Super Stat Sticky: Get Your Learn On!

Baseball Reference

Brooks Baseball

Baseball Savant

Baseballsavant

Oh so good.

Do you want to know what the average exit velocity of balls hit by Trumbo the week of May 15th?

90.0 MPH

Maybe you want to overlay Seth Smith's 2016 spray chart onto OPACY?

Sure, they can do that.

How about his defense in 2016?

Yep, they got it.

How about Kim's game winning pinch hit HR?

Yep, check the media tab.

On 1/6/2017 at 8:26 PM, Can_of_corn said:

Baseballsavant

Oh so good.

Do you want to know what the average exit velocity of balls hit by Trumbo the week of May 15th?

90.0 MPH

 

Maybe you want to overlay Seth Smith's 2016 spray chart onto OPACY?

Sure, they can do that.

How about his defense in 2016?

Yep, they got it.

How about Kim's game winning pinch hit HR?

Yep, check the media tab.

 

Shockingly (), John Gibbons is probably the worst challenger in MLB.  League average for challenges has been about 50/50 over the last 3 years.  Gibbons has been 33% over-turned/67% not over-turned, 42/58, 36/64

https://baseballsavant.mlb.com/replay?challenge_type=&year=2016&challenger=teamchallenging&team=Blue Jays

Gibbons has challenged 155 times over the last 3 years compared to 97 for Buck Showalter.

Other team's fans seem to think that Buck complains a lot but that doesn't hold up through these numbers.  Buck is one of the most infrequent challengers in the league, but he's been good at it, getting 53/97 correct.

Stat question:  Why is K:9 often referenced when K:PA is so much more informative?

4 hours ago, backwardsk said:

Stat question:  Why is K:9 often referenced when K:PA is so much more informative?

Just a historical accident from the days where the stats commonly published were IP, R, H, ER, BB and K's.     K/9 is easily calculated from there.    

5 hours ago, backwardsk said:

Stat question:  Why is K:9 often referenced when K:PA is so much more informative?

I look at K%, but I often find myself writing the player's K/9 in a post because most people have a better idea of what a good/bad K/9 is compared to what a good/bad K% is.

Edit: Here is a useful chart.

The last three posts in this thread, from over three years ago, talked about K/9 vs K/PA (K%).

MLBtraderumors.com has decided to stop using K/9 and BB/9, and switch to K% and BB%.  A pitcher who has 2 perfect innings, faces 6 batters, and strikes out 3 of them should not have the K rate as a pitcher who pitches 2 innings, gives up 3 walks and 3 hits, and strikes out 3 of the 12 batters he faces.  K/9 is 1.5 for both, K% is 50% for the first picher and 25% for the second batter.

Here is the article describing the change at mlbtraderumors...

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2021/01/pitching-stats-mlbtr.html

5 hours ago, SteveA said:

The last three posts in this thread, from over three years ago, talked about K/9 vs K/PA (K%).

MLBtraderumors.com has decided to stop using K/9 and BB/9, and switch to K% and BB%.  A pitcher who has 2 perfect innings, faces 6 batters, and strikes out 3 of them should not have the K rate as a pitcher who pitches 2 innings, gives up 3 walks and 3 hits, and strikes out 3 of the 12 batters he faces.  K/9 is 1.5 for both, K% is 50% for the first picher and 25% for the second batter.

Here is the article describing the change at mlbtraderumors...

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2021/01/pitching-stats-mlbtr.html

The new Baseball Forecaster book for 2021 also made this basic change.   

Their difference, K-BB%, is my favorite one stat to know if I only get to know one about a pitcher.

Its funny, just K% itself scales pretty well to Batting Average at the good end of the scale, though yea verily many an Oriole of recent vintage has struck out batters way below the Mendoza Line.   My brain is partly re-programmed to also ignore the meaningless thousandths, though "Ty Cobb had a lifetime 37% Hit Rate" or "Ted Williams had a 41% Hit Rate in '41" don't quite flow off the tongue.

I want to say my earliest memories of getting clued into this were around the time Fangraphs was growing its library, and folks were digging into stuff like why Roy Halladay's K/9 was "not that good".