Fantistics: PED Testing Shifting Game Back Toward Pitching - Fantasy Baseball Cafe 2014 Fantasy Baseball Cafe
100% Deposit Bonus for Cafe Members!

Return to Baseball Leftovers

Fantistics: PED Testing Shifting Game Back Toward Pitching

Moderator: Baseball Moderators

Re: Fantistics: PED Testing Shifting Game Back Toward Pitching

Postby GotowarMissAgnes » Thu Feb 18, 2010 12:50 pm

Haven't had a chance to check his numbers, but the guy still has some major reasoning problems.

"Additionally the strength of a lineup can exaggerate the effects of a ballpark."
Uh, no, it can't. Unless you are arguing that there is some systematic fashion in which both home and away teams alter their lineups by ballpark to create that exaggeration. If there is such a study demonstrating that, I'd like to see it. It would be very interesting.

"Which brings on a fantasy paradigm: pitchers are becoming more predictable to forecast (therefore shouldn't be discounted as in the past),"

Uh, BS. His basis for stating this from the second article, was the following:

A: Does anyone remember early in the 2000s when famous Sabermetician Bill James wouldn't even do pitching projections because of his frustration with their predictability?


So, that's your first piece of evidence?

B.Don't get me wrong, they'll always be an increased injury factor as pitchers are just more injury prone (the "unnatural" pitching motion). Outside of the injury factor, I routinely correctly project an almost equal number of directional upswing/downswing among both hitters and pitchers.


In other words, ignoring the fact that pitchers get injured, I predict an equal number of risers and decliners. Any data to confirm that prediction, dude? Any effort to try to look at the size of those fluctuations, rather than just the direction, which is a critical element in predictability?

If you can't get the little things right, I'm very suspicious of that you'll get the rest of it right.
"I don't want to play golf. When I hit a ball, I want someone else to chase it."
GotowarMissAgnes
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Fantasy Expert
Posts: 5516
Joined: 12 Dec 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Happy Valley

Re: Fantistics: PED Testing Shifting Game Back Toward Pitching

Postby asalerno » Thu Feb 18, 2010 1:49 pm

Now that he's indirectly addressed and disproven your un-researched claims on the new park run factors:
(GotowarMissAgnes:If I look at the bottom 11 parks in run park factor, 7 of them were built in 2000 or later)
You now have found another topic to criticize?

What I've read there has always been intuitive, which to me is more practical to some of the theoretic research I’ve found elsewhere. Am I biased, yep but 8 league championships will do that. There is talk and then there are results. You can find out for yourself how Fantistics player projections have stacked up against others.

I don't expect you to be aware of what he's written in the past, but at the same time I don't think you should be passing judgment without knowing his body of work.
asalerno
Softball Supervisor
Softball Supervisor


Posts: 26
Joined: 6 Jan 2007
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: Fantistics: PED Testing Shifting Game Back Toward Pitching

Postby dmendro » Thu Feb 18, 2010 2:40 pm

GotowarMissAgnes wrote:I got no dog in the PED issue. My comments are about his use of the numbers with respect to fantasy ball. My point is that no ONE number--not slugging percentage, not run index, not HRs--tells the full story about how player values change. And one number, not even adjusted for ANY factors, even the most simple ones, certainly tells you little to nothing about player values (or PEDS, for that matter).

So, as I said, I wouldn't trust it. The guy has done a half-assed analysis of the data.

I think you are confusing Tony's article for what you want it to be. Some sort of valuation shift in pitcher and hitters. Rather it's about making a case that there was a third party responsible for spike in offensive numbers over the last 15 years outside of the baseball park.

In fact Tony's site has a very detailed valuation of each player put into a single statistical category by which he values a playe called FPI. His software goes above and beyond that and actually rates each player given your particular leagues scoring based on FPI and VAM (value after the mean). If there's anything Tony's site lacks, it is not statistical data backing up his valuations and projections.
---------------------------------------------------------
The Black 'N Blue Podcast
RSS Feed: http://feeds2.feedburner.com/BlacknBlue
Beating each other up one sport at a time.
dmendro
Minor League Mentor
Minor League Mentor


Posts: 796
(Past Year: 1)
Joined: 11 Dec 2006
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: Fantistics: PED Testing Shifting Game Back Toward Pitching

Postby dmendro » Thu Feb 18, 2010 2:57 pm

Nevermind.
Last edited by dmendro on Thu Feb 18, 2010 5:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.
---------------------------------------------------------
The Black 'N Blue Podcast
RSS Feed: http://feeds2.feedburner.com/BlacknBlue
Beating each other up one sport at a time.
dmendro
Minor League Mentor
Minor League Mentor


Posts: 796
(Past Year: 1)
Joined: 11 Dec 2006
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: Fantistics: PED Testing Shifting Game Back Toward Pitching

Postby JTWood » Thu Feb 18, 2010 3:22 pm

dmendro wrote:The quality of the lineup in run creation is going to adversely effect their PF if it's a bad team.

That's not true.

It's a relative calculation.
Team A could underscore everyone by 20% for the year, and their baseline will still be 1.00 just like everyone else.
Image
JTWood
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
CafeholicCafe WriterEagle EyeWeb Supporter
Posts: 11508
Joined: 22 Jun 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Unincorporated Heaven

Re: Fantistics: PED Testing Shifting Game Back Toward Pitching

Postby dmendro » Thu Feb 18, 2010 5:30 pm

You are right. I still think it's a wholey inexact statistic, because it certainly does not take into account constants like who was playing in each matchup, did you face the same quality defensive lineup and pitching in all cases, etc. etc. which is the point that Tony is trying to get to.
---------------------------------------------------------
The Black 'N Blue Podcast
RSS Feed: http://feeds2.feedburner.com/BlacknBlue
Beating each other up one sport at a time.
dmendro
Minor League Mentor
Minor League Mentor


Posts: 796
(Past Year: 1)
Joined: 11 Dec 2006
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: Fantistics: PED Testing Shifting Game Back Toward Pitching

Postby GotowarMissAgnes » Thu Feb 18, 2010 5:45 pm

asalerno wrote:Now that he's indirectly addressed and disproven your un-researched claims on the new park run factors:
(GotowarMissAgnes:If I look at the bottom 11 parks in run park factor, 7 of them were built in 2000 or later)
You now have found another topic to criticize?


As I wrote, I haven't had time yet to check his analysis, so I'm not agreeing with the claim that he's disproven jack. And rather than "indirectly addressing" them, why not do the real work and prove his own claim?

But, yes, I do find several other topics to criticize in my quick look at the article. Is there some rule that all previous disagreements must be settled before moving on to another?

What I've read there has always been intuitive, which to me is more practical to some of the theoretic research I’ve found elsewhere. Am I biased, yep but 8 league championships will do that. There is talk and then there are results. You can find out for yourself how Fantistics player projections have stacked up against others.

I don't expect you to be aware of what he's written in the past, but at the same time I don't think you should be passing judgment without knowing his body of work.


I'm well aware with how Fantastics has done

http://www.insidethebook.com/ee/index.php/site/article/evaluating_the_2009_forecasts_chone_zips_fantastics_win/

Of course, I'm also well aware that just a few years ago, PECOTA was on top of that chart, and now they are near the bottom.

I'm not making a comment about anyone's body of work. I'm making a comment about this single set of analyses, which I find to be sloppy and incomplete. And it's just silly to argue that someone has to become familiar with his "entire body of work" to comment on this one effort. This work stands or falls on its own.
"I don't want to play golf. When I hit a ball, I want someone else to chase it."
GotowarMissAgnes
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Fantasy Expert
Posts: 5516
Joined: 12 Dec 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Happy Valley

Re: Fantistics: PED Testing Shifting Game Back Toward Pitching

Postby GotowarMissAgnes » Thu Feb 18, 2010 5:49 pm

dmendro wrote:I think you are confusing Tony's article for what you want it to be. Some sort of valuation shift in pitcher and hitters. Rather it's about making a case that there was a third party responsible for spike in offensive numbers over the last 15 years outside of the baseball park.

In fact Tony's site has a very detailed valuation of each player put into a single statistical category by which he values a playe called FPI. His software goes above and beyond that and actually rates each player given your particular leagues scoring based on FPI and VAM (value after the mean). If there's anything Tony's site lacks, it is not statistical data backing up his valuations and projections.


dmendro wrote:Nevermind.


I think that's part of the problem with the essays. It tries to be both things. Tony says:

The point of this: Clearly the dynamics of the game has changed and so must our ability to factor in these changes in a fantasy baseball context. One observation that needs to be addressed: The degree of separation in the top tiers is vastly smaller now than is was 10 years ago (as the charts above illustrate). Which leads to the natural question, is there an overvaluation of batters in the 20-40 range on draft day 2010? The answer will be yes, as once again we are seeing an undervaluation of pitchers in early serpentine and auction drafts.


But, then he also tries to cram in this PED issue. I don't think I'm the only one who read these articles, and came away thoroughly confused about what point he's trying to make. And neither article or follow-up really presents a solid case for either claim.
"I don't want to play golf. When I hit a ball, I want someone else to chase it."
GotowarMissAgnes
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Fantasy Expert
Posts: 5516
Joined: 12 Dec 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Happy Valley

Re: Fantistics: PED Testing Shifting Game Back Toward Pitching

Postby GotowarMissAgnes » Thu Feb 18, 2010 5:54 pm

dmendro wrote:You are right. I still think it's a wholey inexact statistic, because it certainly does not take into account constants like who was playing in each matchup, did you face the same quality defensive lineup and pitching in all cases, etc. etc. which is the point that Tony is trying to get to.


If that's Tony's point then he should:

A) State it clearly

and

B) Provide good evidence to support it,

That's especially true because others have studied some of these issues. Lichtman's component park factors, for example, represent one effort to improve upon simple park factors.
"I don't want to play golf. When I hit a ball, I want someone else to chase it."
GotowarMissAgnes
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Fantasy Expert
Posts: 5516
Joined: 12 Dec 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Happy Valley

Previous

Return to Baseball Leftovers

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests

cron
Forums Articles & Tips Sleepers Rankings Leagues


Today's Games
Thursday, Oct. 2
(All times are EST, weather icons show forecast for game time)

Detroit at Baltimore
(5:37 pm)
Kansas City at LA Angels
(9:07 pm)

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