Understanding Sabermetrics by Gabriel B. Costa, Michael R. Huber, John T. Saccoma Read Free Book Online Page A
projected career cumulative hitting records of Ruth and Williams, since strikeouts are also a cumulative statistic. That is, we replace AB by K and substitute IP for PA. So if x is the number of additional K, and we assume an extra 800 IP, then
yielding x = 825 additional K, when we solve for x. So the predicted prorated career strikeout total for Koufax would be 2396 + 825 = 3221.
Now, let us further assume that Koufax would have been a 6 percent better pitcher during these additional 800 innings. Our kicker, k , is therefore 1.06. Hence, our new additional strikeout total becomes (1.06)825 = 875, giving a projected career total of 2396 + 875 = 3271 We note that we could have arrived at this figure by using the formula
and computing (1.365)(2396) = 3271.
We summarize the technique of computing the EC for K in Figure 5.2.
Figure 5.2 Computing the equivalence coefficient for strikeouts
This technique can be used for all cumulative pitching statistics such as shutouts, decisions, etc. However, the approach must be modified when considering such statistics as earned run average.
A former sabermetrics student at Seton Hall University, Patrick Forgione, derived the following EC approach for projecting pitchers’ ERA:
where ER are the number of earned runs allowed and x is the additional number of ER allowed; IP is the number of innings pitched and y is the additional number of IP; k is the kicker, where, as before, k > 1, if the pitcher is “better” and k < 1, if the pitcher is “worse.”
To illustrate this, we consider the case of Dizzy Dean referenced at the beginning of this chapter. We first must determine reasonable values of x and y which should be based on his record. One way to approach this is to make certain assumptions, much like we did in the Ruth-Williams discussion above. Let’s give Dean an additional 1000 IP; since Dean yielded 661 ER in 1963.66 IP, he averaged 0.337 ER / IP. If we simply prorate these numbers, then Dean would have given up a total of 337 ER in the additional 1000 IP (just multiply .337 by 1000). This preserves his lifetime ERA of 3.02.
But what if we assume that he would have been 5 percent better during these additional innings? This means that the “kicker” k has a value of 1.05. We now multiply the 1000 IP by 1.05. Using the formula above to project Dean’s ERA, we have
as his projected ERA.
As in the case of hitting, this instrument can be tweaked in many ways, and, as is in the case of all modeling, care must be exercised regarding any sort of prediction or projection.
A subtle mathematical observation should be made here regarding the EC approach pertaining to statistics like ERA. Because ERA is an average, rather than a cumulative statistic, and because there are two terms in both the numerator and the denominator, the coefficient for this statistic is nothing more than the kicker, which appears in the denominator of the formula.
We summarize the technique of using the EC approach for ERA in Table 5.3 on page 38.
Table 5.3 Computing the equivalence coefficient for earned run average
We end this chapter with a few words about what has been called the “unmeasurable” aspect of baseball: fielding. By its very nature, fielding is more subjective than hitting and pitching. (For instance, when is a catch “great”?) And, as was mentioned above, there are relatively few fielding measures discussed in baseball. Traditionally, assists (A), putouts (PO) and errors (E) have been the three most important components in virtually all fielding metrics — with Passed Balls (PB) included for catchers.
This being said, for cumulative statistics, such as career A or PO, the EC may be used, in virtually the same way we applied it in our discussions above pertaining to Ruth, Williams and Koufax.
For relative measures such as Fielding Average (FA) which is given by
and Range Factor (RF) which is defined as
where G is the number of games played, the use of
yielding x = 825 additional K, when we solve for x. So the predicted prorated career strikeout total for Koufax would be 2396 + 825 = 3221.
Now, let us further assume that Koufax would have been a 6 percent better pitcher during these additional 800 innings. Our kicker, k , is therefore 1.06. Hence, our new additional strikeout total becomes (1.06)825 = 875, giving a projected career total of 2396 + 875 = 3271 We note that we could have arrived at this figure by using the formula
and computing (1.365)(2396) = 3271.
We summarize the technique of computing the EC for K in Figure 5.2.
Figure 5.2 Computing the equivalence coefficient for strikeouts
This technique can be used for all cumulative pitching statistics such as shutouts, decisions, etc. However, the approach must be modified when considering such statistics as earned run average.
A former sabermetrics student at Seton Hall University, Patrick Forgione, derived the following EC approach for projecting pitchers’ ERA:
where ER are the number of earned runs allowed and x is the additional number of ER allowed; IP is the number of innings pitched and y is the additional number of IP; k is the kicker, where, as before, k > 1, if the pitcher is “better” and k < 1, if the pitcher is “worse.”
To illustrate this, we consider the case of Dizzy Dean referenced at the beginning of this chapter. We first must determine reasonable values of x and y which should be based on his record. One way to approach this is to make certain assumptions, much like we did in the Ruth-Williams discussion above. Let’s give Dean an additional 1000 IP; since Dean yielded 661 ER in 1963.66 IP, he averaged 0.337 ER / IP. If we simply prorate these numbers, then Dean would have given up a total of 337 ER in the additional 1000 IP (just multiply .337 by 1000). This preserves his lifetime ERA of 3.02.
But what if we assume that he would have been 5 percent better during these additional innings? This means that the “kicker” k has a value of 1.05. We now multiply the 1000 IP by 1.05. Using the formula above to project Dean’s ERA, we have
as his projected ERA.
As in the case of hitting, this instrument can be tweaked in many ways, and, as is in the case of all modeling, care must be exercised regarding any sort of prediction or projection.
A subtle mathematical observation should be made here regarding the EC approach pertaining to statistics like ERA. Because ERA is an average, rather than a cumulative statistic, and because there are two terms in both the numerator and the denominator, the coefficient for this statistic is nothing more than the kicker, which appears in the denominator of the formula.
We summarize the technique of using the EC approach for ERA in Table 5.3 on page 38.
Table 5.3 Computing the equivalence coefficient for earned run average
We end this chapter with a few words about what has been called the “unmeasurable” aspect of baseball: fielding. By its very nature, fielding is more subjective than hitting and pitching. (For instance, when is a catch “great”?) And, as was mentioned above, there are relatively few fielding measures discussed in baseball. Traditionally, assists (A), putouts (PO) and errors (E) have been the three most important components in virtually all fielding metrics — with Passed Balls (PB) included for catchers.
This being said, for cumulative statistics, such as career A or PO, the EC may be used, in virtually the same way we applied it in our discussions above pertaining to Ruth, Williams and Koufax.
For relative measures such as Fielding Average (FA) which is given by
and Range Factor (RF) which is defined as
where G is the number of games played, the use of
Similar Books
Gaudi Afternoon
Barbara Wilson
The Conformity
John Hornor Jacobs
What Lola Wants (London Dolls Book 1)
JoAnne Kenrick
Excessive Joy Injures the Heart
Elisabeth Harvor
After the Wreck, I Picked Myself Up, Spread My Wings, and Flew Away
Joyce Carol Oates
Second Time Around
Nancy Moser
The Substitute Stripper
Ari Thatcher
All Due Respect Issue 2
Owen Laukkanen
Taking Flight
Tabitha Rayne