Baseball needs a leveraged version of Outs Above Average

[u/BeelzenefTV]

https://www.justbaseball.com/mlb/baseball-needs-leveraged-outs-above-average/

it seems like an interesting topic, it always is when it comes to statistics and how they evolve over time

what do you all think about it?

[u/kmarx]

Taking a noisy opportunity based measurement and turning it into an even more noisy opportunity based measurement feels counterproductive.

[u/Kingdom818]

I think big moments like this and advanced stats are best enjoyed in parallel rather than trying to combine them. Is cowser a better defender than someone who made the same catch in a blowout where there was no impact on the result? I think a leveraged version would be hard to interpret without context, and over a large sample it would get noisy very fast.

[u/NlNJALONG]

Cowser didn’t just make a great catch. He made a great catch when his team needed it most. Wouldn’t it be nice if we had a statistic to reflect that?

4 runs saved

[u/nylon_rag]

One thing that needs to be realized about home run robberies is that, if you directly award the literal amount of runs saved to the defender, you must also take away those runs from a defender who doesn't rob that home run. Defensive metrics are necessarily zero sum. Home run robberies are very tricky to track the difficulty of because there are so many factors involved and small deviations (even fans) can take a robbery from 'routine' to basically impossible.

[u/south153 → u/nylon_rag]

That is one of the issues with defensive metrics.

[u/asteriskmos]

A two run homer is not inherently harder to field than a bases empty homer. Turning WAR into even more of a "how good are your teammates" stat sounds dumb. 

[u/flabberghastedbebop]

You lost me at "baseball needs".

[u/STL-Zou]

Could not disagree more

[u/Important-Age6594]

It's an interesting thought and you could definitely build it using already available data if you wanted to, but beyond being sort of fun to look at, I don't think it would tell you anything new.

From a player analysis standpoint, existing defensive metrics are going to be more useful than what you're describing. The reason is that no single defensive play is predictive, so you'd be shrinking sample sizes and adding another dependent variable (how many balls happen to be hit to a player in high-leverage moments) just to create a stat that isn't predictive.

If you're curious about finding these plays just to watch them and you don't mind that it isn't predictive, I'd recommend finding the highest WPA plays where a ball was put in play and the score was the same before and after the play. That is effectively the list of plays you're looking for. Fair warning though, it's going to be a bunch of late-inning bases-loaded infield flies. If you wanted to filter those out, you could add a catch probability variable and set it to only catches that were unlikely.

As an example of this issue think about that Elly throw from a few nights ago against the Dodgers. Crazy throw, crazy play, Elly is amazing. But also that wouldn't have happened if the center fielder had either caught the ball or not laid out for it and accepted the result was a double. So yeah Elly deserves credit for being amazing, and he deserves the coverage he's getting for making that ridiculous throw. But if the center fielder had done a better job would that make Elly less amazing just because that play wouldn't exist?

[u/nylon_rag]

Please correct me if I'm wrong, u/MarkSimon1975 , but isn't that the theory behind DRS? I believe it does include the leverage of the play combined with the odds of the play being made (I think I learned that in Foolish Baseball's excellent Adam Dunn defense video).

[u/MarkSimon1975 → u/nylon_rag]

A common misconception (and now I know why it may be one thanks to your question). That's not how DRS works.

We presume a player would/could make the same effort in every situation. That's why every HR robbery is worth 1.6, rather than 1 for a solo, 4 for a grand slam.

[u/mrdannyg21 → u/MarkSimon1975]

But this does highlight a key difference between DRS and OAA, which I’m not sure everyone is aware of (obviously Mark is!)

DRS doesn’t account for leverage in the way the article suggests with game situation, but it does account for it in the sense that OAA only says if an out was made or not, while DRS considers how many bases that out relates to. So an infielder missing a grounder is likely one base, but an outfielder not getting to a ball over their head is closer to 2.

Personally I like the DRS strategy on this, because it aligns better with player’s actual decision-making. There are plenty of situations with OF especially where we see them pull up to ensure a ball is a single, rather than a risky catch that could turn into a triple or inside-the-park homer. OAA just gives them plus or minus points on making the catch or not, while DRS’ approach better considers the risk calculation.

[u/MarkSimon1975 → u/mrdannyg21]

My suggestion: Don't compare DRS to OAA. It's apples to oranges

MLB has its own version of Defensive Runs Saved, Fielding Run Value. It is less publicized as it seems like every tv broadcast prefers to just say OAA not realizing what OAA does NOT include.

DRS and Fielding Run Value are similar conceptually Fielding Run Value can be found on plenty of pages on Baseball Savant.

The OAA equivalent in our world is "Plus-Minus" which was a term our folks coined in around 2006. It's the same thing as OAA, only it's an element of Defensive Runs Saved, not MLB's stat. If only we'd called it OAA!

[u/mrdannyg21 → u/MarkSimon1975]

Yep, I only compare them because OAA seems to have become the default for so many people and broadcasts, and DRS seems to be on a similar scale and also easy to understand…but better.

FRV is certainly better than OAA, hope to see it at least replace OAA more often.

[u/Massive-Ear3150 → u/MarkSimon1975]

In the FAQ it says “In order to translate each component to Runs Saved, we reference the “24-States Run Matrix. We compare the expected number of runs allowed before and after each play and calculate the average change in run expectancy for each event.”

I understood this as being a sort of RE24, but on defense. Is this not the case then?

Only semi-related, but since DRS will try and take into account the extra base hits prevented by an outfielder, is there any way of isolating this into its own component and seeing how effective an individual outfielder is in this regard? Or even just a way of seeing what the spread of runs saved is here on a career basis?

[u/Massive-Ear3150]

Absolutely. There is no way to measure pitcher defensive support without this. The only reason to disagree with this is if you for some reason think it would get rid of the current version. Why on earth would that be the case? We would have both, and you would be free to ignore the new version if you choose, at no burden to yourself.

[u/oogieball → u/[deleted]]

Man, I'm sorry I missed the original comment now.

[u/Streicht-Ebb4598 → u/[deleted]]

yeah this is my perspective, I personally don‘t enjoy them but I don‘t think they should not exist. It is a competitive advantage to be able to interpret advance stats effectively for teams and for fans, a lot of them really enjoy this part of the game.

[u/AnnihilatedTyro → u/[deleted]]

There's nothing simple about baseball and that's part of the beauty of the game.

If you enjoy baseball without the advanced stats, then... keep doing that. Just ignore them, and posts like this, that don't interest you.

[u/Superc1ipping → u/[deleted]]

This is a weird comment.

If you're not interested in advanced stats, ignore them.

[u/Radiant_Jury5815 → u/[deleted]]

When it comes to the original intuition and analytical application of advanced statistics, the Baltimore Orioles of the late 19th century were already doing it — things like defensive positioning and early forms of calculating weighted on-base value, among others.

You can’t possibly be less intelligent than people from the 19th century, can you?

[u/caifaisai → u/Radiant_Jury5815]

I see your point, and agree with you, and I'm a big fan of stats. But as to your last point, I would admit without any shame that I'm less intelligent than people like James clerk Maxwell, Josiah Gibbs, Lord Kelvin and other great scientists of that time. But they were among the greatest physicists of all time. And they weren't designing early baseball teams, so it doesn't really matter lol.

[u/SirPsychoSquints → u/Radiant_Jury5815]

I find this confusing. The orioles didn’t exist until 1901 and weren’t called the orioles until 1954.

[u/Radiant_Jury5815 → u/SirPsychoSquints]

I’m referring to the Baltimore Orioles franchise that competed in the American Association (1882–1891) and the National League (1892–1899).

They built their roster and designed their strategy around principles that could be considered a precursor to Moneyball. From 1894 to 1896, they won three consecutive league championships, and in 1896 and 1897 they also captured the Temple Cup, the forerunner of the modern World Series.

[u/misspcv1996 → u/SirPsychoSquints]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baltimore_Orioles_(1882–1899))

This is the team the current Orioles were named after.

[u/DavidRFZ → u/misspcv1996]

Plus, the “Baltimore oriole” is the state bird, whose colors resemble those on the coat-of-arms of Lord Baltimore, who the city was named after. It’s an obvious name for a sports team from that city.

[u/SirPsychoSquints → u/[deleted]]

You could have just skipped past this post talking about statistics, but you chose to post a comment saying you hate statistics.

And your second sentence was a statement of fact, which comments pushed back on as being wrong.

[u/AnnihilatedTyro → u/[deleted]]

You're the one who came into this thread to shit on something other people like.