Tonight was the first run (though I'd already set up the spreadsheets) and required a fair number of tweaks, but even so I was able to get all the stats ready in 35 minutes. I expect that I'll be able to get it down to 20-some minutes in the future, which will let me update these season-to-date stats weekly. I will probably do this in lieu of the monthly Reds reviews I've done over the past few years, as those are just too time consuming and didn't really provide much genuine insight.
I've tried to include notes below each table about the meaning of some of the more obscure statistics, but if you have questions please do not hesitate to ask!
NL Central Update
| Team | W | L | PCT | RS* | RS/G* | RA* | RA/G* | Pwins | W%for90 | XtrapW |
| STL | 9 | 4 | 0.692 | 61 | 4.71 | 47 | 3.61 | 8 | 0.544 | 112 |
| MIL | 8 | 4 | 0.667 | 63 | 5.28 | 50 | 4.21 | 7 | 0.547 | 108 |
| CHN | 7 | 5 | 0.583 | 57 | 4.77 | 58 | 4.85 | 6 | 0.553 | 95 |
| PIT | 6 | 6 | 0.500 | 64 | 5.30 | 66 | 5.47 | 6 | 0.560 | 81 |
| CIN | 6 | 7 | 0.462 | 51 | 3.96 | 50 | 3.88 | 7 | 0.564 | 75 |
| HOU | 5 | 8 | 0.385 | 53 | 4.08 | 55 | 4.23 | 6 | 0.570 | 62 |
The Reds' miseries in Pittsburgh amplified it, but over the first two weeks the Reds' offense has been the worst in the NL Central. Fortunately, the pitching has been second-best, which has kept them out of the basement.....Pythagoras has them in third place, for whatever that's worth.
Hitting
| Last | First | PA | %BB | %K | %LD | BABIP | AVG | OBP | SLG | ISO | OPS | PrOPS | lwts_RC | R/G | RAR |
| Patterson | Corey | 46 | 7% | 4% | 15% | 0.189 | 0.262 | 0.304 | 0.667 | 0.405 | 0.971 | 1.039 | 8.8 | 7.19 | 4.5 |
| Phillips | Brandon | 57 | 9% | 19% | 29% | 0.375 | 0.308 | 0.368 | 0.481 | 0.173 | 0.849 | 0.786 | 8.9 | 6.46 | 4.1 |
| Bako | Paul | 35 | 14% | 17% | 25% | 0.458 | 0.367 | 0.457 | 0.500 | 0.133 | 0.957 | 0.753 | 6.5 | 8.97 | 4.0 |
| Keppinger | Jeff S | 58 | 10% | 3% | 14% | 0.298 | 0.320 | 0.386 | 0.500 | 0.180 | 0.886 | 0.885 | 8.6 | 6.28 | 3.9 |
| Griffey Jr. | Ken | 54 | 15% | 13% | 19% | 0.297 | 0.273 | 0.389 | 0.409 | 0.136 | 0.798 | 0.821 | 6.4 | 5.05 | 2.0 |
| Dunn | Adam | 50 | 26% | 20% | 11% | 0.192 | 0.167 | 0.380 | 0.250 | 0.083 | 0.630 | 0.851 | 4.9 | 4.14 | 0.8 |
| Hopper | Norris S | 20 | 5% | 0% | 15% | 0.313 | 0.313 | 0.389 | 0.313 | 0.000 | 0.702 | 0.718 | 2.4 | 4.79 | 0.7 |
| Encarnacion | Edwin | 49 | 20% | 16% | 7% | 0.172 | 0.179 | 0.347 | 0.333 | 0.154 | 0.680 | 0.849 | 4.7 | 3.88 | 0.5 |
| Valentin | Javier | 18 | 11% | 6% | 7% | 0.267 | 0.250 | 0.333 | 0.313 | 0.063 | 0.646 | 0.616 | 1.8 | 3.93 | 0.2 |
| Votto | Joey D | 26 | 0% | 15% | 36% | 0.364 | 0.308 | 0.308 | 0.308 | 0.000 | 0.616 | 0.705 | 1.9 | 2.75 | -0.5 |
| Hatteberg | Scott | 27 | 19% | 7% | 25% | 0.200 | 0.190 | 0.333 | 0.238 | 0.048 | 0.571 | 0.839 | 1.9 | 2.70 | -0.5 |
| Freel | Ryan | 24 | 4% | 8% | 16% | 0.238 | 0.227 | 0.250 | 0.273 | 0.046 | 0.523 | 0.634 | 1.0 | 1.39 | -1.4 |
| Castro | Juan | 10 | 10% | 0% | 0% | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.100 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.100 | 0.581 | -0.6 | -1.63 | -1.7 |
The summed linear weights across all players is 57 runs, which is 6 more than they've scored--almost a half-run per game more. Situational hitting hasn't been good thus far to say the least....Patterson, Bako, Phillips, and Keppinger all had a fine first two weeks.....PrOPS thinks that Bako will turn back into a pumpkin soon, and isn't impressed with Phillips.....On the other hand, PrOPS thinks that Patterson and Keppinger have been legit, and that Dunn, Encarnacion, and Hatteberg have had awful luck thus far.....Dunn and Eddie's line drive rate has been dreadful, though.....Ryan Freel has picked up where he left off last season, and Juan Castro managed to do a tremendous amount of damage to the Reds despite having only 10 PA's.
Total Player Value (Hitting + Fielding)
| Last | First | Pos | RAR | Fielding | PosAdj | TtlValue |
| Patterson | Corey | CF | 4.5 | 2.0 | 0.2 | 6.8 |
| Bako | Paul | C | 4.0 | 1.2 | 0.6 | 5.8 |
| Keppinger | Jeff S | SS | 3.9 | 0.7 | 0.3 | 4.9 |
| Phillips | Brandon | 2B | 4.1 | -1.5 | 0.1 | 2.7 |
| Votto | Joey D | 1B | -0.5 | 2.7 | -0.3 | 1.9 |
| Dunn | Adam | LF | 0.8 | 1.3 | -0.4 | 1.7 |
| Castro | Juan | SS | -1.7 | 3.0 | 0.1 | 1.3 |
| Griffey Jr. | Ken | RF | 2.0 | -0.4 | -0.4 | 1.2 |
| Valentin | Javier | C | 0.2 | 0.0 | 0.2 | 0.4 |
| Hatteberg | Scott | 1B | -0.5 | 0.9 | -0.3 | 0.1 |
| Freel | Ryan | CF | -1.4 | 0.2 | 0.0 | -1.2 |
| Hopper | Norris S | LF | 0.7 | -2.1 | -0.1 | -1.5 |
| Encarnacion | Edwin | 3B | 0.5 | -2.9 | 0.1 | -2.3 |
These fielding estimates have the Reds at +5 runs overall.....Patterson's plus performance at the plate and field has him leading the Reds position players in value, along side the even more surprising Paul Bako.....Jeff Keppinger has kept on hitting, and has been adequate at shortstop.....Votto and Castro's fielding numbers look too high, and are an indication of small sample size issues.....The opposite is (unfortunately) probably not the case with Encarnacion, who comes in well below-replacement level over the first few weeks....unfortunately, the the Reds don't really have other options as long as Gonzalez remains injured.
Pitching
| Last | First | IP | K/9 | BB/9 | HR/9 | HR/F | %GB | BABIP | ERA | FIP | OPSa | BsR | BsR/G | RAR | FIPRAR |
| Harang | Aaron | 21.0 | 6.4 | 2.1 | 0.9 | 10% | 42% | 0.200 | 2.14 | 3.37 | 0.579 | 6.4 | 2.73 | 7.5 | 4.6 |
| Cueto | Johnny | 19.3 | 11.2 | 0.5 | 1.9 | 19% | 35% | 0.171 | 3.72 | 3.09 | 0.550 | 5.7 | 2.66 | 7.1 | 4.9 |
| Cordero | Francisco | 5.0 | 9.0 | 1.8 | 0.0 | 0% | 17% | 0.167 | 0.00 | 1.55 | 0.285 | 0.3 | 0.54 | 4.3 | 2.7 |
| Volquez | Edinson | 10.3 | 7.9 | 4.4 | 0.0 | 0% | 48% | 0.286 | 0.87 | 2.66 | 0.560 | 2.7 | 2.35 | 4.1 | 3.1 |
| Lincoln | Mike | 6.7 | 5.4 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0% | 62% | 0.227 | 1.35 | 1.75 | 0.442 | 1.0 | 1.39 | 2.7 | 2.0 |
| Burton | Jared | 6.7 | 14.8 | 1.3 | 2.7 | 47% | 64% | 0.000 | 4.05 | 3.67 | 0.494 | 2.1 | 2.88 | 1.6 | 0.6 |
| Mercker | Kent | 3.7 | 4.9 | 4.9 | 2.4 | 24% | 44% | 0.000 | 2.45 | 6.71 | 0.595 | 1.3 | 3.20 | 0.7 | -0.9 |
| Fogg | Josh | 9.0 | 6.0 | 3.0 | 3.0 | 24% | 41% | 0.214 | 7.00 | 6.59 | 0.888 | 6.0 | 5.97 | 0.0 | -1.2 |
| Affeldt | Jeremy | 4.0 | 6.8 | 6.8 | 2.3 | 47% | 82% | 0.182 | 2.25 | 6.68 | 0.833 | 2.5 | 5.61 | -0.3 | -1.0 |
| Weathers | David | 4.7 | 0.0 | 9.6 | 0.0 | 0% | 33% | 0.263 | 3.86 | 6.14 | 0.750 | 2.9 | 5.54 | -0.3 | -0.9 |
| Coffey | Todd | 8.3 | 2.2 | 1.1 | 2.2 | 24% | 50% | 0.281 | 7.56 | 5.70 | 0.883 | 5.5 | 5.99 | -0.9 | -1.2 |
| Arroyo | Bronson | 15.7 | 8.0 | 2.9 | 2.9 | 26% | 39% | 0.286 | 5.17 | 5.92 | 0.947 | 12.4 | 7.11 | -2.0 | -1.0 |
Base runs predicts the Reds should have given up 49 runs, 1 shy of their actual total.....There's a fairly bimodal distribution here, with great performances and lousy ones, and little in between....Aaron Harang and Johnny Cueto bring top honors, but Cordero and Volquez have been outstanding in less work.....Kudos to Mike Lincoln for a tremendous first two weeks....There are huge mismatches, in the bad way, between ERA and FIP for Mercker, Weathers, and Affeldt, which makes me worry about the bullpen.....Base Runs agrees on Weathers and Affedlt...has Weathers really still not had a strikeout this season?!?
Thanks to the Hardball Times, who supplied most of the statistics used above. ZR data came from ESPN.com.
A little surprising Volquez and Arroyo have the same Fip. Arroyo is troubling to me...he looking more like an innings eater like Fogg than the other three.
ReplyDeleteThe 0.947 OPSa is brutal.
Small sample. Take a deep breath....
Justin, cool stuff. I like following this kind of stuff over a season, so I'm looking forward to it being a running tabulation.
ReplyDeleteI have a quick (hopefully) question. Clearly Edwin has been dreadful so far this season, but I was wondering if we can figure out how much his 2 high leverage hits have balanced out that damage. I kind of get lost when we start converting player runs to wins (outside of the basic 10 runs = 1 win concept), and then when WPA joins the party, I'm just searching for the equals sign so I know the conclusion. Anyway, can we tell how much EdE's big hits have made up for his otherwise horrendous start? Is it already in your numbers?
Thanks!
@Aaron: Volquez (2.66) and Arroyo (5.92) don't have the same FIP. Arroyo's big problem right now is the HRs, but I'd expect that that will improve given that his HR/FB is much higher than his career norm. That really looks like the only thing statistically that is drastically outside of the levels he put up the last 2 seasons.
ReplyDelete@Joel, thanks--I agree that this will be a fun thing to keep track of. Might get a little redundant later in the season, but we'll cross that bridge when we come to it.
ReplyDeleteAs far as Edwin goes, my numbers assume no particular leverage bias in timing of performance. I think the only way to assess what you're asking is to use WPA, and his WPA is currently +0.35, which is second among position players. His fielding almost negates that, but it indicates that he's been a net-neutral player thus far in terms of effect on actual games.
Of course, those kind of high-leverage performances do not tend to be repeatable, as his performance in Pittsburgh would indicate. Then again, I don't expect him to hit like he has all season. I think Baker's doing about as good a job as he can with him, so it's just a waiting game.
@Aaron, I agree with Joel's assessment of Arroyo. In fact, I'd argue that his 8.0 k/9 is actually really encouraging, as that's been the primary indicator of his performance over his career to my eye.
-j
Dunn is trying to destroy the whole three true outcomes thing. Nearly 50% of his PA end with a walk or strikeout. Maybe in fifty years someone will be able to successfully determine the true value of him.
ReplyDeleteHe is a fascinating player.
ReplyDeleteI take it from your comments that you think that I'm overestimating his value by applying standard techniques for assessing batters to his performance? Why? Aren't his strikeouts worth the same as those of any other hitter? Aren't his walks worth the same as those from any other hitter? I'm not sure why we'd treat him differently on a PA-by-PA basis, and that's the way linear weights are employed.
I've said many times that the problem with Dunn as a player has nothing to do with his hitting. He's the best hitter the Reds have. The problem with Dunn is his terrible defense, which cuts his value by at least one third.
-j
justin,
ReplyDeleteNo I wasn't directing that to you at all, I was merely saying I think everyone has a tough time gauging his value. His defense brings his value down but how much (I see that you said a third and I don't know enough to evaluate better than you), but I've read other fielding metrics that were more critical. Also, and it's a small sample size, but what if he finished the year batting .172 with a .450 OBP. Of course there is value there, but what kind? Especially with the guys behind him not slugging very high either. And I agree with you that he is probably the best hitter but is he their best player? 2nd best? 3rd best? I have no idea, and neither do the reds. That's why they haven't reupped him. The problem is he does very few things well, but the things he does do well he does them very well. So how do you value that?
Well, I guess my take on that is to do what I do with all the other hitters: take everything they do on a PA by PA basis and equate those events to their average effect on on runs scored (or wins--and if you don't want to use average effect, you can use actual effect on wins by tracking WPA). Similarly, I look at everything they do on defense and equate that to runs. That procedure is what the player value series I wrote last winter was was all about (see sidebar for links).
ReplyDeleteFor example, last year, my estimates have Dunn at about 51 runs above a replacement player on offense (or ~31 runs above average). I also estimated that Dunn was about 15 runs below the average defender (across positions). This was all in the player value series. However, that estimate was without an adjustment for his throwing arm, which earlier this year John Walsh (at THT) estimated at -4 runs last year.
So that puts Dunn's total value to the Reds at 51 - 15 - 4 = 32 runs above a replacement player. So by those estimates, his defensive problems cut his value by 37% last year. And in 2006, when Dunn struggled at the plate, his defense absolutely killed his value.
We can also convert this value to dollars. If we estimate free agent value at $4 million per 10 runs above replacement in 2007 (which is about right), that puts his 2007 performance at $12.8 million. I had his overall performance second among Reds position players (Harang was the best overall player, by far), trailing Brandon Phillips' excellent defense and decent hitting by 3 runs (7 if you include the arm adjustment).
I'll agree that there are lots of assumptions that go into those estimates. But I think all the assumptions are reasonable, and furthermore they seem to work well in terms of evaluating player salaries. So they're probably pretty similar (at least) to what the big league clubs are doing in their player valuations these days..
-j
Justin -
ReplyDeletePark effects? I assume they differ between LH & RH pitchers (and hitters)
GABP is a little more HR friendly & a bit GB unfriendly, but what about L & R?
When the park opened, the prediction was that GABP would favor LH batters (& thus LH pitchers would be needed)
Has that played out?
TIA!
Right now, I'm using park factors with the goal of equalizing value within each run environment. In other words, offensive events are worth less in Coors' than in PETCO because they happen more often in Coors' than in PETCO. In GABP's case, it's a slight hitter's park according to a 5-year regressed park factor (1.01), so all hitters get a slight dink in their estimated value whereas all pitchers get a slight boost in their value. How a player gets his runs, however, is sort of irrelevant from this perspective--if lefties have an advantage (the walls are shorter, so it wouldn't surprise me if it's true--though it's nothing like the Fenway effect on righties), then they'll be more valuable in the runs environment at GABP.
ReplyDeleteThe goal of neutralizing a player's stats to remove any bias of the park, including left/right splits, is a different beast. It really requires one to use individual, regressed park factors for each event in each handedness to do it right (including most especially plate appearances). Very few people even try to do this--I know PECOTA incorporates this level of detail (though I don't think--or at least haven't seen it reported--that they regress their park factors, and they probably should).
PECOTA's data are also the only place I remember seeing left/right runs park factors for GABP (I think it was probably the 2006 annual that went into detail about this). Unfortunately, my old baseball prospectuses are packed away in storage, so I can't look this up to confirm the left/right split they report.
Maybe KJOK's park database has this, or allows the calculation of this? I could check later on, though I can't do it now... -j
Thanks, Justin - this came from a discussion that the Reds had tried to go with more lefty bats because of GABP's layout (vets like Griff & Dunn but almost all their OF prospects, Hamilton, Dickerson, Bruce,et al too). A park that favors LH bats would also suggest stockpiling LH pitchers. (Not going out of their way, but if there's a choice, go with a lefty.) Anyway, that can leave them short of RH bat off the bench, etc.
ReplyDeleteBob Howsam retooled the Reds for speed back in the 70s because of the new field, so it makes some sense that the Reds signing & player development would reflect GABP to some degree.. But, does GABP *actually* play that way (my ultimate question).