Positional Adjustments

[tangotiger]

What does the calculation look like for calculating base stealing runs? Is it something really simple like =/- 0.25 runs based on failure or success?

 

Yes, something like that. +0.2 for a SB and -0.45 for a CS. Something along those lines.

[John_Havok]

Yes, something like that. +0.2 for a SB and -0.45 for a CS. Something along those lines.

 

Would it vary based on stealing or being caught stealing 2nd vs 3rd vs home and/or the number of outs at the time? Like, how run expectancy would change?

 

I’m thinking Elly de la Cruz stealing all three bases in like 30 seconds the other night might be worth more than just stealing 2nd three separate times.

[tangotiger]

Would it vary based on stealing or being caught stealing 2nd vs 3rd vs home and/or the number of outs at the time? Like, how run expectancy would change?

 

I’m thinking Elly de la Cruz stealing all three bases in like 30 seconds the other night might be worth more than just stealing 2nd three separate times.

 

Yes, you could definitely do it by run expectancy. It's a question of how simple or complex you want to make it. After all, you can do the same thing with HR and hits and walks and strikeouts too.

 

Just because you make it more accurate doesn't mean you are making it better.

 

There's definitely an argument to be made both ways.

[Spanky__99]

Thanks for taking the time, Tom, great stuff.

[Spanky__99]

Spanky summoned Tom Tango.

 

Awww yeah, in actuality it was c-pee's 10 cent brain.

 

ETA: LTBF actually, but connorp and CD started the WAR flaw, lol.

Edited July 13, 2023 by Spanky99

[connorp]

Alright, let’s get back to why it was started in the first place. I will present the most basic sense of reasoning of why 1b is unfairly devalued off the rip.

 

Most baseball plays that aren’t a hit are “routine” outs. Or at least, there aren’t a ton of hits where you’re left wondering if Player B could’ve made the play, when Player A doesn’t make it. There’s really a handful of balls like that any given game, that can go to any position. These plays can obviously impact a game greatly.

 

Positioning is going to determine a lot in terms of if a play gets made. But even balls that aren’t “routine” are again, still going to be made by most players at a position. So if a LF has to cover 30ft of a fly ball and stays in a jog, yeah he’s moving around and so you value it more, but it’s still a play most of his peers make.

 

Over time it will become more apparent who’s making extra outs and all that, so of course advance statistics will tell a story, or at least try to lol. There’s some pretty wild fluctuation in many cases year-to-year that point out to a better formula being needed…

 

But anyways, one position that gets as many of those challenging plays is 1b in terms of picks, stretches, coming off the bag to make a play, a throw across the diamond etc…. All of these actions you can kind of directly relate to a player at another position needing to make a dive in the field (actually 1b do that too), or make a spectacular catch on the run. A made-or- missed pick can be just a critical as any on-the-field event. So this notion that it’s a position that’s far less important because you can just stick the old fat guy there bc all he has to do is stand there and catch the ball is wrong.

 

Also, an athletic 1b can help your IF positioning by allowing him to cover some ground.

 

I’ll keep it to that basic point for now.

[wilko]

Alright, let’s get back to why it was started in the first place. I will present the most basic sense of reasoning of why 1b is unfairly devalued off the rip.

 

Most baseball plays that aren’t a hit are “routine” outs. Or at least, there aren’t a ton of hits where you’re left wondering if Player B could’ve made the play, when Player A doesn’t make it. There’s really a handful of balls like that any given game, that can go to any position. These plays can obviously impact a game greatly.

 

Positioning is going to determine a lot in terms of if a play gets made. But even balls that aren’t “routine” are again, still going to be made by most players at a position. So if a LF has to cover 30ft of a fly ball and stays in a jog, yeah he’s moving around and so you value it more, but it’s still a play most of his peers make.

 

Over time it will become more apparent who’s making extra outs and all that, so of course advance statistics will tell a story, or at least try to lol. There’s some pretty wild fluctuation in many cases year-to-year that point out to a better formula being needed…

 

But anyways, one position that gets as many of those challenging plays is 1b in terms of picks, stretches, coming off the bag to make a play, a throw across the diamond etc…. All of these actions you can kind of directly relate to a player at another position needing to make a dive in the field (actually 1b do that too), or make a spectacular catch on the run. A made-or- missed pick can be just a critical as any on-the-field event. So this notion that it’s a position that’s far less important because you can just stick the old fat guy there bc all he has to do is stand there and catch the ball is wrong.

 

Also, an athletic 1b can help your IF positioning by allowing him to cover some ground.

 

I’ll keep it to that basic point for now.

 

Go into more detail please.

[connorp]

Go into more detail please.

 

I could, mate. That’s a condensed, “I’m going to the beach”, version

[Spanky__99]

lol

[tangotiger]

I didn't see a question in that long post, so there is nothing for me to respond to.

 

If you have a terse question, I'd be happy to respond.

[Spanky__99]

I didn't see a question in that long post, so there is nothing for me to respond to.

 

If you have a terse question, I'd be happy to respond.

 

He thinks the positional adjustment is wrong for 1B, basically, thinking metrics aren't picking up the other nuances of 1B. IE; Wasting your time.

[connorp]

He thinks the positional adjustment is wrong for 1B, basically.

 

Well, I thought that’s what kicked it all off. Anyways, I respect this guy. Most of you guys would be like “you’re a dumbass”, with nothing else. I can respect there’s a reason for formulas and it seems like this guys know you can’t be a slave to a number and there’s room for interpretation

[Spanky__99]

Well, I thought that’s what kicked it all off. Anyways, I respect this guy. Most of you guys would be like “you’re a dumbass”, with nothing else. I can respect there’s a reason for formulas and it seems like this guys know you can’t be a slave to a number and there’s room for interpretation

 

He's already answered questions on 1B in this thread. There's room for interpretation in everything in regards to baseball statistics, meat. Just ask him if picks and footwork are calculated in defensive metrics. This isn't hard connor.

[connorp]

He's already answered questions on 1B in this thread. There's room for interpretation in everything in regards to baseball statistics, meat. Just ask him if picks and footwork are calculated in defensive metrics. This isn't hard connor.

 

Even if it’s calculated, the fact is that 1b are devalued as playing a less important position, and this affects their WAR totals. I simply gave my grievance on it per tutu-wearing Laila’s challenge, and that’s that.

I understand there’s not a question in there. We can move on

[Spanky__99]

Even if it’s calculated, the fact is that 1b are devalued as playing a less important position, and this affects their WAR totals. I simply gave my grievance on it per tutu-wearing Laila’s challenge, and that’s that.

I understand there’s not a question in there. We can move on

 

So connorp's formula is right and Tom Tango's wrong, gotcha. lmao... you're embarrassing.

[connorp]

So connorp's formula is right and Tom Tango's wrong, gotcha. lmao... you're embarrassing.

 

It never hurts to hear feedback, meat. Elon Musk takes feedback. It doesn’t mean he’s going to change anything or agrees, but he’s always listening.

[John_Havok]

I'll boil it down then to an actual question that could be answered.

 

Is there a way to add the skill of 1b with picking balls in the dirt, throwing guys out across the diamond, and other skills specific to 1b into some kind of additional defensive value to 1b?

 

For example, right now OAA would give credit to another IF for fielding a ground ball, and throwing "wild" to 1B and requiring the 1b to make a pick, stretch, jumping catch etc... that may other wise result in an error for the IF and the runner getting on base.

[Laika]

I didn't see a question in that long post, so there is nothing for me to respond to.

 

If you have a terse question, I'd be happy to respond.

 

I think his question is something like:

 

Has any attempt been made to quantify and value the small but repetitive contributions that are particular to 1B defense? Things like picks and scoops, catch radius (some are "bigger targets"), success rate on the complex plays involving pitcher coverage, and so forth.

 

Related question:

 

Is it possible that first baseman in general are undervalued because defensive statistics may ignore some of the above because the numbers are hard to figure out?

 

Related question:

 

Is it possible that GOOD defensive first baseman in particular are undervalued for this reason?

[tangotiger]

I'll boil it down then to an actual question that could be answered.

 

Is there a way to add the skill of 1b with picking balls in the dirt, throwing guys out across the diamond, and other skills specific to 1b into some kind of additional defensive value to 1b?

 

For example, right now OAA would give credit to another IF for fielding a ground ball, and throwing "wild" to 1B and requiring the 1b to make a pick, stretch, jumping catch etc... that may other wise result in an error for the IF and the runner getting on base.

 

This is a good question, and it's on my todo. I call this the "transfer process". The way OAA is built, it's based on first-touch. Overwhelmingly, the impact of a fielding play is determined by the first fielder to touch the ball.

 

With 1B, they are often at the mercy of their fielders, whether receiving a throw, or a pitcher getting to the bag. Or even depending on other fielders to make a play in foul territory.

 

That said, the overall impact of this will naturally be 0 at the league level, since all the 1B will be compared to each other. The league average 1B will naturally be 0 above average. The RANGE in this "teamwork" or "synergy" skill will likely be +/- 2 or 3 runs.

 

I can tell you that other researchers have tackled this subject in novel ways and we end up with around that. So, yes, there's a skill, but it's a question of magnitude. The first-touch skill will always be much higher than the synergy skill.

[tangotiger]

Related question:

 

Is it possible that first baseman in general are undervalued because defensive statistics may ignore some of the above because the numbers are hard to figure out?

 

Related question:

 

Is it possible that GOOD defensive first baseman in particular are undervalued for this reason?

 

I think you can say that for other positions as well to some extent. Relay throws, or anything that requires teamwork. To the extent that there is undervaluation of good fielders related to teamwork, it's +/- 2 or 3 runs.

[Laika]

And there you have it. Straight from the Tiger's mouth.

 

If you think WAR is unfair to Vlad you can go ahead and add 0.2 WAR or so to his seasonal total, if you want. But it doesn't make sense to disregard the entire institution of defensive metrics. Don't throw the baby out with the bath water.

[bluejaysinternNo5]

damn I thought tangotiger was going to tell us Vlad actually had 3 WAR and not 0.4

[tangotiger]

And there you have it. Straight from the Tiger's mouth.

 

If you think WAR is unfair to Vlad you can go ahead and add 0.2 WAR or so to his seasonal total, if you want. But it doesn't make sense to disregard the entire institution of defensive metrics. Don't throw the baby out with the bath water.

 

Right, the bath water position is a political position.

 

We have been very very good in showcasing stats at a pretty granular level. Just because we don't do one or two things doesn't mean you can discard the other three or four things that we DO do.

 

We don't consider batting with runners on base to be different from bases empty. If you want that, that's fine. Use RE24. That's WHY it exists! It's to give folks a choice.

 

For things that we don't have at all, like scooping, feel free to add 2 or 3 runs to one fielder while ALSO subtracting 2 or 3 runs to another fielder. You will find that your ultimate conclusion is not going to change, not unless you have two players who are close to begin with.

[connorp]

And there you have it. Straight from the Tiger's mouth.

 

If you think WAR is unfair to Vlad you can go ahead and add 0.2 WAR or so to his seasonal total, if you want. But it doesn't make sense to disregard the entire institution of defensive metrics. Don't throw the baby out with the bath water.

 

It’s not an attack. I mean, I think wRC+ is a great stat. I just pointed out to times it can use more interpretation.

 

I think you’ll always have casual pushback with defense though. You can’t be all over the map like that, +16 one year, -1 the next. I mean, you can take an average over a few years to get a better idea, but then you have a guy that a “6 WAR” season one year, when really it was probably 4.

[Laika]

It’s not an attack. I mean, I think wRC+ is a great stat. I just pointed out to times it can use more interpretation.

 

I think you’ll always have casual pushback with defense though. You can’t be all over the map like that, +16 one year, -1 the next. I mean, you can take an average over a few years to get a better idea, but then you have a guy that a “6 WAR” season one year, when really it was probably 4.

 

Why not though?

 

Players can hit .300 in a season and .250 the next year.

 

Defense might be subject to similar year to year variations as other skills. The league changes, peers change, team positioning changes... players get slower...

[John_Havok]

You can’t be all over the map like that, +16 one year, -1 the next. I mean, you can take an average over a few years to get a better idea, but then you have a guy that a “6 WAR” season one year, when really it was probably 4.

 

You're still not quite grasping the full situation. It's absolutely possible for a defender to be really good one year, and then average or worse the next, just like it's possible for hitters to be really good one year, and then average or worse the next.

 

This idea that if something can't be perfectly quantified down to the tiniest variance and detail that it becomes completely unreliable is a terrible way to look at things.

[connorp]

Why not though?

 

Players can hit .300 in a season and .250 the next year.

 

Defense might be subject to similar year to year variations as other skills. The league changes, peers change, team positioning changes... players get slower...

 

That’s a solid retort. I think I’ve read they concede it’s better to take a larger sample size than one season though

[connorp]

It’s not often you guys use any logic, so I’m a little shell shocked atm

[Carlos Danger]

Awww yeah, in actuality it was c-pee's 10 cent brain.

 

ETA: LTBF actually, but connorp and CD started the WAR flaw, lol.

 

My issue with WAR was very specific to David Ortiz and the HoF voters using it as a relative stat to judge David Ortiz against his peers and those already in the HoF. My issue was not with the metric, it was the use of the metric.

 

Unfortunately, there were baseball writers using a WAR comparison for Ortiz who obviously played DH a significant amount of the part of his career that he had the most success.

 

And thank you Tom for being here and taking everyone's questions.

Edited July 13, 2023 by Carlos Danger

[John_Havok]

My issue with WAR was very specific to David Ortiz and the HoF voters using it as relative stat to judge David Ortiz against his peers and those already in the HoF. My issue was not with the metric, it was the use of the metric.

 

Unfortunately, there were baseball writers using a WAR comparison for Ortiz who obviously played DH a significant amount of the part of his career that he had the most success.

 

And thank you Tom for being here and taking everyone's questions.

 

If the people who helped bring advanced stats to the forefront of baseball analytics had a nickel for everytime some writer or fan misunderstood and misused their stuff (myself included), they would all be the richest beings on earth.