Beyond the Box Score: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Around SBN: Headlines: BC Beats BU 4-3 in 58th Beanpot Championship

Are LHB being unfairly struck out looking on pitches away?

Before we begin I want readers to know that I understand the minutaie of such a topic. Originally this was going to be a post on the full count, but the ridiculous of one of my charts made me decide to look at this phenomena instead.

From my last post on the Oakland A's strike 3s looking and some other work I've got in the pipeline (here's a preview), I've noticed a disturbing trend with regard to left handed batters. They're being rung up a ridiculous amount of the time on pitches not just away, but way away. Here's what I'm talking about.

2_strike_kc_away_to_lhb_medium

(Remember this is from the catcher/umpire perspective)

The black line represents 10 inches to the left of home plate, which is what I've seen referred to as the very edge of the strike zone. To account for a couple inches of error in the data as well as balls that may have crossed the strikezone farther in the y dimension (say a slider from a RHP that crosses home plate 5 inches behind the front of the plate where pitch f/x measures from) I've only taken the strikes that pitchfx said were centered at 1 foot to the left of home plate or farther left.

I'm also only concerned with pitches within the top and bottom of the batter's strikezone. If an ump is missing a ball both low and away, he's probably hopeless anyway. In this exercise there were only 10 Kc that were both high/low and away, so umps are pretty good with the knees to the letters rule. The ball grazes the edge of home plate rule, eh maybe not so much.

Star-divide

So How Bad Is It?

For those who don't want to count each dot, that's 674 Kc away which were likely unjustified, at least according to the data we are provided with. That's about a little over 1 every 4 games last season. I don't know if that sounds like a lot to you, but when you consider these are just the balls away to LHB (there are plenty of other OoZ Kc to both LHB and RHB high, low and every other direction) I think it's quite a problem.

The other thing I wanted to see was consistency. If these were always called strikes unjustly, at least the batter knows he needs to swing at a ball at this part of the "strike zone". If they're sometimes balls and other times strikes, well what is he supposed to do then? So here's the Kc overlaid on the balls away.

Ballkcaway_medium

Hmmm, this picture isn't as helpful as I originally intended. I mean it's nice to see that umpires are calling balls 2 feet away from the center of home plate balls, and that pitchers throw a lot more balls way out there than I had expected, but it doesn't answer our consistency question at all. It's also way too many data points and has broken Excel's scatter plot more than a few times already today (R has a much steeper learning curve than I anticipated). Let's instead look at the zone in dispute.

Let's Zoom In A Bit

The furthest called strike was just under 1.61 feet away from the center of home plate, so I'm going to take that as the farthest point. I'm not trying to make the graph ingenuine by making the origin something other than (0,0), it's just that we are only concerned with a 1/2 foot by 2 foot area of the "strike zone" right now so it makes sense just to focus on that part. Just remember to look at the axis to make sense of the graph.

Balls_and_kc_special_medium

Well now isn't that interesting, looks like the umpires aren't even consistent. Even if they were consistently bad at least batters would know what to do. I'm not a huge fan of arbitrary zones, but I don't have the hang of the software yet to do a heat map so arbitrary it is.

A little more than 1/2 of the Kc fell in the first quarter of the graph horizontally [-1.00, -1.16], 364 Kc to be precise. In that same region, 462 Balls were called. So we can say the umps were wrong 44% of the time, just a bit under half. That's not very helpful to batters. I would think they would actually prefer if that number were much higher, say 80%, because then they at least know they need to swing at it since it will be called a strike. Obviously they'd prefer to be getting the proper strike zone called if anything, but that simply doesn't look like it's happening right now.

As to the break-even point, it's at 1.096 feet away from the center of home plate. All pitches between [-1 and -1.096] had a 50/50 chance of being called a ball or strike. It's only a little over 3 inches away from where the true strike zone is supposed to end, but it's called a game of inches for a reason, and those are very valuable to a pitcher.

What can be done?

Well, the easiest thing is just to tell the umpires to call the correct strike zone and it would make things nice and simple. Considering this fishy LHB business has been going on for a while though, it may not change anytime soon. So what else is to be done?

Left Handed Batters

Sorry guys but it looks like you're getting screwed here a bit. Gotta learn to start swinging at those balls away with two strikes. I know you can't do much with them, but maybe you could foul them off?

For what it's worth batters swung at 4360 (54.9%) of pitches in the disputed area [-1, -1.61]. It's hard to say whether that's an effect of the umpire's calls or just batters swinging at worse pitches with 2 strikes on them, but that sounds like a lot. Even my favorite free swinger Pablo Sandoval "only" swung at 53.8% out of the zone overall last year.

Who knows, something good might even happen. Even Padres C Luke Carlin took one of those pitches deep   (highlighting mine)Carlin_medium
and he's got 12 HR in almost 1500 professional AB.

Pitchers

You've got it easy, the ump is practically giving you a few extra inches away, and most left handed batters probably aren't doing much damage even if they make contact in that area, only 8 HR were hit in that area with two strikes. Don't go to the well there every time since you might become too predictable, but if I was a LHP I'd throw sliders and curves in that area almost with reckless abandon. RHP with tailing fastballs are set as well.

Umpires

You do enough to draw ire already just by wearing your uniform, though most of the time it's not deserved. In this instance it appears to be the case though, so learn to properly look over the catchers shoulder or figure out a better way to approach calling pitches away when a LHB is up, because you don't seem to be doing a very good job right now.

5 recs  |  Comment 54 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Around SB Nation

Wednesday's Frosty Mug

Jan 2010 from Brew Crew Ball - 41 comments

Friday's Frosty Mug

Dec 2009 from Brew Crew Ball - 100 comments

The Rookies Who Aren't

Nov 2009 from Brew Crew Ball - 1 comment

Comments

Display:

i'm excited about this

what does the one for right handers look like? are umpires similarly poor then, or do they just not like the sinister types?

i suspect, though, that 95% of the inaccurately called strikes are due to Jack Cust getting sawn off. yes. that sounds like the truth.

Billy Beane loves soccerball, and so should you

by alea iacta est on Feb 13, 2009 8:50 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Good stuff

I wonder whether the inaccurately called strike percentage is different RHB vs LHB, high versus low, and away versus inside. I suspect that away strikes are called more liberally due to umpire positioning. Not sure about high versus low, or RH versus LH.

Heat maps would be helpful here, as would a similar analysis of inaccurately called balls (inside the corner by so many inches…) Is this average MLB umpire error, or worse than average?

by Adam Peterson on Feb 13, 2009 9:25 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Wow,

great stuff. I’d love to see a follow up for rhb’s to see if this is a “discrimination” or if it is just that the umpires are terrible at calling the outside corner with two strikes.

I just got back from your mom's basement.

by Warden11 on Feb 13, 2009 10:23 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

One would think

that if this is so noticeable the league would catch on sooner or later with Questec. Kudos for the great research.

G G G E-flat_______ F F F D__________....

by t ball on Feb 14, 2009 12:04 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

What does the opposite side look like for RHB?

If it looks fairly similar, then I’m not sure there’s an issue, other than bad umpiring.

Vogt early, Vogt often.

by Brickhaus on Feb 14, 2009 12:29 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

misc rambling and tangents

I was trying to find an article that my recollection was that it was about the MLB person who dealt with umpires. The “outside strike” (to me a ball called a strike on the outside) was one of the issues that he rode the umpires on and supposedly he improved things, but eventually left the job and speculation was that he was forced out. I think I read it when Chipper Jones made some salty comments about the quality of umpiring.

The outside strike seems to be critical for the success of some pitchers. Schilling once smashed a Questec camera and guys like Jamie Moyer live off of it. I feel pretty confident in my prediction that the Brewers won their playoff game against Moyer because he didn’t get the outside strike, and he won later in the playoffs because he got it.

Although I didn’t find the article I came across a couple others. In The Ten Unwritten Rules of Calling Balls and Strikes, the catcher influences 7 of them. Besides raising questions about umpiring, it highlights how difficult it is to evaluate catchers. I am a big Jason Kendall fan and think he is a big plus for the Brewers while people who don’t watch him as much and some Brewers fans as well think he is a weak player who should be replaced. It makes me wonder about Varitek. It seems as if the Sox should have bid him adieu, but perhaps his contribution in various ways makes him a good signing at $5 million IIRC.

Rule 9 about calling 0-2 and 3-0 counts is a possible subject of inquiry.

Here is an AP story in SI. Clearly guys like you are going to be a thorn in the sides of the status quo (yay!), but I’d like to see a breakdown by umpire and umpire v. team and umpire v. batter.

I also question the notion that a 90 percent success rate should be considered acceptable. Its not so much that the 90 percent level is unreasonable, but that like high leverage statistics for players, umpires can call a near perfect game ands simply call 1 or 2 strike 3 calls on balls outside the zone and change a game. Another thing I’ve seen is an umpire who calls pitches down the middle of the zone as balls in the first inning, particularly with a young pitcher, and the result is a frazzled pitcher with a high count and the team down a couple runs. That umpire can influence a game outcome but still be rated as doing an excellent job.

In summary, a kudos to you and throwing out some thoughts on ways to slice and dice the mountain of data becoming available.

by ol Pete on Feb 14, 2009 12:07 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Number 9 I take huge issue with

The problem comes from not everybody (the umpire world) likely to treat this the same way. Then batters/pitchers are left clueless unless they know each umpire personally as to the likelihood of getting a call on 3-0 as opposed to 0-2. I can understand in principle why they wouldn’t want to call it uniformly but in practice it’s so damn subjective they shouldn’t bother with it.

In fact this is what my original study was going to look at in a way, that is are batters getting rung up on pitches outside of the zone differently depending on 2 strike count. I’ll likely come back to it at some point but it was becoming a bit too massive.

Can't get enough of the Oakland A's? Visit Oaktown Awesomer's. For further statistical analysis, Beyond the Box Score.

by iamawesomer on Feb 14, 2009 5:24 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

awesomer is awesome

I love this kind of analysis. I do have a request of one of the BtB people though, and I figured since iamawesomer is an A’s fan, he might be willing to analyze the enemy (Angels). I’m hoping someone can take a look at Ervin Santana, as he had a profound year last year. He changed a lot of things (threw his slider a LOT more and stopped throwing the change), and there were positive results. One cannot simply use luck/regression to explain his 2008 season (and actually his BABIP was just about what we’d expect from him). Anyway, you guys actually know how to use Pitch Fx data, etc, and I just thought that would be fun to look at.

"If Bowden was a general contractor, he'd build houses with nine bedrooms, six garages, no bathrooms, and half a roof."

by DyeLongJustice on Feb 14, 2009 3:01 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

You're right, Santana's FIP-style metrics the previous few years were around 5.00 and then they suddenly dropped.

He “deserved” his awesome ERA last year. And looking at what changed would be cool.

Keep in mind, though, that regression doesn’t just handle seasons that were flukey in the lucky sense. It’s also to account for the fact that Santana’s skills will likely regress somewhat towards his old level of production.

Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.

by Sky Kalkman on Feb 14, 2009 4:28 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Looking solely at the FIP components

Santana saw a sharp reduction in HR/9, from 1.56 down to 0.95. He also saw a decent jump in SO/9 (+1.23) and reduction in BB/9 (-1.55).

IMO, Santana may see a regression in HR/9 (to around his career average 1.11), considering his GB/FB ratios are generally in the .8-.9 range. For the walks and strikeouts, perhaps we will see a regression, but he quite possibly “figured it out”…

by Adam Peterson on Feb 14, 2009 6:13 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

GB/FB

went from 0.78 in 2007 up to 0.93 last year, so there was movement toward GB. My point was that his career average is 0.86, so a regression to the mean wouldn’t be very far in GB/FB.

by Adam Peterson on Feb 15, 2009 7:30 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Why this might be a LHB issue.

LOOGYs, man. They pitch from the far left of the rubber (usually), and often step toward the foul line when they stride. This creates a HUGE angle to that outside corner.

Some questions that come to mind in looking for a possible explanation:
-How many (percentage) of those strikes were thrown by a LOOGY?
-How many (percentage) of those balls were thrown a LOOGY?

by NoNameOnCard on Feb 14, 2009 3:55 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

You wouldn't by chance have a LOOGY list on ya?

For all my pitchfx talents I don’t have very good retrosheet skills.

Actually I guess I could use the games table and search by relievers who faced the most LHB? Could be a decent approximation of LOOGYness.

Can't get enough of the Oakland A's? Visit Oaktown Awesomer's. For further statistical analysis, Beyond the Box Score.

by iamawesomer on Feb 14, 2009 5:29 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I am listless (haha).

Narrowing the search to left-handed relievers (if possible) would be a strong move in the right direction.

Outside of that, I guess you’d have to go through the season rosters and pick out the LOOGYs from each team.

by NoNameOnCard on Feb 14, 2009 7:38 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I would start with LH relievers

as a good start. Trying to pick out the LOOGYs may not gain you much, and it introduces a degree of subjectivity. See if there is a difference RH versus LH relievers…

by Adam Peterson on Feb 15, 2009 7:32 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

somebody at THT, maybe Treder

did an article or three on OOGYs a couple years back. Obviously the list would be out of date (and there was probably a historical component too), but his methodology is something you can do with B-ref PI. I think he defined an OOGY as someone with an IP/G < 1. Or maybe a little lower. IIRC, it matched up about right with intuition.

Also, cheese.

by Jeff Sackmann on Feb 15, 2009 2:34 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I enjoy this type of research

but it may not be kosher with MLB. I was told that quite clearly after discussing my ump studies from last year at the pitchf/x summit. I’ve asked for an update/clarification on the topic, but I actually removed my work on what types of breaking balls umps miss, who is a hitter’s umpire etc., long ago.

by Harry Pavlidis on Feb 14, 2009 3:56 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

While I understand why MLB doesn't why umps challenged, I don't know how much of a black mark this is against them.

It’s just interesting. And we’re not picking on any specific umps, meaning we’re likely dealing with something that’s just difficult to call.

And noticed that fewer “bad calls” are made as the ball gets higher or lower. It’s almost as if umps are calling more of a rounded strike zone instead of a rectangular strike zone, which is probably easy to do intuitively. I.e., how far is a pitch from being right down the middle?

Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.

by Sky Kalkman on Feb 14, 2009 4:31 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I specifically left out the umpire part

I could do a look at them but chose not to partially for the kosher reason and also because I don’t have the corresponding umpire list to match with the numbers (I’m sure Harry does but I’m not really looking to bash people in particular). It’s more the overall idea that I’m concerned with.

Can't get enough of the Oakland A's? Visit Oaktown Awesomer's. For further statistical analysis, Beyond the Box Score.

by iamawesomer on Feb 14, 2009 6:00 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I agree

I’m hoping that’s OK. What I find is the umps and the hitters have basically the same zone, and it’s pretty consistent.

by Harry Pavlidis on Feb 14, 2009 6:18 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

The true zone is definitely an oval rather than a square

Many years from now, when his name's recalled
Everyone will say, "He should have passed the ball"
-- Al Stewart, "Football Hero"

by PaulThomas on Feb 15, 2009 2:19 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I would love to see this graphically. Some sort of heat map or fine-grained color coded graph of boxes...

… showing the percentage pitches to each location that are called balls and strikes. Maybe divide out by pitch and pitcher/batter handedness.

Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.

by Sky Kalkman on Feb 15, 2009 1:49 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Hmm I could see why MLB would have a problem with that

publicly at least.

But I’d be surprised if some teams at least aren’t privately conducting research like this, or they’re doing a huge injustice to themselves if they’re not.

Can't get enough of the Oakland A's? Visit Oaktown Awesomer's. For further statistical analysis, Beyond the Box Score.

by iamawesomer on Feb 14, 2009 5:10 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

That's ridiculous

but, in any case, what are they going to do about it? They make the info available, and you draw (true) conclusions from it. I hardly think they’ll get rid of pitch f/x just to appease some bad umpires. They can’t force you to suppress your findings.

Many years from now, when his name's recalled
Everyone will say, "He should have passed the ball"
-- Al Stewart, "Football Hero"

by PaulThomas on Feb 15, 2009 2:18 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

actually

MLBAM has threatened to stop providing f/x. There are a couple of teams (at least) that want it out of the public domain, as well.

Also, cheese.

by Jeff Sackmann on Feb 15, 2009 2:36 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Good Write up

As an umpire though, I can settle this rather easily…it is just difficult

it is easy to sit at home or even in the batters box and make judgments about the umping but it isnt easy for us

the ball is moving a bit and we have to make a call in a split second that is maybe 1 inch away from being a strike

oh yeah, we do that a couple hundred times a game

the outside corner is the hardest one to call…period

by Horns130 on Feb 14, 2009 3:58 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

The ump typically sets up over the inside corner

so the inside corner is much easier to call (right in front of you), while the outside corner is farther away, looking from an angle to boot.

by Adam Peterson on Feb 14, 2009 4:22 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I'm sure that's an issue.

But I’d be curious to see the results for the inside corner, too. I’m guessing there’s still an effect of pitches that are off the plate inside being called strikes more often when they’re centered vertically (close to the center of the strike zone). Can you do the second graph for inside pitches? And then maybe both inside and outside for righties?

Oh, and maybe do them for different types of pitches, thrown by different-handed pitchers?

Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.

by Sky Kalkman on Feb 14, 2009 11:42 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Type of pitches

Probably has quite an effect on this. I’d expect a curve ball or slider that ends up a few inches outside to be more likely to be called a strike than a fastball in the same place due to the movement.

by Adam Peterson on Feb 15, 2009 7:34 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Not sure I'd agree with that.

From my umpiring days (Legion/HS), those calls always seemed easier because they were moving away at the time. They just seemed “clearer” to me. Close fastballs were always tough because they stayed right along the corner. Catchers didn’t catch the ball as it is moving away from the zone.

I guess what I’m saying is that not calling outside breaking balls never brought any complaints/groans, but fastballs on the corner always brought a few.

I just got back from your mom's basement.

by Warden11 on Feb 15, 2009 1:07 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Human error

There will always be some degree of error in calling balls and strikes. The key (for me) is to determine whether inside/outside, LHB/RHB, etc has a significantly different rate of inaccurate calls.

Also, a few studies have shown variation in the PitchFx release point data. I wonder if there are any similar errors in the pitch X-Y location data.

by Adam Peterson on Feb 14, 2009 4:24 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I think everyone (or most everyone) understands it's hard.

I don’t think anyone thinks umpires don’t do a better job than any of us could do or that there’s anything nefarious going on. Just that human error will cause, well, errors.

I’m not out to trash umpires for not necessarily doing the best they can, I’m going to trash Major League Baseball for not doing everything they can to have the most accurate strike zone calls possible.

If that can be done with humans, fine. I’m just not sure it can.

by philkid3 on Feb 14, 2009 6:47 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

That's a remarkably understated position

I’m 100%, totally, utterly convinced that the most accurate strike zone calls possible cannot be made by humans.

Many years from now, when his name's recalled
Everyone will say, "He should have passed the ball"
-- Al Stewart, "Football Hero"

by PaulThomas on Feb 15, 2009 2:20 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I'm not 100%

Just because I insist on keeping an open mind.

I’m pretty close, though.

by philkid3 on Feb 15, 2009 5:02 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I assume there is nothing nefarious

but it is far from a certainty. Fans of the NBA were derided when they wondered about the performance of the officials. The guy who got caught was a complete idiot. There are 100s of millions of dollars at stake and MLB umpires can change the outcome of games and still be rated excellent.

by ol Pete on Feb 15, 2009 11:02 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I would like to see the major leagues try to automate all ball and strike calls.

Not eliminate the home plate umpire though. It just seems to be a more fair way of doing things around home plate. One benefit would be less arguments from both teams.

"Evolution happened, now get over it." Michael Shermer

by rodcarew on Feb 14, 2009 4:24 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

My Issue With This

The tracker for that system kills the batter on breaking balls though b/c it loves to adhere to the where the ball crosses the plate idea.

Ive seen curves bounce into the glove that it shows as a strike

by Horns130 on Feb 14, 2009 11:22 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

You can fine tune it to whatever humans decide should be called, no?

A less drastic example is the vertical strike zone: umps don’t call the rulebook these days, but it’s easy to adjust the computer system for that. Also the width of the called zone is a bit wider (and more on one side than the other) than the rulebook.

Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.

by Sky Kalkman on Feb 14, 2009 11:44 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Are you saying that you won’t make a strike call on a pitch that bounces even if it crosses the strike zone?

by ol Pete on Feb 15, 2009 10:57 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Correct

And you wont find a single umpire who will

by Horns130 on Feb 15, 2009 8:52 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

That’s a depressing claim.

by ol Pete on Feb 15, 2009 9:35 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Agree Wholeheartedly

Neither the vertical or horizontal strike zone present any major technical hurdles to overcome. Cameras and the visible spectrum might not be the right answer; perhaps radar would be a better choice. Define a circle based on the front center out to the black of the plate and calculate the signal return time. That should clearly indicate the altitude of the ball if it crosses the circle. If it does cross the circle, there’s no return time and the pitch is clearly a ball.

The horizontal can easily be figured by a simple redefinition of the strike zone. Perhaps the distance from the hollow behind the knee of the front leg in a normal batting stance to the ground, then taken from the hollow of the knee upwards by a given multiple. A multiple of 1.25 for most adult males would be be approximately the bottom of the sternum plus an inch or two. A 5th technical umpire could set this on a per at-bat basis with one mouse-click over a live video image, or it could be taken from batting practice or other archive data.

The umpire could be signaled with the decision almost before his normal reaction time to make the call manually. And he’d always have the option to override in case of an obvious malfunction. The HPU would always be in control of the other aspects of the job as it currently stands, although there are aids to that as well. Test cricket has an infrared thermographic camera system to judge their equivalent of the foul tip and hit batsman (contact = friction = heat) which is available in near-real time.

The hurdles aren’t technological; they’re human. Getting the batters, pitchers and umpires to accept the system is the key. The umpires won’t like it at first, unless they’re made to realize that in the long haul it means a lot less grief for them. If the system is built right and the HPU feels he’s in control of the technology, that would be a good start. Something as simple as a hand-held clicker to turn the radar on and off would give a feeling of control.

And it’s my view that a more regular strike zone where batters don’t get punched out on a ball outside is going to put more offense in the game which it seems has been one on MLB’s goals if a largely unstated one.

Fred Lewis can stand under my umbrella.
31 May 2007, 21:38 EST - the last time Matteh's career W-L wasn't below.500
We are at war with Los Angeles. We have always been at war with Los Angeles.

by S.F. Giangst on Feb 15, 2009 2:44 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

People elsewhere are talking about how "we need right handers, because if it's the same this is worthless."

What? Am I the only person that makes no sense to? If it’s happening to right handers, too, I’m just as mad because it’s still, a foot away from where balls should be strikes, flipping a coin to decide if a ball is a strike or not. If it’s happening on both sides of the plate, it’s just aggrivating in another way.

Anyway, someone should do a right handed study so people stop demanding one.

by philkid3 on Feb 14, 2009 9:15 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

RHB eh, stay tuned tomorrow!

And I agree with you about the RHB thing, even if it’s poor both ways than either officially make the strikezone wider in each direction or just get something to automate calls.

Can't get enough of the Oakland A's? Visit Oaktown Awesomer's. For further statistical analysis, Beyond the Box Score.

by iamawesomer on Feb 14, 2009 9:35 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Wow, nice work.

Soy el niƱo destructor. I eat kids for breakfast. Roar. - Juan Francisco 'spoken with an Italian accent'

by jacob brumfield on Feb 16, 2009 2:06 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

We use numbers and stuff.
Community Guidelines
Why be a member?
Start posting on Beyond the Box Score »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

770insig_small
BtB's "Ball On A Budget" Fantasy League - Discuss Participants, Payrolls and Position Eligibility

Recent FanPosts

Ds9_small
good graphing program?
Small
Predicting HR/FB Rates
Leopold_butter_scotch_southpark_small
Troy Tulowitzki vs Ryan Braun
Small
Pitchers batted ball observations
Small
Eric Byrnes: A player worth a look?
Small
Valverde Is Charging Detroit Double
Mukuro_small
Another question: About power rankings
Small
Why You Shouldn't Trade for Arroyo
Jinaz-reds-avatar_small
Last Call for BtB Sabermetric Writing Award Nominations

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

FanShots

Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.

Recent FanShots

Can you spot the five guys NOT in the Hall of Fame? It's easy, I separated 'em for ya. :)

Here's the full post about guys elected to the Hall of Fame primarily for their defense. Guys like Brooks Robinson, Ozzie Smith, Bobby Wallace, John Ward, and Bid McPhee stand up as definite HOFers, with many others worthy of debate (and a couple aren't worth any debate at all).

I almost made it through the whole post without comparing some HOFers to our friends Bill Dahlen, Lou Whitaker, Bobby Grich, Alan Trammell, and Ron Santo. Almost.
If you care about newspaper coverage of MLB, read this post
Visualizing the Difference Between Offensive and Defensive Value for Catchers
First B-Pro and now ESPN. Tommy, you're growing up so fast
THT - Advancing by ground
Negro League Museum Close to Folding
It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one...
Ranking Minor League Systems Using Victors Wang's Prospect Valuations
Pitch f/x on Ricky Nolasco Stretch vs. Windup again
Veron Wells the artist.  I never knew.

http://www.vwellsart.com/

+ New FanShot All FanShots >

BtB on Twitter

Main Feed: @BtBScore

Jeff: @jeffwzimmerman
Steve: @steve_sommer
Sky: @BtB_Sky
Dan: @dturkenk
Harry: @harrypav
Jinaz: @jinazreds
Jack: @jh_moore
Erik: @Erik_Manning
Tommy R: @trancel
Justin: @justinbopp

Subscribe to BtB via Email

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

BtB Goes Social


Managers

Wbc_029_small Jeff Sullivan

Editors

Rawlings_baseball_bigger_small Dan Turkenkopf

Limes_125_small Sky Kalkman

770insig_small Jeff Zimmerman (TucsonRoyal)

Aviles_small Justin Bopp

Authors

Roots_game_small R.J. Anderson

Jinaz-reds-avatar_small JinAZ

Face_small Harry Pavlidis

1753738656_110919ebe9_o_small vivaelpujols

Ozzie_small erik

Raysring1_small Tommy Rancel

Redcap_small SFiercex4

St_louis_cardinals_ce1141_003263_small stevesommer05

Paige_small Satchel Price