|
|
|
|
Baseball Primer Newsblog— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand
Thursday, May 29, 2008
Swayed by Owings?
Don’t be a fool
Remember the Buhl!
In the six years that I’ve generated PECOTA forecasts, I’ve never bothered to run hitting projections for pitchers. In fact, I’ve regarded pitcher hitting as something of a nuisance; I specifically screen out any pitchers so that they won’t be selected as comparable players. This isn’t an aesthetic judgment by any means—watching pitchers try (and fail) to hit is one of my favorite pastimes. But since even the pitchers who make 35 starts a year won’t usually get more than 80 or 90 plate appearances, I’ve generally figured that it wasn’t quite worth the trouble.
Still, if you aren’t accounting for pitcher hitting, you’re unambiguously cheating some guys out of their value. For example, Micah Owings had a VORP of 16.5 last season, so his offense did more to contribute to his team’s success than actual, real-life hitters like J.D. Drew, Ivan Rodriguez, and Rafael Furcal. But how much of that performance was actual skill rather than a fluke of small sample size? Pitcher hitting suffers from the monkeys-typing-Shakespeare problem: take enough pitchers, give them all 70 at-bats or so, and two or three of them are going to wind up hitting .320 with a couple of long balls, perhaps simply by a stroke of luck.
To address this question, I developed a regression-based system for projecting hitter performance that I’ll call SPHPS (Simple Pitcher Hitting Projection System), which isn’t a catchy anagram at all, but has the virtue of being a palindrome. This system is derived solely from the hitting statistics of pitchers; you don’t want to include position players in the same dataset because then you’ll regress toward the mean established by position players, when pitchers and position players are selected to play in the major leagues based on totally different skill sets. (The gap between pitcher and position-player hitting has grown steadily since the dawn of baseball time).
Repoz
Posted: May 29, 2008 at 02:57 PM | 12 comment(s)
Related News: General, Sabermetrics
|
My Bookmarks
You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.
Hot Topics
|
|
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
You mean to say, SPHPS isn't a catchy acronym. An anagram is a rearrangement of the letters in one word to make another word: Giles is an anagram of Selig; Ankiel is an anagram of Kaline. An acronym is a word formed from taking the first letters of a phrase or title and forming a word out of them: NATO is an acronym for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization; Scuba is an acronym for self-contained underwater breathing aparatus.
Of course, not many pitchers that amass 27 hits in 168 ABs over the last 3 years can seriously be considered good hitters.
What's the midwest?
Why are these pitchers hitting anyways, wouldn't it make more sense to use a DH?
FAIL.
list of pitchers since 1960 with >50 PAs and a BA > .300
there are some repeaters--Rhoden, Hampton, Vern Law (funny--I don't remember him being that good of a hitter); Hershiser's 1993 is pretty amazing: 356/373/411 with only 5 K's (I wonder how many pitchers ever had a 5:1 hits:strikeouts ratio
Which is exactly why we named our daughter Txpypxt.
Shouldn't you have named her Mosnar?
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main