tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-608528753722196209.post7401641026550551959..comments2016-11-19T04:43:27.554-08:00Comments on Cybermetrics: How Might Integration Have Affected The Lefty Grove/Randy Johnson Debate?Cyril Moronghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07148864847009186694noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-608528753722196209.post-606807569423725272010-01-29T14:51:31.498-08:002010-01-29T14:51:31.498-08:00here is that last link
http://cyrilmorong.com/ALE...here is that last link<br /><br />http://cyrilmorong.com/ALERA.htmCyril Moronghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07148864847009186694noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-608528753722196209.post-3680162931841191412010-01-29T12:55:03.365-08:002010-01-29T12:55:03.365-08:00I found that Grove had 12 top 5 finishes in SO/BB ...I found that Grove had 12 top 5 finishes in SO/BB while Johnson had 11. Grove beats him in top 10 finishes 13-11. I tend to agree that Grove was more dominant and still would be after adjustments.<br /><br />And here is something I posted to the SABR List in early 2006:<br /><br />"I thought it would be interesting to use a point system to see how well pitchers have done in RSAA (runs saved above average and it is park adjusted). A first place finish would be 10 points, second 9, and so on. Ties would split points. A tie for first would get 9.5. Then I called up the annual top tens for the AL, NL and AA using the Lee Sinins Sabermetric Encyclopedia. Each pitcher got his points then a career total was found for each guy. Here are the top 10<br /><br />Cy Young-134<br />Clemens-132<br />Grove-113.5<br />W. Johnson-111.5<br />Mathewson-102<br />Maddux-101.5<br />Alexander-98<br />Nichols-95<br />R. Johnson-83<br />Blyleven-74<br /><br />Here is something I did with FIP ERA and standard deviations<br /><br />http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/story/2006/6/2/104946/4377<br /><br />The two are close.<br /><br />Here is something else I did with standard deviations. You just have to look for each guy's nameCyril Moronghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07148864847009186694noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-608528753722196209.post-55360743575708800542010-01-28T14:31:25.712-08:002010-01-28T14:31:25.712-08:00Cy,
I see your point about adjusting ERA, and ERA...Cy,<br /><br />I see your point about adjusting ERA, and ERA+, for the change in the run scoring environment. BB-reference can adjust a player's stats for different environments, assuming that each pitcher faces a constant number of batters (before fatigue sets in or pitch counts come into play).<br /><br />I think ERA+ understates how much more dominant Grove was in his time than Johnson was. The ERA+ calculation is apparently sensitive enough for even a small rise in league scoring to wipe out Grove's advantage in ERA+. <br /><br />That said, it's hard to argue that Grove's dominance over the AL, as I have looked at in terms of standard deviation in ERA, would have deteriorated to the level which Johnson had over his leagues. <br /><br />Also, in 17 seasons, Grove led the 8-team league in ERA 9 times, and was top 5 3 other times. In 22 seasons, Johnson led 14/16 team leagues 4 times, and was top 5 4 other times. Maybe Grove's (and Ruth's) apparent dominance has as much to do with league size as with segregation. <br /><br />Both Johnson and Grove pitched in high run-scoring environments. Is it easier to dominate in high scoring environments than low? (Maybe I'll look at the standard score for the ERA league leader and regress against changes with league R/G and number of teams.)bobmnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-608528753722196209.post-82963043956941432312010-01-28T11:17:26.158-08:002010-01-28T11:17:26.158-08:00Bob
Thanks for dropping by and commenting.
I dis...Bob<br /><br />Thanks for dropping by and commenting.<br /><br />I disagree on the double counting issue. You would be right if each pitcher's ERA went up by the same %. Certainly Grove's differential is not going to change. But if each pitcher goes up by the same absolute amount, then Grove's relative ERA falls since 3/4.5 is less than 3.5/5.<br /><br />To get around this issue, I tried increasing his OPS by both the same absolute amount as I thought the league average would rise as well as the same percentage increase in OPS. My result was similar in both cases. Of course, that all assumed a linear relationship between OPS and runs, which may not be true. But my guess is that even if the relationship is non-linear, it is not very much so and the result would not be affected very much.<br /><br />Think about a league where Grove pitches a shutout every game and the league ERA is 1.5. His relative ERA is 0 (or infinite if you take the reciprocal). Now we add in a bunch of new, good hitters. If each pitcher's ERA goes up by .5, then Grove's relative ERA has to fall. <br /><br />I wish I knew why run scoring fell in the beginning years of integration. It seems like it should have been the opposite since the non-whites have played a bigger role as hitters than pitchers. There might be some other factors at work.<br /><br />CyCyril Moronghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07148864847009186694noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-608528753722196209.post-53664713639762843012010-01-28T00:25:38.580-08:002010-01-28T00:25:38.580-08:00Very interesting analysis.
I conclude something...Very interesting analysis. <br /><br />I conclude something slightly different from your analysis.<br /><br />From your data, the absence of segregation in baseball could arguably have produced an era equivalent to a higher run scoring environment due to the imbalance from added hitting talent outweighing added pitching and fielding talent. So, the league ERA would have increased.<br /><br />However, the league-wide increases in hitting talent (and fielding talent) should only affect Grove's ERA, but not his ERA+. Otherwise, it's "double counting" the impact of hitting on Grove's ERA+. Only the influx of pitching talent should affect his ERA+, his standing relative to other pitchers. Everyone faces the same distribution of hitters (roughly). <br /><br />(I can believe that replacing the bottom 20% as you describe would raise the average by about 6%, as it did for qualifying pitchers from 2000-2009.)<br /><br />Counting only the impact of the pitching talent influx--the 5.7% improvement in league average ERA independent of changes in hitting--Grove's new ERA+ would then be (4.42/1.057) divided by 3.06 = 137. This is still above Randy Johnson's ERA+. <br /><br />As an aside, if you look at (actual, gradual) integration in time series, the opposite seemed to have occurred. Run scoring in baseball was high but flat and then decreasing through Grove's career. I find it interesting that, if you take out the WWII years, I think the run scoring trend in generally down, not up, for the next 20 years.bobmnoreply@blogger.com