Question for those who like math. Topic

MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Doesn't matter.    Spread out over a variety of seasons with a variety of pitchers and catchers in a variety of worlds makes it pretty difficult for the high PC catchers to get all the "good" chances while the low PC catchers only get the "bad" opportunities.

And results aren't biased.  
12/6/2011 6:02 PM
deanod
Posts: 3150 (0)
Hall of Famer
115 18 1 37 1 51
Prospect
Posted by MikeT23 on 12/6/2011 6:02:00 PM (view original):
Doesn't matter.    Spread out over a variety of seasons with a variety of pitchers and catchers in a variety of worlds makes it pretty difficult for the high PC catchers to get all the "good" chances while the low PC catchers only get the "bad" opportunities.

And results aren't biased.  
I just crunched some numbers and they said that you should partake in a bowl of dickeating.

Since we know that they're unbiased, I'm pretty certain that we can all agree that it's the correct course of action for you.
12/6/2011 6:05 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
While your results aren't biased, your formula is flawed.   Try again. 
12/6/2011 6:09 PM
deanod
Posts: 3150 (0)
Hall of Famer
115 18 1 37 1 51
Prospect
oops, you're right.

apparently there was a small rounding error, the correct course of action was for you to eat 10 bowls of dicks.

you better get started!
12/6/2011 6:11 PM
bigal888
Posts: 390 (0)
Hall of Famer
116 4 3 1 15 70
Prospect
Posted by MikeT23 on 12/6/2011 6:02:00 PM (view original):
Doesn't matter.    Spread out over a variety of seasons with a variety of pitchers and catchers in a variety of worlds makes it pretty difficult for the high PC catchers to get all the "good" chances while the low PC catchers only get the "bad" opportunities.

And results aren't biased.  
In order to truly isolate the effect of PC, you need to disregard data where PC has no effect, otherwise you'll skew the results towards lower era numbers and give PC too much value. I'm willing to bet that about 1/3 of all innings pitched are by pitchers with pitches above 80, think about bullpens. Of course I could be wrong about that estimate.
12/6/2011 6:18 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
I guess I'll try to explain it again.  I wasn't looking to put an exact number on it(you may have saw where I said I could be off by 0.012 per 1 point of PC).  I was looking for a pattern.  The pattern presented itself and it appeared to be about 0.012 per 1 point of PC.    It was checked over 20+ seasons with various catchers with various pitchers on various teams.    The pattern is there. 
12/6/2011 6:35 PM
jonas1102
Posts: 1016 (0)
Hall of Famer
35 1 24 43 11
Rookie
PC is essentially ballpark factor modifier.  70 is neutral.  100 takes the 1B factor down a full point, 40 takes the 1B factor up a full point.
12/6/2011 6:40 PM
bigal888
Posts: 390 (0)
Hall of Famer
116 4 3 1 15 70
Prospect
Where did you see that? This is the first I've heard that. I have seen admin post that it modifies the pitchers pitches.
12/6/2011 6:57 PM
jonas1102
Posts: 1016 (0)
Hall of Famer
35 1 24 43 11
Rookie

I have never seen admin state that it modifies pitches.  I got my information from the fact that I made it up, because everyone else seems to be making **** up in this thread as well.

12/6/2011 7:03 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
I didn't make anything up.  The numbers are what the numbers are.
12/6/2011 7:59 PM
deanod
Posts: 3150 (0)
Hall of Famer
115 18 1 37 1 51
Prospect
Posted by MikeT23 on 12/6/2011 7:59:00 PM (view original):
I didn't make anything up.  The numbers are what the numbers are.
obsolete and worthless to begin with

thanks for your expert contribution!
12/6/2011 8:11 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
I assume, from your bitter response, that you checked the teams I mentioned and found them to be 100% accurate.

Or your bowl of dicks got cold before you finished them.
12/6/2011 8:16 PM
deanod
Posts: 3150 (0)
Hall of Famer
115 18 1 37 1 51
Prospect
So I ran the numbers for my starting pitching staff in GAP to check up on Al's theory.

The correlation coefficient between standard deviation of pitch ratings and points of averaged saved by the higher PC catcher is -0.54 lulz

that's how you have fun with small samples.
12/6/2011 8:26 PM
deanod
Posts: 3150 (0)
Hall of Famer
115 18 1 37 1 51
Prospect
of course, my methodology, which is infinitely more precise than miket or death's, still is seeing wild swings in the value of PC every time i analyze a new pitcher.

you really do need a huge sample for this to work.  i'll save this one in google docs and supplement it on a rainy day
12/6/2011 8:28 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Checking one team in a partial season is a little less of a sample size than 20+ seasons spread out over 4 worlds.

Just sayin'.
12/6/2011 8:34 PM
◂ Prev 1...5|6|7|8|9 Next ▸
Question for those who like math. Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2024 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.