13
2013
How Statistics Reshaped The Way We View Pitchers and Their Game
An article by 
In 2003, Moneyball: The Art of Winning an Unfair Game, a book written by Michael Lewis, sparked the interest of not only baseball fans, but also management and statistical scholars across the country. [1] Recently in 2011, this book was introduced as a sports drama movie starring Brad Pitt.
Basically the storyline of the book encompasses how the main character Billy Beane, General Manager of the Oakland Athletics, implemented a measurement and feedback system based on a player’s ability to get on base. This system was based on the sabermetric principles and theories first introduced by Bill James in his comprehensive Historical Baseball Abstract, a rigorous statistical analysis used to track the traits most connected to a player’s value to a team. [2]
What is Sabermetrics?
The Moneyball book implies that when sabermetrics is used to identify players with superior abilities (who aren’t noticed by competitor scouts), it allows new players to be added to a team; thus, increasing the winning percentage for the team without paying premium salaries to those players. This results in a competitive advantage for the team’s league standing. For further understanding of sabermetrics and its theory in relation to baseball, please check the paper written by Jim Albert.
DiamondView and PlayersPlan
Several detailed programs have been implemented by teams like the Cleveland Indians MLB team. The Indians have implemented two programs: DiamondView and PlayersPlan with the hopes of increasing appraisal of a player’s performance and value. These types of plans are often used by MLB team managers to facilitate selection and recruitment possibilities and help determine the optimum team salary distributions. [3]
Systems like DiamondView and PlayersPlan keep track of each player in a database that is used for recruiting and selection, training and development, appraising player’s skills, and helping evaluate compensation for the players. For example, information on a baseball pitcher would include such pitching statistics as the number of times the pitcher allows a walk, how many members of the opposite team were pitched to at the plate, the number of times the pitcher entered the game with intent to save the game but failed, number of hits allowed in a game, home runs allowed, earned run average and many more. Statistics, along with some physics theory, has also suggested that left-handed pitchers get better results against left-handed hitters. Knowing which pitchers have the best odds against hitters based on this theory, managers can stratgically use relief hitters to counter pinch hitters substituted into a game at the last minute.
Others Question Usefulness of Sabermetrics
Many consider sabermetrics a valuable and objective means to gain an effective measure of a player’s value to the team. Others question the usefulness of such statistics in the prediction of future behavior of players.
DIPS
Another measurement tool known as Defense-Independent Pitching Statistics (DIPS), introduced by Voros McCracken as early as 1999, measures a pitcher’s stats. These stats do not include plays that involve infielders or outfielders, but are based on stats that result strictly from the control of the pitcher alone, like walks and strikeouts. [4]
DICE and FIP
Others, like Tom Tippett [5], felt this DIPS evaluation tool was not entirely viable; while others have introduced new math formulae and statistics that keep track of innings pitched(IP), which measures how many outs were made while a pitcher was pitching. For instance, formulae such as Defense-Independent Component ERA (DICE) and FIP do consider factors that make them highly dependent on the defensive play of the fielders.
It appears that the focus on talent and statistics, along with the recent implementation of information technology, will continue to be implemented and will infuse team selection — including MLB pitchers — and salaries for awhile.
Patricia Deming, is a graduate of the University of Texas at Austin, with a BA in Mathematics. She enjoys writing articles and contributing to sports and education blogs, such as DegreeJungle.com. She has been a baseball fan for many years and regularly attends Seattle Seahawks games.
[1] Lewis, M. (2004). Moneyball: The art of winning an unfair game. New York: Norton.
[2] James, B. (2001). The new Bill James historical baseball abstract. New York: Free Press.
[3] http://www.cleveland.com/gameplan/index.ssf?/gameplan/more/part2.html
[4] Voros McCracken, “Pitching and Defense: How Much Control Do Hurlers Have? January 23, 2001.
[5] http://www.sloansportsconference.com/?tag=tom-tippet
This Fan Shot was contributed by Patricia. Have something you want to say about the Mets? Share your opinions with over 15 thousand Mets fans who read this site daily. Send your Fan Shot to GetMetsmerized@aol.com. Or ask us about becoming a regular contributor.
About the Author: Fan Shot
Share your opinions with over 15,000 daily readers on MMO and write your own Fan Shot. If we like what we read, we'll feature you on our front page with the rest of of our great content. Simply email us at GetMetsmerized@aol.com and we'll take care of the rest. Then you can tell your all your friends and family that you were published on Mets Merized Online - the #1 Mets Fan Site on the web!
38 Comments + Add Comment
Recent Comments
- oleosmirf: on Mets and Braves Suspended After Eight Tied 5-5, Will Resume Play Saturday: Just because they all seem to dislike...
- oleosmirf: on Scout Says No Way Flores Can Play Any Position But First Base: I watched Flores play 2B in spring...
- Hawk: on Mets and Braves Suspended After Eight Tied 5-5, Will Resume Play Saturday: Please send Tejada down with Ike.
- Dave Willins: on Mets and Braves Suspended After Eight Tied 5-5, Will Resume Play Saturday: Enough of TC bungling already. Let's please...
- Heybatter: on Mets and Braves Suspended After Eight Tied 5-5, Will Resume Play Saturday: Rice will have to......Edgin pitched one inning...
Need Tickets To The Mets Game?
Check Out These Great MLB Links!
Photographs From Gordon Donovan
5393 Fans Follow Us On Twitter!
1269 Fans Like Us On Facebook!
2341 Fans Read Our Feed!
1702 Fans Subscribe via Daily Email!
Nice job on this Patricia. I think there are two different types of stats and sometimes people think the goal of stats is to do the same thing.
For example – there are evaluation stats and projection stats. For fans, I personally think you can evaluate a pitchers performance simply by using W-L (to some degree), ERA, WHIP, IP, Hits allowed, BB, K, HR-Allowed. And then if you’re talking about bullpen arms, you can add saves, inherited runners v. inherited runners scored
For executives and scouts its different. They are in the business of figuring out the future. Figuring out if a players performance was below their normal standard is there evidence to suggest they can or should turn it around?
That’s where stats like DIPS, FIP, BABIP etc come into play. I appreciate their usage by executives because I think they need to gather as much info as they can to make an investment…. I don’t see how that’s a bad idea.
But as a fan, I don’t really need to know a pitchers BABIP because by the time he is on my team, BABIP isn’t relevant because he either gets the job done or he doesn’t.
The problem many see with Stat Analysis is not so much the concept but the implementation,
And lets be clear here Stat analysis has been going on for far longer than the publication of Moneyball.
The only thing that has actually changed is the stats are now saved into electronic format that easily is cut and pasted into a spreadsheet that you can PLAY with metric formulae and come up with new metrics.
That doesn’t make the new metric any better than what was, just different. And if done badly leads to the wrong answer or at minimum an incomplete answer…
Take the DICE metric mentioned. Great for judging strikeout pitchers and finding guys who walk too many, but it will leave off all those groundball pitchers who rely on the defense to get thier outs. They will be hurt by the small remaining samples making one walk amplified in what the metric says your pitcher will do because it cuts out the majority of his good results due to UNATURAL SELECTION of the person creating the metric.
In the end the analysis and metric is only as good as the person who created it. While it may make sense to think that HBP and RBOE should be a component in wOBA is it something that the player achieved? Is it something he can duplicate? Is the wOBA earned? In the case of wOBA RBOE is weighted higher than a Hit the player earned! Is that right? Does it make sense?
And how good is that metric when comparing a guy who managed to get on mostly via errors or by HBP compared to a guy who earned all his bases on hits?
How does wOBP rank the following?
Player A 200PA 60H
Player B 200PA 40H, 20RBOE
Who has the higher wOBA and who is actually better once you actually look at the metric component? Who would you really rather have?
And what is worse is these newly created BAD metrics are then used as building blocks on even newer Metrics such as WAR. wOBA is a prime component in producing the War Metric!
And as they say in the computing and statistical sciences….Garbage in = Garbage Out!
Sometimes less is more. and in the case of Statistical analysis that usually holds true. Unless you can find a completly comprehensive formula for that position (almost impossible at this point) You will always find yourself cutting out some TYPE of player or add some metric that will add errors into your results.
For this reason many believe it is better instead to come up with SIMPLER metrics to judge ASPECTS of a player that can then be averaged out as a plus or minus in the end.
Then a metric that judges a pitcher such as DICE may give High K LowBB pitchers a high score, And GB Pitchers will get a higher score in another metric that would complement DICE in that it only counts results not just from the pitcher. You can easily combine the results later on and get an overall score for a pitcher that works no matter what type of pitcher he is.
As they say in the engineering business the more complicated you make something the more likely it is to break. That holds true with Statistical analysis as well.
So while there will always be arguments of metrics and thier use the use isn’t really the issue it’s the creation and the attempt to MASH numbers without any oversight of bias due to Mathematical selection and Philisophical beliefs of the author of the Metric.
a Metric like DICE works well for Roger Clemmons, Dwight Gooden, Steve Carlton and Seaver.
Guys like Maddux and Ojeda not so much.
And while many point to historically good pitchers showing up at the top of the list when they sell thier new metric formula to the masses they never bother to look at all the great pitchers who do not show up on the list who would expose the bias and imbalance in the metric that would point to the realization…It isn’t done yet! It’s missing a key ingredient or has some ingredient that does not belong.
“Take the DICE metric mentioned. Great for judging strikeout pitchers and finding guys who walk too many, but it will leave off all those groundball pitchers who rely on the defense to get thier outs. They will be hurt by the small remaining samples making one walk amplified in what the metric says your pitcher will do because it cuts out the majority of his good results due to UNATURAL SELECTION of the person creating the metric.”
That is the whole point. Pitchers have no control over if a short stop fields a ball cleanly or not. The advanced stats try to focus on what a pitcher directly controls.
“In the end the analysis and metric is only as good as the person who created it. While it may make sense to think that HBP and RBOE should be a component in wOBA is it something that the player achieved? ”
It is the outcome of the at bat.
“In the case of wOBA RBOE is weighted higher than a Hit the player earned! Is that right? Does it make sense?”
RBOE is rated higher than a single. Do you know why things are weighted the way they are?
wOBA isn’t looking for the most earned event, it is about the events that do the most to score runs (frequency of said event also plays a role).
So, while a single might feel more pure and manly to you, errors are more likely to result in extra bases than a single.
Of course, if you were being honest, you wouldn’t phrase your statement as if an RBOE was wroth more than a 3B.
“How does wOBP rank the following?
Player A 200PA 60H
Player B 200PA 40H, 20RBOE
Who has the higher wOBA and who is actually better once you actually look at the metric component? Who would you really rather have?”
that is impossible to tell without knowing what the other hits were. And, by the way, Pete Rose, in over 3500 games only RBOE 205 times. And he’s baseball’s all time RBOE leader. 20 RBOE in a season would be kind of crazy.
“And what is worse is these newly created BAD metrics are then used as building blocks on even newer Metrics such as WAR. wOBA is a prime component in producing the War Metric!”
In which one?
“Sometimes less is more. and in the case of Statistical analysis that usually holds true.”
I have never heard of any statistician, in any field saying that. I’ve worked with or have friends who study statistics in finance, medicine, engineering, politics and several other fields and have never heard them once say they would be more accurate by using less information. If the information is relevant and accurate, you want as much as you can get.
“As they say in the engineering business the more complicated you make something the more likely it is to break. That holds true with Statistical analysis as well.”
Yes, you want as few moving parts as possible. But you can’t force something to be simple when it isn’t.
“So while there will always be arguments of metrics and thier use the use isn’t really the issue it’s the creation and the attempt to MASH numbers without any oversight of bias due to Mathematical selection and Philisophical beliefs of the author of the Metric.”
Any statistician worth their graphing calculator knows you have to show your work and let others pick it apart. Peer review is essential.
“a Metric like DICE works well for Roger Clemmons, Dwight Gooden, Steve Carlton and Seaver.
Guys like Maddux and Ojeda not so much.”
Gregg Maddux has the highest FIP of the 1990s of any pitcher with more than 1500 IP
http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=pit&lg=all&qual=1500&type=8&season=1999&month=0&season1=1990&ind=0&team=0&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0
Of course, this also shows the problem for people like you who attack advanced stats.
You go after the stat instead of questioning your presumption. You want things that will confirm your preconceived notion. You warp the evidence to fit your conclusion.
The way it is suppose to work is you change your conclusion to fit your evidence.
“And while many point to historically good pitchers showing up at the top of the list when they sell thier new metric formula to the masses they never bother to look at all the great pitchers who do not show up on the list who would expose the bias and imbalance in the metric that would point to the realization…It isn’t done yet! It’s missing a key ingredient or has some ingredient that does not belong.”
Or maybe some of those other pitchers weren’t as good as you assumed. Advanced stats rise and fall on their own merit. The results have no bearing on their usefulness.
Yeah I said he will not show well in Dice and you say he does then post a link to FIP…
This is why I will ignore just about everything you say!
Cause lunacy like this is being sold as LOGIC just as wOBA is sold as a good metric but only when hidden deep inside WAR where no one can see where the mistakes in construct were made.
As for the guy who can’t control the SS making an error that doesn’t mean he should be penalized for something SOMEONE ELSE did and have his JOB DONE not count based on someone else’s failure in the SAME EXACT WAY that a Batter should not be credited for doing something good based on SOMEONE ELSE’s screwup as is the case in the counting of HBP and RBOE in wOBA!
Funny how you love to discount GOODNESS of a player based on the fact someone else MAY HAVE screwed up but are MORE than willing to count someone else’s screwup as a GOOD of the player who benefitted from GIFTS he DID NOT EARN!
Yeah way to be consistent there slappy?
Since you really have nothing to add here and can’t even show links to the metric we are talking about in your veiled attempt and countering something I said you will just be ignored as a fool that has no other purpose but to place wool over the eyes of people who KNOW BETTER, and MUCH BETTER than you!
“Yeah I said he will not show well in Dice and you say he does then post a link to FIP…”
I couldn’t find a list of DICE for the 90s. FIP is close to it.
Show me how different DICE would be. Give us a link.
“This is why I will ignore just about everything you say!”
Because it challenges your preconceived notions?
“Cause lunacy like this is being sold as LOGIC just as wOBA is sold as a good metric but only when hidden deep inside WAR where no one can see where the mistakes in construct were made.”
You act like Tango is hiding the formula for wOBA.
http://www.insidethebook.com/woba.shtml
here is the Wikipedia page
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WOBA
Fangraphs has it listed as a category on player pages.
And again, which WAR are you referring to?
“As for the guy who can’t control the SS making an error that doesn’t mean he should be penalized for something SOMEONE ELSE did and have his JOB DONE not count based on someone else’s failure in the SAME EXACT WAY that a Batter should not be credited for doing something good based on SOMEONE ELSE’s screwup as is the case in the counting of HBP and RBOE in wOBA!”
OK, word soup. Yummy.
Pitcher’s don’t get penalized for error’s in their ERA, remember? The E stands for earned.
What DIPS, DICE, and FIP do is not give guys extra credit for having great defenses or take away from guys who have poor defenses.
For a guy ranting about simplicity, you should want to know which pitchers don’t rely on events out of their control.
and didn’t I already point out why you’re freaking out over RBOE and HBP is pointless? If a guy RBOE 10 times in a season, he’ll lead the league.
The point is, how likely does RBOE lead to a run? At a greater rate than a single, according to Tango. If you disagree, go after his math. Don’t claim your incredulity as proof. Just because you don’t like the result does not invalidate the process.
“Funny how you love to discount GOODNESS of a player based on the fact someone else MAY HAVE screwed up but are MORE than willing to count someone else’s screwup as a GOOD of the player who benefitted from GIFTS he DID NOT EARN!”
Actually, no. Advanced stats can be used to filter out good and bad luck.
“Since you really have nothing to add here and can’t even show links to the metric we are talking about ”
OK, Mr 303 IQ, you show us. Show us where Maddux ranks in DICE.
No, you won’t.
You couldn’t prove an Apple was red so you showed me an pomegranet as proof that fruit is red and since an apple is a fruit it is red as well….
Until I break out the orange.
You have proved nothing here but how insistent and bad you are at proving anything you say and think CLOSE ENOUGH is proof where proof doesn’t exist.
And anything created by Tango Tiger is about as usefull as that RBOE he puts into wOBA you keep ignoring hoping it goes away and gets forgotten.
No good can come from talking about a guy who says something he can’t seemingly prove.
I said he would be lower in DICE and you have yet to show he isn’t. When you find what it is your looking for you still have the issue of did he rank below someone due to the fact the Metric penalized him for relying on a defense more than someone else who wasn’t a better pitcher than him but didn’t need defensive help in his sampling…
You been smoked and thrown into the ashtry…BYE BYE!
Yet another instance where all your questions were answered and all your theories disproved, so you revert to the “I said in CAPS so it must be true and I’ll ignore all the evidence that proves me wrong” defense. Why won’t you ever be honest with yourself?
Shouldn’t you be busy looking for the proof that we made a Matching offer to Bourn but he decided to go elsewhere?
We are all still waiting for you to back up what you said and have not seen a shred of your effort yet…
Until then as far as credibility goes I’m in the lead…
I said we would never make an offer to Reyes…TRUE
I said the Pagan deal was a bust…TRUE
I said we were not serious about paying the price to get Bourn….TRUE
And you said We made a matching offer that was turned down…FALSE!
SO much for a guy who thinks he has credibility…
Tsk Tsk….
I didn’t say the Mets made Bourn a matching offer. That’s another lie. I said they matched the guaranteed offer. That is a universal truth. To be clear, are you stating the Mets did not offer Bourn $48 million dollars over four years?
And Poof goes the reputation of Mr Credibility…
XtreemIcon February 11, 2013 at 11:34 pm .
Seriously? The Mets matched the guaranteed offer Bourn eventually took.
http://metsmerizedonline.com/2013/02/latest-on-bourn-cubs-mariners-rangers-indians-interest-greater-than-being-reported.html
And Vigouge I’ll respond to you here….
What your saying is wOBA isn’t a constant now is it?
The new version may well be better than the old version….
But what your said DOES prove my point in SPADES doesn’t it?
The answer a metric gives is only as good as the SOURCE you got it from and the FORMULA used to calculate it!
And I would suggest while it’s better than the way it used to be done it still counts HBP (which are not an earned Base and still weights HRs and other extra base hits much lower than they should be in relation to a single now don’t they?
SO a guy with high singles seems almost as a good as a guy who hits HRs and due to that the WAR which uses it skews towards the singles hitter not the guy who drives in the most runs which are what actually WINS the game.
And how exactly does that “poof” my credibility? I told you what I said and were kind enough to prove me right. Thanks for that.
So, you think it should be discredited because
1) they update it to fit in with new findings
2) you don’t like the results
is that about right?
“SO a guy with high singles seems almost as a good as a guy who hits HRs”
Example? Show us how that works. Even Steve Balboni maintained a wOBA above league average for most of his career.
You two are LIVING proof that two Half wits don’t make ONE WIT!
How does it discredit you?
You CLAIMED you NEVER SAID we made a matching offer….
I showed you to be the LIAR hence Credibility gone!
You were also asked in that thread to show PROOF that we matched…
You ran away as usual when your denials didn’t work.
I never said the Mets made a matching offer, no matter how loudly you say I did. You posted what I did say. Read it again. You proved yourself wrong all by yourself.
XtreemIcon February 11, 2013 at 11:34 pm .
Seriously? The Mets matched the guaranteed offer Bourn eventually took.
It doesn’t get any clearer than that!
From the guy who is wrong more often than me but calls me always wrong….
Ho Hum….
Read it again. Did the Mets match the offer? Or the guaranteed offer? It’s like teaching remedial pre-school. What was the guaranteed offer the Indians offered? What did the Mets offer?
Hey, Cybil, I just showed you where Maddux ranks on DICE. Look down.
You couldn’t prove an Apple was red so you showed me an pomegranet as proof that fruit is red and since an apple is a fruit it is red as well….
I have no idea what you’re arguing about, but I thought that line was awesome. I’m stealing it.
“You couldn’t prove an Apple was red so you showed me an pomegranet as proof that fruit is red and since an apple is a fruit it is red as well….
Until I break out the orange.”
And then you make yourself the nuts in the fruit cake.
“You have proved nothing here but how insistent and bad you are at proving anything you say and think CLOSE ENOUGH is proof where proof doesn’t exist.”
I linked to BP saying that DICE and FIP are the same stat under different names. I also linked to a chart showing that Maddux was the best pitcher of the 1990s by FIP.
I also pointed out how the only “evidence” you have provided is your own incredulity.
“And anything created by Tango Tiger is about as usefull as that RBOE he puts into wOBA you keep ignoring hoping it goes away and gets forgotten.”
You can’t discredit the process because you don’t like the result.
and I don’t ignore it. I address it directly. You are simply piling on lies to support your untenable position.
“No good can come from talking about a guy who says something he can’t seemingly prove.
I said he would be lower in DICE and you have yet to show he isn’t.”
Yes, I did.
” When you find what it is your looking for you still have the issue of did he rank below someone ”
Maddux doesn’t rank bellow any in the 1990s.
“due to the fact the Metric penalized him for relying on a defense more than someone else who wasn’t a better pitcher than him but didn’t need defensive help in his sampling”
A pitcher who doesn’t need to rely on an above average defense behind him is in fact better than a pitcher who does. Why is that so strange?
You’d think the guy who does most of the work himself would be seen as better.
You genuinly ARE that stupid aren’t you?
I didn’t discredit a metric based on it’s results….I discredited it based on it’s FORMULA for calculating results…
This is why you always fail in your attempts to argue with what I say…
Either because it went right over your little head or you didn’t even bother to read just reply and a attack like a dog on a keyword…
This is why you fail time and time again!
“This is why you always fail in your attempts to argue with what I say…
Either because it went right over your little head or you didn’t even bother to read just reply and a attack like a dog on a keyword…”
lol what? Donal’s the one addressing your points, you’re the one calling Donal a filthy retarted liar…
You’re attacking the idea that a RBOE is worth more than a single without actually addressing how Tango came to that conclusion.
So address it then….
GO on I have been waiting for you to do that for two years now yet you always seem to run from it.
As for Crack we pay no attention to a guy who admits to using whatever name he feels like…
Do you disagree with the notion that RBOE is more likely to lead to a run scoring than a single?
Yes I disagree and disagree even MORE that the guy who couldn’t get a hit and needed an error to get on base did something and should get more credit for someone else’s screwup than a guy who made his own accomplishment.
There is no reason to believe getting on via error creates a greater chance of a run than a Hit does.
And Error doesn’t usually CAUSE a run to score anymore than a Hit usually does.
And if an error DOES score a run you don’t give the credit to the guy who did nothing without defensive help.
He couldn’t CAUSE the error and should get no credit for anything that happens during one.
Your problem is you think wOBA is a credential. It’s not. It’s resutant. It measures the likelihood of runs scoring based on the outcomes of each plate appearance. Has nothing to do with how good a player is. You dont understand the very basic function of the stat but feel you know enough to speak on it’s intricacies.
Yeah try and lie and subterfuge your way out of it…
#1 there is no situation where an error is more likely to score a run than a hit will.
#2 it IS used as a credential asa major component of WAR!
BOTH ar used to try and figure out who is the better player to have as ALL metrics are!
Just hiding the bad metric into another is not solving your problem of garbage being put into the equation
#3 wOBA is Weighted On Base Average it’s not a resultant as it takes no results other than cunting stats and weights them based on how productive they are supposed to be which is why it’s dumb to have a single be worth more than a quarter of what a HR is…A HR is 4 bases a Single is just one!
“#1 there is no situation where an error is more likely to score a run than a hit will.”
So, an outfielder dropping a fly ball that rolls to the wall wouldn’t be more likely to create a run than a bloop or bunt single? A third baseman throwing the ball into the stands wouldn’t do more to create a run than said bloop or bunt?
Also, you are being dishonest and I already corrected you on this. The contention is that rBOE is more likely to create a run than a single. Not any old hit. A single.
“weights them based on how productive they are supposed to be which is why it’s dumb to have a single be worth more than a quarter of what a HR is…A HR is 4 bases a Single is just one!”
1) That isn’t how weighting works
2) You assume all bases are of equal value. The difference between second and first is actually greater than the difference between third and second.
Nope no more likely to score a run than a ball hit he couldn’t possibly catch no matter what he did!
If the error could score a run then a hit could just as easily because the end result was the RUN could score unless an OUT was made!
If the ball rolls to the wall it really doesn’t matter. If he could catch it the runner would be holding waiting for the tag. If it was a hit he wouldn’t be waiting and score because he was running from the get go!
So no yor situation does not show an Error makes a run score more likely than a hit does.
The only difference is the error if not made could PREVENT a run scoring…A hit means there was NO WAY to prevent it from scoring making the hit MORE LIKELY to score the run since the fielder had no shot at preventing it!
A ball rolling to the wall cleanly isn’t a single. Or usually isn’t. So, no it doesn’t fit here.
Doesn’t matter where the ball goes after he doesn’t catch it…If it scored due to the error it scores just the same with a hit!
Only scenario you can come up with that MIGHT fit is runner on 2nd fly ball….
If thats the scenario he is holding on base until the error happens.
Then takes two bases after the error occurrs.
Same situation a single scores that runner just as well. He runs on the contract reaches third by the time the ball gets to the OFer and scores because the throw has to be perfect to nail him since he is already running full speed.
If the runner is on 3rd he scores either way…
If the runner is on first rolling to the wall will not help unless a SECOND error is made.
He is not going first to home on a single error. another Throwing error would be involved.
And in the end you have ONE type of error that could score a run compared to dozens of HIT uutcomes tat are MUCH MORE LIKEY to score that run so your whole premise is just flat out wrong!
So sorry charlie your scenario doesn’t help you at all in proving an error leads to a run more often than a hit does.
RBI totals when compared to RS says otherwise!
If there was an error no RBI would be awarded!
Oh, here’s why I couldn’t find a list of pitchers by DICE
http://www.baseballprospectus.com/glossary/index.php?search=FIP
BP defining FIP
” It was conceived of by both Tom Tango and Clay Dreslough, the latter of who called it Defense-Independent Component ERA.”
So, ya, I did show you how Maddux ranks in DICE.
Be sure to let us know when you figure out exactly what metric your talking about because you appear to be confused and only know what they are based on the heading in the table and not how they are actually calculated….
And as Vig pointed out the heading doesn’t tell you what is included in the version of wOBA listed now does it?
So you really have no clue what your talking about or showing just parroting what you read on the INTERNET….
BONJOUR I’m a French Model!
OK, I forgot I was teaching the remedial class. I’ll make it easier for you
DICE and FIP are the exact same thing. Same formula. Different names.
You couldn’t even teach Pre-School
Just to further gum up the works, the past couple fangraphs fourmulas for wOBA didn’t use RBOE’s. The 2012 formula is
wOBA = (.691*NIBB + .722*HBP + .884*1B + 1.257*2B + 1.593*3B + 2.058*HR)/(PA-IBB)
So any consternation about bases reached because of error being worth more than a single is overblown.
Keep in mind, I’ve done this dance with him before. I even showed how rare it is for RBOE to significantly drive up a player’s wOBA to begin with. It is such a rare occurrence. If a guys does it 10 times in 600 PAs, he might lead the league.
I actually went and looked up Reyes’s and Chipper’s, Reyes had one roe every 70 pa’s, Chipper had 1 every 95 or so. So you’re right it’s just too rare of an occurrence with no real control by the hitter that it doesn’t matter.