZ9gV8b6eOFiXVIh6Utc_Eb-qkEabmuLcJbLMXY9jS/s1600/BRob.png" /></a></div>
<br />
And Ozzie Smith (197-192)<br />
Comparable pitchers: Claude Osteen (196-195), Tim Wakefield (200-180), Doyle Alexander (194-174)<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhhmNperB7J9V2dAnG6sVW5CbbpSAkHxlV7ymTnqVpJ9JhANusR4X_mgbCtUxqciyY-W2ODiCE0WlURhTawn51FEUNdswyInWTa_AGdv1AiwWTe5MMlKZ1nJWZJtfrjagOTJRj9ZXv29TDd/s1600/Ozzie.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhhmNperB7J9V2dAnG6sVW5CbbpSAkHxlV7ymTnqVpJ9JhANusR4X_mgbCtUxqciyY-W2ODiCE0WlURhTawn51FEUNdswyInWTa_AGdv1AiwWTe5MMlKZ1nJWZJtfrjagOTJRj9ZXv29TDd/s1600/Ozzie.png" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
Okay, we will move now to some more borderline hall of fame cases. At least <i>I</i> think they are more borderline, or have been considered borderline.<br />
<br />
Craig Biggio (275-202) - he is here because he has been labelled a "compiler", but I think he is better than that.<br />
Comparable pitchers: Jamie Moyer (269-209), Tom Glavine (305-203), Burleigh Grimes (270-212)<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgYQasPImE2xb3V-ADyIYxxjmT5hUFaZ_OiOWy3j2kgwCACWzuw9-_FtO8YwivDAg5EoDOaHZo1um0UWQZGNcK-eMwDKbWXAbUrAk4VGPOURPMNx5VW9ymVJ2i0x8bHfxWdFqlzr6PFQIe1/s1600/Biggio.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgYQasPImE2xb3V-ADyIYxxjmT5hUFaZ_OiOWy3j2kgwCACWzuw9-_FtO8YwivDAg5EoDOaHZo1um0UWQZGNcK-eMwDKbWXAbUrAk4VGPOURPMNx5VW9ymVJ2i0x8bHfxWdFqlzr6PFQIe1/s1600/Biggio.PNG" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
Jim Rice (192-140)<br />
Comparable pitchers: Dwight Gooden (194-112), David Cone (194-126), Mark Buehrle (185-139)<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEideMoUUf2AxWcCqSQL8zvAjcHrf66L5P07oYweLUn-8EPkdyc-Kt9pqRdNyG5u57r3JB0X4CIomqyQLiR5yU1xOecmuVjXfoFvWL-NkO3zUXm_uOyfkEsF-pedmmc6RDk9fBLllCLcCCNY/s1600/Rice.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em; text-align: center;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEideMoUUf2AxWcCqSQL8zvAjcHrf66L5P07oYweLUn-8EPkdyc-Kt9pqRdNyG5u57r3JB0X4CIomqyQLiR5yU1xOecmuVjXfoFvWL-NkO3zUXm_uOyfkEsF-pedmmc6RDk9fBLllCLcCCNY/s1600/Rice.PNG" /></a><br />
<br />
<br />
Andre Dawson (217-161)<br />
Comparable pitchers: Kenny Rogers (219-156), Curt Schilling (216-146), Catfish Hunter (224-166), John Smoltz (213-155)<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg2JSYWrCaHhBZKjq6B0rs0SSXKJ9AhUYVSfLEM7wJlJYL50T5OhtScr4cb68AHEA5MB0pyki1lCQOcAwBFatncVBokoMijalXKNqnCAH7EyjTq5I1nnzxusn9H4Ys9RkOWve5ceYIWB7sz/s1600/Dawson.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg2JSYWrCaHhBZKjq6B0rs0SSXKJ9AhUYVSfLEM7wJlJYL50T5OhtScr4cb68AHEA5MB0pyki1lCQOcAwBFatncVBokoMijalXKNqnCAH7EyjTq5I1nnzxusn9H4Ys9RkOWve5ceYIWB7sz/s1600/Dawson.PNG" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
Kirby Puckett (178-124)<br />
Comparable pitchers: Dave Stieb (176-137), Bartolo Colon (185-128), Rube Waddell (178-127), Dave Stewart (168-129)<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi5XBy8RzEa5V60qwZFojt255L-00rQrdfluD9Z7CcGcvAyYzGeUfaKXlT2hu2pFVET7Vh9D1J0EeEiZSAT2hafod6Xn46xQWf5myBSvA3TDFOWWZzQ7qiW5QUNe8d2ocCV9tNuKxsvNCx3/s1600/Puckett.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi5XBy8RzEa5V60qwZFojt255L-00rQrdfluD9Z7CcGcvAyYzGeUfaKXlT2hu2pFVET7Vh9D1J0EeEiZSAT2hafod6Xn46xQWf5myBSvA3TDFOWWZzQ7qiW5QUNe8d2ocCV9tNuKxsvNCx3/s1600/Puckett.PNG" /></a></div>
<br />
I'm not sure if this is a case FOR their comparables to be in the HOF, or if it is more of a case against their inclusion. By this standard, Biggio looks more like he belongs in the hall. Puckett was lucky he got in before of all of his PR mess.<br />
<br />
Now for the modern players, who are not finished quite yet*.<br />
<br />
<i>*I would argue that Vernon Wells is finished.</i><br />
<br />
Albert Pujols (233-98):<br />
Comparable pitchers: Whitey Ford (236-106), Pedro Martinez (219-100)<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhClBt4AMr5OnV13LZIy5SHNIWTvjyEJ07y82A7Xe7QxgfZTs7qj4odlqR8iQmGpWxCEfKHKXyEa-i1kfOAjSVJegJ0B30YVgeQIWvOu1s4v8-81GBi-GoQF_Vc6Cp1RZa3FRbMkh2GaeHt/s1600/Pujols.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhClBt4AMr5OnV13LZIy5SHNIWTvjyEJ07y82A7Xe7QxgfZTs7qj4odlqR8iQmGpWxCEfKHKXyEa-i1kfOAjSVJegJ0B30YVgeQIWvOu1s4v8-81GBi-GoQF_Vc6Cp1RZa3FRbMkh2GaeHt/s1600/Pujols.PNG" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
Miguel Cabera (182-87):<br />
Comparable Pitchers: Ron Guidry (170-91), Pedro Martinez (219-100), Sandy Koufax (165-87)<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj12WnkeSsoD16QksB4A6n-Em4iCN12w1gAvQuHWr33VIWyKpf-A1fVO3tskOajhIG-tZKDVEGmTy71r_yzsHFNJ-jItK6E8-ZiQVQVnbHocSeXxtgnt4frbfDnCJ61vih6Ja9cPB0EdF85/s1600/MCabrera.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj12WnkeSsoD16QksB4A6n-Em4iCN12w1gAvQuHWr33VIWyKpf-A1fVO3tskOajhIG-tZKDVEGmTy71r_yzsHFNJ-jItK6E8-ZiQVQVnbHocSeXxtgnt4frbfDnCJ61vih6Ja9cPB0EdF85/s1600/MCabrera.PNG" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
Vernon Wells (130-124):<br />
Comps: Cy Falkenberg (130-123), Pedro Astacio (129-124), Jon Lieber (131-124), Darryl Kile (133-119)<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiEa0R38sf1zqs2r6tEDKEt86gICkiuw8c5KQsF-PgrDz7vrDpYZd1bH5h_tsOnKre4EDNuWSYC2ucq8olCUYXAbPQ64zPpw1gC5_4GHd_xpGz4k3ITBFXa48xks_bCWXefuCDbEJauoJ1l/s1600/Wells.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiEa0R38sf1zqs2r6tEDKEt86gICkiuw8c5KQsF-PgrDz7vrDpYZd1bH5h_tsOnKre4EDNuWSYC2ucq8olCUYXAbPQ64zPpw1gC5_4GHd_xpGz4k3ITBFXa48xks_bCWXefuCDbEJauoJ1l/s1600/Wells.PNG" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
Adrian Beltre (183-156):<br />
Comps: Mark Buehrle (185-139), Mark Langston (179-158), Derek Lowe (176-157). Remember that Beltre has produced a lot of his value defensively - I am underwhelmed by these numbers.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiPnGtBsIDjGXXxojimRy0JaMbhIS5j-aGnFrDCHjCFEoKq_TJxwfKcr58lPX9Z3O4K8jiDI1pswY9qZDv0pO7MQEIKG6ECgOhHTDZe0rzGeHT85EyaE_snF-m7-3BUC4jqWlEtD3JDY07m/s1600/Beltre.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiPnGtBsIDjGXXxojimRy0JaMbhIS5j-aGnFrDCHjCFEoKq_TJxwfKcr58lPX9Z3O4K8jiDI1pswY9qZDv0pO7MQEIKG6ECgOhHTDZe0rzGeHT85EyaE_snF-m7-3BUC4jqWlEtD3JDY07m/s1600/Beltre.PNG" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
Adam Dunn (170-116):<br />
Comps: Bret Saberhagen (167-117), Rube Waddell (178-127), Bartolo Colon (185-128)<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjGl2ck4AoIaXxFSYQzF7JHAxLf7yiai3V8ALFj5FFItyRjRl_hbzr-6aiZmcJ5aPqXXbfLXToRGIyOslhqxVmP5lz8tJBqr1ddmmIeMeqzEmTwcE3VGJsvBgWioA-G9dHPoE3aj2RWLj3n/s1600/Dunn.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjGl2ck4AoIaXxFSYQzF7JHAxLf7yiai3V8ALFj5FFItyRjRl_hbzr-6aiZmcJ5aPqXXbfLXToRGIyOslhqxVmP5lz8tJBqr1ddmmIeMeqzEmTwcE3VGJsvBgWioA-G9dHPoE3aj2RWLj3n/s1600/Dunn.PNG" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
Pujols and Cabrera don't really even have comparables, they are that good - and they are also at the mid-points of their careers, before the decline phase which we see in some of these other players. Adding 4-5 seasons of .500 or close to .500 records will make a lot more pitching comparisons accurate and reasonable.<br />
<br />
I included Beltre because I thought he would have a surprisingly good record. He does not. I included Dunn because I thought he might be the equivalent of an innings eater. He wasn't - his Wx-Lx is actually good. This type of stat apparently likes his style of game - and doesn't take off points for his baserunning or defence. Vernon was about what I expected. Some good seasons, some mediocre, .500 overall.<br />
<br />
I could do this all day. And I might continue. But I think that is enough for now.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />simonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08053789051385270752noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1697358494613902278.post-52778707633721558722013-09-05T17:22:00.000-07:002013-09-05T17:23:11.639-07:00W - L for HittersBaseball fans learn to understand win loss records pretty quickly. At least until they become the dreaded sabermetricians who doubt everything they ever knew about win loss records.<br />
<br />
But, win-loss records are still a thing, and given a win loss record you probably have an 80% chance of understanding what kind of season that pitcher had. When I was a kid, Jack Morris came to play for the hometown blue jays and WON 20 GAMES. Well, he was worth 2.9 WAR that year, and his 4.04 ERA was not special. So that is a misleading example. I have already written about Cliff Lee and how much his 2012 6-9 record means.<br />
<br />
Anyways, yesterday I decided to turn RE24, which can transform into REW, into an equivalent win loss record that depends a little less on how the pitcher's team does in individual games and a little more about how the pitcher actually, you know, pitches. I can't go into what RE24 means again, so please <a href="http://baseballweblog.blogspot.ca/2013/09/the-win-is-dead-long-live-xwin.html">go read that one first</a>.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br /><br />
Today I realized that all players have RE24 (base our runs added). For each change of base/out state, equal and opposite RE24 are added or subtracted from the pitcher and hitter. If I can turn starting pitching REW (base out wins added) into a pitching win loss record, then why can't I turn hitting REW into a similar win loss record? I think there are at least two good reasons to try this:<br />
<br />
1. Pitching is no more than half the game in most cases - each team spends about half the time hitting, and pitching isn't pitching without defensive support. For starting pitching, it has become normal to throw 6 or 7 innings in a start, and consider that a <i>good</i> start. Fine. But then 2/3 of half the game is... 1/3? A starting pitcher may influence the game more than other players, but it's only tradition for a pitcher to get a win.<br />
<br />
2. Remember back in 2011 when Justin Verlander was in the middle of being really awesome and winning the Cy Young and MVP award? Well, one of the arguments went like this: JV pitches 250 innings, and each inning has more than 3 batters, so he is influencing more than 750 plate appearances - probably more like 1000 plate appearances - more than an everyday player. So why can't his impact be as large? Touche. However, in the context of RE24, there are some subtleties I would like to bring up.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.tangotiger.net/re24.html">Using 1993-2010 data from Tom Tango</a>, let's go through a few examples. Each time a pitcher comes into the game, the run expectancy is 0.544.<br />
<br />
1. When the pitcher gets a three-up-three-down inning, the pitcher gets +0.544 and the hitters get -0.544.<br />
<br />
2. Now, suppose the pitcher loads the bases with no outs. The RE is now 2.390. The pitcher has gone up from 0.544, so has accumulated -1.846. The batters have +1.846.<br />
a. The next batter hits a home run. 4 runs score, and the run expectancy goes down to 0.544 again. The pitcher has -4.00 so far, and the hitters have +4.00.<br />
b. The next three hitters get out without scoring a run. The pitcher goes up 2.390 now, bringing the total to +0.544 for the pitcher and +3.456 for the hitter.<br />
<br />
If you're with me, then you just had that feeling that may have happened when you were doing algebra homework as a kid, and suddenly everything cancelled each other out and you were left with x = 4. It's not quite that simple, I think because of errors and other stuff maybe? I'm still not sure who gets blamed for stolen bases.<br />
<br />
Anyways, the point remains that in most cases, the best a pitcher can do is to get through the inning without allowing any runs. That's good for about +0.544 RE24.<br />
<br />
For a batter, it's a different story. Grand slam with two outs? That's +3.186 in a single at bat. Solo shot with out out? That's worth +0.709. Double to score both of the men on first and second with no outs? That's worth +1.614. Batters get more opportunities to fail, but they can also put up numbers more quickly.<br />
<br />
I think both of these are reasons to actually do this comparison, because I want to see what batters are worth in a pitching W-L record context. Of course, this leaves out defence and some other stuff, so Miguel Cabrera is going to be ahead of Mike Trout in this stat.<br />
<br />
Now for the mechanics. I decided that plate appearances and innings pitched are similar, and gave them the relationship:<br />
<br />
IP = (PA - 200) * 0.5<br />
<br />
This makes a 600 PA season equivalent to 200 IP.<br />
A 750 plate appearance season is equivalent to 275 IP.<br />
At or below 200 PA, this doesn't make any sense.<br />
<br />
Then it follows the same structure as pitching Wx and Lx:<br />
<br />
Wx = (IP / 9.0 IPS / 2) + REW<br />
Lx = (IP / 9.0 IPS / 2) - REW<br />
<br />
I will post a bunch of tables of stats including Wx - Lx records and "IP" equivalent for batters. I only have included players with at least 300 PA.<br />
<br />
Let's start with some 2013 stats. For perspective, Clayton Kershaw leads MLB with a 16-7 Wx-Lx record. Here are the current MLB leaders in batting REW:<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg38s4ZAtgs1zkIHJ9rytOdhDccD1RoTeRipBDGJzVUf2-hNdZDxe1urb_kbHayviO9xXKNBEZoCfCy-5CUtk2rp-bAPKqL2LU4vQ_SSn-Ar9Asb1yYqb4LH9i1nhRK6BmKq9wgOea9reGb/s1600/WxLxTop20_2013.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg38s4ZAtgs1zkIHJ9rytOdhDccD1RoTeRipBDGJzVUf2-hNdZDxe1urb_kbHayviO9xXKNBEZoCfCy-5CUtk2rp-bAPKqL2LU4vQ_SSn-Ar9Asb1yYqb4LH9i1nhRK6BmKq9wgOea9reGb/s1600/WxLxTop20_2013.PNG" /></a></div>
<br />
Here are the middle 20, the .500 starters:<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjytmFJsQJbaL34iZcyEYIM088P0UXvC80FC425j90SesP0rtBJrFocoKOjr9BTQlAnAPfLf5Cac5_1FvBKSJWZfM6grnO-SFrH5AxYG_EpaSZv90E_Cd0TgDDVGd18_9_fnhgUOwgnCZsK/s1600/WxLxMiddle20_2013.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjytmFJsQJbaL34iZcyEYIM088P0UXvC80FC425j90SesP0rtBJrFocoKOjr9BTQlAnAPfLf5Cac5_1FvBKSJWZfM6grnO-SFrH5AxYG_EpaSZv90E_Cd0TgDDVGd18_9_fnhgUOwgnCZsK/s1600/WxLxMiddle20_2013.PNG" /></a></div>
<br />
And here are the worst 20:<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjdgdgwO-ApUn3K1XUUNQJjonqAP9SFcyJojHGmqzS37idk3G2Uhq64_RHbH59frkKVPtwT9pg6uU6-TzuTuz_Ar18qLcidnSewoiBdFKncE2lodpkjhmboSTPKIbdzbzne0R3BsWfymBYx/s1600/WxLxBottom20_2013.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjdgdgwO-ApUn3K1XUUNQJjonqAP9SFcyJojHGmqzS37idk3G2Uhq64_RHbH59frkKVPtwT9pg6uU6-TzuTuz_Ar18qLcidnSewoiBdFKncE2lodpkjhmboSTPKIbdzbzne0R3BsWfymBYx/s1600/WxLxBottom20_2013.PNG" /></a></div>
<br />
Here are the top 20 REW seasons since 1950. It is quite evident that in the early 2000s, Barry Bonds broke baseball. He went 23-0 twice and become the only player to go over 10 REW in a season. But remember how great skinny Barry Bonds was! His 1993 and 1996 seasons made this list. Of course, this stat only goes back to about 1950, so we miss all of Babe Ruth and the best of Ted Williams, Ty Cobb, Rogers Hornsby, Lou Gehrig, Jimmie Foxx, and others.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiEMniaTXRF4QlxI5ZwLLuDiS_QwVfvHQ17XIhLNjNuTa_KKYRgyfz1wD0mtIGMq8QRJodR8TTLl8tOxEaBPwcTfsvmPwZzo5AYbGGvsTYr0ZeomZMAPkPSZiGYjMgCnNTgehNBjxu-p_CF/s1600/WxLxTop20_Alltime.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiEMniaTXRF4QlxI5ZwLLuDiS_QwVfvHQ17XIhLNjNuTa_KKYRgyfz1wD0mtIGMq8QRJodR8TTLl8tOxEaBPwcTfsvmPwZzo5AYbGGvsTYr0ZeomZMAPkPSZiGYjMgCnNTgehNBjxu-p_CF/s1600/WxLxTop20_Alltime.PNG" /></a></div>
<br />
Here are the worst 20 REW seasons since 1950. It really is amazing that Neifi Perez was allowed to reach 585 plate appearances in 2002.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjy_SAt5YzznKjtr-uHPCZJqfckOZGQ5gGd8tht9-jxjx1wxV4qVotj_H-1P-Iw2BrskdNurK-lIknmX5pYPHcC5woqGbmo95hb9-mTkCM_f498iEhxhY33S9lkvINciMWi_xlZlD69myeM/s1600/WxLxBottom20_Alltime.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjy_SAt5YzznKjtr-uHPCZJqfckOZGQ5gGd8tht9-jxjx1wxV4qVotj_H-1P-Iw2BrskdNurK-lIknmX5pYPHcC5woqGbmo95hb9-mTkCM_f498iEhxhY33S9lkvINciMWi_xlZlD69myeM/s1600/WxLxBottom20_Alltime.PNG" /></a></div>
<br />
Here are the 20 seasons with the most plate appearances since 1950, the "highest workload" seasons. I find it amazing that 4 of the top six seasons occurred in only two seasons, 1975 and 2007.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhtG84GcBqO9wsMKd-ax0ncvlnhKuXVESfNY3_nJugVJ3v9iUO6MTbLLqRaCB0AgZ2Yl_UKzSMS8nLDc49tcUJ8ZS-7f2v_lj__Sel8x2yLIqCPC6zfJRECKTIsy6bJdvZgyUV6e7xpJnnx/s1600/WxLxMostPA.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhtG84GcBqO9wsMKd-ax0ncvlnhKuXVESfNY3_nJugVJ3v9iUO6MTbLLqRaCB0AgZ2Yl_UKzSMS8nLDc49tcUJ8ZS-7f2v_lj__Sel8x2yLIqCPC6zfJRECKTIsy6bJdvZgyUV6e7xpJnnx/s1600/WxLxMostPA.PNG" /></a></div>
<br />
I think that the next part of this should be in its own post, so I will do that instead. Stay tuned!<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />simonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08053789051385270752noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1697358494613902278.post-82212900784387639422013-09-05T06:55:00.004-07:002013-09-05T07:47:36.241-07:00The Win is Dead! Long Live the xWin!I was reading Joe Posnanski's <a href="http://joeposnanski.blogspot.ca/">blog</a>, as usual, when I went through <a href="http://joeposnanski.blogspot.ca/2013/09/burgers-sold-and-pitcher-wins.html">this article</a> and came across a comment by one of his Brilliant Readers, Stephanie. Which got me thinking that it's time for a blog post.<br />
<br />
The article is about the building support which has been apparently formalized into killing the win as a statistic because it's dumb. But maybe we should still keep it, because everyone knows the win and its a very easy to understand statistic. 20-5 is a great season. 11-13 is a mediocre season. 3-12 is a bad season. Ok.<br />
<br />
I've already been over this, but although wins and losses are certainly correlated with a good pitching season, <a href="http://baseballweblog.blogspot.ca/2013/06/weird-numbers.html">they can be incredibly misleading</a>. So I am proposing an alternative, a way to turn a very good and robust <i>advanced metric</i> into a win loss record. For now, let's call it xWins and xLosses, or Wx-Lx.<br />
<br />
First, a look at old wins and losses.<br />
<br />
To get a win, a starting pitcher must<br />
- pitch at least 5 innings<br />
- leave with his team in the lead<br />
- his team never gives away the lead and wins the game<br />
<br />
To get a loss, a starting pitcher must<br />
- start the game<br />
- leave the game with his team losing, and his team never comes back to even tie the game<br />
<br />
Ok. That's a weird statistic, right? Relief pitcher wins are even worse. For example, you could pitch 1/3 of an inning, give up 5 runs so that your team is tied or losing, but finish the inning. Now have your team mount a comeback in the next half inning, get pulled out of the game, and pick up the WIN.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<br />
There is a stat called <a href="http://joeposnanski.blogspot.ca/2013/09/stat-of-day-re24.html">RE24</a>, and it works for hitters and pitchers. It is similar to <a href="http://baseballweblog.blogspot.ca/2013/05/joey-bats-wins-game-by-himself.html">WPA</a>, which I have covered already in this blog. Basically, there are 8 base-runner situations that are possible:<br />
1. Nobody On<br />
2. Man on First<br />
3. Man on Second<br />
4. Man on Third<br />
5. Man on 1st and 2nd<br />
6. Man on 2nd and 3rd<br />
7. Man on 1st and 3rd<br />
8. Bases loaded<br />
<br />
There are also 3 out situations (0 1 or 2). 8 times 3 is 24 possible base/out states.<br />
<br />
Smart people have figured out that there is a certain "run expectancy" for each of the base/out states. With nobody out and the bases loaded, you expect to score way more runs than with 2 outs and the bases empty. When the hitter/pitcher complete a play, they get credit for the positive/negative outcome of that plate appearance. Good players accumulate positive credit.<br />
<br />
With every action by a hitter or pitcher, the state of the game changes. Runners on 1st and 2nd with one out? Expect to score 0.97 runs, on average. If the batter strikes out, the run expectancy changes to 0.47. The batter receives -0.50 RE24. The pitcher receives +0.50 RE24. If the batter hits a home run, the next state is one out with the bases empty (0.30 runs) - but three runs have scored (3.00 - 0.97 + 0.30 = 2.33). The hitter gets +2.33 RE24, and the pitcher gets -2.33 RE24.<br />
<br />
WPA cares more about how the actions affect the probability of the outcome of the game, so actions matter much much more late in tight games. RE24 only cares how actions relate to the probability of scoring runs, so a run early on in a blowout is worth just as much as the winning run in the bottom of the 12th.<br />
<br />
Fangraphs and Baseball-Reference seem to calculate RE24 differently, which is too bad. I will use the bbref version for all of this.<br />
<br />
Miguel Cabrera is currently leading MLB with 73.9 RE24, or "base out runs added". Chris Davis and Mike Trout are 2nd and 3rd with 66.3 and 66.1, respectively. These are huge totals, by the way - all of these guys are having monster seasons. Last year was led by Edwin Encarnation with less than 60. Cabrera has the 27th highest total since 1980, so it's a great season by this measure.<br />
<br />
Okay. That's the stat. Wasn't I writing about pitcher wins?<br />
<br />
So, Stephanie suggested that we normalize some of our more useful stats like WAR into a form that is more digestible by people who understand what a win loss record means. They don't really know or care that a 8.4 WAR season is awesome. They know* that a 20 win season is awesome.<br />
<br />
<i>*think</i><br />
<br />
I propose this:<br />
<br />
RE24 is in the form of runs - that is kind of abstract. Well, those same smart people can transform RE24 into Base Out Wins Added by normalizing to the run scoring environment of the era (for different scoring eras, different numbers of runs translate into different numbers of wins). So Miguel Cabrera's 73.9 RE24 is worth 6.9 REW (Base Out Wins Added). Clayton Kershaw's MLB leading 41.0 RE24 is worth 4.9 REW.<br />
<br />
RE24 is composed of both positive and negative components, which kind of cancel each other out. The websites give WPA+ and WPA-, but they do not give me RE24+ and RE24-, so I will do the best I can. I want to transform RE24 into a win loss record that is about the same magnitude as real win loss records.<br />
<br />
Here is the formula I am proposing, at least to start:<br />
<br />
Wx = (Innings Pitched / Innings Per Start) / 2 + REW<br />
Lx = (Innings Pitched / Innings Per Start) / 2 - REW<br />
<br />
That is pretty simple, I think.<br />
<br />
Innings Per Start (IPS) should be the same for everyone - you don't get extra credit for short starts. Let's be tough and make it 9.00 for everyone.<br />
<br />
When Innings Per Start is 9.00, Innings Pitched / Innings Per Start basically gives the equivalent number of complete game starts the pitcher made. Dividing it by 2 gives a .500 Wx-Lx record. That is, if REW was zero for a pitcher, that pitcher would have a .500 Wx-Lx record. REW adjusts the .500 record so that a good pitcher has more wins than losses, and a bad pitcher has more losses than wins.<br />
<br />
But does it work?<br />
You tell me.<br />
<br />
Top 20 in REW for 2013 (at least 10 GS):<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh_pfGN75Oit88pUygaH5paXt5Xmwn-MIEiux_c_YubMZ-q3RH8A3De2ZThIkPLuF6kj0ebe1j0tElEtrbu2Y-n-DbxQ8NvwewGKokAe3nv9alp8Ydh1r2JWaM_FdBnbO90P0Oa6MYLQKWp/s1600/WxLxTop20_2013.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh_pfGN75Oit88pUygaH5paXt5Xmwn-MIEiux_c_YubMZ-q3RH8A3De2ZThIkPLuF6kj0ebe1j0tElEtrbu2Y-n-DbxQ8NvwewGKokAe3nv9alp8Ydh1r2JWaM_FdBnbO90P0Oa6MYLQKWp/s1600/WxLxTop20_2013.png" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
Middle 20 in REW for 2013:<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjalVL9J7qf6A0FJL9nIScamCSxHI7vOJZiD7sHer5pAr_roPFoDW9-M0yZ8kEdB50Rpa3RElVAQYqVENqY686QDPeW76qB1cF8wziUTsjPH7-twgN3YWljz5vBEYUt3vOSOOwxvUbZoiv7/s1600/WxLxMiddle20_2013.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjalVL9J7qf6A0FJL9nIScamCSxHI7vOJZiD7sHer5pAr_roPFoDW9-M0yZ8kEdB50Rpa3RElVAQYqVENqY686QDPeW76qB1cF8wziUTsjPH7-twgN3YWljz5vBEYUt3vOSOOwxvUbZoiv7/s1600/WxLxMiddle20_2013.png" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
Bottom 20 in REW for 2013:<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh9rMSo3WFuaFx9dON_UevQhGxxdHTNAfC16YpdtxAY71DjqS86R2BYtJwBTAonjiL3weW6c_Qq6gwTDFLMUhU_cOdLlKpUgP5ubGBaZyxsdzn6VZJccV_p95c-YyayAcyrC-7go5ttD_2z/s1600/WxLxBottom20_2013.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em; text-align: center;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh9rMSo3WFuaFx9dON_UevQhGxxdHTNAfC16YpdtxAY71DjqS86R2BYtJwBTAonjiL3weW6c_Qq6gwTDFLMUhU_cOdLlKpUgP5ubGBaZyxsdzn6VZJccV_p95c-YyayAcyrC-7go5ttD_2z/s1600/WxLxBottom20_2013.png" /></a><br />
<br />
I think it works pretty well.<br />
<br />
Let's move away from 2013. What do full seasons look like? Do all-time great historical seasons get the proper treatment? When Felix won the Cy with 13 wins - what was his Wx-Lx record? Did Pedro and Randy Johnson and Greg Maddux and Sandy Koufax and Steve Carlton put up huge Wx-Lx records?<br />
<br />
Here are the top 20 REW seasons since they started calculating the statistic:<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgRfpHbqL15p_dMt3mM-mbWAoreXJWYmtS7fimrDvBZJx0ubCnPjlmWoRBNaQr_xZwYkEp5DXsl1Mx6h5f7JV6QTDAyDaYMZLE91EQ0vXbrhhqSydLnUFCxRTT_coKp3MEAMYAcfaGvqgYL/s1600/WxLxTop20_AllTime.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgRfpHbqL15p_dMt3mM-mbWAoreXJWYmtS7fimrDvBZJx0ubCnPjlmWoRBNaQr_xZwYkEp5DXsl1Mx6h5f7JV6QTDAyDaYMZLE91EQ0vXbrhhqSydLnUFCxRTT_coKp3MEAMYAcfaGvqgYL/s1600/WxLxTop20_AllTime.png" /></a></div>
<br />
Two Pedros, three Madduxes, three Koufaxes, two Seavers, Gibson in '68, Carlton in '72... and of course the Doc's ridiculous 1985. 276IP at 20 years old would just not happen anymore.<br />
<br />
And here are the worst 20 REW seasons:<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgu97eN2FNkZ0cUxCiYM2ys3hhpdk-5vZ_liA6KPESA4g2Kw6c83E2zUI26_5_PRxfpvNEnTwrekTd9F4-2B1pReRocbdAHX5p_WhbHEqSZaRCgQLAXXZKf18KqvdWpgbXSkpuq_4NuI0_p/s1600/WxLxBottom20_AllTime.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgu97eN2FNkZ0cUxCiYM2ys3hhpdk-5vZ_liA6KPESA4g2Kw6c83E2zUI26_5_PRxfpvNEnTwrekTd9F4-2B1pReRocbdAHX5p_WhbHEqSZaRCgQLAXXZKf18KqvdWpgbXSkpuq_4NuI0_p/s1600/WxLxBottom20_AllTime.png" /></a></div>
<br />
Oh right, last two. When Felix Hernandez won the Cy in 2010 with a 13-12 W-L record, his Wx-Lx was 19-9. That makes more sense. On the other hand, when Justin Verlander won the Cy and MVP in 2011 with a sparkly 24-5 record, his Wx-Lx was a slightly less impressive 20-8.<br />
<br />
So, what do you think?<br />
<br />simonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08053789051385270752noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1697358494613902278.post-46688520073205862602013-08-10T15:18:00.003-07:002013-08-10T16:36:45.540-07:00Least Valuable Sluggers (LVSs)Home runs are a nice thing. More home runs = better player, right?<br />
<br />
Clearly I think the answer is no, or I would not be writing this. There are other factors involved. Like every other thing that player does - defence, GIDPs, baserunning, walks, strikeouts, etc etc etc. As usual, let's turn to WAR.<br />
<br />
Here are the 10 least valuable 50 home run seasons of all time:<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgREnHEgEcGYr2tzs0FTn2p_XBLeHwE21qGvzUm8DF_kfQ7cJr-pER0DFeoj81EOPfXicURHJeb-YmW5I6odGkL9WKRoYGzhVi5tsM5zTH79-Ag7yl9veMIWpz4YT2WwxsLuHpdZ-s1umlF/s1600/50HR_WAR.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgREnHEgEcGYr2tzs0FTn2p_XBLeHwE21qGvzUm8DF_kfQ7cJr-pER0DFeoj81EOPfXicURHJeb-YmW5I6odGkL9WKRoYGzhVi5tsM5zTH79-Ag7yl9veMIWpz4YT2WwxsLuHpdZ-s1umlF/s1600/50HR_WAR.png" /></a></div>
Those are all good seasons. But considering 50+ HR, not <i>great</i> seasons. Wha happened?<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br /><br />
*cough*defense*cough* - defence is going to come up a lot during this post.<br />
<br />
Prince Fielder should be a DH, especially as he ages over the duration of that monster contract. He is entertaining to watch as he plays first base (the easiest position), but is not especially effective. In 2007 baseball reference rated him as 15 runs below average at first (better than -22 in 2006 when he posted a -0.7 WAR). That hurts.<br />
<br />
Prince still walks a lot, hit hits for average, and he slugs. So it's not a terrible season by any means. But still, 50 home runs is supposed to be legendary, right?<br />
<br />
What about the others on the list?<br />
Out of 10 seasons, there are only 6 players, who fit 2 profiles:<br />
1. Slugging first baseman who should be a DH because their defence is so bad<br />
(Mark McGwire, Prince Fielder, Ryan Howard, David Ortiz - already a DH)<br />
2. Slugging corner outfielder who should be a DH because their defence is so bad<br />
(3x Sammy Sosa, Greg Vaughn)<br />
<br />
Also, notice that every one of these seasons occurred between 1996 and 2007. 7 of 10 of these seasons occurred within the 5 year period 1996-2000.<br />
<br />
WAR is a context neutral stat, that is, it compares players relative to their peers. When the league as a whole hits a lot of home runs and scores a lot of runs, the relative value of a home run decreases. Sammy Sosa hit 63 home runs in 1999* and was worth less than 5 wins to a 67-95 Chicago Cubs team. That's crazy - except it's not. Sosa played bad defence, did bad baserunning, and did all his damage during one of the two craziest (the other being the 1930s) offensive eras ever.<br />
<br />
<i>*I have two favourite Sammy Sosa stats:</i><br />
<i>1. Sammy Sosa hit more than 60 home runs three times, in 1998, 1999 and 2001. He led the league in home runs twice. Which years did he lead the league in home runs? This is easier because of the above chart. But anyways, the correct answer is: not during any of these three seasons! He led with 50 in 2000 and 49 in 2002. </i><br />
<i>2. Sammy Sosa is listed at 165 pounds on his baseball reference page. Um... no.</i><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Moving on, here are the 10 least valuable 40-49 home run seasons of all time:<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjXsxJSS5YQZLzjP4fHZTXNkccokL1avRe0YxKxqNZOcKKXlxjV5en-jMZ3A6_nRgHisWjYiOxUIRcjZL9i7eBUvUMOdUZyc6o1p5sLRGVixu8MDmy6ouqcrspFb-hHLd8uSv9KGQxT2HEx/s1600/40HR_WAR.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjXsxJSS5YQZLzjP4fHZTXNkccokL1avRe0YxKxqNZOcKKXlxjV5en-jMZ3A6_nRgHisWjYiOxUIRcjZL9i7eBUvUMOdUZyc6o1p5sLRGVixu8MDmy6ouqcrspFb-hHLd8uSv9KGQxT2HEx/s1600/40HR_WAR.png" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
None of these seasons are "replacement value" yet - but we are getting close. How are these players so un-valuable despite their slugging prowess?<br />
<br />
Well yes, its the other parts of baseball, but it's fun to look at how those parts can overshadow what is ostensibly a good season, isn't it?<br />
<br />
First up is Adam Dunn. What a fascinating baseball player. In probably the most boring way possible. He hits home runs, he walks, he strikes out. He plays poor defence, if he is allowed to play defence at all. He is third all time (behind Mr. Derek Jeter and Gary Sheffield) in defensive runs below replacement. And he is not very valuable considering he hits lots of home runs. The only reason he did not lead the first list is probably that he has never hit 50 home runs. He hits 40 home runs. Every year*. Dunn is probably not a key part of a good baseball team. Over his first 106 games this year (leading up to today), he has hit 26 home runs** and has a WAR of 0.0.<br />
<br />
<i>*Adam Dunn hit </i>exactly <i>40 home runs for four consecutive years 2005-2008. </i><br />
<br />
<i>**26 home runs in 106 games projects to exactly 40 home runs over 162 games. Okay, 39.74.</i><br />
<br />
But Adam Dunn seasons don't really <i>appear</i> to be great seasons. At least not to me. "In 2006, Dunn hit .234 with 40 home runs and 92 RBIs, and struck out 194 times" - even Joe Morgan could tell that this is not a particularly great season, even with the home runs.<br />
<br />
Most of the other seasons on this list match that pattern - pretty low batting average, high strikeouts. Some of them have very high RBI totals, which could be sort of confusing and confounding. Most/all of these seasons are accompanied by terrible defensive ratings from 1B or corner outfield.<br />
<br />
One number in that table sticks out like crazy. One year, really. And that is Dante Bichette's 1.2 WAR Triple Crown attempt in 1995. Dante hit .340 (but since Tony Gwynn was still in the league he finished 3rd) and led the league with both 40 home runs and 128 RBIs in only 139 games*. He even led the league with 197 hits. And again, he finished with 1.2 WAR. If Mike Piazza and Tony Gwynn were not awesomer at batting average, Dante Bichette could have won the Triple Crown and probably would have won the MVP**. Am I wrong?<br />
<br />
<i>*Strike-shortened Schedule</i><br />
<br />
<i>**He finished 2nd to 5.9 WAR Barry Larkin</i><br />
<br />
This was the result of a brutal 18 runs below replacement at defence, poor baserunning, and a new ingredient: Coors Field, the greatest offensive ball park since the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baker_Bowl">Baker Bowl</a>*, or maybe ever. Since I know what's coming next, I am going to leave my rant until later. That's called foreshadowing**.<br />
<br />
<i>*280 ft to the right field wall</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>**<a href="http://www.rachellegardner.com/2012/10/writing-craft-foreshadowing/">it's not</a></i><br />
<br />
<br />
Here are the 10 least valuable 30 home run seasons of all time:<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgQiElix_nR7j_5My5gbK-im4puyunLJSpdbMjdisBg9NYeFuZNTfab8-JvPbeixVO0ntF0qrFx0aKTqT82OqwxbWxnn6Fu5Kgmy0bYqVJ2s2UrCwss7acDBRVs7FZ18ZYZqVA3qauL2vn1/s1600/30HR_WAR.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgQiElix_nR7j_5My5gbK-im4puyunLJSpdbMjdisBg9NYeFuZNTfab8-JvPbeixVO0ntF0qrFx0aKTqT82OqwxbWxnn6Fu5Kgmy0bYqVJ2s2UrCwss7acDBRVs7FZ18ZYZqVA3qauL2vn1/s1600/30HR_WAR.png" /></a></div>
<br />
Now we are really getting somewhere. There are nine seasons where a "replacement" player would have been more valuable than the 30 home run slugger on the team. I have a lot of digging and commenting to do about all of this, so try to stay with me. There has to be a lot of interesting stuff in here.<br />
<br />
<br />
10. Richie Sexson (+0.1)<br />
The 1999 Indians were one of the monster offensive teams we have ever seen, scoring 1009 runs. Sexson played 1B, LF, RF and DH poorly. He didn't walk - his OPS+ was only 102 (2% above average). He hit home runs and his teammates were pretty spectacular at getting on base - <i>six</i> had OBPs of .397 or better. They are the <i>only team in history</i> that had 6 players with an OBP over .395 (100 games or more each):<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiaOKuUMGOsY_XKA9TEeX3R_z8xUA2mnIxBHLfuSDBfX30072uPX83YonaTTHy__EERHWet1yG9Av28qAqOGompxvY8BS3l9NJPr37yTk5EyubrJ0vSKYE34liAwwNVuYMAZ9FcL29f2mlv/s1600/1999Indians.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiaOKuUMGOsY_XKA9TEeX3R_z8xUA2mnIxBHLfuSDBfX30072uPX83YonaTTHy__EERHWet1yG9Av28qAqOGompxvY8BS3l9NJPr37yTk5EyubrJ0vSKYE34liAwwNVuYMAZ9FcL29f2mlv/s1600/1999Indians.PNG" /></a></div>
<br />
By WAR, Sexson was the 15th most valuable position player on this team. But the rest of the team is more interesting than Sexson.<br />
<br />
The '99 Indians juggernaut lost to the Red Sox in the first round of the playoffs in a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1999_American_League_Division_Series#Cleveland_Indians_vs._Boston_Red_Sox">crazy and memorable playoff series</a>. Cleveland went up 2-0, then lost games 3 and 4: 9-3 and (yes) 23-7. This was the steroid era. Pedro Martinez left game 1 with a back injury. In game 5, he entered the game to start the fourth, with the score already tied 8-8. This was the steroid era. Pedro pitched 6 scoreless no-hit innings and the red sox won 12-8.Wow.<br />
<br />
<br />
9. Tony Batista (-0.2)<br />
Tony was a crazy guess hitter. I have never seen a batter swing at so many terrible pitches he had clearly decided to swing at before the ball left the pitcher's hand. By 2004, he was a one dimensional third baseman. His fielding actually wasn't that bad. His negative WAR, as far as I can tell, can mostly be attributed to Batista getting on base at a .270 clip. That's bad. His OPS+ was 81.<br />
<br />
.241 with 32 home runs and 110 RBIs doesn't sound that bad - but if that's all you get, then yeah, it's bad.<br />
<br />
<br />
8. Cory Snyder (-0.4)<br />
In 1987, I did not know about baseball or that Cleveland had any Indians. (In)famously, <a href="http://www.news-herald.com/articles/2012/04/16/sports/nh5368030.txt?viewmode=fullstory">Sports Illustrated picked Cory Snyder, Joe Carter and the Cleveland Indians to win it all</a>. They finished last in the major leagues at 61-101. Oops. Negative WAR from Snyder could not have helped.<br />
<br />
Snyder regressed during his second season, and his 33 home runs were not enough to offset a .273 OBP with 166 strikeouts. Snyder never fulfilled any potential and retired with a career .291 OBP.<br />
<br />
<br />
7. Adam Dunn (-0.4)<br />
We've already discussed Dunn - apparently when he doesn't hit 40 home runs, he doesn't have any sort of value at all. But, home runs are probably the best way to get paid for providing about 0 value.<br />
<br />
<br />
6. Joe Carter (-0.5)<br />
As a Jays fan, I'm sad to see aging hero Joe Carter on this list. We certainly didn't realize it at the time - Joe Carter drives in 100 runs <i>every</i> year - but his lack of on base skills certainly limited his overall career value.<br />
<br />
Carter retired after the 1998 season. After his legendary home run to end the 1993 World Series, Carter actually provided -1.8 WAR for the rest of his career despite averaging 24 home runs and 90 RBIs for his age 34-38 seasons. Carter went negative war 6 times in his 16 year career. This makes me kinda sad. I didn't think that Joe was a hall of famer, but I thought he was a pretty great outfielder.<br />
<br />
But he did hit <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oX2dJ4K0Oew">that home run</a>.<br />
<br />
<br />
5. Leon Wagner (-0.6)<br />
I'm not gonna lie - I've never heard of Leon Wagner before. In this 1964 season, he did post an OPS+ of 107 with those 30 home runs, so that's pretty good. It seems that this negative WAR season is largely attributable to terrible defensive ratings - 19 runs below replacement that year as a low value corner outfielder, and 79 runs below replacement over his 11 year career. I don't really know who is putting together defensive run metrics for players from the 1960s, but I personally will take them with a grain of salt.<br />
<br />
<br />
4. Tony Armas (-0.9)<br />
Is this Tony Armas Sr.? Yeah, apparently. Well, that is interesting in itself. In 1984, Armas hit a league leading 43 home runs to go with his 121 OPS. But it's 1983 on our list. That year, he hit 36 home runs with a dreadful <b>.254</b> OBP en route to an 85 OPS+. Ouch. To top it off, he was a below replacement outfielder that year.<br />
<br />
Which leads me to a different question, that has sort of been percolating for this entire post. And which will likely lead to another blog post. When we consider a "replacement level player", are we considering an overall player? Or are we considering, of the whole pool of players, replacement level defence and replacement level offence separately?<br />
<br />
I'll try to explain what I mean. I think that of all the AAA+ players, including major leaguers, a good defender is easier to find than a good hitter. That makes the defensive standard higher for the players who are good hitters - they have to match the standard of the easily-found defensive specialist. Hmm. More on that later.<br />
<br />
<br />
3. Dave Kingman (-1.0)<br />
I read a <a href="http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/writers/joe_posnanski/12/02/dave.kingman/">great piece about Dave Kingman</a> once that made me look up his career stats. It's a strange career. I'm not sure how much this happens, but he had one season that was much better than all of his other seasons, his 1979 season when he led the league in home runs, slugging and OPS.<br />
<br />
His last season was 1986, and he mostly played (played?) DH. The man obviously had power, to hit 35 home runs in his age 37 season. He signed on with the Giants the next year but couldn't get out of the minors and retired. His below-replacementness was clearly noted, despite his home run power.<br />
<br />
The 1986 Oakland A's went 76-86 with 21 year old Rookie of the Year Jose Canseco.<br />
The 1987 Oakland A's went 81-81 with 23 year old Rookie of the Year Mark McGwire.<br />
The 1988 Oakland A's went 104-58 and lost the world series to Kirk Gibson and the LA Dodgers.<br />
The 1989 Oakland A's went 99-63 and swept the Giants in the earthquake World Series.<br />
<br />
That team changed the game and probably launched the steroid era. But that's a topic for a different post.<br />
<br />
<br />
2. Mike Jacobs (-2.0)<br />
This only happened 5 years ago, so I'm kind of disappointed for not knowing about this already. Mike Jacobs was a power hitting first baseman who might be done with MLB by now. The Diamondbacks gave him 13 games last year, and he gave them -0.2 WAR. His career WAR totals go in the wrong direction:<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhDOe7bUbIwqcHAjERvQjGSqfLic6f6qCDYl6CEzAMaNv50jH4pBj74oKC0ZiggVNVYUe3AzE_kz_4C252g7H2-tjtTFVLOz330D6lJ3aUUe2MrlcJ14QUCnFm7g1PGaleU3cc7gb_dySC6/s1600/MJacobsWAR.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="290" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhDOe7bUbIwqcHAjERvQjGSqfLic6f6qCDYl6CEzAMaNv50jH4pBj74oKC0ZiggVNVYUe3AzE_kz_4C252g7H2-tjtTFVLOz330D6lJ3aUUe2MrlcJ14QUCnFm7g1PGaleU3cc7gb_dySC6/s400/MJacobsWAR.PNG" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
He starts good, gets worse, get's even worse for his monster (monster?) 27 year old 2008 season, then gets less worse as he fades into retirement. Which I find very interesting. Is it just me?<br />
<br />
Most of the negative value comes from terrible defensive ratings: -24 runs as a first basement is pretty tough to overcome. A .299 OBP is not really worth keeping on the field for bad defence, even with the power.<br />
<br />
<br />
1. Dante Bichette (-2.3)<br />
I already got to write a little bit about Dante Bichette, since his 1995 season appeared on our 40+ home run LVS list. But his 34-year-old 1999 takes the LVS award home for good! Congrats! (congrats?)<br />
<br />
In a 14 year career, Bichette played what I would call full seasons 12 times. In those years, he averaged .301/.339/.504 with 23 home runs and 93 RBIs. That's good, right? He accumulated 5.7 WAR in those 12 seasons. That's pretty insubstantial. He was 95 runs below replacement as a corner outfielder.<br />
<br />
The numbers are a mirage of course because he played most of those years in Coors Field pre-humidor. In his age 26-28 seasons with the Angels and the Brewers, he averaged .259/.293/.409 with 12 home runs and 51 RBIs during 118 games played. That's a first clue.<br />
<br />
The Rockies traded for Bichette as they prepared for their first season. He was readily available - that's the definition of a replacement player, right? Over the next seven seasons in Colorado, he totaled .316/.352/.540 and averaged 29 home runs and 118 RBIs. At Coors Field he hit .360/.397/.640 - it was a crazy place!<br />
<br />
Let's check out some of the Rockies's home splits before 2002, when the humidor was installed:<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjLiPohC7r2Fv8rtS15mbtDKNWWQAozsJskEqTN_0o8zNNFhL5MhinXDldRPBk1RF8Qwc3UNFoqmhSyueeDo1LhAr7pGu2HrH74ol8aHBaIaRSAa7-zeQkEDXwVBMR6Kwln-48tVuASlQls/s1600/CF_Home.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjLiPohC7r2Fv8rtS15mbtDKNWWQAozsJskEqTN_0o8zNNFhL5MhinXDldRPBk1RF8Qwc3UNFoqmhSyueeDo1LhAr7pGu2HrH74ol8aHBaIaRSAa7-zeQkEDXwVBMR6Kwln-48tVuASlQls/s1600/CF_Home.PNG" /></a></div>
<br />
And now the same list of players's away splits:<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiIa_sQhLdGDYoY2v4Jgy_rp6b2KZyCHj8HyuuodJa8_HPufkbGENclj3B39zEaHoH0AhfHLIxmnV_Dvv531XaQTk8KyBP8fy8GWGxBEHtMxBv0NPNRb2wNULX-a211XDuRKnFLnSxS_QCj/s1600/CF_Away.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiIa_sQhLdGDYoY2v4Jgy_rp6b2KZyCHj8HyuuodJa8_HPufkbGENclj3B39zEaHoH0AhfHLIxmnV_Dvv531XaQTk8KyBP8fy8GWGxBEHtMxBv0NPNRb2wNULX-a211XDuRKnFLnSxS_QCj/s1600/CF_Away.PNG" /></a></div>
<br />
A crazy place.<br />
<br />
Okay, but more about 1999 and LVS Dante. He hit 20 of those 34 home runs at home, but that still leaves 14 for the road. Not the worst. It's a boring reason, but the reason that 1999 is on the list so high is because of... a bad defensive rating - a whopping 34 runs below replacement as a corner outfielder. Coors Field was a hitters park in part because they put the fences back to compensate for the thin dry air that made baseballs travel so far. That left a <i>lot</i> of space for LVS Dante to cover.<br />
<br />
The 1999 Rockies scored 906 runs - but they allowed 1028. They were a disaster, going 72-90 to finish last in the NL West. Their hitters totaled 1.5 WAR - including a 5.1 WAR Larry Walker*. They allowed 1028 runs with a pitching staff that totaled 21.7 WAR - what a terrible environment to be in.<br />
<br />
Staff ace Pedro Astacio happened to be my fantasy baseball secret weapon that year - I started him on the road only and he was awesome. Overall he had a 5.04 ERA in 232 innings for a 5.9 WAR. On the road he went 12-6 with a 3.60 ERA. Of pitchers with an ERA over 5, Astacio has the highest WAR by far, with 1938 Bobo Newsom in second at 4.8. The ERA standard has to be lowered to 4.45 in order to find a higher WAR, 2000 Brad Radke at 6.2 (also during the steroid era).<br />
<br />
Which is all to say that players on the 1993-2001 Colorado Rockies probably collected some of the most misleading statistics there are - with Dante Bichette's weird 1999 leading the way.<br />
<br />
<br />
Well, that was fun.<br />
<br />simonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08053789051385270752noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1697358494613902278.post-15743905819978313092013-07-27T07:32:00.000-07:002013-08-10T16:37:12.374-07:00Ted Williams and war (Not that kind of WAR)There's a famous story about Ted Williams that goes something like this. Someone asked TW something, and he said something like "When I walk down the street, I want people to say, 'There goes the greatest hitter who ever lived' ".<br />
<br />
Clearly, I remember that story very well. And tell it even better.<br />
<br />
In any case. Is Ted Williams wrong? Is he <i>not</i> the best hitter who ever lived?<br />
<br />
Who else is <i>seriously</i> in the conversation?<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br /><br />
Going by baseball-reference WAR, the top 15 looks like this:<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh_DGXzhZX2PWZL3NokE9sUuTP62CQAHT8ysktJXx1owc43Y_nYEYpS7Pjc4pZ52PsqzxRR9RMjRgwFTmIFenLS2ZVBeuPLD43fnrXRbnYq9Wr8DymvqTqR6zGsSaJmNLV5S3lGa5M83vL-/s1600/WAR_Top15.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em; text-align: center;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh_DGXzhZX2PWZL3NokE9sUuTP62CQAHT8ysktJXx1owc43Y_nYEYpS7Pjc4pZ52PsqzxRR9RMjRgwFTmIFenLS2ZVBeuPLD43fnrXRbnYq9Wr8DymvqTqR6zGsSaJmNLV5S3lGa5M83vL-/s1600/WAR_Top15.PNG" /></a><br />
<br />
I think the best hitter conversation can easily be confined to these players, and probably fewer. Who else? There's good ol Shoeless Joe, who had his career cut short by bad decision making. There's Albert Pujols, who is not done yet (92.8 WAR in 13 seasons. At age 33; he could get to 110 with another 6 years averaging 3.0 WAR). There's also Joe DiMaggio, who got to 78.2 WAR in 13 seasons. But he was more of a<b> </b><i>best ballplayer ever</i><b style="font-style: italic;"> </b>candidate than he was a greatest hitter ever candidate, right?<br />
<br />
Because as far as I can tell, that story that I re-told so well about Ted Williams tells us at least 2 things about Ted Williams:<br />
1. He didn't care about fielding (other stories would back this up)<br />
2. He considered himself to be a damn good hitter<br />
<br />
Now, Ted is #11 on that WAR list, just behind Eddie Collins and just ahead of A-Rod. But for argument's sake, let's agree with Ted. Fielding is stupid. Here is the list of all-time leaders of <i>offensive </i>WAR only:<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjwYj-SO8O6OZhdDTM1QJ_EEq4Om6XwnznnsPpnl3HJobQZWWPJw6vYJB2j4FKa0TrIxJsooH0zW5jsRuGCVKNBMNlshGJEM6MMUZByIawgdzuP0xKLb4NQpTyIV_P-hhSVzEi0UNp7oLcX/s1600/Top15_oWAR.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjwYj-SO8O6OZhdDTM1QJ_EEq4Om6XwnznnsPpnl3HJobQZWWPJw6vYJB2j4FKa0TrIxJsooH0zW5jsRuGCVKNBMNlshGJEM6MMUZByIawgdzuP0xKLb4NQpTyIV_P-hhSVzEi0UNp7oLcX/s1600/Top15_oWAR.PNG" /></a></div>
<br />
On this list, TW is up to sixth. Now we are getting somewhere. But still. 126 is a long way behind the gold standard of hitting Babe Ruth, the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyrite">pyrite</a> standard Barry Bonds, and the other all time greats ahead of him.<br />
<br />
Well, let's also look at some of the more "traditional" stats leaderboards. This is a list of the 500 HR club, sorted by batting average:<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj3eQVWUhWYHqbqzM42B2YMj-0ibpPhxclkJjphtH5BOKkPho6gZDSi3ZQZt04Y_rIp6dGkVkH4z5PaXouH5Wf2Tp16MtwNBo0gU189YeagaqGpve2ssIYHAY8opyOFbg8LNE_bAQwdVbXn/s1600/500HRavg.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj3eQVWUhWYHqbqzM42B2YMj-0ibpPhxclkJjphtH5BOKkPho6gZDSi3ZQZt04Y_rIp6dGkVkH4z5PaXouH5Wf2Tp16MtwNBo0gU189YeagaqGpve2ssIYHAY8opyOFbg8LNE_bAQwdVbXn/s1600/500HRavg.png" /></a></div>
<br />
In terms of overall career leaders, Williams is:<br />
T-7th in batting average<br />
1st in on base percentage<br />
2nd in slugging percentage<br />
2nd in OPS and OPS+<br />
4th in walks<br />
T-18th in HR<br />
14th in RBI<br />
19th in runs scored<br />
21st in TB<br />
<br />
Okay, well the rate stats are better than his standings in WAR. But it's not exactly 1st across the board, is it.<br />
<br />
Why am I writing this web log post?<br />
<br />
It basically has to do with that other kind of war. You know, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II">that kind</a>. And <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_war">that kind</a>. In addition to being a bad-ass triple-crown-winning major league hitter, Ted Williams also became a bad-ass fighter pilot.<br />
<br />
In contrast to those players above him on the list, TW played just 19 seasons. A closer look: he played more than 40 games 17 seasons; more than 100 games 15 seasons. In the two <40 game seasons, he got 2.3 WAR. In the 17 other seasons, he made it to 120.9 WAR. In the list of career leaders, he only really lags behind in the accumulation statistics.<br />
<br />
He debuted in 1939 at age 20; he retired after 1960 at age 41. He missed <i>all</i> of 1943, 1944 and 1945 because of the war - <i>his age 24, 25 and 26 seasons</i>. He missed all but 43 games of 1952 and 1953, his age 33 and 34 seasons.<br />
<br />
My point is this. More than any other great player (Joe DiMaggio, Hank Greenberg, Johnny Mize and a few others can also certainly complain), war robbed Ted Williams of the prime of an astounding career.<br />
<br />
Consider:<br />
In 1941, TW hit .406/.553/.735 with 37 HR<br />
In 1942, TW hit .356/.499/.648 and won the triple crown<br />
In 1946, TW hit .342/.497/.667 with 38 HR<br />
<br />
In 1951, TW hit .318/.464/.556 with 30 HR<br />
In 1954, TW hit .345/.513/.635 with 29 HR in only 117 games<br />
<br />
My point is that these were not seasons on the periphery of an otherwise great career. No, these were <i>five</i> seasons of prime that are gone forever. I am always so sad to find missing data points, and these ones hurt.<br />
<br />
In 1953, 34 year old TW returned from war on August 6 and hit .407/.509/<b>.901</b> in 37 games.<br />
To put that in some sort of perspective, in Yasiel Puig's first 27 games this year, at the height of everyone going nuts, he went .443/.473/.745.<br />
<br />
So, of course, the exercise is this. Put a reasonable five prime years back into Williams' career, and what do his totals look like?<br />
<br />
No doubt there are others on the internet machine who have done this already. I didn't look on purpose, because I want to try it myself. And I don't actually know what I will decide yet about his G.O.A.T candidacy. But basically we are going to compare Williams to Babe Ruth (hitting only!*), remembering that Ruth also "missed" part of his hitting career by being a full time pitcher the first 3-4 seasons of his career (1200 IP).<br />
<br />
<i>*Since I am comparing </i>hitting only<i>, we will not include the argument (that will never be beat) that Ruth was a dominant pitcher </i>and<i> a dominant hitter.</i><br />
<br />
I will look at it in three ways:<br />
Low - Ted happened to miss all of his worst seasons, imagine that!<br />
Medium - Those missed years look an awful lot like his other prime years<br />
High - Ted happened to miss all of his best seasons. Dammit!<br />
<br />
Here's what I did:<br />
For the years 1943-1945, I took the average of 1941, 1942, 1946 and 1947 for all counting stats. Then I multiplied by a percentage. This has the effect of making his rate statistics the average of those years.<br />
<br />
For Williams, it seems to me that, when he is in the lineup, he is Ted Williams. The thing causing him to fluctuate in counting totals is just the number of games he plays and the number of plate appearances he accumulates.<br />
<br />
For 1952-1953, the same logic applies. Like I wrote before, when he actually played at the end of 1953 he was a monster, and he hit .388 and homered his age at 38, so I don't think I need to worry too much about the effect of age at 33 and 34. I took his level of on-field performance to be an average of his performance 1950-1955 inclusive. I multiplied this performance by a certain number of plate appearances and added it to his actual totals from 1952-1953, (which were outstanding). The "low" estimate is composed of fewer plate appearances than the "high" totals.<br />
<br />
Okay. For 1943-1945, I multiplied by the following percentages to get the following seasons:<br />
Low - 90% of avg totals.<br />
Medium - 98% of avg totals<br />
High - 103% of avg totals.<br />
<br />
Note that the three 1943-1945 seasons I've simulated are all identical:<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgr6CG_i9asDBDoxMQ-UEhEvCKHj3vq7xuctd4FgIXk1MIH6d7v5GLEJRxSrzO8txzauI164MwJNB_q0qmUk27DTaE9ChB63pasz7r7Q7vsb8hqrzyWWuonAs6PxfS4EL6KuZykJchLKgSd/s1600/1943-1945.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgr6CG_i9asDBDoxMQ-UEhEvCKHj3vq7xuctd4FgIXk1MIH6d7v5GLEJRxSrzO8txzauI164MwJNB_q0qmUk27DTaE9ChB63pasz7r7Q7vsb8hqrzyWWuonAs6PxfS4EL6KuZykJchLKgSd/s1600/1943-1945.png" /></a></div>
<br />
For 1952 & 1953, I added the following number of plate appearances*:<br />
Low - 400 in 1952 (TW actually had 12) / 300 in 1953 (TW actually had 110)<br />
Medium - 450 / 350<br />
High - 500 / 400<br />
<br />
<i>*TW's PA totals from 1950-1955 are: 416, 675, 12, 110, 526, 416. A 500 PA season seems fairly optimistic</i><br />
<br />
Here are the 1952 and 1953 seasons I have simulated:<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEintp_7d1RzfyRpWlkkL7XuPEuPRCOIA04dI_opl__ZjTK7ouSd9jzC1TmyeAc2MQtKMk3RTHMS0mxIYPj0hshIuW_nRSaCxa2_bZqDDFvtlIUPWPCtTRTdIM48nWB-MVXUrTEDj8FSrr6h/s1600/1952-1953.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEintp_7d1RzfyRpWlkkL7XuPEuPRCOIA04dI_opl__ZjTK7ouSd9jzC1TmyeAc2MQtKMk3RTHMS0mxIYPj0hshIuW_nRSaCxa2_bZqDDFvtlIUPWPCtTRTdIM48nWB-MVXUrTEDj8FSrr6h/s1600/1952-1953.png" /></a></div>
<br />
In this case, the seasons are different because he played part of both, which were added to the simulated war time replacement. It's also interesting that my "high" estimate 1953 has worse rate stats than the "low" 1953. This is because in the 37 games Williams played in 1953, his rate stats were off the charts.<br />
<br />
Alright. So this brings us to career totals time:<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgUXQASWlmv1vQ06jUdJKzHr4goz0zWUI1NJhIFQ5yaBy7IuVDkSKCDDN4nNqo56yVAc71wh5L-SnJUlgkXN1jEUygrfle_fULk9KTEcbGUgFNPJjh4Nx8W8E_G0YlE_g9hI2ivxrXn6pfQ/s1600/TWSummary.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgUXQASWlmv1vQ06jUdJKzHr4goz0zWUI1NJhIFQ5yaBy7IuVDkSKCDDN4nNqo56yVAc71wh5L-SnJUlgkXN1jEUygrfle_fULk9KTEcbGUgFNPJjh4Nx8W8E_G0YlE_g9hI2ivxrXn6pfQ/s1600/TWSummary.png" /></a></div>
<br />
Since I brought it up at the start, I should also do a WAR comparison. I will give Williams 10 WAR/year for 1943-1945 (that's crazy but it's actually legit - he averaged 10.5/year 1941-1947 and 7 WAR/year for 1952-1953, just under his 1951 and 1954 totals.<br />
<br />
That adds a total of 41.7 WAR and moves his career WAR from 123.2 to <b>164.9</b>, good enough for 1st on the career position player WAR leaderboard.<br />
<br />
<b>What is my verdict?</b><br />
I still think it's a good question. It was a good question at the start of this post and it's still a good question after all of this. Williams shortcomings when compared to the other all-time greats have mostly been that he did not play enough to accumulate historically mind-blowing totals. So if he had them, at his career-normal rates, would be be considered the greatest hitter of all time?<br />
<br />
First, given the <i>high</i> estimates. Is Williams's <i>high</i> career greater than Ruth's?<br />
I think... no. Sort of. Mostly. Williams becomes the all-time leader in WAR, runs, RBIs and walks. He moves into the top 6 in basically every important offensive category except triples and stolen bases. But he is still second in slugging, second in OPS, second in OPS+. He is first in OBP and walks, by a large margin. It's tough. It's opinion. Finally it is a close call. But to me, the Babe puts it over the top with the ridiculousness of his best seasons. In this case, Williams was better for longer. Ruth had a more spectacular peak.<br />
<br />
These two plots show the WAR of Ruth and Williams (with my estimates) over their careers. The first plots in chronological order. The second plots in sequential order with the best seasons first. The difference between them, for me, lies in the peak. Ruth has 6 seasons above Williams's best. And just so we are clear , 10 WAR in a season is historical territory. These are crazy seasons.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjK9U2VXoCZKyIavZU0gtT1V3t6sjrpwYYz_0gq7NIqcz5EpWrmkPFBWW0dy_gDPs7TQFfz0rkZcAPxJ64GUNPjYZVGYN18K3qaZ5IRgoTxQhZUhoNq6y1FaVKBMJubvUXoRxJg4gG9ZbiW/s1600/WARchrono.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="464" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjK9U2VXoCZKyIavZU0gtT1V3t6sjrpwYYz_0gq7NIqcz5EpWrmkPFBWW0dy_gDPs7TQFfz0rkZcAPxJ64GUNPjYZVGYN18K3qaZ5IRgoTxQhZUhoNq6y1FaVKBMJubvUXoRxJg4gG9ZbiW/s640/WARchrono.png" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgv3_JMXEbADaIHO_HERKORmYUB-X9YgLIvmgSq8-n3ljJuKGCSCo5lxHOxLum0b4Ea_rRVyOZGHWx2P0z33rWLUmLDFy6XKiSOAcxN2aia-4-5gOU7FMjPJLU_2OGUd7T-IFfP9pekWUay/s1600/WARbesttoworst.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="464" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgv3_JMXEbADaIHO_HERKORmYUB-X9YgLIvmgSq8-n3ljJuKGCSCo5lxHOxLum0b4Ea_rRVyOZGHWx2P0z33rWLUmLDFy6XKiSOAcxN2aia-4-5gOU7FMjPJLU_2OGUd7T-IFfP9pekWUay/s640/WARbesttoworst.png" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
The next questions I would ask would be how the <i>medium</i> and <i>low</i> career totals stack up. It's kinda moot for my opinion, but I think it puts Williams firmly in second with an argument available for first, if he is not already there.<br />
<br />
Ruth put up a career .690 slugging percentage, which is the single greatest factor for me in this argument*. Their other rate statistics - BA and OBP - are close. But Ruth crushes Williams, and every other ball player ever, at hitting for power. Ruth led the league 13 out of 14 years in both slugging percentage and OPS. It's not surprising that he would become the all time leader.<br />
<br />
<i>*There are only 46 </i>seasons <i>in baseball history that top Ruth's .690 career mark - 10 of these belong to Ruth. Two belong to Williams. There are only 36 non-Ruth seasons by 20 different players who have managed to top Ruth's career .690. Wow.</i><br />
<br />
Also, I've written this post about replacing Ted Williams's lost seasons with full ones. The same could be written for Ruth - if the Red Sox hadn't bothered making him a pitcher, I could add 3-4 full time seasons to his career totals. But, these seasons would be his age 20-22 seasons, and in the dead ball era - not exactly prime time for hitting.<br />
<br />
At least two more things should also be considered:<br />
<br />
1. During WWII, most of the good players went to fight in the war. So there's no way around that. But by some chance if Williams stayed, he would have been playing against inferior competition. His stats would likely have been further inflated and it's not unreasonable to think he would/should have won some more MVP awards and/or triple crowns.<br />
<br />
2. At any point during those five seasons, anything could have happened on the ball field or otherwise (although it's hard to argue he would have been in <i>more</i> danger playing baseball) to end his career completely or otherwise ruin it and prevent him from ever becoming a hall of famer, let alone an all time great.<br />
<br />simonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08053789051385270752noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1697358494613902278.post-54357420210068235002013-07-19T17:15:00.001-07:002013-08-10T16:37:36.332-07:00Triple CrownsSince this is the Base Ball Web Log, when I say Triple Crown, I mean the baseball triple crown. And I'm going to keep it to hitters - for now. The Triple CCrown is when a hitter leads his league in HR, RBI and AVG. I think it's because that's all anyone cared about in the 1930s. You may have a different theory.<br />
<br />
Anyways, the Triple Crown has been won <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_League_Baseball_Triple_Crown">17 times</a>, most recently last year by Miguel Cabrera. The pitching Triple Crown is less rare, and has been achieved <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_League_Baseball_Triple_Crown">38 times</a>.<br />
<br />
Last year, during the Jocks Vs Nerds Great MVP Debate, <a href="http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/tom_verducci/09/25/miguel-cabrera-triple-crown/index.html">Tom Verducci</a> wrote that Mike Trout was actually on his way to a rarer triple crown: leading the league in runs, stolen bases and WAR. That has been done 14 times by only 8 players.<br />
<br />
The traditional Triple Crown is tough to do because it's hard to hit for power and average. Those skills don't necessarily or usually go hand-in-hand. Defence aside, you can get a job as a <a href="http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/d/dunnad01.shtml">.250 power hitter</a>, and you can also get a job as a <a href="http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/c/carewro01.shtml">.350 slap hitter</a>. You cannot generally get a job as a <a href="http://baseballweblog.blogspot.ca/250SlapHitter">.250 slap hitter</a>. You can definitely get a job as a <a href="http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/c/cabremi01.shtml">.350 power hitter</a>.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br /><br />
But really, it is a two-faceted triple crown. It is actually not that rare to lead in home runs and RBI, because the two stats are related. RBI is not a great stat. When you hit a lot of home runs, you drive in more batters because A) you drive in yourself more, and B) other players are on base sometimes when you hit home runs.<br />
<br />
There is the "slash" triple crown, or SABR triple crown, which is when a batter leads the league in AVG/OBP/SLG. These things are also related - a high average + walks fuels a high OBP, and a high avg + power fuels a high SLG. It's obviously impossible to win the slash triple crown with a low average. I could write a whole post about slash triple crowns*, so I will leave those alone for now.<br />
<br />
<i>*And I would like to</i><br />
<br />
So the questions I have are like this. What is the weirdest triple crown that someone has actually pulled off? What are some other interesting triple crowns? What are some of the most predictable triple crowns?<br />
<br />
Well, I will start with one that has never actually happened, but I would love to see someone pull this one off: lead the league in 2B, 3B and HR. A player would have to be fast, powerful, and get an absurd number of extra base hits. It is not uncommon for young players to hit more doubles early in their career, with HR increasing and 2B decreasing as they reach their prime. 2B are liners into the gap, but also near-HR. Batters can only produce so many of those style of hits before things get crazy.<br />
<br />
Anyways*, this is not something I know how to directly search for, so I will approach it in a roundabout way. There are 106 seasons where players have at least 30 2B, 30 HR and at least 7 3B. I would expect it to be impossible to lead a league with less than any of those numbers, right? (Well, since 1920)<br />
<br />
<span style="font-style: italic;">*I type that a lot in this blog... don't know if that's a good or a bad thing.</span><br />
<span style="font-style: italic;"><br /></span>
Of those 106 seasons:<br />
Players led the league in 2B and 3B 2 times<br />
Players led the league in 2B and HR 3 times<br />
Players led the league in 3B and HR 1 time<br />
<br />
Okay, so those are pretty sparse, that's only 6 seasons. What happened to the third leg of MY triple crown (2B/3B/HR)? league leaders are in <b>bold</b>, and this is listed in reverse chronological order. None of these seasons have occurred since 1950.<br />
<br />
1. In 1949, 28 year old Stan Musial went <b>41</b>/<b>13</b>/36. He finished second in HR to Ralph Kiner, who had 54.<br />
<br />
2. In 1948, 27 year old Stan Musial went <b>46</b>/<b>18</b>/39. He finished third in HR, behind Ralph Kiner and Johnny Mize, who <i>tied for the lead with 40</i>. It's so sad. This is definitely the closest anyone has* come to this triple crown. Musial also led the league in runs, hits, RBI, AVG, OBP, and SLG. This is one of the finest all-around seasons ever.<br />
<br />
<i>*will ever?</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
3. In 1940, 29 year old Hank Greenberg went <b>50</b>/8/<b>41</b>. His teammate Barney McCosky led the league with 19 triples.<br />
<br />
4. In his ("real") Triple Crown season of 1934, 25 year old Joe "Ducky" Medwick went <b>56</b>/10/<b>31</b>. He tied for 6th in triples, behind Arky Vaughan who had 17.<br />
<br />
5. In 1928, 28 year old Jim Bottomley went 42/<b>20</b>/<b>31</b>. He finished tied for 3rd in doubles, behind Paul Waner, who had 50.<br />
<br />
6. In 1922, in one of the most ridiculous offensive seasons ever, 26 year old Rogers Hornsby went <b>46</b>/14/<b>42</b>. He also led the league in runs (141), hits (250), RBI (152), AVG (.401), OBP (.459), SLG (.722) and TB (450). Alas, he finished 5th in triples, behind Jake Daubert, who had 22.<br />
<br />
There is no Babe Ruth on this list. He never led the league in 2B or 3B. He was too busy hitting home runs, walking, and striking out*.<br />
<br />
<i>*Brilliant segue</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
The next triple crown I want to find is the so-called three-outcome player. This player hits home runs, walks, and strikes out. He apparently tries to avoid hitting the ball to the defence?<br />
<br />
Who has pulled off this triple crown - how rare is it to be the best at all of these things? (Hint: Adam Dunn has never led the league in all three things, mostly because he has never led the league in HR)<br />
<br />
And the winners (in reverse chronological order) are (BB/SO/HR):<br />
<br />
1. Dale Murphy (1985) went 90/141/37<br />
2. Mike Schmidt (1983) went 128/148/40<br />
3. Mickey Mantle (1958) went 129/120/42<br />
4. Hack Wilson (1930) went 105/84/56<br />
5. Babe Ruth (1928) went 137/87/54<br />
6. Babe Ruth (1927) went 137/89/607. Babe Ruth (1924) went 142/81/46<br />
8. Babe Ruth (1923) went 170/93/41<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
1. Dale Murphy finished 7th in MVP voting</div>
<div>
2. Mike Schmidt finished 3rd in MVP voting</div>
<div>
3. Mickey Mantle finished 5th in MVP voting</div>
<div>
4. Hack Wilson finished... was there <a href="http://www.baseball-reference.com/awards/mvp_cya.shtml">no MVP voting in 1930</a>? Well, with 191 RBIs, he would have finished 1st.</div>
<div>
5-7. Babe Ruth was disqualified from MVP voting due to the rule that you could only win once</div>
<div>
8. Ruth won his first (and only) MVP</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
All of these triple crown seasons were still quite valuable - despite the strikeouts. Drawing walks and hitting home runs are pretty good ways to help your team win.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
On to the next.</div>
<div>
What about a triple crown of... singles, steals and... what else makes an awesome leadoff hitter? OBP?</div>
<div>
Nope, <b>nobody</b> has managed to pull that one off. The closest seems to be... Richie Ashburn, in 1958. He led the league with a .440 OBP and 176 singles. And finished second with 30 steals to Willie Mays, who had 31. CLOSE. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Okay. What about... HBP, GIDP and SF. That would be a strange one. Also... no. Only two players have led the league at any two of those things.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
1. In 1986, Gary Carter led the league with 21 GIDP and 15 Sac Flies. He tied for 6th with 6 HBP, behind Tim Wallach, who had 10.</div>
<div>
2. In 2004, Miguel Tejada led the league with 24 GIDP and 14 Sac Flies. He finished with 10 HBP, well behind a two way tie at 17.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
What is <i>actually</i> the best triple crown to win? I guess it depends what you value. What about a double-crown of value? Did anyone lead their league in offensive WAR <i>and</i> defensive WAR? I guess the "triple" would be adding the leader in <i>overall </i>WAR.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Three players have pulled off the WAR double crown (oWAR/dWAR):</div>
<div>
1a. 30 year old Cal Ripken (9.2/3.4) in 1991</div>
<div>
1b. 23 year old Cal Ripken (7.5/3.6) in 1984</div>
<div>
2. 24 year old Willie Mays (8.6/2.0) in 1955</div>
<div>
3. 26 year old Snuffy Stirnweiss (6.6/2.8) in the war year 1945 (pun sort of intended)</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Okay, I'll do one more. How about total bases, walks and... batting average. I would also assume that these players would be from the subset of slash triple crown winners. Leading a league in batting average and walks is a deadly combo. Or, batting average and total bases is a power-packed average. I think that these, or contenders for this triple crown, would be some of the best seasons we have seen.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
There are five winners, and a handful of contenders. First the winners (TB/BB/AVG):</div>
<div>
1. 28 year old Ted Williams in 1947 (335/162/.343)</div>
<div>
2. 23 year old Ted Williams in 1942 (338/145/.356)</div>
<div>
3. 30 year old Jimmie Foxx in 1938* (398/119/.349)</div>
<div>
4. 28 year old Rogers Hornsby in 1924 (373/89/.424)</div>
<div>
5. 29 year old Babe Ruth, also in 1924 (391/142/.378)</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<i>*I always forget that Jimmie Foxx played for the Red Sox. But he played for them for 6.5 years starting in his age 28 1936 season.</i></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Now about some of the contenders for this triple crown, and by that I mean these winners of at least two legs:</div>
<div>
In 2005, 29 year old Derrek Lee went <b>393</b>/85/<b>.335</b></div>
<div>
In 2004, 39 year old Barry Bonds went 303/<b>232</b>/<b>.362</b></div>
<div>
In 2002, 37 year old Barry Bonds went 322/<b>198</b>/<b>.370</b></div>
<div>
In 2000, 26 year old Todd Helton went <b>405</b>/103/<b>.372</b></div>
<div>
In 1967, 27 year old Carl Yastrzemski went <b>360</b>/91/<b>.326</b> in one of the all time great (and real (and slash) Triple Crown) seasons</div>
<div>
In 1966, 30 year old Frank Robinson went <b>367</b>/87/<b>.316</b> (real and slash Triple Crown)</div>
<div>
In 1958, 26 year old Mickey Mantle went <b>307</b>/<b>129</b>/.304</div>
<div>
In 1956, 24 year old Mickey Mantle went <b>376</b>/112/<b>.353</b> (real Triple Crown)</div>
<div>
In 1955, 20 year old Al Kaline went <b>321</b>/82/<b>.340</b></div>
<div>
In 1952, 31 year old Stan Musial went <b>311</b>/96/<b>.336</b></div>
<div>
In 1951, 30 year old Stan Musial went <b>355</b>/98/<b>.355</b></div>
<div>
In 1949, 30 year old Ted Williams went <b>368</b>/<b>162</b>/.343*</div>
<div>
In 1948, 29 year old Ted Williams went 313/<b>126</b>/<b>.369</b></div>
<div>
In 1946, 27 year old Ted Williams went <b>343</b>/<b>156</b>/.342</div>
<div>
In 1941, 22 year old Ted Williams went 335/<b>147</b>/<b>.406</b></div>
<div>
In 1939, 26 year old Johnny Mize went <b>353</b>/92/<b>.349</b></div>
<div>
In 1935, 23 year old Arky Vaughan went 303/<b>97</b>/<b>.385</b> (slash Triple Crown .385/.491/.607 from a SS)</div>
<div>
In 1934, 31 year old Lou Gehrig went <b>409</b>/109/<b>.363</b> (real and slash Triple Crown)</div>
<div>
In 1933, 25 year old Jimmie Foxx went <b>403</b>/96/<b>.356</b> (real Triple Crown)</div>
<div>
In 1928, 33 year old Babe Ruth went <b>380</b>/<b>137</b>/.323</div>
<div>
In 1928, 32 year old Rogers Hornsby went 307/<b>107</b>/<b>.387</b></div>
<div>
In 1926, 31 year old Babe Ruth went <b>365</b>/<b>144</b>/.372</div>
<div>
In 1925, 29 year old Rogers Hornsby went <b>381</b>/83/<b>.403</b> (real and slash Triple Crown)</div>
<div>
In 1923, 28 year old Babe Ruth went <b>399</b>/<b>170</b>/.393 (14.0 WAR all time record)</div>
<div>
In 1921, 26 year old Babe Ruth went <b>457</b>/<b>145</b>/.378</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<i>*This has to be the closest triple crown miss EVER. In addition to missing this TB/BB/AVG triple crown, missing this batting title cost Ted Williams what would have been his third <b>real</b> Triple Crown (his 43 HR and 159 RBI led the league) and his sixth slash triple crown (his .490 OBP and .650 SLG led the league). I might have to do a separate post about this. The reason I appear to be getting so worked up about this is because Ted Williams missed this batting title by a very very small amount. He lost .34291 to .34276 to George Kell. </i></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Okay, last one for real. Has anyone ever managed to lead the league in HR, SB and hits? Power and speed tend to be opposite, which is why we go nuts over players <a href="http://www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/power_speed_number_season.shtml">who can do both well</a>.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Yes! Two players.</div>
<div>
27 year old Chuck Klein hit 38 HR, stole 20 bases (yes, 20 led the league) and collected 226 hits in 1932.</div>
<div>
22 year old Tyrus Cobb hit 9 HR, stole 76 bases and collected 216 hits during his real and slash Triple Crown 1909 season. Can you imagine a modern player winning the Triple Crown of HR/RBI/AVG and also stealing 76 bases to lead the league?</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Me neither.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
One last point. I wrote the ages for the good triple crowns for a reason. Players don't put up huge seasons after they are 31 or 32. It just doesn't happen. <a href="http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/b/bondsba01.shtml">Unless...</a></div>
<div>
<br />
<br /></div>
simonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08053789051385270752noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1697358494613902278.post-77304449198306561062013-07-17T15:08:00.000-07:002013-08-10T16:38:09.952-07:00MVP-Level WARThe amazing website Baseball Reference gives a handy guideline for understanding WAR:<br />
<0 Replacement<br />
0-2 Substitute<br />
2+ Starter<br />
5+ All Star<br />
8+ MVP<br />
<br />
That seems pretty straightforward. Produce 8 or more WAR in a single season, and you are probably in the MVP conversation*.<br />
<br />
<i>*Provided you can get through the other BWAA hoops that have been put in place over the years.</i><br />
<br />
WAR is composed of, well, a little bit of everything. It is an attempt to quantify a batter's contribution at the plate, in the field, and on the bases. It combines all of these things into RAR (<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8XDyfBYE4DY">rawr!!</a>), Runs Above Replacement, and then converts runs into wins to get the WAR number based on how easy runs are to come by during that season. "Replacement" is a funny concept - this is a fictitious player who, theoretically, any team could pick up at any time to get 0.0 WAR in the lineup and contribute to more losses than wins. Think of a "Replacement" team as the worst teams in history - <a href="http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/NYM/1962.shtml">1962 Mets</a> (6.5 WAR batting, 3.1 WAR pitching), 2003 Tigers (8.1 WAR batting, -1.1 WAR pitching), etc. These are teams made of players that could be had off the scrap heap, or expansion draft, or whatever. Then add players' WAR to move up in the standings.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br /><br />
There are multiple versions of WAR, based on different ideas and defensive metrics. I will be writing about the Baseball Reference version.<br />
<br />
So, back to the original point. An MVP candidate is supposed to contribute 8+ WAR, or close to it. Since 1901, there have been 273 seasons of 8+ WAR for batters*.<br />
<br />
<i>*This list does not include Miguel Cabrera - yet. Maybe he should work on his D.</i><br />
<br />
There have been 565 seasons of 7+ WAR for batters. I don't want to accumulate the entire plot, but the 7+ WAR hitsogram looks a lot like the right side of a normal distribution:<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjhQb-IJaZkop8Ok3A8LH66C3eipU4R-v-fIdyiARulsdNPhuWIIw5j_5Tho5BiJdzVLqvTu7ttPbId9UHDO8ybpAj5zLdbDW4ZJVfEYeSV99qFUGCyW3xcVo0728RbnGJCyGLHLjTP5AAX/s1600/WARHist.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="290" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjhQb-IJaZkop8Ok3A8LH66C3eipU4R-v-fIdyiARulsdNPhuWIIw5j_5Tho5BiJdzVLqvTu7ttPbId9UHDO8ybpAj5zLdbDW4ZJVfEYeSV99qFUGCyW3xcVo0728RbnGJCyGLHLjTP5AAX/s400/WARHist.png" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
That single data point on the far right corner is Babe Ruth in 1923. Ruth was a WAR behemoth, with the top two single-season totals, 6 of the top 12, and the most career WAR (163.2)*.<br />
<br />
<i>*Plus he also accumulated a significant amount of WAR as a pitcher. But this post is about batters only.</i><br />
<br />
Actually, there are a lot of players who were WAR champions. Recently, Albert Pujols led the NL in WAR for 6 straight seasons 2005-2010. Before that, Barry Bonds* led the NL 12 out of 15 years 1990-2004. Long before, Willie Mays led the NL in WAR for 10 of 13 years, at around the same time Mickey Mantle was leading the AL in WAR five straight years. Ruth led the AL 11 of 13 seasons at about the same time Rogers Hornsby was leading the NL 11 of 13 seasons. Honus Wagner led the NL 8 straight seasons, and 11 of 13. It isn't a mistake that I am listing legends of the game here - WAR measures the things that make a player awesome at baseball and lead to that player's team winning games. The type of player that does well at WAR gets on base, hits for power, and plays solid defence, or does one or more of those things legendarily well.<br />
<br />
<i>*Old man (age 36 to 39) Barry Bonds led the league in WAR 2001-2004 with a "different style of play" than when young man normal career prime (age 25 to 31) Barry Bonds led the league in WAR 6 out of 7 years 1990-1996.</i><br />
<br />
Aside - I will admit to a healthy scepticism about the accuracy of defensive metrics from before TV and play-by-play records really took off. Okay.<br />
<br />
Ruth accumulated 14 WAR (worth near MVP production from TWO players) in 1923, a season that isn't generally acknowledged as his best. He achieved 12.4 in his legendary 60 HR 1927 season. He got up to 12.9 in his legendary 1921 season, where he set the all time (post-1901) single season marks in runs, HR, RBI, SLG, TB, and probably more (TB and runs records still stand). 1923 was remarkable, and also gets boost from 1.2 defensive WAR. Hmm.<br />
<br />
Those seasons are at the top end. The other top-end seasons?<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEilxWfwkYpLeE4mSNmAo2_x4AGnCvMxWTcuPp2PJEgLjQMpMrSF01t5kRfMFkDDxXMVOnnYZWsLnSuLgz90WzjwGIBknu-T5YBNDvvwOMCHGJ7FV5LBOdAxlpadsA_mHePTuw4aUmrdhGgG/s1600/Top10.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEilxWfwkYpLeE4mSNmAo2_x4AGnCvMxWTcuPp2PJEgLjQMpMrSF01t5kRfMFkDDxXMVOnnYZWsLnSuLgz90WzjwGIBknu-T5YBNDvvwOMCHGJ7FV5LBOdAxlpadsA_mHePTuw4aUmrdhGgG/s1600/Top10.png" /></a></div>
<br />
The list is a who's who of the best seasons ever. Poor Lou Gehrig crushed 1927 with 11.8 WAR and didn't lead the league (because of Ruth, #4). Notice that every single one of these hitters led the league in OBP and SLG (and therefore OPS)*. Because the type of player that does well at WAR gets on base, hits for power, and plays solid defence.<br />
<br />
*Except Gehrig, who finished second in those things to his teammate.<br />
<br />
The WAR list has lots of interesting things to notice. At least that I will notice. And point out, right now. Down the rabbit hole...<br />
<br />
The highest WAR by a player who did not lead his league in a single offensive category was Willie Mays in 1963. The 32 year old Mays accumulated 10.6 WAR with no black ink:<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhFc3kJm3mxIU3BKX7B2LupXKRBUEAVt_tQ7Lj8Sz1ICEtfPB5IACtpWzjIoM47zleXuX5KgNT7T5kcw1nwRCYdfApyQW-XAiXv9E9jovbZVavVzuo7JIB7aiuyb7Z2hyAj50U9pp7Y-DRP/s1600/Mays1963.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhFc3kJm3mxIU3BKX7B2LupXKRBUEAVt_tQ7Lj8Sz1ICEtfPB5IACtpWzjIoM47zleXuX5KgNT7T5kcw1nwRCYdfApyQW-XAiXv9E9jovbZVavVzuo7JIB7aiuyb7Z2hyAj50U9pp7Y-DRP/s1600/Mays1963.png" /></a></div>
<br />
There were two seasons where a player had MVP Level 8+ WAR with zero home runs:<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgTDqrUbYCmP30C9iwPhSAXTuzoYIPOU0LGAKc1EFZ8E9m7xxpUbiabclpxZjaB_RJqXXMMS4kzc2PGGGk9wV99aYeKOQ-0BXp3drf39K8l2nr_8vgzdR1HsO4tHWvtrp8WsYPMqWNHK7MN/s1600/FewestHR.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgTDqrUbYCmP30C9iwPhSAXTuzoYIPOU0LGAKc1EFZ8E9m7xxpUbiabclpxZjaB_RJqXXMMS4kzc2PGGGk9wV99aYeKOQ-0BXp3drf39K8l2nr_8vgzdR1HsO4tHWvtrp8WsYPMqWNHK7MN/s1600/FewestHR.png" /></a></div>
<br />
But, those seasons were both dead-ball era, so how about the fewest HR during an MVP-Level season in the modern age?<br />
Wade Boggs hit 3 during his 8.4 WAR 1989 season (51 2B, .430 OBP)<br />
Willie Wilson hit 3 during his 8.5 WAR 1980 season (230 hits, 15 3B, 79 SB)<br />
And Lou Boudreau hit 3 during his 8.0 WAR 1944 season<br />
<br />
Of our MVP candidates, the largest Fielding RAR season belonged to (tie) 1989 Young Barry Bonds and 1927 Frankie Frisch, with 37 RAR each. 1989 Young Barry Bonds managed to get to 8.0 WAR with a .248 average and 19 home runs on the strength of his 3.5 defensive WAR.<br />
<br />
The largest baserunning RAR contribution belonged to (surprise) Rickey Henderson with 18 RAR in 1985. It was NOT his 130 SB season. It was not a 100+ SB season. It was his 80SB-10CS 1985 season. Among our MVP candidates, there are only 10 seasons with 10 baserunning RAR or better*. It would seem that baserunning is not the most direct path to MVP-Level WAR.<br />
<br />
<i>*Including Mike Trout's 10.9 WAR 2012, where his 49SB against 5CS led to 10 baserunning RAR</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
OBP is widely considered to be the most important offensive statistic. The more outs a player makes, the less valuable that player is, and the sooner games end. The lowest OBP on our MVP candidate list was Brooks Robinson with .304 in 1968 on his way to a 8.4 WAR. However, we also know that 1968 was the Year Of The Pitcher, so that .304 OBP isn't so bad compared to a league average of .299! And we also know that Brooks Robinson, Defensive Wizard of the Century, derived an incredible portion of his value from his third base defence. In 1968 he was credited with 4.5 WAR for defence alone.<br />
<br />
The "alltime" record for single season dWAR is apparently Terry Turner, who logged 5.4 in 1906. I don't see how it is possible to calculate dWAR from 1906. The highest dWARs that I find remotely credible are 4.9 (total of 5.0) for Mark Belanger in 1975 and 4.7 (total of 7.3) for Ozzie Smith in 1989.<br />
<br />
But back to OBP for a moment. Only 79 of our 273 MVP candidates have an OBP <i>under</i> .400, which makes for a pretty great season. Only 9/273 have WAR below .360. OBP is huge in racking up a big WAR. And it is one of the keys of being an effective baseball player, contributing to actual wins.<br />
<br />
I'm pretty sure that more fun with WAR will come later.simonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08053789051385270752noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1697358494613902278.post-39591240724315282862013-07-15T05:37:00.001-07:002013-08-10T16:38:21.310-07:00PuigYasiel Puig, Dodgers demigod, is finally coming back down to earth. Sort of. Since the start of July, Puig has hit *only* .300/.333/.420 in 12 games. This leaves his overall line at .391/.422/.616 in 38 games leading up to the all star break since his debut June 3 (remember the crazy throw to 1B?).<br />
<br />
On June 2, the Dodgers were 23-32 and 8.5 games back in the NL west, already.<br />
<br />
Today, the Dodgers are back to .500 at 47-47 and only 2.5 games back - right in the thick of things in a tight division race.<br />
<br />
Puig has missed a single game (a 1-0 win on July 13), so LA is 23-15 with him in the lineup. That's great! Wow! Puig is the difference maker! A losing team turns into a winning team right away, and the Dodgers will keep this up and streak to the pennant!<br />
<br />
Don't get me wrong - Puig has been spectacular to start his major league career, and more than that, he is really fun to watch, especially with those <a href="http://wap.mlb.com/play/?content_id=27867619&query=puig+throw">throws from right field</a>. But there is more to the story than just Puig. Over his 38 game span with the Dodgers, it is actually debatable whether or not he has been the most productive player on his own team.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br /><br />
<br />
I think it has been easy to forget just how great of a player Hanley Ramirez was, earlier in his career with the Marlins. Over his age 23, 24 and 25 seasons, he <i>averaged</i> .325/.398/.549 with 117 Runs, 41 doubles, 29 home runs, 85 RBIs and 38 SBs (11 CS), for an OPS+ of 145. This from a (I concede below-average) shortstop.<br />
<br />
Then he slowly lost it. His age 26 2010 season was great by any other standard, but did not live up to his own. His 2011 and 2012 seasons were plain disappointing. This was supposed to be the prime of the career of a hall of fame player, but instead Ramirez was traded to LA midway through 2012 after going .246/.322/.428 in the first half. He is still just 29 years old.<br />
<br />
Ramirez has spent most of the season on the DL. He played 4 games in late April / early May, and returned to the DL. He has been back for good since June 4 (the day after Puig).<br />
<br />
In those 35 games, Ramirez has hit .379/.438/.672 and the Dodgers have gone 22-13 in the games he has played.<br />
<br />
Let's go over this one more time:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiLQDm66BhVGa9OJY_-P8TrjOhMDN8YTYQmiWEnD1cFRTNTKJMPV6yz5PIh-rSe452u721N-xocIVRoo27m5RRxIjgBIUQVD0RxRKsh6BoLd7uQRrN5JHOg9HWzs8LodrbnqW2mC5A2lEh_/s1600/PuigRamirez.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiLQDm66BhVGa9OJY_-P8TrjOhMDN8YTYQmiWEnD1cFRTNTKJMPV6yz5PIh-rSe452u721N-xocIVRoo27m5RRxIjgBIUQVD0RxRKsh6BoLd7uQRrN5JHOg9HWzs8LodrbnqW2mC5A2lEh_/s1600/PuigRamirez.png" /></a></div>
<br />
Ramirez has accumulated 2.5 WAR in 39 games; Puig has 2.7 in 38 games.<br />
<br />
Regardless of who has actually been the more productive player, this is a wonderful argument for the Dodgers and their fans to be able to have, and every other team should be jealous.<br />
<br />
I hate to burst the myth bubble, but Puig has not single-handedly raised this Dodgers team up over the last six weeks - he has had help, particularly from a resurgent Hanley Ramirez. If these two can keep it up for the rest of the summer, it is going to be a fun summer to watch. Although I doubt the Diamondbacks agree.<br />
<br />
Note to self: revisit this comparison in September.simonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08053789051385270752noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1697358494613902278.post-16088746541048376802013-07-03T20:07:00.003-07:002013-08-10T16:38:40.087-07:00The 27th BatterThis post has been a few months in the making and dates back to that pre-web-log era.<br />
<br />
In any case, I think it's pretty interesting so I decided to write it up anyway.<br />
<br />
There have been 21 perfect games in MLB history, and a surprising number of them have come in the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Major_League_Baseball_perfect_games">last few seasons</a>. But, there have also been 11 near-misses: perfect games through 26 batters that have failed. The most recent, and my inspiration, was Yu Darvish's season opener this year. On April 2, Darvish mowed through the first 26 Houston Astros, striking out 14 of them. On the 27th batter, he gave up a first pitch single and lost the perfect game (Texas won 7-0).<br />
<br />
Before that game, there had been 31 perfect game candidates, 21 of which were completed. Going into that game, the 27th batter was hitting .276/.323/.448 - not bad. After that 1/1, the 27th batter of a perfect game is currently hitting a cumulative .300/.344/.467.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br /><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg6mmvBWXfL1RTwAaH_YdY1SLrlXlapCOmbr71n_GLjDuaGAGfig8ynb56YIkipwguLI9WE8-T2ZYLQw8PFyWmu_eELKJuheOFkeripjQA1cJFXx1glzvPNnfo5kb2CQt6DeNXo2eV4P-Ra/s914/27AVG.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="464" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg6mmvBWXfL1RTwAaH_YdY1SLrlXlapCOmbr71n_GLjDuaGAGfig8ynb56YIkipwguLI9WE8-T2ZYLQw8PFyWmu_eELKJuheOFkeripjQA1cJFXx1glzvPNnfo5kb2CQt6DeNXo2eV4P-Ra/s640/27AVG.PNG" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjpwuL67ioPReGVMnaIS9os8zH6oEuZvdKdhaMM0wDNJC6r59LIjj451bWTmXtfUVejYSqwLrcNoiQcklOh4YdaWotqRAWCTtnuscJt98xYxzfsmWtVwJqGRcswc2cGeBgkKch8SVSAnF9x/s914/27OBP.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="464" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjpwuL67ioPReGVMnaIS9os8zH6oEuZvdKdhaMM0wDNJC6r59LIjj451bWTmXtfUVejYSqwLrcNoiQcklOh4YdaWotqRAWCTtnuscJt98xYxzfsmWtVwJqGRcswc2cGeBgkKch8SVSAnF9x/s640/27OBP.PNG" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh0Qp9DEgnYWNBUt86KRPOb94_WCUXcLu4G8YUmGgtMlv9I8-apP3Mz_vdTd0kTdwIsX2LAP_ACCABsK-fvPBHcLrpsq5rM-34BFvXQ67RFpOmqTf4XODsg6KWN1cdI_sSvXae2yxtvEFkY/s914/27SLG.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="464" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh0Qp9DEgnYWNBUt86KRPOb94_WCUXcLu4G8YUmGgtMlv9I8-apP3Mz_vdTd0kTdwIsX2LAP_ACCABsK-fvPBHcLrpsq5rM-34BFvXQ67RFpOmqTf4XODsg6KWN1cdI_sSvXae2yxtvEFkY/s640/27SLG.PNG" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiwjD4sWSOgT79-ZxiVVdSyW8WXBnKmiymCmB8p04owhHjB3fhngPAOVAo0Spaog3zA2SNSlbmR_AQJIT2f_Bu5d1Gwy3d9Nfy4j2J7OwN4RDxlIleeYQki1Z73pnUC5FsVoK0DIGuA53Ea/s914/27ALL.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="464" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiwjD4sWSOgT79-ZxiVVdSyW8WXBnKmiymCmB8p04owhHjB3fhngPAOVAo0Spaog3zA2SNSlbmR_AQJIT2f_Bu5d1Gwy3d9Nfy4j2J7OwN4RDxlIleeYQki1Z73pnUC5FsVoK0DIGuA53Ea/s640/27ALL.PNG" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
On April 20, 1990, Brian Holman of the Seattle Mariners gave up a home run to 27th batter Ken Phelps of the Oakland Athletics, which really impacts the slugging percentage of our 27th batter. Then again, 1 HR in 30 at bats is not far from the 2013 league average of 1 HR every 34.1 at bats.<br />
<br />
For reference, the 2013 MLB average is .254/.317/.402. So, taken as a whole, the 27th batter is slightly *better than average* (small sample size alert!). Over 32 plate appearances, it's close enough, and I think we only have enough data, to say that the 27th batter of a perfect game is basically an average major league hitter.<br />
<br />
Of course, we also all remember the 31st perfect game candidate - Armando Galarraga - losing his bid with 26 outs when umpire Jim Joyce famously blew a close call at first base, awarding the batter a free hit. Umpire mistakes are a part of baseball and certainly can occur in this situation, especially with so much pressure on the line. If Galarraga had actually completed his perfecto, the current batting line for the 27th batter would be an even more average-like .267/.313/.433. As you can see, with only 32 PA a single hit has a huge impact on the bottom line.<br />
<br />
Between 1904 and 1922, the 27th batter started off his career cold, going 0/3 with a HBP in his first 4 PA (.000/.250/.000). From 1932 to 1990, the next 14 PA were scorching hot - .462/.500/.846! Over the last 23 years, the 27th batter has been in a bit of a slump, seeing the field more often (14 PA in only 23 years) but hitting only .214/.214/.214 with 3 singles. That's baseball.<br />
<br />
Once we have had enough at bats for a full season of 27th batter, we can see if these "average batter" projections truly turn out to be reasonable. If the pace of the last 23 years keeps up, I will re-post the 600PA analysis in... 933 years. Peace out.simonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08053789051385270752noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1697358494613902278.post-28708321210311283002013-06-21T07:52:00.000-07:002013-08-10T16:39:08.506-07:00New StatOn Tuesday night, Josh Hamilton grounded into 3 double plays during a 3-2 loss to the Mariners.<br />
<br />
In honour of that, I think its time to talk about a new stat - OPPA, or Outs Per Plate Appearance.<br />
<br />
Even good hitters have bad nights, and bad hitters probably have more bad nights, but it takes a special confluence of opportunity and execution to create more outs than plate appearances.<br />
<br />
To continue my apparent obsession with GIDPs, and how funny I apparently find it to be when hitters ground into multiple GIDPs, this post is all about the most-GIDP games ever. Unfortunately, triple plays are not as easily accessed, so if a batter created triple play outs I am going to ignore that for this post.<br />
<br />
The methodology here is pretty simple:<br />
1. Find all the batters who have GIDPed 3 or more times in a game<br />
2. Count the number of outs they produced<br />
3. Divide those outs by plate appearances.<br />
4. Notice other interesting things.<br />
<br />
That search returns 109 batters that have accumulated 3 or more GIDPs in a single game, with the first coming in 1934. So maybe every time I say "of all time" I don't <i>really</i> mean it.<br />
<br />
Surprisingly, only one batter ever has GIDPed 4 times in a game. That batter is likely going into the hall of fame... as a manager. Need more clues? He goes by the name of J Torre. No wait, that's too obvious. Joe T.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br /><br />
On <a href="http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/NYN/NYN197507210.shtml">July 21, 1975</a>, Joe Torre went 0-4 with 4 GIDPs, for an astounding 8 outs in 4 plate appearances, and an OPPA of 2.00. Yikes - that's as high as you can get, in this "study". The Mets lost 6-2 to the Astros in 9 innings. Torre created an obnoxious 29.6% of his team's outs.<br />
Bot 1: Line Out / Single / Torre GIDP<br />
Bot 3: Groudout / Single / Single / Torre GIDP<br />
Bot 6: Single / Torre GIDP / Groundout<br />
Bot 8: Single / Single / Torre GIDP / Walk / Flyout<br />
<br />
Oops.<br />
<br />
Next, there are eight illustrious batters who GIDPed 3 times in 3 plate appearances, for an equal but less impactful OPPA of 2.00:<br />
Joe Adcock - <a href="http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/PIT/PIT195507200.shtml">July 20, 1955</a>. Milwaukee loses 4-3 to Pittsburgh<br />
Ted Martinez - <a href="http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/PHI/PHI197409252.shtml">September 25, 1974</a>. Mets lose 6-3 to the Phillies<br />
Jose Morales - <a href="http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/MIN/MIN198005170.shtml">May 17, 1980</a> (entered game as PH). Twins lose 14-11 to the Brewers<br />
Dave Conception - <a href="http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/ATL/ATL198606130.shtml">June 13, 1986</a>. Reds lose 3-2 to the Braves<br />
Julio Franco - <a href="http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/TEX/TEX198904090.shtml">April 9, 1989</a>. Ranges win 3-2 over the Blue Jays<br />
Pete Incaviglia - <a href="http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/CHA/CHA198908170.shtml">August 17, 1989</a>. Rangers lose 6-1 to the White Sox.<br />
Jeff Baker - <a href="http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/COL/COL200706020.shtml">June 2, 2007</a>. Rockies win 4-1 over the Reds.<br />
Kevin Kouzmanoff - <a href="http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/k/kouzmke01.shtml">August 5, 2009</a>. Padres lose 6-2 to the Braves.<br />
<br />
There are some good players and some relative nobodies on this list, but I would bet that there are no or few speedsters who are getting GIDPed 3 times a game.<br />
<br />
Josh Hamilton, this week, did not reach base in his 5 plate appearances, for a OPPA of 1.60. That ties him for 53rd all-time with 12 other batters (for players with at least 3 GIDPs in a game). Not bad.<br />
<br />
Are you noticing a trend with these GIDP masters? I am! Most of these teams are losing! Not surprising when so many rally-killing outs are made by a single player.<br />
<br />
But it looks like it's more complicated than that. OPPA at the high end of the scale tends to bunch to common numbers. Let's take a look at the Win percentage for some common OPPA numbers:<br />
<br />
8 outs in 4PA or 6 outs in 3PA - OPPA = 2.00 (9 games): 2-7, 0.222<br />
7 outs in 4PA - OPPA = 1.75 (43 games): 13-30, 0.302<br />
8 outs in 5PA or equivalent - OPPA = 1.60 (13 games): 7-6, 0.538<br />
6 outs in 4PA or equivalent - OPPA = 1.50 (16 games): 9-7, 0.562<br />
7 outs in 5PA or equivalent - OPPA = 1.40 (16 games): 7-9, 0.438<br />
Between OPPA = 1.20 and OPPA = 1.39 (9 games): 7-2, 0.778<br />
<br />
What does this mean? Well, someone who could use statistics might start using p values and t tests, but I don't think I will bother with that.<br />
<br />
I am reluctant to say that when a team's batter GIDPs 3 times and has an OPPA between 1.20 and 1.39, they are almost certain to win that game. That seems crazy. And I don't quite believe this trend all the way to the left side:<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhkLfHGLtHXuSexWIOmEEMZ6Ua9bDA_H4QfmIQrEHa1MyrWaEZcewvzOXeY-Y4EhXOOsOUgP_AbbOay43bnHCUC8woWMsjYzy1FsCiqT3PB9erqv6ZCg8vUrgT6zehegEXtavOAgklmWjK-/s1600/OPPA1.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhkLfHGLtHXuSexWIOmEEMZ6Ua9bDA_H4QfmIQrEHa1MyrWaEZcewvzOXeY-Y4EhXOOsOUgP_AbbOay43bnHCUC8woWMsjYzy1FsCiqT3PB9erqv6ZCg8vUrgT6zehegEXtavOAgklmWjK-/s1600/OPPA1.png" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
However, it actually does make some sense to me that when a team has a batter with at least 3GIDPs and an OPPA of at least 1.75, that hurts their chances of winning that game. That is 6-8 outs from a single batter in 3 or 4 plate appearances - not cool.<br />
<br />
Other interesting things:<br />
Only one player has >= 3 GIDPs and an OPPA of exactly 1.00, and that occured during a (I didn't know these existed) TIE GAME. This had to be some sort of strange perfect storm, right?<br />
<br />
On Monday July 4, 1960 at Wrigley Field, in the second game of a doubleheader, the Giants and Cubs tied 1-1 in 14 innings. Wrigley Field had no lights back then, and both teams had games the next day, so...? Frank Thomas went 1-5 with 2BB and 3GIDPs for 7 outs in 7PA.<br />
<br />
Then I looked further. The Cubs played 156 games that year, in a 154 game schedule, because they had ANOTHER TIE GAME. Again in the second game of a doubleheader, they <i>tied</i> the Cardinals 4-4 in 10 innings. Get some lights! Ernie Banks led the league with 156 games played for a 60-94 team. Weird.<br />
<br />
Okay. Last interesting thing. More like a crazy batting line, so there must be something interesting about this game that was played like 30 years ago.<br />
On <a href="http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/CHA/CHA198405080.shtml">May 8, 1984</a>, HOF SS Robin Yount went 3-10 with a walk and 3 GIDPs in a 7-6 loss to the White Sox. That's weird, right? Who gets 11 PA in a game?<br />
<br />
It is accompanied in the Baseball-Reference database with the following note:<br />
<i>Game was suspended in the top of the 18th with the score 3-3 and was completed May 9, 1984 at Comiskey Park I.</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
This game ended up taking <i>twenty-five</i> innings. Which is to say, they played 7+ innings after the game was suspended in the 18th.<br />
<br />
BOTH teams scored 3 runs in the 21st inning to keep the score tied and the game going. How obnoxious. Finally, in the 25th, Harold Baines hit a walkoff home run with one out to end the game.<br />
<br />
<br />
That game and <a href="http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/CHA/CHA198405080.shtml">box score</a> just leads to more blog ideas. Oh boy...<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />simonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08053789051385270752noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1697358494613902278.post-22416874162897668622013-06-06T05:23:00.001-07:002013-08-10T16:40:00.187-07:00Weird NumbersI will start with a question: based on the two seasons of pitching below, who would you rather have?<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjyIxyFbCzIWoVpixcVOu5h6CnXOhmFM4LZQ7k8tkabjasCeNJvHmCGeb22O0_KM_1ls2hn-EgiVhVai9QUXXROtrmw16zTtYQyEmIbAEcWYItA7D9H-6od4CTlwulk6Y8dPluWYJelKV5k/s1600/WhoWouldYouRatherHave.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjyIxyFbCzIWoVpixcVOu5h6CnXOhmFM4LZQ7k8tkabjasCeNJvHmCGeb22O0_KM_1ls2hn-EgiVhVai9QUXXROtrmw16zTtYQyEmIbAEcWYItA7D9H-6od4CTlwulk6Y8dPluWYJelKV5k/s1600/WhoWouldYouRatherHave.png" /></a></div>
If you know or care what these stats mean, you might have one of three reactions:<br />
1. I will take the first pitcher - he gives up fewer home runs and has a better <a href="http://www.fangraphs.com/library/pitching/fip/">FIP</a><br />
2. I will take the second pitcher - he strikes out more batters and walks fewer batters!<br />
3. I will take both and probably make the playoffs - these guys are both aces.<br />
<br />
By these so-called "advanced" stats, these two seasons are not that different. Now let's play that game again:<br />
Pitcher 1: 22-3 over 223 IP in 31 starts.<br />
Pitcher 2: 6-9 over 211 IP in 30 starts.<br />
<br />
Now, it's a no-brainer, right? You take pitcher 1. It's not even close.<br />
<br />
I think I'm too obvious to actually "blow your mind" here, but... pitcher 1 in the two sets of data is the same! Pitcher 2 in both sets of data is the same! Woah!<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br /><br />
<br />
Pitcher 1 is Cliff Lee in 2008.<br />
Pitcher 2 is Cliff Lee in 2012.<br />
<br />
<br />
Cliff Lee was a mediocre pitcher until 2008. In 2008 or slightly before, something clicked. Cliff Lee became a possibly superhuman low-walk control freak of a pitcher, went 22-3 and led the league with a 2.54 ERA.<br />
<br />
Since then, he has had a pretty interesting career. Interesting in the way that he has had unique and strange things happen to him, and unique and strange statistics to show for himself.<br />
<br />
Cliff Lee is 34 this year and has 2 more years remaining on the 5 year / $120 million deal he signed with the Phillies, back when Roy Halladay still had a shoulder, Chase Utley still had a hip, and Ryan Howard wasn't Old (more on him later). Cliff Lee won 6 games last year. He wasn't injured. His contract is considered to be fairly <i>team friendly</i> - that is, he is still regarded as a top-shelf pitcher.<br />
<br />
So... wha happened?<br />
<br />
Well, I would first like to mention other things that are strange about Lee's career, and career numbers. This might turn into a rant about the Win as a statistic, but I'm going to try to be careful.<br />
<br />
Lee was traded <i>three </i>times in one year, the first time as the reigning (and deserving) AL Cy Young winner:<br />
July 29, 2009: Traded by Cleveland with nobody* to Philly for nobody*.<br />
December 16, 2009: Traded by Philly** to Seattle for nobody*<br />
July 9, 2010: Traded by Seattle to Texas for nobody*<br />
<br />
<i>*nobody who has ever done anything good enough to matter in MLB</i><br />
<div>
<i>** Who decided that they wanted Roy Halladay instead. But then re-found and signed Lee to a 5-year deal after the 2010 season to create the Best Rotation Of All Time***</i><br />
<i>***Which didn't quite work out for them.</i></div>
<div>
<br />
Each time he was traded, it was as one of the best pitchers in baseball... but still, he was traded. Each team decided it was better off without him. And each team that traded for him thought he was the missing piece in the puzzle. Let's see how that turned out:<br />
<br />
Philly 2009: Lost 4-2 in the World Series to that incredible A-Rod-led Yankees team (?)<br />
Lee went 4-0 in the postseason, giving up 7 ER in 40.1 innings over 5 postseason starts.<br />
<br />
Seattle 2010: Put together a roster based almost entirely on pitching and defence. Their team OPS+ was 76. Their team OBP was .298. They averaged less than 3.2 runs per game, over the course of the season. And their pitching and defence was not enough to win games - by the time Lee was traded on July 9, they were 34-51 and 16 games back. Lee managed to get <i>4.8</i> runs of support per game for this dreadful team and generally pitched well, going 8-3 with a 2.34 ERA.<br />
<br />
Texas 2010: Lee, the 2009 postseason assassin, was acquired for the stacked Rangers' postseason run. Somehow the Rangers team that scored 4.8 runs per game only scored 3.8 for Lee, who went 4-6 with a 3.98 ERA. Some assassin. He went 3-0 over the first two rounds of postseason, giving up 2 runs in 24 innings, but the Giants hit him hard in the World Series that year, and he lost both times.<br />
<br />
Despite playing for 4 teams in 2 years and pitching in back to back World Series, Lee was not enough to put a team over the top - that's okay. Nobody is.<br />
<br />
In 2011, Lee had a nice little year. 17-8 with a 2.40 ERA and ---weird statistic--- 6 shutouts* in 6 complete games**. He finished 3rd in Cy Young voting, deservedly so.<br />
<br />
*This is the most shutouts in a single year since Randy Johnson had 6 in 1998, and before that since Tim Belcher had 8 in 1989.<br />
** Cliff Lee in 2011 had the most shutouts ever where all of his complete games were shutouts. He went 6 for 6. Nobody had ever done that before. Tied for second is Felix Hernandez in 2012 and Bob Ojeda in 1988 with 5 out of 5.<br />
<br />
<br />
In 2012, Lee had a very strange year. He went 6-9 with a 3.16 ERA in 211 innings. He pitched bad sometimes, but mostly he pitched pretty well. He just... lost. Or got no-decisions. Based on the Win statistic, he had a bad year. But really, he probably just had one of the unluckiest years ever. He also pitched 0 complete games and 0 shutouts, despite going 10 shutout innings in his third start of the year.<br />
<br />
His team scored only 3.5 runs for him per game. That's low, but its not crazy. This year he is getting 3.7 RPG and he is 7-2. Already.<br />
<br />
<br />
Let's go deeper than anyone should ever go into this.<br />
<br />
Lee made 30 Starts in 2012. The Phillies went 12-18 in these starts.<br />
<br />
0 Earned Runs<br />
3-0 with 1 No Decision (10 innings on only 102 pitches)<br />
<br />
1 ER<br />
2-1 with 4 No Decisions<br />
The Phillies went 3-4 in these games:<br />
W 4-1*, 3-1*, 4-3<br />
L 3-5, 1-2*, 1-2, 1-2<br />
(* = Decision)<br />
How depressing.<br />
<br />
2 ER<br />
1-2 with 3 ND (that's harsh)<br />
The Phillies went 2-4 in these games:<br />
W 9-2*, 3-2<br />
L 6-10, 1-2*, 2-6*, 4-5<br />
<br />
3 ER<br />
0-1 with 3 ND<br />
Phillies went 2-2<br />
<br />
4 ER<br />
0-2 with 2 ND<br />
Phillies went 1-3<br />
<br />
5 ER<br />
0-2 with 1 ND<br />
Phillies went 0-3<br />
<br />
6 ER<br />
0-1 with 1 ND<br />
Phillies went 1-1<br />
<br />
When Cliff Lee gave up <i>more </i>than 1 earned run in a start, he won 1 game. All year.<br />
When he gave up more than 2 earned runs in a start, he won 0 games.<br />
When he gave up 2 earned runs or less, he went 6-3 with 8 no decisions.<br />
Now that's pressure. Give up 2ER or less, or have no chance at a W.<br />
<br />
Anyways, this is amazing because it's crazy. And even more amazing because Lee started September at 3-7 and had to make a strong push to get to 6 wins. He went 3-2 over 7 starts in September, in which he gave up a total of 8 ER. Has anyone ever had an unluckier year? Ever?<br />
<br />
Well I think that's a good question, and I'll try to figure out an answer. I'm looking for seasons in which a starting pitcher pitched above average, pitched a lot, and still ended up with very few wins.<br />
<br />
In baseball history, there have been only 4 seasons where a pitcher had at least 30 starts, pitched over 200 innings, and had an ERA+ over 100 (where 100 is league average). It's hard to pitch all the time, pitch better than average, and not get wins.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhoQahmyQgKk05rAuYzPtwMQYahJleI0SpdA-2JZh0wvv6Ust076R3GEdvTtU0ePKpp2u_qAQ6ukXh70fTkn2I6y7JBCZcYUB36Nmi3q6LESo1tsxC4ougbTv_qY1kcnvmrCl8hnzHM9S4a/s1600/unluckiest_ever.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhoQahmyQgKk05rAuYzPtwMQYahJleI0SpdA-2JZh0wvv6Ust076R3GEdvTtU0ePKpp2u_qAQ6ukXh70fTkn2I6y7JBCZcYUB36Nmi3q6LESo1tsxC4ougbTv_qY1kcnvmrCl8hnzHM9S4a/s1600/unluckiest_ever.PNG" /></a></div>
<br />
Maybe Joey Hamilton was the unluckiest pitcher ever?<br />
<br />
Maybe not.<br />
<br />
In 1995, Joey Hamilton had a Fielding Independent Pitching (FIP) of 3.96, compared to his ERA of 3.08. This is a measure, on an ERA scale, of about how much luck has to do with pitching success. If luck is not a factor, FIP and ERA should be the same. His batting average allowed on balls in play (BABIP) was .267. Again, if this is an unusually low number, it generally means that some luck was involved.<br />
<br />
In 2012, Cliff Lee had an FIP of 3.13, compared to his ERA of 3.16. His BABIP was .309, about league average.<br />
<br />
So... Joey Hamilton had to get a bit lucky in order to pitch well enough to get unlucky enough to be the unluckiest pitcher ever. This is getting confusing.<br />
<br />
My point is, that although Joey Hamilton in 1995 got screwed out of wins as well as any pitcher ever. However, Cliff Lee in 2012 might have pitched better than any pitcher, ever, who ended up a terrible win total. Strange.<br />
<br />
Now let's revisit that comparison between pitcher 1 (2008 Cliff Lee) and pitcher 2 (2012 Cliff Lee):<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjFsCiJxit_tARratSpqRA_0s7ok8gMO-08RGtmRwtPk_xwd70tGSdUrJY8caCji5CBfFtofefvjbm82MAYE0x4EMgBv9HN6KjPkn4zpzJzW2KciZvchIQbFGzTlDI9MYGVLK0Awi9J-3aU/s1600/2008vs2012.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjFsCiJxit_tARratSpqRA_0s7ok8gMO-08RGtmRwtPk_xwd70tGSdUrJY8caCji5CBfFtofefvjbm82MAYE0x4EMgBv9HN6KjPkn4zpzJzW2KciZvchIQbFGzTlDI9MYGVLK0Awi9J-3aU/s1600/2008vs2012.PNG" /></a></div>
Except for W-L, these numbers are not that different. The biggest difference here is that 2012 Cliff Lee gives up home runs at more than twice the rate of 2008 Cliff Lee. However, 2012 Cliff Lee also strikes out more batters and walks fewer batters. BABIP is basically the same. FIP is not that different. But the Win-Loss records are polar opposites. Yeah, Lee probably got lucky in 2008 to get to 22-3, but not historically so.<br />
<br />
Anyways, Cliff Lee is really good. But his career, and 2012 in particular, has been kinda weird. That is all.<br />
<br /></div>
simonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08053789051385270752noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1697358494613902278.post-23105573175344593532013-06-04T08:10:00.003-07:002013-06-05T17:31:54.989-07:00Ádám LindI thought I knew how to spell Adam Lind, Jays DH (who plays 1B because he's somehow better at it than Edwin Encarnacion. Pardon me. Edwin <i>Encarnación</i>.)<br />
<br />
According to Yahoo!, I didn't <i>quite</i> have it right:<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhGBpyHz0lrQOYh5yKPZZhb_etayiou1IsCuZDISJ8yOpN_22J9g2r0g3Vs5etHoRomwTVejgu0cf3ebToMrZHnvz5ZD-PsZW0TivMCYosmgMWgPWGF7sGtVEzwHEG0A7bNUyPxbC19HESb/s1600/AdamLind.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhGBpyHz0lrQOYh5yKPZZhb_etayiou1IsCuZDISJ8yOpN_22J9g2r0g3Vs5etHoRomwTVejgu0cf3ebToMrZHnvz5ZD-PsZW0TivMCYosmgMWgPWGF7sGtVEzwHEG0A7bNUyPxbC19HESb/s1600/AdamLind.png" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
This is a joke, right?<br />
<br />simonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08053789051385270752noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1697358494613902278.post-34138204074904864962013-05-23T07:58:00.002-07:002013-08-10T16:40:28.279-07:00And now for the Worst...I recently published a Web Log <a href="http://baseballweblog.blogspot.ca/2013/05/joey-bats-wins-game-by-himself.html">about WPA and the best WPA games</a>. Here are a few notes about the worst WPA games.<br />
<br />
The best WPA game for a batter was +1.503 by Art Shamsky, 1966.<br />
The best WPA game for a pitcher was +1.675 by Vern Law, in 1955.<br />
<br />
The wosrt WPA game for a batter was -0.820 by Juan Rivera, in 2003 for the Yankees. He managed to go 0 for 6 (with a walk!), but what sunk his performance below all others was the 3 GIDP* in a 10-9 17-inning Yankees win.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br /><br />
<i>*Ground Into Double Play</i><br />
<br />
Rivera got off to a hot start, GIDPing in the top of the 2nd with runners on 1st and 3rd to end the inning (WPA = -0.11).<br />
In the 4th, Rivera flew out with a runner on 1st for the 2nd out of the inning (WPA = -0.02).<br />
Rivera led off the 6th with a groundout (no runner on 1st, too bad) (WPA = -0.02).<br />
In the top of the 8th, Rivera grounded out with the bases empty to end the inning (WPA = -0.03)<br />
In the top of the 10th, Rivera comes up with the bases loaded, 8-8 tie game, and only one out. If you guessed GIDP, you were right! (WPA = -0.35, from 71% chance of Yankee victory to 36%. ouch)<br />
In the top of the 13th, Rivera works a 2 out, bases-empty walk (WPA = +0.03)<br />
In his last at-bat, in the 16th, Rivera comes up with 1 out and runners on 1st and 3rd. He GIDPs (WPA = -0.32, Yankees win chances go from 68% to 36%).<br />
<br />
The worst clutch performance ever. Rivera would go on to finish the season with a WPA of -1.1.<br />
<br />
<br />
For pitchers, the worst WPA game ever was -1.234 by Rawly Eastwick, in 1976 for Cincinnati. The Reds lost 4-3 in 9 innings to Atlanta. Eastwick pitched only 1.1 innings and was tagged with the loss and the blown save.<br />
<br />
Eastwick enters the game in the top of the 8th with a 1-0 lead and the Reds win expectancy at 66%. By the end of the inning, the Reds are down 2-1 and their Win Expectancy is down to 28% (WPA = -0.38). The Reds batters score 2 runs in the bottom of the 8th to raise their Win Expectancy of 85%! Eastwick loads the bases and then gives up a double. He is pulled with one out in the inning, with two men on base, and the Reds Win Expectancy at just 9% (WPA = -0.74). Tah dah!<br />
<br />
Worst performance ever. Not many relief pitchers get to lose the game twice anymore, so... good for him?simonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08053789051385270752noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1697358494613902278.post-44736485497932820742013-05-23T07:25:00.001-07:002013-08-10T16:40:43.608-07:00Joey Bats Wins a Game by HimselfI was unlucky enough to be working during yesterday's late-afternoon Jays/Rays matchup, but I was following by the At Bat app on my iPhone (which is great by the way). It was surprising enough to see the Jays tie it up in the ninth, let alone win it in extras. That is a rare day in Toronto. It was only after checking out just how they won that I could not help but see that Jose Bautista completely dominated this box score. Whether or not it showed in the game is another thing, but I can't imagine you could walk away with any other impression.<br />
<br />
4/4 With 2 HR and all 4 RBIs in a 4-3 win is good enough. A look at the Fangraphs WPA for the game though, tells just how crucial Joseph Bats was to the win. I know, I'm pretty excited about this baseball game and I haven't even seen a replay yet.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br /><br />
<a href="http://www.baseball-reference.com/about/wpa.shtml">WPA </a>stands for Win Probability Added, and it basically goes like this. At the beginning of the game, each team (theoretically) has a 50% chance of winning the game. They are tied at 0.500 to 0.500. Enough baseball has been played, over the course of history, that we are able to calculate for every possible game situation (inning/outs/baserunners/score/etc):<br />
1) What is the probability that each team will win?<br />
2) How much did the last thing that happen change that probability?<br />
<br />
When the pitcher strikes out the first batter of the game, the pitcher's team is now slightly more likely to win - but just slightly. It is still a tie game and one team has 26 outs left, while the other team has 27. That was a low-WPA strikeout! The pitcher gets a small dose of +WPA, and the batter gets a small dose of -WPA.<br />
Fast forward to the last out of a one run game. The closer strikes out the last batter with the bases loaded in the bottom of the ninth. That is a high-WPA strikeout! The closer gets a nice helping of +WPA, while the batter gets an equal and opposite helping of -WPA. Kind of like Newton's 3rd law, but for baseball.<br />
<br />
A change of +1 indicates an entire win or loss. The WPA of all players on a winning team will add up to 0.500. The WPA of all players on a losing team will add up to -0.500. Generally, the more <a href="http://www.fangraphs.com/scoreboard.aspx?date=2011-10-27">exciting </a>the game, the more WPA that is given out (more lead changes, close finishes, etc).<br />
<br />
Okay.<br />
<br />
That's where Jose comes in. Here's how his night went at the plate:<br />
1. Bottom 1st, Rays 0 : Jays 0, 0 Out, Runner on 2nd.<br />
JB singles in the run. WPA added = +0.07 (7%, from 61% to 68%)<br />
<br />
2. Bottom 4th, Rays 2 : Jays 1, 0 Out, no baserunners.<br />
JB HR to DEEP LF. WPA added = +0.13 (13%, from 43% to 56%)<br />
<br />
3. Bottom 6th, Rays 2 : Jays 2, 1 Out, no baserunners.<br />
JB Walks. WPA added = +0.04 (4%, from 54% to 58%)<br />
<br />
4. Bottom 9th, Rays 3 : Jays 2, 0 Out, no baserunners.<br />
JB HR to DEEP LF! Tie game! WPA added = 0.44 (An increase of 44% from 20% to 64%. Huge.)<br />
<br />
Now the game is in extra innings, where runs scored by the home team are pretty important in determining who wins the game.<br />
<br />
5. Bottom 10th, Rays 3 : Jays 3, 2 out, runners on 1st and 3rd.<br />
JB singles home the run and the Jays win. WPA added = 0.36 (36% added, from 64% to 100%)<br />
<br />
<br />
Tonight, his total (b-ref) WPA was +1.053. That is the 39th best ever single-game WPA performance by a hitter. Ever. Here is the top 10 (thanks to baseball-reference):<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgQRjMLhskc0TKheGlgVjtHIKviLW2HkdJqL5fbfvUgk5bVBfE-uX8hpEn-ifKqO1asTQtg0c5x8i7cSKNyRFmtuU2qQrl4VQ7nKT2qzoXPdAy3YXzFzPlTzSVLF_0ifWXc2gjnKCaYteDu/s1600/top10.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgQRjMLhskc0TKheGlgVjtHIKviLW2HkdJqL5fbfvUgk5bVBfE-uX8hpEn-ifKqO1asTQtg0c5x8i7cSKNyRFmtuU2qQrl4VQ7nKT2qzoXPdAy3YXzFzPlTzSVLF_0ifWXc2gjnKCaYteDu/s1600/top10.PNG" /></a></div>
<br />
Art Shamsky managed to get +1.503 WPA in only 3 plate appearances - kind of a big deal.<br />
If you want to find out more about these games, there is a nice little summary <a href="http://joeposnanski.blogspot.ca/2011/08/statistics-and-stories.html">here</a>.<br />
<br />
Jose also set the Blue Jays (batting) record for single-game WPA, smashing Robbie Alomar's 1991 record of 1.037 (when very few people knew that WPA was a thing). There have only ever been 8 Blue Jays with games over +0.800 WPA:<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjTGdHbxEMuQ0S_sJkrxQeAcMyH_95Fu8IxiDXNnNwmeKR-h97WzJCakJqwL5vRgv3_1J1Gzkenf58g_21AddHQEUzUjxos7q70ddG4btL1xpmcUJ7z2ewPnjWvUpMA2GaRS-qxe9vKaoE0/s1600/JaysWPA.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjTGdHbxEMuQ0S_sJkrxQeAcMyH_95Fu8IxiDXNnNwmeKR-h97WzJCakJqwL5vRgv3_1J1Gzkenf58g_21AddHQEUzUjxos7q70ddG4btL1xpmcUJ7z2ewPnjWvUpMA2GaRS-qxe9vKaoE0/s1600/JaysWPA.png" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<br />
Coming into the game, Jose was carrying a cumulative +0.38 WPA this season. Now, his season WPA is a more robust +1.4. Needless to say, the Jays could use more games like this from The Boss (and others) if they are going to make a playoff push.<br />
<br />
<br />
Aside:<br />
Pitchers get WPA scores too - equal and opposite to the hitters they face. Since the best thing a pitcher can do is get an out, pitcher scores tend to have more of a ceiling than hitters, unless the pitcher is pitching many shutout innings in a long extra inning game.<br />
<br />
The highest WPA ever by a pitcher is 1.675, when Vern Law pitched all 18 innings in a 4-3 win in 1955. That sort of thing doesn't happen too much anymore.<br />
<br />
The highest WPA by a pitcher in the last 20 years was 0.930 (Mike Magnate pitched 5.1 shutout innings in extra innings in 1996).<br />
<br />
The highest WPA ever by a pitcher in a 9-inning game is 0.966 by Bob Keegan in 1956.<br />
<br />
The Blue Jays record for WPA by a pitcher is 0.991 by Jesse Jefferson in 1980 for a 11 inning shutout.<br />
<br />
<br />
So many fun facts!<br />
<br />simonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08053789051385270752noreply@blogger.com0