Sunday, August 26, 2018
The Cincinnati Hit
?In the midst of an article showing the history of dealing with the IBB, or 4-pitch walks, Poz drops this one in:
A batter hits or bunts a ball and would very clearly be thrown out at first base. The fielder instead tries and fails to get the lead runner. In 1913, the batter was awarded a hit for that — the Cincinnati hit. It makes sense. No out was recorded. The batter reached base. That’s a hit, right?
Um, no. The Baseball Writers Association was outraged at the very idea of the Cincinnati hit — imagine giving a player a hit when he would have so clearly been thrown out. The BBWAA could not imagine a bigger injustice. ... And so, by a vote of 35-26, the BBWAA determined in 1914 that a batter will be credited (debited?) with a fielder’ choice and an out on such plays, even if no out was recorded. And it remains that nonsensical way to this day.
In other words, instead of creating a category for it, they decided to not have a category at all. They could have chosen to record it as to what it clearly is... and then decide whether to count it for batting average purposes. Just like we record SF, and then we can decide what to do with it.
There are two things going one: (1) record the data and (2) analyze the data. It is two distinct functions, separate functions. Data recorders record and data analysts analyze.
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