SB Nation Bay Area Editor's Pick
PxP: Lawyerball
by elcroata on May 12, 2011 9:16 AM PDT
Email
Print
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, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75.
122 comments
|
36 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
It's amazing how intuitive this is...
relying on BABIP is far worse than a 50/50 call by the umpire. When you consider that it’s not just regular contact, but rather contact induced by a pitcher’s pitch, and also that the umpire is more likely to call a ball on a full count, the results are almost too good to be true.
With a BABIP under .300 (b/c of it being a pitcher’s pitch) and the odds of the ump calling it a ball over 60%, the batter is at least twice as likely to get on base by taking the 3-2 borderline pitch.
However, if the batter is looking inside fastball and gets it, then by all means swing away. Just don’t try to foul off that 3-2 low and outside curveball.
John 3:16
People will still bitch about called strike 3 on a borderline pitch.
Official Athletics Nation Rotating Tagline Editor - Pam liked my old sig better.
My thoughtful watermelon is easily mistook for an early American catapult.
People, as always and everywhere, prefer simple wrong answers.
"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson
by nevermoor on May 12, 2011 10:16 AM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
And that's okay
It was an out. Maybe a big one. Are they supposed to sit back and not care? Or are they supposed to say, “That’s fine.”
It’s okay that baseball fans complain about this. And it’s understandable. Even if they’ve read and appreciated this article.
as long as they realize they're complaining about the wrong thing.
Official Athletics Nation Rotating Tagline Editor - Pam liked my old sig better.
My thoughtful watermelon is easily mistook for an early American catapult.
Some people like to bitch about people who bitch.
I'm here to talk about the past.
by 67MARQUEZ on May 13, 2011 4:19 AM PDT up reply actions 3 recs
Great work.
And thank you. I even felt compelled to log in and Rec to help you with your immortal struggle with Dan.
The only thing I have to add is that – in keeping with the human element – if an umpire demonstrates a particular strike zone, the hitter should adapt accordingly.
If an umpire is squeezing the plate a little, the best approach is to lay off. However, if an umpire shows a penchant for calling most inside strikes, perhaps be a bit more aggressive.
Thanks for the praise
and for making Dan cry :)
2011 Oakland Athletics: We have Cy Young pitchers and make yours look like it, too
How could he?
Robots don’t shed tears
2011 Oakland Athletics: We have Cy Young pitchers and make yours look like it, too
They do if they've been equipped with HEMAN, the Human Emotional Mimesis And Recognition system.
Not sure if Dan has that upgrade or not.
by LoneStranger on May 13, 2011 6:17 PM PDT up reply actions
I think there's some selective sampling here
Once the count reaches two strikes, the umpires will deviate from their 50/50 baseline and be significantly less likely to call a strike on the borderline pitch. So, playing Lawyerball on borderline pitches with full count is not really like a coin flip, t’s more like betting on a rainy day in London.
Is the ump less likely to call a borderline pitch a strike when there are already two strikes, or are the borderline pitches that are taken with two strikes more likely to be outside of the rulebook strikezone (and thus on the outer edges of the "borderline zone)?
Letting a borderline pitch go on a full count is a great idea when it’s likely to be called a ball, and I’d guess the borderline pitches that are taken are much more likely to be called balls than the ones that were swung at. The batters are selecting the samples in these two buckets by choosing whether or not to swing, and they’re more likely to swing at pitches on the inner part of the borderline zone than the outer part.
The fact that batters have a higher wOBA when not swinging than when swinging doesn’t necessarily suggest that taking borderline pitches is the superior strategy. Rather, it may simply suggest that batters are pretty good at choosing which borderline pitches to swing at (the ones likely to be called strikes) and which ones to let go (the ones likely to be called balls).
Your last sentence basically sums it up and should end whatever complaining people have, though.
All the “expand the zone with 2 strikes” nonsense should pretty much be laid to rest. Batters usually swing when it’s a strike, and take when it’s not.
Obviously not 100% accurate, but for the most part.
Official Athletics Nation Rotating Tagline Editor - Pam liked my old sig better.
My thoughtful watermelon is easily mistook for an early American catapult.
This is definitely true.
And I recognize this as the right approach. (On the other hand) For my part, I feel as though I was traumatized during childhood with the back-to-back strikeouts looking against Boston (you know of what I speak). Since, watching a third strike has disproportionately infuriated me.
Similarly, I used to appreciate the gritty, gamer types of players that play the game the right way (i.e. slide into home plate). Luckily, a combo of Jason Kendall’s existence and Fire Joe Morgan cured me of this bias.
Just to clarify
“Expand the zone with 2 strikes” isn’t always nonsense. “Expand the zone on a full count” definitely is, but doing so on an 0-2 count, for example, is a completely different situation.
by UrgentMirth on May 12, 2011 10:37 AM PDT up reply actions
It really isn't.
I mean, that’s the entire point of this whole fanpost.
Official Athletics Nation Rotating Tagline Editor - Pam liked my old sig better.
My thoughtful watermelon is easily mistook for an early American catapult.
All I'm saying is that I think you're taking the results of this study and expanding them across the board without sure backing.
Certainly, according to data elcroata presented, swinging at a borderline pitch in a full count does not lead to a very high expected wOBA, and I would bet that you can carry those expected wOBA results over to non-full count two strike situations as well.
However, the expected wOBA of taking a borderline pitch with two strikes drops significantly if the count isn’t full. One of your two possible outcomes changes from “getting on base” to “taking a ball and extending the AB.” Without seeing any data, I couldn’t say how far it drops, but I would bet that the expected wOBAs of the two actions (swinging or taking) are close enough to the point where you can’t plainly say that expanding the zone with two strikes is nonsense.
Maybe taking is still the right move if the count isn’t full, I don’t know, but it would require more research before you can make that claim.
Right now
I don’t have the numbers to back up my position. But intuitively and because of the ones that came out here, I think it is a bad idea to do it in general.
2011 Oakland Athletics: We have Cy Young pitchers and make yours look like it, too
I don't have numbers either, but expanding the zone on 0-2 makes sense to me intuitively for the same reason expanding on 3-2 doesn't.
In both situations an action a batter takes (taking a borderline pitch) results in a 50-50 chance of two outcomes. In a 3-2 count, the outcomes are a walk and a strikeout. Walks are way more positive than strikeouts are negatives, so that action is clearly positive. When you compare it to the other action a batter can take (swinging at the pitch), the positive result of the first action outweighs the likely results of the second action.
In an 0-2 count, the two outcomes of taking a borderline pitch are ball one and a strikeout. Clearly, the positives of this outcome are less than the positives of the 3-2 count situation. Intuitively to me, it seems that a 50-50 chance of extending an AB or getting out are not better than the outcomes of swinging at the borderline pitch.
It would be more significantly more complicated to actually verify or disprove this, as you would have to calculate the projected value of extending the AB in terms of probabilities that three more consecutive balls are thrown or a non-borderline strike is thrown next and compare that to the likely results of swinging at the 0-2 borderline pitch (part of that action’s value is extending the AB anyway).
In short, when taking the borderline pitch gives you a 50% chance to extend the AB to a 1-2 count and a 50% of getting out, I’m not so sure that has more value than swinging at the pitch (which, if we assume your full count borderline swing stats are similar for 0-2 borderline swing stats, contains a better than 1/3 chance of extending the AB anyway).
by UrgentMirth on May 12, 2011 11:40 AM PDT up reply actions
It is somewhat quantifiable
wOBA through 0-2 count is .212; through 1-2 it’s .237. So a ball taken there has that certain value. A jump from 1-2 to 2-2 is much more significant – .237 to .290. And the one from 2-2 to 3-2 is downright huge – .290 to .403.
So, it does seem that a ball taken has an increased value as the count grows, but that would be just the beginning of the calculations, as this is wOBA in general and not the one of swinging at the borderline pitch.
2011 Oakland Athletics: We have Cy Young pitchers and make yours look like it, too
That's pretty interesting, and makes sense.
Given those wOBA jumps, it may be the case that taking a borderline pitch on 2-2 is still the right move, but not so for 0-2 or 1-2, since the next pitch is still going to be in a pitcher’s count and the batter is unlikely to see much to hit anyway.
I’m not sure, but it’s all fascinating stuff to me regardless.
Quickly and roughly, looking at your numbers for swinging at 3-2 borderline pitches
If we assume those numbers are very similar for swinging at 0-2 pitches, we get the breakdown of swinging at a borderline 0-2 pitch to be (very roughly):
15% K
40% Extend the AB
30% Out on ball in play
15% Reach base
That means a 55% chance of not getting out and a 45% of getting out. It seems to be that that’s more valuable than a 50% chance of getting out and a 50% chance of not getting out that comes with taking the pitch.
Of course, the values of the types of not getting out (extending the AB v getting on base) are not equal and the likelihood of a positive outcome in the different “extend the AB” counts (0-2 again or 1-2) are different, etc. so we can’t draw much from this conclusion.
The point is, I don’t think we can claim categorically that taking a borderline pitch on 0-2 is the right move (nor can we claim that swinging is the right move either though).
by UrgentMirth on May 12, 2011 11:49 AM PDT up reply actions
that's a 55% chance of not getting out on the next pitch? not what ultimately happens to the batter during that plate appearance?
the artist formerly known as inbillywetrust
Yes, it's a 55% chance of not getting out on that specific pitch.
I’m not making any claims on what would happen on later pitches (for the Extend the AB option).
Still, that is roughly a 5% better outcome on the immediate result of swinging at an 0-2 borderline pitch than taking it. Whether that is counteracted by what happens in potential later pitches is unknown to me though, and could very well swing the result in the other direction.
my sense is that hitters do worse post an 0-2 count than any other count. not sure it matters if the pitch is close or not. but i don't have the data.
the artist formerly known as inbillywetrust
If they are really good at it
choosing which borderline pitches to swing at (the ones likely to be called strikes) and which ones to let go (the ones likely to be called balls)
why do they swing at roughly 80% of them if only 50% are likely to be called strikes?
2011 Oakland Athletics: We have Cy Young pitchers and make yours look like it, too
Ooops, I've hit the post button, it seems
Anyway, while I agree that batters mostly have a general idea of what is a strike and what not (unless fooled with a pitch) it is hard to ignore the swinging jump at the same pitches from 43% to 77%. We are talking same pitches here – so it is pretty clear that hitters (most of them) do expand the zone.
Now, are more balls called because of a better selection bias? Could be. But I wouldn’t rule out the human factor of the umpires. I think we can call it “established” that umpires change their strike zones depending on the count – remember the 3-0 discrepancy on pitches clearly outside of the zone. Similar (opposite) propensity seems to exist with two-strike count, although your point is certainly valid, as well.
2011 Oakland Athletics: We have Cy Young pitchers and make yours look like it, too
They're not perfect, but they're much better than random guessing
As your data shows, 50% of taken borderline pitches are called strikes, while only 37% of 3-2 borderline pitches are called strikes. That suggests, to me, that batters methodically expand their strike zones with two strikes—meaning that the pitches they choose not to expand to are the ones most likely to be called balls.
You seem to have the data; what does it say? Are the borderline 3-2 pitches that are taken more likely to be outside the rulebook strike zone than the ones that are swung at? Are they more likely to be outside of the oval strike zone that is generally called? I’d guess there is some umpire bias, but that most of the discrepancy is due to batter selectivity.
Batters likely do expand the zone a bit too much on 3-2 pitches, but I doubt it’s anywhere near the magnitude the .456/.321 wOBA split you cite suggests. A borderline 3-2 pitch that is just inside the edge (not corner) of the strike zone is a very difficult pitch to hit, but it’s also likely to be called a strike if it’s taken. The wOBA on pitches like that are going to be lower than average regardless of what the batter does simply because they’re very good pitches.
A decent amount of the wOBA result of a pitch is decided as soon as the pitch leaves the pitcher’s hand; the pitches with the lower expected wOBA are more likely to end up in the swing bucket, while the ones with the higher expected wOBA are more likely to be taken.
Certainly
Are the borderline 3-2 pitches that are taken more likely to be outside the rulebook strike zone than the ones that are swung at?
They are for sure, although right now I don’t have the data with me (it’s on my office PC and I hope nobody from my work will read that). If for nothing else, then for a reason that the majority of the borderline area is outside the rulebook strike zone (that was needed to get the 50/50 split).
2011 Oakland Athletics: We have Cy Young pitchers and make yours look like it, too
Thanks, I'd love to see the data if you have a chance to pull it later
If for nothing else, then for a reason that the majority of the borderline area is outside the rulebook strike zone (that was needed to get the 50/50 split).
This is the reason that the majority of “borderline” pitches are outside the strike zone, but it doesn’t follow that the ones taken are more likely to be outside of the strike zone than the ones swung at.
This was my first thought.
Not all borderline pitches are equal. That said, it likely wouldn’t change the results too much.
No, they are not
But I see no reason to think that the pitchers have the ability to throw on the inner part of the borderline zone more often when there is a full count than they do otherwise.
2011 Oakland Athletics: We have Cy Young pitchers and make yours look like it, too
by elcroata on May 12, 2011 11:05 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
This is what I was wondering too
Given that we are only talking a zone 4 inches wide, it’s pretty darn difficult to decide you are going to place it on the inner two-inches versus the outer two-inches. I don’t think even Maddux’s control was that perfect. Maybe Danbot’s is, I couldn’t say.
but a hitter won't swing equally at all borderline pitches
in a 0-2 count, they may swing more at the inner-borderline pitches, protecting. This will bias the remainder of pitches that the umpire gets to judge to be lower quality borderline pitches.
Similar for 3-0 – tend to swing less at said pitches, biasing the typical 3-0 borderline pitch towards inner.
i.e. the statistics are not over a true random sample.
this may or may not be true, but should be examined.
This is fantastic
Am I correct in thinking we can’t “know” when a particular batter is taking/swinging because they feel the pitch is/isn’t a borderline pitch?
Put a bird on it
Pretty much.
I guess, unless the batter immediately turns and walks off cause they were fooled and know they just go struck out.
Official Athletics Nation Rotating Tagline Editor - Pam liked my old sig better.
My thoughtful watermelon is easily mistook for an early American catapult.
In which case it probably wasn't borderline at all
And they guessed wrong.
Sigh. Another rec.
Damn you, elcroata.
by danmerqury on May 12, 2011 11:02 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
But you still lead!
Damn you
2011 Oakland Athletics: We have Cy Young pitchers and make yours look like it, too
It's close
EXPAND THE ZONE!!!
2011 Oakland Athletics: We have Cy Young pitchers and make yours look like it, too
Are you gonna take that, danmerqury?
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
Hell yeah, I am.
The more he tries when it’s close, the lower the production. It says so right up there!
by danmerqury on May 12, 2011 8:27 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
This is really great!
I vibrated with joy that join A's. -- Kim Seong-min
by WaddellCanseco on May 12, 2011 11:08 AM PDT reply actions
Well written!
There is a major problem with it though. How can you get Bobo to require the A’s batters, like Kouz, to read and incorporate this philosophy into their game? This is where the canker gnaws!
Life insurance s..cks. I'm now worth more dead than alive.
Thank you and thank you
2011 Oakland Athletics: We have Cy Young pitchers and make yours look like it, too
First we have to tell Kouz that the strike zone does NOT reach to the opposite batters box
and on the ground.
Official Athletics Nation Rotating Tagline Editor - Pam liked my old sig better.
My thoughtful watermelon is easily mistook for an early American catapult.
Yeah, he does seem to have Vlad's swingzone( without his ability to make contact)
This may call for a “Clockwork Orange” type intervention. It’s to bad, because he really is a good guy, and an above average fielder.
Life insurance s..cks. I'm now worth more dead than alive.
It looks to me like Kouzmanoff can't read the spin of the baseball.
The best hitters can – it’s just a natural ability.
This is why he swings at crap – he’s simply guessing. I don’t think it’s something you can correct at this point.
"Nah, you look like Elijah Wood." - danmerqury
he needs to look for the red dot
Put a bird on it
by Future Ed on May 12, 2011 1:12 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I know you used league totals to form these opinions, but what would happen if you broke them down based on the quality of hitter?
What I’m trying to say, is that I’d take Hamilton over Rajai no matter what the count is. Could this whole issue come down to good hitter VS bad hitter?
Life insurance s..cks. I'm now worth more dead than alive.
"What would happen if you broke them down based on the quality of hitter?"
Probably a divorce. Or a severance package.
2011 Oakland Athletics: We have Cy Young pitchers and make yours look like it, too
Ok, ok! I really admire the amount of work you guys put into these articles.
I just meant to ask, would you expect to see a difference based upon the hitters themselves.
[No, I don’t want to see you get in trouble for the effort]
Life insurance s..cks. I'm now worth more dead than alive.
Gut response
Yes, along the lines of the general quality difference. But, frankly, no idea if that is really right
2011 Oakland Athletics: We have Cy Young pitchers and make yours look like it, too
Fair enough.
I would think the same. The good hitters would tend to carry the stats of the bad hitters, no matter what the situation.
Life insurance s..cks. I'm now worth more dead than alive.
Also on batter selectivity types
For example, everybody’s favorite selectivity outlier, Vlad — does it make sense for someone actually skilled at hitting balls outside the zone to expand (and/or expand further)? (Also: would require preliminary analysis to quantify whether Vlad is, in fact, a “good bad-ball hitter” in the first place — ie, whether he has a higher-than-average babip on balls in the grey area/outside the zone.)
A B -3X = Swedish girls like chocolate @('.')@
by monkeyball on May 13, 2011 3:08 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Glad you chimed in
And Vlad is on my long might-be-interesting-to-look-into list
2011 Oakland Athletics: We have Cy Young pitchers and make yours look like it, too
Ichiro definitely does
but he’s a bizarre exception; his “BABIP on balls” is about twice the league average IIRC.
"We don't want our people to be preoccupied with seminude, crazy men jumping up and down who are chasing an inflated object," said Sheik Mohamed Osman Arus, head of operations for the Hizbul Islam insurgent group.
Great stuff
Thank You
""Expelliarmus!" said Eckstein, attempting to knock the bat out of Matt Kemp's hands, just before Kemp laced a single to center." -Ken Tremendous
Thanks for a great post
I’m sure it’s a bit more complex than even this terrific post can appreciate, but as with so much of your previous work, you’ve help many of us see and understand the game better.
It surely is more complex
These posts are more of an initial impulse towards deeper thinking on a certain aspect of baseball than a definitive answer.
And you are welcome.
2011 Oakland Athletics: We have Cy Young pitchers and make yours look like it, too
Good POST
answer this.
don’t you want A’s hitter’s being aggressive within the zone? barton is so passive that in hitter’s counts he’s late on 85-90mph cockshots because he isn’t aggressive. When cojax or crisp hit, they get their monies worth..and their numbers at the moment are decent in comparison to Barton
what does your info say about taking 2 strike borderline.(1-2 inches) with risp..do umps still usually call balls? what about the most productive hitters in the league..what’s their 2 strike approach? also do we have more 2 strike counts than other teams?
it always seems we take hittable pitches..(except for cojax, crisp, and kouz..shit kouz will swing at anything) early in the count which leads to more 2 strike counts which leads to player’s like barton taking backwards K’s…once again if you K and walk at the same rate you dont have a good idea of the zone.
the name of the game is scoring runs or driving them in….we don’t do either ……thanks 4 the info…..
Ray Fosse thinks Pete Rose is a prick......
nvjcfdsfjsiokdjfngiofdk
once again if you K and walk at the same rate you dont have a good idea of the zone.
For the millionth time…that’s so far from the truth that it’s damn near backwards.
2010
League average K rate: 20.7%
League average BB rate: 8.5%
So Daric last year? 18.3% K’s, 16.0% BB’s. Close to being even, but…so what? He strikes out 12% LESS than average, and walks 88% MORE than average. And you say he doesn’t have a good idea of the zone?!
by danmerqury on May 12, 2011 9:41 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
just
look at his at bats..most recently his last one when he K’d looking on a curveball….stats aside for a second okay? Barton is in his head so bad right now…..thats why im saying he doesn’t know the zone now, thus his k and bb rate being roughly the same….as a baseball guy…i feel his swing is too good not to use it more…i want him to be aggressive within the zzzone..i want him to drive in runss and hit for average…is taht asking so much? because hears a heads up..at this rate how much longer do you think he’s gonna be around?
Ray Fosse thinks Pete Rose is a prick......
MY. HEAD. ASPLODE.
m*****f***ing c***s***ing peanut butter and jelly!! f*** f*** f***!!!
by JediLeroy on May 13, 2011 3:48 AM PDT up reply actions 3 recs
Barton is Barton. He's not changing. They either have to live with it or replace him.
I vibrated with joy that join A's. -- Kim Seong-min
by WaddellCanseco on May 13, 2011 6:49 AM PDT up reply actions
Don't you know his problem is his lack of homerunz?
Life insurance s..cks. I'm now worth more dead than alive.
Preach it brother!
Moar dingerz from teh cornerzzzz!
Aren't you forgetting the uniqueness of baseball?
It is the ONLY sport where the defense begins each play. The batter still has to hit the ball. As Hank Aaron was so insistent to point out, “People sat I’m a HOF’er because I have a BA over .300, but I look at the fact that I fail 70% of the time.” It’s not like the batters gets to call the pitch and location.
Life insurance s..cks. I'm now worth more dead than alive.
Please stop feeding this troll
"We don't want our people to be preoccupied with seminude, crazy men jumping up and down who are chasing an inflated object," said Sheik Mohamed Osman Arus, head of operations for the Hizbul Islam insurgent group.
"once again if you K and walk at the same rate you dont have a good idea of the zone."
Once again you don’t know what you’re talking about when you say this.
Last of the Ninth - Photography
very well done
[[waits for graphically illustrated post measuring the volume of CJ Wilson’s infantile, ego-involved whining from start to start]]
"If we start getting into that sh*t, we might as well get out the plastic sheeting and have an orgy." --Gaijin Suketto
How did you know what my next post was on, anyway?
And thanks
2011 Oakland Athletics: We have Cy Young pitchers and make yours look like it, too
Amazing piece.
To be honest, i’ve kinda been scared to read your posts since usually statistic-based articles tend to be dull and boring. But this was quite the opposite. Everything made perfect sense, and to your luck, the solution ended up proving an interesting and convincing point. Keep up the great work elcoata, i look forward to reading everything you post in the future.
"Caring about stuff binds us to the other people that care about stuff, and that creates the communities that makes life worth living."
that one without the charts kinda sucked.
Official Athletics Nation Rotating Tagline Editor - Pam liked my old sig better.
My thoughtful watermelon is easily mistook for an early American catapult.
Mind-blowingly awesome, as always... elcroata!
The last pics with Hamilton and Rajai were a nice touch. Really funny…
At one point in my life I liked Dave Kingman more than Rickey Henderson. I was stupid.
TYVM
Yeah, when I searched for .321 wOBA players last year and Rajai popped up, I smiled
2011 Oakland Athletics: We have Cy Young pitchers and make yours look like it, too
To be fair to Rajai, he was exciting when he got on base.
"Nah, you look like Elijah Wood." - danmerqury
gotta love how he karate chops the air when he runs
If someone built a robot to run the bases it would probably look like Rajai…. and everyone would complain about the AI needing an upgrade
by Oaktown Shutout on May 13, 2011 9:16 AM PDT up reply actions
I used to chuckle at how it looked like his wheels were spinning every time he attempted a steal.
Like his feet were too quick for his body.
"Nah, you look like Elijah Wood." - danmerqury
only thing i get out of this is that NYA is the most disciplined team with 2 strikes because they must have picked up on what umpires secretly know: if a yankee doesn’t swing, it can’t possibly be a strike.
but (which signals everything previous was in jest) i do have a more real itch to scratch. not sure if you can provide… i went crosseyed trying to compare the swinging age charts as a whole. the teams jump all over the place AND the vertical axes represent very different ranges (fewer than 2k: 38-49%, 2k: 73%–80% — wow. they don’t even overlap. this is something your graphics don’t make immediately clear on a visual level — edward tufte wants a word with you.). which only sparked my curiosity about seeing these in one chart to compare by team. i have no idea what this would prove or enlighten… but i’m curious about it nonetheless.
really don't care if i ever come back.
*age charts = percentage charts
really don't care if i ever come back.
by AV on May 13, 2011 9:54 AM PDT up reply actions
Yankee bias
This post doesn’t show that umpires are biased toward the Yankees on close calls. It doesn’t show that they aren’t, either. However, for your consideration, elcroata already dispelled the myth that the Yankees get an advantage more than other teams on balls clearly out of the zone.
The good thing out of this exercise is that there seems to be no doubt that umpires are impartial. No matter how I sliced it, they were not leaning in any way towards a certain franchise, a home team or anything similar. The percentages of strikes called were very constant, and in their miniscule differences actually seemed to disfavor the usual suspects like Yankees or Red Sox.
link
Whether that’s true or not for close strikes is a more interesting question. I’d argue that the Yankees can afford players that have excellent plate discipline and are good hitters. Pretty good strategy if you can afford it.
Don't you realise you'll find next monday or next Tuesday/Your golden shoes day
by PDXAthleticsfan on May 13, 2011 10:18 AM PDT up reply actions
of course. i was totally kidding with that bit, and i thought my jest parenthetical made it clear enough.
i admit though that i thought of the joke when wondering how it was that some teams jumped so much in discipline, if discipline is what this really measures, from one circumstance to the other (yankees, rays) and other teams seemed to stay in the pretty much in same area (A’s, sox). that’s ultimately what made me want to see the chart as one piece.
really don't care if i ever come back.
Doh! I really should read better
Don't you realise you'll find next monday or next Tuesday/Your golden shoes day
by PDXAthleticsfan on May 13, 2011 10:49 AM PDT up reply actions
Good input, thanks
If you can wait till Monday, I’ll put that chart up, too
2011 Oakland Athletics: We have Cy Young pitchers and make yours look like it, too
send me the data if you’d like, and i could plot the graph myself. i have an idea about how i want to arrange the columns. or not, i can wait too. thanks.
really don't care if i ever come back.
by AV on May 13, 2011 7:43 PM PDT up reply actions
Curious whether there might be some differences
between takes/swings at the nebulous top and bottom ends of the zone, and takes/swings at the (nominally) set right and left ends.
Otherwise, though, this is awesome. We pretty much knew what the answer was going to be, but it helps to have a great post like this in one’s back pocket, like carrying a can of Yahoo-B-Gon spray.
"We don't want our people to be preoccupied with seminude, crazy men jumping up and down who are chasing an inflated object," said Sheik Mohamed Osman Arus, head of operations for the Hizbul Islam insurgent group.
Thank you
I’m not sure how many questions are answered here because there are so many variables, but this is terrific work.
I would be curious to see on 3-2 counts whether the strikeout/walk percentages for Barton and Cust were any different from that of other players. I suspect they are in the case of Barton, not sure about Cust because he’s so patient and strikes out so often.
This was interesting ...
help me out. (Seriously, I want to learn this) So, I should be “ok” when a hitter takes a border-line pitch with 2 strikes and strikes out looking, because odds are he’s more apt to walk than strike out in this situation, is this correct?
And why shouldn’t I want him to swing away if the pitch is border-line? I’m assuming it’s because even if he makes contact, he’s more likely to make an out than get a base-hit. How come I always feel better when the hitter either swings and misses or makes an out, “because at least he took a shot at it”?? Is this just something I’ve trained myself on, when, in fact, I shouldn’t (feel better)? Damn, I just feel like hoping for a walk sure is a lot more risky than trying to get a base hit. I admit this may be flawed thinking, but it sure feels better to me. Swing the bat and see what happens.
I needed a team so I wouldn’t turn into one of the eighty million pink hat-wearing Bud Light-drinking mulleted idiots at Fenway.
I look at it this way...
The best he’ll get is a walk. If the bases aren’t loaded, he can’t drive in a run. If he swings, the odds diminish of his landing on base, but the odds increase (obviously) that he’ll drive in a run or move into scoring position. It’s especially disheartening if you’ve got a guy on third base, there are two outs, and the next hitter is Kevin Kouzmanoff. So even if it’s the right thing to do in terms of statistics, the outcome is always slightly disappointing (because someone else needs to do the damage, and because a hit is more fun than a walk, even if the outcome is identical).
Lawyer ball, no matter how effective, is really boring.
The phrase you asked "is this correct" about, is correct
Basically, the way it works is that, once you have two strikes on you, you’re in very bad shape and hitting a reset button is better than continuing the at-bat.
Trying to get a walk is far, far, FAR less risky than trying for a base hit. It’s also lower-reward, but not nearly enough so to outweigh the “starting over without two strikes on you” effect.
"We don't want our people to be preoccupied with seminude, crazy men jumping up and down who are chasing an inflated object," said Sheik Mohamed Osman Arus, head of operations for the Hizbul Islam insurgent group.
I'm not always upset at batters taking strike three.
I’m upset when they take strike three in a close game after a lead-off triple.
Would anybody like to do a study of taking or swinging at 3-0? :)
Excellent post
Nice topical post (at least, topical in regards to current AN discussions). I always feel smarter after reading your posts, although probably just by association.
I do take heart that you are single-handedly improving the average output of Europe-based AN posters. I feel like the guy who works at the grocery store who’s in the bar with Bill Gates and thinks “man, the average income of everyone in this bar is like a gajillion dollars!”
It's like people from Monte negro used to say
There is 200 million of Russians and us.
Thanks a lot, btw.
2011 Oakland Athletics: We have Cy Young pitchers and make yours look like it, too
For all the crap we give Geren...
over normal day to day moves, which are annoying as all get out, actually leaving Trevor F’n Cahill on the mound for three innings In May when he’s five mph off normal is so stupid, it’s nearly unbelievable.
by AgitationStation on May 15, 2011 5:33 PM PDT reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Baseball Nation Recent Stories
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- The Juice: Long Adam Dunn homer punctuates Chris Sale’s 15 Ks, Mark Trumbo goes deep after Jered Weaver goes down for Angels
- Leyland begs media to make umpires ‘accountable’ for bad calls (VIDEO)
- Get a grip: Reds’ Todd Frazier loses bat, still connects for home run (Video)
- Eric Hosmer redefines the Baltimore chop with infield double (Video)
- College player makes impossible over the fence catch to save tournament game (Video)
