OOTP Developments Forums - View Single Post - An example of why I don't think DIPS will reflect pre-1960 pitchers accurately

Big Train · 06-15-2004, 05:53 AM

Skipaway, OOTP6 doesn't "evaluate talent" The only reason it knows how to rate Joe Schmo is because the database tells it his stats. If his stats over several years show that he was bad the odds are very low that he was just constantly unlucky.

But anyway there is luck in every facet of the game, hitting and fielding require luck as well as skill. aAfraction of an inch often determines whether a ball is a hit or a strike or an out. Fielders routinely just miss balls or happen to be positioned perfectly to make a play they couldn't otherwise make.

Your version of DIPS seems to take away a lot of the credit the pitcher rightfully deserves. A fielder catching a popup in the infield is showing great skill but a pitcher only shows his skill on the few times during the game where he strikes someone out. I doubt a major league infielder is proud of himself when he catches a pop-up. It's expected of him. I'm the first one to applaud a fielder who clearly takes away a hit from someone but on making a routine play he deserves little credit, he wouldn't even be in the majors if he couldn't make routine plays most of the time.

Hitters get lucky quite often too yet no one suggests that some
hitters aren't better than others. Hitters who produce stats near the top of the league every year must have some talent besides luck, most people would except that. So why is it so hard for people to accept that pitchers who don't give up many hits might have some talent besides luck which makes their pitches harder to hit? And sometimes they don't strike out the guy because he is able to make partial contact. [Before you make the argument about Pedro and Maddux's BABIP fluctuating I'd like to point out that *all* stats fluctuate. There are countless examples of hitters who hit .300 one year and .220 the next]

I think Tippet is right on and by the way he specifically said that some pitchers' ability to avoid hit on balls in play is *not* statistically insignificant.

Oh and Zachary et. al were just illustrations of more "decent" pitchers with very low strikeout totals.

06-15-2004, 05:53 AM	#28 (permalink)
Big Train Major Leagues Join Date: May 2002 Location: Canada Posts: 317 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0x in 0 posts	Skipaway, OOTP6 doesn't "evaluate talent" The only reason it knows how to rate Joe Schmo is because the database tells it his stats. If his stats over several years show that he was bad the odds are very low that he was just constantly unlucky. But anyway there is luck in every facet of the game, hitting and fielding require luck as well as skill. aAfraction of an inch often determines whether a ball is a hit or a strike or an out. Fielders routinely just miss balls or happen to be positioned perfectly to make a play they couldn't otherwise make. Your version of DIPS seems to take away a lot of the credit the pitcher rightfully deserves. A fielder catching a popup in the infield is showing great skill but a pitcher only shows his skill on the few times during the game where he strikes someone out. I doubt a major league infielder is proud of himself when he catches a pop-up. It's expected of him. I'm the first one to applaud a fielder who clearly takes away a hit from someone but on making a routine play he deserves little credit, he wouldn't even be in the majors if he couldn't make routine plays most of the time. Hitters get lucky quite often too yet no one suggests that some hitters aren't better than others. Hitters who produce stats near the top of the league every year must have some talent besides luck, most people would except that. So why is it so hard for people to accept that pitchers who don't give up many hits might have some talent besides luck which makes their pitches harder to hit? And sometimes they don't strike out the guy because he is able to make partial contact. [Before you make the argument about Pedro and Maddux's BABIP fluctuating I'd like to point out that all stats fluctuate. There are countless examples of hitters who hit .300 one year and .220 the next] I think Tippet is right on and by the way he specifically said that some pitchers' ability to avoid hit on balls in play is not statistically insignificant. Oh and Zachary et. al were just illustrations of more "decent" pitchers with very low strikeout totals. Last edited by Big Train; 06-15-2004 at 08:38 AM.