 |
View Old Forum Thread
Old Forum Index » Baseball Beta Testing » Beta News » Changing variables for batting/hitting
Admin
Tyson
Changing variables for batting/hitting
January 11, 2012 at 10:54PM View BBCode
I've adjusted some numbers in the sim to try to get the overall league stats back to normal. I'm going to check this again after the 2112 season and see how things look. The main culprit seemed to be way too many home runs, but I adjusted just about every hitting event.Tyson
tworoosters
January 11, 2012 at 11:14PM View BBCode
Is this being done in both beta and the ASL, or just beta ?
Shaheen
It that home runs that should be now outs or home runs that will be other types of hits or home runs are now in play and can be something else? The beta leagues top pitching staff has a 1.40 WHIP. The ASL is better but the league is not really balanced.
January 12, 2012 at 01:42PM View BBCode
Originally posted by Admin
I've adjusted some numbers in the sim to try to get the overall league stats back to normal. I'm going to check this again after the 2112 season and see how things look. The main culprit seemed to be way too many home runs, but I adjusted just about every hitting event.
Tyson
It that home runs that should be now outs or home runs that will be other types of hits or home runs are now in play and can be something else? The beta leagues top pitching staff has a 1.40 WHIP. The ASL is better but the league is not really balanced.
lvnwrth
When you say you "adjusted just about every hitting event" does that include strikeouts? When the hitting explosion began, home runs did spike...seriously. But, K's also returned to their old numbers, where no one really comes close to K/IP ratio of 1:1. By way of example, here's Joe Raether, one of the better pitchers in beta, whose career prime began before the change and has extended into the change:
Year, IP, K
2101 83 90
2102 214.2 208
2103 201.2 203
2104 242.1 272
2105 150 163
2106 247.2 262
2107 262.2 276
2108 258.1 203
2109 253 204
2110 241.2 192
2111 175.1 136
As you can see, he rolls along at a little better than 1K/IP until the changes went into effect. Then he falls off dramatically...about 20% or better...to around .8K/IP. This is just one example, but I believe it's representative of what happened.
While HR are likely the main culprit, the decrease in K's has to be a contributing factor. There are still 27 outs per team, per game, so if HR alone were the cause, the number of strikeouts should not have decreased, but they have. This has to be a factor in increased scoring, because the K is a rally killer with runners in scoring position and less than two outs. (Nobody scores or advances to third on a K.)
January 12, 2012 at 02:39PM View BBCode
Originally posted by Admin
I've adjusted some numbers in the sim to try to get the overall league stats back to normal. I'm going to check this again after the 2112 season and see how things look. The main culprit seemed to be way too many home runs, but I adjusted just about every hitting event.
Tyson
When you say you "adjusted just about every hitting event" does that include strikeouts? When the hitting explosion began, home runs did spike...seriously. But, K's also returned to their old numbers, where no one really comes close to K/IP ratio of 1:1. By way of example, here's Joe Raether, one of the better pitchers in beta, whose career prime began before the change and has extended into the change:
Year, IP, K
2101 83 90
2102 214.2 208
2103 201.2 203
2104 242.1 272
2105 150 163
2106 247.2 262
2107 262.2 276
2108 258.1 203
2109 253 204
2110 241.2 192
2111 175.1 136
As you can see, he rolls along at a little better than 1K/IP until the changes went into effect. Then he falls off dramatically...about 20% or better...to around .8K/IP. This is just one example, but I believe it's representative of what happened.
While HR are likely the main culprit, the decrease in K's has to be a contributing factor. There are still 27 outs per team, per game, so if HR alone were the cause, the number of strikeouts should not have decreased, but they have. This has to be a factor in increased scoring, because the K is a rally killer with runners in scoring position and less than two outs. (Nobody scores or advances to third on a K.)
tm4559
i am aware some real life pitchers do it. i am also aware not a whole lot of them do. in the National League last year (or the american league) how many pitchers that pitched over, say, 200 innings had a K per inning? i am all for some of the simultated pitchers getting a k per inning. but not as many as we had in the asl at one time, that was just plain dumb.
January 12, 2012 at 06:53PM View BBCode
well. its hard to get it right i think. he worked on the K's over there in the ASL (before the hitting went off the rails over there), and way too many pitchers had a strikeout per inning.i am aware some real life pitchers do it. i am also aware not a whole lot of them do. in the National League last year (or the american league) how many pitchers that pitched over, say, 200 innings had a K per inning? i am all for some of the simultated pitchers getting a k per inning. but not as many as we had in the asl at one time, that was just plain dumb.
tm4559
January 12, 2012 at 06:53PM View BBCode
(it was as dumb as 85 or 90 home runs, is what i am trying to say. dumb is dumb. whether the benefits go to the pitchers or the hitters.)
Admin
Home runs will be other types of events (hits, outs, etc.)
I adjusted strikeouts, walks, hit by pitches, singles, doubles, triples, home runs.
If I can get the league totals about right, I'll continue to tweak to get the right distribution without those averages. For instance, a player or 2 should hit 45+ HRs per season. So if the averages are right, but everyone is hitting 14 HRs, then we'll need to tweak. Same goes for pitchers.
Tyson
January 12, 2012 at 07:39PM View BBCode
This for both ASL and beta.Home runs will be other types of events (hits, outs, etc.)
I adjusted strikeouts, walks, hit by pitches, singles, doubles, triples, home runs.
If I can get the league totals about right, I'll continue to tweak to get the right distribution without those averages. For instance, a player or 2 should hit 45+ HRs per season. So if the averages are right, but everyone is hitting 14 HRs, then we'll need to tweak. Same goes for pitchers.
Tyson
lvnwrth
As for pitchers over 200 innings, how many pitchers even throw 200 innings anymore. There are a lot of relievers who average better than 1 K per IP...almost every team has at least one.
January 13, 2012 at 01:54AM View BBCode
tm....I agree that K's were high. However, I don't think they were as high as they were low before.As for pitchers over 200 innings, how many pitchers even throw 200 innings anymore. There are a lot of relievers who average better than 1 K per IP...almost every team has at least one.
lvnwrth
As for pitchers over 200 innings, how many pitchers even throw 200 innings anymore. There are a lot of relievers who average better than 1 K per IP...almost every team has at least one.
January 13, 2012 at 01:54AM View BBCode
tm....I agree that K's were high. However, I don't think they were as high as they were low before or now.As for pitchers over 200 innings, how many pitchers even throw 200 innings anymore. There are a lot of relievers who average better than 1 K per IP...almost every team has at least one.
tm4559
January 13, 2012 at 11:46AM View BBCode
thats cool. i just want to know how many there are. you can put it at 150 innings if you want. or 25 starts. whatever. my assumption is that, if our starters get the right amount (relatively) the relievers will too (unless they are just bad, and then, they shouldn't get them anyway. right?)
lvnwrth
In MLB last season, pitchers averaged roughly 7 K/9 (7.3 in NL, 6.9 in AL). In this beta season to date, pitchers are averaging 6.04 K/9. That's a deficit (in comparison to MLB) of about 2200 strikeouts...or about 140 per team.
I suspect, though I could be entirely wrong, that it will be nearly impossible to get both league and individual numbers right. For Kimbrel to average 14 K/9, I'm guessing you push a lot of guys higher. To get the league numbers right, I'm guessing you push some guys over 9 K/IP who shouldn't be there, to balance out the Kimbrels, who are being pushed down.
[Edited on 1-13-2012 by lvnwrth]
January 13, 2012 at 01:30PM View BBCode
Working on the sorts...40 guys who pitched at least 60 innings last year averaged 9.1 K/IP or better. Ten of those qualified for the ERA title (162+IP).In MLB last season, pitchers averaged roughly 7 K/9 (7.3 in NL, 6.9 in AL). In this beta season to date, pitchers are averaging 6.04 K/9. That's a deficit (in comparison to MLB) of about 2200 strikeouts...or about 140 per team.
I suspect, though I could be entirely wrong, that it will be nearly impossible to get both league and individual numbers right. For Kimbrel to average 14 K/9, I'm guessing you push a lot of guys higher. To get the league numbers right, I'm guessing you push some guys over 9 K/IP who shouldn't be there, to balance out the Kimbrels, who are being pushed down.
[Edited on 1-13-2012 by lvnwrth]
tm4559
January 13, 2012 at 02:08PM View BBCode
its an interesting thing. strikeouts have always been low, when he did work on them in the ASL, they went crazy (they went crazy for the hitters too, naturally). its all about just experimenting until they come out closer i guess.
tworoosters
In the entire history of MLB there have only been 35 players have a season with a slugging % over .700. In Beta there were six hitters with slugging percentages over .700 in 2011, down from 21 in 2010.
[Edited on 1-15-2012 by tworoosters]
January 14, 2012 at 08:30PM View BBCode
Slugging went down in Beta in 2011, but was still too high . As an example the highest team slugging percentage in MLB in the past decade was .491, and only three times did a team slug as high as .470, whereas in beta five teams slugged over .500 in 2011.In the entire history of MLB there have only been 35 players have a season with a slugging % over .700. In Beta there were six hitters with slugging percentages over .700 in 2011, down from 21 in 2010.
[Edited on 1-15-2012 by tworoosters]
tm4559
January 15, 2012 at 03:55PM View BBCode
well, anyone can look at it from 2108 forward and see its way out of bounds. 2107, that is a more instructive season, if, indeed, tyson knows what he was going with that season.
tm4559
January 15, 2012 at 04:03PM View BBCode
yeah, 06-07, thats your starting point. you had big hitting, and good eras from the good pitchers, and a good number of good pitchers that had a k per inning. whatever you had then, that was pretty good.
lvnwrth
January 27, 2012 at 04:11PM View BBCode
Without going into a lot of detail yet, it appears that adjustments have really tamped down HR, without significantly effecting ERA. Was this the desired effect?
tm4559
lets look at the pitchers, just for fun. you have 35 pitchers i think, with an era under five runs. how many of them are good? the best one, with a 2.97 era is rated 80 overall. it isn't even good. you have 12 with an era under four runs, and the best one is rated 86. an A pitcher i guess. irv skiff, 98/74 at 3.55, should it be better or worse? or is 3.55 about right? who is the real life equivilant to irv skiff? or who should be?
now, we have 10 hitters slugging over .600, i am sure its too many. except for brinkoff of arizona, every one of them has power at 90 or above (almost everyone of them has it at 95 or more and above).
you have 40 hitters slugging over .500, so, there are 30 or so, total, slugging from .500 to .599.
now, if you go back 10 seasons, to 2103, you had one hitters slugging over .600. and you had 15 slugging from .500 to .599. so, about half as many.
if you look at era from that same 2103 season, you had 18 pitchers at 3 runs or better. eight............teen. how many real life pitchers in the american or national leagues carry that? don't combine them, just use one league.
i think we all agree the real answers lie somewhere in the middle of all this stuff. it isn't easy to get there. some folks want more K's for the pitcher, or more walks for the hitters, o they want carlos pena, they want juan pierre, they want mickey mantle and albert puljos and, i don't know. tony gwynn or somebody. they want the outliers and they want the universal stuff to come up right too. its quite an undertaking.
January 28, 2012 at 02:41PM View BBCode
just kidding. i believe you have to look a little deeper though. the real issue is, not how many pitchers have a bad era, but how bad are the pitchers? not how many hitters slug over .600, but how many of those are not very good hitters? i am sure he is incrementally adjusting the thing and trying to get at the results he wants.lets look at the pitchers, just for fun. you have 35 pitchers i think, with an era under five runs. how many of them are good? the best one, with a 2.97 era is rated 80 overall. it isn't even good. you have 12 with an era under four runs, and the best one is rated 86. an A pitcher i guess. irv skiff, 98/74 at 3.55, should it be better or worse? or is 3.55 about right? who is the real life equivilant to irv skiff? or who should be?
now, we have 10 hitters slugging over .600, i am sure its too many. except for brinkoff of arizona, every one of them has power at 90 or above (almost everyone of them has it at 95 or more and above).
you have 40 hitters slugging over .500, so, there are 30 or so, total, slugging from .500 to .599.
now, if you go back 10 seasons, to 2103, you had one hitters slugging over .600. and you had 15 slugging from .500 to .599. so, about half as many.
if you look at era from that same 2103 season, you had 18 pitchers at 3 runs or better. eight............teen. how many real life pitchers in the american or national leagues carry that? don't combine them, just use one league.
i think we all agree the real answers lie somewhere in the middle of all this stuff. it isn't easy to get there. some folks want more K's for the pitcher, or more walks for the hitters, o they want carlos pena, they want juan pierre, they want mickey mantle and albert puljos and, i don't know. tony gwynn or somebody. they want the outliers and they want the universal stuff to come up right too. its quite an undertaking.
tm4559
January 28, 2012 at 02:50PM View BBCode
i mean, we can't go by any one team, i understand that. but my entire pitching staff, everyone of them has an era between about three and a half and four and a half runs, and it seems ok to me, because all of them are just average to slightly above average. what should their era be?
tm4559
January 28, 2012 at 05:34PM View BBCode
(and of course maybe whip or something might be better to look at for pitchers, we know abe doesn't get the earned runs right some time. i have no idea whether slugginng percenage is the right thing for hitters, it was just one of the things that came up there, from rooster, and it is kind of obviously too high. in defense of era and a connection with slugging though, we would expect too high slugging to drive era up, perhaps, or arguably even, more than anything else. whip, just counting all hits equally, might kind of miss the point i suppose.)
lvnwrth
2011 - 15 (0 over .600)
2010 - 15 (1 over .600)
2009 - 20 (2 over .600)
2008 - 26 (1 over .600)
2007 - 23 (3 over .600)
Avg - 19.8 (1.4)
Here are pitchers who qualified for the ERA title with ERA under 3.50
2011 - 20 (8 under/equal to 3.00)
2010 - 20 (11 under/equal to 3.00)
2009 - 17 (8 under/equal to 3.00)
2008 - 11 (4 under/equal to 3.00)
2007 - 8 (1 under/equal to 3.00)
Avg - 15.2 (6.4)
Your contention that the pitcher rated 80 "isn't even good" takes that pitcher out of context. I don't know what that pitcher's splits are, but I'd argue that an 80 overall pitcher is pretty good. He's certainly good, relative to the rest of the beta league.
And what do the hitters look like? Are they all 80 or better? I think hitters are still over performing, and pitchers are under performing.
January 30, 2012 at 04:41AM View BBCode
Using your numbers, and looking only at the National League (since they don't use the DH), here are the number of hitters who slugged .500+ the last five years:2011 - 15 (0 over .600)
2010 - 15 (1 over .600)
2009 - 20 (2 over .600)
2008 - 26 (1 over .600)
2007 - 23 (3 over .600)
Avg - 19.8 (1.4)
Here are pitchers who qualified for the ERA title with ERA under 3.50
2011 - 20 (8 under/equal to 3.00)
2010 - 20 (11 under/equal to 3.00)
2009 - 17 (8 under/equal to 3.00)
2008 - 11 (4 under/equal to 3.00)
2007 - 8 (1 under/equal to 3.00)
Avg - 15.2 (6.4)
Your contention that the pitcher rated 80 "isn't even good" takes that pitcher out of context. I don't know what that pitcher's splits are, but I'd argue that an 80 overall pitcher is pretty good. He's certainly good, relative to the rest of the beta league.
And what do the hitters look like? Are they all 80 or better? I think hitters are still over performing, and pitchers are under performing.
tm4559
(and the pitcher with the 2.97 era isn't very good, in the context of what we are used to from a good pitcher. but it obviously just had a lucky season, which happens all the time, no matter what the code looks like).
January 30, 2012 at 11:56AM View BBCode
i don't think i denied the hitters were overperforming. check the part where i said the slugging percentage was obviously too high.(and the pitcher with the 2.97 era isn't very good, in the context of what we are used to from a good pitcher. but it obviously just had a lucky season, which happens all the time, no matter what the code looks like).
Admin
After the next season of data, I'll look at the distribution within the averages to see whether the players are distributed properly.
Tyson
January 30, 2012 at 10:56PM View BBCode
Ok, I looked at the last 2 seasons of data, as well as the last season of data in the salary league, and compared to the 2008 season for MLB. Everything looks pretty close, singles are a bit high so I'm going to decrease those for the upcoming season.After the next season of data, I'll look at the distribution within the averages to see whether the players are distributed properly.
Tyson
Pages: 1 2