Jump to content

Fan vs. PECOTA Projections


square634

Recommended Posts

The diff between the .609 OPS and Bill James' LH projection works out to about 5 runs over the course of the season. Big deal.

And that's offense.

Now, if his defense goes from GG level to above average, that costs us more runs.

There really is nothing in his past to suggest LH can be a league average SS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 201
  • Created
  • Last Reply
The problem is that's not how anybody seems to estimate offensive value. Rather, the estimate is based on OBP and SLG. I'm not saying you're wrong, just that you're suggesting a method for estimating hitting value that's completely different, that's all.

I'm not sure why you are using a RC formula using only OPS considering the OBP and SLG components have different worths. Maybe it's just a rough estimation, but that part loses me. I'm not saying your necessarily wrong, but I agree with Frobby in that those numbers don't make sense to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps I'm not thinking this through very clearly, but I don't see why preventing a single should be worth more than hitting a single. Using those numbers (a single is worth .479 runs, and an out is worth .303 runs), I understand the theory that a single prevented is worth .782 runs.

However, when a SS hits an additional single beyond what the replacement SS would have hit, shouldn't the same .303 be added if the replacement SS would have gotten out? For example, if Tejada reaches base 60 more times than LH, he also makes 60 fewer outs, so LH is costing his team .303 runs each of those times, while Tejada's singles give an additional .479 runs. That doesn't even take into account differences in slugging percentage. Does any of that make sense, or am I not thinking about this correctly?

No, you are exactly correct. And by the way, the idea that a run scored is worth less than a run prevented strikes me as nonsense in the context of evaluating an individual player, even if it has some validity in evaluating how a team will perform overall.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure why you are using a RC formula using only OPS considering the OBP and SLG components have different worths. Maybe it's just a rough estimation, but that part loses me.

I didn't. I was using OBP and SLG. I also reported on what they mapped into for the resulting OPS, but I calc'd them using OBP and SLG, just as described.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the idea that a run scored is worth less than a run prevented strikes me as nonsense in the context of evaluating an individual player, even if it has some validity in evaluating how a team will perform overall.

You could be right, but I don't see how. If DR's are worth more than RC's for the team, why would you choose to completely ignore that fact when assessing each guy's contribution?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You could be right, but I don't see how. If DR's are worth more than RC's for the team, why would you choose to completely ignore that fact when assessing each guy's contribution?

Because the difference on a team level is very small, so the difference on an individual level is tiny.

For example, a team that allows 800 runs and scores 700 will win about 92 games. Another team that outscores its opponents by 100 runs, but does it 700 to 600, will win about 93 games. That's one win difference for the whole team by shifting its emphasis to defense.

When you chop that up into what it means for an individual, or 1/25th of the roster, a great defender's share of shifting a team's philosophy to runs prevented is a small fraction of a win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because the difference on a team level is very small, so the difference on an individual level is tiny.

For example, a team that allows 800 runs and scores 700 will win about 92 games. Another team that outscores its opponents by 100 runs, but does it 700 to 600, will win about 93 games. That's one win difference for the whole team by shifting its emphasis to defense.

When you chop that up into what it means for an individual, or 1/25th of the roster, a great defender's share of shifting a team's philosophy to runs prevented is a small fraction of a win.

Oh, I think we can all agree that Bill James said it was a small fraction. When you factor it in to the amount of wins (or runs, whatever) that you attribute to a given guy, it's just a tiny fractional difference. Lotsa of things about baseball are small fractional differences. That doesn't mean we shouldn't factor them in if they're real. We factor them in every place else. So, why shouldn't we factor them in when it comes to the impact of D?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rshack....Using what you know about LH(either opinion or stats) and using Tango's research, do you think LH can be a league average SS?
Assuming a league average SS hits .700 OPS and is 0 in terms of the Fielding Bible's +- rating, then according to RShacks formula LH would have to field at a FB rate of +27. In '06 Everett put up a +43, so LH would have to be a little better than half way between Everett and average defensively.1970's estimates had him better than that.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Assuming a league average SS hits .700 OPS and is 0 in terms of the Fielding Bible's +- rating, then according to RShacks formula LH would have to field at a FB rate of +27. In '06 Everett put up a +43, so LH would have to be a little better than half way between Everett and average defensively.1970's estimates had him better than that.

Tango's research says he would have to have a 609 OPS and play Everett level defense to be league average...Can LH do this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps I'm not thinking this through very clearly, but I don't see why preventing a single should be worth more than hitting a single. Using those numbers (a single is worth .479 runs, and an out is worth .303 runs), I understand the theory that a single prevented is worth .782 runs.

However, when a SS hits an additional single beyond what the replacement SS would have hit (I'll call it a "marginal single") shouldn't the same .303 be added? For example, if Tejada reaches base 60 more times than LH, he also makes 60 fewer outs, so for each "marginal single", LH is costing his team .303 runs because he would have produced an out. That doesn't even take into account differences in slugging percentage. Does any of that make sense, or am I not thinking about this correctly?

Yes, if you hit 60 more singles and get 60 fewer outs, you are worth some 48 more runs. This is part of the Linear Weights construction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A run saved is worth a tiny bit more than a run created.

If you score 0.25 more runs per game, your win% goes from .500 to .525. If on the other hand you allow 0.25 less runs per game, your win% is .526.

So, you are talking about .001 wins per game, 0.16 wins per season, for the shift of 40 runs from offense to defense.

If you want to be that precise, go for it!

***

Yes, fielding SS is 0.5 wins more difficult than fielding at 3B. That's what those adjustment numbers are for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rshack....Using what you know about LH(either opinion or stats) and using Tango's research, do you think LH can be a league average SS?

I don't see why not. I don't know what he will actually do if he plays, but everything I look at says that he can:

  • To be league average, he needs to generate 63 runs.
  • If hits according to Bill James' 2008 projection (.282/.296/.578), in 500 AB's he'll generate 41.7 RC.
  • Adjusting the raw-RC by the factor Bill James uses in everybody's Win Shares, that 41.7 translates to a value of 40.1 RC.
  • Which means he's 22.9 runs shy on offense. So, to be league average, his defense has to worth 22.9 runs.
  • Adjusting DR by the factor Bill James uses in everybody's Win Shares, he has to be worth 22.0 raw-DR in the field to get the total up to 63 runs.
  • Notice that the fact that I'm adjusting CR/DR like Bill James does in Win Shares actually hurts LH. Without doing that, his raw 41.7 RC means he only has to produce 21.3 DR to be average, but I'm saying he has to find 22.0 DR instead. I'm being harder on LH than are the folks who think we should just ignore the different relative value of CR and DR. So, it's not like I'm cheating in favor of LH. I'm just trying to do it right. (Ye of little faith, please raise your hand if you thought I was doing sneaky pro-LH cheating ;-)
  • When 1970 did his exercise in the other thread using range data, his calculation for LH's defense came to 39 DR. Now, I understand that that is based just on ML data for all the guys he was looking at, and I agree that the sample is too small. But I think that gives us more reason to doubt the crappy DR it gave to Hu and Aybar than to have huge doubts about LH. If he actually showed the range to do that, why not give that *some* credence? I can see how Hu fans might complain, on the grounds that the sample didn't permit Hu to show off his range. But I don't see how it could completely fabricate range that LH doesn't have. However, I can see how the high value might seem suspect. In that same thread, 1970 said he thought that 30 DR was prolly more sensible than 39, which is discounting the stat-value by 23%. Either way, both of those are way higher than what LH needs to be league average. I don't see why it's a big stretch to think he would get 22.0 DR, which would be discounting the stat-calc of his range by more than 40%. Or, if you think I'm being too tough on LH, and want to use the 21.3 raw-DR instead, then you could discount the stat-calc of his range by fully 45% and he'd still be be a league-average SS. That doesn't seem highly unlikely to me.

If we use .782 runs for each extra play, that means that he's got to make 28.2 extra plays (or 27.2 extra plays if we don't do the Win Shares adjustment). What's so crazy about that?

ps: That's to be league average. IIRC, tangotiger was tolerating a net cost of half-a-win. If you wanna do that, then you can reduce the extra-plays needed by slightly more than 6.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see why not. I don't know what he will actually do if he plays, but everything I look at says that he can:
  • To be league average, he needs to generate 63 runs.
  • If hits according to Bill James' 2008 projection (.282/.296/.578), in 500 AB's he'll generate 41.7 RC.
  • Adjusting the raw-RC by the factor Bill James uses in everybody's Win Shares, that 41.7 translates to a value of 40.1 RC.
  • Which means he's 22.9 runs shy on offense. So, to be league average, his defense has to worth 22.9 runs.
  • Adjusting DR by the factor Bill James uses in everybody's Win Shares, he has to be worth 22.0 raw-DR in the field to get the total up to 63 runs.
  • Notice that the fact that I'm adjusting CR/DR like Bill James does in Win Shares actually hurts LH. Without doing that, his raw 41.7 RC means he only has to produce 21.3 DR to be average, but I'm saying he has to find 22.0 DR instead. I'm being harder on LH than are the folks who think we should just ignore the different relative value of CR and DR. So, it's not like I'm cheating in favor of LH. I'm just trying to do it right. (Ye of little faith, please raise your hand if you thought I was doing sneaky pro-LH cheating ;-)
  • When 1970 did his exercise in the other thread using range data, his calculation for LH's defense came to 39 DR. Now, I understand that that is based just on ML data for all the guys he was looking at, and I agree that the sample is too small. But I think that gives us more reason to doubt the crappy DR it gave to Hu and Aybar than to have huge doubts about LH. If he actually showed the range to do that, why not give that *some* credence? I can see how Hu fans might complain, on the grounds that the sample didn't permit Hu to show off his range. But I don't see how it could completely fabricate range that LH doesn't have. However, I can see how the high value might seem suspect. In that same thread, 1970 said he thought that 30 DR was prolly more sensible than 39, which is discounting the stat-value by 23%. Either way, both of those are way higher than what LH needs to be league average. I don't see why it's a big stretch to think he would get 22.0 DR, which would be discounting the stat-calc of his range by more than 40%. Or, if you think I'm being too tough on LH, and want to use the 21.3 raw-DR instead, then you could discount the stat-calc of his range by fully 45% and he'd still be be a league-average SS. That doesn't seem highly unlikely to me.

If we use .782 runs for each extra play, that means that he's got to make 28.2 extra plays (or 27.2 extra plays if we don't do the Win Shares adjustment). What's so crazy about that?

ps: That's to be league average. IIRC, tangotiger was tolerating a net cost of half-a-win. If you wanna do that, then you can reduce the extra-plays needed by slightly more than 6.

Exactly. If LH has a +- of 27(16 plays less than Everett '06)he is LA at .570 OPS. Sounds better all the time.:002_sbiggrin:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly. If LH has a +- of 27(16 plays less than Everett '06)he is LA at .570 OPS. Sounds better all the time.:002_sbiggrin:

Well, to tell you the truth, when all this started I didn't really care. All I knew was that LH can't hit and that he sure looked like Looie Aparicio (plus some) on my TV. So, my initial thought was that it's too bad he can't hit a little better and steal some bases. Then, when I looked at the MiL numbers that everybody was using to call him "the worst baseball player ever", and compared that to his small-sample of ML numbers, I decided "I hope he can remember how to take a friggin' walk." But now, with all this, I'm kinda hoping he does play, just so I can see what happens ;-)

My hunch is that there are some folks who have been reading all this, but who haven't said much, who are looking at what I posted and are sitting there thinking, "But-but-but... that *can't* be right!" I think it's right, at least as far as I know. I haven't invented a single thing, I'm just taking what other people say and seeing how the number work out, that's all. If we think stats have value, isn't that what we're supposed to do?

Here's what I think a lot of the disbelief is about: It's the constant myopia around here about OPS. I don't think it's mostly because anybody is *trying* to do that, I think it happens by accident. It is entirely normal around here for people to judge guys by looking at a single number, and in recent years BA has been replaced by OPS as that single number. People see OPS used as the main basis for judging guys all the time. So, as an accidental side-effect of that, some people accidentally decide that all that really matters is OPS and, oh by the way, a little D would be nice if you can get it. Maybe people don't quite say that out loud, but the net result is the same. I think most of that is due to the fact that we hear OPS all the time. To me, this is similar to what happens on the news about international finance. Almost nobody actually knows squat about international finance. But when you hear the news-heads talking about the Chinese yuan all the time, you figure it matters a lot. I bet any poll about which foreign currency matters most would show tons of votes for the Chinese yuan, just based on what we hear all the time. But if the news-heads went back to talking about the Japanese yen non-stop for a few months, then everybody would think that's what matters. I think the same thing happens here about OPS. Personally, I think OPS is a good stat. But I also think excellent-D counts for way more than a lot of folks seem to think it does.

But, anyway, all the talk about how playing LH will be tantamount to the FO being lazy and throwing the season is just nuts. I hope the FO worries about who they want long-term, and I don't want them wasting much time and resources worrying about getting a mediocre temp-solution. And, as for all the dime-a-dozen temp-solution guys who are way-better than LH and who can be had for nothing, I'm still waiting to see that list. So far, it's mostly a bunch of older AAAA utility guys. I'd rather watch LH play SS than an older AAAA utility guy. At least LH is pretty to watch. While we're waiting for the team to get good, I want to have *somebody* who's pretty to watch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • Posts

    • Agreed.  As it stands now, we've heard that they want Gunnar to get some starts at SS.  So, I think Mateo'll start the season as the SS starter for most games.  It won't be 100% as Hyder plays the numbers between Mateo/Urias/Frazier.  And Westburg if he's on the team.   Only Mateo's bat can change that narrative. He definitely has value at the MLB level for teams that are thin up the middle and have hitters elsewhere.  But for the O's, I think the team is best served with him as a pinch runner/defensive replacement.  
    • For a second I thought I had to defend Roll Tide. Kyle Virbitsky has a 4.49 ERA in the minors.  I think Tide saw his 5.06 RA9.
    • I don't think picking up a below average pitcher is something that can be called a strong move. It's a move. 
    • Off the top of my head I'd say Hernaiz is roughly equivalent in value to a late second round pick at this point.  I certainly wouldn't expect a late second round pick to end up being more than Hernaiz is. I have a question for you.  More value....Irvin or a free agent pitcher that received a Qualifying Offer?
    • Rojas is a similar player but how is a the "perfect comp" when he's a FA in 2024 and Mateo isn't a FA until 2026?    Also, Mateo had a 3.4 RWAR compared to 2.5 for Rojas.    Is the player the Marlins got from the Dodgers in his FA year, a decent prospect? Ranked Los Angeles Dodgers #10 prospect in-season in 2022 BA Grade: 50/High Track Record: Amaya grew up in suburban Los Angeles and is the grandson of former Brooklyn Dodgers prospect Frank Amaya. The Dodgers kept the connection going when they drafted the younger Amaya in the 11th round in 2017 and signed him for an above-slot $247,500. Amaya quickly established himself as the best defensive shortstop in the Dodgers system, but longstanding questions about his bat only increased after he hit .216/.303/.343 at Double-A Tulsa in 2021. Scouting Report: Amaya is a gifted defensive shortstop with elite instincts for the position. He is always in the right place, secures every ball with his soft, reliable hands and makes every throw with his plus, accurate arm. He's not the rangiest or flashiest defender, but he makes every play and is elite at nuances such as tags and relays. Amaya's bat is further behind. He previously demonstrated elite-strike zone discipline but tried to hit for power in 2021 and started chasing and overswinging. He's an undersized hitter who is best when he drives singles the other way with a short, direct stroke. The Future: Amaya's defense gives him a chance to stick as a utilityman. He'll try to make the necessary offensive adjustments in 2022. Scouting Grades: Hitting: 50. Power: 40. Speed: 50. Fielding: 60. Arm: 60.   So the Marlins got the #10 prospect in a very good system for one year of Miguel Rojas but Jorge Mateo who is younger with 3 years of service time and just had a better overall season than Rojas has every had, can't get back a significant prospect?    Really?
  • Popular Contributors

  • Popular Now

×
×
  • Create New...