Coco's future

[Jayhawk Bill]

LOL! Fair enough. However' date=' I don't buy Crisp being a better runner than Granderson. The formula isn't fool-proof, and you guys know it. [/quote']

 

How is a play-by-play assessment of the delta of run probability for every base-out combination not foolproof if the outcome is expressed in run value?

 

See, Barry Bonds is a subjective issue with huge subjective plusses and minuses. (Glad that I could lend a quote!) There can be more than one answer. Baserunning, though, can be analyzed objectively play-by-play over 162 games, and Dan Fox actually did that for all of MLB. At that level, it's no longer a matter of opinion. Curtis Granderson is very good; he was 7th in the AL. Crisp, though, was best in the AL. Crisp was a good base stealer, but he was also very good at all other aspects of baserunning, especially advancing on fly outs. That's what put him at the top for 2007--it's not just stealing bases.

[Gom]

Here is where I will respectfully disagree. There are many factors that go into baserunning, and it is not accurately defined by current statistical models. Since I don't have the particulars of the statistical formula, who was in the top ten for the last two years? My point is that baserunning is a skill that doesn't differ from year to year until the player loses a step or two. In fact, I would guess that players baserunning improves as they learn the arms of the outfielders, the turf, etc. If the difference is significant, then I would say its a useless model.

[Jayhawk Bill]

Here is where I will respectfully disagree.

 

Distinguishing itself from your previous disagreement positively in terms of etiquette.

 

It's not a formula; it's a play-by-play analysis of every baserunning play over 162 games for every team. I've shown you the link for the 2007 leaders. You can purchase the full analysis from BP in the 2008 BP Prospectus; you can even work with Dan Fox and he might share with you, privately, his work for 2000-2006.

 

I don't think that the analysis exists before 2000.

[Gom]

How do you quantify it? It's like throwing arm. Do assists necessarily show who's got the best arm? The best shortstops may have more errors than a lesser shortstop because they simply get to more balls. What's their respective speed going from first to third? The only real quantifiable number that has little/nothing to do with the rest of your team is base stealing. That is why I don't buy the analysis as being solid. There are too many variables that have little to do with the baserunner. Keep that list handy since I don't have access to BP. Let me know at the end of this year how consistent it is. It is my subjective opinion that a player's skill in baserunning doesn't vary all that much from year to year under the age of 32 [that's when they start slowing down in footspeed]. If there is a decent amount of variation, then the statistic is useless.

[Jayhawk Bill]

It is my subjective opinion that a player's skill in baserunning doesn't vary all that much from year to year under the age of 32 [that's when they start slowing down in footspeed]. If there is a decent amount of variation' date=' then the statistic is useless.[/quote']

 

Paraphrasing, if a player's metric doesn't match your preconceived notion, you will consider it useless.

 

That is why I don't buy the analysis as being solid.

 

But you've already come to that conclusion.

 

What's their respective speed going from first to third?

 

Included; EqHAR (Equivalent Hit Advancement Runs) includes all cases of changes in run expectancy because players took extra bases on hits. Granderson and Crisp were both good, with Crisp trailing Granderson 2.22 to 1.64 in that aspect of baserunning (see above).

 

How do you quantify it?

 

By taking all changes in run expectancy related to baserunning for all MLB players for the entire year: every stolen base, caught stealing, advance on an out, advance an extra base on a hit, getting picked off, and getting extra bases for any other reason (eg passed balls).

 

Already told you that.

 

The only real quantifiable number that has little/nothing to do with the rest of your team is base stealing. There are too many variables that have little to do with the baserunner.

 

Every result of every play in MLB is quantifiable.

 

Regarding help, does David Ortiz protect baserunners the way he protects batters--if Big Papi is coming down the third base line behind Dustin Pedroia, Pedroia's run hardly counts because no sane catcher will block the plate?

 

Seriously, by your logic you'd throw out batting average because pitchers differ.

 

It's like throwing arm. Do assists necessarily show who's got the best arm? The best shortstops may have more errors than a lesser shortstop because they simply get to more balls.

 

Or because batters get different pitches...that's really unfair.

 

Big Papi and Dustin Pedroia don't get the same pitches. Big Papi almost never sees a strike down the middle of the plate, because he can usually hit such pitches for home runs. Pedroia sees a mix of pitches across and around the whole plate. We still compare their batting stats.

 

In MLB, situations always vary, but over hundreds of chances opportunities for players often--usually--balance. That's why we accept stats.

 

Even with that red herring you raise of throwing arms, over hundreds of chances (a career's worth, not a season's worth) assist count tends to show who's best. But there's even better work being done at the play-by-play level--just as we can track baserunning by runner, we can track it by which outfielder is holding the ball on a given play. With that information at hand, we can see on which outfielders the runners are taking extra bases and how much those extra bases are worth, not just counting when they get caught.

 

Keep that list handy since I don't have access to BP. Let me know at the end of this year how consistent it is.

 

You'd asked for the leaders--I'd expect the leaders to be at least as consistent as, say, batting average leaders for the AL:

 

2007

 

Ordonez-DET .363

Suzuki-SEA .351

Polanco-DET .341

Posada-NYY .338

Ortiz-BOS .332

 

2006

 

Mauer-MIN .347

Jeter-NYY .344

Cano-NYY .342

Tejada-BAL .330

Guerrero-LAA .329

 

Sometimes, despite relatively constant skill and hundreds of opportunities, leaders change.

[Gom]

You make valid points, I have to agree. However, do you really believe that baserunning is more or less as static as batting average as you claim?

 

Like you listed, none of the top 5 in the AL in 2007 finished in the top 5 in 2006. I personally think BA is not the most indicative of a player's offensive value when used alone. In 2007, according to BA, Posada was a better hitter than Ortiz. Is there anyone in their right mind that would take Posada at the plate over Ortiz? When you agree to that, then I'll agree that Crisp is a better baserunner than Granderson.

 

A player may just get lucky. Look at Posada. A career .270+ hitter, he hit .338 last year. Does anyone think he'll repeat it? There is variability there, much more than in fielding and baserunning. Baserunning and fielding tend to decline across the board as players age. Bonds, if he plays again, may hit .350 again. I don't think he'll steal 50 bases again like he has in the past. Why not? You tell me.

 

Is everything that happens on a field quantifiable? I would say given all the variables, if able to quantify it, then the answer would be yes. Do we have a statistical model that can accurately determine baserunning? Not in my opinion. Too many variable that are not accounted for.

 

The point is that the models do not account for enough of the variability to be taken any more strongly than a trend, in my opinion. This is not true of all stats, as offensive and pitching stats have been around more, studied more, advanced more, and are easier to quantify. Maybe we'll get there with fielding and baserunning, but we aren't there yet.

[Jayhawk Bill]

You make valid points' date=' I have to agree. [/quote']

 

W00t! We agree! :thumbsup:

[Gom]

You make valid points, my friend. The statistics are about as credible as Jayson Blair.

[Jayhawk Bill]

You make valid points' date=' my friend. [/quote']

 

Too kind.

 

The statistics are about as credible as Jayson Blair.

 

Except for that open-source auditability thing...Dan Fox isn't using proprietary metrics, he's using run-expectancy tables for base-out situations. One can, if one chooses, check an entire season to audit his work.

 

Whereas Jayson Blair's work for the NYT was notorious in that it didn't hold up to audit...slight difference.

 

You should learn to appreciate the newer stats, Gom. Tell ya what--PM me if you want to make a point here on some future issue, and if I'm online I'll offer you stats (if available) before you post. You'll learn faster if you're not trying to discredit, but rather using newer stats to advantage, and we're here to discuss and learn, not necessarily to argue.

 

FWIW, here's the run-expectancy table for MLB 2007:

 

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/statistics/sortable/index.php?cid=204022

 

That may give you a better idea of how this stuff is done.

[Gom]

I appreciate it. It's not that I don't understand, or appreciate it, which I do on both accounts. It's just with scientific analysis, you go into an experiment with a hypothesis. You have two things that can happen if it doesn't go according to plan. Either there was an error in the empirical data or the formula, or the expectations are wrong. I personally think that in the case of baserunning, there are too many variables that are not accounted for.

 

Either way, I will take you up on your offer. Being a scientist by education, I always question everything.

 

I like to learn..but also to argue. You, like my arch-nemesis, ORS , have shown you can hold your own. Kudos to you.

[Gom]

Hey Jayhawk...BP is predicting 88 wins for the Rays. Probably the same statistics they used to determine that Crisp is a better baserunner than Granderson.

 

I couldn't resist.

[BSN07]

Hey Jayhawk...BP is predicting 88 wins for the Rays. Probably the same statistics they used to determine that Crisp is a better baserunner than Granderson.

 

I couldn't resist.

 

 

 

The Rays will cause some problems within the division. There not going to be the Sox, and Yanks whipping boys. They will finish 3rd at the highest, but there a decent club. This team could probably make the PO if they where in the NL.

 

 

I think 88 W's is a fair guess.

[MANNYHOF24]

The Rays will cause some problems within the division. There not going to be the Sox, and Yanks whipping boys. They will finish 3rd at the highest, but there a decent club. This team could probably make the PO if they where in the NL.

 

 

I think 88 W's is a fair guess.

 

I think if both the Yankees and Sox are going to be in the 90's for wins, 88 is a little high. I would say no higher than 80. I have also heard that Kazmir is having elbow problems this spring which might put out any chance they have at being sucsessful.

[jacksonianmarch]

Rays win 70 this yr.

[BSN07]

88 might be a bit hi, but right around .500 is about right. This team is far from the pushover it has been since its been in the league...

[Jayhawk Bill]

Rays win 70 this yr.

 

Just wanted to quote you to capture your words for the future.

 

We'll see.

[Gom]

The Rays will cause some problems within the division. There not going to be the Sox, and Yanks whipping boys. They will finish 3rd at the highest, but there a decent club. This team could probably make the PO if they where in the NL.

 

I think 88 W's is a fair guess.

It's on. Jacko at 70, Jayhawk Bill and BP at 88. We'll see at season's end.

[Jayhawk Bill]

It's on. Jacko at 70' date=' Jayhawk Bill and BP at 88. We'll see at season's end.[/quote']

 

 

Never said that. I didn't make a prediction of wins...I just want to preserve someone else's.

[Cocos Disciples]

I'm going with 79 and 3rd place for the Rays. Mark it down.

[redsoxrules]

I'm going with 79 and 3rd place for the Rays. Mark it down.

 

so the jays will be worst than last year?

[BSN07]

Jays are better then some are saying. If Roy and AJ can stay healthy, the Jays will be a strong team.

[Gom]

Never said that. I didn't make a prediction of wins...I just want to preserve someone else's.

You made the quote. You love BP. It's your quote. Either take it, or admit that Granderson is a better baserunner than Crisp. Can't mix and match.

 

Isn't it "modern stats" that is making this prediction for the Rays?

 

I have to admit, I'm having a lot of fun with JHB. He's a cool Sox fan. Not like the rest of you punks

 

Yeah, I'm talking to you. You know who you are.

[Cocos Disciples]

Jays are better then some are saying. If Roy and AJ can stay healthy' date=' the Jays will be a strong team.[/quote']

 

IF

[Jayhawk Bill]

You made the quote. You love BP. It's your quote. Either take it' date=' or admit that Granderson is a better baserunner than Crisp. Can't mix and match. [/quote']

 

False dilemma. I post from a Red State--we still have personal liberties down here.

 

And Crisp was the best baserunner in the AL in 2007. :harhar:

[Gom]

False dilemma. I post from a Red State--we still have personal liberties down here.

 

And Crisp was the best baserunner in the AL in 2007. :harhar:

I LOVE IT! ROFL!

[riverside sluggers]

Jays are better then some are saying. If Roy and AJ can stay healthy' date=' the Jays will be a strong team.[/quote']

 

Also Vernon Wells, BJ Ryan, Reed Johnson, Lyle Overbay, Scott Rolen and David Eckstein

[BSN07]

Also Vernon Wells' date=' BJ Ryan, Reed Johnson, Lyle Overbay, Scott Rolen and David Eckstein[/quote']

 

Thats why in my AL East predictions I had the Sox 1st, Jays/Yanks/Rays in 2-5 in no particular order. If I had to choose, I'd say the Jays 2nd, then the Yanks(I believe SP will be the Yanks downfall this season), then the Rays.

[BoSox21]

Considering how strong the AL East looks this year, could the Orioles end up with the worst record in MLB history?

[Gom]

What I love here is how the Yankees finished two games behind the Sox last year, but a good percentage of you guys is picking them to finish 3rd.

[Cocos Disciples]

What I love here is how the Yankees finished two games behind the Sox last year' date=' but a good percentage of you guys is picking them to finish 3rd.[/quote']

 

What exactly is a "good percentage"?