Protection

[markedman5]

Ok guys.

 

I tried to explain to my friend on the Marquette basketball board that protection is basically a myth but he isn't buying it.

 

Anybody else who want to give it a shot?

 

He is in the Fielder has to be resigned no matter how much it costs camp because of the protection he provides Braun........

 

 

http://mbd.scout.com/mb.a...415&f=2850&t=7869320&p=4

[Baldkin]

You should just post this:

 

http://thoughtcatalog.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/A-Flowchart-to-Help-You-Determine-if-Yoursquore-Having-a-Rational-Discussion.jpg

[logan82]

McGehee was offered 3/$20m?

 

Also, how is Braun getting on base more a bad thing?

[Oxy]

Protection is only a myth in aggregate. Statistically, when large data sets are used it will all come out in the wash, so it appears to have no effect whatsoever. However, if you actually ask pitchers if they are more careful with some guys because of the hitter that is on deck, they will say absolutely (most of them). So obviously, pitchers will pitch differently depending on the on-deck batter and the situation in the game. The question is whether or not the way that they pitch "differently" in actuality ends up to be a good thing or a bad thing. Sometimes being careful with a guy will work out and sometimes it will bite you in the butt. Sometimes pitching to contact will work out and sometimes it won't. It all depends on the individual match-ups on the field and the situation at the time. There will be times this year when it may actually be better for the Crew that teams pitch around Braun. There will be times when it would absolutely be an advantage if Fielder was on-deck. Hopefully the former happens often enough that Crew frequently end up with more runs than the other guys.

[rluzinski]

Protection is only a myth in aggregate. Statistically, when large data sets are used it will all come out in the wash, so it appears to have no effect whatsoever. However, if you actually ask pitchers if they are more careful with some guys because of the hitter that is on deck, they will say absolutely (most of them). So obviously, pitchers will pitch differently depending on the on-deck batter and the situation in the game. The question is whether or not the way that they pitch "differently" in actuality ends up to be a good thing or a bad thing. Sometimes being careful with a guy will work out and sometimes it will bite you in the butt. Sometimes pitching to contact will work out and sometimes it won't. It all depends on the individual match-ups on the field and the situation at the time. There will be times this year when it may actually be better for the Crew that teams pitch around Braun. There will be times when it would absolutely be an advantage if Fielder was on-deck. Hopefully the former happens often enough that Crew frequently end up with more runs than the other guys.

 

But no one is asking if pitchers pitch to batters differently in different situations. The theory of protection says that an average elite batter will perform better when he has a good batter after him. If you say that isn't true in the aggregate, that theory fails.

[Oxy]

Protection is only a myth in aggregate. Statistically, when large data sets are used it will all come out in the wash, so it appears to have no effect whatsoever. However, if you actually ask pitchers if they are more careful with some guys because of the hitter that is on deck, they will say absolutely (most of them). So obviously, pitchers will pitch differently depending on the on-deck batter and the situation in the game. The question is whether or not the way that they pitch "differently" in actuality ends up to be a good thing or a bad thing. Sometimes being careful with a guy will work out and sometimes it will bite you in the butt. Sometimes pitching to contact will work out and sometimes it won't. It all depends on the individual match-ups on the field and the situation at the time. There will be times this year when it may actually be better for the Crew that teams pitch around Braun. There will be times when it would absolutely be an advantage if Fielder was on-deck. Hopefully the former happens often enough that Crew frequently end up with more runs than the other guys.

 

But no one is asking if pitchers pitch to batters differently in different situations. The theory of protection says that an average elite batter will perform better when he has a good batter after him. If you say that isn't true in the aggregate, that theory fails.

 

You are right in the way that I stated it. However, not all runs are created equal. So just because Braun has near equal raw rate statistics this year compared to last year doesn't mean that he has contributed to winning just as many ball games because of the situation of his successes. I'm not totally in tune with all of the new stats, but I would guess that runs created and WPA have something to do with this?

[rluzinski]

It's hard to argue that a player that is surrounded by good players won't contribute to winning more games. Again, not sure what that has to do with the classic definition of protection.

[Oxy]

It's hard to argue that a player that is surrounded by good players won't contribute to winning more games. Again, not sure what that has to do with the classic definition of protection.

 

You are right in the classic definition of protection, where a guys overall numbers are supposedly going to decline without "protection." I would say that his rate stats won't be affected very much but his counting stats (runs and RBIs) would be. This is basically a moot point though with Braun this year, since Ramirez is putting up good numbers. Ryan IS protected.

 

To use an extreme example of my point, just look at Barry Bonds' monster years from 2002-2004 (ignoring the chemical enhancements, of course). Despite setting records for OBP AND SLG, his runs and RBI totals were relatively pedestrian (still all-star caliber, just nothing close to record worthy). Teams refused to let him hit with guys on base, and that seemed to be an excellent strategy. His rate numbers were probably BETTER because of this lack of protection, but did he actually have a better year contributing to more wins for his ballclub than a year in which he had better protection, put up poorer rate stats, but scored more runs and drove in more runs?

[rluzinski]

Pretend a team just switches their crappy 8 and solid 5 hitter around in the order. The 4 hitter is now "unprotected". His runs scored are going to go down for obvious reasons. His RBI's will also go down a bit because of intentional walks. In most cases, though, those intentional walks actually increase expected runs scored vs facing him Yeh, you don't have your better batters bunched up, so that hurts run production. But protection isn't about optimizing batter order, its about not having a good batter to put after your slugger to begin with. Long story short, your unprotected batter will produce less runs (R + RBI -HR) but your team might actually score more runs because the average IBB increases expected runs scored.

 

Yes, there are specific situations where those IBB will hurt you. For instance, if it's the bottom of the 9th with 2 out and your team is down 1 with runners on 3rd and 2nd, the IBB will lower your odds of winning. As you pointed out, that isn't going to hurt the batter's rate states, though.

[Oxy]

Just wanted to bump this one for fun and lolz.

 

Pretend a team just switches their crappy 8 and solid 5 hitter around in the order. The 4 hitter is now "unprotected". His runs scored are going to go down for obvious reasons. His RBI's will also go down a bit because of intentional walks. In most cases, though, those intentional walks actually increase expected runs scored vs facing him Yeh, you don't have your better batters bunched up, so that hurts run production. But protection isn't about optimizing batter order, its about not having a good batter to put after your slugger to begin with. Long story short, your unprotected batter will produce less runs (R + RBI -HR) but your team might actually score more runs because the average IBB increases expected runs scored.

 

Yes, there are specific situations where those IBB will hurt you. For instance, if it's the bottom of the 9th with 2 out and your team is down 1 with runners on 3rd and 2nd, the IBB will lower your odds of winning. As you pointed out, that isn't going to hurt the batter's rate states, though.

 

"In most cases"--What cases would those be? Maybe those cases where good hitters are following that player who gets IBB???

 

That second bolded sentence is ridiculous. "Your unprotected batter will produce less runs (R + RBI - HR) but your team might actually score more runs because the average IBB INCREASES (what?? I thought my unprotected batter will produce LESS runs?) expected runs scored"

 

Is the "unprotected" batter an "average" batter or not?

 

Since baseball is (or should be) about building up to score run(s), it is a good idea to have good hitters hit back-to-back-to-back.