Regression's A Powerful Force
by Jeff on Nov 3, 2009 10:42 PM PST
in The More You Know
35 comments
No new ideas presented here. I just remember that, back when I was first learning about regression, one of the things that stuck with me was seeing how the top batting averages in the league in Year X looked in Year X+1, so here's a similar concept with a different, more contemporary statistic. What you see below are the top 20 players in WAR in 2008 and how they then did in 2009. Accompanying them is an old friend.
Please try to keep this in mind if you notice that Franklin Gutierrez is having a tough time repeating as a superstar.
0 recs |
35 comments
Email
Print
Comments
And yet... Pujols.
Our Lord! Our Savior! He has returned to guide us to the promised land!
Fans are typically idiots.
by The Typical Idiot Fan on Nov 3, 2009 10:46 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Joe Mauer says fuck you to your point.
Gutierrez is going to pull off the 1/20.
...and now I'm here
by Librocrat on Nov 3, 2009 10:56 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
Wow, Rios was replacement level this year.
by Mariner John on Nov 3, 2009 11:27 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
David Wright's regression came despite a .400 BABIP
by stupidquestions on Nov 4, 2009 12:06 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
David Wright missed a ton of playing time
by seattlebruin on Nov 4, 2009 12:42 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Turns out I'm an idiot and thought he got beaned in the head much earlier in the season
your point stands
by seattlebruin on Nov 4, 2009 12:43 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Which isn't that high for him
He had hidden leg injuries all year that killed his UZR and power.
by Sam Page on Nov 4, 2009 12:59 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not exactly sure what you mean
He’s never had above a .400 BABIP for a season.
by stupidquestions on Nov 4, 2009 1:06 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I get what you're saying but .400 is quite high compared to his career averages
You’re likely correct about the injuries causing his sudden and dramatic drop-off in power, though.
by OlSalty on Nov 4, 2009 3:30 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
OK, now I've got a better idea what you meant
You’re right that a .400 BABIP isn’t really sky-high for him considering his usual high BABIP, but it is still something we should expect to regress back down next year. The other interesting thing is that his road ISO this year was only 8 points higher than his home ISO, so Citi Field didn’t really even contribute to the power loss.
by stupidquestions on Nov 4, 2009 4:34 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It's 60 points above his previous career average.
by Matthew on Nov 4, 2009 6:32 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It wasn't a mathematical argument that his avg wasn't going to regress
just a little context for non-Mets fans that David Wright tends to have above-average BABIPs
by Sam Page on Nov 4, 2009 9:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
60 points above your career average is high.
by Matthew on Nov 5, 2009 12:30 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I should have realized that I was arguing with a Mets fan.
My bad.
by Matthew on Nov 5, 2009 10:30 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
We were arguing?
“High” is totally subjective. Yea it’s 60 points above his career average and will probably regress. My point was that his career average was .340, which is above average to start with. Why have a pedantic debate over what is the formal definition of “high” is?
by Sam Page on Nov 5, 2009 12:32 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Damn you Jeff.
On the crappy connection here at work, it took that image a second to load. But once it popped up on the screen it made me recoil.
FUCK THE ANGELS! FUCK THE ANGELS! FUCK THE ANGELS!
by Goose on Nov 4, 2009 3:10 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
This is fine.
However if it were sideways I wouldn’t be able to stop laughing for a good two minutes.
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett http://mvn.com/marinersminors/
by JY on Nov 4, 2009 11:42 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Why has nobody run with Next Laird? Eyebrows is hampered by his employer, but
we’ve got to be able to make something out of the combination of both photos.
by marc w on Nov 4, 2009 11:59 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
His rugged good looks are also a powerful force.
And they can not be regressed….
“Handsome mean he looks at himself;
Rugged mean you look at him.” ~ Simpsons
by Kunkoh on Nov 4, 2009 4:58 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Now I'm confused as to the definition of regression again.
Regression is not the same as decline due to aging, is it? This is a serious question, not a set up.
by Kermit. on Nov 4, 2009 5:01 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
