Jump to content
Want to get your head around free agents the WORLD CHAMPION Brewers can spend on this winter? Click here and check out our top 75 free agents ranking! ×
Brewer Fanatic

rluzinski

Verified Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    9,362

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Profiles

Forums

Blogs

Events

Milwaukee Brewers News, Rumors & Analysis

2026 Milwaukee Brewers Top Prospect Rankings

Milwaukee Brewers Videos

2022 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

Milwaukee Brewers Trade & Free Agent Rumors

Milwaukee Brewers Fan Guides & Resources

2023 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

2024 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

The Milwaukee Brewers Players Project

2025 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

2026 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by rluzinski

  1. rluzinski
    Well, thst inning was Yosted.
  2. rluzinski
    The Brewers are now 44-45 in "must win" games. They can pull to .500 in "must win" games with a win today.
  3. rluzinski
    I've read sveral studies on protection and I recall them all concluded the only thing you might lose is intentional walks. They could not find Bonds' performances being conttroled by who batted after him, for instance. All the old links seem to be dead but I shall continue the search. As for players feeling compelled to change their approach, I suppose they will if they are actively being asked to. Corey Patterson comes to mind. Since the point of these studies is to see how various skill sets can be utilized in various places in the lineup, I think it's fair to assume management could make it clear to the player NOT to change his approach to fit the traditional roles. Finally, I'm sure there are some interaction among batters but what's important is the scale of the interaction. It appears that the connections between consecutive batters is slight enough as to allow simulations of batting orders to simply work. Maybe a study will come along to prove all the above wrong but as far as I know, this seems to be where we are at right now.
  4. rluzinski
    I really should have figured that out.
  5. rluzinski
    You seem frustrated that I don't see it your way and are lowering yoruself to belittling me and my knowledge of statistical studies although having no idea whether I do or not. Point me to the evidence (anecdotal or statistical evidence) you used to formulate your opinion that batter interaction (protection, skill set change based on batting position, etc...) is a real and significant phenomena. If you can demonstrate that your opinion is at least based on some kind of hard evidence, I will be happy to retract my claim. As it is, you have still provided zero evidence to support your opinion. That is my opinion, just because you don't like it that gives you no right to insult me. It wasn't a malicious attack against you or even directed at you in any way. Where did I maliciously insult you again? By suggesting you are unfamiliar with the statistical studies pertaining to this subject matter? That fact is obvious and if you don't want that pointed out, don't dismiss studies you have never read.
  6. rluzinski
    I've given plenty of reasons within this thread why I believe my theory is correct. Reasons but zero evidence. Not even anecdotal evidence. You can't agree to disagree without insulting?... What gives you the right to talk that way to me?!? You come to a statistical analysis forum and say: Now you want to play the martyr when someone strongly objects? Give me a break. Because I don't agree with you you are now going to insult my intelligence? It has nothing to do with your intelligence. It has to do with your disregarding studies you know nothing about yet think are worthless. You could be genius for all I know. Sounds like you want anyone that comes into this forum to roll over and bow to every word you say. Yes, I post on this forum not to exchange thoughts and ideas about statistical analysis of baseball but simply to boost my ego. Because all the cool kids like statistical analysis. You've got me all figured out. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/eyes.gif If you think statistical analysis of baseball has absolutely no merit, start a thread in this forum explaining why you think that. Please don't inject "studies mean nothing" into random threads because that adds nothing to the discussion.
  7. rluzinski
    http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/7391/569/400/win%20prob706.gif LINK
  8. rluzinski
    And that amount of evidence is zero evidence which is exactly why these studies don't hold any weight. The evidence is in the form of statistical studies using the scientific method. Again, if you consider them zero evidence than you are in the wrong forum. While their findings are in no way conclusive infallable, they are certainly stronger evidence than the anecdotal evidence usually used to argue the opposing view. You haven't even offered up that. It's a theory, not fact. I doubt you have never read a single word from any of these studies yet you disregard them with a wave of the hand. With a comment like the above, I can't say I'm suprised. I don't agree with that theory and you mentioned to the gentleman who started this thread like it is fact when it isn't. Sheesh. Go back and read the the post. My exact words were: EDIT: Here's a link to one of the best lineup studies out there: Evaluating Traditional Lineups
  9. rluzinski
    The game sure is a lot more fun when they win http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif That sure was crazy. 3-1 series against the Cubs get's the Crew 2 over .500 at the break. Hard to be disappointed with that.
  10. rluzinski
    Helling, I was just kidding when I said all that stuff. You are OK with me!
  11. rluzinski
    I would have thought you would want views from both sides of the coin. I did not mean to imply that you had nothing to add to this discussion but if you disregard statistical evidence out of hand, you can see how that might create problems when the title of the forum is "Statistical Analysis". No one ever assumed there was no interaction among batters, quite the opposite. I think many researchers were suprised when they couldn't find any real statistical evidence of protection and other related phenomena. They realized that a batter's performance is relatively consistent, irregardless of his place in the batting order and the players around him. When that realiziation was made, it justified using simulators in order optimization studies. Again, it's not my claim that their are no such effects; only that they are most likely small enough as to be masked by statistical noise. Also, I didn't mean to suggest that the difference between the worst and best lineup was insignificant just suprisingly small. Since the tradational batting lineup (like what you posted) is a fairly reasonable way to contruct a lineup in the first place, further optimization results in only a modest gain in runs scored. It is because of that fact that it's usually not worth all the discussion teh topic usually generates.
  12. rluzinski
    As for measuring streakiness, the book "Curve Ball" formulated a way to quantify it using running averages (Bill James did something similar as well). Here's a graph of Jenkin's 10 game running batting average last year: http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/7391/569/400/jenkins.0.jpg Here's a graph of a randomly generated running average or a player who has a 29.2% chance of getting a hit average AB (Jenkins batted .292 last year): http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/7391/569/400/robojenkins.jpg ABB: Jenkins and Consistency I explain some of the methodolgy in the comments section but haven't finished the study yet. Some day soon I hope. Jenkins certainly more inconsistent than expected last year but not by as much as some think. As for the benefits of a hitter being "consistent", I'm not convinced it was much value anyway. 9 typically inconsistent players will average out to a relatively consistent offense anyway. I know of no studies looking at the topic but it could easily be done with a simulator.
  13. rluzinski
    Many studies have done on this topic and there just isn't very much statistical evidence to support that claim. I don't mean to suggest that there's no interaction among batters but it's most certainly significantly less than traditionalists assume. If you are unswayed by statistical evidence than you are in the wrong part of this forum. Also, that person getting almost 100 less atbats per year is going to kill your offensive production. Not to mention that the people getting the most at bats in your lineup won't even be the guys who have the best obp, that will have a HUGE effect on how many runs you score in a season. Again, you are over estimating the effects. Lineup optimization has been studied to death and many go through the step of making the worst lineup (pitcher batting first) to establish a scale. The author always seems suprised by the relatively small effect it has on runs scored. Batting lineup optimization is important, but it appears to be not as important as some think. LINK
  14. rluzinski
    http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/7391/569/400/win%20prob630.gif
  15. rluzinski
    Can we not waste a beautiful Bush outing, please?
  16. rluzinski
    That is supposed to be publically available, end? MLB seems to be about 10 years behind everything (except their video offerings, apparently).
  17. rluzinski
    Can this be moved to the Stats forum, please?
  18. rluzinski
    Maybe the Brewers have been hovering around .500 all year because they are about a .500 team? Naa. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/wink.gif
  19. rluzinski
    It seems like providing PBP every half inning could be beneficial to those trying to figure out where the IGT is. Only 18 extra posts! http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif
  20. rluzinski
    http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a345/rluzinski/chat-1.gif
  21. rluzinski
    http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/7391/569/1600/win%20prob627.gif Those probabilities are for the remaining 3 games of the series. So "win 2" means finishing the series 2-1, for an overall series record of 3-1. 60% chance of winning the series (3-1 or sweep).
  22. rluzinski
    Stats Inc. tracks every play, givng them subjective labels like "hard play", "easy play" ext. They are not publically available, however. A person with MLB video could go back and watch the games and do so pretty easily. How long are the compacted games? A half hour? That's 15 minutes of defense a game x 77 games. Two guys could hammer that out in a week http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif
  23. rluzinski
    NICE START! Get that junk ball crap outa here, Maddux! Keep pounding that strike zone.
  24. rluzinski
    Got it. I'm sure that's good enough anyway. If you ever want to work with me to write simulator for major league games, please let me know. The fact that I'm using Excel should tell you where my programing skills are. It's BASIC or bust for me http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/frown.gif While I was at it, I drew up a Brewerfan.net Game Day graphic similar to MLB, that way I could watch all the valpos, Robins, razzzors streak around the bases and light up the scoreboard! That's pretty damn awesome. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif
  25. rluzinski
    What he said. The dominator for OBP isn't PA, since OBP doesn't include SH. Brady Clark: H = 64 BB = 31 HBP = 8 AB = 229 SF = 4 OBP = (H+BB+HBP) / (AB+BB+HBP+SF) OBP = (64+31+http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/glasses.gif /(229+31+8+4) = .3787 The demoninator of OBP isn't necessarily PA-SH. That's because PA includes"Reached on defensive interference" (at least for ESPN). IIRC, Clark reached from catcher's interference, hence TPA being 1 higher than "AB+BB+HBP+SH+SF" BTW, I was horribly confused by all this the first time I set out to calculate these things on my own http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif MLB Statistics Glossary, ESPN
×
×
  • Create New...