Dominance Factor For Top 40 Pitching Prospects

0 Points

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Author

Comment

TokenWilliams

#21

[-]

Veteran Member

Posts: 457

09/21/09 5:30 PM

I don't get this. What is this supposed to tell me? Past performance? According to Sullymetrics "Overall, we feel this statistic is significantly improved, and a better way to determine just how dominant a starting pitching prospect was at each stop." Ummmm ok - you feel it - great, good for you - i'd feel it too if I spent the last 6 months trying to figure something out..... but my question is - why do I need a new stat to tell me how dominant someone already was? Don't we already know this by the stats we already have?

But the biggest thing is, why does age determine if someone dominated at a particular stop? Unless this correlates to predicting a pitchers future success I fail to see its usefulness. If it does help predict future success then show me the numbers with past prospects.

Reply Quote

FenwayTheHardWay

#22

[-]

Veteran Member

Posts: 1515

09/21/09 6:07 PM

Veteran Member

This may be a dumb question, but I want to throw it out there:

Is this stat supposed to be predictive? Is it supposed to tell me how these prospects are going to preform going forward (that would seem to be the only point). If that's the case, how is this not just a weak-ass version of PECOTA? That system considers the same stats (and more) but actually attempts to systematically figure out how each one correlates to future success, and provides a robust projection as opposed to a single number that measures... something.

"Jonathan Papelbon, not wasting any time, going to his bread and butter there, and that's the cheese."- Buck Martinez

Reply Quote

sleep6666

#23

[-]

Veteran Member

Posts: 328

09/21/09 6:31 PM

Veteran Member

chavopepe2 wrote:
In regards to OPS; the combination of SLG% and OBP is completely random. These two stats are not proportionally related and there is absolutely no reason to put them together. It works primarily because of its simplicity.

Just to further pile on OPS, slugging percentage isn't even a percentage at all, while OBP is. Mathematically, OBP and SLG% have different units and should not be added. OPS being useful is really a minor miracle.

"Baseball's hard." - Lars Anderson

Reply Quote

TheGoldenGreek33

#24

[-]

Veteran Member

Posts: 2976

09/21/09 6:39 PM

Veteran Member

FTHW, I just saw it as a different way to tell you how dominant a pitcher was in that one year. I don't see it trying to serve as predicative value going forward. I find it interesting to look at because it combines the three main elements of a pitcher: 1) the ability to keep runners off base, 2) the ability to throw ground balls, and 3) to strike hitters out. So while it probably is a freakshow stat that could do without the level modifier, IMO it still was somewhat interesting to look at.

Reply Quote

JimRiceRocks

#25

[-]

Veteran Member

Posts: 1164

09/21/09 7:29 PM

Veteran Member

AMarshal2 wrote:
I like that they use 0.72 as the factor for gb% because "72% of gb's turn into outs." That's horrible. More fly balls turn into outs than ground balls, why not throw fly balls in there?

I have no idea if this is true or not - not questioning it. But if true, why do we love our prospects with high GB%? Why wouldn't we prefer FB pitchers if they are outs more frequently?

"You can never have too much bitching" - left coast bosox fan
"No wonder a lot of opponent's announcers have bullpenis envy - left coast bosox fan

Reply Quote

mredsox89

#26

[-]

Veteran Member

Posts: 671

09/21/09 7:32 PM

JimRiceRocks wrote:

AMarshal2 wrote:
I like that they use 0.72 as the factor for gb% because "72% of gb's turn into outs." That's horrible. More fly balls turn into outs than ground balls, why not throw fly balls in there?

I have no idea if this is true or not - not questioning it. But if true, why do we love our prospects with high GB%? Why wouldn't we prefer FB pitchers if they are outs more frequently?

Just playing devil's advocate here. If that is true, then the 28% of gb that are not outs are most likely only singles. Whereas any % of fly balls that are not outs are XBH, usually 2b's or HR's

Reply Quote

JimRiceRocks

#27

[-]

Veteran Member

Posts: 1165

09/21/09 7:42 PM

Veteran Member

That's logical. I'm just trying to get at the statement and why GB's are more important than FB's. Or if you're saying they are not.

"You can never have too much bitching" - left coast bosox fan
"No wonder a lot of opponent's announcers have bullpenis envy - left coast bosox fan

Reply Quote

Yirmiyahu

#28

[-]

Veteran Member

Posts: 507

09/21/09 7:52 PM

The following numbers are MLB's splits for the entire 2009 season:

Split	PA	BA	OBP	SLG	OPS
Ground Balls	53329	0.236	0.236	0.257	0.493
Fly Balls	44862	0.224	0.218	0.600	0.818
Line Drives	23532	0.733	0.730	1.000	1.730
Bunts	2864	0.376	0.376	0.376	0.752

http://www.baseball-refer...amp;lg=MLB&year=2009

Mrredsox89 was right; flyballs are turned into outs slightly more often than groundballs, but the ones that aren't are overwhelmingly extra base hits. Note that line drives aren't included in flyballs for these numbers.

Reply Quote

sleep6666

#29

[-]

Veteran Member

Posts: 329

09/21/09 8:15 PM

Veteran Member

JimRiceRocks wrote:
That's logical. I'm just trying to get at the statement and why GB's are more important than FB's. Or if you're saying they are not.

JRR, strikeouts have had a run impact of approximately -0.11, infield flies -0.09, groundballs 0.04, outfield flies 0.18, and line drives 0.39 per incident.

That's a nice find from BR, Yirmiyahu , except the numbers for bunts are wrong....very wrong...

"Baseball's hard." - Lars Anderson

Reply Quote

Yirmiyahu

#30

[-]

Veteran Member

Posts: 509

09/21/09 8:24 PM

Well, the bunts wouldn't include sac bunts, because those don't count as at-bats and thus wouldn't factor into OPS at all.

Reply Quote

TheGoldenGreek33

#31

[-]

Veteran Member

Posts: 2980

09/21/09 8:28 PM

Veteran Member

sleep6666 wrote:
That's a nice find from BR, Yirmiyahu , except the numbers for bunts are wrong....very wrong...

Not necessarily. Most bunts are sacrifices, which don't count toward the triple slash. Most hitters that bunt for a base hit are fast, obviously. Ichiro is a career .663 hitter when bunting for a base hit.

Reply Quote

sleep6666

um...

#32

[-]

Veteran Member

Posts: 330

09/21/09 8:31 PM

Veteran Member

$OBP = \frac{H+BB+HBP}{AB+BB+HBP+SF}$

"Baseball's hard." - Lars Anderson

Reply Quote

TheGoldenGreek33

#33

[-]

Veteran Member

Posts: 2981

09/21/09 8:33 PM

Veteran Member

SF = Sac Fly

Reply Quote

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Yuku free message boards

SoxProspects.com

Dominance Factor For Top 40 Pitching Prospects