Why Bonderman? - Fantasy Baseball Cafe 2014 Fantasy Baseball Cafe
100% Deposit Bonus for Cafe Members!

Return to Baseball Leftovers

Why Bonderman?

Moderator: Baseball Moderators

Postby NZF » Wed Mar 09, 2005 8:16 pm

LBJackal wrote:
What does BAA tell you other than a pitcher's hit rate? Nothing.


What else would you need it to tell you :-?
When you're right no one remembers, when you're wrong no one forgets - NZF
NZF
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar
Mock(ing) DrafterPick 3 Weekly WinnerSweet 16 SurvivorLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 4795
Joined: 19 Jan 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Sitting in the Cake Tin enjoying a cold Speights

Postby LBJackal » Wed Mar 09, 2005 8:21 pm

New Zealand Fan wrote:
LBJackal wrote:
What does BAA tell you other than a pitcher's hit rate? Nothing.


What else would you need it to tell you :-?


What the pitcher's hit rate SHOULD have been, which is important for projecting his future ERA and WHIP. BB, K, and HR do tell you what a pitcher's hit rate should have been.

Why would you use a stat that only tells you partial and redundant information? Convenience is the only reason I can think of. But personally I'd rather spend 30 more seconds and get useful information.
Image

"Jack, will you call me, if you're able?"

"I've got your phone number written, in the back of my Bible."
LBJackal
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Pick 3 Weekly Winner
Posts: 9196
Joined: 1 Jul 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: The Hotel Yorba

Postby Conner » Wed Mar 09, 2005 8:26 pm

A pitcher's BAA can be very decieving if the hit rate of balls in play is either much higher or lower than "normal". As LBJackal said, Bonderman's hit rate was much lower than it should've been...so his BAA should've been higher.

But I don't agree that it's completely useless. Yes...K's, BB's and HR's will almost always indicate what kind of BAA a pitcher wil have...and BAA isn't a perfect stat...but it's still somewhat useful, if you look at it the right way.
Conner
Minor League Mentor
Minor League Mentor


Posts: 760
Joined: 22 Feb 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball

Postby LBJackal » Wed Mar 09, 2005 8:29 pm

Conner wrote:BAA isn't a perfect stat...but it's still somewhat useful, if you look at it the right way.


I just don't see a use for it. What does it tell you that BB, K, and HR don't? BAA by it's nature is a flawed stat, and if you use it to determine anything else about a pitcher, it too will be flawed.
Image

"Jack, will you call me, if you're able?"

"I've got your phone number written, in the back of my Bible."
LBJackal
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Pick 3 Weekly Winner
Posts: 9196
Joined: 1 Jul 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: The Hotel Yorba

Postby NZF » Wed Mar 09, 2005 8:37 pm

I'm not convinced that theory / formula is anymore valuable as a tool than BAA.

Quite simply, for a 21 year old pitcher, Bonderman had an outstanding year in 2004. He is possibly overrated but he's certainly not over valued in comparison to guys like Rich Harden.

Whatever stats you want to use will prove that.
When you're right no one remembers, when you're wrong no one forgets - NZF
NZF
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar
Mock(ing) DrafterPick 3 Weekly WinnerSweet 16 SurvivorLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 4795
Joined: 19 Jan 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Sitting in the Cake Tin enjoying a cold Speights

Postby Conner » Wed Mar 09, 2005 8:43 pm

LBJackal wrote:
Conner wrote:BAA isn't a perfect stat...but it's still somewhat useful, if you look at it the right way.


I just don't see a use for it. What does it tell you that BB, K, and HR don't? BAA by it's nature is a flawed stat, and if you use it to determine anything else about a pitcher, it too will be flawed.


I'm not going to argue about it with you....In fact, I agree with you much more than not.

Just playing a little bit of devil's advocate...
Conner
Minor League Mentor
Minor League Mentor


Posts: 760
Joined: 22 Feb 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball

Postby LBJackal » Wed Mar 09, 2005 9:07 pm

Conner wrote:
LBJackal wrote:
Conner wrote:BAA isn't a perfect stat...but it's still somewhat useful, if you look at it the right way.


I just don't see a use for it. What does it tell you that BB, K, and HR don't? BAA by it's nature is a flawed stat, and if you use it to determine anything else about a pitcher, it too will be flawed.


I'm not going to argue about it with you....In fact, I agree with you much more than not.

Just playing a little bit of devil's advocate...


Yeah I'm not really trying to argue with you, it just sounds like that when I post... I see that you recognize the hit rate theory, but I just question the point of using BAA when essentially it tells you nothing.

And NZF, Voros McCracken (the guy who came up with the theory) has been given a ton of credit for it, and it hasn't been disproven in the 4 years or so that it's been out there. He's been working for the Red Sox for the past 2 years, and therefore hasn't come out with any updates for his DIPS system which shows that the Red Sox believe in him. It's a very good tool, if not the best tool, for adjusting a pitcher's ERA and WHIP to find how well he truly pitched. It correlates to future ERA better than ERA itself. BAA hasn't been shown to correlate to anything. I don't see why you argue in favour of it, with no evidence whatsoever of it being useful for anything.
Image

"Jack, will you call me, if you're able?"

"I've got your phone number written, in the back of my Bible."
LBJackal
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Pick 3 Weekly Winner
Posts: 9196
Joined: 1 Jul 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: The Hotel Yorba

Postby ramble2 » Wed Mar 09, 2005 9:28 pm

LBJackal wrote:
New Zealand Fan wrote:
LBJackal wrote:BAA is only a product of K's, BB's, and HR's. .300 is usually the averge hit rate, and anything above or below is almost completely attributable to luck. Bonderman had a .278 hit rate.

Therefore, his .237 BAA should have been .253 or about there. And really, when you can look at K/BB and HR/9, BAA is useless, and not indicative of anything relevent.


BAA is a far more relevant and reliable statistic to use than ERA.
Jake Peavy is a fine example of that. IMO you are over analysing something that is quite simple.

You say BAA is only a product of K's, BB's and HR's. I think you've got that wrong.


BAA is better than ERA but it doesn't mean it's useful. ERA is next to useless as well. What does BAA tell you other than a pitcher's hit rate? Nothing. And you can tell their hit rate from their BB, K, and HR.


Okay, I'm a bit lost now. I admit I haven't spent the time getting to know McCracken's work or the proper use of BAA, etc. But even if BAA is only a product of K, BB and HR, isn't that pretty useful? I was under the impression that K and BB were two of the best indicators of pitching success. If BAA incorporates that, then why isn't it all that useful? Or are you simply saying that taking the extra few minutes to look at things like K/9 and K/BB, etc. are going to be more informative?
ramble2
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar
CafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe Ranker
Posts: 2952
(Past Year: 5)
Joined: 27 Feb 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Salt Lake City

Postby NZF » Wed Mar 09, 2005 9:32 pm

LBJackal wrote:
I don't see why you argue in favour of it, with no evidence whatsoever of it being useful for anything.


I guess because anything I ever read in magazines and on websites mentions only BAA and never this other formula.

You've obviously done a far amount of study with it. How did it go last season, in projecting the future ERA and WHIP of for example Oliver Perez, Jeremy Bonderman, Jake Peavy and Pedro Martinez in 2004?

Also you said this dude, Phil McCracken or whoever, was working for the Red Sox now. Can we believe then that he has had a lot to do with bringing Matt Clement, Wade Miller and David Wells, to Boston?
When you're right no one remembers, when you're wrong no one forgets - NZF
NZF
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar
Mock(ing) DrafterPick 3 Weekly WinnerSweet 16 SurvivorLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 4795
Joined: 19 Jan 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Sitting in the Cake Tin enjoying a cold Speights

Postby LBJackal » Wed Mar 09, 2005 10:36 pm

ramble2 wrote:
LBJackal wrote:
New Zealand Fan wrote:
LBJackal wrote:BAA is only a product of K's, BB's, and HR's. .300 is usually the averge hit rate, and anything above or below is almost completely attributable to luck. Bonderman had a .278 hit rate.

Therefore, his .237 BAA should have been .253 or about there. And really, when you can look at K/BB and HR/9, BAA is useless, and not indicative of anything relevent.


BAA is a far more relevant and reliable statistic to use than ERA.
Jake Peavy is a fine example of that. IMO you are over analysing something that is quite simple.

You say BAA is only a product of K's, BB's and HR's. I think you've got that wrong.


BAA is better than ERA but it doesn't mean it's useful. ERA is next to useless as well. What does BAA tell you other than a pitcher's hit rate? Nothing. And you can tell their hit rate from their BB, K, and HR.


Okay, I'm a bit lost now. I admit I haven't spent the time getting to know McCracken's work or the proper use of BAA, etc. But even if BAA is only a product of K, BB and HR, isn't that pretty useful? I was under the impression that K and BB were two of the best indicators of pitching success. If BAA incorporates that, then why isn't it all that useful? Or are you simply saying that taking the extra few minutes to look at things like K/9 and K/BB, etc. are going to be more informative?


Yes, the extra time to look at K, BB, and HR can make a big difference. BAA is a product of the three important stats. So is ERA, So is WHIP. So is virtually every other stat out there with the exception of G/F ratio. That doesn't make all those stats good. ERA is flawed because an irregular strand rate or hit rate can alter it. Same goes for WHIP and BAA.

And NZF, no, hit rate won't tell you that Oliver Perez will break out, or that Jake Peavy will have an extremely high strand rate, or that Pedro will allow a ton of HR. But neither will BAA, or any otehr stat for that matter, so I don't get your point.

And the mere fact that McCracken is working for the Red Sox should say something. I don't think he has a huge influence on the signings, but who knows. People made fun of Paul DePodesta for doing the same type of thing in Oakland since he didn't have any prior baseball experience and came straight form college, but he was a key influence in turning Oakland into one of the msot successful teams in baseball and is now the owner of a team with a huge budget. But go ahead and make fun of the stat geeks, they probably don't know anything...
Image

"Jack, will you call me, if you're able?"

"I've got your phone number written, in the back of my Bible."
LBJackal
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Pick 3 Weekly Winner
Posts: 9196
Joined: 1 Jul 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: The Hotel Yorba

PreviousNext

Return to Baseball Leftovers

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests

Forums Articles & Tips Sleepers Rankings Leagues


Today's Games
Wednesday, Oct. 22
(All times are EST, weather icons show forecast for game time)

San Francisco at Kansas City
(8:07 pm)

  • Fantasy Baseball
  • Article Submissions
  • Privacy Statement
  • Site Survey 
  • Contact