Scoring rules

[SoCal_Dad]

The real difference in the NFHS definition of a WP is that little word “SHALL”. In most rule sets a ball the touches the dirt pretty much absolves the receiving player of an error if the ball isn’t handled and causes prolonged life for a batter or allows a runner to move up. The NFHS rule also does that if a pitch touches the dirt in front of the plate, but not if it touches the dirt anywhere else.

The NFHS rule says "including" which implies there are also other ways for a pitch to be too low. NFHS could have phrased it much better if that was the only way for a pitch to be too low. I believe it is a clarification to include those pitches rather than an absolute standard for too low.

In this particular case, the only real difference is, a WP has no effect on whether or not a run is earned, but a PB can.

As you know, WP is charged against the pitcher and PB is charged to the catcher.

 

[Greenmonsters]

Your post proves my point of there are way too many rule sets. Why should someone like yourself who’s making a real effort to educate himself have to read so many differently worded descriptions of the exact same event?

The real difference in the NFHS definition of a WP is that little word “SHALL”. In most rule sets a ball the touches the dirt pretty much absolves the receiving player of an error if the ball isn’t handled and causes prolonged life for a batter or allows a runner to move up. The NFHS rule also does that if a pitch touches the dirt in front of the plate, but not if it touches the dirt anywhere else.

That causes the scorer to make some kind of judgment about whether or not the catcher “should” have caught the ball. When that happens, you end up with one of those situations where a player or coach would feel the ball should have been handled cleanly, but the rules say different. When the rules leave no doubt as to what happens in a specific situation, it gets rid of one more controversial thing.

In this particular case, the only real difference is, a WP has no effect on whether or not a run is earned, but a PB can. That’s one reason that several years ago I decided to try to come up with a different way to measure a pitcher’s performance. Here’s an example of that from 2007 thru 2013 for all the pitchers on our HS team who threw at least 25 total innings.

View attachment 4704

To me its an interesting alternative way to look at pitchers because it counts WPs, balks, and their errors rather than just those stogy old things we’ve been told to look at for so many years. ;

What do you have for catcher stats in addition to the standard PB, SB/SBA, fld %? Assuming proper application of defensive indifference, SBA/inning might be useful. But, IMO, one of the most valuable stats would be % successful blocks i.e., (attempts - (WP + PB))/attempts. On a 2-catcher team, I often see one catcher preferentially paired with the wilder pitchers and the other catcher paired with the pinpoint control pitchers and the resulting statistics can be misleading.

 

[Scorekeeper]

test

What do you have for catcher stats in addition to the standard PB, SB/SBA, fld %?

The upload file feature seems to have crapped out, so you’ll have to go to this link. http://www.infosports.com/scorekeeper/images/def1.pdf

I can also do pickoff attempts for catchers like I do with pitchers, but I haven’t as yet. The truth is, so much depends on the pitchers, I don’t know if catcher metrics really mean a great deal.

Assuming proper application of defensive indifference, SBA/inning might be useful.

I don’t know about DI in SB, but its such a nebulous thing in BB, its something I’ve very seldom had the occasion to mark. As I said above, SBA/inning is something that would mean a great deal in BB because the pitchers control the running game so much.

But, IMO, one of the most valuable stats would be % successful blocks i.e., (attempts - (WP + PB))/attempts. On a 2-catcher team, I often see one catcher preferentially paired with the wilder pitchers and the other catcher paired with the pinpoint control pitchers and the resulting statistics can be misleading.

Well, I don’t know how “valuable” it would be, but your question piqued my interest enough to give it some detailed thought.

I’m not sure I understand your algorithm. What kind of attempts are you talking about. IOW, define attempt. I understand WP+PB but because I don’t know what an attempt is, subtracting PBs and WPs from it, then dividing the result by attempts isn’t ringing any bells with me.

In my program, I track all balls and strikes in the dirt. I could easily look to see if there were an open base where that BID/SID might allow a PB or WP. But I’m not at all sure what to do with the information if I went ahead and got it. Please expound a bit.

 

[Greenmonsters]

I can also do pickoff attempts for catchers like I do with pitchers, but I haven’t as yet. The truth is, so much depends on the pitchers, I don’t know if catcher metrics really mean a great deal.

Runners picked off, pick off attempts, picked off % are possibilities. Pitchers don't figure into it in FP so it would be a true catcher metric.

I don’t know about DI in SB, but its such a nebulous thing in BB, its something I’ve very seldom had the occasion to mark. As I said above, SBA/inning is something that would mean a great deal in BB because the pitchers control the running game so much.

(Editorial sidenote: First and third situation shenanigans are prevalent in FP SB. Too many SBs credited that really should be considered DI when second base is granted uncontested.)

FP is the antithesis of BB in that the running game is nearly 100% controlled by the catcher because runners can't leave before pitch release. Reviewing typical NCAA stats you can identify a lockdown catcher by the below average SB attempts (in addition to a better than average CS %). SBA/inning would help further clarify a catcher's relative strength/weakness.

I’m not sure I understand your algorithm. What kind of attempts are you talking about. IOW, define attempt. I understand WP+PB but because I don’t know what an attempt is, subtracting PBs and WPs from it, then dividing the result by attempts isn’t ringing any bells with me.


In my program, I track all balls and strikes in the dirt. I could easily look to see if there were an open base where that BID/SID might allow a PB or WP. But I’m not at all sure what to do with the information if I went ahead and got it. Please expound a bit.

What I'm trying to get at is quantifying how well a catcher blocks - essentially potential WPs prevented (WPP aka successful blocks). Objectively, it could be quantified as pitches in the dirt with runners on with no resulting advancement. With the understanding that a ball in the dirt is a WP (forget the NFHS quirk!), and the fact that PBs are a simple, routinely tallied stat (albeit w/ subjectivity regarding routine effort), the new stat, PWPPP (Potential Wild Pitch Prevented Percentage), would be calculated as (Chances - WP allowed)/Chances, where Chances = balls in the dirt with runners on. Low PB, low WP, and a high PWPPP would be reflective of an excellent blocking catcher, moreso if the # of chances is significant. Sounds like you could extract this if you are recording balls in the dirt.

 

[Scorekeeper]

Runners picked off, pick off attempts, picked off % are possibilities. Pitchers don't figure into it in FP so it would be a true catcher metric.

Very true, but I think you can understand why I don’t bother with it. However, I certainly would if I scored in a FP venue.

(Editorial sidenote: First and third situation shenanigans are prevalent in FP SB. Too many SBs credited that really should be considered DI when second base is granted uncontested.)

I can believe that, but the language in the baseball rule is so specific about what makes an “effort”, its something rare.

FP is the antithesis of BB in that the running game is nearly 100% controlled by the catcher because runners can't leave before pitch release. Reviewing typical NCAA stats you can identify a lockdown catcher by the below average SB attempts (in addition to a better than average CS %). SBA/inning would help further clarify a catcher's relative strength/weakness.

Its like LLI BB in that the bases aren’t “open”. Again, if I were scoring in a FP environment, there are at least a few metrics I’d modify or produce.

What I'm trying to get at is quantifying how well a catcher blocks - essentially potential WPs prevented (WPP aka successful blocks). Objectively, it could be quantified as pitches in the dirt with runners on with no resulting advancement. With the understanding that a ball in the dirt is a WP (forget the NFHS quirk!), and the fact that PBs are a simple, routinely tallied stat (albeit w/ subjectivity regarding routine effort), the new stat, PWPPP (Potential Wild Pitch Prevented Percentage), would be calculated as (Chances - WP allowed)/Chances, where Chances = balls in the dirt with runners on. Low PB, low WP, and a high PWPPP would be reflective of an excellent blocking catcher, moreso if the # of chances is significant. Sounds like you could extract this if you are recording balls in the dirt.

Yah, I’m sure I could, but it would be a bit tricky. The biggest trick would be in identifying if it was a WP or PB situation, IOW a runner on. I have to be honest and say that I’m not likely to modify my program just to do that, but I might. In my case it would be that I’d have to decide where to track it.

My 1st guess is it should be a defensive metric, not a pitching or hitting metric, and that it should be something simple, rather than something which wouldn’t be obvious. FI, right now I count BIDs and SIDs this way. If a pitch touches the dirt and its called a ball or hits the batter, it’s a BID. If it hits the dirt and the batter swings at it, its an SID, and I store that in the pitching records.

In order to tie to the catcher, I’d have to tie it to the defensive records where the POs, Assts, E’s, CS, PB’s etc. get stored. So, when I hit F12(BID) or F11(SID), the program would need to know if it should generate a defensive event. In each defensive record I store the player, his number, and the pitcher among other things, so this event would be a “block”. But because the program is doing so many other things at the same time, I’d have to be really careful.

A block would be when there was a runner on, the pitch hit the dirt, and a WP or PB didn’t take place.