CSS Button No Image Css3Menu.com
New! Search comments:
(NOTE: Relevance, Author, and Article are not applicable for comment searches)
yes, late break is a horrible misnomer. We could use full pitch flight break, or only early break, in the numbers but the context of "tunnel point to plate" make sense. Otherwise it's virtually arbitrary. Just get some slice of how the pitch trajectory and/or magnus force are making the ball go from one place to another, it doesn't really matter which slice you take.
that may be a bit of an over-reduction, but, yes. That is a big part of public facing baseball analysis, it's not just about new discovery but clearly documenting and demystifying.
that's a tip of the iceberg question. The short answer is yes. The full non-answer is something like: how do these elements make it harder for hitters to adjust; can you use these as markers for development needs/role routing based on things like "this guy can't get thru the order twice despite good stuff since he can't do X Y and Z" where X Y Z are something about his sequencing/command profile.
we like <span class="statdef"><a href="http://www.baseballprospectus.com/glossary/index.php?search=DRA" onmouseover="doTooltip(event, jpfl_getStat('DRA'))" onmouseout="hideTip()">DRA</span></a>, naturally. I think some articles will coveron that in the future, bu the main idea here is to describe and publish. As we improve our stat pages (seriously beta is around the corner, any day now) we'll make it easier for people to explore these questions themselves.
As far as the teams go, yes. They do. The concept isn't new, in coaching, and it certainly has been a focus of a few in analytics-driven player development and acquisition.
slow curve, aka euphus in extreme cases
1. off the top of my head, it's almost as fast (# of pitches) as it is for catchers. So a couple weeks of games is a reasonable rule of thumb, but we should dig out the proper values
2. we'll have more on that this week
3. looks like harder throwers/nastier breakers fare poorer, even though pitch type is a factor the specifics (movement speed etc) are not
4. they really create their own special pool, don't they? Especially since we're being specific to pitch type. In general, they're hard to frame
5. me too. That's why we have more stuff in the pipeline, some of which builds on the tunnel/sequence data we just published today
6. stat acronyms will be the death of me
solely relying on the assumption that 'glove is target' is one thing, making the assumption that a 'more catchable pitch' is another. We've done the latter, while commandfx relies on the former. There is much more to command than this aspect, for certain. For example, can you put your curveball back-to-back in the zone as a drop-in followed by out of the zone in the dirt?
tomorrow we'll be able to see how much he relies on changing speeds, too. At least that part he's kept up, but ... not to much success.
"argument with his significant other"
That's absurd to the point of dishonesty.
I'll just echo and agree with MGL's note on the lack of citations. We all need to do much much better in this arena.
we'll get those updated asap, sorry about that
it's going out bit by bit, we should have everything back to 1970 by this evening.
We'll try and provide good answers to these questions in a few weeks. The pitcher has more control than the catcher, but catchers can really stand out over time since they appear in so many more games.
the data is still funneling its way through, everything back to 1970 should be online later this afternoon, with updates flowing all day
pitch calling etc tends to impact value less than framing does. But, yes, it is possible Scioscia had a strong preference for a guy's game calling.
That said, three different NL AGMs told me, when researching game calling for ESPN, that teams will simply call games from the bench if they don't like how a guy handles pitchers.
It's interesting how _not_dropping his glove helped him. Some guys (<span class="playerdef"><a href="http://www.baseballprospectus.com/card/card.php?id=45447">Russell Martin</a></span>, I believe, is one) like to keep that glove down so there's no target to "miss". But I suspect that requires better pitch reading skills etc....much to think about here. Great work, Dustin!
It goes back to 2008, but we will likely go back to 1988 as well (with a different non PITCHf/x based model)
yes, we do plan on making the component breakdowns available on Player Cards in the near future.
catcher and pitcher, along with lead runner and batter, are 'random effects' in the model. So ... it's magic! Or Judge can explain better.
that is the entire underlying model to the probability component, included in the <span class="statdef"><a href="http://www.baseballprospectus.com/glossary/index.php?search=WP" onmouseover="doTooltip(event, jpfl_getStat('WP'))" onmouseout="hideTip()">WP</span></a> model.
Speed, pitch type, where it hit the ground http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=22934
Great question. We'll do some work on this topic as we put this stuff into <span class="statdef"><a href="http://www.baseballprospectus.com/glossary/index.php?search=PECOTA" onmouseover="doTooltip(event, jpfl_getStat('PECOTA'))" onmouseout="hideTip()">PECOTA</span></a>.
Meanwhile, we have posted the data for 2008-2015 in the sortables http://www.baseballprospectus.com/sortable/index.php?cid=1892377 which you can download and explore.
I'm totally buying him a cape for next season.
*it's used on the leaderboards, also byproducts of the data are used in our stats, particularly framing; the process is not automated, it's manual. And we have a method to recalibrate the data so it's more consistent park-to-park
I've been classifying pitches since they started publishing data. The data is used on brooksbaseball.net.
And, no, the data is not available for download.
Kate, like all BP authors, has access to the Pitch Info data that I provide to Brooks and several MLB teams.
Cooper Johnson was my favorite. Butt on the ground like Lucroy, stays very still, even when catching cross-body.
Times I heard on his first throw were 1.7 and 1.8 fwiw.
excellent questions. Framing might get easier as you move up, and so far it appears the promotion penalty is pretty light (.01 csaa is about 1 win of value, and the penalty I'm looking at is about .002 ... tentatively ... from AAA to MLB). We'll have a follow-up on those things in a couple weeks as we suss these things out and get it into FRAA/WARP/PECOTA
12 year old me agrees strongly. Stupid pitchers getting all the credit. I want some ice cream.
Caveat to consider: the way framing is translated into runs is 'aware' of the fact that a called strike expands the zone/leads to weaker balls in play later in the AB. It may be challenging to further isolate an effect beyond this, although it is possible. So far I've thought of
- look at first pitch swings
- see of good framers have better LWTS (outcomes) than bad framers beyond what would be predicted by the count and other factors
As described in the article, the pitcher impact is absolutely part of the model. As also alluded to, we'll have some follow-ups about who those guys are, and a McCann like case in comparing retro- and pfx-based CSAA
Yes to all your questions (nightly)
great question, we haven't deeply explored those secondary outcomes yet. We've got a growing list. Including blowouts, extra innings, position players, framer impact on non-takes (more fat pitches? from Neil Weinberg), veteran status impact, familiarity with umpire impact ... and more.
BTW, if anyone has specific questions about the code, speak up. We'll publish it when it's final (after this feedback round we've initiated here), but I'm happy to share relevant parts now for the curious.
Using raw CSAA (per frame chance) our top five are
J. Molina .028
J. Lucroy .022
C. Vazquez .021
C. Stewart .021
R. Rivera .020
Yadi checks in at .013, McCann .011. Scioscia, btw, checks in at a robust .017 in the pre-golden era of framing _and_ at the tail end of his career. Very impressive.
BTW, for a quick rule of thumb, each .01 of CSAA per chance roughly translates to a single Win Above Average over the course of a full season.
I would not consider a splitter a fastball. It's a changeup, so I'm curious how your results differ if you make that adjustment (and I can feed you some data on which cutters are used as fastballs, vs which are used as sliders ... you know where to find me :) )
it's not likely they'll do this again in 2014. Game 6 is not an option but there may be a tiny small slight eeny itty bit of a sliver of a chance that G1 of the WS can have it. Highly unlikely. Did I mention that it isn't likely to occur?
I didn't record it, as I wasn't expecting to write about it until later in the broadcast.
I'm not on the prospecting side, but I would have a lot of follow-up questions for that scout before I printed that statement. Because it seems to ignore a lot of things.
Soler looks fine. His continued leg issues seemed to have been addressed with some postural training. I'd expect to see him in a month, the Cubs have slipped and pretty much acknowledged that is the plan (recent McLoed interview, IIRC)
It was just me, we all had one pick. I don't see how hard that is to understand. My explanation is in the original remark and I've expanded on it in the comments section. You can disagree with me--I think about 98% of the world does, which is about 1.5% better than I expected--but this isn't a troll job.
that's hilarious. I was in Seattle for the BP event, crashing on my sister's couch. I live in Chicago, I was born and raised in New Jersey.
I'm in a very small minority, but that doesn't impact my actions. Other than wishing I could have traded down and stolen him later.
that's utterly false. I did this at the kitchen table in Seattle, was the first person to pick and not a single person spoke to me about it. Unless you count my sister's dog. But I think she was just asking to go out.
My ears are burning.
I realize I'm too risk averse to be a GM or scouting director but if you give _me_ a chance to get immediate and lasting value with 3 tiers of projection (OBA, game calling, pitch blocking), I'm taking it.
Castro, not an issue. Take the player that meets the cost/impact/risk assessments the best. Zunino fits the bill.
Development costs: almost nil with Zunino, outside of having Buck around to mentor him (PLEASE just focus on game calling there). Catchers often cost a great deal (of time) to develop.
Also, developing receiving skills etc. often detracts from development of hitting skills which gives Zunino some more hope to fulfill some of the projection with the bat and eye that other catchers may not.
As much as I love Wacha, Correa, Buxton ... even Gausman. Just too easy to take a guy like Zunino. Not for you, fine. But this didn't come flying out of my ass.
funny, I played the video over and over again, too.
"Maybe it does make the manager feel better about life, but you can’t put happy feelings on the scoreboard." Not for long. FEELSf/x is coming soon, and it will be made available to the scoreboard operators.
I'm a huge advocate for taking away Doumit's catching gear.
r sq. would be about .72 or something, so that's a better measure of variance explained--which is still awesome.
But, yes, we need to re-run that analysis and see how well it holds up. We'll actually go ahead and publish 'projections' when we post the full set of zone contour images.
sorry, px pz (plate locations) can be miscalibrated, so we correct them
simple 3-2-1 weighted projections correlated something like .85 to next season performance (we'll re-run that, it's been a while) so the skill is stable (Dan did some more analysis on that, maybe he chime in--in short we haven't found the aging curve yet).
the wowy analysis attempts to tease apart the pitcher and catchers, we have a fair amount of confidence in that particular aspect but it's something that we intend to tune and explore in future versions
I think we have a lot more to learn about framing, but we're happy with the direction we're moving with this model (warts and all)
Thanks for the thoughtful feedback, keep it coming!
Yes, we will be updating in-season. We'll use the 2013 model and hold off on xy corrections until we have enough to establish a reliable version for each. We'll also have to deal with new pitcher/umpire corrections, so the #s will be squishy day-to-day.
And, yes, the block data is the same RPM approach with fewer factors (we ignore count and season).
Thanks for the insight on the WARP integration, much appreciated.
give me an excuse to spin up a 16-core server, John, and I'll take it ... great ideas all over the place here, from lots of folks.
basically what ever credit we give (or blame we assign) to the catcher is taken away from the pitcher and defense. How that's shared is influenced by, in this example, Glavine's ownership likely being more than the norm. We shall see.
But, yes, you have to take it way from someone else if we add it to the catcher, and the first victim will be the dudes on the bump.
Also, if a pitcher had bad framers working for him, whether or not he was a good one, he'll get some credit back.
this is a topic of debate. I was on the "use a constant value" side until we realized the importance of resizing the zone by count. So the model is context-aware at it's core. Our decision (and we could be wrong) was to retain that context for the run values.
If you look at our sortables, you can see the .14 based values for comparison. The field is "FR_RUNS_ADDED_BY_CALL" which reminds me I need to update the glossary before Ben notices I haven't.
Interesting question. It's possible. The strike zone adjustments would address calibration issues but not some other factor that could make things challenging. That's something we should explore as we work on version 2.0
no, I just selfishly picked a place that fits the same description you just gave.
I like the sausage making articles.
yep, I figured Lawrence would be an easy access to the city. Glad that it helps!
I think these are a cut above Philly's Best ... they're addictive, too.
That's not currently planned to return, but it may down the road.
great idea! Thanks for sharing that
yes, I actually provide the same data to both Brooks and BP. We intend to use it for projections, and other things, in short order.
One possible example would be accounting for a less regressable GB rate for a guy who just added a sinker, or started throwing it more often. That would trickle thru in a variety of ways.
what we have planned is analysis of roughly six metrics for hitting and pitching -- basically the five roto categories (we figure that's a common use for PECOTA, planning a draft or dynasty roster) and wOBA for an all-in-one metric.
We're calculating things like mean average error (weighted and unweighted), RMSE, correlation on common projections to compare the systems.
We have some other ideas already, but if folks have things they'd like to see us measure/compare we're happy to hear your suggestions.
We have an article in the works on this very subject.
this ballot actually is about cutting off limbs to get down to 10 rather than adding fluff to get up to 10.
(by actively I mean Rob just sent me an email with the latest)
PECOTA is our #1 focus (just ask Rob. Don't, he's busy with PECOTA).
Stu's assignment is building a test bed and a set of benchmarks.
We're refactoring portions of PECOTA to allow for more experimentation and testing.
All of these activities (the latter is not fully underway) will create a lot of information that we will be sharing.
Long-term prospects (10 year, upside) are actively being worked on.
There certainly is no lack of emphasis on analysis, quite the contrary. We're no longer making it the domain of a single resource. This is a change we're making to improve and expand our capabilities.
Of course I couldn't think of this when the editors were soliciting input for this ... Brian Bannister, somewhere in Player Development. I was impressed with him at Saber Seminar, someone needs to hire that man.
Do you have a ranking of the top 4 year players?
Thanks, Jared. I've gotten a few suggestions to move on to other pitches, so I'm sure I will.
thanks, links have been added
Guess what my Saber Seminar talk is about :)
a very important question. It's a layer or two deeper than the current stage, but we're headed there.
The thing with offspeed stuff is every grip is different. You can see splitters fade (Fister) or changeups tumble (Cueto). Rich Harden threw (or throws) a circle-change that acts like a slider. People think it's his splitter sometimes, too.
So my philosophy is
(a) try and identify changeup vs splitter grips as much as possible; but
(b) group them together for high level analysis
I wonder if he'll work it back in after he gets more settled with his slider and sinker additions.
He didn't make the cut-off for # of pitches thrown to be included here.
Holland's speed gap wasn't the problem, it's the movement gap...or lack thereof. He's actually getting less of a drop gap between the hard stuff and the change in 2013, although he may have given himself a little more of a speed gap.
it's a good question, I haven't looked into that...yet.
Thanks Pat. Summary data is a good idea, I will include that in the next segments.
As far as other pitches go, no current plans but I can see that happening.
this side-view flight path seems to confirm that L.png>
In fairness three of the five prospects you list came from other clubs and Stauffer is far more than two years removed from prospect status. Pitchers get hurt.
we'll actually be covering this topic at The Post this season. We've already discussed the visualization technique we're going to use, so look for it (we'll surely show it here, too).
for the record, Alan contributed to that Rivera piece (as did I and the rest of the CGC gang) ... and what you've said pretty much encapsulates how I think late movement manifests.
I still think he should apply for a DR passport.
Yes, that seems to be the case. It's Olmsted, but how he popped up as being on DR I haven't figured out.
I don't know. But it's amazing that we see 97 as the high end and wonder what's wrong. The only thing that seems certain is he has unusual gifts.
possibly, because his fastball and slider are above average.
so far so good
but he's fresh off a shoulder injury and being watched closely
Turns out Bucci won't be pitching in the WBC
Thanks. The other maybe is Narveson, health allowing.
while researching this topic for Ben, I found that Farnsworth started throwing his "cutter" while with the Yankees. Bingo, right?
It was really his old "slider" and the guy who suggested he throw it as a cutter was ....
wait for it ....
btw, the data set used for this article includes all available pitches from MLB regular season games.
Seasons from 2008 forward are nearly complete (PITCHf/x systems in all parks), 2007 is partial (systems in many parks but they came online at various times of the season) and there's even a dusting of 2006 from the primordial stew of PITCHf/x.
It will get better. It's a very simple implementation, AFAIK, at the moment, but clearly MLBAM is not afraid to put new things out there and work on them.
It reminds me of the color commentary feature in Diamond Mind, so that's a plus.