Season is 1/10th done. Let's check OPS+ plus ERA+
With 16 games, 624 PAs, and 147 IP under our belt, we probably have enough of a sample size to determine how the Giants are doing in team "OPS+ plus ERA+" compared to rest of the NL.
If you'll recall, I came up with this measurement last season as a way of trying to answer the question, "Does the Giants superior pitching make up for their average-ish offense?" By adding OPS+ and ERA+, my theory was that it would give us a park-adjusted idea of how teams compare when you balance their pitching with their offense. As a non-stat guy, I also found it pretty easy to wrap my brain around.
You might also recal that the 2010 NL leader in this "PlusPlus" stat went on to win the World Series, so my efforts to get this stat copyrighted have been well worth it, if such efforts actually existed.
Without any further ado, here are the current NL rankings:
| Team | OPS+ | ERA+ | PlusPlus |
| STL | 117 | 112 | 229 |
| COL | 96 | 128 | 224 |
| PHI | 99 | 124 | 223 |
| SFG | 97 | 124 | 221 |
| MIL | 93 | 121 | 214 |
| FLA | 90 | 123 | 213 |
| Cin | 118 | 90 | 208 |
| ATL | 79 | 126 | 205 |
| PIT | 89 | 111 | 200 |
| WSN | 81 | 119 | 200 |
| SDP | 74 | 123 | 197 |
| LgAv | 93 | 104 | 197 |
| CHC | 94 | 91 | 185 |
| ARI | 106 | 78 | 184 |
| HOU | 91 | 82 | 173 |
| LAD | 82 | 86 | 168 |
| NYM | 83 | 77 | 160 |
A couple observations:
- We're already seeing the separation you'd expect with the better teams rising to the top.
- LOL Dodgers
- San Diego, despite being ranked almost dead last in every offense category, remains "average" because of their pitching.
- The Giants won the title last season with a 216 "PlusPlus" and are currently ranked #4 with a 221. It appears pitching has been pretty good overall this season, but that will probably balance out. (Note the league average 104 ERA+.)
- As a reminder, league average OPS+ in the NL usually comes in at around 94 or 95, not the 100 many people assume.
This FanPost is reader-generated, and it does not necessarily reflect the views of McCovey Chronicles. If the author uses filler to achieve the minimum word requirement, a moderator may edit the FanPost for his or her own amusement.
63 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
copiedrite
Marvin Barrios, come on I'll show you your bedroom. Don't stay on the phone too long to Panama, please.
by foothillsfan on Apr 19, 2011 11:59 AM PDT up reply actions
Unless that was meant as a jest--
-and one can never be sure around here-it is wrong.
Professional baseball analyst since 1980.
Wir sind gewohnt, daß die Menschen verhöhnen was sie nicht verstehn.—Goethe
Y'know,
I’d be just as happy and maybe happier if the effin’ forum software would let me decide for myself what effects I want, or don’t want.
The intended post:
Unless that was meant as a jest—
—and one can never be sure around here—it is wrong.
Professional baseball analyst since 1980.
Wir sind gewohnt, daß die Menschen verhöhnen was sie nicht verstehn.—Goethe
It was in jest
I had originally written “copywrited” like a moron and Even was pokin’ fun
The thong is, it happened.
I loved yesterday's baseball outcomes.
Because not only did the Giants dominate the Rockies on the road but SDP lost a 1-0 game in 10 innings. So awesome to have that kind of garbage behind us—mostly.
Relief! I Thank you for your Lefferts.
Wow, the Cards and Reds have good offenses.
Matt Cain: He'll save children, but not the Dodger children.
I call him gerald. he’s a pristine white handkerchief, though? nediB eoJ Joe Biden ‽ Joe Biden.
They have to come back down to earth
Even though there’s a fair amount of data, it’s going to be somewhat skewed by which teams and pitchers they’ve faced.
The thong is, it happened.
I don’t see any reason to think Cincinnati won’t continue to be a very good offense thru the season though.
MY DAD WAS WRONG!
MY BOY NEEDS TO THROW HARDER!
But 118 OPS+ is crazy good. They lead the league last season with a 108 OPS+
In the last 10 years, only four teams have had a team OPS+ higher than that:
2003 Braves 112
2003 Cards 111
2002 Giants 110
2001 Giants 112
I can’t help but notice that these teams did this in the heart of a certain era.
The thong is, it happened.
Problem with that last statement
OPS+ is compared to other teams during the same season.
As for why those teams had such high OPS+.
Barry Bonds and Albert Pujols. 03 Braves…that’s an anomoly apparently.
I LOVE YOU BASEBALL GODS!!!!!
I promise that my adopted Giant, one Zach Wheeler, will not shoot anybody.
iirc, career years from Lopez and Giles really help
Don't think he can cut it in the bigs? Brock Bond will be the bigger man and walk walk walk away.
It's pretty clear that Sheffield was creaming the ball that year too - 162 OPS+
The thong is, it happened.
If you look at those teams, there are some "usual suspects"
From the Ginats you’ve got Bonds, Santiago, Benard, Rios, Estelella, Aurilia
The thong is, it happened.
TLR is finally playing Rasmus daily
And the scary part is that Pujols was Bocockian to start the year.
Juan "Doesn't Cheat The Game" Perez, future CF for the World Champion San Francisco Giants.
True, but noway Berkman continues to hit like he has so far.
I feel prickishly demanding!
I couldn't be prouder of my recent adoptee - Tim Lincecum's dealer. He provides the secret fuel behind both Cy Youngs. Also, he taught Timmy the change-up.
by giantsfansince1981 on Apr 19, 2011 3:19 PM PDT up reply actions
Very true
And I shouldn’t have implied that they were good just because Rasmus is getting to play everyday, I just wanted to take a shot at TLR.
Juan "Doesn't Cheat The Game" Perez, future CF for the World Champion San Francisco Giants.
Always a good move.
I used to like TLR. Now I think he’s crap.
I feel prickishly demanding!
I couldn't be prouder of my recent adoptee - Tim Lincecum's dealer. He provides the secret fuel behind both Cy Youngs. Also, he taught Timmy the change-up.
by giantsfansince1981 on Apr 19, 2011 4:03 PM PDT up reply actions
He won’t keep a slugging percentage of .692, but Berkman’s a hell of a hitter. Surely the examples of Huff/Burrell 2010 have taught us not to write off a good hitter after one bad year.
No doubt he’s good. I’m just referring to him hitting at an insane level. He could have a damn good year after losing a couple hundred points of slugging percentage.
I feel prickishly demanding!
I couldn't be prouder of my recent adoptee - Tim Lincecum's dealer. He provides the secret fuel behind both Cy Youngs. Also, he taught Timmy the change-up.
by giantsfansince1981 on Apr 19, 2011 8:40 PM PDT up reply actions
Any interest in doing this for AL teams too?
Please don't cut Ishikawa! 2009 Tops All-Star Rookie and World Champ 2010!
Not really
I haven’t figured out a very automated way of doing this. I enter the teams and numbers individually into a spreadsheet, so it takes a while. Once they’re entered, summing and sorting them is easy, but the first part is a pain.
If ther’e’s some easier way to pull stuff from BB-ref, I’m not aware.
The thong is, it happened.
You can page-scrape . . .
. . . using a PHP script or something of the sort. It’s a big pain to set up, but that’s a one-time effort; after that, you can get updates every day automagically. I don’t use BB-ref myself, simply because they weren’t around when I started, but the principle is the same.
Professional baseball analyst since 1980.
Wir sind gewohnt, daß die Menschen verhöhnen was sie nicht verstehn.—Goethe
What if it was just
a series of small pains to set up?
You want optimism? My glass is half full of emptiness.
Not difficult, mind . . .
. . . just tedious. (Provided you are comfortable in some programming language; I happen to have fallen into PHP, and like it, but anything would work.)
Actually, if you want some PHP scripts that page-scrape a different source and produce text data files easily parsed, send me an email or PM or whatever this forum allows.
Professional baseball analyst since 1980.
Wir sind gewohnt, daß die Menschen verhöhnen was sie nicht verstehn.—Goethe
Hmmm...
On the one hand, this stat makes a lot of common sense. On the other hand, Goofus came up with it.
"This is a street fight, and we win those." -- BRIAN SABEAN, 10/23/10
Proud owner of the saddest looking IMDb page in the world.
by Josh from Hollywood on Apr 19, 2011 1:32 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Cardinals were scuffling for offense for a little while
then exploded vs. the DBacks and Dodgers. Teehee!
You want optimism? My glass is half full of emptiness.
How are you calculating the League Average?
If you are using the mean, it seems like the average is being dragged down overly much by the trash in LA and NY.
The median average is 202.5, which draws the line right in between Atlanta and Pittsburgh, which seems like a better place for the league average to reside. It’s just my opinion, but the Padres seem like a below average team.
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way. - SLC
I'm not calculating it, baseball reference is.
I pulled everything from the NL page.
But you’re right, the bottom teams are REALLY dragging down the average.
The thong is, it happened.
Cool thanks.
As a point of reference, AL OPS+ averages about 5 points higher than NL. I think it’s all DH-related.
It makes comparing it with NL pretty useless.
The thong is, it happened.
It is DH-related, in that AL teams hit better because of the DH. Because OPS+ and ERA+ are adjusted to the major league average, comparison across leagues is possible.
"Lee pitches...Renteria hits a high drive, deep left-center field, David Murphy going back, he's on the warning track—it is...go-one!"
Oh, Seattle.
I feel prickishly demanding!
I couldn't be prouder of my recent adoptee - Tim Lincecum's dealer. He provides the secret fuel behind both Cy Youngs. Also, he taught Timmy the change-up.
by giantsfansince1981 on Apr 19, 2011 8:40 PM PDT up reply actions
Vaunted AL East
guffaw/chortle
You want optimism? My glass is half full of emptiness.
by DanielSmith on Apr 20, 2011 10:47 AM PDT up reply actions
Interesting.
By arcane means I won’t bother anyone with, I reckon that those numbers divided by 2.3 approximate probable seasonal wins. That would make this for the NL West, just by the numbers as they stand:
COL: 97
SFO: 96
SDG: 86
ARI: 80
LAD: 73
Those are—especially for a number so early on—pretty decent (based on my own projections). The only one I see changing a lot is Arizona, who will probably be around 87 or so. (As posted the other day, I see SFO finishing 1 game ahead of COL, which is obviously within the statistical-noise zone.)
Professional baseball analyst since 1980.
Wir sind gewohnt, daß die Menschen verhöhnen was sie nicht verstehn.—Goethe
Interesting theory re: 2.3X
Did you look at last year’s numbers to see if it holds up?
The thong is, it happened.
Nope.
It’s an almost textbook-perfect example of application of The Law of Hasty Generalizations. But it wouldn’t completely surprise me if something not unlike it did hold up.
Professional baseball analyst since 1980.
Wir sind gewohnt, daß die Menschen verhöhnen was sie nicht verstehn.—Goethe
I just tried your theory on the 2010 Giants and came up with 94 wins
Of course they won 92, but their pythag was 94, so that’s somethng.
The thong is, it happened.
Uh Maybe
But does anyone think the COL ERA+ at the end of the year will be better than the Giants?
Time to repeat in '11!
by Myemail21479 on Apr 20, 2011 7:07 AM PDT up reply actions
He didn't say that
It was more of a “At their current production…” type of thing
The thong is, it happened.
1/10 done, I give us a B-
we need to by playing at least A-
GO GIANTS
Trade Sabean/jk...Overthrow the Ydorks...
I am not a "real" Warriors fan without season tickets-The Lacob Rules
...for the love of Bonds
I hate to nitpick (and correct me if I'm wrong; I'm not totally sure about this)
Especially because I really do like this idea, but I don’t think ERA+ works for this. Since ERA+ uses a different denominator from OPS+ (and the other adjusted stats) – player instead of league – a simple addition doesn’t correctly evaluate ERA’s contribution to the PlusPlus stat. I don’t know if it’s overrating or underrating, but I’m pretty sure it’s not strictly correct either way.
I feel like this is a minor difference (much like the OPS vs. wOBA debate, where wOBA comes out slightly better but OPS is almost as good and a much easier calculation given OBP and SLG), but still one worth noting, especially for a pitching-heavy team like the Giants and much of their competition. It’s still an interesting stat, though, and I don’t expect you to produce something that is statistically perfect not being a sabremetrician and all (I think). It’d be nice if WAR had the relative-to-league element like this instead of just being an absolute number.
Seth Rosin can hit the side of a barn with a baseball. From space.
Giants baseball: We're stupid enough to WIN that (TM)
I think you're looking for too much here
OPS+ and ERA+ are pretty close in one respect, they average at about 100. If you subscribe to the theory that pitching and offense are pretty equally important, then adding them together gives you a somewhat-balanced “score” by which to compare other teams.
As I said in the intro, this was inspired by all the old talk of “If only we had an average offense to go with our pitching.” I was simply trying to find a quick way to see how unbalanced teams compare to balanced ones.
The thong is, it happened.
Oh, I know I am
And league average is 100 for both of them IIRC. But I don’t think ERA+ is a consistent metric; 100 is league average, but 101 is not exactly in between 100 and 102. So as you go farther away from 100, the inconsistency gets worse, to the point that a very good or very bad staff wouldn’t be appropriately evaluated. It’s perfectly fine for comparing a pitcher to the league average, but comparing pitchers to each other one tends to assume a linear curve (which is also implicit in the addition because OPS+ is linear) and that’s not the case here.
For example, a team with an OPS+ and ERA+ of 150 would get a PlusPlus of 300, and so would a team with an OPS+ of 175 and ERA+ of 125. But Team 2 wouldn’t be equal overall to Team 1 because ERA+ isn’t working on a linear scale. So your desire to compare unbalanced teams to balanced ones wouldn’t work all that well because ERA+ is going to screw with the overall evaluation of the team.
Again, this is a minor issue that you shouldn’t have to solve, I know. As a quick-and-dirty stat, it’s just fine and very interesting. I just noticed the problem and figured I should point it out.
Seth Rosin can hit the side of a barn with a baseball. From space.
Giants baseball: We're stupid enough to WIN that (TM)
It’s a point I’ve made before – as you say, it’s not an issue as long as you realise the limitation is there.
The other issue is that it also assumes a linear relationship between OPS and runs scored, which also isn’t true (and again becomes less true the further you get from 100).
For example, imagine two teams – team A is league average at everything, while team B scores at half the league average but also gives up runs at half the league average. Both have a Pythagorean of .500 (team B is a cartoon team just to demonstrate what happens as you move away from league average).
At first glance, team A has an OPS+ of 100 and an ERA+ of 100, while team B might have an OPS+ of 50 and an ERA+ of 200. So team B has a Goofus+ of 250, while team A has a Goofus+ of 200 – that’s in spite of both being .500 teams. That’s quincy’s point above: to attempt to conclude more succinctly, Goofus+ favours asymmetric teams over equally talented symmetric ones.
But actually, OPS+ isn’t linear with runs scored – doubling OPS more than doubles runs scored. So to score half as many runs, you might need an OPS+ of 65 or so. So team B actually has a Goofus+ of 265 – an even bigger difference. If team B was a strong hitting, poor pitching team, the difference would actually be smaller. Conclusion: Goofus+ favours asymmetric strong pitching teams over asymmetric strong hitting teams.
So Goofus+ systematically overrates teams with stronger pitching than hitting. Which is fine, as long as we aren’t using it to prove, say, that the Giants (who are prime candidates for being overrated by this stat) have performed better than their W-L suggests.
by sarf_london_niner on Apr 21, 2011 1:47 AM PDT up reply actions
OK, about that ratio:
It looks as if historically it’s closer to just about 2 even (or just average the PlusPlus numbers).
Goofus, you can see the PlusPlus data for any league, any year, that BBref has by just going to here:
http://highboskage.com/PHP/goofus.php?yr=2010&lg=A
where, of course, you plug in the season and league you actually want (league code is case-insensitive). If no league is specified, it defaults to NL; if no season is supplied, it defaults to the current season.
If you want the complete PHP script, just let me know. You can upload it anywhere that PHP works, which is pretty much any host server. You could even use it locally if you have PHP on your personal system.
Sample output (except line breaks are doubled here for mysterious Chroniclesque reasons):
For the AL in 2010:
BAL : OPS+ = 90 and ERA+ = 93 for a PlusPlus of 183 and 107 games won, for ratio of 1.71
BOS : OPS+ = 109 and ERA+ = 104 for a PlusPlus of 213 and 93 games won, for ratio of 2.29
CHW : OPS+ = 100 and ERA+ = 107 for a PlusPlus of 207 and 104 games won, for ratio of 1.99
CLE : OPS+ = 97 and ERA+ = 90 for a PlusPlus of 187 and 107 games won, for ratio of 1.748
DET : OPS+ = 103 and ERA+ = 98 for a PlusPlus of 201 and 90 games won, for ratio of 2.233
KCR : OPS+ = 100 and ERA+ = 85 for a PlusPlus of 185 and 98 games won, for ratio of 1.888
LAA : OPS+ = 92 and ERA+ = 101 for a PlusPlus of 193 and 85 games won, for ratio of 2.271
MIN : OPS+ = 106 and ERA+ = 105 for a PlusPlus of 211 and 101 games won, for ratio of 2.089
NYY : OPS+ = 109 and ERA+ = 106 for a PlusPlus of 215 and 105 games won, for ratio of 2.048
OAK : OPS+ = 92 and ERA+ = 116 for a PlusPlus of 208 and 106 games won, for ratio of 1.962
SEA : OPS+ = 79 and ERA+ = 100 for a PlusPlus of 179 and 116 games won, for ratio of 1.543
TBR : OPS+ = 104 and ERA+ = 104 for a PlusPlus of 208 and 100 games won, for ratio of 2.08
TEX : OPS+ = 102 and ERA+ = 110 for a PlusPlus of 212 and 104 games won, for ratio of 2.038
TOR : OPS+ = 107 and ERA+ = 99 for a PlusPlus of 206 and 110 games won, for ratio of 1.873
Average ratio: 1.983
Professional baseball analyst since 1980.
Wir sind gewohnt, daß die Menschen verhöhnen was sie nicht verstehn.—Goethe
Note:
The “ratio” is not meaningful except for full seasons.
Professional baseball analyst since 1980.
Wir sind gewohnt, daß die Menschen verhöhnen was sie nicht verstehn.—Goethe
Actually, the ratio might be a good mid-season predictor of season win totals...
…since OPS+ and ERA + aren’t counting stats.
As the season moves along, it’ll get more accurate.
The thong is, it happened.
Oh, I agree.
It’s just that the number values for wins don’t come out neat and tidy; but simple pro-rating would handle that.
Professional baseball analyst since 1980.
Wir sind gewohnt, daß die Menschen verhöhnen was sie nicht verstehn.—Goethe
Cool and thanks!
I think the ratio is going to vary between leagues because OPS+ is higher in the AL.
I went back a few years and it’s running closer to 2.5 for the NL.
The thong is, it happened.
The principle certainly sounds right.
Professional baseball analyst since 1980.
Wir sind gewohnt, daß die Menschen verhöhnen was sie nicht verstehn.—Goethe
Are these 2011 AL-only pluspluses?
go rowand
by lincypoo i wuv u on Apr 21, 2011 4:10 PM PDT up reply actions

by 






















