Batting Adjustments

[tangotiger]

Similar to the positional adjustments, feel free to ask your questions.

 

Try to frame your question in the form of a question: don't include your opinion in the question, or preamble it with your opinion. I'm not here to "defend" anything, just to explain it.

[John_Havok]

when calculating xBA, do you think it's possible to start incorporating spray angle into it's formulation?

[tangotiger]

when calculating xBA, do you think it's possible to start incorporating spray angle into it's formulation?

 

It really depends if your purpose is to model the PLAY or the PLAYER.

 

Most of my time is spent on trying to understand players, and so, we need to tease out those things that cause a large amount of random variation.

 

This is similar to removing fieldable batted balls and only using FIP. Because FIP describes the player much better when you exclude fieldable balls. Of course, if you want to explain the PLAY, they you want to include fieldable balls.

 

Which do you prefer? And you can't say "both", not if you want ONE metric. If you want two, then fine. But that's two separate questions and so two distinct metrics.

 

UPDATE: Here's a good post on the subject: http://tangotiger.com/index.php/site/article/spray-angle-overfits-xwoba

[connorp]

Similar to the positional adjustments, feel free to ask your questions.

 

Try to frame your question in the form of a question: don't include your opinion in the question, or preamble it with your opinion. I'm not here to "defend" anything, just to explain it.

 

Very well. Rephrased:

 

My board nemesis, Spanky, and others took objection when I said wRC+ can be flawed in the circumstance where a players runs created get yielded down by park factor in cases where they play their home games in an + offensive environment but their splits actually show they hit poorly at home, and better on the road. Do you think there is an error in my thought process on that?

[tangotiger]

Very well. Rephrased:

 

My board nemesis, Spanky, and others took objection when I said wRC+ can be flawed in the circumstance where a players runs created get yielded down by park factor in cases where they play their home games in an + offensive environment but their splits actually show they hit poorly at home, and better on the road. Do you think there is an error in my thought process on that?

 

That is a good question.

 

We have to try to understand WHY we are doing park factors. And it's to (try) to put players on the same baseline.

 

If we look at 2023 (for illustrative purposes), we can see that Yankee Stadium helps HR hitters and hurts players who get non-HR hits:

https://baseballsavant.mlb.com/leaderboard/statcast-park-factors?type=year&year=2023&batSide=&stat=index_wOBA&condition=All&rolling=&sort=12&sortDir=desc

 

This is also true at Dodger Stadium. Indeed, if you look at Dodger Stadium year by year, you will see that is consistent:

https://baseballsavant.mlb.com/leaderboard/statcast-venue?venueId=22

 

Now, let's say you have two batters who are equivalent away from Dodger Stadium, one who is a power hitter and one who is a bigtime singles hitter. But overall, they are equivalent.

 

At Dodger Stadium, the power hitter will likely be more helped than the singles hitter. Or, for illustrative purposes, let's say this is true.

 

So the question is thusly: do we want to apply a SINGLE park factor, the same park factor, for EVERY hitter? Or do we want to apply an individualized park factor?

 

Well, it depends what you are trying to answer. In terms of helping the team win, then you want a single park factor. One batter was able to leverage Dodger Stadium and the other one was not. It's not their fault that they had to play 81 games there. But, that's indeed what happened. And to explain what happened, the one who was able to leverage Dodger Stadium will get the wins.

 

But, if you try to trade for a player, or try to place all the players in a neutral park (or have them play 5 games at each of the 30 parks), then you'd want an individualized park adjustment.

 

This is actually far more important for pitchers than batters in terms of asking the question, and yet 99% of the time, the question is asked about batters.

[connorp]

Thank you. Essentially this is what I was saying. I can totally understand what it’s doing with a broad brush, but there will be cases where you need to take a closer look at how park factor influenced an individual players numbers

[tangotiger]

Thank you. Essentially this is what I was saying. I can totally understand what it’s doing with a broad brush, but there will be cases where you need to take a closer look at how park factor influenced an individual players numbers

 

I usually find the disagreement is that there's two distinct questions, and so it requires two distinct answers. But each side is assuming there is only one question and one answer.

 

3Com Park for example was terrible for LHH. But Barry Bonds had neutral splits. That's because he was largely unaffected by the park. But he ends up looking like a monster there because everyone else was depressed at 3Com.

 

So, yeah, he stood out far more at 3Com than elsewhere.

 

It really (really really) depends on the question being asked.

[Jimcanuck]

You were 26 in 1994. Are the 1994 Montreal Expos the best team ever?

[Captain_Obvious]

Is there any batting metric that takes opposing pitcher quality into account?

[tangotiger]

You were 26 in 1994. Are the 1994 Montreal Expos the best team ever?

 

I had to choose an Expos team without Raines, Dawson, and Carter on it. But I love Pedro and Dennis Martinez. Therefore: yes.

[tangotiger]

Is there any batting metric that takes opposing pitcher quality into account?

 

Yes, the one at Reference does that.

[Jimcanuck]

When will we see UIH (Umpire Independent Hitting) to pair with FIP

[wilko]

Are you using chat GPT to answer these questions?

[43211234]

I don't have a question right now but it's cool to see you doing this. Thanks

[tangotiger]

When will we see UIH (Umpire Independent Hitting) to pair with FIP

 

Umpires are better each year. I know it's hard to believe, but it is demonstrably true.

[tangotiger]

I don't have a question right now but it's cool to see you doing this. Thanks

 

My pleasure.

[tangotiger]

Are you using chat GPT to answer these questions?

 

First rule of Chat GPT: we don't acknowledge Chat GPT.

[BTS]

Really appreciate all of the insights you’re dropping here, Mr. Tango.

[tangotiger]

Really appreciate all of the insights you’re dropping here, Mr. Tango.

 

Thank you kindly

[Spanky__99]

Very well. Rephrased:

 

My board nemesis, Spanky, and others took objection when I said wRC+ can be flawed in the circumstance where a players runs created get yielded down by park factor in cases where they play their home games in an + offensive environment but their splits actually show they hit poorly at home, and better on the road. Do you think there is an error in my thought process on that?

 

This is a lie, I took offence to you saying wRC+ wasn't park adjusted, fool.

[Spanky__99]

Tom, I feel I know your answer to this question, but here goes, is clutch hitting a skillset, or random statistical noise individually and as a team, this is very Blue Jay specific by the way? lol

 

I know for Omar and I, we'd love to hear your take.

 

Also thanks for tabling this, on behalf of most of this forum we are much obliged at you taking the time and answering our questions.

 

Great stuff!

[tangotiger]

Tom, I feel I know your answer to this question, but here goes, is clutch hitting a skillset, or random statistical noise individually and as a team, this is very Blue Jay specific by the way? lol

 

I know for Omar and I, we'd love to hear your take.

 

Also thanks for tabling this, on behalf of most of this forum we are much obliged at you taking the time and answering our questions.

 

Great stuff!

 

Thank you for the kind words.

 

Because humans are involved, clutch is a skill. HOWEVER, that is a very boring question and a boring answer. Our job is not to say IF something exists. Humans are involved, so naturally it DOES exist. No, our job is to see the DEGREE to which something exists, the MAGNITUDE.

 

The clutch skill, to the extent it exists, is much less than the platoon advantage for example (another human-based trait). It takes a loooong time to find the clutch skill. And by the time you find it, the player's career is half over. (And being human, it's not even clear how persistent it is.)

 

Even if you are able to determine the clutch skill in time, its impact is so muted (like I said, much less than the platoon advantage) that it makes it NOT ACTIONABLE.

 

So, in the end, what we have is:

- yes, clutch skill exists

- it takes a long time to find it

- its magnitude is small

- which makes it not actionable

[Spanky__99]

Thank you for the kind words.

 

Because humans are involved, clutch is a skill. HOWEVER, that is a very boring question and a boring answer. Our job is not to say IF something exists. Humans are involved, so naturally it DOES exist. No, our job is to see the DEGREE to which something exists, the MAGNITUDE.

 

The clutch skill, to the extent it exists, is much less than the platoon advantage for example (another human-based trait). It takes a loooong time to find the clutch skill. And by the time you find it, the player's career is half over. (And being human, it's not even clear how persistent it is.)

 

Even if you are able to determine the clutch skill in time, its impact is so muted (like I said, much less than the platoon advantage) that it makes it NOT ACTIONABLE.

 

So, in the end, what we have is:

- yes, clutch skill exists

- it takes a long time to find it

- its magnitude is small

- which makes it not actionable

 

Thanks, so basically it's negligible as I thought you'd infer, cheers.

[connorp]

Don’t forget everyone’s favorite old school/new school debate. Lineup protection. What say ye on that?

It exists, or no?

[tangotiger]

Don’t forget everyone’s favorite old school/new school debate. Lineup protection. What say ye on that?

It exists, or no?

 

We devoted a section of The Book to that. You can read about it in Amazon's Look Inside for free.

 

Again, you asked the very boring question that I will give you a very boring answer to: of course it exists, because humans are involved. NEVER ask "if" it exists. What you must ask is: "to what extent" does it exist.

 

What happens with protection is that the quality of the outcomes are shifted around, but that the overall impact ends up being negligible.

[connorp]

We devoted a section of The Book to that. You can read about it in Amazon's Look Inside for free.

 

Again, you asked the very boring question that I will give you a very boring answer to: of course it exists, because humans are involved. NEVER ask "if" it exists. What you must ask is: "to what extent" does it exist.

 

What happens with protection is that the quality of the outcomes are shifted around, but that the overall impact ends up being negligible.

 

Definitely can respect that answer as well. There’s anecdotal evidence from former players saying they either did, or didn’t, change their approach based on lineup protection.

 

I can understand you can quantify what you can quantify.

[tangotiger]

Definitely can respect that answer as well. There’s anecdotal evidence from former players saying they either did, or didn’t, change their approach based on lineup protection.

 

I can understand you can quantify what you can quantify.

 

Sure, there's a qualitative thing that happens here, and we can measure it. In the end however, the actual outcomes, the overall value, that is easily quantifiable, and it turns out: it's negligible.