Things that aggravate you about baseball
I love baseball. Of course i love stupid stuff to like GTLing, Jersey Shore, boozing, & women, but i really like baseball. It's what i think about when i go to bed, it's what i think about when i wake up, & it's what i watch when i have free time. Of course, even though i love it, there is plenty about it that aggravates me. Below you will find a list of what aggravates me about the great game of baseball.
1. Very uneven payrolls
The Yankees payroll is over 206 m this season while teams like the Pirates & Padres sit at 34 m & 37 m. Are the low payroll teams to blame? Are the high payroll teams to blame? It aggravates me that the playing field is not as even as it should be because of spending. You don't see that huge of a difference in other major sports, so why mlb?
2. GM's that should have been canned years ago
I understand it isn't necessarily easy to build a contending franchise, but it baffles me that some teams, for example the Mets or Cubs, continue to stick with piss poor GM's for so much longer than they should. It doesn't take a bright mind to figure out some GM's are failures and shouldn't be in that position.
3. Our reliance on era. Sure era is easy to calculate, gives us some feel how a pitcher is pitching, and is often used in fantasy, but it doesn't tell the story as well as FIP does as to how well a pitcher is really pitching. HR*13+(BB+HBP-IBB)*3-K*2)/IP, plus a league-specific factor (usually around 3.2) - This is ugly, but something we should put more weight on than era.
Some examples of pitchers that are benefiting from era as of a couple of days ago...
Tim Hudson 2.43 era 4.34 FIP
Jamie Garcia 1.49 era 3.29 FIP
Ubaldo Jiminez 1.16 era 2.92 FIP
David Price 2.23 era 3.97 FIP
I could go on with plenty more examples, but i think you get the point. There are plenty of examples of pitchers that have deceivingly good era's to the untrained eye. A pitchers greatness or lack there of should be based on things he controls, such as bb rate, k rate, & hr rate. Some pitchers benefit from stranding a ton of runners, get lucky on their balls in play, have line drive rates way off their career norm, have hr rates way off their career norms, or get lucky defense. We need to stop relying so much on era and make a stat like FIP more mainstream.
4. People that like to ignore defensive metrics like DRS or UZR
No defensive stat is perfect, but these are two of the better ones we have. Visually, it is hard for anyone to really tell how good a player is defensively, which is why metrics like this have been created. People have a tough time visually determining a players range, speed, route running, throwing speed, throw accuracy, ect. It helps to visually see a player play defense to evaluate them, but metrics like DRS & UZR should not be ignored, and should be more mainstream than they are.
5. Putting too much weight into a players batting average. Players should be going up to bat with goals of getting on base, getting as many bases as possible when getting on, and driving in as many runs as possible. I remember reading something about a rookie that debuted a couple of decades ago, and i believe he walked in all four of his plate appearances. His teammates came up to him and said, "better luck next time." What a terrible thing to say to a player that got on base in all his plate appearances in his debut.
Again, this kind of comes down to fantasy in a way, but many people value players that hit for high averages without walking too much. The Willinighams, Adrian Gonzalezs, Johnny Damons, & Adam Dunn's of the world are undervalued because they don't always hit for great averages yet walk at solid rates. Lets value players with high obp more.
6. The save statistic
Saves should either be counted as holds, or there should be some other way to keep track of them without drastically increasing a pitchers value. If a closer has a very good track record as a closer as they reach arbitration for the first time, they sky rocket their value. Players like Huston Street or Jonathan Papelbon become pricey commodities once they find success in the closers role. If those players aren't on competitive teams, that are willing to dish out 10+ m a year for them over multiple years, they are goners. Part of what bothers me about this is that often times, they either are A) not even consistently pitching in the highest leverage of situations, or B) not among the top WAR getters of relievers on their teams. Is it easy to close a game out? No. The save stat financially screws things up once a player becomes arbitration eligible and/or hits free agency. Fix this one mlb.
7. Voters
Voters are (mean word). When you give the fans the power to vote on who gets into the all star game in nearly any sport, they act like (mean word). Willing members are left off each season, and undeserving members make it each season. Same goes for other awards such as Gold Gloves, Silver Sluggers, Cy Youngs, & MVP's, but in this case the voters are perceived educated & unbiased in evaluating talent . Voting on these awards should be a privilege. Those that vote, should have a great understanding of how to evaluate talent, and should be questioned if their votes are way off mark. Voters should be experts, otherwise awards like these hold little weight in my eyes.
I can keep rambling on about this, but am interesting in your views on what is wrong with the game today. Let me know your thoughts on any of the above, or anything else you would want to add to this list.
39 comments
|
3 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
FIP Formula
One thing that aggravates me is the FIP formula. First of all, the constant term (3.2) is much too large, which dampens the difference between pitchers or teams. Second, the weight on HR’s is too large relative to the weight on BB’s. The value of K’s is overstated as well. The actual coefficients will vary a bit from year-to-year. Right now multiple regression on team statistics yields the following:
2.02*HR + 0.63*BB – 0.20*K + 1.46.
In the standard formula 3 K’s offset 2 walks. In the regression formula 3 K’s don’t even completely cancel out one walk!
I’m wiling to listen to any argument on this subject, but I don’t think using regression is the best way to do it.
Beyond the Box Score / Capitol Avenue Club / shwitter: @CapitolAvenue
I hope you know you just ruined FIP for me....
Beyond the Box Score / Capitol Avenue Club / shwitter: @CapitolAvenue
Is that because it's based on linear weights?
But haven’t linear weights been derived both from regression and from Markov chains?
by Dan Turkenkopf on Jun 22, 2010 9:07 PM EDT up reply actions
FIP isn't based on linear weights.
It’s a regression equation. The weights do NOT come out to exactly what they would if you used LWTS as the basis, because of (say) correlation between K rate and BABIP.
(If you look at FIP – it’s expressed in slope/intercept form, like any linear regression. That’s, well, because it is.)
I thought it was linear weights...
Lump K’s in with all outs for linear weights, then subtract the value of a BIP from everything…
According to the references I can find, it's based on the linear weights values
The formula for FIP is:
(13*HR + 3*BB – 2*K)/IP + C
where BB can include HBP and/or exclude IBB and C is a constant (usually around 3.2) that centers FIP around the same mean as ERA. C can be calculated for both leagues together in a given year or for each league separately.
The formula is derived from the average linear weights values for four types of events: HR, BB, K, and BIP. Each weight is presented relative to the average value of a BIP, so that the BIP term in the formula is 0. The formula is thus a simplified form of:
(13*HR + 3*BB – 2*K + 0*BIP)/IP + C
This fact makes it possible to calibrate the coefficients in FIP to different BIP values, such as in a very good or very poor defensive environment or in a park with an extreme BABIP park factor.
by Dan Turkenkopf on Jun 23, 2010 8:27 AM EDT up reply actions
If you look..
…really, really deep at The Book Blog:
I originally got mine by regression, and then solved for it analytically.
I need to find a better cite for this. The key is that the K weight on FIP isn’t what it would be if it was a straight LWTS derivation, because there is a modest observed effect of K rates on BABIP rates and that’s “baked in” to FIP.
Has anyone tried to do a LWTS-based FIP?
I’m about to do it anyway, but curious.
Beyond the Box Score / Capitol Avenue Club / shwitter: @CapitolAvenue
What if we used linear weights to calculate the value of the BB’s, HBP’s, and batted balls, then use regression to correct for strikeout rate.
Beyond the Box Score / Capitol Avenue Club / shwitter: @CapitolAvenue
I don't think it is
Isn’t each term just the run value of each event minus the run value of the average BIP * 9?
Another interesting thing on FIP...
We all tend to view it as a “what a guy’s ERA should have been/will be going forward” stat. (Sort of how “BABIP” has become an argument beyond a simple measure of “hits per ball in play”.)
However, some say the original/main intent is simply a stat that measures a pitcher’s talent that’s tied to HR, SO, BB. FIP isn’t necessarily making a judgment on if BABIP matters, it’s just choosing to ignore it and only measure certain things. (Sort of like how K/BB isn’t saying HRs can be ignored.)
by Sky Kalkman on Jun 23, 2010 10:32 AM EDT up reply actions
Be careful regressing on team statistics...
“Right now multiple regression on team statistics yields the following:…”
There are too many confounding factors for your team-wise approach to apply to individuals. Similarly, OPS looks really good when you look at team data, but it’s flaws can be exposed when you look at individuals.
If you derive a stat for individuals (like FIP), you can apply it to teams if you make some reasonable assumptions (like linearity). If you derive a stat for teams (as you apparently just did), it does not follow that you can automatically apply it to individuals.
The Wave
period
check out VEB on facebook...just search groups for Viva El Birdos
by Dttl89 on Jun 22, 2010 12:59 PM EDT reply actions 3 recs
And as a response to yours
I appreciate the large difference in payroll because it shows the team’s ability to generate revenue. It’s not the yankee’s fault the pirates suck, it’s the pirates’. That and the fact that the MLB payroll is a fairly small number compared to the cash coming into the franchises.
check out VEB on facebook...just search groups for Viva El Birdos
Cap/Floor
I just think there needs to be some sort of cap/floor to spending. Spending correlates to winning for the most part.
I appreciate the idea
of a cap/floor, but those would only hurt the players. I doubt MLBPA would ever go for that.
check out VEB on facebook...just search groups for Viva El Birdos
what if having a more competitive landscape led to more revenue?
then everybody wins
Would you like to follow me on Twitter, Facebook, or my blog...well you can't.
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Jun 22, 2010 7:22 PM EDT up reply actions
I didn't realize
you could force competitiveness…. Salary cap wouldn’t stop larger budget teams from spending money, they’d just put it elsewhere and remove the smaller budget team competitiveness in the international market and draft.
Also, teams with low attendance typically have low attendance no matter how competitive they are.
check out VEB on facebook...just search groups for Viva El Birdos
Do you have anything to back this claim?
Also, teams with low attendance typically have low attendance no matter how competitive they are.
Glad I came, just wish I hadn't stayed so long.
People ask me what I do in winter when there’s no baseball...Rock Chalk Talk
Im thinking specifically of the marlins and rays
Nats and San Diego also fit the mold.
check out VEB on facebook...just search groups for Viva El Birdos
San Diego's been bad.
Washington’s been a joke but they do sell well when Strasburg pitches. Marlins and Rays do struggle with attendance.
Glad I came, just wish I hadn't stayed so long.
People ask me what I do in winter when there’s no baseball...Rock Chalk Talk
San Diego is
still first in their division…and as of right now has the best record in the national league…what’s your definition of good? I think I’m just missing your counter argument…
check out VEB on facebook...just search groups for Viva El Birdos
The last 10 years:
Finished 1st in their division twice.
Finished 3rd in their division twice.
Finished 4th in their division twice.
Finished last in their division four times.
That doesn’t make me think “good team”.
Going on this year, very few people thought they had a chance at .500. Attendance is down but I’d bet their attendance is growing as the season moves along. Two things I’d feel safe making a bet on: (1) They’ll finish the season with an average attendance higher than they’re at now if they continue winning. Averaging 23,393 according to baseball reference. (2) If they finish first or second in the NL West, they’ll have much better attendance numbers next year.
Willing to accept either of those bets?
Glad I came, just wish I hadn't stayed so long.
People ask me what I do in winter when there’s no baseball...Rock Chalk Talk
weird you mentioned those two teams
because i went to the Rays no no on Friday & the Marlins game on Sunday. It is absolutely pathetic how few fans were at both stadiums, even though they aren’t bad teams.
You do realize that there's often
a very direct correlation between attendance and winning?
That’s not always the case, but generally speaking, if a team starts to win more often, more fans will flock to the stadium.
Just look at the White Sox. In the early part of the 2000’s, they were routinely in the 1.7 million to 1.9 million range with their attendance. Then, in 2005, they start winning some games, and attendance jumps to 2.34 million. In 2006, following the WS win and with high expectations for the team, attendance jumped again to 2.9 million.
Then, the team continually disappoints over the next few years, and by 2009 attendance has dropped back down to 2.2 million. Some cities simply aren’t viable areas for an MLB team, but generally speaking, winning has a huge effect on attendance.
I like baseball.
I write for Beyond the Box Score and The Hardball Times Fantasy
by Satchel Price on Jun 24, 2010 12:15 PM EDT up reply actions
That's one example
and I’m not going to say that’s an outlier, but lower attendance teams stay lower attendance. That was my point. I’m not saying that more people won’t come out. My point was that they will have generally low attendance no matter what. Look at the Rays, Marlins, San Diego, and Toronto. Obviously you can cherry pick examples either way, and I haven’t looked, but I’d be willing to bet that high attendance teams will stay higher attendance, and lower will stay lower. The white sox seem like a great example of a team that’s (I would assume) medium to higher attendance that would receive quite a boon from a winning season, but they’re not really a low attendance team (as far as I know).
check out VEB on facebook...just search groups for Viva El Birdos
Drunk fans
And violent fans
And when combined, Dodgers fans.
Aaron King is still my homeboy... iffy mechanics and all
McFAQ for all you newcomers out there.
Beach Balls
AN: Where you will be an A's fan or Dallas Braden will show you the repercussions of your actions.
Anyone who refuses to acknowledge the existence of luck as a major factor in every baseball game.
They need to take a long look at only the fourth start since 1920 where a pitcher surrenders 13+ hits in 8 innings or less while earning double digit strikeouts.
From a fairly new, but sabermetrically inclined, fan
1) Intentional Walks – Almost always a bad idea
2) Designated Hitter – I mean come on!
3) Mutual Disrespect Between Teams and Officials – Yelling, Screaming, and Attempting to Injure are not healthy adult behaviors, and they are not the marks of professionals in any field, sport or otherwise.
If I hit a hole-in-one on this grand slam the dominoes will fall like a house of cards. Checkmate.

by 





























