On the average, the run value of a high inside fastball is -.001 where minus is good for the pitcher. The run value of a low outside fastball is +.001. In other words, the run value of the former is better than the run value of the latter.
Now, put all pitch sequence and game theory stuff aside.
In an average situation against an average batter, where those run values above absolutely apply, which pitch should a pitcher attempt to throw, and why?
The answer I gave, which MGL later said to be correct is: Low and away.
Your phrasing: "which pitch should a pitcher attempt to throw, and why?" The key word is attempt. If you make a mistake down and away, you probably won’t get burned as much as if you make a mistake going up.
If he has perfect control, then by all means take the one which the better value, but there is human error involved.
about 1 year ago
Zach Sanders
10 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
More from MGL:
I was thinking about the pitch f/x article or two a while back that told us exactly what I told you – that the high inside fastball was a very effective pitch. What the data and article did NOT tell you was the run value of a pitch that was ATTEMPTED to be thrown high and inside. That may be (and probably is) a very different story. And of course that is the number that most interests us in terms of figuring out what kinds of pitches a pitcher should throw and when he should throw them (and against what kinds of batters).
I agree, after reading MGL make his point, this is critical to goood pitch f/x analysis.
Well, you can still say that a pitch to a certain location is good, as long as everyone understands that’s if the pitch lands right there. If we’re talking about aiming a pitch, you have to consider where it might miss and how good those locations are. And the range of “might miss” locations will change for different pitchers.
Beyond the Boxscore Not a member? Sign up.
Makes sense.
But how are we ever going to be able to tell where the pitch was intended to be?
@bs_uf15bosox9be:OverTheMonster-ALLERGEN WARNING:May contain PB.
Mike Fast is suggesting that Sportvision track where the catcher initially sets up
It won’t be perfect, but it would give more of an indication of intent.
Apparently they’re willing to consider it, but it’s way down their list of priorities.
by Dan Turkenkopf on Jul 20, 2009 7:53 AM EDT up reply actions
Still, We can't always tell if they are aiming low or high
So it’s only halfway there.
by Zach Sanders on Jul 20, 2009 11:23 AM EDT up reply actions
That, and sometimes a catcher sets up late when a batter's peeking.
So that could affect how they record it.
@bs_uf15bosox9be:OverTheMonster-ALLERGEN WARNING:May contain PB.
It's also possible to record the catcher's signs,
as long as there’s no one on second base.
Decrease runs scored?
Maybe.
Decrease winning? Never seen that proven.
-SFTU
You know what would be awesome?
If you had lots of data on where the catcher set up vs. where a pitcher actually located, you could derive a command coefficient for each guy. That way, you could do a Bayesian run expectancy with a certain degree of pitcher-dependent error built into each location, and determine where the best run value would be.
by Tommy Bennett on Jul 20, 2009 5:01 PM EDT up reply actions
That's too geeky
Even for me :)
Derosa.
by vivaelpujols on Jul 20, 2009 5:11 PM EDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Beyond the Box Score
Related FanShots on Beyond the Box Score
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
BtB on Facebook
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
