In the previous Friday lecture, I discussed a bit about runs, how they’re determined, and why it is important that all events be placed in terms of them. Runs are indeed valuable, but they are just half of what determines wins and losses in a baseball game. Today I’ll discuss the other important aspect of baseball, baseball’s “clock.”

But first, let’s start with a question that I once pondered when I first got into sabermetrics and one that, while many people may generally understand, isn’t always best explained: why are walks so valuable? Or, to ask it in a way more commonly asked, why do sabermetricians glorify the walk so much?

Here are the answers:

1) Walks are only as valuable as they are in terms of runs (remember, we learned that on Friday).

2) Sabermetricians aren’t glorifying walks per se.

If those answers sound vague, allow me to explain further. I present you this chart of custom linear weights for each offensive event based on a run estimator called BaseRuns (more on BaseRuns as we continue our run estimator discussions, which start up again on Friday). Weights were determined by Tom Tango. Let’s focus in on the five-run environment as an example. In a five-run environment, the run value above average of a walk 0.327 runs. If you’ll notice, the walk is the lowest valued batting event on the chart, discounting the intentional walk. Compare that to the single, which is worth 0.488 runs, or the home run, valued at 1.406 runs. A walk is worth a little less than third of a run, less than a quarter of a home run and even 67% of the value of a single. Clearly, the walk isn’t some highly valuable event in comparison to these others.

So clearly sabermetricians, the same people who built these models that claim the walk has a low run value compared to any hit, are not arbitrarily overvaluing the walk. However, I lied a bit when I said the walk is lowest valued batting event; actually, it’s the lowest valued positive batting event. Further down the column, there’s another event that can occur in a batting situation that is negatively valued: the out (there is also the strikeout, but there’s a very small difference in the value between the two). Therein lies part of the key to why walks are evaluated as important.

Everyone knows that baseball has no traditional clock that counts down until every digit hits zero and the game ends. But in actuality, baseball games do have definite clocks in terms of outs. Every out counts down until the end of the game, and ultimately the game ends when the losing team records its 27th out (outside of extra innings). Thus, the out is the only limited resource in the game of baseball, and this makes each out made is a significant team loss and each out remaining a valuable commodity.

And there is the reason why walks are so “valued” by sabermetricians. It is not the pure production that a walk provides but rather the value of the walk against the negative value of the out. Essentially, walks, like all other batting events, are inherently valuable as “not outs.” In a five-run environment, the out is worth 0.306 runs below average. Even a lowly walk in the discussed environment is still worth 0.631 runs more than an out. Then consider that drawing walks is (theoretically) more repeatable as a skill than hitting, because walks only involve the pitcher and hitter’s skills, while hits will also involve some aspect of fielders as well, and you can see why walks are valued highly at a player-evaluation level.

This value difference between safe events and out events is the main reason why OBP has gained traction as a useful statistic for evaluating players. While its name, “on-base percentage,” frames the statistic as a “percentage of times on base,” its most important aspect is really best framed as “percentage of opportunities without recording an out.” Because outs are the only commodity during a baseball game in which teams are limited in access, gathering players who minimize their outs compared to a league average is a viable way to improve an offense. And again, the easiest way to improve OBP at a team level is to find players who draw large numbers of walks. Again, the walks aren’t valuable necessarily, but their status as repeatable skills that avoid making outs make them a valuable player quality.

Now we have two defined qualities that determine the outcome of a game of baseball: runs, which are a measure of production for teams, and outs, which are a measure of time or opportunity for teams. With those two values, we can determine the quality of a team’s or individual’s play. Out future discussions will then go into the various methods of evaluation of this quality.

References

1. Tango, Tom M. “Sabermetrics 301: Custom Linear Weights.” Tangotiger.net. Link provided above.

Reading Materials

1. Remember that for this Friday, the required reading is Patriot’s in-depth explanation of runs created. He did an excellent job of explaining it, so think of me as the guide leading you through the text, though the text is still the authority on this matter.

2. If you’re interested in how not to determine runs from component stats for individual players, Phil Birnbaum tells you that linear regression is not the way to go. Basically, those linear regressions on a team level don’t get the linear weights right on an individual level.

3. MGL gives us a primer on how we should project lefty-righty splits for any player, and says that the projection says Ryan Howard’s game against lefties should be better than advertised.

Now, we’ll open the floor for any commentary or discussion. Have at it folks, feedback is much appreciated.

Tweet This Post

This entry was posted on Wednesday, October 28th, 2009 at 8:56 am and is filed under Fundamentals. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.