[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
THE BOOK cover
The Unwritten Book
is Finally Written!

Read Excerpts & Reviews
E-Book available
as Amazon Kindle or
at iTunes for $9.99.

Hardcopy available at Amazon
SABR101 required reading if you enter this site. Check out the Sabermetric Wiki. And interesting baseball books.
Shop Amazon & Support This Blog
RECENT FORUM TOPICS
Jul 12 15:22 Marcels
Apr 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

Advanced

Tangotiger Blog

A blog about baseball, hockey, life, and whatever else there is.

Friday, July 18, 2014

WOWY: plain-english v not

Some ten or twelve years ago, I introduced WOWY (with or without you).  The beauty of it is in the simplicity of description.  The other beauty is I can drill down at a player or pair or any level I want.  I control the entire process.

At its heart, it's nothing more than a regression with multiple variables to consider.  So, it was interesting to see this article by Max Weinstein, and I'm sure Max Marchi did something similar two or three years ago (Marchi had asked me for the historical results of my WOWY that I published in the Hardball Times Annual so he had something to compare against, and I think the results were extremely highly correlated; I don't remember where Max published it, be it Hardball Times or BPro).

So, the reason I am not a fan of the approach that Max and Max use is because it is very black box.  They rely on best-fit, and you may end up getting an absurd result.  Think of an extreme example like Cal Ripken.  I've seen the exact same approach from Brian MacDonald as he used it for NHL plus/minus.  They all follow the same process.  But I could tell by the results from Brian's work (tremendous as it is) that it didn't pass the sniff test.  Some variable was not being handled or not handled well enough.  You can check the old blog for that.

Anyway, so what you end up in the end is a list of results.  And that's it.  No real flavor for it, no profile.  And it may end up being that the more automated approach that Max and Max and Brian et al follow could even be more precise, it's just a bit harder to make sense of it when something looks wrong.

?

(3) Comments • 2014/07/18 • Statistical_Theory

Latest...

COMMENTS

Nov 23 14:15
Layered wOBAcon

Nov 22 22:15
Cy Young Predictor 2024

Oct 28 17:25
Layered Hit Probability breakdown

Oct 15 13:42
Binomial fun: Best-of-3-all-home is equivalent to traditional Best-of-X where X is

Oct 14 14:31
NaiveWAR and VictoryShares

Oct 02 21:23
Component Run Values: TTO and BIP

Oct 02 11:06
FRV v DRS

Sep 28 22:34
Runs Above Average

Sep 16 16:46
Skenes v Webb: Illustrating Replacement Level in WAR

Sep 16 16:43
Sacrifice Steal Attempt

Sep 09 14:47
Can Wheeler win the Cy Young in 2024?

Sep 08 13:39
Small choices, big implications, in WAR

Sep 07 09:00
Why does Baseball Reference love Erick Fedde?

Sep 03 19:42
Re-Leveraging Aaron Judge

Aug 24 14:10
Science of baseball in 1957

THREADS

July 18, 2014
WOWY: plain-english v not