So did I, breaking out into a main board discussion. The article proposes a new stat, the goose egg, which is easily calculated during the game (like a save) but correlates much better with optimal reliever usage.I enjoyed this article.
A relief pitcher records a goose egg for each inning in which:
- It’s the seventh inning or later;
- At the time the pitcher faces his first batter of the inning:
- His team leads by no more than two runs, or
- The score is tied, or
- The tying run is on base or at bat
- No runs (earned or unearned) are charged to the pitcher in the inning and no inherited runners score while the pitcher is in the game; and
- The pitcher either:
- Records three outs (one inning pitched), or
- Records at least one out, and the number of outs recorded plus the number of inherited runners totals at least three.
In easy to understand terms, it basically comes down to "holds" and "saves" being equally important. Which i think is a good step in the right direction in terms of evaluating relief pitchers.If you look at the numbers of recent closers, saves correlate to goose eggs but goose eggs don't correlate to saves. I don't know how to word it. Basically if someone has 44 saves, he probably has 40 goose eggs. If someone has 40 goose eggs, he may have 4 saves or 38.
With one further wrinkle: you can earn more than one goose egg per game, but only one hold.In easy to understand terms, it basically comes down to "holds" and "saves" being equally important. Which i think is a good step in the right direction in terms of evaluating relief pitchers.
Also, you don't have to pitch a scoreless inning to get a hold; you just have to not blow the lead*. A pitcher could come into the 7th inning with a 3-0 lead and the bases empty, throw five straight walks before K'ing the next three batters, leave with a 3-2 lead, and get a hold. But that wouldn't be a goose egg.With one further wrinkle: you can earn more than one goose egg per game, but only one hold.
Could whoever started the thread provide some context? It seems to start rather abruptly. For those not in the know, what is the difference between "Shutdowns" "Meltdowns" and "Goose Eggs"? From the article, it seems "Goose Eggs" is easy to understand.
One minor point is I don't like when mods start new threads without providing the context of why the thread needed to be started in the first place.
Are they?In easy to understand terms, it basically comes down to "holds" and "saves" being equally important. Which i think is a good step in the right direction in terms of evaluating relief pitchers.
Let me start by saying that I really like this idea.Could whoever started the thread provide some context? It seems to start rather abruptly. For those not in the know, what is the difference between "Shutdowns" "Meltdowns" and "Goose Eggs"? From the article, it seems "Goose Eggs" is easy to understand.
One minor point is I don't like when mods start new threads without providing the context of why the thread needed to be started in the first place.
There's no such thing as a blown hold.Are they?
I would surmise that teams that blow a save have a lower winning percentage than teams that blow holds.
Could be completely wrong on that.
Just more evidence of how inexact the hold stat is...there is no "blown hold" stat. Blown holds are recorded as blown saves.Are they?
I would surmise that teams that blow a save have a lower winning percentage than teams that blow holds.
Could be completely wrong on that.
I know that. There's no such thing as a goose egg either.There's no such thing as a blown hold.
Agreed 100%. Take Game 5 of the 2004 ALCS, To Gordon comes in the 8th inning, 2 run lead. HR by Papi, 1 run lead. Then a walk by Millar, Roberts comes in, gets in Gordon's head, Nixon singles, men on 1st and 3rd, no outs and in comes Rivera. Varitek hits a sac fly and it's a tie game. Mariano gets a blown save, and negative score on this new graphic. It's not really fair to pin it all on him. And he did make it out of the inning without further damage.I think the no inherited runners scoring piece of it is a bit harsh. If a reliever comes into a bases-loaded, no out situation, with his team up by 2 or 3 runs, then goes sac fly-double play to get out of the inning with 1 run across and his team still in the lead, that is a DAMN good performance. I think how the inherited runner scores is important. If a reliever enters with a man on 1st and no outs and that runner scores, then it is probably that reliever's "fault". But not in my bases loaded situation
I think you are right about trying to get context in there, and that's already happening with the whole leverage part that is so central to the goose egg calculation. The most obvious solution is to weight the calculation of this perfect stat further based on game state, but now you are basically just recreating reliever WPA. It's not a bad thing, but it defies the whole 'easily calculated by a casual fan in real time.'I think the no inherited runners scoring piece of it is a bit harsh. If a reliever comes into a bases-loaded, no out situation, with his team up by 2 or 3 runs, then goes sac fly-double play to get out of the inning with 1 run across and his team still in the lead, that is a DAMN good performance. I think how the inherited runner scores is important. If a reliever enters with a man on 1st and no outs and that runner scores, then it is probably that reliever's "fault". But not in my bases loaded situation
Shutdowns/Meltdowns is a metric featured at (and, I think, invented by?) the folks at Fangraphs. It's based on Win Probability Added and is very simple: if a reliever increases win probability by 6% or more, he gets a Shutdown. If he decreases it by 6% or more, he gets a Meltdown. If his result is in between those two points, he gets neither. The 6% figure was chosen because it produces totals that correlate well to save totals--i.e., shutdown leaders will typically be in the 40+ range.Could whoever started the thread provide some context? It seems to start rather abruptly. For those not in the know, what is the difference between "Shutdowns" "Meltdowns" and "Goose Eggs"? From the article, it seems "Goose Eggs" is easy to understand.
This is the attraction of the Shutdown/Meltdown stat. It correctly sees the value of that bases-loaded, no-out, one-run performance as roughly equivalent to the value of a one-out, 2nd-and-3rd, no-run performance, while the Goose Egg draws an arbitrary line between the two. (The S/M stat has an arbitrary line of its own, the 6 percent thing--a pitcher who increases win probability by 6.0 percent is considered to have done the same thing as a guy who increases it by 9 percent, but a much better thing than a guy who increases it by 5.9 percent, which of course makes no sense.)I think the no inherited runners scoring piece of it is a bit harsh. If a reliever comes into a bases-loaded, no out situation, with his team up by 2 or 3 runs, then goes sac fly-double play to get out of the inning with 1 run across and his team still in the lead, that is a DAMN good performance. I think how the inherited runner scores is important. If a reliever enters with a man on 1st and no outs and that runner scores, then it is probably that reliever's "fault". But not in my bases loaded situation
I split it out from the game thread, and tried to provide a brief summary in my post (which is the 3rd post of the thread).Could whoever started the thread provide some context? It seems to start rather abruptly. For those not in the know, what is the difference between "Shutdowns" "Meltdowns" and "Goose Eggs"? From the article, it seems "Goose Eggs" is easy to understand.
One minor point is I don't like when mods start new threads without providing the context of why the thread needed to be started in the first place.
The article talks about that in a fair amount of detail, and comes up with a goose-egg WAR and some other more sophisticated stats based on the relative value and occurrence of goose eggs vs. broken eggs and the like.Let me start by saying that I really like this idea.
It's certainly a step in the right direction, but I think to measure effectiveness, you need to compare it to either overall "goose egg opportunities" and/or "blowing a goose egg" or whatever you want to call it.
Not just fans, but managers. You're not allowed to have computers in the dugout--analytics departments are great between games, but they can't feed you in-game info. Part of what's driving reliever usage now (IME, and the article seems to agree) is that managers want to get saves for their closers and can easily figure out in-game when to deploy people to get saves....It's not a bad thing, but it defies the whole 'easily calculated by a casual fan in real time.'
I guess what I'm saying is, no team should ever use 'goose eggs' in their analytics department, but if it gives fans/announcers something to talk about that isn't saves for comparing relievers, then it could still be valuable.
is concerned, can we work scrambled eggs, omelets, and quiche into the mix? All this talk of eggs is making me hungry.goose eggs vs. broken eggs and the like