Jonah Keri tells the scotties of the world to STFU

a stern admonishment to the DAVID WRONG crowd. found via neyer's not so sweetly named blog.

almost 3 years ago kendynamo 15 comments 1 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Love Jonah Keri

Another well-written piece by him.

by meigs1414 on May 1, 2009 1:58 PM EDT reply actions

I also enjoyed

the first comment and Jonah’s response. Short summary: Yankee fans have selective memory about A-Rod, Dub has had a bad month and New Yorkers of all stripes need to calm the fuck down.

'Oh yes, I know all about that duty-of-a-citizen stuff. It doesn't go. There are exceptions to every rule, and this was one of them. When a man risks his liberty to come and root at a ball-game, you've got to hand it to him. He isn't a crook. He's a fan.'

by Catsmeat Potter-Pirbright on May 1, 2009 1:59 PM EDT reply actions

God I can't wait for the mets to beat on the phillies

Then, people can shut up with the negativity.

by meigs1414 on May 1, 2009 2:00 PM EDT up reply actions

Yep

Solid piece here. I say we have a cage match of baseball knowledge between Keri and John Gonzalez.

by Mark Himmelstein on May 1, 2009 2:11 PM EDT reply actions

To be fair

Wright’s #‘s in those situations were way down last year from the previous years. I’m in the “Wright has to stop psyching himself out” camp and that only appeared to become a problem last year, and citing splits from the last three years, as Keri does, misses that point. Of course, that doesn’t mean that his basic point isn’t correct.

by Mount17 on May 1, 2009 4:26 PM EDT reply actions

citing splits from the last three years, as Keri does, misses that point.

Citing splits from just last year and this month makes the point. Fans are too into small sample sizes and are too quick to draw conclusions from them.

by Sokojoe on May 1, 2009 5:19 PM EDT up reply actions

So Keri uses stats

from two years to say any arguments from stats from the last year+ are “completely false.” I’m not saying conclusions should be drawn (or that he should be traded, that’s ridiculous), but I think it’s OK to have some concern (which, granted, the emailer in the piece went way past).

by Mount17 on May 1, 2009 5:49 PM EDT up reply actions

From this link, scroll to bottom, this is why small sample sizes suck my ass.

What Pizza Cutter does is find out at which point the r-squared for different statistics reaches the .50 barrier, the point at which the majority of the variation of a stat is predictable.

Hitters

Strikeout rate/Contact rate*: 150 PA
LD%: 150 PA
Walk rate: 200 PA
GB%: 200 PA
GB/FB: 200 PA
FB%: 250 PA
Home run rate: 300 PA
HR/FB: 300 PA
BABIP: Doesn’t reach a 0.50 r-squared at 650 or below.
Batting average: Doesn’t reach a 0.50 r-squared at 650 or below. Pizza Cutter guesses it would at around 1000 PA.
*Note: Pizza Cutter also lists a stat called “contact rate,” which stabilizes at 100 PA, but this is different than the contact rate that we use. I believe this refers to contact rate on a per-pitch basis as opposed to a per-at-bat basis.

Pitchers

K/PA: 150 BF
GB%: 150 BF
LD%: 150 BF
FB%: 200 BF
GB/FB: 200 BF
K/BB: 500 BF
IF FB%: 500 BF
BB/PA: 550 BF
BABIP: Doesn’t reach a 0.50 r-squared at 650 or below.
HR/FB: Doesn’t reach a 0.50 r-squared at 650 or below.

Wright had ~200 PAs with runners in scoring position so while his walk rate and LD% rate should and were his true ability, it wasn’t enough PAs for his BA/BABIP to stabilize to his career norm. By looking at numbers over the past three years we increase the sample size thereby seeing true ability.

by Sokojoe on May 2, 2009 1:29 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs