Comments on: New Pitcher Value Stats

By: Tangotiger

Tangotiger — Thu, 30 Aug 2012 14:57:58 +0000

FIP is agnostic on what happens to fieldable balls. That’s because FIP only cares about non-fieldable PA. Just like OBP is agnostic on HR and 3B being different from 1B.

xFIP is agnostic on the actual outcome of a flyball. If you find that valuable, then fine. I don’t.

By: andys

andys — Thu, 30 Aug 2012 14:26:26 +0000

But there’s still no regression happening. It’s just treating all fly balls the same, in the same way that FIP treats all non-HR balls the same.

FIP: HR balls, non HR balls each are being treated as the only two groups of contact.
xFIP: Fly balls, non-fly balls each are being treated as the only two groups of contact.

I fail to see the difference.

By: JDanger

JDanger — Thu, 30 Aug 2012 04:05:12 +0000

OK sure, but it’s intended to be a regressed HR rate. You are assigning run values of HR (that have not necessarily occurred) to 11% of the pitcher’s FB%, rather than actual HR allowed.

By: noseeum

noseeum — Wed, 29 Aug 2012 22:19:36 +0000

I’m sure cursing is not generally appreciated on the boards here, so I apologize in advance. But it must be said:
This is fucking awesome.

By: Tangotiger

Tangotiger — Wed, 29 Aug 2012 21:13:56 +0000

Not “everything”. No such thing.

If you have decided you want to use something actual-runs-based, then yes, RE24 is what you should prefer.

By: Tangotiger

Tangotiger — Wed, 29 Aug 2012 21:12:58 +0000

RA9-wins is on the same scale as WAR.

FDP and its subcomponents (LOB-wins and BIP-wins) are centered around 0 being average.

By: TFINY

TFINY — Wed, 29 Aug 2012 20:28:57 +0000

I believe that 0 is the baseline; at 0 FDP, the pitcher is performing precisely as his WAR dictates, when taking into account BABIP and LOB. Any positive number will make him better than his WAR declares.