Stat-Colored Glasses

BtB Power Rankings: Through Tuesday, June 30th, 2009

by JinAZ on Jul 1, 2009 9:12 PM EDT in Stat-Colored Glasses Comment 55 comments

Welcome to our weekly ranking of all the MLB teams! In this ranking, we use aggregate team hitting, pitching, and fielding statistics--not team wins, losses, runs scored, or runs allowed--to evaluate the performance of teams to date. You can think of the estimated winning percentage (eW%) below as how we'd expect teams to fall out if we threw teams with these aggregate statistics into one big league and let them battle it out for thousands of games.

The table is sortable if you click in the header. All data are park-adjusted when possible. A legend is below the table, followed by commentary. There is also a table comparing actual vs. expected run scored and run allowed totals, as well as actual vs. expected winning percentages.

Rank	Chg	Team	wOBA	eRS	tRA	tRns	Fld	eRA	eW%lg	LgAdj	eW%
1	0	TB	0.363	463	4.76	368	21.9	346	0.638	11.0	0.662
2	+2	NYA	0.361	443	4.85	366	1.0	365	0.595	10.6	0.620
3	0	BOS	0.344	400	4.24	321	-14.5	336	0.583	10.7	0.610
4	-2	TOR	0.339	401	4.50	356	4.8	351	0.563	11.0	0.590
5	0	LAN	0.335	387	4.17	328	11.8	316	0.594	-10.8	0.565
6	+7	CHA	0.322	331	4.11	310	-6.8	317	0.519	10.7	0.550
7	-1	DET	0.330	350	4.86	364	19.2	345	0.507	10.7	0.536
8	-1	COL	0.326	350	3.99	302	-1.7	304	0.565	-10.7	0.535
9	-1	MIN	0.334	379	4.79	370	-6.5	377	0.503	11.0	0.531
10	-1	TEX	0.333	356	4.97	376	18.5	357	0.499	10.6	0.527
11	0	LAA	0.339	371	5.05	372	-6.2	378	0.490	10.4	0.517
12	-2	CLE	0.337	397	5.15	400	-19.7	420	0.472	11.0	0.499
13	+1	KC	0.315	306	4.22	314	-14.7	329	0.467	10.6	0.498
14	+4	SEA	0.317	316	4.77	361	17.3	343	0.462	10.6	0.492
15	0	BAL	0.331	357	4.85	365	-23.5	389	0.460	10.7	0.487
16	+1	MIL	0.334	369	4.93	372	13.9	358	0.514	-10.7	0.486
17	-1	PHI	0.340	381	5.09	379	4.4	375	0.508	-10.3	0.482
18	-6	NYN	0.332	362	4.59	345	-14.9	360	0.502	-10.6	0.474
19	+3	ARI	0.312	323	4.21	329	6.4	322	0.501	-10.7	0.470
20	+3	PIT	0.325	342	4.92	369	21.9	347	0.493	-10.7	0.464
21	-2	STL	0.324	343	4.53	352	4.2	348	0.493	-11.0	0.463
22	-1	ATL	0.315	319	4.10	312	-15.2	327	0.488	-10.6	0.458
23	+1	OAK	0.304	288	4.40	335	-7.1	342	0.422	10.6	0.452
24	-4	CHN	0.308	296	4.27	315	5.5	309	0.480	-10.3	0.449
25	+3	SF	0.306	287	4.30	322	8.7	313	0.461	-10.6	0.429
26	0	FLA	0.323	350	4.74	373	-15.0	388	0.452	-11.0	0.424
27	0	HOU	0.322	330	4.87	369	-1.9	371	0.445	-10.4	0.417
28	-3	CIN	0.310	304	4.80	363	19.8	343	0.444	-10.4	0.414
29	0	WAS	0.328	354	5.28	393	-22.8	416	0.422	-10.4	0.396
30	0	SD	0.318	320	5.05	383	-8.9	392	0.404	-10.6	0.377

Continue reading this post »

55 comments | 0 recs |

BtB Power Rankings: Through Tuesday, June 23rd, 2009

by JinAZ on Jun 24, 2009 10:24 PM EDT in Stat-Colored Glasses Comment 9 comments

More photos » by Tony Gutierrez - AP

Ian Kinsler's Texas Rangers are back on top of the AL West, at least on paper. (AP Photo/Tony Gutierrez)

Browse more photos »

Welcome to our weekly ranking of all the MLB teams! In this ranking, we use aggregate team hitting, pitching, and fielding statistics--not team wins, losses, runs scored, or runs allowed--to evaluate the performance of teams to date. You can think of the estimated winning percentage (eW%) below as how we'd expect teams to fall out if we threw teams with these aggregate statistics into one big league and let them battle it out for thousands of games.

The table is sortable if you click in the header. All data are park-adjusted when possible. A legend is below the table, followed commentary about five teams. There is also a table comparing actual vs. expected run scored and run allowed totals, as well as actual vs. expected winning percentages.

BtB Power Rankings: Through Tuesday, June 23

Rank	Chg	Team	wOBA	eRS	tRA	tRns	Fld	eRA	eW%lg	LgAdj	eW%
1	0	TB	0.362	418	4.85	340	17.6	323	0.623	10.0	0.648
2	+1	TOR	0.343	377	4.47	322	8.0	314	0.587	10.0	0.614
3	-1	BOS	0.348	372	4.32	299	-15.4	314	0.581	9.7	0.608
4	0	NYA	0.359	400	5.00	347	-0.3	347	0.569	9.7	0.595
5	0	LAN	0.342	366	4.14	294	7.2	287	0.614	-9.9	0.587
6	0	DET	0.330	316	4.79	327	20.1	307	0.513	9.7	0.542
7	+6	COL	0.330	328	4.03	280	-4.4	284	0.567	-9.9	0.537
8	+2	MIN	0.340	356	4.85	343	-6.2	349	0.510	10.0	0.537
9	-1	TEX	0.333	322	5.14	350	22.8	328	0.492	9.6	0.520
10	+1	CLE	0.341	374	5.17	368	-16.2	384	0.486	10.0	0.512
11	-4	LAA	0.337	334	4.99	338	-7.7	346	0.484	9.6	0.511
12	0	NYN	0.337	342	4.47	306	-10.9	317	0.537	-9.6	0.509
13	+1	CHA	0.311	275	4.15	284	-8.5	293	0.472	9.7	0.503
14	-5	KC	0.317	282	4.18	282	-19.6	302	0.469	9.6	0.499
15	+2	BAL	0.331	325	4.85	333	-16.6	349	0.465	9.7	0.493
16	-1	PHI	0.343	357	5.09	350	2.9	347	0.514	-9.4	0.487
17	-1	MIL	0.331	328	4.92	337	15.8	321	0.510	-9.7	0.481
18	+5	SEA	0.314	282	4.69	327	13.1	314	0.451	9.7	0.481
19	+3	STL	0.328	323	4.56	324	5.8	318	0.508	-10.0	0.479
20	-1	CHN	0.311	275	4.18	281	9.0	272	0.505	-9.3	0.474
21	0	ATL	0.316	295	4.05	284	-10.9	295	0.501	-9.7	0.470
22	-4	ARI	0.312	294	4.21	302	5.3	297	0.496	-9.9	0.466
23	-3	PIT	0.325	312	4.98	338	15.1	323	0.484	-9.7	0.456
24	0	OAK	0.302	259	4.45	312	-4.1	316	0.410	9.7	0.441
25	0	CIN	0.308	275	4.75	332	18.8	314	0.439	-9.6	0.409
26	0	FLA	0.320	314	4.77	344	-15.5	360	0.436	-10.0	0.408
27	0	HOU	0.323	303	5.01	343	-4.2	347	0.435	-9.4	0.408
28	+1	SF	0.302	253	4.28	296	2.3	293	0.435	-9.7	0.404
29	-1	WAS	0.329	327	5.32	362	-16.2	378	0.429	-9.4	0.403
30	0	SD	0.319	293	5.03	348	-7.5	355	0.410	-9.6	0.383

Offense = wOBA (park-corrected), eRS (estimated runs scored; wRC from FanGraphs, then park adjusted)
Pitching = tRA and tRns are a home-brew version of Graham MacAree's statistic.
Fielding = Fld: average of bUZR (from FanGraphs) and THT's batted balls statistic (converted to runs)
eRA (estimated runs allowed) = Pitching - Fielding
eW%lg = estimated winning percentage within the specific league (AL or NL)
LgAdj = league adjustment (bonus to AL teams, penalty to NL teams, because the AL has superior level of play)
eW% = estimated winning percentage if all teams were in one league (after league adjustment)
Methods provided in more detail in the first post in this series

Team Leaders (asterisks indicate teams improving in specific ranking):

American League
Offense (wOBA): Rays, Yankees, Red Sox
Pitching (tRA): White Sox*, Royals, Red Sox
Fielding (Fld): Rangers, Tigers, Rays*

National League
Offense (wOBA): Phillies, Dodgers*, Mets
Pitching (tRA): Rockies, Braves, Dodgers*
Fielding (Fld): Reds, Brewers, Pirates

"On Paper" Playoff Leaders (asterisks indicate new leaders):

American League: E=Rays, C=Tigers, W=Rangers*, WC=Blue Jays*
National League: E=Mets, C=Brewers, W=Dodgers, WC=Rockies

Commentary below the jump!

Continue reading this post »

9 comments | 0 recs |

BtB Power Rankings: Through Wednesday, June 17th, 2009

by JinAZ on Jun 18, 2009 10:31 PM EDT in Stat-Colored Glasses Comment 17 comments

More photos » by Nam Y. Huh - AP

Ubaldo Jimenez fronts the best pitching staff (to date) in the National League. They've helped the Rockies rise in our rankings, and are now our "on paper" leaders for the wild card. (AP Photo/Nam Y. Huh)

Browse more photos »

Welcome to our weekly ranking of all the MLB teams! In this ranking, we use aggregate team hitting, pitching, and fielding statistics--not team wins, losses, runs scored, or runs allowed--to evaluate the performance of teams to date. You can think of the estimated winning percentage (eW%) below as how we'd expect teams to fall out if we threw teams with these aggregate statistics into one big league and let them battle it out for thousands of games.

The table is sortable if you click in the header. All data are park-adjusted when possible. A legend is below the table, followed commentary about five teams: Giants, Reds, Diamondbacks, Angels, and Cubs. This week, I focus specifically on looking at disparities between these rankings and Pythagorean team records to date. There is also a table comparing actual vs. expected run scored and run allowed totals, as well as actual vs. expected winning percentages.

BtB Power Rankings: Through June 17, 2009

Rank	Chg	Team	wOBA	eRS	tRA	tRns	Fld	eRA	eW%lg	LgAdj	eW%
1	+1	TB	0.365	396	4.87	319	13.3	306	0.624	9.3	0.648
2	+1	BOS	0.351	356	4.35	281	-12.9	294	0.592	9.0	0.618
3	-2	TOR	0.342	346	4.53	303	14.3	289	0.586	9.3	0.613
4	0	NYA	0.364	384	5.14	333	-1.4	334	0.569	9.0	0.594
5	0	LAN	0.340	338	4.13	273	5.2	267	0.609	-9.2	0.581
6	0	DET	0.325	286	4.80	305	21.0	284	0.504	9.0	0.533
7	+5	LAA	0.340	317	4.88	306	-6.7	313	0.506	8.9	0.533
8	-1	TEX	0.339	310	5.23	331	24.0	307	0.504	8.9	0.532
9	+6	KC	0.319	266	4.02	251	-15.2	267	0.499	8.9	0.530
10	+1	MIN	0.340	333	4.95	325	-7.8	333	0.500	9.3	0.527
11	-3	CLE	0.343	356	5.13	343	-15.0	358	0.497	9.4	0.523
12	-2	NYN	0.341	323	4.47	279	-13.0	292	0.548	-8.8	0.521
13	+1	COL	0.324	290	4.05	257	-5.6	263	0.545	-9.0	0.515
14	+4	CHA	0.311	255	4.10	261	-7.9	269	0.476	9.0	0.508
15	-6	PHI	0.346	336	5.19	331	12.8	318	0.527	-8.8	0.501
16	+1	MIL	0.332	310	4.85	315	18.0	297	0.520	-9.2	0.492
17	+4	BAL	0.330	297	4.96	314	-18.2	332	0.446	9.0	0.474
18	+6	ARI	0.312	273	4.21	282	10.6	271	0.503	-9.2	0.472
19	-6	CHN	0.309	244	4.12	251	7.0	244	0.501	-8.5	0.469
20	+2	PIT	0.326	291	4.92	312	16.2	295	0.493	-9.0	0.464
21	-5	ATL	0.316	270	4.11	264	-9.6	274	0.494	-8.9	0.463
22	-3	STL	0.326	290	4.53	295	0.1	295	0.492	-9.2	0.463
23	-3	SEA	0.310	254	4.70	305	8.2	297	0.428	9.0	0.458
24	-1	OAK	0.302	239	4.54	292	-2.2	294	0.406	8.9	0.436
25	0	CIN	0.308	255	4.70	306	18.1	288	0.445	-8.9	0.415
26	+3	FLA	0.322	299	4.84	326	-16.1	342	0.436	-9.3	0.409
27	-1	HOU	0.324	284	5.02	320	-7.6	327	0.432	-8.8	0.405
28	-1	WAS	0.330	302	5.38	336	-18.4	354	0.422	-8.8	0.397
29	+1	SF	0.303	238	4.37	279	-0.6	280	0.427	-9.0	0.396
30	-2	SD	0.317	266	5.10	327	-9.0	336	0.391	-8.9	0.364

Offense = wOBA (park-corrected), eRS (estimated runs scored; wRC from FanGraphs, then park adjusted)
Pitching = tRA and tRns are a home-brew version of Graham MacAree's statistic.
Fielding = Fld: average of bUZR (from FanGraphs) and THT's batted balls statistic (converted to runs)
eRA (estimated runs allowed) = Pitching - Fielding
eW%lg = estimated winning percentage within the specific league (AL or NL)
LgAdj = league adjustment (bonus to AL teams, penalty to NL teams, because the AL has superior level of play)
eW% = estimated winning percentage if all teams were in one league (after league adjustment)
Methods provided in more detail in the first post in this series

Team Leaders (asterisks indicate teams improving in specific ranking):

American League
Offense (wOBA): Rays*, Yankees, Red Sox
Pitching (tRA): Royals, White Sox, Red Sox
Fielding (Fld): Rangers, Tigers, Blue Jays*

National League
Offense (wOBA): Phillies, Mets*, Dodgers
Pitching (tRA): Rockies(!)*, Braves, Cubs
Fielding (Fld): Reds*, Brewers, Pirates

"On Paper" Playoff Leaders (asterisks indicate new leaders):

American League: E=Rays*, C=Tigers, W=Angels*, WC=Red Sox*
National League: E=Mets*, C=Brewers*, W=Dodgers, WC=Rockies(!)*

Commentary below the jump!

Continue reading this post »

17 comments | 0 recs |

BtB Power Rankings: Through Tuesday, June 9th, 2009

by JinAZ on Jun 10, 2009 11:00 PM EDT in Stat-Colored Glasses Comment 16 comments

More photos » by Darren Calabrese - AP

Roy Halladay's Toronto Blue Jays seem to have righted the ship after a rough spell, and have risen to the top of the BtB Power Rankings. Can they get back in first place in the AL East while the Yankees and Red Sox beat up on each other this week? (AP Photo/The Canadian Press,Darren Calabrese)

Browse more photos »

Welcome to our weekly ranking of all the MLB teams! In this ranking, we use aggregate team statistics--not team wins, losses, runs scored, or runs allowed--to evaluate the performance of teams to date. You can think of the estimated winning percentage (eW%) below as how we'd expect teams to fall out if we threw teams with these aggregate statistics into one big league and let them battle it out for thousands of games.

The table is sortable if you click in the header. All data are park-adjusted when possible. A legend is below the table, followed commentary about five teams: Red Sox, Cubs, Rockies, Royals, and Cardinals. I have also added a table this week comparing actual vs. expected run scored and run allowed totals, as well as actual vs. expected winning percentages.

BtB Power Rankings

Rank	Chg	Team	wOBA	eRS	tRA	tRns	Fld	eRA	eW%lg	LgAdj	eW%
1	+1	TOR	0.346	322	4.53	275	12.1	263	0.595	8.5	0.622
2	-1	TB	0.356	338	4.97	291	12.8	278	0.594	8.3	0.619
3	+3	BOS	0.348	307	4.37	250	-14.2	264	0.571	8.1	0.598
4	0	NYA	0.364	343	5.25	305	5.8	299	0.568	8.1	0.593
5	-2	LAN	0.345	316	4.17	250	4.6	246	0.618	-8.3	0.590
6	-1	DET	0.327	256	4.70	265	17.7	247	0.517	7.9	0.546
7	0	TEX	0.343	291	5.31	304	23.3	280	0.518	8.1	0.545
8	+2	CLE	0.345	317	5.07	297	-16.5	313	0.506	8.3	0.532
9	+2	PHI	0.352	309	5.19	290	13.4	277	0.554	-7.8	0.528
10	-2	NYN	0.341	286	4.33	240	-16.4	256	0.552	-7.8	0.525
11	+1	MIN	0.340	301	5.11	300	-6.6	307	0.490	8.3	0.517
12	+2	LAA	0.330	261	4.86	267	-2.7	270	0.483	7.8	0.511
13	+5	CHN	0.320	240	4.14	226	5.6	220	0.541	-7.6	0.510
14	+8	COL	0.321	253	4.03	228	-6.7	235	0.535	-8.1	0.504
15	-6	KC	0.315	229	4.14	230	-18.5	248	0.463	7.9	0.494
16	+1	ATL	0.319	248	3.99	230	-5.8	236	0.523	-7.9	0.493
17	-1	MIL	0.328	264	4.78	271	18.8	252	0.521	-8.1	0.492
18	-3	CHA	0.310	226	4.20	239	-8.1	247	0.459	8.1	0.490
19	-6	STL	0.324	255	4.46	260	2.8	257	0.496	-8.2	0.467
20	+3	SEA	0.312	231	4.73	275	2.4	272	0.424	8.1	0.453
21	-1	BAL	0.326	256	5.04	284	-16.9	301	0.424	8.1	0.451
22	-3	PIT	0.324	255	5.05	285	16.9	268	0.477	-8.1	0.448
23	+4	OAK	0.306	221	4.58	264	-2.2	266	0.416	7.9	0.445
24	0	ARI	0.309	238	4.31	259	6.7	252	0.474	-8.2	0.443
25	-4	CIN	0.316	242	4.71	274	16.6	257	0.472	-7.9	0.443
26	+2	HOU	0.330	264	5.03	283	-7.4	291	0.453	-7.8	0.426
27	-1	WAS	0.337	284	5.37	299	-20.7	319	0.442	-7.8	0.417
28	-3	SD	0.322	254	5.05	295	-3.4	299	0.424	-8.1	0.397
29	0	FLA	0.317	257	4.89	296	-12.7	308	0.414	-8.3	0.387
30	0	SF	0.304	210	4.48	251	-1.4	252	0.417	-7.9	0.387

Offense = wOBA (park-corrected), eRS (estimated runs scored; wRC from FanGraphs, then park adjusted)
Pitching = tRA and tRns are a home-brew version of Graham MacAree's statistic.
Fielding = Fld: average of bUZR (from FanGraphs) and THT's batted balls statistic (converted to runs)
eRA (estimated runs allowed) = Pitching - Fielding
eW%lg = estimated winning percentage within the specific league (AL or NL)
LgAdj = league adjustment (bonus to AL teams, penalty to NL teams, because the AL has superior level of play)
eW% = estimated winning percentage if all teams were in one league (after league adjustment)
Methods provided in more detail in the first post in this series

Team Leaders (asterisks indicate teams improving in specific ranking):

American League
Offense (wOBA): Yankees, Rays, Red Sox*
Pitching (tRA): Royals, White Sox, Red Sox
Fielding (Fld): Rangers, Tigers, Rays*

National League
Offense (wOBA): Phillies, Dodgers, Mets*
Pitching (tRA): Braves, Rockies*, Cubs*
Fielding (Fld): Brewers*, Pirates, Reds

"On Paper" Playoff Leaders (asterisks indicate new leaders):

American League: E=Blue Jays*, C=Tigers, W=Rangers, WC = Rays
National League: E=Phillies*, C=Cubs*, W=Dodgers, WC =Mets

Commentary below the jump!

Continue reading this post »

16 comments | 0 recs |

PitchFX, Dirt, and Parks

by Dan Turkenkopf on Feb 2, 2009 8:00 AM EST in Stat-Colored Glasses Comment 12 comments

The last two years, I've published rankings of how successful catchers were at blocking balls in the dirt. I've been leveraging the Pitch FX data from MLB for this analysis, but I haven't really used the full power of the technology. To this point, I've relied on the Gameday stringers to classify whether a pitch was in the dirt or not.

Harry suggested that I look beyond the human element and use the more detailed pitch location information to determine when a pitch would hit the dirt. Luckily for me, he was kind enough to provide a formula that allowed us to figure out at what point the pitch would hit the ground. After going back and forth on it for a little while, and confirming with some other people, we decided that all pitches that landed within 3 feet behind the front of home plate could be considered to be balls in the dirt.¹

In 2008, comparing the scorekeepers to the computer system led to the following difference:

Stringers	Pitch FX
13332	23147

So the stringers identified pitches in the dirt only 60% of the time that the Pitch FX system did. I grew curious about such a great discrepancy (which only got larger if we moved the catcher's location back to -3.5 or -4 feet).

Continue reading this post »

12 comments | 0 recs |

Quick UZR/PMR Comparison

by Dan Turkenkopf on Dec 8, 2008 8:00 AM EST in Stat-Colored Glasses Comment 4 comments

Now that FanGraphs is publishing MGL's UZR, I wanted to see how the 2008 results compared to David Pinto's PMR (which I converted to runs here).

I ran a quick correlation for each position containing the players qualified according to PMR - those who were on the field for at least 1000 balls in play.

Position	Correlation
Pitcher	NA
Catcher	NA
First Baseman	0.71501645
Second Baseman	0.58129407
Third Baseman	0.62672569
Shortstop	0.68798239
Left Fielder	0.74839581
Center Fielder	0.52849967
Right Fielder	0.80255003

There were definitely some issues in center field, and to a lesser extent 2B. The two systems had a high level of agreement in the corner OF positions.

The 10 biggest disagreements were:

Player	Position	PMR	UZR	Diff
Akinori Iwamura	2B	-17.25	0.6	17.85
Pedro Feliz	3B	-10.19	7.2	17.39
Troy Glaus	3B	-13.85	3.3	17.15
Edgar Renteria	SS	-16.14	0.9	17.04
Jose Reyes	SS	-18.21	-1.5	16.71
Brad Hawpe	RF	-21.64	-37.2	15.56
Melvin Mora	3B	-17.81	-3	14.81
Torii Hunter	CF	4.81	-9.8	14.61
Dan Uggla	2B	14.85	0.3	14.55
Bobby Abreu	RF	-11.45	-25.2	13.75

Both PMR and UZR were calculated using the Baseball Info Solutions (BIS) data set this season. I wonder if David or MGL might be able to give some ideas as to where the differences might come from.

4 comments | 0 recs |

2008 Catcher Block Percentage

by Dan Turkenkopf on Dec 1, 2008 12:00 PM EST in Stat-Colored Glasses Comment 40 comments

Last year I began calculating how successful each catcher was at blocking pitches. I tied together the MLB GameDay data with the Retrosheet play-by-play information to identify how many opportunities each catcher had to make a meaningful block. I then subtracted away the number of "misses" or wild pitches and passed balls to come up with a percentage of blocked pitches, which I called Catcher Block Percentage.

Continue reading this post »

40 comments | 0 recs |

2008 Defense Behind Pitchers By PMR

by Dan Turkenkopf on Dec 1, 2008 8:00 AM EST in Stat-Colored Glasses Comment 12 comments

Each season, David Pinto releases his Probablistic Measure of Range (PMR) ratings based on play-by-play data from Baseball Info Solutions. PMR measures how many plays above or below expected each team or player made based on batted ball characteristics like velocity and location. Here at Beyond the Box Score, we're translating the play numbers into runs (following a method developed by LA Black Hawk of Waterloo). More information can be found in this post.

Along with the position-by-position numbers, David shares how each pitcher was affected by his defense during the season. He follows a very similar methodology, determining the number of outs that should have been converted, and comparing those to the outs that were actually converted.

Continue reading this post »

12 comments | 0 recs |