Return to Cafe Hall of Fame

2013 CLOSERS THREAD

Re: 2013 CLOSERS THREAD

Postby Niffoc4 » Mon Jun 03, 2013 2:39 pm

Quackman wrote:
ramble2 wrote:
Quackman wrote:
This^. There are always exceptions like the one fnk pointed out but closers on good times are more valuable as a general rule. If the closer is on a bad team, the stars have to align just right for the closer to get a decent number of saves,,,,especially in H2H closers on bad teams can kill your team in terms of saves.

This general rule isn't very strongly supported. It turns out there are some good analytic studies of the correlation of winning percentage (of teams) to saves produced. Below are some links, but here are a couple of quick take-aways:
In other words, don't over think things. Go after the most skilled closers and don't worry too much about how good their team is. If you prefer anecdotal evidence, recall that Hoffman racked up lots of saves with some pretty lousy SD teams.

Here are some nice articles from Fangraphs if you want to see the data:



WRONG. Its all bs, and we've all seen it before. This is where stats go wrong sometimes. 18.3%? lol. In h2h leagues closers on bad teams are terrible. If they lose you saves 4 weeks in a row then win you one week with 3 saves is that good? Statswise its fine but you lose saves for 3 weeks right? Also the articles are general and im not really thinking about teams that are near the .500 mark.
So you're arguing that save opportunities will be more erratic for bad teams than good teams even though the end of the year save totals are indistinguishable?
Niffoc4
Major League Manager
Major League Manager


Posts: 1698
(Past Year: 7)
Joined: 26 Oct 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: 2013 CLOSERS THREAD

Postby BALCO All-Stars » Mon Jun 03, 2013 2:42 pm

Can we stop the bickering about this? Please, let's move along.

Rotoworld blurb confirming why Veras didn't get the SV last night: "With Jose Veras unavailable after pitching the last two days, Ambriz pitched a scoreless ninth inning. "

http://www.rotoworld.com/player/mlb/6136/hector-ambriz
BALCO All-Stars
Major League Manager
Major League Manager

User avatar

Posts: 1992
(Past Year: 3)
Joined: 9 Apr 2007
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: In mancave playing CodMW2

Re: 2013 CLOSERS THREAD

Postby Quackman » Mon Jun 03, 2013 3:16 pm

Niffoc4 wrote:
Quackman wrote:
ramble2 wrote:This general rule isn't very strongly supported. It turns out there are some good analytic studies of the correlation of winning percentage (of teams) to saves produced. Below are some links, but here are a couple of quick take-aways:
In other words, don't over think things. Go after the most skilled closers and don't worry too much about how good their team is. If you prefer anecdotal evidence, recall that Hoffman racked up lots of saves with some pretty lousy SD teams.

Here are some nice articles from Fangraphs if you want to see the data:



WRONG. Its all bs, and we've all seen it before. This is where stats go wrong sometimes. 18.3%? lol. In h2h leagues closers on bad teams are terrible. If they lose you saves 4 weeks in a row then win you one week with 3 saves is that good? Statswise its fine but you lose saves for 3 weeks right? Also the articles are general and im not really thinking about teams that are near the .500 mark.
So you're arguing that save opportunities will be more erratic for bad teams than good teams even though the end of the year save totals are indistinguishable?


indistinguishable? For me its like thinking about upside. Sure closers on miami or houston could end up with 35 saves, but that will take some amazing luck. If you wanna look at what im talking about,,,take the top 10 save totals for 10 years for a total of 100 Closers, then sort out how many of those 100 were on BAD teams. If i had to guess id say maybe 20% or less of the 100. Its less risky and there is more upside when a closer is on a good team especially in a h2h league where consistent production is valued at a premium.
Quackman
Minor League Mentor
Minor League Mentor


Posts: 550
(Past Year: 12)
Joined: 15 Mar 2012
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: 2013 CLOSERS THREAD

Postby SpecialFNK » Mon Jun 03, 2013 3:53 pm

getting more saves could be different than getting more save opportunities.
a great closer on a bad team could get more saves in limited save opportunities than an average/below average closer on a good team that gets more save opportunities but doesn't have the same success at closing out those games.

I think this all started trying to compare Rex Brothers to Luke Gregerson. both are only filling in part time while the regular closer is on the DL. Colorado might be a better team, but when I break it down I look at how it's Huston Street in San Diego. he misses time every season. even once he does return, he is still likely to miss more time. even when Street was healthy he wasn't pitching that well, so Gregerson could replace him anyway.
SpecialFNK
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar
CafeholicFantasy Expert
Posts: 4997
(Past Year: 38)
Joined: 21 Mar 2007
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: 2013 CLOSERS THREAD

Postby Niffoc4 » Mon Jun 03, 2013 4:13 pm

Quackman wrote:
Niffoc4 wrote:
Quackman wrote:

WRONG. Its all bs, and we've all seen it before. This is where stats go wrong sometimes. 18.3%? lol. In h2h leagues closers on bad teams are terrible. If they lose you saves 4 weeks in a row then win you one week with 3 saves is that good? Statswise its fine but you lose saves for 3 weeks right? Also the articles are general and im not really thinking about teams that are near the .500 mark.
So you're arguing that save opportunities will be more erratic for bad teams than good teams even though the end of the year save totals are indistinguishable?


indistinguishable? For me its like thinking about upside. Sure closers on miami or houston could end up with 35 saves, but that will take some amazing luck. If you wanna look at what im talking about,,,take the top 10 save totals for 10 years for a total of 100 Closers, then sort out how many of those 100 were on BAD teams. If i had to guess id say maybe 20% or less of the 100. Its less risky and there is more upside when a closer is on a good team especially in a h2h league where consistent production is valued at a premium.
It's been awhile since I first read these, so I went back, and essentially the Eno's conclusion is that bad teams provide about 18.3 percent less save opportunities than good teams. So, I was wrong to say indistinguishable, there is a difference. Eno's point is that it's the difference between roughly 30 save potential and 40 save potential. Given the choice you probably go with the 40 save guy, but it still makes sense to pay attention to the guy on the bad team.
Niffoc4
Major League Manager
Major League Manager


Posts: 1698
(Past Year: 7)
Joined: 26 Oct 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: 2013 CLOSERS THREAD

Postby Quackman » Mon Jun 03, 2013 4:24 pm

but even the 18.3 % is decieving. Alot of h2h out there nowadays and the 18.3% doesnt mean much week to week. Obv example of what im saying, lets say Houston is playing the Tigers for 3 games and Atlanta for 4 games (hypothetical). Lets face it, 18.3% feels like 99% for this week. If i have a closer on a bad team and i see matchups like this i know im in trouble in H2h for that week. Even the 18% is very debatable but even if assuming thats true, the impact week to week is more than simply saying its the diff between 30 and 40 saves.
Quackman
Minor League Mentor
Minor League Mentor


Posts: 550
(Past Year: 12)
Joined: 15 Mar 2012
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: 2013 CLOSERS THREAD

Postby daullaz » Mon Jun 03, 2013 6:29 pm

Look at last year's team saves and win totals for each league:

http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagu ... tching::14
http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagu ... tching::14

For the most part, the teams with 90 wins are all at the top (Texas is a little lower). Some of the mediocre-to-bad teams do a little better than league average but a little worse than that top tier. Some of the over-.500 teams are a little under league average in saves. However, the teams at the bottom of the saves list don't have many wins.

Basically, having a lot of wins doesn't guarantee you a lot of saves, but it makes it easier to finish at or near the top of the league in saves. Conversely, not having a lot of wins doesn't doom you to the cellar, but it does make it more likely you'll finish at or near the bottom of the league in saves.

I don't know if this lines up historically or if last year was an aberration, but it makes sense to me. You can get saves anywhere, but it's easier with high-win teams.
Image
daullaz
Head Scribe
Head Scribe

EditorCafeholicCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeCafe MusketeerPick 3 Weekly WinnerSweet 16 SurvivorLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 4242
(Past Year: -627)
Joined: 17 Jan 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Babel

Re: 2013 CLOSERS THREAD

Postby Niffoc4 » Mon Jun 03, 2013 7:03 pm

It's a decent point for H2H leagues, I guess. As someone who solely plays roto, I don't really pay attention to 1-week splits for anything, and instead focus on getting longer-term value.
Niffoc4
Major League Manager
Major League Manager


Posts: 1698
(Past Year: 7)
Joined: 26 Oct 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: 2013 CLOSERS THREAD

Postby AHF » Mon Jun 03, 2013 7:08 pm

Niffoc4 wrote:It's a decent point for H2H leagues, I guess. As someone who solely plays roto, I don't really pay attention to 1-week splits for anything, and instead focus on getting longer-term value.


Is there data on that for H2H leagues or are we just talking anecdotes? I trust the more robust studies over people's gut because the numbers sometimes refute what the gut suggests. So while I am comfortable with around 18% of variation in save totals being attributed to the overall team, I am not there on week-to-week volatility without something more than anecdotes. That something more may be there but I just haven't seen it yet.
AHF
College Coach
College Coach

User avatar

Posts: 233
(Past Year: 4)
Joined: 20 Feb 2009
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: 2013 CLOSERS THREAD

Postby cordscords » Tue Jun 04, 2013 3:21 am

Wilhelmsen had another rocky outing. Still not even close to losing his job, but if you're trying to think 2 steps ahead keep an eye on Capps.
cordscords
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar
Mock(ing) Drafter
Posts: 4340
(Past Year: 5)
Joined: 23 Jan 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball

PreviousNext

Return to Cafe Hall of Fame

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

cron