AcidRock23 wrote:Note, it just has a short bit about guile, suggesting that some pitchers who can work pitch selection, make faces or whatever can get an extra boost which is not really quantifiable. Their modus operandi is (caution: approaching gross oversimplification) to look at rates of ground balls, fly balls and line drives and then compare that to other, more traditional strats. They also have 'strand rate' calculated for pitchers as well.
Despite all the number crunching, there are some guys who, for whatever reason, end up doing better than their 'BPI' number would suggest. The short (maybe a column and a half?) article suggests that this could be described as a pitcher with 'guile', since luck can be quantified. I do think that their methodology is very interesting though and that you would find the book useful. There's kind of too many #s to just toss them out though, you really have to read it to get the picture of why it works.
By age, I wasn't meaning so much 'experience' as much as 'wear and tear'. I'm 37 and have a GREAT DEAL of empathy for players just getting into a groove at the start of a season.
Ah, thanks for the clarification. I still think it sounds like they're hitting on some of the things I'm interested in. I also think there are other factors I haven't considered (or rather unwilling to make those hundreds of calculations) that they are able to quantify.
As for the "wear and tear", I get what you're getting at now. I think the best way to actually look at it might be a cumulative effect based on a few factors such as age, innings pitched *last year*, injury history (and the contributing factors to the injury), years in the majors, etc. Good point for sure and not something I was thinking of breaking down further but I bet there's a couple points I was about to overlook because of oversimplification.
I'll run some numbers tonight and see if I can come up with a few good examples of players I think will over or under produce based on these influences.