Need help understanding pitching scoring

[Dan Wood]

Let's get rid of scoring altogether and we can just argue and posture for 162 games.

[Colby]

Let's get rid of scoring altogether and we can just argue and posture for 162 games.

Hahahaha.... Alright let's go back to my post and consider reasonable adjustments. 

[VolsRaysBucs]

Let's get rid of scoring altogether and we can just argue and posture for 162 games.

I'd go along with this as well, except it appears the majority would rather adjust a system they are not happy with.  Regardelss of whether or not we make the changes I'd personally like to see, I will not be taking my ball and going home.  Constructive criticism and constantly analyzing a system with so many moving parts is not "bashing or *itching," it is due dilligence on the part of league participants.  Does MLB look at division alignment, wildcards, DH, ect on a "constant" basis.  Yep.  Does the NFL visit revenue sharing, 18 games schedules, shorter preseasons, larger active rosters, ect on a "constant" basis.  Again, yep.  If one is looking for a league where their thoughts and ideas are paramount, one could create a 4-8 team league where everyone thinks exactly alike.  If one is trying to field a 30 team league, one had better be prepared to have debate and dissenting voices aimed at their positions.  This is a free league.  If 1,000 Bill James' said that our scoring system was terrific, it still would not change the fact that a majority of GM's do not favor it.  There are no algorithms to dispute this.  I am a saber myself, but realize that data, if viewed through only one prism, can and will be skewed.  Dress it as you will, but the scoring system does not reflect real life VALUE.  Again, if my team walks 20 batters and wins 1-0, the pitcher did his job.  He recorded 27 outs without giving up a run.  To me, the offense was LUCKY to get the walks and the pitcher was SKILLED in working around them.  Viewed either way, how can one side say the other is wrong?  Does it not come down to preference? 

[lp815]

Mike for President, 2012! :iatp:

[h4cheng]

Taking Dan's idea, I tried to some testing using the current year data. Here are some preliminary results (I did this in 15 minutes) using the following scoring system:
   
IP   5
BB   -4
K   7.5
HR   -10
XBHA   -8
GB   1.5

I tried to balance it so the the overall value for pitchers do not increase (at least for the top 100 starters).

I think this is better balance between the sabermetric statistics and the conventional statistics. We can play around with the weights. This is a just a first draft, but at least now we have a tangible alternative.

[Dan Wood]

Just did about 30 seconds of research and came across this ...

32,705 hits in the MLB this year (last year I assume)
10,394 have been on ground balls (31.8%)
7,773 have been on fly balls (23.8%)
14,108 have been on line drives (43.2%)
430 have been on bunts (1.3%)

If line drives have more of a chance to be hits, ground balls really only end up as singles unless they go down the line, at most they are doubles. I still think it should be a negative when a pitcher gives a LD then.

IP +
GB+
FB+
K+
BB-
HR-
LD-

whatever the ratio of the scoring should be is beyond me, but in my opinion I think this may be the way to go. We can also do batters faced instead of IP. 

[bravesfan4]

Taking Dan's idea, I tried to some testing using the current year data. Here are some preliminary results (I did this in 15 minutes) using the following scoring system:
   
IP   5
BB   -4
K   7.5
HR   -10
XBHA   -8
GB   1.5

I tried to balance it so the the overall value for pitchers do not increase (at least for the top 100 starters).

I think this is better balance between the sabermetric statistics and the conventional statistics. We can play around with the weights. This is a just a first draft, but at least now we have a tangible alternative.

i looked it over. I really like it Howe.... I would be in favor of this

[Colby]

I think Howe's post and Dan's post are both very solid.  I like the stats that Dan posted.  This is why I feel that FB should be added.  However, a higher percentage of fly ball hits end up as XBH, but if we included XHBA in the scoring system then it would make up for that.  We have solid ratios right now between position player points (62%) and pitchers (38%) based on Bill James (with defense receiving 16%).  Of course, if we went defense-neutral then it would end up being 54% - 46%.  However, defense was stated as a big part of this league, so we really only need to focus on these adjustments and make sure the overall points stay the same.

[bravesfan4]

I like the xbh over fb for sure. I like lowering some of the other categories such as HR, K, and GB but awarding the IP. Looking over Howe's spreadsheet, it makes it more realistic with guys like Jake Westbrook and Ryan Dempster. It moves them to where they belong.

[VolsRaysBucs]

I like both Howe and Dan's posts as well.  The beautiful thing about it is that we have time to beta test and allow everyone to weigh in.  I like how Howe (haha) described his as "blending saber and conventional" or something to that effect.  Based on what I saw from the spreadsheet, that looks to be a very solid starting point, at the very least.  This appears to make "bumps" rather than "jumps" in the changes, which is a good thing.  I think this would help reduce the frequency that we have "Price vs Neimann" scenarios going forward, which also is a good thing.  Great work/ideas so far fellas!