FanGraphs Baseball

Comments

RSS feed for comments on this post.

  1. Where can we see the park factor values?

    Comment by Jim H — October 5, 2010 @ 11:02 am

  2. +1, I would love to be able to see them.

    Comment by jsp2014 — October 5, 2010 @ 11:03 am

  3. Question: When to park factors enter the WAR equation? Is wOBA park adjusted already or does this happen later?

    Comment by Greg — October 5, 2010 @ 11:48 am

  4. wOBA is not park adjusted; the “Batting” under the “Value” section is, however (unless I’m mistaken).

    Comment by J.T. Jordan — October 5, 2010 @ 11:59 am

  5. Park factors also come into play for pitching:
    http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/pitcher-win-values-explained-part-six

    I noticed Lee and Doc both slipped a little with the update. Dave, did you take note of any significant changes to the WAR leaderboards? I recall when B-R updated theirs a few weeks ago, Sabathia leapfrogged King Felix.

    Comment by Greg Maddux — October 5, 2010 @ 12:06 pm

  6. There were really no significant changes because we use 5 year regressed and one extra year isn’t going to make a whole lot of difference. At the very most a player may have changed 3 runs with rounding (some Yankee players since the park is new and the home/away numbers were considerably different in the two years), but that’s about it.

    Comment by David Appelman — October 5, 2010 @ 12:09 pm

  7. David – how do you handle new parks (like NY on Minn)?

    Do you just regress it with previous years of the old park to get the 5year data set? If a new park is substantially different do you go back and update old WAR data once a 5 year data set can be obtained on a new park?

    Comment by tom — October 5, 2010 @ 4:51 pm

  8. To echo others, can you provide a table with the park factors you have calculated?

    Comment by evo34 — October 6, 2010 @ 1:33 am

  9. Patriot gives a table of park factors on his site, so you can go there. I’m also interested about Minnesota. What park factors were used before this update and how did it change the numbers afterward?

    Comment by CSJ — October 6, 2010 @ 11:25 am

  10. The new Twins park was set at 100 at the beginning of the season and it ended up as 99 this year.

    New parks (or parks with significant changes) start out fresh at one year of data and are regressed 40% in year 1, 30% in year 2, 20% in year 3 and then 10% for years 4 and 5.

    New park data is never mixed with old park data.

    As for a table with park factors, I’ll try and give that a permanent spot this off-season.

    Comment by David Appelman — October 6, 2010 @ 12:39 pm

  11. Thanks for your response.

    Comment by CSJ — October 6, 2010 @ 1:46 pm

  12. Have the UZR and +/- final updates happened yet? Thanks

    Comment by Darren — October 8, 2010 @ 8:02 am

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Close this window.

0.260 Powered by WordPress