Why doesn't wOBA include IBB?

[jetsfan28]

Just because a player is IBB doesn't necessarily mean they are good. It takes no skill whatsoever to watch a pitcher throw four pitches in the other batter's box. It's something a hitter cannot possibly control.

So now we're only counting things that we feel take talent? Let's not count any walks, since they theoretically could be achieved without any talent, as you could go up and simply not swing the bat. wOBA should be used to measure production, not talent, and an IBB does produce to some extent, even if it's a small amount.

[RTL]

So now we're only counting things that we feel take talent? Let's not count any walks, since they theoretically could be achieved without any talent, as you could go up and simply not swing the bat. wOBA should be used to measure production, not talent, and an IBB does produce to some extent, even if it's a small amount.

HAHA Well let's get over-dramatic why don't we! Drawing a walk takes skill and does show a player's talent. Getting intentionally walked doesn't show a damn thing. I guess we just disagree on the matter.

[RTL]

They wouldn't be IBB if the pitcher an opposing manager felt they could get them out with any level of confidence. While number 8 hitters in the nl do get walked intentionally some, they wouldn't if the 9 hitter wasn't worse than them. There is a value there, and it should be adjusted to find its true value.

But they are IBB so what's your point? I don't see much value if any for a #8 hitter being intentionally walked to face a pitcher.

[RTL]

Why did you tell me that it's not if you didn't know?

Admittedly I didn't know the exact formula but I thought since OBP didn't included errors, neither would a more advanced metric but I was wrong and think it's pretty stupid for a stat like that to included errors. I apologize.

[RTL]

IBB isn't included in wOBA calculation because the increase in expected runs for someone drawing an intentional walk is fairly low. I don't remember what it is off hand, but I think I remember Dave Cameron saying it's something pretty ridiculous like +.1 runs. I could be wrong on the exact value, but I definitely remember the explanation part is correct.

Makes sense.

[Milnertime]

Admittedly I didn't know the exact formula but I thought since OBP didn't included errors, neither would a more advanced metric but I was wrong and think it's pretty stupid for a stat like that to included errors. I apologize.

Reaching on an error is more of a function of skill than an IBB is. Obviously, it's largely a function of luck, but you can reasonably expect guys with good speed to have more ROEs.

Simply, speed can "force" errors. Also, there is no room for interpretation for intentional walks. The catcher stands up and the pitcher throws 4 pitches way wide. Errors are determined by 1 of 30 different major league official scorers, any of which may have had a different opinion about the play in question.

I haven't seen the numbers in a while, but I do believe ROE also holds a fairly high run value.

[Poughkeepsie]

Regardless if you think IBB don't show skill, you are still getting on base and increasing the odds for runs to be produced. It should count.

[Jeffy25]

HAHA Well let's get over-dramatic why don't we! Drawing a walk takes skill and does show a player's talent. Getting intentionally walked doesn't show a damn thing. I guess we just disagree on the matter.

Regardless of your opinion on skill that an IBB takes to create, the purpose of wOBA isn't to show skill, but rather your ability to produce runs. wOBA does raise the run expectancy a certain amount (not sure how much exactly) and it should be calculated in wOBA since it does yield runs produced. When you are IBB, you have raised the possibility of your team scoring a run, which is all that your job is anyway.

There are plenty of skill statistics, wOBA shouldn't be used as one. It should be viewed as a another determination like slash line in viewing who produced more runs. It isn't a skill statistic.

[Jeffy25]

Admittedly I didn't know the exact formula but I thought since OBP didn't included errors, neither would a more advanced metric but I was wrong and think it's pretty stupid for a stat like that to included errors. I apologize.

It's just a statistic to measure run production, it isn't used to measure skill at all. Even if it does show a correlation to skill, it shouldn't be used to measure it.

[Jeffy25]

Have found out that Tango includes it in his calculations now, so anyone that uses his is using IBB's correctly. Don't know what the value that he gave for it yet is.

So at least someone else has caught it since the introduction of the statistic.

I found all this out through a guy in another forum and we barely spoke about it, but it's a great catch.

[RTL]

I don't find being intentionally walked as showing an "ability to score runs" is all. It's the other team's choice that a hitter has zero control over. It shows no ability at all. The more I learn about this stat, the less impressive it is. No big deal.

[Jeffy25]

I don't find being intentionally walked as showing an "ability to score runs" is all. It's the other team's choice that a hitter has zero control over. It shows no ability at all. The more I learn about this stat, the less impressive it is. No big deal.

I wouldn't look at it as an individual statistic necessarily. But the IBB does yield a run probability. Just like reaching on an error, hitting a double, etc. You raise the teams win and run probability almost every time you IBB. It should be reflected in wOBA.

That's certainly your prerogative, you could look up the stat, and download stats into an Excel sheet and mess with it. You can make it better the more you learn about it. You don't have to accept the way other people post it.

I love the stat, this and a slash line are the first things I look at.

[VenezuelanMet]

I hate the notion of a number calculating "skill" or "talent" Just show me exactly what happened and I'll draw my own conclusions. I really like wOBA but I've always have his same complaint with it. It is completely arbitrary, a IBB is still a base gained, period.

[long ball]

IBB are obviously less valuable than other walks. They almost never happen with runners on first. IBB are completely controlled by the pitcher (or manager).

Note: Depending on the specific analysis, the PA term (plate appearances) may exclude bunts, IBB, and a few of the more obscure plays.

http://www.insidethebook.com/woba.shtml

[Jeffy25]

For fun, PA are sometimes different on Baseball-reference than on Fangraphs, for example, Jacoby Ellsbury.