Jump to content
Jays Centre
  • Create Account

BP Introduces New Offensive Statistic in DRC+

Spanky99

By Spanky99
in Toronto Blue Jays Talk

 Share

Recommended Posts

Spanky99 GOAT

Spanky99

Old-Timey Member
Posted
Posted (edited)

BP has introduced a new offensive stat DRC+, very interesting read... the follow up questions are very good and answers will be answered in better detail in early '19... I thought JFL19 was joking yesterday about this in the OT Forum.

 

Why DRC+

Jonathan Judge

December 3, 2018

 

This article is part of the launch for Baseball Prospectus’ new hitting statistic, Deserved Runs Created, which you can learn much more about here.

 

Why another batting metric? Because existing batting metrics (including ours) have two serious problems: (1) they purport to offer summaries of player contributions, when in fact they merely average play outcomes in which the players participated; and (2) they treat all outcomes, whether it be a walk or a single, as equally likely to be driven by the player’s skill, even though no one believes that is actually true.

 

DRC+ addresses the first problem by rejecting the assumption that play outcomes automatically equal player contributions, and forces players to demonstrate a consistent ability to generate those outcomes over time to get full credit for them. DRC+ addresses the second problem by recognizing that certain outcomes (walks, strikeouts) are more attributable to player skill than others (singles, triples).

 

DRC+ gives more weight to extreme performances in the former (because they are more likely to reflect the batter’s actual contribution) and less weight to extreme performances in the latter (because they tend to be flukier). By addressing these two deficiencies in existing metrics, DRC+ ends up being substantially more reliable and predictive for individual hitters than any other baseball hitting metric. That includes wOBA, wRC+, OPS+, and many others you still see used by writers in analyzing baseball performance.

 

With that said, I think it’s important to say a few words about what DRC+ is not. The fact that DRC+ performs much better than other metrics does not mean that these other metrics—which have served the analytic community reasonably well for many years—somehow are “wrong.” There is no “right” or “wrong” when it comes to player metrics; rather, it is a continuous process of trying to get things “more right” than we had them before.

 

Recently, we provided an objective benchmark system by which metrics could be compared. What you see in that article is a history of steady forward progress in measuring batter performance, starting with batting average and up until recently culminating in wOBA and wRC+. Just as DRC+ has surpassed existing metrics, at some point in the future, DRC+ may itself be surpassed. When that happens, our analysis should be all the better for it.

 

Similarly, the fact that DRC+ is much more accurate than other metrics on average does not mean it cannot still have weak spots and areas for improvement. DRC+ is the output of several models, and those models make decisions based on what is expected, not by functioning as some sort of oracle. Rough edges and blind spots are still possible, and we’re actually very interested to hear if you think you have seen any.

 

Having talked about what DRC+ is and what it is not, let’s conclude by talking about one of our favorite parts: that DRC+ is willing to be uncertain. As with our catcher framing and DRA metrics, DRC+ has specific uncertainty bounds. Mike Trout, for example, in 2018 had a DRC+ of 180, with a standard deviation (plus or minus) of 13 points. So, we are pretty confident Mike Trout was somewhere between 167 and 193, and skeptical about him being in the range beyond that, but are happy to admit he very well could deserve something other than exactly 180. Being honest about uncertainty is an important part of understanding what it means to be accurate.

 

Essentially, DRC+ is our best estimate for what a hitter produces at the plate, based on how much credit he has shown he deserves for each of the outcomes he participated in. We hope you find this useful also.

 

Informative links below...

 

https://www.baseballprospectus.com/news/article/45445/comparing-drc-ops-and-wrc/

 

https://www.baseballprospectus.com/news/article/45338/introducing-deserved-runs-created-plus-drc/

 

https://www.baseballprospectus.com/news/article/45383/the-performance-case-for-drc/

 

What do you folks think?

Edited by Spanky99
jays4life19 MVP

jays4life19

Old-Timey Member
Posted
Posted
BP has done a good job at showing why it's clearly superior to any other stat out there. As BTS mentioned, it's a bit of a pain in the ass it won't be on Fangraphs, but oh well. I like how it's both descriptive and predictive and will be my go to stat if i want a quick snapshot on how a guy is performing. Also, hoping they release the exact formula of DRC+ in the coming months.
TheHurl Toronto Blue Jays

TheHurl

Site Manager
Posted
Posted
I’ll use it if Fangraphs ever adds it to their player pages. BP’s site is a mess.

 

Hopefully now that it has been purchased by the core four it will return to it's roots. And of course... More Sayre!!!!

TheHurl Toronto Blue Jays

TheHurl

Site Manager
Posted
Posted
Maybe Seattle has adopted this new metric - Carlos Santana was 46th last year.

 

People are s***ing on Santana pretty badly but his numbers last year weren't that bad. He's always been a low BABIP guy but he tried to beat the shift more last year (the lowest pull% of his career) and it was the lowest BABIP of his career. He has an ability to put the bat on the baseball...last year he swung at way more pitches but his k-rate went down. Seems like he'll be one of the easier fixes out there.

Laika Cooperstown

Laika

Community Moderator
Posted
Posted
Holy s*** - Mark McGwire is better than Babe Roth!

 

Babe Ruth's 10,000+ PA career is not a big enough sample for DRC+ to stop assuming he is less talented than his production, lol.

 

(I'm assuming their formula just isn't properly tuned for the past).

Laika Cooperstown

Laika

Community Moderator
Posted
Posted
People are s***ing on Santana pretty badly but his numbers last year weren't that bad. He's always been a low BABIP guy but he tried to beat the shift more last year (the lowest pull% of his career) and it was the lowest BABIP of his career. He has an ability to put the bat on the baseball...last year he swung at way more pitches but his k-rate went down. Seems like he'll be one of the easier fixes out there.

 

There's not really much to fix - he should just regress in the right direction. The problem is that $17.5M is a lot for a ~2.0-2.5 win 1B in this climate. Layer the Hoskins defensive position stuff on top, which made Santana simply an awkward piece for Philly to have.

DigitalRock FCL Blue Jays

DigitalRock

Old-Timey Member
Posted
Posted
Good point - I must prefer going off what Tabby 'sees'

 

Tabby only sees big strong men..... I also never inferred going by the eye ball test was even a valid approach.

Dr. Dinger GOAT

Dr. Dinger

Old-Timey Member
Posted
Posted
Tabby only sees big strong men..... I also never inferred going by the eye ball test was even a valid approach.

 

You never inferred or you never implied?

Boxcar All-Star

Boxcar

Old-Timey Member
Posted
Posted
ah its a hitting stat only, my bad

 

Yeah it was only near the top of the first paragraph, I can see how that might be confusing.

 

They really should just find a way to pack all the information right into the headline.

Spanky99 GOAT

Spanky99

Old-Timey Member
Posted
  • Author
Posted
Yeah it was only near the top of the first paragraph, I can see how that might be confusing.

 

They really should just find a way to pack all the information right into the headline.

 

It's in the headline, lol.

Boxcar All-Star

Boxcar

Old-Timey Member
Posted
Posted
It's in the headline, lol.

 

It says "offensive stat" in the headline, which could possibly include baserunning you f***ing bicycle. The first paragraph clarifies that it is hitting only.

Spanky99 GOAT

Spanky99

Old-Timey Member
Posted
  • Author
Posted
It says "offensive stat" in the headline, which could possibly include baserunning you f***ing bicycle. The first paragraph clarifies that it is hitting only.

 

Don't be such a pedant, toerag. Who knew you'd come to your buddies defense, lol?

Boxcar All-Star

Boxcar

Old-Timey Member
Posted
Posted
Don't be such a pedant, toerag. Who knew you'd come to your buddies defense, lol?

 

You're the one that decided to correct me, *******.

Spanky99 GOAT

Spanky99

Old-Timey Member
Posted
  • Author
Posted
You're the one that decided to correct me, *******.

 

I wasn't correcting you, I was laughing at Jim, ya salty dog guzzling hermaphrodite.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
The Jays Centre Caretaker Fund
The Jays Centre Caretaker Fund

You all care about this site. The next step is caring for it. We’re asking you to caretake this site so it can remain the premier Blue Jays community on the internet.

Become a Caretaker

  • Member Statistics

    20,996
    Total Members
    48,845
    Most Online
    ButchS
    Newest Member
    ButchS
    Joined
×
×
  • Create New...