|
stuart scott irl posted:I can't do modern era but I can do 1950-2009: You're awesome, thanks so much!
|
| # ? Sep 3, 2011 14:51 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 19, 2013 06:50 |
|
|
You'd figure it'd be really easy to get an objective, factual report on park factors by looking at spray charts and common distance of balls hit in the league. Just looking at the data, it'd be pretty easy to see how much the design of the park plays into the effects of hits and extra base hits. You could assume an average depth of where the fielder plays and the average distance a fielder has to travel to get to the ball--in fact you could probably ballpark that information--and then track the types of hits it would give up. This would also take into account the affects the marine layer in San Diego and the thin air in Coors have. Then your data isn't so affected by the talent in the park and the types of players the team builds. As it stands, players with bad or good defense heavily affect park factors. Why has no one done this?
|
| # ? Sep 4, 2011 18:17 |
|
|
I asked a version of this before, but I don't think in this exact scenario. If the batter hit a homerun, and as he's rounding third says something to the 3rd base ump and the ump throws his out, does the homerun count or would it be a triple since that was the last base he touched?
|
| # ? Sep 4, 2011 19:36 |
|
|
Orgophlax posted:I asked a version of this before, but I don't think in this exact scenario. Probably something along tihe lines of ejection with the player being substituted for and being allowed to continue around the bases. It hasn't happened to the best of my knowledge and there really isn't an approved ruling for it.
|
| # ? Sep 4, 2011 19:42 |
|
|
If I remember correctly, the player would need to have a pinch runner subbed in. The player gets credit for the hr and rbi, but the pinch runner gets the credit for scoring the run.
|
| # ? Sep 4, 2011 19:48 |
|
|
Ok dumb question incoming. I see slugging percentage being used a lot but I have never run into an actual definition. Can anyone explain it?OdinsBeard posted:Total bases divided by at bats. Total bases = #singles+2*#doubles+3*#triples+4*#homeruns Thanks. It's actually much different than I thought. I thought it was dependent on how hard the ball was being hit. Plutonic Cheddar fucked around with this message at Sep 4, 2011 around 21:26 |
| # ? Sep 4, 2011 21:16 |
|
|
Plutonic Cheddar posted:Ok dumb question incoming. I see slugging percentage being used a lot but I have never run into an actual definition. Can anyone explain it? Total bases divided by at bats. Total bases = #singles+2*#doubles+3*#triples+4*#homeruns
|
| # ? Sep 4, 2011 21:18 |
|
|
Plutonic Cheddar posted:Ok dumb question incoming. I see slugging percentage being used a lot but I have never run into an actual definition. Can anyone explain it? It's a measure of how many bases the hitter is getting. So if your SLG is .500 you're averaging .5 bases per at bat. Anything above .500 is very good. Anything below .400 is probably not very good.
|
| # ? Sep 4, 2011 22:43 |
|
|
Badfinger posted:It's a measure of how many bases the hitter is getting. So if your SLG is .500 you're averaging .5 bases per at bat. Anything above .500 is very good. Anything below .400 is probably not very good. As an aside, .slg does tend to undervalue doubles hitters. A guy with 40 hr an 10 doubles in 150 hits will have a much higher slugging than a guy who has 50 doubles and 20 hr in the same amount of time (assuming 500 ab it would be .560 to .520) but the doubles hitter would be more valuable via linear weights as a double is worth more than half a homer in run expectancy. But slugging is generally a very good and widely accepted statistic.
|
| # ? Sep 5, 2011 01:34 |
|
|
The Blue Caboose posted:If I remember correctly, the player would need to have a pinch runner subbed in. The player gets credit for the hr and rbi, but the pinch runner gets the credit for scoring the run. Something to this effect did actually happen in 2008, with Bengie Molina. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/artic.../SPEH13640M.DTL
|
| # ? Sep 5, 2011 01:39 |
|
|
The Blue Caboose posted:As an aside, .slg does tend to undervalue doubles hitters. A guy with 40 hr an 10 doubles in 150 hits will have a much higher slugging than a guy who has 50 doubles and 20 hr in the same amount of time (assuming 500 ab it would be .560 to .520) but the doubles hitter would be more valuable via linear weights as a double is worth more than half a homer in run expectancy. But slugging is generally a very good and widely accepted statistic. The run expectancy of events is dependent on the scoring environment, and most of the weights I've seen used older data (for instance the wOBA entry at fangraphs links to their linear weights entry which links to a Tom Tango article which has the run expectancies from 1999-2002). I wonder if if the run expectancy of a home run is still less than twice that of a double.
|
| # ? Sep 5, 2011 01:45 |
|
|
OdinsBeard posted:The run expectancy of events is dependent on the scoring environment, and most of the weights I've seen used older data (for instance the wOBA entry at fangraphs links to their linear weights entry which links to a Tom Tango article which has the run expectancies from 1999-2002). I wonder if if the run expectancy of a home run is still less than twice that of a double. wOBA weights claim that a hr is worth about 1.65 times as much as a double, so that leaves a pretty big margin either way. I do wonder how much linear weights really do change from season to season though.
|
| # ? Sep 5, 2011 04:07 |
|
|
The Blue Caboose posted:wOBA weights claim that a hr is worth about 1.65 times as much as a double, so that leaves a pretty big margin either way. I do wonder how much linear weights really do change from season to season though. In a low run environment like the one we have today (particularly low when compared to the mid-2000s), I would think that the value of a home run would go up, as it's less likely that a double will actually lead to any runs.
|
| # ? Sep 5, 2011 04:26 |
|
|
The Goog posted:In a low run environment like the one we have today (particularly low when compared to the mid-2000s), I would think that the value of a home run would go up, as it's less likely that a double will actually lead to any runs. So I got home and went to do a little research, and it seems like wOBA (as well as most LW based stats) is based on long term average linear weights.
|
| # ? Sep 5, 2011 07:48 |
|
|
The Goog posted:In a low run environment like the one we have today (particularly low when compared to the mid-2000s), I would think that the value of a home run would go up, as it's less likely that a double will actually lead to any runs. Using this, looking for the lowest ratio, in 1908 a HR was worth 1.72 times a double.
|
| # ? Sep 5, 2011 08:11 |
|
|
Why do most games begin at x:05, x:10 or x:15, and even more oddly, x:07 for the postseason?
|
| # ? Sep 5, 2011 23:02 |
|
|
Hipster_Doofus posted:Why do most games begin at x:05, x:10 or x:15, and even more oddly, x:07 for the postseason? To give the tv broadcasts time to do their intros, and to cram in as many ads as possible.
|
| # ? Sep 5, 2011 23:28 |
|
|
Hipster_Doofus posted:Why do most games begin at x:05, x:10 or x:15, and even more oddly, x:07 for the postseason? Don't forget the White Sox and their 7:11 start times due to a sponsorship deal with 7-11
|
| # ? Sep 5, 2011 23:41 |
|
|
Hi, I'm typically an NHL fan but I'm doing the traditional Bay Area bandwagoning of following one of our sports teams the season after they actually win something. Do most ball clubs make a big deal of their old days, especially in another town, the way that the Giants continually bring up their history in New York? I would think normally if you mentioned New York baseball to any crowd in California you'd get boos. I know the Yankees and BoSox wax nostalgic all the time. For the Giants, is it just because Willie Mays is still alive and kinda made it a dynasty? Most hockey teams not named Maple Leafs or Canadiens generally keep their mouths shut about their history (even Edmonton is fully out of the Gretzky haze) so it's weird to hear baseball people talk about their olden days so much. I guess this is also why baseball always seems to get the most "walking historical fact book" types. Craptacular! fucked around with this message at Sep 6, 2011 around 00:11 |
| # ? Sep 6, 2011 00:09 |
|
|
Craptacular! posted:Hi, I'm typically an NHL fan but I'm doing the traditional Bay Area bandwagoning of following one of our sports teams the season after they actually win something. Baseball loves its history. That's why we make a bigger deal out of records than many other sports. Baseball has a special place as the oldest American sport, and it's a part of what makes the game special for a lot of people.
|
| # ? Sep 6, 2011 00:12 |
|
|
As any rear end in a top hat Giants fan can tell you, the Giants are very proud of their New York heritage because they have so little to show since moving to San Fran.
|
| # ? Sep 6, 2011 00:29 |
|
|
Does the homeplate ump give a hand signal when a run is scored, other than safe if it's a close play?
|
| # ? Sep 6, 2011 00:59 |
|
|
I've never seen a hand signal from an ump on a play at the plate that wasn't either out or safe.
|
| # ? Sep 6, 2011 01:05 |
|
|
The broken bones posted:As any rear end in a top hat Giants fan can tell you, the Giants are very proud of their New York heritage because they have so little to show since moving to San Fran. Why wouldn't they want to highlight wonderful moments like this? 
|
| # ? Sep 6, 2011 01:27 |
|
|
zakharov posted:To give the tv broadcasts time to do their intros, and to cram in as many ads as possible. Well, poo poo, that sure seems pretty obvious in retrospect.  But still, why x:07 for the postseason, or even anything earlier than x:10 for that matter?
|
| # ? Sep 6, 2011 01:53 |
|
|
Hipster_Doofus posted:Well, poo poo, that sure seems pretty obvious in retrospect. Different networks have different preferences. Don't read too much into it; Yankees games have a listed 1/7:05 start but I've rarely seen them start before 1:10.
|
| # ? Sep 6, 2011 01:54 |
|
|
Carlton Banks posted:Don't forget the White Sox and their 7:11 start times due to a sponsorship deal with 7-11 Nah not anymore. That sponsorship stopped before this season.
|
| # ? Sep 6, 2011 02:37 |
|
|
Who is and is not eligible for the MLB draft? Do players have to officially declare for it in some form, or could a team just draft a good athlete who's never played baseball before because he's such a track star or great hockey player with the hopes that they can make him a ballplayer?
|
| # ? Sep 7, 2011 21:54 |
|
|
DannoMack posted:Who is and is not eligible for the MLB draft? Do players have to officially declare for it in some form, or could a team just draft a good athlete who's never played baseball before because he's such a track star or great hockey player with the hopes that they can make him a ballplayer?
|
| # ? Sep 7, 2011 22:26 |
|
|
jeff samarjizjzizjzizjsizja comes to mind as a hendry lol project
|
| # ? Sep 7, 2011 22:39 |
|
|
DannoMack posted:Who is and is not eligible for the MLB draft? Do players have to officially declare for it in some form, or could a team just draft a good athlete who's never played baseball before because he's such a track star or great hockey player with the hopes that they can make him a ballplayer? Baseball has so many rounds that taking fliers on great athletes in late rounds probably isn't that uncommon, but realistically they would never sign if they were THAT good at another sport. As far as I know, the only requirement for a player to be draft eligible is for them to be a North American citizen. All other foreigners go through their own free agency.
|
| # ? Sep 7, 2011 22:39 |
|
|
DannoMack posted:Who is and is not eligible for the MLB draft? Do players have to officially declare for it in some form, or could a team just draft a good athlete who's never played baseball before because he's such a track star or great hockey player with the hopes that they can make him a ballplayer? Any Canadian or US resident is draftable when they become a senior in high school. If a player goes to a 4-year school, they're not eligible to be drafted until junior year. (Junior colleges and smaller schools are exempted from this) Oh, and they can't sign a professional contract with a club, otherwise they become a free agent and lose draft eligibility.
|
| # ? Sep 8, 2011 05:50 |
|
|
Totally stupid hypothetical question: The strike zone is supposed to be belt to knees and the width of the plate. If a player learned how to bat well enough while having his knees bent at a perfect 90 degrees so his belt was only about 4 inches above his knees, would he only have a 4 inch tall strike zone?
|
| # ? Sep 10, 2011 01:27 |
|
|
Orgophlax posted:Totally stupid hypothetical question: The strike zone is supposed to be belt to knees and the width of the plate. If a player learned how to bat well enough while having his knees bent at a perfect 90 degrees so his belt was only about 4 inches above his knees, would he only have a 4 inch tall strike zone? Theoretically, yes. In reality, the umpire would just roll his eyes, ballpark a normal zone, and force him to use that Umpires don't take kindly to rules-lawyers
|
| # ? Sep 10, 2011 01:28 |
|
|
Orgophlax posted:Totally stupid hypothetical question: The strike zone is supposed to be belt to knees and the width of the plate. If a player learned how to bat well enough while having his knees bent at a perfect 90 degrees so his belt was only about 4 inches above his knees, would he only have a 4 inch tall strike zone? On paper, yes, in reality the umpire would either use an ad hoc "reasonable" strike zone or tell the batter to stop making a "mockery of the game" or some poo poo like that ^welp
|
| # ? Sep 10, 2011 01:29 |
|
|
Orgophlax posted:Totally stupid hypothetical question: The strike zone is supposed to be belt to knees and the width of the plate. If a player learned how to bat well enough while having his knees bent at a perfect 90 degrees so his belt was only about 4 inches above his knees, would he only have a 4 inch tall strike zone? Rickey Henderson used to do this a lot. I always heard that it was knees to belt after the batter has swung or the ball has passed the plate.
|
| # ? Sep 10, 2011 01:32 |
|
|
Orgophlax posted:Totally stupid hypothetical question: The strike zone is supposed to be belt to knees and the width of the plate. If a player learned how to bat well enough while having his knees bent at a perfect 90 degrees so his belt was only about 4 inches above his knees, would he only have a 4 inch tall strike zone? This is basically how Eddie Gaedel hit, if i recall correctly. Also he was like 3'11" or something. I'm sure the conclusion would be more interesting if he hadn't been banned from baseball after one pa.
|
| # ? Sep 10, 2011 01:36 |
|
|
If a pitcher commits an error that later allows a run to score, is it credited as an earned run?
|
| # ? Sep 10, 2011 03:38 |
|
|
Mozi posted:If a pitcher commits an error that later allows a run to score, is it credited as an earned run? No, fielding errors basically always result in unearned runs regardless of who makes them.
|
| # ? Sep 10, 2011 03:40 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 19, 2013 06:50 |
|
|
Mozi posted:If a pitcher commits an error that later allows a run to score, is it credited as an earned run? Of the possible pitcher misplays, only wild pitches count towards earned runs, fielding/throwing errors don't.
|
| # ? Sep 10, 2011 03:48 |
|
