Wednesday, September 02, 2015
Team UZR
?MGL does good stuff here.
One suggestion, and I'll use the Astros 2015: he has the infielders as -6.1 runs in 59% of the data. I would therefore pro-rate that to 100% of the data as -10.3 runs. Since the total team runs is -11.3, then I would say that they were -1 runs based on their shifting.
I will reiterate that I don't agree with BIS in flagging a play as "influenced the play". A guy can hit an opposite-field flyball, and will BIS flag that as influenced by the shift? Probably not, since, after all, how could they know? What if a GB goes right to the 1B on a severe shift? Will they flag that? After all, the 1B was always playing in the same spot, shift or no shift. The batter hits it right to the 1B. Did the shift influence anything? Who knows, but will BIS have an opinion on that?
The issue is this "1" and "0" classification, and the determination AFTER THE FACT. You get in trouble when you make after-the-fact decisions. Bill James had a long article a few years back on his issues with the BIS classifications. I concurred with his opinion then, and I haven't seen anything different to suggest otherwise. Maybe they have made changes. Well, I guess everyone always makes changes. But, I haven't seen anything to have my opinon changed.
Recent comments
Older comments
Page 1 of 151 pages 1 2 3 > Last ›Complete Archive – By Category
Complete Archive – By Date
FORUM TOPICS
Jul 12 15:22 MarcelsApr 16 14:31 Pitch Count Estimators
Mar 12 16:30 Appendix to THE BOOK - THE GORY DETAILS
Jan 29 09:41 NFL Overtime Idea
Jan 22 14:48 Weighting Years for NFL Player Projections
Jan 21 09:18 positional runs in pythagenpat
Oct 20 15:57 DRS: FG vs. BB-Ref
Apr 12 09:43 What if baseball was like survivor? You are eliminated ...
Nov 24 09:57 Win Attribution to offense, pitching, and fielding at the game level (prototype method)
Jul 13 10:20 How to watch great past games without spoilers