Saber Bombs are MLB FanHouse's introduction to sabermetrics, those new and sometimes unwieldy metrics that are changing the way we think about baseball
If you're even a semi-ardent baseball fan, chances are good that you've seen MLB.com's new Gameday feature this year, which gives an incredible and detailed synopsis of the action on the field. The most interesting byproduct of the new Gameday is that Pitch FX data is now available to the general public for every pitch throw. If you're unfamiliar, Pitch FX measures the speed of each pitch in two places (at the release point and as it crosses the plate), as well as horizontal and vertical break. Many people see this wealth of information as the next frontier of sabermetrics, because it allows more detailed analysis than ever of each pitcher's start.
Saber Bombs are MLB FanHouse's introduction to sabermetrics, those new and sometimes unwieldy metrics that are changing the way we think about baseball
Earlier this week, Brinson issued a strong, "Sell High!" warning on the Reds' pitching phenom Edinson Volquez. It's probably good advice, but it's easy to underestimate just how good Volquez has been this year. The Cincinnati Enquirer did some digging and found that his 1.33 ERA puts him on pace for the best adjusted ERA since 1930 and it's by a wide margin.
Now since this is the Saber-Bomb and the purpose of the Saber Bomb is to educate, let's talk about adjusted ERA (more commonly known as ERA+) and just how insane the starts the Volquez and Cliff Lee have gotten off to this year. ERA+ is used to normalize ERAs across ballparks and eras and it's a very easy stat to understand. It's calculated by taking the league average ERA, dividing it by the player's ERA, and multiplying by the park factor, which is represented by a number based on 100 as neutral, over 100 favoring hitters, and under 100 favoring pitchers. The result is ERA+ with 100 being exactly average and anything over 100 being better than average. It's a quick and easy number to compare players across eras with, because it measures individual performance against league performance.
So how good have Lee and Volquez been? The best adjusted ERA since 1930 belongs to Pedro Martinez, who had a 291 in 2000. Right now, Volquez is at 336 and Lee is at 305. Unfortunately for them, their peripheral numbers don't really show a path to a record breaking season. Volquez has a WHIP of 1.27, which is a good number for a young pitcher, but nothing earth shattering. It's a good indication that his ridiculous ERA has involved some good luck and will catch up to him. Lee, on the other hand, just isn't enough of a power pitcher to stay as unhittable as he's been. It's been fun watching these two dominate, but it's not very likely to last.
Saber Bombs are MLB FanHouse's introduction to sabermetrics, those new and sometimes unwieldy metrics that are changing the way we think about baseball. Each post highlights a specific stat, player, team or media member either embodying that understanding, or missing the boat completely.
Among baseball fans, Bill James is either a pioneer of enlightened baseball thought or some nerd who enjoys math more than actually watching a game. It's that black and white, with staunch proponents on both sides of the "stats vs. scouts" debate often refusing to see shades of gray.
But if those people who completely disregard James' contributions to the game actually took the time to understand where he's coming from, they'd probably be surprised at how much he still respects and values the old school. From his (extremely-long-but-worth-the-time) Q&A with the Freakanomics blog:
Q: Generally, who should have a larger role in evaluating college and minor league players: scouts or stat guys? A: Ninety-five percent scouts, five percent stats. The thing is that - with the exception of a very few players like Ryan Braun - college players are so far away from the major leagues that even the best of them will have to improve tremendously in order to survive as major league players - thus, the knowledge of who will improve is vastly more important than the knowledge of who is good. Stats can tell you who is good, but they're almost 100 percent useless when it comes to who will improve.
Saber Bombs are MLB FanHouse's introduction to sabermetrics, those new and sometimes unwieldy metrics that are changing the way we think about baseball. Each post highlights a specific stat, player, team or media member either embodying that understanding, or missing the boat completely.
For the better part of the last week, my fellow 'Housers MattWatson and Mullet have been wondering just what the Brewers were thinking when they forked out $7 million to Mike Cameron for him to cover center field in Miller Park next year. Their concerns are certainly valid. Cameron is old and his bat has been slipping for a couple of years. He certainly doesn't play center field like he used to and he's definitely suspended until almost May for using stimulants. Still, I think the people are missing the point on Cameron. I think his signing vastly improves the Brewers from a defensive standpoint, and I don't just mean his defense.
Signing Cameron and putting him in center sets off a nice little chain reaction for the Brewers' defense. It moves Bill Hall from center, (where he was very bad last year) to third base and that moves sends Ryan Braun from third (where he was historically bad) to left field. Defense is notoriously hard to quantify, but I'm going to look at a few of the newer school metrics to try and illustrate how this move helps the Brewers. Follow along after the jump for all of the stat-laden goodness.
Saber Bombs are MLB FanHouse's introduction to sabermetrics, those new and sometimes unwieldy metrics that are changing the way we think about baseball. Each post highlights a specific stat, player, team or media member either embodying that understanding, or missing the boat completely.
Just how excited is New England about Josh Beckett's performance last night? At least some people are ready to crown it one of the best Red Sox playoff performances of all-time. From the Hartford Courant:
We've seen the miracle of Curt Schilling's bloody sock in 2004. We've seen Pedro Martinez climb out of the bullpen with a strained muscle under his right shoulder blade in 1999 and pitch six innings of no-hit ball. We've seen Luis Tiant grunt, groan and sweat his mustache off on his way to a 163-pitch night in the 1975 World Series.
Yes, there may have been more dramatic pitching performances in Red Sox postseason history. But there have been no more authoritative than Josh Beckett's four-hit shutout of the Los Angeles Angels at Fenway Park.
Looking at the numbers, it's kind of hard to argue ... right? Well, just to make sure, I ran the numbers. Josh Beckett posted a Game Score last night of 87, so I did a search on Baseball-Reference for all Red Sox postseason pitching performances by a starter with a Game Score of 87 or greater.
And you know what? Beckett's may not be the best, but it's the best in the last 40 years. Jim Lonborg posted an 88 in 1967 by pitching a one-hit, one-walk shutout against the Cardinals in the postseason. Before that, only Babe Ruth (97 in 1916) and Bill Dinneen (90 in 1903) had a mark as high. So, yeah, believe the hype: Josh Beckett really did carve out a piece of history last night.
Saber Bombs are MLB FanHouse's introduction to sabermetrics, those new and sometimes unwieldy metrics that are changing the way we think about baseball. Each post highlights a specific stat, player, team or media member either embodying that understanding, or missing the boat completely.
Earlier today, my man Postman R wondered about the Cardinals chances at the playoffs, concluding that as long as they're mathematically alive, it's stupid to count the defending champs out. And so I'm here to do what all nerdy bloggers with big sideburns and big sunglasses do; prove him wrong with statistics (sorry, man, nothing personal).
We can use simple math first. The Cardinals are five games behind the Cubs and four and a half behind the Brewers with 18 to play (and 17 for the Brewers and 16 for the Cubs). To make up that deficit, the Cards would have to go 11-7 AND hope that the Cubs go 5-11 while the Brewers go 6-11. Granted, the Cubs and Brewers seem to have an affinity for tanking, but the Cards are currently six games under .500, going four games over the last eighteen games seems to be a tall task.
Just how tall of a task is it? You can find out after the jump.
Saber Bombs are MLB FanHouse's introduction to sabermetrics, those new and sometimes unwieldy metrics that are changing the way we think about baseball. Each post highlights a specific stat, player, team or media member either embodying that understanding, or missing the boat completely.
One great and entirely overlooked aspect of sabermetrics is that it's not all just newfangled stats that are hard for the casual fan to understand. They can just as easily take a look at what seems to be a common baseball truth and see if there's actually any truth behind it. That's what makes this Hardball Times article about swinging at strikes so great. Swinging at strikes is a basic baseball tenant, but haven't you ever wondered just how important it is? (Warning: if you haven't, just stop reading now.)
Common sense says it's best to swing at strikes and not at balls. But it's not always that easy. You don't have to listen hard to hear someone complain about a star player "walking too much." In general it happens when they draw a walk in a big situation where a hit would drive in key runs (think Alex Rodriguez in October or JD Drew at every stop along the way before Boston). Just how much value is there in swinging at strikes? Find out after the jump.
Yes, the Marlins are not in playoff contention, but it's hard to ignore Hanley Ramirez and Miguel Cabrera, especially considering they're first and second, respectively, in the NL in VORP, and rank in the top three in Runs Created. [...] -- Carolyn, Boca Raton, Fla.
Actually, you're right. That's exactly what I did, and how I came up with Prince Fielder as my NL MVP leader. His "good'' year is actually more than good, and the Brewers are right in the thick of the playoff race. While I understand your sentiments, I am more interested in "wins created'' than runs created. And the day I consider VORP is the day I get out of the business. The idea of the MVP is to honor the player who has had the biggest positive impact on the pennant races. [...]
"Wins created" and runs created ... nope, those have nothing to do with each other at all, do they? I mean, it's not like baseball is a game solely determined by how many runs you score while preventing the other team from scoring. Nope, the amount of runs you score has nothing to do with wins. Nothing interrelated there, not at all.
And man, you don't have to like VORP, but at least present an alternative viewpoint. Explain why you think a team's success should factor into MVP voting; that's something most people could get behind, even if it does dismiss more "valuable" performances for non-contending teams. The point is: don't just dismiss it out of hand. As Rex Grossman might say, that's ignorant. And we don't want writers for the nation's leading, most respected sports magazine coming across as ignorant, now do we?
Saber Bombs are MLB FanHouse's introduction to sabermetrics, those new and sometimes unwieldy metrics that are changing the way we think about baseball. Each post highlights a specific stat, player, team or media member either embodying that understanding, or missing the boat completely.
Jorge Posada has always been a good, if not great, offensive catcher: his lifetime averages of .279/.379/.478 makes for an extremely solid career, especially for a catcher.
This year, though, at the age of 36, Posada is having a Bonds-like insurrection into the top of the MVP discussion. He's hitting .340/.420/.546 (!!), and has been doing so consistently since the beginning of the season. How?
Unlike Bonds, it seems very unlikely Posada is getting any sort of boost from steroids; instead, he's getting the benefit of the oldest performance-enhancing drug ever created: luck.
Saber Bombs are MLB FanHouse's introduction to sabermetrics, those new and sometimes unwieldy metrics that are changing the way we think about baseball. Each post highlights a specific stat, player, team or media member either embodying that understanding, or missing the boat completely.
Let me start this post off by saying that of all our writers here at the MLB branch of the FanHouse, I'm the least sabermetrically inclined. It's not that I don't value sabermetrics, or understand them, it's just that I hate math. I used to like it, but then I hit AP Calculus my senior year of high school and the love affair was over. Going through sabermetrics reminds me of calculus, so I'm a little apprehensive about using it.
That being said, since I currently have a man-crush on Dan Haren, when those new -fangled numbers tell me Haren is having one of the best seasons ever, I listen. From Dayn Perry's Stats 101 column on Fox Sports:
So the focus of today's installment of Stats 101 is how Haren's work to date is stacking up in historical terms. The question, which might surprise you, is this: is Dan Haren on his way to one of the best seasons ever by a starting pitcher? Let's explore.
...Thus far, Haren's truly walking with the gods. If he maintains his current level of performance, his ERA+ for 2007 will rank fifth all-time. In other words, Haren's on his way to a profoundly special season.
Of course, it's possible that Haren is headed for a bit of a fall. For one, he's posting the best home run rate of his career despite also posting the lowest groundball-fly ball rate of his career. That probably won't last. As well, he's currently allowing a Batting Average on Balls in Play (BABIP) of .218. As explained in an earlier edition of Stats 101, when a pitcher's BABIP is significantly less than around .290, he's a good bet to regress in the future.
Overall, though, Haren is well on his way to making a bit of history. Only time will tell whether he can keep it up.
Saber Bombs are MLB FanHouse's introduction to sabermetrics, those new and sometimes unwieldy metrics that are changing the way we think about baseball
And it's working. If you consider yourself a fan of both 
