A case for balance

Postby OdysseyTigger » Thu Dec 22, 2005 10:46 am

[quote:83fc66e366="sschu"].

3. Over/underperformance

It seems your hitters performed about average, but your error rate was outstanding, only 86 for the season. With the exception of Carter, every player was under the value on his card, this seems unusual to me.


FWIIW, sschu[/quote:83fc66e366]

Luck played no part in these error rates and they can not be considered overperformance. Match dominant high strikeout pitching with top defense and you will minimize fielding chances. The EXPECTED result would be an error rate below the card value.
OdysseyTigger
 
Posts: 55
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 2:34 pm

Postby PJ Axelsson » Thu Dec 22, 2005 10:48 am

No worries, sschu, I'm also trying to facilitate some good discussion here.

:D
PJ Axelsson
 
Posts: 55
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 2:34 pm

Postby sschu » Thu Dec 22, 2005 11:00 am

OT,

Not sure I understand your point:

***
Match dominant high strikeout pitching with top defense and you will minimize fielding chances.
***

Is not the X chance the same for Koufax and Camnitz? Koufax has no BP 1B effect on his LH side of course. Sandy will get a K instead of a gb B or popout, not sure how that affects error rate.

sschu
sschu
 
Posts: 55
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 2:34 pm

Postby OdysseyTigger » Thu Dec 22, 2005 11:34 am

1) less batters = less chances = less errors

2) dominant pitching + strong defense = less batters

3) don't know about the x's in strat, however in real life less balls put in play = less chances = less errors - If strat allows the same per at bat error chance behind a pitcher who averages a strikeout per inning as for one who averages a strikeout per nine innings, then they have a problem with their model
OdysseyTigger
 
Posts: 55
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 2:34 pm

Previous

Return to Strat-O-Matic Baseball: All-Time Greats

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 35 guests