• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

OFFICIAL 2017 WORLD SERIES L.A. DODGERS VS. ASTROS THREAD

Awesome that the game was fast, masterful pitching on both sides, but I don't really like these games where all runs are scored on HRs. Basically 1 terrible hanging pitch by Keuchel and that's it.
 
Imagine how fast the game would have been without the long half inning breaks.
 
MHBDemon said:
https://books.google.com/books?id=FrUYdXKZFZwC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=twopage&q&f=false

RJ, if you are interested, go read Chapter 3, or just pages 71 through 80. The chapter says not even 60 PAs is enough to provide predictive value.

Also, chapter 2 disproves the "hot hand" theory though it says there is just a tiny bit of predictive value of hot and cold streaks for pitchers.
Click to expand...

The concept that the hot hand doesn't exist in BASKETBALL is ludicrous.

Just because someone says something about 60 PA doesn't mean everyone has to believe it. If a guy is a .250 hitter but for some reason has hit .500 against a pitcher in 30 PAs and you don't think it's predictive, it's on you when he beats you. Conversely, if a .300 hitter is 1-20 against someone and you think he's going to hit that pitcher, good for you, I'll see in Spring training not the WS.
 
RJKarl said:
The concept that the hot hand doesn't exist in BASKETBALL is ludicrous.

Just because someone says something about 60 PA doesn't mean everyone has to believe it. If a guy is a .250 hitter but for some reason has hit .500 against a pitcher in 30 PAs and you don't think it's predictive, it's on you when he beats you. Conversely, if a .300 hitter is 1-20 against someone and you think he's going to hit that pitcher, good for you, I'll see in Spring training not the WS.
Click to expand...

You clearly didn’t read it.
 
RJKarl said:
Just because someone says something about 60 PA doesn't mean everyone has to believe it.
Click to expand...

It's not a subjective opinion, it is a conclusion objectively supported by more than a hundred years of statistical evidence.
 
First of all, I wasn't talking about a Hot hand in baseball. I've never talked about that until now. The only hot hand I've posted about is in basketball.

You can find examples to fit anything you want. Unless I missed it, he didn't show ANYTHING that disputed his concepts. To assume that none exist, seems a bit of a stretch.
 
RJKarl said:
First of all, I wasn't talking about a Hot hand in baseball. I've never talked about that until now. The only hot hand I've posted about is in basketball.

You can find examples to fit anything you want. Unless I missed it, he didn't show ANYTHING that disputed his concepts. To assume that none exist, seems a bit of a stretch.
Click to expand...

lol. like i said, anything to avoid being wrong. We were talking about batter vs. pitcher matchups, which is not the same thing as the hot hand.
 
RJKarl said:
Just because someone says something about 60 PA doesn't mean everyone has to believe it. If a guy is a .250 hitter but for some reason has hit .500 against a pitcher in 30 PAs and you don't think it's predictive, it's on you when he beats you. Conversely, if a .300 hitter is 1-20 against someone and you think he's going to hit that pitcher, good for you, I'll see in Spring training not the WS.
Click to expand...

167a89f.png
 
MHBDemon said:
lol. like i said, anything to avoid being wrong. We were talking about batter vs. pitcher matchups, which is not the same thing as the hot hand.
Click to expand...

I used the concept of hot hand in basketball as to showing that the concepts of stat geeks not being the be all and end all that you seem to have.

The chart you have cherry-picks certain players in certain years.

If you also noticed in my first post, I said 8-10 PAs was indicative of anything. Yet 4 of the 8 examples your chart shows is about 8-10 PAs. I also said you needed a minimum of 20 PAs to make a any conclusion. Three of the players on that chart hadn't had 20 PAs and they were 3 of the 4 who had over 10 PAs in 2002.

Here are my posts about this:

"Obviously, 2-5 or 1-8 don't matter. When you get 20, 30, 40 ABs, they are indicative of what's more likely to happen."

"As I said, I'd start taking a look at it at 20 ABs if the number is dramatically off one way or the other. As to getting to 40 PAs, you're looking at 8-10 starts."

I said START LOOKING, but of course that doesn't mater.

Your chart has nothing to do with what I posted. Nor does it show a single player who continued to do well.
 
Last edited:
RJKarl said:
Nor does it show a single player who continued to do well.
Click to expand...

That is the fucking point! The study didn't cherry pick those players. It analyzed 300 samples of players that had >17 PAs against a pitcher from 1999-2001 and then >9 PAs against the same pitcher in 2002. Those players in the chart were the BEST against those pitchers, and none of them performed as you would expect in the following year. That same exact methodology, applied even to larger samples, shows that not even 60 PAs is predictive.
 
MHBDemon said:
That is the fucking point! The study didn't cherry pick those players. It analyzed 300 samples of players that had >17 PAs against a pitcher from 1999-2001 and then >9 PAs against the same pitcher in 2002. Those players in the chart were the BEST against those pitchers, and none of them performed as you would expect in the following year. That same exact methodology, applied even to larger samples, shows that not even 60 PAs is predictive.
Click to expand...

Again, my minimum criteria was 20 PAs, half those people didn't reach that.

It also didn't show people who were dramatically under performing against pitchers.
 
RJKarl said:
Again, my minimum criteria was 20 PAs, half those people didn't reach that.

It also didn't show people who were dramatically under performing against pitchers.
Click to expand...

Your minimum criteria was 20 ABs.

From the study:
With our three hundred confrontation pairs, we get an average of 22 before PA and 11 after PA.
Click to expand...

2zrgec7.png
 
wOBA? A weighted stat? 1 HR in 10 PAs would change that number wouldn't it?

Straight numbers...not weighted ones.
 
RJKarl said:
wOBA? A weighted stat? 1 HR in 10 PAs would change that number wouldn't it?

Straight numbers...not weighted ones.
Click to expand...

wut.

Just because you don't understand the metric, it doesn't mean it can't objectively measure player performance.

Post your statistical analysis so we can all see how you determined 20 ABs to be a minimum requirement.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top