An attempt I made at comparing a teams offensive output. It could be used with any metric. Adding names really jumbled it up. Let me know what you think.
Here is the related article at RoyalsReview.com
about 1 month ago
Jeff Zimmerman
18 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
If your intent is to show the Royals really suck everywhere except 1B, RF and DH, it’s effective. But it’s information overload. DH looks the best because you only have the AL. I’d restrict it all to the league. It would also be nice to track individual teams. A line chart would be good for that, but then you’d probably have to do it one division at a time.
Agreed...
I like it, but I would have used Interquartile Range bars with a line marking averages (or Medians, or harmonic means), just so it’s easier on the eyes and more intuitive.
Blogger and Editor, Rational Pastime Blog
I thought it worked pretty good for showing the Royals.
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
I'm with you, Warden
I don’t think it was information overload at all, and we all know the DH is only in the AL, so the comparison to average is still valid. If it needs to be AL-only that would be b/c of the difference b/t AL & NL hitting overall, not b/c you have fewer points to compare at DH.
Would you like to follow me on Twitter, Facebook, or my blog...well you can't.
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Jul 22, 2010 5:52 PM EDT up reply actions
More teams please
you should make a color coding for all teams
by Alexander אלכסנדר Mermelstein on Jul 22, 2010 4:03 PM EDT reply actions
You could make a By-Division version that could be color-coded without being to cluttered
and still offer relevant analysis of how the teams in a division compare
Would you like to follow me on Twitter, Facebook, or my blog...well you can't.
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Jul 22, 2010 5:53 PM EDT up reply actions
I think that would be very confusing trying to get 30 different colors/shapes
comparing 2 would work though
- .-. ..- … – / – …. . / .—. .-. - .. . … …
by Jeff Zimmerman on Jul 22, 2010 6:15 PM EDT up reply actions
I should have been more clear with my comment above
by “By-Division”, I meant highlighting players/teams within the same division. I thing you could have 5 teams’ worth of colors/shapes without it getting too confusing.
Would you like to follow me on Twitter, Facebook, or my blog...well you can't.
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Jul 23, 2010 3:16 PM EDT up reply actions
I wonder if it could work with a field map with rings at each position. Bigger diameter = better production.
Really like it, though. Also shows the relative strengths of each position, regardless of highlighting a team.
It really helps convey some ideas that some Royals fans bring up
Butler and Dejesus are above average compared to all players, but just average for their position.
Continued info to show why Kendall bats 2nd.
I would bold the 0 line next time for easy reference.
- .-. ..- … – / – …. . / .—. .-. - .. . … …
by Jeff Zimmerman on Jul 23, 2010 8:59 AM EDT up reply actions
yeah, i like that idea
and while we’re giving you extra work to do, how about a dot/line/marker for each position showing the average and/or median value for the position?
Would you like to follow me on Twitter, Facebook, or my blog...well you can't.
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Jul 23, 2010 3:17 PM EDT up reply actions
Sir, your model appears to be broken
I don’t know what kind of horseshit statistic your are using, but it is clearly not correctly modeling offense. As any fan worth his salt knows, the Royals are LEADING THE LEAGUE IN HITTING. How could they possibly be as offensively inept as your model shows when they are leading the league in HITTING, and hitting is offense?
by rileydog22 on Jul 22, 2010 10:05 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
As mentioned at Royals Review:
If you turn the graph upside down it measures each player’s grit
- .-. ..- … – / – …. . / .—. .-. - .. . … …
by Jeff Zimmerman on Jul 23, 2010 9:02 AM EDT up reply actions
Perhaps the use of boxes for each position
would simplify the graph and make it nicely presentable. You could indicate the average with a line, the 25-75 quartiles with one color box, and the 0-100 range with another color. It’s effectively three sets of error bars.
Red Sox Talk
redsox.wordpress.com
fantasyscope.wordpress.com
saberrattling.wordpress.com
There's some talk of "boxes" - are these in addition to the dots or replacing them?
I like having each data point represented, so I’m not in favor of replacing the dots. The boxes and error bars could go either way, but I can already see the general distribution and 75/25 pretty easily without the box-and-whiskers.
Would you like to follow me on Twitter, Facebook, or my blog...well you can't.
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Jul 23, 2010 3:20 PM EDT up reply actions
Just wondering, but that monster dot in left field is Josh Hamilton, right?
In terms of 2010 offense, it’s basically been Hamilton and a bevy of slugging 1B churning out numbers so far this season.
Gotta admit, his explosion the past few months has been one of the bigger surprises of the season in terms of big offensive performances. Who saw Hammy batting over .350 near the end of July?
I like baseball.
I write for Beyond the Box Score and The Hardball Times Fantasy
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recent FanShots
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.
