[USML Announce] Saves + Holds Redux

Tue Feb 12 10:14:28 EST 2019

 Good points, Mark.
This version re-sorts the right-hand data to make Mark's points clear.
    On Tuesday, February 12, 2019, 8:54:09 AM CST, springkerb <springkerb at aol.com> wrote:  

 To me, the 2x saves version does a better job of identifying pitchers who can reliably hold a lead--which I think is what we're trying to measure here.  For example, the version that values saves and holds equally says that Jose Alvarado is third in the league.  He's a good reliever, but I don't think he was more reliablelast year than Trienen or Chapman.  Similarly, the equally weighted version says the Chaz Roe (Chaz Roe?) was the sixth most reliable holder of leads in the AL.  That's nuts.
In general, major league managers use their best relievers later in the games, and that makes sense, since holding a lead gets more valuable later in the game.  A clean ninth inning improves the team's likelihood of winning more when there are fewer innings left to play.  So, at least to my eye, the 2x approach does a better job of rewarding better relievers. 
Mark

Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S®6 active, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone
-------- Original message --------From: JOHN FRUIT <jtfruit at msn.com> Date: 2/12/19 5:19 AM (GMT-06:00) To: USML Announcements <announce at usml.net>, Frank Luby <zachfehsvater at yahoo.com>, Andy Klein <anrklein at gmail.com> Cc: springkerb <springkerb at aol.com> Subject: Re: [USML Announce] Saves + Holds Redux 
What's apparent is that the 2x saves method seems to put even more statistical emphasis on the saves category, kinda defeating the purpose.

Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone

-------- Original message --------From: springkerb via Announce <announce at usml.net> Date: 2/11/19 10:15 PM (GMT-06:00) To: Frank Luby <zachfehsvater at yahoo.com>, Andy Klein <anrklein at gmail.com>, USML Announcements <announce at usml.net>Cc: springkerb <springkerb at aol.com> Subject: Re: [USML Announce] Saves + Holds Redux 
Cool.  It's an interesting comparison.

Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S®6 active, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone
-------- Original message --------From: Frank Luby <zachfehsvater at yahoo.com> Date: 2/11/19 10:02 PM (GMT-06:00) To: Andy Klein <anrklein at gmail.com>, USML Announcements <announce at usml.net> Cc: springkerb <springkerb at aol.com> Subject: Re: [USML Announce] Saves + Holds Redux 
To throw some data into this discussion, here are the top 50 relievers in the AL last season ranked by the SV+HLD method and the 2xSV+HLD, in a side by side comparison ...
On Monday, February 11, 2019, 9:44:36 PM CST, springkerb via Announce <announce at usml.net> wrote:

I'd like you to reconsider the ratio.  There are about twice as many holds as saves. Weighting them equally would actually make the 7th and 8th inning guys more valuable than closers, which just doesn't seem right.
Mark

Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S®6 active, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone
-------- Original message --------From: Andy Klein <anrklein at gmail.com> Date: 2/11/19 7:33 PM (GMT-06:00) To: USML Announcements <announce at usml.net> Cc: springkerb <springkerb at aol.com> Subject: Re: [USML Announce] Saves + Holds Redux 
Nope ... we talked about it, but never voted on it.  I'm actually advocating Saves + Holds, not 2XSaves + Holds.  I'm fine with 2020 implementation.  I'll wait another day and then make a formal proposal.
-Andy
On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 7:02 PM springkerb via Announce <announce at usml.net> wrote:

See my other email.  Thought thiswas a done deal for this year.
Mark

Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S®6 active, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone
-------- Original message --------From: Andy Klein <anrklein at gmail.com>Date: 2/11/19 4:16 PM (GMT-06:00) To: USML Announcements <announce at usml.net>Subject: Re: [USML Announce] Saves + Holds Redux 
That's four quick positive responses.  Eager to hear others ... and whether people would generally prefer to implement in 2020.
-Andy
On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 5:01 PM JOHN FRUIT <jtfruit at msn.com> wrote:

Yeah, Josh Hader struck out like 50 Cubs in 10+ innings of work and had nary a save.

Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone

-------- Original message --------From: Frank Luby via Announce <announce at usml.net>Date: 2/11/19 3:38 PM (GMT-06:00) To: USML Announcements <announce at usml.net>Cc: Frank Luby <zachfehsvater at yahoo.com>Subject: Re: [USML Announce] Saves + Holds Redux 
What’s a closer ...?

Seriously though, I’m with Andy. Gives a purpose and a strategy to those many many pitchers I refer to as DNH guys (as in “do no harm”).

I would be fine with immediate implementation.

- Frank

Sent from my iPhone

> On Feb 11, 2019, at 3:25 PM, Andy Klein <anrklein at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I proposed this last spring and received a distinctly unenthusiastic response.  But I am re-proposing that we move to Saves + Holds as a category instead of just Saves.  That better reflects the reality of MLB pitching value today.  It also would end what is, IMHO, an inordinate focus on playing the "closer carousel" in our league.  
> 
> I would be up for doing this immediately -- and I say that as someone who will otherwise retain a closer.  But I suppose the typical way of doing this would be to make it effective next season.
> 
> Last year, we agreed to implement the change if we voted to do so by mid-season.  But the proposal died for lack of interest.
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> -Andy
> _______________________________________________
> Announce mailing list
> Announce at usml.net
> http://usml.net/mailman/listinfo/announce_usml.net

_______________________________________________
Announce mailing list
Announce at usml.net
http://usml.net/mailman/listinfo/announce_usml.net
_______________________________________________
Announce mailing list
Announce at usml.net
http://usml.net/mailman/listinfo/announce_usml.net

_______________________________________________
Announce mailing list
Announce at usml.net
http://usml.net/mailman/listinfo/announce_usml.net

_______________________________________________
Announce mailing list
Announce at usml.net
http://usml.net/mailman/listinfo/announce_usml.net

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://usml.net/pipermail/announce_usml.net/attachments/20190212/716c8083/attachment.html>