What data do you guys use for determining plate vision. I was just using strikeouts per ab. Also what do you guys consider an average rating, mid 60's?
-
-
Re: Determining plate vision for players
I use strikeouts. Idk if it's right but I've always felt like discipline is tied to walks, not visionKris Bryant doesn't hit homeruns, he destroys pitcher's dreams. #Bryantwatch -
Re: Determining plate vision for players
I would swing and miss pct.
Players that swing early in the count and rarely strike out, doesn't necessarily mean they should have high plate vision.
Same goes for players that do strike out a lot, but also take a lot of pitches and walk a lot. Taking a 3-2 pitch off the plate that gets called a strike should not mean their PVis should take a hit.Comment
-
Re: Determining plate vision for players
Same here and add on looking at what their percentage of takes is. Hitters could have a high percentage of taking balls but a higher swing-and-miss percentage. Not necessarily a straight vision issue as they are good at discerning pitches out of the zone.
You've got different styles of hitters to work with so there's a few ratings I would look at to set up for a hitter like contact, vision, and discipline.
There's hitters who may not hit all that well (sub-.250) but when they come up, they often work deep counts because they don't chase borderline pitches or foul them off repeatedly. For that, I might have them have higher vision and discipline ratings but give them a hit on their contact ratings. Other hitters who tend to chase more, I would hit their discipline levels more so than their vision ratings.Comment
-
Re: Determining plate vision for players
Just last week I looked at three year weighted averages for a number of different metrics and compared them to the devs' vision ratings. I did this for 432 MLB players on their roster, including free agents.
Charting the data in excel for each and then calculating correlational coefficients, here are the R-values produced by the best fit lines:
Plate Appearances/K - .8824
Whiff % - .9054
AB/K - .8854
BIP% (AB-K+SF)/(AB+SF) - .9729
A value of 1 is a perfect correlation.
The last two metrics are pretty much the same thing, so I'm not sure why my R-values were that much lower for AB/K; I just know that when I graphed a scatter plot using BIP% it was a near-perfect straight line with a few outliers sprinkled in. In fact, BIP% for vision has produced the highest correlational coefficient I've seen thus far. If you take an average for each rating value (average all the 99s, 98s, 97s, etc...) you can get the r-value up to .9944, so I'm convinced this is what the devs are using for their ratings.Comment
-
Re: Determining plate vision for players
Honestly whiff pct should affect the rating the most. Like I stated earlier...swinging early in the count and putting it in play doesn't really mean they are good at putting the ball in play or avoiding strike outs. I mean...statistically yes, but they really are sacrificing an entire AB just to avoid striking out. I don't think managers want that unless the player has a really bad K rate.
I could take a guy like Chris Carter and strike out less than 30 times a season just by using contact and swinging early in the count.....
Cool data though...Last edited by cardinalbird5; 06-29-2014, 05:33 PM.Comment
-
Re: Determining plate vision for players
I'm not to attempting to suggest what should or should not be, just what is as I see it through the data.
When lining up three year weighted averages in whiff percentages, the overall correlation is fairly good, but when you examine the players at the top it doesn't line up well at all with their ratings. BIP% not only has a very high correlation overall but the top guys line up almost perfectly.
That said, we can't forget that the devs have to deal with the sim engine. Whiff % reveals information on a pitch-by-pitch basis, and of course the sim engine doesn't simulate individual pitches (sportscast manager aside). BIP%, however, deals with the results of a plate appearance/at bat. Since people are apt to be quite critical of sim engine statistics it seems natural they would use BIP%.
If they used whiff % as a basis for vision ratings, you'd see guys who don't strike out often fanning much more than they do and vice versa due to the fact that some hitters have a good whiff % but also strike out a lot (some of the differences in this regard are quite striking). This could be for a number of reasons like getting fooled and not swinging, being more aggressive early and winding up in more 0-2 counts, etc...
And so what I would say is if you're interested in gameplay, use whiff %, if sim engine statistics are of importance to you, use BIP%.Last edited by JTommy67; 06-29-2014, 06:28 PM.Comment
Comment