The Simple Questions Thread

[Seamhead]

Have any questions that aren't relevant in any future/present thread? Then ask them here. Someone will either answer them, or better yet, link you somewhere where your question will be answered.

Oh, and there's already a good mailbag here:

http://www.tangotiger.net/wiki/index.php?title=Mailbags

Though, this is more advanced stuff.

[Jilly Bohnson]

Yeah, we're going to make this the simple question thread. What's OPS? What is UZR? Quick and easy stuff go in here, harder stuff can get it's own topic.

[Driven]

Yeah, we're going to make this the simple question thread. What's OPS? What is UZR? Quick and easy stuff go in here, harder stuff can get it's own topic.

Maybe a stickied thread of a glossary of terms would be helpful?

EDIT: Nevermind you guys are way ahead of me.

[Seamhead]

Agreed. Feel free to change the title to "Simple Questions Thread".

[Pavelb1]

Woba please. I consider myself fairly smart, but I can't wrap my head around it as described in The Book or by Rob Neyer, so in simple terms please.

[Jilly Bohnson]

Woba please. I consider myself fairly smart, but I can't wrap my head around it as described in The Book or by Rob Neyer, so in simple terms please.

Okay, so basically it goes like this. You know how stuff like a single, a double, a walk, and a homerun, etc. each have a run expectancy attached to them? That is, for example, a single is worth let's say half a run, meaning for every single that is hit it generally leads to half a run scored on average. Well what wOBA does, is it takes all of what a player did, all their singles, doubles, homers, etc., attaches their run expectancy for each of those events, and then multiplies them by certain mulitpliers that make wOBA on the same scale as OBP to make it easier to understand. So for example about .335 would be average, .350 would be pretty good, and .400 would f'ing awesome.

[Zep]

wOBA's actual formula looks like this in case you're ever bored and want to calculate for yourself:

wOBA = (0.72xNIBB + 0.75xHBP + 0.90x1B + 0.92xRBOE + 1.24x2B + 1.56x3B +1.95xHR) / PA

That is, (.72 x Non-Intentional Bases on balls + .75 x Hit-by-Pitch + .90 x Singles + .92 x Reached Base on Error + 1.24 x Doubles + 1.56 x Triples + 1.95 x Home Runs)/Total Plate appearances.

wOBA (from my understanding) is basically OBP, but each specific event that leads to a batter reaching base is given a specific value, or weight (a triple is worth more than a double, a double is worth more than a walk, etc.).

[Rylinkus]

wOBA's actual formula looks like this in case you're ever bored and want to calculate for yourself:



That is, (.72 x Non-Intentional Bases on balls + .75 x Hit-by-Pitch + .90 x Singles + .92 x Reached Base on Error + 1.24 x Doubles + 1.56 x Triples + 1.95 x Home Runs)/Total Plate appearances.

wOBA (from my understanding) is basically OBP, but each specific event that leads to a batter reaching base is given a specific value, or weight (a triple is worth more than a double, a double is worth more than a walk, etc.).

Is that the fangraph formula or the SC one?

Actually, I'll expand. Fangraphs uses a different wOBA formula than Statcorner. Which one is the better one in people's opinions? And why? Perhaps this isn't a simple question and warrants it's own thread.

It does bring up the issue with Saber stuff. .BA is, well .BA. Everyone computes it the same way. The fact that wOBA fluctuates in the way it's acquired probably turns some people off to the concept.

[Gigantes4Life]

I will start it off.

How is UZR/150 figured?

Because it sure as hell isnt current UZR figured over 150 games. At least not on fangraphs it isnt.

For example. Last year the Royals had a positive UZR, but a negative UZR/150. Or like this year Nick Swisher has a -.3 UZR in RF, but a 2.6 UZR/150.

It is UZR over 150 games. But it's 150 defensive games. It's based upon the expected chances at their relative position. Meaning if a 2B plays 9 innings but gets no balls hit to him, he really didn't even play a defensive game.

http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx...on=OF#fielding

Right at the beginning of the right columns, it says "DG," that of course stands for Defensive Games.

The reason the UZR/150 can come out so weird like that is because they simply don't extrapolate UZR. They extrapolate errors, range, arm, etc.

Ok Sabermetrics + me dont click.. except for the simple things... heres a question i want to know... what sabermetric stat is best to determine a players overall value and skill to a team?

Lavigne pretty much had it.

WAR is the best stat in measuring a player's overall value to his team at the moment. Of course, you need to use the best stats in order to measure it correctly.

A combination of UZR and +/- (you must pay for this though) for defense (some use the Fans' Scouting Report, probably go over this later).

wOBA is the way to go for offense.

And FIP or tRA for pitchers. Some like to use ERA with FIP, but tRA is probably the way to go as well.

The whole concept of WAR takes a while to explain, and honestly probably deserves its own thread. I believe seamhead made a post about it in the MLB forum, maybe he could repost it?

Is that the fangraph formula or the SC one?

Actually, I'll expand. Fangraphs uses a different wOBA formula than Statcorner. Which one is the better one in people's opinions? And why? Perhaps this isn't a simple question and warrants it's own thread.

It does bring up the issue with Saber stuff. .BA is, well .BA. Everyone computes it the same way. The fact that wOBA fluctuates in the way it's acquired probably turns some people off to the concept.

I believe the major difference is that fangraphs incorporates stolen bases into its equation. Everything else is just alterations of the historical data. In the longrun, the difference shouldn't be large. I prefer SC simply because of wOBA*.

[Seamhead]

Is that the fangraph formula or the SC one?

Actually, I'll expand. Fangraphs uses a different wOBA formula than Statcorner. Which one is the better one in people's opinions? And why? Perhaps this isn't a simple question and warrants it's own thread.

Because Fangraphs incorporates SBs and CSs, and does not incorporate NIBB and ROE (or one of the two; I forgot). SC does not incorporate baserunning, and does incorporate NIBB and ROE.

Basically, SC sticks with the original wOBA formula. The NIBB and ROE part is really not too much of a problem, though; it's the base-stealing. I don't feel it has a place in a hitting metric.

Plus, Fangraphs doesn't park-adjust wOBA. It parks adjust wRAA, which is the counting metric based off of wOBA. SC does have a park-adjusted version of wOBA, and a counting version.

It does bring up the issue with Saber stuff. .BA is, well .BA. Everyone computes it the same way. The fact that wOBA fluctuates in the way it's acquired probably turns some people off to the concept.

Yeah, I agree. I meant to post this at The Book Blog, but I forgot to.

[C1Bman88]

Actually, I'll expand. Fangraphs uses a different wOBA formula than Statcorner. Which one is the better one in people's opinions? And why? Perhaps this isn't a simple question and warrants it's own thread.

Fangraphs' is better, IMO. Statcorner doesn't include SB and CS, but incorporates ROE. And I honestly don't know if they use the correct RV scale, because it changes from year to year. I know Fangraphs does.

[flips333]

wOBA's actual formula looks like this in case you're ever bored and want to calculate for yourself:



That is, (.72 x Non-Intentional Bases on balls + .75 x Hit-by-Pitch + .90 x Singles + .92 x Reached Base on Error + 1.24 x Doubles + 1.56 x Triples + 1.95 x Home Runs)/Total Plate appearances.

wOBA (from my understanding) is basically OBP, but each specific event that leads to a batter reaching base is given a specific value, or weight (a triple is worth more than a double, a double is worth more than a walk, etc.).

why doesn't wOBA take into account Intentional Base on balls... there's got to be a run probablity associate with it to.

[C1Bman88]

why doesn't wOBA take into account Intentional Base on balls... there's got to be a run probablity associate with it to.

The run value of an intentional walk is usually worth about 0.18 runs. Not very high at all.

[hoggin88]

wOBA's actual formula looks like this in case you're ever bored and want to calculate for yourself:



That is, (.72 x Non-Intentional Bases on balls + .75 x Hit-by-Pitch + .90 x Singles + .92 x Reached Base on Error + 1.24 x Doubles + 1.56 x Triples + 1.95 x Home Runs)/Total Plate appearances.

wOBA (from my understanding) is basically OBP, but each specific event that leads to a batter reaching base is given a specific value, or weight (a triple is worth more than a double, a double is worth more than a walk, etc.).

I don't like the fact that reaching base by an error is factored into wOBA. Sure it correlates to run production, but it isn't a result of a person's skill. Why should someone get credit for reaching base on a ****** ground ball that goes through someone's legs?

[Gigantes4Life]

I don't like the fact that reaching base by an error is factored into wOBA. Sure it correlates to run production, but it isn't a result of a person's skill. Why should someone get credit for reaching base on a ****** ground ball that goes through someone's legs?

That's not true. There's actually been correlation between RBOE and player type. I can't find it, but guys like Ichiro force many more errors than guys like Dunn.