Return to Baseball Leftovers

New form of DIPS

Moderator: Baseball Moderators

Postby LBJackal » Fri Jan 14, 2005 12:11 am

Tavish wrote:
LBJackal wrote:OK this got lost in the shuffle again. Anybody think it would be useful:

LBJackal wrote:Just got an idea: what about the player's individual IPAvg, or the ratio of his IPAvg to his team's IPAvg?


???


Isn't the premise behind the theory that BABIP is not under the control of the pitcher? Introducing player IPAvg into the mix would go heavily against that.


It would go against Voros' theory but I don't fully agree with his theory to begin with. Remember a while back when I said IPAvg isn't fully random... :-D Well the problem I'm facing has to do with players who don't fit the mold of your standard pitcher. He created a way to adjust it for knuckleballers I believe, but that's not very helpful considering there's only 1 essentially in baseball. Some players can control their IPAvg to some extent, guys like Webb, Glavine, Westbrook, and the other outliers. I could include a player's career IPAvg relative to his team's IPAvg and maybe that would help. Otherwise large groups of players will have inaccurate Theory ERA's which isn't good. I suppose I could just do the individual, "look at the trends" method.
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: 9018
(Past Year: -178)
Joined: 1 Jul 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: The Hotel Yorba

Postby Tavish » Fri Jan 14, 2005 12:33 am

I suppose I could just do the individual, "look at the trends" method.


That is basically what you are left with if you believe that some pitchers have greater control over it than others. I haven't looked at the numbers in a team context but I do know that the number of pitchers who are constantly below the league average for BABIP is very small. Even then its difficult to say that they are below the average due to ability or a better than average defense behind them. Using the team context method like you are would probably be more beneficial in that regard.
Bury me a Royal.
Tavish
Mod in Retirement
Mod in Retirement

User avatar
CafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeCafe SpotterWeb Supporter
Posts: 10554
(Past Year: -510)
Joined: 3 May 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball

Postby LBJackal » Fri Jan 14, 2005 12:40 am

Tavish wrote:
I suppose I could just do the individual, "look at the trends" method.


That is basically what you are left with if you believe that some pitchers have greater control over it than others. I haven't looked at the numbers in a team context but I do know that the number of pitchers who are constantly below the league average for BABIP is very small. Even then its difficult to say that they are below the average due to ability or a better than average defense behind them. Using the team context method like you are would probably be more beneficial in that regard.


Yeah and even then, going by trends of how much they are below/above the expected ERA, it would take into account every reason, not just IPAvg. Such as SLG Against, strand rate (don't know a lot about that but apparently it can't be controlled either), and God knows what else.
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: 9018
(Past Year: -178)
Joined: 1 Jul 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: The Hotel Yorba

Postby reiser » Fri Jan 14, 2005 9:34 am

LBJackal wrote: Isn't the premise behind the theory that BABIP is not under the control of the pitcher? Introducing player IPAvg into the mix would go heavily against that.


well, the throry didn't hold up, bottom-line.
http://www.diamond-mind.com/articles/ipavg2.htm

what it did point out though, is that pitchers don't exert near the amount of inluence on BABIP as one would think...there are parks and defenses that influence this stat as well. which is why we are still talking about DIPS, because the part of his theory that held up the best, a pitcher's control over Defense independent stats, is very statistically significant. at the end of the day, we are still kind of left though with not much useful info, such as Wins and ERA.

LB, I think there are some advantages and disadvantages to using IPAvg, and I think your pointing of this towards fantasy purpose is awesome.

the thing is, how much of team IPAvg is park, and how much is Randy Johnson and the 4 dwarfs, or whoever picthed on the DBacks last year?

he would be an extreme example obviously of someone who is way above his team IPAvg, so that might affect our true imprssion of Johnson. and vice versa, say, a not so terrible pitcher on the DBacks would look hideous against RJ's stats. so we need to unskew that.

you would think there is a fairly simple way to Average out Team IPAvg against League IPAvg.
reiser
Minor League Mentor
Minor League Mentor

User avatar

Posts: 640
(Past Year: -1)
Joined: 17 Feb 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball

Postby LBJackal » Fri Jan 14, 2005 10:25 am

I don't think Johnson's IPAvg skewed the data... it's not like being Randy Johnson gives you a good IPAvg. Over the past 9 years, RJ has had 4 seasons above the team's IPAvg, 4 seasons below it, and one exactly the same. His .33 points below it in 2004 was a fluke, and I don't think I'm going to adjust the team's IPAvg just because he left... maybe because the defense has a whole new look to it, but it's still the same park, same infield grass, etc. Since he pitches so many innings, it's important to factor them all in because it's a huge portion of the defenses accomplishments. Bad pitchers like Mike Gosling, Chad Durbin, and Jose Valverde all had better IPAvg's than RJ last year, just as a sidenote.

So unless I'm missing what you're saying, I don't see a situation where I'd have to unskew a team's IPAvg. BTW I appreciate all the input you're giving me, this is great ;-D
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: 9018
(Past Year: -178)
Joined: 1 Jul 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: The Hotel Yorba

Postby reiser » Fri Jan 14, 2005 1:17 pm

LBJackal wrote: So unless I'm missing what you're saying, I don't see a situation where I'd have to unskew a team's IPAvg. BTW I appreciate all the input you're giving me, this is great ;-D


this is the money quote from Tippett's article-we may be agreeing Lb :)

"In other words, pitchers do affect the rate of hits on balls in play. That means we can no longer use the team's IPAvg as a baseline against which to evaluate a pitcher. McCracken asserted that the team's IPAvg depended only on the park and the defense, but we've found that it depends on the park, the defense, and the quality of the pitchers on that team. If we use team IPAvg as the baseline, a good pitcher on a good staff is going to look worse than he really is. A good pitcher on a bad staff is going to look better than he really is. A good pitcher on an average team is still going to look a little worse than he really is because his own good performance is included in the team's IPAvg. "
reiser
Minor League Mentor
Minor League Mentor

User avatar

Posts: 640
(Past Year: -1)
Joined: 17 Feb 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball

Postby LBJackal » Fri Jan 14, 2005 1:49 pm

reiser wrote:
LBJackal wrote: So unless I'm missing what you're saying, I don't see a situation where I'd have to unskew a team's IPAvg. BTW I appreciate all the input you're giving me, this is great ;-D


this is the money quote from Tippett's article-we may be agreeing Lb :)

"In other words, pitchers do affect the rate of hits on balls in play. That means we can no longer use the team's IPAvg as a baseline against which to evaluate a pitcher. McCracken asserted that the team's IPAvg depended only on the park and the defense, but we've found that it depends on the park, the defense, and the quality of the pitchers on that team. If we use team IPAvg as the baseline, a good pitcher on a good staff is going to look worse than he really is. A good pitcher on a bad staff is going to look better than he really is. A good pitcher on an average team is still going to look a little worse than he really is because his own good performance is included in the team's IPAvg. "


What context are they using "good"? Good as in a good IPAvg? That would make sense with the way they used the term. But not all great pitchers have a great or even good IPAvg. Using the example of Arizona... both RJ and Schilling have had as many seasons worse then the team's aggregate IPAvg as they have better than it. So I wouldn't consider them good in terms of IPAvg. I'll go and check to see who has traditionally been better than his team's IP avg. I don't think it'll be of a lot of use though since I doubt there's a strong correlation between good pitchers and good IPAvg's.
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: 9018
(Past Year: -178)
Joined: 1 Jul 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: The Hotel Yorba

Postby reiser » Fri Jan 14, 2005 2:33 pm

LBJackal wrote:
reiser wrote:If we use team IPAvg as the baseline, a good pitcher on a good staff is going to look worse than he really is. A good pitcher on a bad staff is going to look better than he really is. A good pitcher on an average team is still going to look a little worse than he really is because his own good performance is included in the team's IPAvg. "

Using the example of Arizona... both RJ and Schilling have had as many seasons worse then the team's aggregate IPAvg as they have better than it. So I wouldn't consider them good in terms of IPAvg. I'll go and check to see who has traditionally been better than his team's IP avg. I don't think it'll be of a lot of use though since I doubt there's a strong correlation between good pitchers and good IPAvg's.


LB, that's exactly what Tippett found-Team IPAvg is skewed when you see RJ or Schilling performing under that. what you are seeing is noise.

another quote:
"That leads to a good question, one that is not easily resolved. Is it better to compare a pitcher's IPAvg to that of his league or his team? If we use the league IPAvg as our baseline, we leave out the impact of the park and the defense. If we use the team's IPAvg as the baseline, we adjust for the park and the defense, but we introduce the quality of the fellow pitchers as a variable that can skew the results.

Neither approach is completely satisfactory. It's probably best to evaluate each pitcher's IPAvg against that of his team but make some accommodation for the quality of the pitching staff before making any judgments about that pitcher and before making any predictions about future performance."
reiser
Minor League Mentor
Minor League Mentor

User avatar

Posts: 640
(Past Year: -1)
Joined: 17 Feb 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball

Postby LBJackal » Fri Jan 14, 2005 3:01 pm

reiser wrote:
LBJackal wrote:
reiser wrote:If we use team IPAvg as the baseline, a good pitcher on a good staff is going to look worse than he really is. A good pitcher on a bad staff is going to look better than he really is. A good pitcher on an average team is still going to look a little worse than he really is because his own good performance is included in the team's IPAvg. "

Using the example of Arizona... both RJ and Schilling have had as many seasons worse then the team's aggregate IPAvg as they have better than it. So I wouldn't consider them good in terms of IPAvg. I'll go and check to see who has traditionally been better than his team's IP avg. I don't think it'll be of a lot of use though since I doubt there's a strong correlation between good pitchers and good IPAvg's.


LB, that's exactly what Tippett found-Team IPAvg is skewed when you see RJ or Schilling performing under that. what you are seeing is noise.

another quote:
"That leads to a good question, one that is not easily resolved. Is it better to compare a pitcher's IPAvg to that of his league or his team? If we use the league IPAvg as our baseline, we leave out the impact of the park and the defense. If we use the team's IPAvg as the baseline, we adjust for the park and the defense, but we introduce the quality of the fellow pitchers as a variable that can skew the results.

Neither approach is completely satisfactory. It's probably best to evaluate each pitcher's IPAvg against that of his team but make some accommodation for the quality of the pitching staff before making any judgments about that pitcher and before making any predictions about future performance."


I don't see the significance :-?

Just because RJ is a good pitcher doesn't mean he's skewing the IPAvg. It sounds like Tippet is equating good pitchers with good IPAvg's which I just don't see being the case.
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: 9018
(Past Year: -178)
Joined: 1 Jul 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: The Hotel Yorba

Postby LBJackal » Fri Jan 14, 2005 3:35 pm

I ran a bunch or correlations... nothing close to a significant correlation between K/BB and IPAvg. Am I missing something?

I realize that a player who is great at keeping his IPAvg low would skew the stats... but I don't know if any players exists that could skew the IPAvg enough to justify altering the team's IPAvg.
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: 9018
(Past Year: -178)
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 0 guests

cron