Bill James feeding the troll: Cy Young Predictor 2013

[Angrioter]

Formula: Cy Young Points (CYP) = ((5*IP/9)-ER) + (SO/12) + (SV*2.5) + Shutouts + ((W*6)-(L*2)) + VB (see below).

 

http://espn.go.com/mlb/features/cyyoung

[Angrioter]

Seems like closers have been getting less recognition recently. Hernandez is definitely the #2 right now among writers, ahead of Nathan.

 

The formula is stupid. James just wanted to feed the trolls.

[Angrioter]

I assume he just used past Cy Young voting results to calibrate the formula. It's the voters who are stupid.

 

Dinosaurs with limited analysis capability. Damn standards lol (ERA, K, WIN)

[Nox]

Bill James ran a regression!!

[Angrioter]

Bill James ran a regression!!

 

Bill James "I can read the minds of voters. I'm a mentalist"

[sachmo55]

Bill James ran a regression!!

 

But can he use his regression to prove WAR?

[guylaroche5]

if it ain't the king and kershaw there is no god

[Nox]

But can he use his regression to prove WAR?

 

Poor BTS.

[GD]

Does anyone have BTS' regression thread bookmarked? I can't find it, for whatever reason.

[Vdubfan]

Why is Hernandez number 2 in your mind like Max is the run away? Across the board, Felix has been the better pitcher this year. Voters aren't so giddy about 17-1 anymore.

[GD]

if it ain't the king and harvey there is no god

 

ftfy

[sachmo55]

Does anyone have BTS' regression thread bookmarked? I can't find it, for whatever reason.

 

lol, I found it in 10 seconds

 

Searched "I ran a regression"

 

http://www.forums.mlb.com/n/pfx/forum.aspx?tsn=1&nav=messages&webtag=ml-bluejays&tid=87627

[reedjohnsonfan]

if it ain't the king and kershaw there is no god

 

Scherzer is 17-1. Hard not to see him winning.

[GD]

lol, I found it in 10 seconds

 

Searched "I ran a regression"

 

http://www.forums.mlb.com/n/pfx/forum.aspx?tsn=1&nav=messages&webtag=ml-bluejays&tid=87627

 

Searched for the wrong username, thanks.

[reedjohnsonfan]

Why is Hernandez number 2 in your mind like Max is the run away? Across the board, Felix has been the better pitcher this year. Voters aren't so giddy about 17-1 anymore.

 

They're not as giddy about wins, but they still matter. If he finishes the season at something like 21-1 how do you not give him the Cy Young? What if he was 17-0 instead of 17-1?

[reedjohnsonfan]

Does anyone have BTS' regression thread bookmarked? I can't find it, for whatever reason.

 

lol that was a funny moment.

[GD]

lol that was a funny moment.

 

I see a Cards troll even got in on this.

[KSaw]

Barring something dramatic, have to imagine that Scherzer wins. Kershaw too. Patrick Corbin deserves plenty of push though. He essentially pitches in a Las Vegas environment, with hitting numbers inflated like they are in the PCL. That Arizona air flattens out breaking balls, kills fastball movement and allows fly balls to just sail into the distance. Meanwhile Kershaw pitches in the very pitcher friendly Dodger Stadium.

[Nox]

Barring something dramatic, have to imagine that Scherzer wins. Kershaw too. Patrick Corbin deserves plenty of push though. He essentially pitches in a Las Vegas environment, with hitting numbers inflated like they are in the PCL. That Arizona air flattens out breaking balls, kills fastball movement and allows fly balls to just sail into the distance. Meanwhile Kershaw pitches in the very pitcher friendly Dodger Stadium.

 

1) Arizona's park factors are not like Vegas'. Stop exaggerating. Just because each city has alot of sand/dirt around them does not make them the same thing.

 

2) We have plenty of measures that take park factors into account.

 

You're lost in a fog if you think there's a legitimate argument for Corbin over Harvey or Kershaw.

[TheHurl]

My Cy Young Predictor Max Scherzer DET 17-1

 

end voting. I really don't think it's the year for voters to get all saber friendly. Scherzer is far from a bad candidate (barring a September blow up) and he has all the casual fan friendly numbers (won-loss, 2nd in K's, on winning team). In the NL we could see some typically bad BBWAA voting, should be fun. Lots of ball left though.

[KSaw]

1) Arizona's park factors are not like Vegas'. Stop exaggerating. Just because each city has alot of sand/dirt around them does not make them the same thing.

 

2) We have plenty of measures that take park factors into account.

 

You're lost in a fog if you think there's a legitimate argument for Corbin over Harvey or Kershaw.

 

No, I think that Kershaw should win (at this point). As for park factor numbers, the atmosphere, air pressure, humidity and temperature in Phoenix is very similar to Vegas. Now Vegas is at a higher elevation by about 300 m and of course that makes a difference. Phoenix at over 300 m still launches baseballs. My point was about the air. It is the thin and dry air that causes the same effect. The ball doesn't really break. It is a huge factor for pitchers, no matter what park factor says. Park factor does not measure the spin, rotation and break on baseballs due to atmospheric pressure.

[Nox]

Park factor does not measure the spin, rotation and break on baseballs due to atmospheric pressure.

 

And why does that matter? You care about the net effect which is, you know, exactly what they measure.

[KSaw]

I think that pitches being flattened matters greatly. It does to the pitchers and it hurts more pitchers than others. A control pitcher who relies on changing speeds and painting corners would be hurt less than most in desert air. The park and it's dimensions don't really matter. People have always talked about Denver and what the altitude does at Coor Field. The humidity in Miami killing home runs gets attention. The lack of break on pitches in Phoenix, allowing hitters to avoid effective out pitches gets only occasionally mentioned in passing. Singles instead of strike outs are often a result. Don't think that there's a measurable stat to gauge ineffective pitch movement due to the air quality.

[Nox]

I think that pitches being flattened matters greatly.

 

It obviously has an effect. That's not being debated.

 

A control pitcher who relies on changing speeds and painting corners would be hurt less than most in desert air

 

No, it's the guys who primarily rely on breaking stuff that get hurt them most. And even then, it's not a dramatic difference compared to a regular pitcher.

 

The park and it's dimensions don't really matter

 

That's a pretty stupid thing to say. You realize the importance of atmospheric conditions in park factors, something many people don't get, but the physical dimensions of a park is obviously a factor as well. I can't even fathom a semi valid argument to the contrary. If we brought the fences in 10 feet all around at Roger's Centre, you're essentially saying it wouldn't matter. That's crazy.

 

Don't think that there's a measurable stat to gauge ineffective pitch movement due to the air quality.

 

You know PitchFX became available like 10 years ago right?

[KSaw]

Good God. Obviously fences coming in matter. That's not what I was meaning at all. I was trying to stay on point to ball movement due to air. And it has a huge impact on 2-seam fastballs. I really wasn't looking for an argument here but pitch fx hardly touches what desert air does to baseballs. It only measures what happens and not why. I'm not even sure that the why and how much of a difference has been studied in depth.

 

It's merely known that altitude and a lack of humidity and heat flatten pitches. Chad Motolla put it pretty well last year. He said that the biggest advantage to hitters isn't the parks or how the ball carries around the PCL, it's that hitters can expect a heavy dose of 4-seam fastballs and sit on them due to the air. Now how do you measure that impact?

[Nox]

I really wasn't looking for an argument here but pitch fx hardly touches what desert air does to baseballs. ?

 

Between PitchFX and Trackman, MLB teams have spin, velocity and trajectory data for every pitch in the MLB and most AAA parks. Vegas included. Now tell me exactly how with that information in hand we can't measure the flattening of a pitch in altitude.

 

As for your 2nd point, the game theory changes are indeed probably the biggest effect. But their overall impact is reflected in the park factors. Yes, more fastballs get thrown, yes hitters know that, yes it makes it easier for them to predict what's coming but the net effect is easily measured by the outputs over many years of data.

[KSaw]

I've never found park factor to be that detailed but I'll do some research on my own. I'm not going to argue a point without all available info. Hell, my original point was that the kid was having a great season in a hitter's park, while the only other 2 starters near or better than he (Kershaw and Harvey) play in pitcher's parks.

[Nox]

Hell, my original point was that the kid was having a great season in a hitter's park, while the only other 2 starters near or better than he (Kershaw and Harvey) play in pitcher's parks.

 

And my original point is that we have the ability to account for context. We don't need to make mental adjustments of arbitrary magnitude because Harvey and Kershaw play in better pitchers parks.

[KSaw]

And your adjustments still rank Harvey as ahead of him? I don't see it at all.

[Nox]

And your adjustments still rank Harvey as ahead of him? I don't see it at all.

 

You make it sound like I created park factors.

 

Wait, are you implying Pat Corbin has had a better year than Matt Harvey? Please tell me I'm misinterpreting this.