Pitching Framing Runs

[nikkachez]

2 minutes ago, ukyah said:

I'm willing to believe in the base principle, but i have a very hard time discounting the importance of the caught stealing percentage, while fully acknowledging that it's far from an individual statistic, meaning the pitcher and receiving fielder play a part in it.

1

Antiquated, while you can't let teams around and carelessly, it's not a major aspect of the game anymore. And the more we learn about catching defense, the more it just becomes another factor in evaluating catching defense.

 

Goddamn, I feel like I've had to post this link a million times, HERE IT IS AGAIN if you're interested in seeing how the Dbacks are trying to evaluate it. And here is how it factors into another way of evaluating pitchers, Deserved Runs Against. Give both a read. They're worth the time.

 

Everyone seems wary of it because they don't know what it is.  

[eaterfan]

Go to robot umps and take catcher framing out of the equation. Get better offensive catchers in there.

[ettin]

18 minutes ago, nikkachez said:

Can't see why teams would undervalue pitch-framing just because of where they play (especially a team trying to extract as much value from their pitching staff as possible). 

My thought on that has to do with the higher altitude and how it impacts all types of pitches (reducing overall movement). It may or may not be a factor it was just something that ran through my head at the time but I haven't given much thought to it to be honest. The lack of movement due to the thin air in Coors Field makes a lot of pitches lose their natural movement you'd see in other ballparks which is why hitters tee up while hitting in that park. Although pitch framing would still be useful it may not have as much value in that environment comparatively.

[Oz27]

15 minutes ago, ukyah said:

i have serious doubts as to the validity of the "pitch framing" stat, much less it's accuracy. i would be interested in hearing an educated argument for it.

i'm willing to believe in the base principle, but i have a very hard time discounting the importance of the caught stealing percentage, while fully acknowledging that it's far from an individual statistic, meaning the pitcher and receiving fielder play a part in it.

This is a long read and a couple of years old, but this will address much of what you're saying - http://www.hardballtimes.com/the-state-and-future-of-pitch-framing-research/

Choosing to ignore pitch framing is choosing to ignore a massive part of the game. Each ball or strike has real value and, as the article points out, it's not hard to see how a catcher can be worth 20+ runs per year through framing. One framed strike per game will end up being worth that much. It's practically impossible to generate that much value from a catcher's influence on the running game or really any other part of their game.

As for the accuracy of the statistics, the year-to-year correlation has been pretty strong. Even though it has declined in recent years, the year-to-year pitch framing correlation is still higher for the framing rungs metric than it is for a lot of widely accepted statistics. Put another way, 'Year 0' framing runs is a better predictor of 'Year 1' framing runs than 'Year 0' batting average is for 'Year 1' batting average. When there is an ongoing year-to-year correlation in a metric, it is hard for me to accept that it isn't accurately reflecting a skill.

[Oz27]

16 minutes ago, nikkachez said:

Everyone seems wary of it because they don't know what it is.  

This x 100.

It reminds me of WAR in the 2000s or deserved run average now.

[Erstad Grit]

Im suspect of the stat if it still says iannetta is good.  

[Oz27]

1 hour ago, Erstad Grit said:

Im suspect of the stat if it still says iannetta is good.  

It says he's terrible.

[ukyah]

4 hours ago, Oz27 said:

This x 100.

It reminds me of WAR in the 2000s or deserved run average now.

WAR is a highly flawed stat and needs serious reconfiguration before it's going to be the end all be all metric that many want it to be. it leads to some serious overvaluation of some average players and some drastic undervaluation of some good players.

i'm going to take the time to read those two links on pitch framing, and i'll chew on it. thanks.

[ukyah]

5 hours ago, nikkachez said:

Antiquated, while you can't let teams around and carelessly, it's not a major aspect of the game anymore. And the more we learn about catching defense, the more it just becomes another factor in evaluating catching defense.

 

Goddamn, I feel like I've had to post this link a million times, HERE IT IS AGAIN if you're interested in seeing how the Dbacks are trying to evaluate it. And here is how it factors into another way of evaluating pitchers, Deserved Runs Against. Give both a read. They're worth the time.

 

Everyone seems wary of it because they don't know what it is.  

 

thanks for the link, i'm going to check them out.

i hate the word antiquated, and i disagree with it's usage here.

i've never seen it posted anywhere, and i'm on here quite a bit.

[Oz27]

58 minutes ago, ukyah said:

WAR is a highly flawed stat and needs serious reconfiguration before it's going to be the end all be all metric that many want it to be. it leads to some serious overvaluation of some average players and some drastic undervaluation of some good players.

Can you elaborate on this? Is your issue with the methodology or the principle? I obviously disagree, strongly, but I'm curious about your reasoning.

[CaliAngel]

My biggest question: Where is Jeff Mathis included in all of this?

[Troll Daddy]

7 hours ago, CaliAngel said:

My biggest question: Where is Jeff Mathis included in all of this?

Pitch framing skills start with a catchers squat.

 

[eligrba]

Mark Twain said that there are three types of lies;

1. Lies

2. Damned Lies

3. Statistics

 

I think he was on to something.

[Troll Daddy]

I put pitching framing close to the bottom of the pecking order of catching skills.

Curious as to how this stat is accumulated. Is every pitch caught recorded in this stat? Is it computer or human generated ? 

 

[eaterfan]

5 minutes ago, Troll Daddy said:

I put pitching framing close to the bottom of the pecking order of catching skills.

Curious as to how this stat is accumulated. Is every pitch caught recorded in this stat? Is it computer or human generated ? 

 

Every pitch is recorded. It uses stat cast to track each pitch. It's then compared to other pitches in the same location and seen how often is called a ball and how often is called a strike. 

Getting a pitch called a strike more often is better. I know a lot of you don't believe in stats, but they show his tend to do better when ahead in the count and pitchers tend to do better when the hitter is behind. 

Obviously getting a strike on a pitch that is called a strike 90% of the time isn't as valuable as getting one that's called 10% of the time. It's factored into how much credit the catcher gets. 

[Blarg]

Or how an umpire sees the game. 

[Stradling]

30 minutes ago, Blarg said:

Or how an umpire sees the game. 

Well I am sure since an ump sees every pitch of each pitcher in the game he is behind the plate there's enough data to account for umpires strike zone.  

[eaterfan]

13 minutes ago, Stradling said:

Well I am sure since an ump sees every pitch of each pitcher in the game he is behind the plate there's enough data to account for umpires strike zone.  

Yup. Also count data. The same pitch is more likely to be called a strike when it's 3-0 than when it's 1-2.

[Troll Daddy]

12 minutes ago, Stradling said:

Well I am sure since an ump sees every pitch of each pitcher in the game he is behind the plate there's enough data to account for umpires strike zone.  

I agree, there's some value in pitch framing but this is a skill most ML catchers are pretty good at doing. Game calling, throwing out runners, blocking balls in the dirt, and hitting are at the forefront. 

 

[Oz27]

4 hours ago, eaterfan said:

Every pitch is recorded. It uses stat cast to track each pitch. It's then compared to other pitches in the same location and seen how often is called a ball and how often is called a strike. 

Getting a pitch called a strike more often is better. I know a lot of you don't believe in stats, but they show his tend to do better when ahead in the count and pitchers tend to do better when the hitter is behind. 

Obviously getting a strike on a pitch that is called a strike 90% of the time isn't as valuable as getting one that's called 10% of the time. It's factored into how much credit the catcher gets. 

Good explanation. When you put it like this, it's silly that the statistic is at all controversial. Many people just don't like it because they don't understand it or because it challenges their previously held views and they don't want to change.

[Troll Daddy]

18 minutes ago, Oz27 said:

Good explanation. When you put it like this, it's silly that the statistic is at all controversial. Many people just don't like it because they don't understand it or because it challenges their previously held views and they don't want to change.

It doesn't really challenge anything ... the game hasn't changed. Just more food for thought. 

[Oz27]

6 minutes ago, Troll Daddy said:

It doesn't really challenge anything ... the game hasn't changed. Just more food for thought. 

As great as this fortune cookie insight is, it literally challenges what you had just posted.

[Troll Daddy]

21 minutes ago, Oz27 said:

As great as this fortune cookie insight is, it literally challenges what you had just posted.

Confucius says: Any idiot can read a stat line but knowing its true meaning is a gift. 

[Stradling]

53 minutes ago, Troll Daddy said:

Confucius says: Any idiot can read a stat line but knowing its true meaning is a gift. 

So then you're not gifted?

[Troll Daddy]

16 minutes ago, Stradling said:

So then you're not gifted?

 

16 minutes ago, Stradling said:

So then you're not gifted?

Actually,  that was your fortune cookie amigo