| Grand Slam Baseball View the Forum Registry |
| |
| 0 |
Subject: Pitching Formulas Posted by: cpa68 - [284131720] Fri, Sep 01, 16:21 This was originally posted on K2's message Board, by the owner of the K2 Mets. Allright-enough already about the meaningless of pitcher’s skill’s. As we all have observed there’s obviously something rotten- but no meaning whatsoever? I find that hard to believe-and since I missed the playoffs and had nothing better to do (actually plenty-but first things first..), I thought I’d dig into this stuff. Now for those who only barely passed math class this is how it goes: (If anyone is into this stuff-please bear with the simplifications-I just tried to make this somewhat accessible to the uninitiated) If we assume that one the outcome of one dependent parameter (in this case starting pitching performance) is depending on a number of more or less known set parameters (i.e. FB, BR, CH, CTRL) we have ways of determining statistically significant associations. This is known as multiple regression analysis. I’m not going to go into details but essentially we can determine, within certain limits of confidence, the degree to which these set parameters affect the pitching performance. So I basically made a spreadsheet of 63 K2 SP’s with skills and performances for last season. I then performed a number of analyses to determine the degree to which the skills predicted the outcome of various pitching stats. The analysis assumes a linear association between skills and performance so the results are depicting the statistically best straight line that fits the observed performances. Bear in mind that for the individual pitcher you cannot directly translate these formulae to their whip/era etc.: these are for the overall data and ONLY gives you an idea of the overall trend. Most important statistic is the r squared value. This gives you the proportion (based on a total of 1) of the parameter examined that are explained by the formulae. Thus r squared=1:every part of the performance is explained and r squared=0:no part of the performance is explained. The remaining proportion of performance cannot be statistically accounted for by the skills examined and are due to stochastic variation (i.e. computer randomized numbers) or gameplan factors unrecognized by skills and me. So here we go: WHIP= 2.69-0.00089*FB-0.0009*BR-0.0007CH-0.0008CTRL R squared: 0.348 ERA=10.42-0.0048*FB-0.0028*BR-0.0047*CH-0.0035*CTRL R squared: 0.275 BB/IP=0.57-0.00012*FB-0.00029*BR-0.00019*CH-0.00021*CTRL R squared: 0.197 K/IP=2.12-0.00078*FB-0.00061*BR-0.00052*CH-0.00061CTRL R squared: 0.277 CONCLUSION Well the operation succeeded but the patient died, and I’ll have to eat it:pitching skills sucks bigtime! All of these results are statistically significant-meaning that with a confidence of 95% we can tell that there is some association, but the magnitude of this is less than impressive.The best estimation predicts the whip where the skill factors determine about 35% (and the relative contributions of the individual skill factors are about equal)of the outcome which leaves some 65% to chance. Also rather sucky: the better skills tend to lower the K/IP. Whew-I’d better stop here since my wife thinks I’m busy writing up my Ph.D. Hopes this made sense to somebody.. This is some interesting stuff on how skills affect stats. | ||||||
| |||||||
Post a reply to this message: (But first, how about checking out this sponsor?) | |||||||