Measuring "Plate Skills"

One last funky stat: "Hitter's +/-"

Once again, to recap our overall philosophy:  PRODUCTION + PLATE SKILLS + AGE-ARC

We got a new stat to measure "Production," which is called "Plausibility Index," which is covered via the "Allegory of the Window."  I felt there needed to be a stat that incorporated both walks and extra-base hits, but also recognized that strikeouts impact Production by reducing the number of balls in play, and, thereby, increasing the necessary conversion rate (the rate of conversion of balls in play to "random-y singles") to a level that may (if it's very high) make offensive success "implausible."

So what about "Plate Skills," the other part of the formula?

Plate Skills can be measured by on-base percentage, or by "eye ratio" (BB / K), or by separate calculations of K% (K / PA) and BB% (BB / PA).  But, here again, I didn't think we were getting the whole picture.  Just like I view strikeouts as a non-trivial part of Production, I view "hitting the ball with authority" as an integral part of Plate Skills.

In other words, it's not just a matter of distinguishing balls from strikes, it's distinguishing a "hitter's pitch" from a "pitcher's pitch."  The latter two may be balls or strikes, so "just" strike-zone judgment is not enough.  When the hitter gets a "hitter's pitch," what is he supposed to do with it?  Hit it!  So, except as it demonstrates the relative ability to avoid strikeouts (by connecting with the ball), "eye ratio" doesn't really cover that part of Plate Skills.

OBP, then, might be better ... except, (1) it doesn't tell you anything about strikeouts, and (2) it can be  mightily affected by our old friend the "random-y single."  As we've noted, the "random-y single" represents a ball hit without authority, and our system treats "random-y singles" as no better than "random-y ball-in-play outs."  Our theory is that the ability to hit "random-y singles" against minor-league pitching doesn't really tell us anything about a prospects likelihood of major-league success.

So, once again, we devised our own stat, which we dubbed "Hitter's +/-

Without going into excruciating detail (well, maybe we already have), we took what appeared to be a reasonable "average" distribution of our six measurable "plate outcomes" from a bunch of major and minor leagues.  [Again -- going back to the Manifesto -- we weren't looking for a "perfect" model, just something "reasonable."]  [The six are walks, strikeouts, home runs, balls hit with authority (2b + 3b), singles (assumed "random-y" per our assumption), and ball-in-play outs (also assumed "random-y").]

Once we had this "normal distribution" of plate outcomes, there is an "expected" OBP resulting therefrom.  It was .295.  If a hitter's results reflected that "normal distribution," he would have a "Hitters +/-" of 0.00, because he would have neither increased nor decreased his "expected" OBP.

OK (maybe?) ...

We then take each plate appearance and measure the difference between that particular plate outcome and the "expected" OBP.  A strikeout drops that PA's expected OBP from .295 to .000, so each strikeout is weighted at -.295.  A home run or a walk increases the "expected" OBP from .295 to 1.000, so they are weighted at +.705.  Balls in play hit with authority (measured as doubles and triples) we calculated (somewhat arbitrarily) to be worth +.225.

Singles and balls in play hit without authority we assume are neither positive nor negative (but "random-y").  Therefore, they neither increase nor decrease the "expected" OBP.  In other words, they don't count in this equation at all.

So ... for a hitter to achieve a positive "+/-" the value of his weighted XBH + BB must exceed the value of his weighted K.  Singles and ball-in-play outs are assumed out of the equation.  If a hitter achieves that positive value, then he is turning the plate appearance to his advantage vis-a-vis the pitcher. 

That last thing, ultimately, is what we are driving at.  The hitter must "play defense" against the pitcher's attack in order to "play offense" against the other team.  The ability to do that is what this stat is driving at.

 

 

Klat Categories: 

Comments

Tacoma Rain's picture

Tacoma Rain

You have not lost me so far... and I do think it makes baseball sense so far from my point of view.

1

Filtered HTML

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote> <ul> <ol> <li> <i> <b> <img> <table> <tr> <td> <th> <div> <strong> <p> <br> <u>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.

Shoutbox

Please log in or create an account to post shouts.
moethedogWell heck. Franklin only has two more hits tonight. Just a double for Liddi. Nothing useful here.2 hours 19 min ago
SABR Mattthat seems to be true at all levels, too. Not just the players...not just the manager...not just the front office...there seems to be no clear and coherent plan of action anywhere3 hours 11 min ago
DaddyOIt feels as if we are fans of a team that has wandered into the desert, got disoriented, and lost it's way.3 hours 51 min ago
SABR MattI agree with Stone that Montero and Ackley need to clear their heads in AAA...and I like the idea of looking at Franklin and Triunfel. I am not sure Bonderman will help much, but it's worth a shot...he's an unknown whereas Harang is a known. And I'd be looking to land a thumper for the OF at the trade deadline not for 2013 but to build around.4 hours 38 min ago
phxterrySo SABR Matt - what's your prescription for the M's right now?5 hours 1 min ago
phxterrycorrection: "Smoak's lower OPS against LHPs."5 hours 18 min ago
phxterryMal, appreciate your addressing my question why Wedgie would start Smoak > Montero against a LHP despite Smoak's lower OPS against RHPs. Unfortunately, Smoak was 0-4 with 3 K's and stranded 5 baserunners, but Montero might have done worse. So do you see any situation now when Wedgie should play Montero, other than the 2 days a week when Montero, who has been reduced to back-up catcher, gives Shoppach some rest? If so, what would those situations be?5 hours 19 min ago
Bat571actually, Andino is somewhat higher than .474; I missed something somewhere - but the idea remains. He's not getting better, he's been between .450 and.500 for a month or so. Ryan has started climbing out of the septic tank and has come from below .400 to where he is now in the last two weeks. And though he has muffed a few plays recently, he's still BY FAR the better glove.5 hours 49 min ago
SABR Matt*sigh*...I miss being competitive into September................5 hours 54 min ago
Bat571Of note, looks like Ryan, with his double, is now at .473 OPS, while Andino is at .474. Can we really afford both, when only one is a superior glove? Triunfel and/or Franklin, please. Ryan can play all 3 IF glove positions, so losing Andino, now that the compressed sked and road trips are behind us for now, is not that much of a loss in flexibility, if either Carlos or Nick replaces him.6 hours 4 min ago
phxterrySerious question: M's now down 0-7; let's assume they lose and record is 20-27, with Wildcard playoff hopes essentially dead. Why wouldn't the M's clear the roster of 1-year older vets unlikely to return next year and bring up young-uns from AAA: 1) Trade Morales 2) Trade or DFA Bay and Rauuuuul 3) DFA Andino 4) Bring up AAA OFers Peguero and Thames 5) Bring up Triunfel & Franklin. Why would you continue to play old vets who won't be on the team next year?6 hours 17 min ago
phxterryFunny quote of the day from Nathan Bishop at LL, alongside today's lineup; "Jesus Montero is not in the dog house. He is not allowed inside at all. He has to sleep outside in the rain." Seriously, if Wedgie won't play Montero as DH against a LHP, what is the point of having Montero on the big league roster? Maybe he can learn by watching Shoppach. Oh wait, we tried that last year, Montero was supposed to sit and learn by watching that fundamentally sound catcher, Miguel Olivo.6 hours 47 min ago
blissedjI kid, I kid. Still love the M's but good grief let's get Andino out of here please. I need Franklin playing SS/2B 5 times a week. That won't hurt Ackley or Ryan. Let 'em compete, best 2 win. Do it again next year with Miller. Don't see how Z and Wedge can sit on their hands much longer. Harang and Saunders limping along. So many areas change can be explored!6 hours 54 min ago
MtGrizzlyThe bullpen isn't going to make it to the ASB without arms falling off at this rate.6 hours 58 min ago
SABR Mattwow guys...you're depressing me more than the team is.7 hours 4 min ago
blissedj"A new day, the same old way", "True to the black and blue", "Ready to Play (but still in Tacoma)", "Donde esta la mojo?", Mariners pitchers adopt "2 outs, so what?"7 hours 6 min ago
phxterryWow - Angels have 24 hits and 18 runs in 10.1 innings against M's pitchers.7 hours 11 min ago
phxterryMariner Fun Fact: When the M's record was 20-21, ESPN had the chances for the M's making the post-season playoffs at 16%. After 5 straight losses and the record at 20-26, the chances are down to 7%. So it looks as if 2 or 3 more losses will drive that possibility to essentially zero.7 hours 22 min ago
blissedjWow, one turn through the rotation to rip the heart right out of the season. Calling Dr. D to surgery.7 hours 26 min ago
malcontent...wild CJ Wilson7 hours 29 min ago