U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > Baseball
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 08-18-2012, 04:45 PM
 
1,080 posts, read 832,342 times
Reputation: 1202

Advertisements

August 18, 1934, Happy Birthday to Roberto Clemente! A Real HERO and true humanitarian! ! !
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-18-2012, 05:49 PM
 
Location: Parts Unknown, Northern California
41,627 posts, read 18,722,763 times
Reputation: 18846
Default Feast or Famine Month For Giants

So far in August the Giants are 9-7, but they are not playing thrillers. In their nine victories San Francisco has outscored their opponents 88-26, an average of 10-3. In their seven losses they have been outscored 39-7, an average of 6-1.

This sixteen game span has featured SF wins of 16-4, 11-6, 15-0, 9-3 and 10-1. Among the losses were the scores 9-1 and 14-2.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-18-2012, 06:45 PM
 
Location: Victoria TX
42,663 posts, read 74,599,740 times
Reputation: 36111
Quote:
Originally Posted by filihok View Post
Poor base running decision by Shane Victorino.

With the Dodgers up 2 - 1 in the 7th Victorino doubled in Luis Cruz to make the score 3 - 1. The Dodgers had a Win Expectancy of 82.8% and a run expectancy of .348.

Victorino was caught stealing, making the 3rd out of the inning at 3rd. This reduced the Dodgers' WP to 80.6% and the RE, of course, to 0

A successful steal would have increased the Dodgers' WP to 83.1% and the RE to .385.

With a decrease of 2.2% and an increase of .3% Victorino would have needed to be successful (1-(.3/2.2)) 87% of the time to break even.
Just curious, and not a criticism. Does your expectation calculation take into account the next batter(s), and Victorino's baserunning in terms of scoring from second or third, and the arms in the outfield, and whether anybody is playing today with a gimpy knee, anbd the probability of a wild pitch by that partucular pitcher and catcher? (Which the base coaches would have known about.) Or are the expectancies based on the set of corresponding game samples thrown together irrespective of the skills of the personnel involved?

The Cardinals lost a game just last week, when they let a runner steal third uncontested, and he scored the winning run in the bottom of extras on an infield hit.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-18-2012, 06:58 PM
 
Location: Parts Unknown, Northern California
41,627 posts, read 18,722,763 times
Reputation: 18846
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88 View Post
Just curious, and not a criticism. Does your expectation calculation take into account the next batter(s), and Victorino's baserunning in terms of scoring from second, and the arms in the outfield, and whether anybody is playing today with a gimpy knee? (Which the base coaches would have known about.) Or are the expectancies based on the set of corresponding game samples thrown together irrespective of the skills of the personnel involved?
The latter. How could you construct a meaningful generalization if you had to modify it for each individual circumstance? It is understood that it is a general figure, but does not apply equally to all circumstances. Your odds of scoring a run with no one out and a runner on first when Prince Fielder is the hitter and Jemile Weeks is the baserunner, aren't really the same as they are if Fielder was the baserunner and Weeks was at the plate.

Of course that would represent the extremes of need for modification. Most of the time the personnel involved do not depart all that far from the general odds, that is why they are the general odds.

You have a stat with some limitations, but you have a tendency to focus on the limitations rather than getting some use out of the information value that is there.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-18-2012, 08:40 PM
 
Location: Albuquerque, NM
13,293 posts, read 12,855,659 times
Reputation: 6637
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88 View Post
Just curious, and not a criticism. Does your expectation calculation take into account the next batter(s), and Victorino's baserunning in terms of scoring from second or third, and the arms in the outfield, and whether anybody is playing today with a gimpy knee, anbd the probability of a wild pitch by that partucular pitcher and catcher? (Which the base coaches would have known about.) Or are the expectancies based on the set of corresponding game samples thrown together irrespective of the skills of the personnel involved?

The Cardinals lost a game just last week, when they let a runner steal third uncontested, and he scored the winning run in the bottom of extras on an infield hit.
No. Do you consider those same factors when you say Matheny is a poor manager because he let a .230 hitter bat instead of a .312 hitter?


Today in baseball...

...the Los Angeles Dodgers scored 6 runs. They had 4 hits. All of which were home runs.

Also today in baseball...

...I suffered through attending a game in person even though I only enjoy spreadsheets and statistics. The game was tolerable though as I was fortunate to see the Yankees lose in person.

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-18-2012, 09:25 PM
 
Location: Albuquerque, NM
13,293 posts, read 12,855,659 times
Reputation: 6637
Quote:
Originally Posted by filihok View Post
...I suffered through attending a game in person even though I only enjoy spreadsheets and statistics. The game was tolerable though as I was fortunate to see the Yankees lose in person.
Glad to see that this play made MLB.COM's highlights.

Baseball Video Highlights & Clips | BOS@NYY: Punto juggles and recovers for stellar play - Video | MLB.com: Multimedia

Bottom of the 5th, Red Sox up 3 - 1 the Yankees had a runner on 2nd with 1 out. Derek Jeter hit a ground ball to Red Sox 3rd baseman, Nick Punto. Punto had the ball deflect off of his glove as he went to field it. It popped straight up in the air and Punto grabbed it with his barehand and fired to first to retire Jeter. With the middle of the Yankee lineup coming up it was a very important play.

Punto making the play decreased the Yankee win expectancy from 31% to 26%.

But, any number of things could have gone wrong.

First, Punto could have failed to bare hand the ball. Most likely Jeter would have ended up safe at first with Ichiro staying at 2nd. In this instance the Yankees' win expectancy would have increased from 31% to 34%. As jtur pointed out, this assumes average players all around. The Yankees were sending two of their best hitters (Swisher and Cano) to the plate and had two of their better base runners on the bases (Jeter and Ichiro). So, the actual win expectancy is probably a bit higher ( the same can be said for all the following situations).

Second, Punto nearly threw the ball away after bare handing it. A strong play by Gonzalez prevented that. Had the throw escaped Gonzalez and the Yankees ended up with, at worst, runners at 1st and 3rd with 1 out their win expectancy would have increased from 31% to 38%.

More likely, Ichiro would have scored and Jeter would have advanced to 2nd base. In this instance the Yankees' win expectancy would have shot up to 44%.

A very good recovery for Punto.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-18-2012, 10:13 PM
 
Location: Albuquerque, NM
13,293 posts, read 12,855,659 times
Reputation: 6637
Today in baseball...

Filihok: They travel in packs, don't they?
Quote:
The Dodgers hit 4 home runs today off of Atlanta Braves pitchers. Hanley Ramirez went deep twice, James Loney once and Luis Cruz once.

The first home run came on a 1-1 pitch to Hanley Ramirez with 1 out in the top of the 2nd. The score was tied 0 - 0 and the Dodgers' win expectancy was 48%.

The second home run came on a 1-0 pitch to James Loney with 1 out in the top of the 2nd. The score was 1 - 0 Dodgers and the Dodgers' win expectancy was 58%.

The third home run came on the first pitch to Luis Cruz with 1 out in the top of the 2nd. The score was 2 - 0 Dodgers and the Dodgers' win expectancy was 68%.

The fourth home run came on a 3 - 0 pitch to Hanley Ramirez with 2 outs in the top of the 6th. The score was 3 - 1 Dodgers and the Dodgers' win expectancy was 75%.

Now, if you were paying attention, you'd have noticed that 3 of those home runs came consecutively. Not only that, they came in the span of 4 pitches by Ben Sheets.

Let's take a look at those pitches.


*brooksbaseball

Pay closest attention to the light blue pitches. They should be somewhat easy to find as they are all right in the middle of the plate. According to Brooksbaseball, Sheets threw 18 pitches in the inning and 12 were strikes. This data includes pitches out of the strike zone that Dodgers batters offered at. By my count 8 of the 18 pitches Sheets threw were right down the middle, 7 of the pitches were well outside of the strike zone and 3 were borderline. I don't think that's a recipe for success. Looks like Sheets was having trouble locating his pitches in the second inning.

Another interesting thing was Sheets' approach to the Dodger hitters. This next chart shows pitches as if all batters were right-handed. That is, inside pitches to left-handed hitters appear to the left of the chart while outside pitches to left-handed hitters appear to the right of the chart. The same as to right-handed batters in both instances.



Easy to see that Sheets was trying to stay away from Dodger hitters, and generally missing with his location. There are 9 pitches to the outside edge of the plate. Dodger hitters took 7 of them. 5 were called balls.

Sheets was missing away with pitches and was orced to throw back over the plate where Dodger hitters could drive the ball over the fence.

Here's video of the back-to-back-to-back home runs.


Of course, any time I am discussing Dodger back-to-back home run streaks I'm reminded of one of the most exciting moments in Dodger history.

Trailing 9 - 5 in the bottom of the 9th inning the Dodgers had a 3% chance of winning the game.

Jeff Kent homered; 7% chance of winning.
JD Drew homered; 14% chance of winning.
Russ Martin homered; 27% chance of winning.
Marlin Anderson homered; 68% chance of winning.

Then, to top if off, Nomar Garciaparra homored in the 11th inning to give the Dodgers the win.
*click the link to see the charts and watch the videos
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-18-2012, 10:51 PM
 
Location: Victoria TX
42,663 posts, read 74,599,740 times
Reputation: 36111
Quote:
Originally Posted by filihok View Post
No. Do you consider those same factors when you say Matheny is a poor manager because he let a .230 hitter bat instead of a .312 hitter?
Regardless of what the run-scoring experience has been in 100,000 prior situations with bases empty and two out, I have no doubt that the chances are better with Molina at the plate than Cruz. Those are the factors I considered.

I didn't see the Dodger game. But if I thought Victorino was not being held on, and the pitcher threw a lot of pitches in the dirt, and the catcher was not good at blocking them, and the batter at the plate beats out a lot of infield hits, I might think sending Victorino was a better strategy than if none of those factors were extant. 87% probability threshold for success is not automatically exactly 87% in every case, but only in the average case. The bell curve puts a lot of circumstances near the mean, but not all of them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-18-2012, 10:55 PM
 
Location: Victoria TX
42,663 posts, read 74,599,740 times
Reputation: 36111
Quote:
Originally Posted by filihok View Post
No. Do you consider those same factors when you say Matheny is a poor manager because he let a .230 hitter bat instead of a .312 hitter?
Regardless of what the run-scoring experience has been in 100,000 prior situations with bases empty and two out, I have no doubt that the chances are better with Molina at the plate than Cruz. Obviously, having a pitcher bunt a runner over for the #1 hitter is not the same as the #8 hitter bunting a runner over for the pitcher. But the run expectancy tables are mute on that point, treating them all the same, and you need to rationalize the situation.

I didn't see the Dodger game. But if I thought Victorino was not being held on, and the pitcher threw a lot of pitches in the dirt, and the catcher was not good at blocking them, and the batter at the plate beats out a lot of infield hits, I might think sending Victorino was a better strategy than if none of those factors were extant. 87% probability threshold for success is not automatically exactly 87% in every case, but only in the average case. The bell curve puts a lot of circumstances near the mean, because the majority of the players perform somewhat close to the mean, and for that reason, the mean is useful to know. But not all of them, which is why strategy can be variable according to citcumstances.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-18-2012, 11:07 PM
 
Location: Albuquerque, NM
13,293 posts, read 12,855,659 times
Reputation: 6637
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88 View Post
Regardless of what the run-scoring experience has been in 100,000 prior situations with bases empty and two out, I have no doubt that the chances are better with Molina at the plate than Cruz. Obviously, having a pitcher bunt a runner over for the #1 hitter is not the same as the #8 hitter bunting a runner over for the pitcher. But the run expectancy tables are mute on that point, treating them all the same, and you need to rationalize the situation.

I didn't see the Dodger game. But if I thought Victorino was not being held on, and the pitcher threw a lot of pitches in the dirt, and the catcher was not good at blocking them, and the batter at the plate beats out a lot of infield hits, I might think sending Victorino was a better strategy than if none of those factors were extant. 87% probability threshold for success is not automatically exactly 87% in every case, but only in the average case. The bell curve puts a lot of circumstances near the mean, because the majority of the players perform somewhat close to the mean, and for that reason, the mean is useful to know. But not all of them, which is why strategy can be variable according to citcumstances.
Of course
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > Baseball
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top