Pedro HOF Induction

[a700hitter]

I love Pedro to death - he is keenly aware of his legend.

He says that Theo ordered the guns pumped for other pitchers on the 2004 staff as well.

[a700hitter]

I love Pedro to death - he is keenly aware of his legend.

How would disclosing that the gun was pumped up in 2004 enhance his image?

[sk7326]

How would disclosing that the gun was pumped up in 2004 enhance his image?

 

That he was getting by with lesser stuff as was the rest of the staff ... akin to his 1999 relief outing

 

But moreover, it's a bit of a nonstory - stadiums pump their guns all the time ... fans want to see high numbers, no harm in giving it to them. I remember it as far back as the late 90s when NBC had Robb Nen throwing 102 MPH in a closing outing.

[a700hitter]

That he was getting by with lesser stuff as was the rest of the staff ... akin to his 1999 relief outing

 

But moreover, it's a bit of a nonstory - stadiums pump their guns all the time ... fans want to see high numbers, no harm in giving it to them. I remember it as far back as the late 90s when NBC had Robb Nen throwing 102 MPH in a closing outing.

So, we have arrived back at my original question. I would assume that these readings come from a permanently mounted radar gun. If teams can pump the numbers on the gun, is the official published data reliable?

[a700hitter]

That he was getting by with lesser stuff as was the rest of the staff ... akin to his 1999 relief outing

 

But moreover, it's a bit of a nonstory - stadiums pump their guns all the time ... fans want to see high numbers, no harm in giving it to them. I remember it as far back as the late 90s when NBC had Robb Nen throwing 102 MPH in a closing outing.

So, with regard to the Red Sox, you think the story about the pumped gun is a fiction created by Pedro to enhance his legend, but at the same time you acknowledge that pumping the gun was/is a common practice in the sport. Why is it a fiction for the Red Sox, but acknowledged fact for other organizations. I don't think that makes sense.

[Bellhorn04]

How would disclosing that the gun was pumped up in 2004 enhance his image?

 

I don't really understand what it would affect one way or the other. What do you think it would affect?

[a700hitter]

I don't really understand what it would affect one way or the other. What do you think it would affect?

I think that the practice is pointless. But I do wonder about the accuracy and integrity of official stats on velocity.

[sk7326]

So, with regard to the Red Sox, you think the story about the pumped gun is a fiction created by Pedro to enhance his legend, but at the same time you acknowledge that pumping the gun was/is a common practice in the sport. Why is it a fiction for the Red Sox, but acknowledged fact for other organizations. I don't think that makes sense.

 

I think that the Sox did something extraordinary might be the fiction part of it. I think the question was to whether it created an unfair advantage or whether it affected velocities that teams used or recorded over that time frame. Both of those I think are non-stories.

[Spudboy]

It was probably somewhat like the sellout streak.

 

Embellishment for profit somehow.

[a700hitter]

I think that the Sox did something extraordinary might be the fiction part of it. I think the question was to whether it created an unfair advantage or whether it affected velocities that teams used or recorded over that time frame. Both of those I think are non-stories.

Who said it is a story? I did find it odd that Theo as the GM got involved in those decisions in real time, but I don't think it is a story. The question that this story made me ask is the following:

 

Here is a question for you. How many guns are on the pitcher during a game. Is there a different stadium gun? Was Theo meddling with the gun or just the reading posted on the score board? It makes me wonder about the integrity of the data we get on pitchers. I have already heard stories that the guns at Fenway were quicker than at other ballparks because of the closer proximity of the gun to the pitcher.

[sk7326]

Who said it is a story? I did find it odd that Theo as the GM got involved in those decisions in real time, but I don't think it is a story. The question that this story made me ask is the following:

 

That is fair. I would think that if a team is not collecting its own data - given how high pressure and paranoid teams are - on this stuff, then that raises questions on whether those teams executives can put on their shoes correctly without labels. What is the point of advance scouting otherwise?

[a700hitter]

That is fair. I would think that if a team is not collecting its own data - given how high pressure and paranoid teams are - on this stuff, then that raises questions on whether those teams executives can put on their shoes correctly without labels. What is the point of advance scouting otherwise?

That is not the point. I am not talking about scouting. I am talking about "official data" that is publically available. Is it reliable on velocity? When a stat is presented regarding the pitcher's with the highest average fast ball velocity, is it accurate and reliable? I guess that you just don't want to address the question.

[sk7326]

That is not the point. I am not talking about scouting. I am talking about "official data" that is publically available. Is it reliable on velocity? When a stat is presented regarding the pitcher's with the highest average fast ball velocity, is it accurate and reliable? I guess that you just don't want to address the question.

 

Short answer: in 2004, I doubt it - or if official velo stats were being collected at all. Now? Yes

[a700hitter]

Short answer: in 2004, I doubt it - or if official velo stats were being collected at all. Now? Yes

Teams can't meddle with the guns and the official data today? Is that your opinion or a fact?

 

Edit: Fangraphs lists pitcher velocity back to 2004. Is that data unofficial? My point is that if the data is corrupted, it is worthless.

Edited September 30, 2015 by a700hitter

[Youk Of The Nation]

My question is, what does it matter? Velocity is almost the least important pitching stat. Whether a guy throws 87 or 92 doesn't really matter if he's getting Breslowed all over the field every time he's out there. If Theo or any other manager/GM messes with the radar gun for their own pitchers to make them "appear faster", what does it matter? No one is trading for or paying a guy based on his velocity, they're signing them based on whether or not they can get outs without giving up 600-foot home runs. Velocity data has always been worthless. Every radar gun is different, based on location, calibration, and even something as simple as humidity. That's basic physics. The only question I have is "why would Theo bother?". It seems like a waste of time.

[Bellhorn04]

'JUGS GUN' has a nice ring to it.

[a700hitter]

My question is, what does it matter? Velocity is almost the least important pitching stat. Whether a guy throws 87 or 92 doesn't really matter if he's getting Breslowed all over the field every time he's out there. If Theo or any other manager/GM messes with the radar gun for their own pitchers to make them "appear faster", what does it matter? No one is trading for or paying a guy based on his velocity, they're signing them based on whether or not they can get outs without giving up 600-foot home runs. Velocity data has always been worthless. Every radar gun is different, based on location, calibration, and even something as simple as humidity. That's basic physics. The only question I have is "why would Theo bother?". It seems like a waste of time.

 

If the integrity of the data collected is compromised it is worthless in any statistical projections. I have similar concern abouts about a lot of data collection used in advanced sabremetrics and projections. If human error and bias enter into the data collection process the stats built upon that data are not very reliable.

[Bellhorn04]

If the integrity of the data collected is compromised it is worthless in any statistical projections. I have similar concern abouts about a lot of data collection used in advanced sabremetrics and projections. If human error and bias enter into the data collection process the stats built upon that data are not very reliable.

 

I think if you're using such data for serious purposes, you're going to go a little further to authenticate that it's reliable. That would include consulting game scouts etc.

[SoxHop]

If the integrity of the data collected is compromised it is worthless in any statistical projections. I have similar concern abouts about a lot of data collection used in advanced sabremetrics and projections. If human error and bias enter into the data collection process the stats built upon that data are not very reliable.

 

What's with you being concerned about human error and bias concerning humans looking at stats, but not the same viewing a baseball gamel? I don't get your take on this......

[a700hitter]

I think if you're using such data for serious purposes, you're going to go a little further to authenticate that it's reliable. That would include consulting game scouts etc.

 

But I thought the sabremetricians thought that advanced statistics were a check on biases involved in scouting. The numbers are supposed to be pure and objective, but the truth is that they may not be based on very reliable data.

[a700hitter]

What's with you being concerned about human error and bias concerning humans looking at stats, but not the same viewing a baseball gamel? I don't get your take on this......

 

I' d rather put my faith in good scouts that I know and hired than on stats based on corrupted data.

[SoxHop]

But I thought the sabremetricians thought that advanced statistics were a check on biases involved in scouting. The numbers are supposed to be pure and objective, but the truth is that they may not be based on very reliable data.

 

We are talking about a radar gun........ they have always been jacked with. Not how many hits someone has. Not how many strike outs.....

 

what crusade are you on tonight Don Quixote??????

[a700hitter]

We are talking about a radar gun........ they have always been jacked with. Not how many hits someone has. Not how many strike outs.....

 

what crusade are you on tonight Don Quixote??????

 

Lol! I just don't have a lot of faith in data collection, the bedrock of advanced sabremetrics. I knew there was a variance in jugs gund, but I thought that was a function of brand and margin of error in the design, but I didn't think that GMs were falsifying radar readings. I did find that surprising. It also makes me more broadly question data collection. That is all.

[Youk Of The Nation]

If the integrity of the data collected is compromised it is worthless in any statistical projections. I have similar concern abouts about a lot of data collection used in advanced sabremetrics and projections. If human error and bias enter into the data collection process the stats built upon that data are not very reliable.

 

Pitch velocity is the only stat I can think of that is subject to this, though. Every piece of data in baseball is pretty cut-and-dried. You can't fake the number of at-bats someone has, or the number of hits or RBI. You can't fudge batting average or ERA, because they're based on physical acts that are plain for all to see. A GM or a scout or an agent can't claim a player has a higher average than he actually does. You can't mess with the data on things that happen in a game, because they're recorded.

 

The only two things I can think of, besides pitch velocity (which is meaningless in the grand scheme of things) that are subject to human interpretation are balls and strikes, which don't factor enough into any statistic to be noteworthy, seeing as they have been subject to human error for over a century with little global impact, and scoring decisions on errors vs. hits. That is also negligible, I'd say, since the percentage of scoring decisions that could go either way is low (most errors are quite obviously errors, even to those of us who are not players or personnel). Small changes or ripples tend to factor out over time, that is a principle of many branches of science and history and it is, I think, an excellent principle when applied to baseball.

 

Statistics are real, at least in baseball. Whereas statistics in most fields, like politics or other demographic minutiae, are subject to errors and malicious interpretation, sports statistics are, by and large, pure and unadulterated. If a player has 1000 at-bats and gets 500 hits, he (in addition to being the best batter ever) is batting .500. If a pitcher gives up 3 runs in 9 innings, he has an ERA of 3.00. It's all math, and math is incorruptible.

[a700hitter]

Pitch velocity is the only stat I can think of that is subject to this, though. Every piece of data in baseball is pretty cut-and-dried. You can't fake the number of at-bats someone has, or the number of hits or RBI. You can't fudge batting average or ERA, because they're based on physical acts that are plain for all to see. A GM or a scout or an agent can't claim a player has a higher average than he actually does. You can't mess with the data on things that happen in a game, because they're recorded.

 

The only two things I can think of, besides pitch velocity (which is meaningless in the grand scheme of things) that are subject to human interpretation are balls and strikes, which don't factor enough into any statistic to be noteworthy, seeing as they have been subject to human error for over a century with little global impact, and scoring decisions on errors vs. hits. That is also negligible, I'd say, since the percentage of scoring decisions that could go either way is low (most errors are quite obviously errors, even to those of us who are not players or personnel). Small changes or ripples tend to factor out over time, that is a principle of many branches of science and history and it is, I think, an excellent principle when applied to baseball.

 

Statistics are real, at least in baseball. Whereas statistics in most fields, like politics or other demographic minutiae, are subject to errors and malicious interpretation, sports statistics are, by and large, pure and unadulterated. If a player has 1000 at-bats and gets 500 hits, he (in addition to being the best batter ever) is batting .500. If a pitcher gives up 3 runs in 9 innings, he has an ERA of 3.00. It's all math, and math is incorruptible.

 

Statistics is not math.

 

A lot of advanced sabremetrics is based on graphs, spray charts etc. That is the kind of data that I was talking about. Batting Average, Slugging %, ERA etc. do not constitute advanced sabremetrics.

[Youk Of The Nation]

Aren't spray charts just charts detailing in which direction each ball was hit, and by whom? That's what I mean, these are things that actually happened. You can't falsify them. You can't say "Player A hit 50% of balls to right field" when recorded data and video clearly show that to be incorrect. Graphs and spray charts are still boiled down to events that actually occurred. Hits, outs, strikes, balls, errors, fouls...these are all recorded for posterity, and impossible to ignore or fake.

[Bellhorn04]

Lol! I just don't have a lot of faith in data collection, the bedrock of advanced sabremetrics. I knew there was a variance in jugs gund, but I thought that was a function of brand and margin of error in the design, but I didn't think that GMs were falsifying radar readings. I did find that surprising. It also makes me more broadly question data collection. That is all.

 

The thing is, if a guy's pitch velocity declines significantly, you usually find out about it first by him getting hammered. There's your accuracy test right there.

[a700hitter]

Aren't spray charts just charts detailing in which direction each ball was hit, and by whom? That's what I mean, these are things that actually happened. You can't falsify them. You can't say "Player A hit 50% of balls to right field" when recorded data and video clearly show that to be incorrect. Graphs and spray charts are still boiled down to events that actually occurred. Hits, outs, strikes, balls, errors, fouls...these are all recorded for posterity, and impossible to ignore or fake.

 

There are stats regarding how a defender gets a jump on a ball, routes taken to balls etc. These like any data points plotted for anything else are subject to human error. I wasn't concerned about falsification which is why the Pedro story was such a surprise to me.

[Bellhorn04]

If data is being falsified to a degree that matters, someone is going to notice.

[a700hitter]

If data is being falsified to a degree that matters, someone is going to notice.

But we don't know to what extent unintentional human error plays a role.