A new stat DRC+

[UndertheHalo]

a new toy for some of our stat heads.  

I need to read the more in depth description from this Judge guy.  But hey, it sounds interesting. 

What do you guys think ?

 

 

[Lou]

deserved?

you have to be kidding me 

[Docwaukee]

8 minutes ago, Lou said:

deserved?

you have to be kidding me 

Trout is still #1

[tdawg87]

Is this like FIP for hitters?

[Lou]

6 minutes ago, Dochalo said:

Trout is still #1

I'm #1 in the DEQ+ ratings

[Docwaukee]

1 minute ago, tdawg87 said:

Is this like FIP for hitters?

It's a souped up version of wRC+ or ops+.  

Think of it this way.  wRC+ and ops+ are what did happen.  DRC+ is what should have happened.  

[ettin]

42 minutes ago, Dochalo said:

It's a souped up version of wRC+ or ops+.  

Think of it this way.  wRC+ and ops+ are what did happen.  DRC+ is what should have happened.  

Haven't seen the details but I imagine it tries to strip out luck, BABIP type issues, errors perhaps. It is probably trying to assess true run creation ability.

[Blarg]

Nice algorithm for PlayStation MLB The Show. 

[Blarg]

A single is more valuable than a walk, but less valuable than a triple. Strikeouts are bad, but grounding into a double play is worse. 

You would think this would be pretty obvious for anyone who has watched the game played. 

[Stradling]

A single is not always more valuable than a walk.  If no one is on base I’d rather have the pitcher throw more pitches giving up a walk than allowing a single.   Am I wrong?  

[Blarg]

Yes.

[Stradling]

Ok why?   I’m not being a dick, I just want to understand.   Especially with this stat being based on what should have happened we can’t look at a single and say, it could be misplayed and it could be stretched into a double.   

[Angelsfan1984]

18 minutes ago, Stradling said:

Ok why?   I’m not being a dick, I just want to understand.   Especially with this stat being based on what should have happened we can’t look at a single and say, it could be misplayed and it could be stretched into a double.   

You’re assuming the single happened in less than 4 pitches. Walks don’t always happen in 4 pitches either. However there is more likelyhood that an error occurs on a single than a walk. 

[Blarg]

Because pitchers are not lasting deep into games anymore. The bullpen reliance has changed and now grinding a pitcher down is less important as putting men on with the threat of scoring.

A hit forces action on the field and has a chance to move runners more than one base. A walk only advances other runners one. So in terms of value a single has predictively more value if you add the possibility of runners on base. A walk doesn't score a lone runner on third or move a runner from second to third. 

[floplag]

10 hours ago, Dochalo said:

It's a souped up version of wRC+ or ops+.  

Think of it this way.  wRC+ and ops+ are what did happen.  DRC+ is what should have happened.  

Good summary i think.  
It would be nice if instead of coming up with new stats they would fix the old ones but thats moot.

[arch stanton]

1 hour ago, Stradling said:

Ok why?   I’m not being a dick, I just want to understand.   Especially with this stat being based on what should have happened we can’t look at a single and say, it could be misplayed and it could be stretched into a double.   

It can come on the 12th pitch of the AB just like a walk can and it can also score the runner from second

[Stradling]

Thanks everyone.  I completely understand why a hit is better than a walk with runners on base, that is pretty logical.  As for the other times, and when we are talking about this specific stat where it is measuring what should have happened, we can’t use the “a hit can cause an error” it is called an error because it shouldn’t have happened.  I know I am splitting hairs, but a single is not ALWAYS better than a walk.  

[floplag]

7 minutes ago, Stradling said:

Thanks everyone.  I completely understand why a hit is better than a walk with runners on base, that is pretty logical.  As for the other times, and when we are talking about this specific stat where it is measuring what should have happened, we can’t use the “a hit can cause an error” it is called an error because it shouldn’t have happened.  I know I am splitting hairs, but a single is not ALWAYS better than a walk.  

All things being equal, same situation, the same number of pitches in the at bat, etc... a ball in play could be misplayed or find a hole or other things that a walk cannot.  a single can move a runner from first to third, a walk cannot.  they are fringe things you cant necessarily count on, but they exist.
Is it always better, no of course not, but it always has the potential to be better     

[arch stanton]

But we all know that a Stradling cannot not argue a point of mindless minutia for 3 pages

[Docwaukee]

2 hours ago, Stradling said:

A single is not always more valuable than a walk.  If no one is on base I’d rather have the pitcher throw more pitches giving up a walk than allowing a single.   Am I wrong?  

the stat isn't measuring the secondary or tertiary impact of a pitchers pitch count or how the batter might obtain an advantage in future at bats by seeing more pitches.  Those are things that are likely never going to be accounted for by a stat and why stats are imperfect (among other reasons).  the purpose of this stat is to weigh the value of a single and weigh the value of a walk.  The impact of those various single situations and walk situations are conglomerated into a value for each.  So while there are likely occasions where a walk in a particular situation might have a slightly greater value than a single via a different situation, the intent is to weigh the general impact/value of a single vs. walk.    

[Stradling]

1 minute ago, Dochalo said:

the stat isn't measuring the secondary or tertiary impact of a pitchers pitch count or how the batter might obtain an advantage in future at bats by seeing more pitches.  Those are things that are likely never going to be accounted for by a stat and why stats are imperfect (among other reasons).  the purpose of this stat is to weigh the value of a single and weigh the value of a walk.  The impact of those various single situations and walk situations are conglomerated into a value for each.  So while there are likely occasions where a walk in a particular situation might have a slightly greater value than a single via a different situation, the intent is to weigh the general impact/value of a single vs. walk.    

Thank you.  

[Stradling]

27 minutes ago, arch stanton said:

But we all know that a Stradling cannot not argue a point of mindless minutia for 3 pages

I appreciate you missing my point.   Thanks!  

[arch stanton]

1 minute ago, Stradling said:

I appreciate you missing my point.   Thanks!  

And I appreciate you driving mine home

[T.G.]

 

[2112]

2 hours ago, Stradling said:

A single is not always more valuable than a walk.  If no one is on base I’d rather have the pitcher throw more pitches giving up a walk than allowing a single.   Am I wrong?  

That's why I hated the new intentional walk rule.  

Before the pitcher has to throw 4 more pitches, and had to concentrate on throwing them outside the strikezone.

Edited December 5, 2018 by NotMyCat
Computer went wonky and thought I was done posting.