Hits Allowed

[Gastric ReFlux]

1) a loss of realism in generating knuckleballers stats

I believe Markus is well aware of this, and wouldn't be surprised if he were to put in code to give knuckleballers something extra. Already in the game, knuckleballers have some differences despite the fact the game isn't pitch by pitch.

[Eckstein 4 Prez]

Personally, I *would* sacrifice realism in kunckleballers if we could get realism in the other 99% of pitchers.

However, since Markus is aware of McCracken's work and those who have subsequently refined it, I believe he'd try to incorporate that in. Hence, the retention of "avoiding hits" in a minor role.

Damn! Beat to the punch by the sheep again....

[Zeeter]

Originally posted by Eckstein 4 Prez
You make some decent points, but there are a few things I'd like to point out:

1. No one is arguing that BA is not important, just that it's been overrated. To put it in Moneyball terms, there's no opportunity to be made with BA, because everyone looks at BA to determine a player's worth. You have to look at the stats that not everyone is looking at "first," as you put it, and that's where OBP becomes so valuable.

<snip>

I am respectfully arguing this point. First, let's take kids and casual fans who can't even spell OBP out of the equation. There is a reason why when a batter comes up the viewer at home is shown his BA and HR totals - it is that everyone knows those numbers.

For more detailed analysts, like those found here, there seems to be some need to further analyze these players, and in the process prove that real baseball fans know what is important and what is not. I will not argue that OBP is important. In your comparison of a .290 hitter vs. a .310 hitter you may even have given more credit to the .310 hitter than necessary. Many times the .290 hitter will have more extra base hits than a .310 hitter, and thus produce more runs.

Furthermore, every one of my statistical examples can be countered with other statistical examples. That was not my objective.

Each player is different. He will approach his at-bat differently based on his place in the order, the pitcher he is facing, and the situation. He will bat differently if there are men on base, if the game is close, if they are way ahead, etc... A number eight hitter may swing at garbage with runners on base in an attempt to avoid walking and allowing the pitcher to make the last out. A leadoff hitter may strike out on a full count because he is trying to let the team see as many pitches as possible.

I guess my point to all of this is that while everyone is trying to discredit the BA stat and give OBP it's props, OBP does not tell the whole story. You cannot compare two players based solely on their OBP. They may play the game differently. He may be a "swing till I'm out" guy, or a guy who will only swing at a pitch if it is in his zone.

I think that maybe batting average was at one time held in too much regard, but I also believe that we are doing the same thing with OBP. My argument is for the people who discredit BA and its followers. BA is an important statistic, and in my opinion is one of the MOST important - right alongside OBP and SLG (and by default OPS).

[dougaiton]

OK, I'll accept that. If anyone can program around this, its Markus.

Thanks.

[Eckstein 4 Prez]

Originally posted by Zeeter
I guess my point to all of this is that while everyone is trying to discredit the BA stat and give OBP it's props, OBP does not tell the whole story. You cannot compare two players based solely on their OBP. They may play the game differently. He may be a "swing till I'm out" guy, or a guy who will only swing at a pitch if it is in his zone.

I think that maybe batting average was at one time held in too much regard, but I also believe that we are doing the same thing with OBP. My argument is for the people who discredit BA and its followers. BA is an important statistic, and in my opinion is one of the MOST important - right alongside OBP and SLG (and by default OPS).

We agree on this point. No one stat tells the whole story, and those that come closest - Win Shares, RC/27, etc. - are WAY too complicated for everyday use.

I absolutely agree with you that BA, OBP and SLG all deserve prominent mention..... I'm not trying to discredit BA, only to say that since people historically have looked only at HR and BA, they're not getting the whole picture and that these two stats alone as measures of a player's worth are overrated.

[TLBOrioles]

XR (or XRBasic) is a pretty nice, simple method to get a better idea of offensive value.

(.50 x 1B) + (.72 x 2B) + (1.04 x 3B) + (1.44 x HR) + (.34 x BB) + (.18 x SB) + (-.32 x CS) + (-.096 x (AB - H))

Divide by PA if you want a rate stat.

Although others have brought it up, I'd stress that the OBP fascination isn't as great as the anti-sabr types make it out to be. Any sabr person with a brain in their head knows damn well that a walk isn't as good as a hit (see above). The emphasis some teams are putting on OBP guys is an economic one. A .220 hitter with a .390 OBP is going to be a lot cheaper than a .350 hitter with a .390 OBP. And while the .350 hitter is better, he's not AS MUCH BETTER as "traditional" thinking would have you believe.

I also disagree that sabr-oriented baseball is somehow boring. Does watching people hack at balls in the dirt turn you on? I'd rather see some people who have plate discipline and force pitchers to make good pitches.

I'm also, in general, against the theory that we should play games in an inefficient manner that causes us to lose more for some aesthetic purpose. Baseball is both a sport and a business, and that means the players and the front office should want to win. If that means "boring" baseball, so be it. I want to watch the strongest, smartest baseball players fighting to win however they have to. I don't want the XFL of baseball.

To unhijack the thread, I do still intend to run some experiments on BABIP in OOTP. When I do I'll post the results here and hopefully we'll have some lively debate about what we can do to improve the engine, and then Markus and crew can hopefully go from there.

[Eckstein 4 Prez]

Running those numbers for the hypothetical .290/.400 guy and the .310/.380 guy, the OBP guy has an XR of 109.72, the BA guy 109.268.

Clearly, these numbers are not significantly different, and if the players cost the same, one pretty much is the same as the other. However, I'd argue that the HR and BA stats are likely to make the BA guy more expensive.... that, I think, is the point about the sabermetric analysis - not that it necessarily leads you to better players, but that it leads you to undervalued players.

[Zeeter]

Originally posted by Eckstein 4 Prez
We agree on this point. No one stat tells the whole story, and those that come closest - Win Shares, RC/27, etc. - are WAY too complicated for everyday use.

I absolutely agree with you that BA, OBP and SLG all deserve prominent mention..... I'm not trying to discredit BA, only to say that since people historically have looked only at HR and BA, they're not getting the whole picture and that these two stats alone as measures of a player's worth are overrated.

I try not to get too worked up about this BA thing. Sometimes, though, I hear people simply throwing BA out the window as a meaningless statistic. It most certainly is not a meaningless statistic. As you say, no one stat says it all. It surely should not be the only defining statistic, but to get a cursory glance at how well a hitter is batting it is quite telling. BA is a very raw number.

It is the people who like to feel all high-and-mighty about the precious OBP because it makes them feel superior that bug me.

[holyroller]

Originally posted by Zeeter
It is the people who like to feel all high-and-mighty about the precious OBP because it makes them feel superior that bug me.

Huh?

[WLight]

Originally posted by Eckstein 4 Prez
Personally, I *would* sacrifice realism in kunckleballers if we could get realism in the other 99% of pitchers.

Me too.

[dougaiton]

But we have realism in stats (apart from hits on balls into play, which is pretty minor) for pitchers just now. What a K/BB type game would change is not making other pitchers' stats better, just how they achieved them. Koufax, Niekro and Perry all perform understandably in OOTP, even if the way they acheive this is incorrect. A k/BB type game would only change the performance of Niekro, as Perry and Koufax's main stats (ERA, WHIP - not good emasures but well understood) would remain the same.

We do not sacrifice the 99% at the minute - but if we changed, we may lose the 1%. That said, as previoulsy mentioned, if Markus treats these guys differently anyway, then he can probably work around it. This change is not about the stats produced, rather how they are acheived (and how we scout and choose our pitchers). Only knucleballers would be statistically affected.

EDIT: Sorry, I don't mean to labour this. I just wanted clear that for a historical simmer this could be problematic. I also understand this is probably easily fixed, but I thought I'd bring it up now before the game came out. BB/K ratios are definetly the way to go, but just a note of caution.

[sebastian0622]

i like cake

[Johnny Slick]

Originally posted by holyroller
Huh?

Shh. Let the boy have his straw man.

John Craven

[blackamus]

Originally posted by Eckstein 4 Prez
You could have stopped your post right there and been correct.

WOW! You really broadsided me with that zinger. If I could make a new name I would so that I would never have to post under this shamed alias ever again.
Alas.
My point is this (among others) baseball is a sport whose primary purpose is the entertainment of it's spectators and it's players. Aesthitics are an important part of the process of entertainment. Watching Jason Giambi work a walk is quite frankly, boring. Watching Alfonso Soriano, Vlad Guerrero, Garciaparra, and any others you would like to throw in that mold is infinitely more exciting. A stolen base is an exciting event in a baseball game. Sabrmetric styled teams will almost never run. A game that is trending towards only having hulking sluggers whose goal is either a walk or a homerun cannot possibly be a positive development. Just as the slam dunk is now a mundane event in a basketball game, the homerun in baseball will soon be.
I won't go on about this much further because I'm about to win my first World Series on this game and I'd like to get back to that.
I'll finish with this, If you have never heard of Max Weber; You should look into what he calls "The Iron Cage of Rationality". Then, think about how that applys to baseball. Not every situation is about maximizing the final product. Baseball is more about enjoyment of the process of generating the products (hits, runs, K's...whatever else) not the products themselves. To focus only on the final product to the detriment of the enjoyment of participants is...dehumanizing. Which is what I find SABRmetrics to be doing.
As a corollary or secondary piece of evidence to back that up, look at how vigorously most of those in SABRmetric circles defend the use of Questec.
Also, to back up a previous posters statements about the arrogance of SOME of those in SABRmetric circles; I too find that discussing baseball with SABRmetric minded folks makes me feel as though the person to whom I'm speaking knows something that I don't know and that they feel that I am too stupid to understand.
Thanks to gastric reflux for the Q&A post. That was very helpful. I suppose valuing "OBP guys" over pure "BA guys" as a purely economic strategy makes alot of sense.

I apologize for lack of coherence in this post...I like to think of my writing style as cubist or maybe I'm just crazy.

[Dwolfson20]

Originally posted by blackamus
WOW! You really broadsided me with that zinger. If I could make a new name I would so that I would never have to post under this shamed alias ever again.
Alas.
My point is this (among others) baseball is a sport whose primary purpose is the entertainment of it's spectators and it's players. Aesthitics are an important part of the process of entertainment. Watching Jason Giambi work a walk is quite frankly, boring. Watching Alfonso Soriano, Vlad Guerrero, Garciaparra, and any others you would like to throw in that mold is infinitely more exciting. A stolen base is an exciting event in a baseball game. Sabrmetric styled teams will almost never run. A game that is trending towards only having hulking sluggers whose goal is either a walk or a homerun cannot possibly be a positive development. Just as the slam dunk is now a mundane event in a basketball game, the homerun in baseball will soon be.
I won't go on about this much further because I'm about to win my first World Series on this game and I'd like to get back to that.
I'll finish with this, If you have never heard of Max Weber; You should look into what he calls "The Iron Cage of Rationality". Then, think about how that applys to baseball. Not every situation is about maximizing the final product. Baseball is more about enjoyment of the process of generating the products (hits, runs, K's...whatever else) not the products themselves. To focus only on the final product to the detriment of the enjoyment of participants is...dehumanizing. Which is what I find SABRmetrics to be doing.
As a corollary or secondary piece of evidence to back that up, look at how vigorously most of those in SABRmetric circles defend the use of Questec.
Also, to back up a previous posters statements about the arrogance of SOME of those in SABRmetric circles; I too find that discussing baseball with SABRmetric minded folks makes me feel as though the person to whom I'm speaking knows something that I don't know and that they feel that I am too stupid to understand.
Thanks to gastric reflux for the Q&A post. That was very helpful. I suppose valuing "OBP guys" over pure "BA guys" as a purely economic strategy makes alot of sense.

I apologize for lack of coherence in this post...I like to think of my writing style as cubist or maybe I'm just crazy.

You bring up some interesting points, which I've never really heard expressed before. But I will respectfully disagree.

I am a fan of the Royals. The one thing I care most about, above and beyond how they play, is whether or not they win. Sabermetrics is designed to help baseball teams win more games. So, as a fan, I believe it's a positive development, because my team can win more games by utilizing sabermetric principles.

[dime]

what do saberfanboys have to fight against, really? What principles or movements oppose sabermetrics? Seeing "RBI" listed on the screen when someone comes to bat? Is it Joe Carter you are bravely standing up against?

[Spielman]

Originally posted by dime
what do saberfanboys have to fight against, really?

Oh, I dunno. Folks who call us "saberfanboys" perhaps.

-Spielman

[Gastric ReFlux]

I apologize for lack of coherence in this post...I like to think of my writing style as cubist or maybe I'm just crazy.

But it was quite aesthetically pleasing

[crackpott]

Alright. So... the guy with the .290 average will have 174 hits and 110 walks over a 600 AB season.

The guy with the .310 average and .380 OBP will have 186 hits and 68 walks. That's 12 more hits... and interestingly enough, 42 fewer walks. I'd say that's not worth it.

Although this is likely flawed, so I'll check the other way... a set amount of PA, as that's more likely when one guy walks a lot more often. Let's put that at 650 and see what happens.

The OBP guy will have 160 hits and 100 walks.
The average guy will have 181 hits and 66 BB

...assuming all other stats are equal since they weren't mentioned (meaning apparently this is the only difference between the players) those hits came in the form of singles. So 21 extra singles vs. 34 extra walks. Despite the people who have something against modern statistics, us "statheads" don't believe a walk is as good as a single. Only one time is that true... when no one is on base. Overall, a single is roughly 1.4X more valuable.

Thus, 1.4 X 21 =
29.4

even with that factored in, it still doesn't make up for the extra walks. It's close, but the OBP guy here proves to be the better player to have.

[Zeeter]

Originally posted by crackpott


...assuming all other stats are equal since they weren't mentioned (meaning apparently this is the only difference between the players) those hits came in the form of singles. So 21 extra singles vs. 34 extra walks. Despite the people who have something against modern statistics, us "statheads" don't believe a walk is as good as a single. Only one time is that true... when no one is on base. Overall, a single is roughly 1.4X more valuable.

Thus, 1.4 X 21 =
29.4

even with that factored in, it still doesn't make up for the extra walks. It's close, but the OBP guy here proves to be the better player to have.

Interesting methodology. My only argument would be that we cannot assume that the 21 extra hits are singles. It would be more reasonable to take the ratio of doubles to hits, triples to hits, and homers to hits and apply that to the formula. I think that you will find different numbers that way.

While I agree that a single is more valuable, how did you come up with 1.4 X 1? Just curious.