The Bringer of Rain: GB/FB Ratio Revisited

The boards are in the summer doldrums, so I'm throwing this out there in case anyone needs an outlet to talk a little baseball.

Although I would much rather post a Champs team, you have to settle for a Finals runner-up since Edge's Freedom Riders unceremoniously hard spanked me in the last series:

http://365.strat-o-matic.com/team/1485773

If I did this link right, this should be the Sim Misc tab screen for my team:

http://365.strat-o-matic.com/team/misc/1485773

As you can see from the Hitters GB-FB line, I produced a ratio of .903 (or +208 net fly balls). Although my team was in the top four in offense most of the year, I actually ended up finishing fifth (still with a perfectly respectable 751 runs scored).

FWIW, I drafted every single "most optimal" player who would produce more fly balls than ground balls at each position. I did this by reviewing their stats from previous teams and determining the players most likely to reproduce a net positive fly ball trend.

On the pitching side, I tried to get optimal "ground ball pitchers" and managed a very high 1.66 GB-FB ratio (1082 net ground balls and 35 net double plays).

The mistake I may have made was using actual ground ball pitchers I ferreted out in Fangraphs. In the all-star setting of SOM Online, getting a lot of ground balls isn't enough, and allowing 244 home runs left me 8th in pitching overall. In addition, I finished 8th in WHIP, 8th in walks allowed and 10th in hits allowed. None of these are very good outcomes.

The real life skill of extracting a lot of ground balls simply does not translate fully into dice rolls. Although my pitchers were fairly strong in ball park homers, the big banger offenses simply would not cooperate with my plan. I may have been able to optimize the pitchers card side, however, there is plenty of damage to be done with the hitters cards. Ask Edge.

Anyway, I hope that's enough to get the ball rolling. If anyone wants to dig a little deeper, join the conversation here.

I'm thinking a ballpark suited for BP singles would have also helped your hitters.

In this particular situation, I think, I needed to help my pitching more than my hitting.

Perhaps...

With pitching,
In hitting friendly parks, my goal is a 5.00 ERA or <, and a 1.50 WHIP or <.
This way, if I can get my staff at these numbers or better, I have a good chance @ winning.

A park like Citizens (1-2 BP Singles), I'm hoping to get 4- 4.50 ERA or <, and 1.4ish WHIP or <.

You're right there, IMO.

I respectfully disagree. I think you needed better hitting. ie. a pure .300 hitter or a couple of guys MAXED vs. RH's)

Zunino- Maxed Out vs. LH's/ 7 vs. RH's.
Bellinger- Maxed out both ways
Carpenter- 6 BPHR's vs. RH's
Harrison- Maxed out vs. LH's
Rosario- Maxed vs. RH's
Trout- Maxed out vs. RH's
Renfroe- Maxed vs. LH's

I just don't see enough SLG vs. RH's.
.234 BA
.319 OB
.460 SLG

With the low BA/OB vs RH's, your slugging,IMO, needed to be .460 or > to be better.

The key is definitely slugging and to quote Justin Turner:

“There’s no SLG on the ground.”

The crux of the experiment was maximizing the GB-FB ratio as a proxy for slugging. I could have done several things differently, however, what I stuck to was using guys who routinely have positive ratios. For instance, while Josh Donaldson is known as The Bringer of Rain, he never actually produces a GB-FB ratio less than one in SOM Online. Kyle Seager and Cody Bellinger are almost always the top two guys in every single league when it comes to the ratio.

Now, whether Donaldson is a better “producer” I might totally concede the argument. But for the purpose of this team, there was one metric only (GB-FB ratio). Further, it gave me a very specific shopping list of 14 players and I was able to draft most of them (if not every single one).

I'll admit, I was hoping to go a few rounds discussing the imaginary wind in Strat-O.

However, the reason I opened this thread was to get a conversation going about the bigger picture in baseball. As a chronic over-analyzer, I get a lot of joy from dissecting the game. There is no shortage of roads to explore in a stats oriented game like baseball. I was discussing this just the other day, arguing on behalf of an optimized game driven by data mining, hacking and outside the box thinking.

But on the other hand...

MLB attendance is down. When the MLB brass blame the weather, it might be time for a deeper look in. While the mechanics of scoring in professional baseball move toward optimal, the "art" of professional baseball seems to be dying. And in the modern era, the fan is absolutely gouged to death in order to attend a game. $20 parking, $8 beer, stratospheric ticket prices, etc etc.

And now, what does your $200 trip to the ballpark buy you? 30 strikeouts, 30 routine fly balls, eight walks and four home runs. Who wants to pay for THAT?

Gone are the days when striking out was the ultimate embarrassment. Joe DiMaggio and Tony Gwynn? How about Joey Gallo.

Is baseball evolving, or is baseball dying?

It is evolving. Free agency, big money in media, league expansions, individual self-expression, technologic advances, medical progress and the shrinking world are some examples. Remember when they lowered the pitcher's mound? How about the number of baseballs used in a game? Chewing tobacco?

Interesting thread!

I’m not sure I can add much, except questions...

I don’t really understand what gets included in those stats in strat online. Is it only
The outs? Or does it include hits ? Where do lineouts and popouts get recorded? (Again, referring to the online strat stats).

Is there a theory about mixing types of position players, instead of striving for one type
Of player for the whole lineup? For example, does it make sense to strive for high OBP with good speed,in leadoff, followed by high average hitters (with low GBA ) in the second position, followed by a lefty flyball hitter, followed by 2 more flyball hitters in clean-up and the fifth spot? (I know this is very common old school thinking, but the question is really a debate between uniformity versus variety, and lineups based on specific roles.) I think that the lineup based on roles may have been more logical in the non-DH era, when the pitcher was often the third out for an Inning, and the next inning started with the leadoff hitter again.

In very limited, anecdotal support of the traditional mixed lineup with roles, I’ve had some fun with my mystery tourney team lately, using this traditional approach. It helps that it’s an 80s decade, where I could draft some speedsters, with good clutch hitting and power for the 4th and 5th hitters in the lineup. I have a good card for Lonnie Smith at leadoff, where he is neck and neck for best league batting average and OBP. The top of the lineup follows the above description except that my third batter is RH. A lefty pull flyball hitter might get more runners advancing to third on flyballs hit to RF, at least in theory.

Your thoughts ?

Btw I’m not posting a link to my team because the league is ongoing and I don’t want specific advice for my team.