[Crapshoot]

Over at FOFC, there was an interesting discussion about the new "poise" rating, and its effects. I, being a die-hard statheadz, find this to be as believable as "clutch" hitters or "proven" veterans. One example often cited there (and elsewhere) is the erstwhile Jaime Moyer- that somehow, his poise helped him through. To whit, I did a little quick and dirty study on Moyer.

						
	IP	BB/9	  K/9	   K/BB	  HR/9	ERA+
1986	87.3	4.33	  4.64	   1.07	  1.03	   80
1987	202	4.32	  5.66	   1.31	  1.25	   84
1988	201	2.46	  5.42	   2.20	  0.90	  104
1989	76	3.91	  5.21	   1.33	  1.18	   82
1990	102.3	3.43	  5.10	   1.49	  0.53	   84
1991	31.3	4.60	  5.75	   1.25	  1.44	   65
1993	152	2.25	  5.33	   2.37	  0.65	  129
1994	149	2.30	  5.26	   2.29	  1.39	  105
1995	115.7	2.33	  5.06	   2.17	  1.40	   94
1996	160.7	2.58	  4.42	   1.72	  1.29	  127
1997	188.7	2.05	  5.39	   2.63	  1.00	  117
1998	234.3	1.61	  6.07	   3.76	  0.88	  132
1999	228	1.89	  5.41	   2.85	  0.91	  130
2000	154	3.10	  5.73	   1.85	  1.29	   83
2001	209	1.89	  5.12	   2.70	  1.03	  127
2002	230.7	1.95	  5.73	   2.94	  1.09	  123
2003	215	2.76	  5.40	   1.95	  0.80	  136

Correlation to ERA+
BB/9 -0.841
K/9 0.018
K/BB 0.759
HR/9 -0.416

Moyer's success is pretty clearly most correlated with his BB/9 rate, and to a lesser degree with his K/BB ratio - not his "poise". He learnt to better control his pitches, and how to better use them- if you have a 65mph changeup, a 83MPH fastball is plenty fast. Years such as the last one are more likely to be exceptions, and one should expect a Moyer decline, aided by the loss of Cameron - if his K/BB ratio is under 2 again, odds are that his ERA will be over 4.

The greater point is to the idea of the poise rating- it seems to be a scary regression towards things like clutch hitting, myths that have been deconstructed again and again. OOTP 6 looks to be a huge step forward in terms of the game engine- ratings like this however, seem to be a step back.

[fantom1979]

Originally posted by Aadik


Moyer's success is pretty clearly most correlated with his BB/9 rate, and to a lesser degree with his K/BB ratio - not his "poise". He learnt to better control his pitches, and how to better use them

Some would consider this poise. Did he have a talent bump? Probably not. Maybe a higher rating in control? Could be. Somehow you have to factor experience into playing ability IMO.

[mauboy]

Originally posted by Aadik

OOTP 6 looks to be a huge step forward in terms of the game engine- ratings like this however, seem to be a step back.

One thing though is, OOTP6 is keeping the old rating tool from OOTP5. So if you aren't satisfied with the new engine. Go back to old one and quit whining(if you aren't whining, accept my apologies). lol

[Crapshoot]

Originally posted by mauboy
One thing though is, OOTP6 is keeping the old rating tool from OOTP5. So if you aren't satisfied with the new engine. Go back to old one and quit whining(if you aren't whining, accept my apologies). lol

Lets try this again- I mentioned the OOTP 6 engine is a huge step forward, because its DIPS based to a great extent- I like this. Adding "poise" is a regression to this, which I don't like, thus my reasoning in pointing it out.

[Crapshoot]

Originally posted by fantom1979
Some would consider this poise. Did he have a talent bump? Probably not. Maybe a higher rating in control? Could be. Somehow you have to factor experience into playing ability IMO.

eh- the problem is that its dangerous to assign a random rating to do this and effect sim results. There is a legitimate point, but I don't think giving points for "experience" is neccessarily the right idea - to a great degree, many of the experiences veterans are around because the manager is too afraid of giving the ball to guys who aren't "proven." Its a question, IMO, of not neccessarily simulating the stupidity of real life as well...

[mlyons]

Although "poise" seems like a vague and undefinable intangible type term, so does "stuff" and "eye". I would venture to guess that in the new engine "poise" will be one of the factors that define the kinds of stats you are looking for, in combination with the other pitching ratings. I would imagine it will be mainly a modifier for HRs allowed, and probably affect BBs to a somewhat lesser extent. My guess is it will end up as a system where you will be able to feed a given pitcher's statistics into the system and come up with unique values for "stuff", "movement", "control", and "poise" -- I don't think it's going to be a subjective value.

[Craig Scarborough]

Aadik,

Like you, I'm not a big fan of things that cannot be demonstrated or quantified by some of kind of study. I think I understand where Markus is going with this, but before I speak to it, let me ask him directly. He's been pretty busy recently working his tail off to get OOTP6 together, so we've really only spoken about pieces that have yet to be implemented.

I'll get back to you on this...

-Craig

[KILLERBS24]

I see what your saying, There is no such thing as clutch, and I see how your worried this is the same thing. I heard someone else mention in a different discussion it should have been a confidence rating which I think is closer to being the right way to define it. Confidence is the factor that makes people perform or not. theres no such thing as clutch, but there is such a thing as Clutch minus, follow me for a sec. people that they talk about being clutch dont perform better in those situations, they perform as they normally would in any other situation, however many people perform worse when the pressure is on, thus giving the impression that the others are clutch. I think confidence would be the way to adress this, people that perform poorly in 'clutch' situations do so because they tense up, get nervous and are afraid to fail in a big spot. Guys that are more confident tend to play up to their talent regardless of situation. I know what your saying, and I don't know if this was the right way to do it or not, but there is a small part of the game that cant be broken down into pure numbers, so I think that there needs to be at least an attempt to recreate that. If it turns out not to be the best way I'm sure it will be worked on for next years game.

[obaslg]

I'm with Aadik. Unlike Stuff, Velocity, and Control, Poise apparently affects events without directly affecting hits, homers, walks, etc. I'm opposed to anything like that, and disappointed that Poise will apparently be a bigger factor than the current Clutch rating.

[Henry]

Just a thought here - but something that you must think through before calling this a bad thing....

What is the intention of OOTP in terms of "replay"?
Let me first state that in a fictiaonl league, this type of thing is good since we're not trying to mirror a real individual - and poise and clutch can all be considered.

In a historical league, however, these type ratings are "guesses" - based on observation and some assumption. Some would say this is bad since we want to stick with only what we know.

So - are we saying we want historical replay and fictional league to operate differently? Or, are we going to lean toward - and accept that OOTP was nt intended to be a "mirror" of reality - but only an "image" of it ?

If we truly believe in the idea of an "alternate" outcome, things like this allow that to happen.

Henry

[lynchjm24]

Originally posted by Henry

What is the intention of OOTP in terms of "replay"?
Let me first state that in a fictiaonl league, this type of thing is good since we're not trying to mirror a real individual - and poise and clutch can all be considered.

That's the point, some of us don't think that poise and clutch can be considered, even in a fictional league.

[Henry]

Originally posted by lynchjm24
That's the point, some of us don't think that poise and clutch can be considered, even in a fictional league.

I guess that's the issue - there's just as many here that feel it should be included as those that don't. In addition, these are in line with Markus' original ideas for the game.

I think the best way to handle these issues (clutch, poise, etc.) is to maybe have these asked as questions when you create the league. That way we could all have the configuration we want concerning attributes that can't be qualified through stats.

Henry

[lynchjm24]

Originally posted by Henry
I guess that's the issue - there's just as many here that feel it should be included as those that don't. In addition, these are in line with Markus' original ideas for the game.

I think the best way to handle these issues (clutch, poise, etc.) is to maybe have these asked as questions when you create the league. That way we could all have the configuration we want concerning attributes that can't be qualified through stats.

Henry

I didn't say there wasn't people who liked the idea . That's a great way to handle the problem.

[mlyons]

I'm still not convinced that poise is going to be a statistic-independent rating. Markus' original statement on poise was, "influences the big picture... younger pitchers may have great stuff, but no idea how to use it, while old veterans are still losing velocity but can still pitch effectively with a high poise rating." That statement, to me, leaves room for interpretation. It could be some statistically nebulous rating, but it could also be rating that can be derived from statistics. Not having heard any follow-up from Markus on the subject, I think it might be a little premature to worry about whether the rating is pushing the game towards more fuzzy, intangible results.

[Bluenoser]

Maybe I'm misunderstanding something here, but confidence and poise can mean the same thing.

As you stated, there's no such thing as "clutch", but there are players who perform as well as normal in clutch situations because they have confidence in themselves. You could also say they have poise in this example.

Now, whether or not this is what "poise' will be in the game, I can't speculate on. That's for Marcus to say.

[draven085]

The poise rating sounds like a mechanism that will be used to generate statistical outliers that would not be generated as easily from a DIPS based game engine. If that is the case, I would hope that any sort of 'poise' rating would be hidden.

Still, I share Aadik's concerns about the poise rating. I think the idea of veterans possessing it over young players is generally bunk. Many of the pitchers typically cited as evidence of 'poise' existing are very good pitchers who hang because they have a more impressive skillset than a typical major league pitcher. If 'poise' exists and is so important, why don't we see more pitchers like Moyer? How come more medicore veterans don't develop this poise and outpitch their 'stuff'?

[rcbuss]

Originally posted by draven085
The poise rating sounds like a mechanism that will be used to generate statistical outliers that would not be generated as easily from a DIPS based game engine. If that is the case, I would hope that any sort of 'poise' rating would be hidden.

Still, I share Aadik's concerns about the poise rating. I think the idea of veterans possessing it over young players is generally bunk. Many of the pitchers typically cited as evidence of 'poise' existing are very good pitchers who hang because they have a more impressive skillset than a typical major league pitcher. If 'poise' exists and is so important, why don't we see more pitchers like Moyer? How come more medicore veterans don't develop this poise and outpitch their 'stuff'?

I agree 100% with the above. "Poise" seems to be Markus' way of reproducing a pitcher's BABIP relative to his teammates. One way to see if this is true is to see if there is an inordinate number of knuckleballers with high poise ratings (6 of the top 35 pitchers in terms of avoiding hits on balls in play in Major League history were knuckleballers, according to Tom Tippett's article -- see below). Unlike other objective measures of pitching ability (BB, K, and HR rates), BABIP's correlation year-to-year is low, so it can often vacillate wildly, from season to season, about a pitcher's "true" ability of preventing hits on balls in play (BABIP). Oftentimes, the signal gets lost in the noise. We know now that many pitchers have the distinct ability to prevent hits on balls in play over the course of a career (see Tom Tippett's excellent article on this at http://www.diamond-mind.com/articles/ipavg2.htm), however this is something that is often known only retrospectively about a pitcher, after he's pitched several seasons. For this reason, keeping this rating "hidden" makes sense. Also, keep in mind that the impact on a pitcher's skill set by BABIP will often be dwarfed by the big three (BB, K, HR). The very BEST pitcher in real life at this skill, in terms of rate, was Charlie Hough, allowing 0.026 less BABIP than his teammates. That comes down to less than 1 hit for every 38 balls in play, or about 1 hit every 2-3 starts -- for the BEST pitcher at this skill.

The following is excerpted from Tippett's article:

"The following table shows how eleven groups of pitchers compared with the overall averages. The first row includes all pitchers who faced less than 1,000 batters in their careers. The second row includes all pitchers who faced at least 1,000 batters but less than 2,000 batters during their careers. And so on.

"Career BF BF HBP BB K HR vsLg vsTm
1 - 999 401,138 .002 .027 -.017 .002 .017 .015
1000 - 1999 931,981 .001 .013 -.009 .001 .006 .004
2000 - 2999 1,105,712 .001 .007 -.005 .000 .002 .001
3000 - 3999 1,179,916 .000 .006 -.003 .000 .000 .000
4000 - 4999 906,271 .000 .002 -.002 .000 .000 .001
5000 - 5999 920,680 .000 .001 .000 .000 .000 .000
6000 - 6999 647,553 .000 -.004 -.002 .001 -.001 -.001
7000 - 7999 843,937 .000 -.003 .000 .000 -.002 -.001
8000 - 8999 716,200 -.001 -.005 .005 .000 -.002 -.002
9000 - 9999 788,532 .000 -.008 -.001 -.001 -.002 -.001
10000+ 2,589,409 -.001 -.010 .008 -.001 -.004 -.003

"Let's walk through the first row so it's clear how to read this table. Those pitchers, as a group:

"faced a total of 401,138 batters in their careers

"hit batters at a rate that was .002 above the league average. In other words, they hit two more batters per 1000 BF than did the average pitcher.

"walked 27 more batters per 1000 BF

"struck out 17 fewer batters per 1000 BF

"gave up 2 more homers per 1000 BF

"gave up 17 more hits per 1000 balls in play when compared with the league-average pitcher

"gave up 15 more hits per 1000 balls in play when compared with the in-play averages of their teammates

"As you can see from the table, the pitchers with longer careers were progressively better than their shorter-career counterparts in every respect. They walked fewer batters, struck out more hitters, gave up fewer homeruns, and gave up fewer hits on balls in play. The ability to prevent hits on balls in play appears to be as much of a skill as anything else."

There has also been some exciting discussions at Baseballprimer.com on the subject; one, in particular, has been nominated for a Primey (http://www.baseballprimer.com/articl...-02-05_0.shtml -- 10. Best Thread category (DIPS analysis)).

The following is an excerpt:

"So, can we say that when a starter has 700 BIP, the influence on those BIP as a group can be broken down by:
luck : 44%
pitch: 28%
field: 17%
park : 11%
??

"I have to admit that I've recently said, though I don't remember where, that I thought the split would be 40/30/20/10 with the order being luck,fielding,pitching,park.

"What we are saying here is that pitching and not fielding is the larger determinant between the two. And perhaps before I read about DIPS I might have had the correct order.

"I think it's still important that yes we need to separate the components (HR.BB,K) from the BIP, as Voros does. But, the conclusions drawn from that does not stand based on the reasoning.

"I think our best conclusions would be the follows:
1 - pitching has more impact on BIP than does fielding
2 - luck has more impact than anything, over 700 BIP
3 - BABIP is not a good enough measure for the pitcher's skill"

Markus is on the right track, but I'd hate to see "poise" become a "Runs Allowed" rating, simply by another name.

[Kett]

From what I understand the poise rating will be the rating the adjusts the BABIP a little bit against the average, as it some pitchers definately have shown that their BABIP against is better than the norm. At the same time, it shouldn't have a huge effect on the pitcher ability because it has also been shown that preventing walks, strikeouts and homeruns are the most important factors in having a good pitcher, and I think Markus understands that. I for one am not worried about the poise rating.

[Bluenoser]

I have to agree with Kett somewhat. Why worry about something we haven't seen yet and can't be sure how it will work?

I think there's too much worry or concern here. Why not wait for the game and see what it actually does? If it's not what everyone was hoping for, or if it doesn't work the way it should, then define the problems through feedback.

We all know how quick Marcus is to "fix" or "adjust" something in this game, especially when it's new. I'm sure this years version will be no different when it comes to Marcus listening to us.

[Swan]

The one player I keep thinking of who has had great Velocity and "stuff", but seems to have terrible "poise" is Armando Benitez.

He has had a career of fantastic k/9 rates and k/bb rates, and and cosistently being stingy with avg against. Yet, he is legendary for being a choker and not having much composer in pressure situations (Just ask any Mets fan when they needed him to come through against the Yankees or Braves).


I am a big time subscriber to sabermetrics, Bill James and the like However, I am inclined to think that as much as the analysis of stats has been neglected for far too long by GM's in building teams, it would be wise to still take a look at how a player handles pressure situations still.