Visual Display of Sabermetric "Tools"

bedir than average · 08-17-2007, 01:45 PM

THT Mailbag: Red Sox Nation, please exhale -- The Hardball Times

The section titled "Get the Picture"

That's a concept for Barry Bonds

That's the concept for Hanley Rameriz

From Studeman's response

Quote:

Your spiderweb graphs are a very interesting idea. I often see these used on personality tests and the like. The key is that each one of the dimensions should be of equal importance, or the dimensions should vary to reflect each stat's importance. Otherwise, the graph is misleading. I don't know if that's possible, but it's certainly worth investigating.

So what Saber "tools" would be the top 4 to 6 to visually represent in such a manner?

Personally I would recommend all be weighted toward league average, the ring in the middle, similar to OPS+. That would help mitigate the "equal importance" argument a bit.

To me the tools, in order of importance, would be

Power - HR/FB
Zone Judgement - BB/K
Walk Rate - BB%
Contact %
Defense - UZR
Speed - Speed Score (The more recent one by Pizza Cutter)

I think for hitters these six categories give you a quick valid snapshot of the tools that a player has, how good they are at them, and would visually convey that information in a less intimadating manner.

nanwynnfan · 08-17-2007, 04:17 PM

All that good work spoiled by the typical, snotty"

"Okay, let's all admit it: mainstream baseball doesn't like sabermetrics. It's too complex for the piddly noggins of most broadcasters to make sense out of."

It's an anthem, for crying out loud; and the worst of the offenders are the ones who bring least of practical value to the discussion.

bedir than average · 08-17-2007, 07:30 PM

No opinion on the actual concept just that single sentence?

nanwynnfan · 08-17-2007, 08:59 PM

The concept, repeatedly stating that it was 'thrown together" with not much attention to fact or detail, and emphasizing "arbitrary," is not a bad one; but it loses credibility and empathy in allowing the writer to be openly haphazard and offering his work as a throwaway, while at the same time perceiving it to be beyond the grasp of the layman.

It's an attitude that seems to have been one of the dominant chromosomes passed on by Sabermetrics' Daddy, Bill James.

The web is a catchy concept and a clever iconic presentation; but it does nothing to evaluate, merely showing skewed data, inferring strengths and weaknesses without attemting to quantify or summarize.

"Cute" doesn't so it for me.

nanwynnfan · 08-17-2007, 10:28 PM

Bedir:

My general observations notwithstanding, I went back and studied the pictorial evaluator and it does look like a good concept.

What I's suggest is that the 5 points of the pentagon be modified:

1. While POWER may be just fine, TOTAL BASES might serve a dual purpose:

a. high TB suggests power while not seeming to isolate HR
b. a high TB number, validated with 2B and 3B production might help suggest another point, SPEED

2. Next to POWER, OB% goies hand-in-hand as a basic formula for run production, so I'd use that instead of "Patience"

3. This might get some arguments, but I'd make this third point CONTACT, essential to advancing runners with batted balls in play;

4. I'd dump "Luck" because it suggests a sabermetric catch-all, default bin foe "otherwise not meaningful. I'd replace that with SPEED.

a. can be inferred from total bases, high 2B and 3B numbers, ina addition to Stolen Bases and success rates, combined with,
b. range elements of defense and a. above.

5. GLOVE is fine.

We would be left with

1. TOTAL BASES [or POWER];

2. OB%

3. CONTACT

4. SPEED

5. GLOVE

As an alternative, SPEED could be merged into GLOVE and ARM might replace LUCK.

Either way, we get a pictorial more in line with the defining elements of a 5 tool player, of which "luck" is NOT one.

nanwynnfan · 08-18-2007, 04:31 PM

It dawned on me that these webs could really give a detailed profile of a player if:

1. they incorporated the cross threads to denote classes of valuation;

2. kept the evaluation components to a reasonable medium:

a. closest to the "spider's lair" = replacement; then branching outward to:
b. average
c. above average
d. superior

Then each tool would be part of an instant icon for each player's performance.

08-17-2007, 07:30 PM	#3 (permalink)
bedir than average Administrator Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Starbucks Posts: 8,256	No opinion on the actual concept just that single sentence? __________________ US Men's National Team World Cup Qualifying \| Democracy in Sports Meets My First Campaign "You're only so sure you're right because they're so sure you're wrong." Orson Scott Card in Xenocide

08-17-2007, 08:59 PM	#4 (permalink)
nanwynnfan Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 2,579	The concept, repeatedly stating that it was 'thrown together" with not much attention to fact or detail, and emphasizing "arbitrary," is not a bad one; but it loses credibility and empathy in allowing the writer to be openly haphazard and offering his work as a throwaway, while at the same time perceiving it to be beyond the grasp of the layman. It's an attitude that seems to have been one of the dominant chromosomes passed on by Sabermetrics' Daddy, Bill James. The web is a catchy concept and a clever iconic presentation; but it does nothing to evaluate, merely showing skewed data, inferring strengths and weaknesses without attemting to quantify or summarize. "Cute" doesn't so it for me. Last edited by nanwynnfan; 08-17-2007 at 10:07 PM.

08-17-2007, 04:17 PM	#2 (permalink)
nanwynnfan Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 2,579	All that good work spoiled by the typical, snotty" "Okay, let's all admit it: mainstream baseball doesn't like sabermetrics. It's too complex for the piddly noggins of most broadcasters to make sense out of." It's an anthem, for crying out loud; and the worst of the offenders are the ones who bring least of practical value to the discussion.

08-17-2007, 10:28 PM	#5 (permalink)
nanwynnfan Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 2,579	Bedir: My general observations notwithstanding, I went back and studied the pictorial evaluator and it does look like a good concept. What I's suggest is that the 5 points of the pentagon be modified: 1. While POWER may be just fine, TOTAL BASES might serve a dual purpose: a. high TB suggests power while not seeming to isolate HR b. a high TB number, validated with 2B and 3B production might help suggest another point, SPEED 2. Next to POWER, OB% goies hand-in-hand as a basic formula for run production, so I'd use that instead of "Patience" 3. This might get some arguments, but I'd make this third point CONTACT, essential to advancing runners with batted balls in play; 4. I'd dump "Luck" because it suggests a sabermetric catch-all, default bin foe "otherwise not meaningful. I'd replace that with SPEED. a. can be inferred from total bases, high 2B and 3B numbers, ina addition to Stolen Bases and success rates, combined with, b. range elements of defense and a. above. 5. GLOVE is fine. We would be left with 1. TOTAL BASES [or POWER]; 2. OB% 3. CONTACT 4. SPEED 5. GLOVE As an alternative, SPEED could be merged into GLOVE and ARM might replace LUCK. Either way, we get a pictorial more in line with the defining elements of a 5 tool player, of which "luck" is NOT one.

08-18-2007, 04:31 PM	#6 (permalink)
nanwynnfan Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 2,579	It dawned on me that these webs could really give a detailed profile of a player if: 1. they incorporated the cross threads to denote classes of valuation; 2. kept the evaluation components to a reasonable medium: a. closest to the "spider's lair" = replacement; then branching outward to: b. average c. above average d. superior Then each tool would be part of an instant icon for each player's performance.