The Curse of Jerry Hairston, Jr./Eric Hinske:
 

Sunday, March 6, 2011

Looking Ahead To 2011 - Nick Swisher

Nick Swisher had a nice bounce-back year in 2009 following a horrendous 2008, and he built on that in 2010, having another good season.  He even made his first trip to the All Star Game by winning the fan vote for the last player, although he probably didn’t deserve it over some of the other candidates. 

Swisher went from a line of .249/.371/.498 in 2009 to a line of .288/.359/.511 in 2010.  Here’s something interesting though.

pa ab 2b 3b hr 1b+bb+hbp so br br/650 outs br/out
607 498 35 1 29 159 126 93 99 396 0.2336
635 566 33 3 29 162 139 96 99 421 0.2286


br: Linear weights batting runs
br/out: br per outs made (AB - H + SH + SF + GDP + CS)
Can you guess which of those lines represents 2009 and which of those represents 2010?

Swisher basically traded 40 BB for singles last season.  On a rate basis, his 2009 was actually slightly better in terms batting runs per outs made.  This appears to be at least partially due to a change in his approach.

season Pit Pit/PA Str Str% L/Str S/Str F/Str I/Str AS/Str AS/Pit Con 1stS L/SO
2009 2585 4.26 1458 56% 37% 14% 23% 26% 63% 36% 78% 18% 29%
2010 2548 4.02 1532 60% 27% 16% 29% 28% 73% 44% 78% 25% 27%
career 15803 4.21 9096 58% 32% 16% 26% 27% 68% 39% 77% 19% 26%

Pit: Pitches seen
Pit/PA:   Pitches per Plate Appearance
Str:   Strikes
Str%:   Strike Percentage
L/Str:   Strikes Looking / Strikes
S/Str:   Swinging Strike Percentage
F/Str:   Foul Ball Strikes Percentage
I/Str:   Ball In Play Percentage
AS/Str:   Swung at Strikes Percentage
AS/Pit:   Percentage of Pitches Swung At
Con:   Contact Percentage
1stS:   First Pitch Swinging Percentage
First Pitch Swinging / PA.:
L/SO:   Strikeout Looking Percentage

Swisher saw fewer pitcher per plate appearance, and took a lot fewer called strikes, going from 37% in 2009 to 27% in 2010.  Every other indicator here shows evidence of a more aggressive approach.  His contact rate on a per pitch basis was effectively the same, but since he swung more often he struck out more often.

His BABIP(Batting Average on Balls in Play)” was .272 in 2009 and shot up to .335 in 2010, compared to .286 in his career.

It’s doubtful he can sustain a .335 BABIP going forward, so the question is going to be if he walks a bit more to compensate for that.  Here’s what the projections say.

Offense

projection PA AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI SB CS BB AVG OBP SLG wOBA BR BR/650 BRAA BRAR
bill_james 614 534 87 137 32 1 27 83 1 1 80 .257 .353 .472 .360 89 94 16 28
fans 629 551 95 148 33 2 27 97 2 2 78 .269 .367 .483 .372 94 97 19 32
cairo 626 537 86 139 32 2 26 84 2 2 77 .259 .353 .471 .357 88 92 14 27
marcel 578 500 78 127 28 2 24 73 2 2 68 .254 .344 .462 .350 79 88 10 22
oliver 588 503 75 129 27 2 26 84 2 1 75 .256 .354 .473 .359 84 93 14 26
pecota 632 537 83 135 28 1 28 82 2 1 82 .251 .354 .464 .357 89 91 13 26
zips 601 515 80 133 29 2 28 81 1 2 75 .258 .354 .485 .363 87 94 15 28
average* 605 518 80 133 29 2 26 81 2 2 75 .256 .352 .471 .357 85 92 13 26
2010 635 566 91 163 33 3 29 89 1 2 58 .288 .357 .511 .373 97 99 21 34


wOBA: Weighted on-base average (does not include SB/CS)
BR: Linear weights batting runs
BR/650: BR pro-rated to 650 PA
BRAA: BR above an average player in projected playing time (adjusted for park, but not for position)
BRAR: BR above a replacement level player (adjusted for park and position)
2010: Un-adjusted 2010 performance  
*average does not include bill_james or fans

There is not a statistic that projections regress more heavily than BABIP, so they’re expecting him to drop to around a BABIP of .291 in 2011 on average.  With that comes an estimated drop of somewhere in the area of about eight runs of value. 

Here are Swisher’s CAIRO percentile forecasts.

cairo % PA AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI SB CS BB AVG OBP SLG wOBA BR BR/650 BRAA BRAR
80% 657 564 97 155 38 3 31 95 3 3 87 .274 .379 .518 .387 106 105 28 41
65% 639 548 91 146 35 3 28 89 3 3 82 .267 .366 .494 .372 97 98 21 34
Baseline 626 537 86 139 32 2 26 84 2 2 77 .259 .353 .471 .357 88 92 14 27
35% 563 483 73 120 26 1 21 71 1 1 65 .248 .335 .438 .336 71 82 5 16
20% 501 430 61 102 21 0 17 60 0 0 55 .237 .317 .405 .315 56 73 -3 8


While I wouldn’t be surprised to see him around that 65% forecast, I think he’ll be closer to the baseline. At age 31, it’s more likely than not that Swisher isn’t going to be better than he was last season.

Of course, there’s nothing wrong with a projection that puts him at 2.5-3 wins better than replacement level.

Base Running

Year ga_opps ga_r aa_opps aa_r ha_opps ha_r oa_opps oa_r total_opps total_r
2007 13 0 39 1 49 1 337 0 438 2
2008 27 0 31 0 35 1 241 0 334 2
2009 21 -1 41 -1 36 1 250 0 348 0
2010 16 0 39 0 43 -2 315 -1 413 -3
Proj 19 0 38 0 40 0 283 0 380 -1


ga_opps: opportunities to advance on grounders
ga_r: run value of advances on grounders
aa_opps: opportunites to advance on air outs
aa_r: run value of advances on air outs
ha_opps: opportunites to advance on hits
ha_r: run value of advances on hits
oa_opps: opportunites to adance on other (wild pitches, passed balls, etc.,)
oa_r: run value of advances on other
total_opps: ga + aa + ha + ao opportunities
total_r: total run value of non-SB base running, compared to average

Last season was Swisher’s worst in terms of base running, but based on the prior data he should be a bit closer to average.  Hopefully he’s not studying at Professor Posada’s School of Base Running.  Or hand conditioning.

Defense

Player Swisher, Nick
Pos RF
year G Inn DRS zRS uRS tRS avg rARM
2006 1 3 0 -1 0 -1 0 0
2007 57 413 4 5 7 8 6 -2
2008 17 118 0 1 -1 -4 -1 0
2009 130 1052 7 -4 -2 5 2 -6
2010 134 1085 6 1 -3 4 2 -3
avg 68 534 3 0 0 3 2 -2
w_avg 90 721 4 0 -1 3 2 -3


DRS: Defensive runs saved compared to average using John Dewan’s plus/minus system
zRS: Runs saved compared to average using Chris Dial’s zone rating system
uRS: Runs saved compared to average using UZR
tRS: Runs saved compared to average using Total Zone
rARM: Runs saved with arm compared to average (OF only)
avg: average from 2006-2010
w_avg: weighted average from 2006-2010 (5/4/3/2/1 weight)

The net on Swisher’s defense is about average, which seems right.  He doesn’t make any spectacular plays but he doesn’t show Sheffieldian indifference either, and his arm is probably not a very good one for RF.

I’ll talk about it more when I get to Curtis Granderson, but I think that Brian Cashman deserves credit for the outfield he’s put together.  For all the kvetching about the Yankees’ buying pennants, Cashman put this outfield together without using the team’s financial advantage to do it.  Swisher doesn’t get as much hype as the Yankee infielders, but he’s an integral part of the team and I find his enthusiasm endearing.

 

--Posted at 10:11 am by SG / 61 Comments | - (0)

Comments

Page 1 of 1 pages:

“Cashman put this outfield together without using the team’s financial advantage to do it.”

Nuh uh, those two trades were pure salary dumps that only the Yankees could afford. Why can’t our GM make real trades like for Beckett, Lowell, and Bay?

For some reason I read “Professor Posada” as “Professor Panda.” Not sure which would be a better baserunner.

Swisher also offers versatility in terms of lineup construction, and he has more intangibles than Jeter.

Getting Swisher from Chicago was a total fleecing by Cashman. He gave up garbage to get a stud corner OF. As for Granderson, all the points have been beated to death. We’ll see how it goes with Jackson, Kennedy, Granderson, and the pitchers Cashman has lined up that apparently made Kennedy expendable.

In 09 Swisher to my naive eye looked almost Shef like in results if not indifference.  Last year seemed much improved.  Thank you Ozzie and Kenny.

Why is Chavez learning 1b?  Wouldn’t it be better to put S there and Jones in right when necessary?

stupid verizon

stupid me

Maybe they prefer Hugo’s bat against righties to AJs and he is a natural infielders so I would think he has more upside defensively then Swish.  But depending on how things shake out your solution may be what happens.

“following a horrendous 2008”

I seem to recall that Swisher’s BABIP was just bad that year, way out of whack wrt his LD% - so by my lights I’d call it ok.

Why is Chavez learning 1b?  Wouldn’t it be better to put S there and Jones in right when necessary?

Depth.  If you lose Gardner or Granderson for some amount of time and don’t want to play Jones full-time you probably don’t want to use Swisher at 1B.

[11] Or building additional trade value ?

LOL @ “Hugo”

[12]
As they’ve been doing with Joba, you mean, right?  Is that the idea?  Yes?
[Aaaaaaargh - off topic!  I’m banned!!!!!!!!!!!!!!]

“and he has more intangibles than Jeter”

I love how confidently this gets stated. How do you even measure intangible level (IL)?

I’ve been banned from nyyfans, Fats Abraham’s Lohud and nomaas.  I’ve also been banished from human society.

[14] and bringing up a topic from a prior thread - BANNED.

Wait, now I’ve done it too ! WAAAAAAaaaaaaa !

[15] It was sarcasm.

[15]
Prove him wrong, yankz. I dare you.

[18]
Well, yes.
Thus the “...you mean, right?  Is that the idea?  Yes?”

I seem to recall that Swisher’s BABIP was just bad that year, way out of whack wrt his LD%...

When a career low BABIP coincides with a career high LD%, the assumption that all lines drives are not created equal seems warranted.

...so by my lights I’d call it ok.

Don’t results have to matter at some level?  If you hit .219 you hit .219, no matter how unlucky you might have been.

[20] No, I just messed up (as it is now apparent after my edit). Sorry.

Hughes gave up 2 HRs and 5 hits in 3 innings.

When a career low BABIP coincides with a career high LD%, the assumption that all lines drives are not created equal seems warranted.

Be careful. You may have just invalidated the postings of most of the contributors at Fangraphs, who spend their time add .120 to LD%, comparing it to BABIP and calling it analysis.

Hughes gave up 2 HRs and 5 hits in 3 innings.

But other than that, Mrs. Lincoln…

“..so by my lights I’d call it ok.”

“Don’t results have to matter at some level?  If you hit .219 you hit .219, no matter how unlucky you might have been.”

If we understand well enough what the fundamentals are and how to measure them and so forth, I’m happy to just go with that and not the W/L side.  Clearly one would have to examine his 2008 more deeply than I did above to get there, but I’m lazy.

Don’t results have to matter at some level?  If you hit .219 you hit .219, no matter how unlucky you might have been.

In terms of value, definitely.  In terms of trying to assess how good a player is, you need to weigh results a bit less.

You may have just invalidated the postings of most of the contributors at Fangraphs, who spend their time add .120 to LD%, comparing it to BABIP and calling it analysis.

Yep.  2008 wasn’t just OK, it was Swisher’s career year!

In terms of trying to assess how good a player is, you need to weigh results a bit less.

Of course.  But that doesn’t mean you were wrong to write that “Nick Swisher had a nice bounce-back year in 2009 following a horrendous 2008.”  He did have a horrendous 2008.  And as a Yankee fan, I’m damned glad he did, since he wouldn’t be playing for my team if he’d had a good 2008.

[27] This is why I’m not a fan of using FIP in WAR calculations. I think WAR should be park adjusted but underlying peripherals don’t always equal performance. A player who pitched to a 3.5 ERA with a 3.8 FIP may not be as good as one with as 3.8 ERA and a 3.5 FIP, but he was more valuable assuming a neurtral park and equal innings. We should expect the pitcher with the lower FIP to be more valuable moving forward however.

“he was more valuable”

He plus his relative luck was more valuable.

[27, 29] The other thing that’s worth mentioning is that certainly players have shown the ability (or counter-ability) to perform as their peripherals would indicate they should have performed or will perform in the future. A fellow by the name of Javier Vazquez comes to mind. So in that case, results are also important.

This is why I’m not a fan of using FIP in WAR calculations. I think WAR should be park adjusted but underlying peripherals don’t always equal performance

Well, FIP isn’t like BABIP, I don’t think. It’s trying to give the pitcher credit for what he had control over. If his defense sucked ass, is that really his fault? I mean, maybe it is, maybe he should have pitched a different way. But if a players BABIP stinks because his “line drives” are soft flares to the SS, I don’t want to see a WAR that has has his BABIP corrected.

I think what you may be referring to is xFIP, which does things like what I mentioned but to HR/9 and maybe BABIP (not sure). In that case, yeah, WAR shouldn’t take that into account. Random variations or not, the pitcher let up the homeruns and his value has to include that.

[33] FIP still values peripherals over actual performance. I think it’s a better metric to, say decide the Cy Young award, but WAR is calculating accrued value. If you give up a ton of runs in a game because of bad defense, that sucks, but you still gave up the runs. Using FIP and xFIP we can tell that that might have been a fluke and is unlikely to happen in the future, but it still happened.

Offensive WAR doesn’t have any corrections in it. Nor should it.

I like FIP, but I don’t think it’s the correct metric to calculate WAR, certainly not alone/as the primary metric that pitcher WAR is based off of.

that sucks, but you still gave up the runs.

But did you? That’s my point. If your defense sucks, they have some culpability there.  Offensive players get to do their thing regardless what other players on the field are doing. Pitchers don’t share that luxury. I’m OK with an attempt to try to know what the pitcher did with what he had control over.

[35] I’m not against FIP. I like FIP, I don’t like it used to calculate WAR.

Since replacement level is adjusted every year, shouldn’t there be a net total WAR that’s roughly the same every year as well? Anyone know what that would be?

Well, FIP isn’t like BABIP, I don’t think. It’s trying to give the pitcher credit for what he had control over. If his defense sucked ass, is that really his fault? I mean, maybe it is, maybe he should have pitched a different way. But if a players BABIP stinks because his “line drives” are soft flares to the SS, I don’t want to see a WAR that has has his BABIP corrected.

The big thing is that there is a skill component to BABIP, it’s just not easy to ascertain over the course of a season or two, and for most pitchers the skill is small.

I harp on this constantly, but FIP and xFIP say Mariano Rivera has been lucky to the tune of something like 70 to 100 runs in his career.  I mean, I suppose it’s possible but at some point you have to trust what the results tell you.

As long as it’s possible for pitchers to consistently beat their FIP/xFIP with what most metrics show to have been one of the worst defenses in the league year-in and year-out, FIP just doesn’t work as a value metric for me.

Do a basic sanity check.  Figure out each team’s FIP runs allowed, and line it up with their UZR.  If a team’s FIP says they should have allowed 650 runs and they allowed 750, does UZR rate them as a -100 defense?  You’ll find it doesn’t match reality at all in many cases.  I think I looked at in 2009 and found an average of about 50 runs of difference per team.

Maybe that’s an issue with defensive metrics or UZR specifically, or maybe it’s evidence that FIP doesn’t really tell you enough on its own and you need to look at more things.

WAR is a retrogressive indicator. It’s literally a recording of what happened, the occurrence being value you contributed. FIP is a predictive metric, meant to equalize all the noise and variance of what actually does happen. Combining the two is mixing up what you want your statistic to tell you.

If Sergio Mitre throws 100 IP of high walk, low strikeout, “lucky” ball, I want WAR to tell me what happened, not that it shouldn’t have - that’s what FIP is for.

[39] Yes. Or release WAR and xWAR. Or maybe WAR needs to combine ERA and FIP in some way. IDK, but I’m generally very wary of WAR for pitchers, at least from fangraphs. BRef doesn’t use FIP but adjusts ERA, I think this might be closer to an approach I agree with.

Since replacement level is adjusted every year, shouldn’t there be a net total WAR that’s roughly the same every year as well? Anyone know what that would be?

A rough rule of thumb is that a replacement level player is two wins worse than an average player.  So take the average team, subtract two wins from each position, subtract two wins from each starting pitcher, and then subtract a few more wins for bench and bullpen.  Figure you should end up with a team that is around a 45-50 win team. 

WAR works best as a tool to compare players IMO.  For teams, you’re still better off just trying to work off how many runs they scored and allowed, or how many runs you think they’re going to score and allow.  For that reason, I never tried to add up league total WAR, although that should be relatively easy to do from FanGraphs or Baseball Reference.

[36, 38, 39, If Sergio Mitre throws 100 IP of high walk, low strikeout, “lucky” ball, I want WAR to tell me what happened, not that it shouldn’t have - that’s what FIP is for.]

But I still think it’s OK to give credit to a pitcher for what he did that we know was under his control. I guess the issue is just, as SG said, FIP isn’t telling us exactly what the entire story is. It’s incorporation of things like what balls should be caught by average defenses or whether or not a pitcher like Andy Pettite can get through 6-7 innings with a good RA consistently over 15 years by letting a bit more baserunners than you would expect is not yet totally understood.

For offensive WAR, if the guy was lucky or unlucky, whatever, that’s his WAR. That’s what actually happened and it’s 100% his doing (with some rare exceptions like baserunning blunders by other players or something like that.) But you have to at least give some consideration to a pitcher that does everything right but still doesn’t get outs when he should because he has to rely on other players to get those outs. So FIP for WAR is OK with me. Or maybe the dWAR is more appropriately applied to the pitcher *and* his defense?

As long as it’s possible for pitchers to consistently beat their FIP/xFIP with what most metrics show to have been one of the worst defenses in the league year-in and year-out, FIP just doesn’t work as a value metric for me.

Somewhat related to what someone mentioned up there about league total WAR adding up to the same each year, shouldn’t the issue with FIP as a value metric just be that the dWAR is conserved? So, if over 200 IP, 3 dWAR are earned by a pitcher and his defense, X% belongs to the pitcher and 1-X% belongs to the defense.

He plus his relative luck was more valuable.

It’s going to take a ton of work to prove that it was all luck.  And you’re lazy, remember?

We’ve been around and around this before, so I’ll just restate my belief that there is only value and noise, and we should report as much of the former as we can without the latter.

“And you’re lazy, remember?”

Every day when I wake up, or try to, I can’t help but be reminded.

I’ll just restate my belief that there is only value and noise, and we should report as much of the former as we can without the latter.

The problem is with reporting the former as the latter.  And vice versa.

The problem is with reporting the former as the latter.  And vice versa.

Yeah, even the data we have that theoretically removes noise is imprecise.  Batted ball types are subject to stringer bias, objective fielding metrics suffer from range bias.  Hell, even balls and strikes are subjective to a degree since umpires have different strike zones.  If a pitcher throws a pitch that should be called a strike and it gets called a ball, is that a failure to execute on his part, or do we pretend he really threw a strike?  Does that mean the batter actually struck out instead of walked?

I think is a good idea to be careful about getting too abstract, at least until we have a better idea of how reliable the data we think tells us more actually is.

“The problem is with reporting the former as the latter.  And vice versa.”

Exactly.

“I think is a good idea to be careful about getting too abstract”

I think we should do whatever evaluates best overall at the moment, and revise when necessary.

WAR is a retrogressive indicator. It’s literally a recording of what happened, the occurrence being value you contributed. FIP is a predictive metric, meant to equalize all the noise and variance of what actually does happen. Combining the two is mixing up what you want your statistic to tell you.

If Sergio Mitre throws 100 IP of high walk, low strikeout, “lucky” ball, I want WAR to tell me what happened, not that it shouldn’t have - that’s what FIP is for.

First: standard caveat about relative statistical ignorance.
My impression is that the notion that the statistic HAS to be there to tell you this or that is like Marxist appeals to authority.  Why?  Because.
In other words, a version of WAR meant to key to ability rather than results would be useful in - as SG says - comparing players.  In one way, more useful than one keyed strictly to absolute results.
In fact, aren’t some WARs on the web calculated more strictly by actual results, some less?
Is there a reason why both versions couldn’t be useful?
What does make sense is to create the stat to tell us something clear.  But either approach to WAR seems reasonably conceived to tell us something potentially interesting and useful.

[48] We could get rid of umpires calling balls and strikes… which will never happen.

But, hitFX should help at some point in the future, right?

Batted ball types are subject to stringer bias

I saw something a year or so ago that suggested a correlation between the elevation of the press box and the classification of batted balls. Stadiums with really high press boxes report more line drives, those right around field level have less. So in theory you could come up with park effects for what is supposed to be an objective stat.

Let’s hope AJ doesn’t slice his hand open on Swisher’s aerodynamic hairdo.  If we still had Kevin Brown, Brownie would already be on the 60 day… ‘course, that would only help the team I s’pose.

Swish was a great Cashman acquisition. Granderson perhaps to a lesser extent, only because Ian Kennedy and Austin Jackson has provided some value to their respective teams. But that can change in a hurry as well. Both, very fine trades.

SG, Swisher’s change in approach to try to swing more is clearly evident in numbers, but is it possible that he can also establish a new BABiP baseline with a swing more approach (which is what I think Long is preaching the Yankees; I believe when A-Rod’s numbers come up, we will see more of this change in approach)? Have there been more players who have tried to metamorphose into players who would trade a few walks for more hits? I would be curious to see how they aged (if they exist). Although, finding such players may not be easy.

Also, given Swishers salary and his 2008 production, I’m nearly positive the players Williams got were as a result of the Yankees taking all his salary. Now he is extremely affordable because he is producing, but if you thought he wouldn’t recover from 08 (like Williams apparently did) then thats a contract you’d want to dump.

Showing your teammates a bobblehead doll makes you self-absorbed?:

Swisher was dealt to the Yankees before the following season after batting .219 and not having a true position available for him.

The Sox were well-aware of Swisher’s outgoing nature that could be viewed as being self-absorbed, especially after one incident in which he showed his bobblehead doll to his teammates in the clubhouse.

Sox manager Ozzie Guillen took note of Swisher pumping his right arm after hitting a two-run home run in the sixth inning that put the New York Yankees ahead. But the Sox rallied for a 7-6 win, and Guillen had a quick answer when asked about Swisher’s gesture.

“That’s the way he is,” Guillen said. “Good for him. Enjoy it. I wish he could do it for me, he was a very horse(bleep) player for me.’‘

link

[56] Ozzie is an example of a guy who got fortunate to win a WS, and now appears to have a job for life.  Regardless of actual aptitude for the job at hand.

he was a very horse(bleep) player for me

What an amazing coincidence.

Ozzie harks back to a time when everyone wasn’t politically correct and boring.
How would Billy have done if the same criteria were applied?  And yet he was often the right hire.
I miss that world - it was more entertaining.
I’m not sold on his managerial talent (although I think it’s difficult to gauge), but I have no problem with people who don’t behave the way I would behave having publicly prominent (non-political) jobs.

SG, Swisher’s change in approach to try to swing more is clearly evident in numbers, but is it possible that he can also establish a new BABiP baseline with a swing more approach (which is what I think Long is preaching the Yankees; I believe when A-Rod’s numbers come up, we will see more of this change in approach)?

It depends.  Did he take too many hittable pitches prior to last year which is why his BABIP went up? Even if that’s the case, .335 is high for a player like Swisher who hits 45.3% of his balls in the air and doesn’t have blazing speed.  His career high prior to 2010 was .301 (league average is around .304).  Banking on him sustaining that level of improvement is probably folly.

Doesn’t mean he didn’t get better, it’s just the degree of improvement that’s in question.

Have there been more players who have tried to metamorphose into players who would trade a few walks for more hits? I would be curious to see how they aged (if they exist). Although, finding such players may not be easy.

I’m not sure.  Walk rate tends to increase as a player ages and singles rate decreases, so you’d have to sift through a lot of noise to find those kinds of players.  I wonder how many have seen as a big a change as Swisher did from 2009 through 2010 though?  I’ll poke around with it a bit.

[50] the Problem is when you start including things like expected or regressed outcomes into calculations like WAR you’re mixing different kinds of stats. HR, hits, BB, K etc., these all happen, whether because of talent luck or whatever. WAR is a stat meant to tell us how much value a player added based on what actually happened, ignoring the whys and hows.

Now, obviously, that’s imperfect as a be all end all stat - it only tells you what happened and has little predictive capacity. But when calculating the value some player actually contributed, which is something we want stats to do, we don’t want to confuse it with what we expect to happen based on technique etc.

So if you wanna look at the elements of season outcomes that a player had more or less control of, and want to determine how to compare one player to another moving forward, that’s great. We have stats like wOBA and TAv and FIP and SIERA for that. But if you want to know who was the MVP, you want to know only what was actually contributed, regardless of whether it should have or not.

Page 1 of 1 pages:

White Sox (59-68) @ Yankees (64-61), Friday, August 22, 2014, 7:05pm
(18 Comments - 8/22/2014 9:19:47 pm)

NJ.com: Yankees’ Brandon McCarthy explains adjustment that’s helped him dominate
(31 Comments - 8/22/2014 7:39:59 pm)

North Jersey: Out on Castillo
(25 Comments - 8/22/2014 1:44:27 pm)

FanGraphs: Brian McCann Probably Couldn’t Be Given Away For Free
(27 Comments - 8/22/2014 10:41:24 am)

Yankees.com: McCarthy masters Astros in four-hit shutout
(7 Comments - 8/21/2014 9:32:41 pm)

NY Post: Joe Girardi out of options as Yankees’ ship sinks
(25 Comments - 8/21/2014 4:40:17 pm)

Yankees.com: Yankees Stink
(19 Comments - 8/21/2014 1:26:18 pm)

Astros (53-73) @ Yankees (63-60), Wednesday, August 20, 2014, 7:05pm
(51 Comments - 8/20/2014 11:17:01 pm)

Whatever
(18 Comments - 8/20/2014 6:19:08 pm)

Whatever
(104 Comments - 8/20/2014 7:05:25 am)