Hi guys,

As we know, when you do a rhb vs lhp you get a 4.5% hitter advantage, or some jargon like that. My question, does a switch hitter get the advantages both ways? Or is there some sort of leveling?

My understanding is that it's best to think of it the other way. A RHB vs. a LHP gets a disadvantage, while a switch-hitter never does.

You mean RHB vs RHP correct?

Posted by bayridgeguy on 1/30/2017 8:52:00 PM (view original):
You mean RHB vs RHP correct?

I think he got it backwards but whatever. Hitters already get a 10% advantage over pitchers because earlier in Whatif, pitchers were really really good. Then they get that extra 5% I think platoon advantage. Which is why most, if not all of the cookies (before the salary update) were switch hitters. I made a team of just switch hitters, and granted, I did play at a +2 singles park, my entire team prob hit like .330. My pitching suffered though.

Posted by bayridgeguy on 1/30/2017 8:52:00 PM (view original):
You mean RHB vs RHP correct?

Yes, sorry, that's what I get for looking at the forums at work.

The platoon advantage, from the only place we've ever seen it, was 4.5%. The example it was used in was a slide showing '00 Pedro Martinez against '23 Babe Ruth. Ruth got a 4.5% platoon advantage facing the opposite-handed Pedro. It's assumed there's a 4.5% DISadvantage for facing a same-handed pitcher. Switch-hitters though are assumed to always be neutral; neither an advantage nor disadvantage in any PA.

For what it's worth, the calculation of the .167 OAV Pedro against the .393 AVG Ruth was a batting average of .261
Yes, that's 94 points away from Pedro's OAV but 132 points away from Ruth's AVG, even though Ruth gets the platoon advantage. That's the effect of normalization. Pedro's OAV+ of 165 outweighs Ruth's AVG+ of 139.

Posted by skunk206 on 1/31/2017 10:09:00 AM (view original):
The platoon advantage, from the only place we've ever seen it, was 4.5%. The example it was used in was a slide showing '00 Pedro Martinez against '23 Babe Ruth. Ruth got a 4.5% platoon advantage facing the opposite-handed Pedro. It's assumed there's a 4.5% DISadvantage for facing a same-handed pitcher. Switch-hitters though are assumed to always be neutral; neither an advantage nor disadvantage in any PA.

For what it's worth, the calculation of the .167 OAV Pedro against the .393 AVG Ruth was a batting average of .261
Yes, that's 94 points away from Pedro's OAV but 132 points away from Ruth's AVG, even though Ruth gets the platoon advantage. That's the effect of normalization. Pedro's OAV+ of 165 outweighs Ruth's AVG+ of 139.

Why would switch hitters be neutral? Why wouldn't they have the platoon advantage at all times?

Posted by d_rock97 on 1/31/2017 10:29:00 AM (view original):

Posted by skunk206 on 1/31/2017 10:09:00 AM (view original):
The platoon advantage, from the only place we've ever seen it, was 4.5%. The example it was used in was a slide showing '00 Pedro Martinez against '23 Babe Ruth. Ruth got a 4.5% platoon advantage facing the opposite-handed Pedro. It's assumed there's a 4.5% DISadvantage for facing a same-handed pitcher. Switch-hitters though are assumed to always be neutral; neither an advantage nor disadvantage in any PA.

For what it's worth, the calculation of the .167 OAV Pedro against the .393 AVG Ruth was a batting average of .261
Yes, that's 94 points away from Pedro's OAV but 132 points away from Ruth's AVG, even though Ruth gets the platoon advantage. That's the effect of normalization. Pedro's OAV+ of 165 outweighs Ruth's AVG+ of 139.

Why would switch hitters be neutral? Why wouldn't they have the platoon advantage at all times?

If they had the platoon advantage, it would have to be factored into salaries. By all indications, it's not.

d_rock, think of MLB. A right-handed batter may hit .300 over a full season. Against LHP though, maybe he hits .330, while he hits .285 against RHP. Most players, not all, will have some sort of platoon split and fare worse against pitchers of the same hand. The intended advantage of a real-life switch-hitter is that they wouldn't have a platoon split no matter what side the pitcher throws from. A .300 hitting switch-hitter, in theory, should be equally skilled from each side and hit about .300 against both RHP and LHP.

If you look at it from a simulation perspective then, it makes some sense to give the .300 Righty a slight boost against LHP but a downgrade against RHP, so that the expected results would more closely match platoon splits that exist in real life. The SIM Righty will most often hit better against LHP than RHP and we see that to be true most of the time. Why then would it make sense for a .300 RL switch-hitter to ALWAYS have an advantage in SIM? He should be neutral, since his RL splits are expected to be closer to neutral.

Posted by skunk206 on 1/31/2017 11:05:00 AM (view original):
d_rock, think of MLB. A right-handed batter may hit .300 over a full season. Against LHP though, maybe he hits .330, while he hits .285 against RHP. Most players, not all, will have some sort of platoon split and fare worse against pitchers of the same hand. The intended advantage of a real-life switch-hitter is that they wouldn't have a platoon split no matter what side the pitcher throws from. A .300 hitting switch-hitter, in theory, should be equally skilled from each side and hit about .300 against both RHP and LHP.

If you look at it from a simulation perspective then, it makes some sense to give the .300 Righty a slight boost against LHP but a downgrade against RHP, so that the expected results would more closely match platoon splits that exist in real life. The SIM Righty will most often hit better against LHP than RHP and we see that to be true most of the time. Why then would it make sense for a .300 RL switch-hitter to ALWAYS have an advantage in SIM? He should be neutral, since his RL splits are expected to be closer to neutral.

I guess it's just how we see things. To me, when a RHB goes against a LHP, he gets the advantage because breaking balls are breaking into him, instead of away, and he sees the ball better because from his POV, the ball doesnt go behind the pitchers head. Switch hitters always are on the opposite side, so they always see the ball better, and have the breaking pitches break into them instead of away.

Thats my RL observation.

But I guess it would be unfair in SIM to give switch hitters a platoon advantage all the time.

In RL though, the advantage that switch-hitters theoretically have is already built into their actual performance. Taking their actual performance and then further enhancing it 4.5% permanently is the wrong thing to do.

Posted by skunk206 on 1/31/2017 2:21:00 PM (view original):
In RL though, the advantage that switch-hitters theoretically have is already built into their actual performance. Taking their actual performance and then further enhancing it 4.5% permanently is the wrong thing to do.

Explained perfectly