Comments on 3-D Baseball: Was A-Rod tipping pitches?

I don't really know how to whittle my list down to...

2009-05-09T20:28:00.000-07:00

I don't really know how to whittle my list down to all the players A-Rod had contact with, and when he had contact with them. Looking only at his former teammates would be a starting point, but it would cut the samples to pretty low levels. The same problem occurs with looking at games he sat in Texas. Since he didn't sit much, looking at blowout games when he was sitting won't add up to much. Instead, I prefer the approach of looking at what non-MI hit in those situations against Texas. That still keeps the same pitchers and tells you how hitters who A-Rod would not have allegedly tipped did compared the ones he might have tipped.

As for looking at the New York numbers, do you mean what A-Rod himself hit in these situations when he wasn't a middle infielder? If so, that's not really what this is looking at. I'm just looking at what opposing middle infielders hit with A-Rod at short. What the Yankees' opponents hit in these situations is already part of the control group of games when A-Rod was not at short. Looking at what A-Rod hit with New York in these situations is more along the lines of what Subway Squawkers was talking about. Since there doesn't seem to be any indication that A-Rod improved in these situations even when he was in Texas, I wouldn't expect much difference in New York.

Kincaid, what about running similar numbers during...

2009-05-08T21:42:00.000-07:00

Kincaid, what about running similar numbers during his years in new york. he's no longer a middle infielder so he shouldn't be able to participate in any exchange of tipping pitches, but his average and power are comparable or better to his years in texas. i know this wouldn't negate the disparities in his texas numbers, but it would be somewhat damning if there was a large statistical difference between his years at third base and his years at short.

The question I would have is how would the hitter ...

2009-05-05T12:33:00.000-07:00

The question I would have is how would the hitter know to look at ARod tipping the pitches? There would have to be some form of conversation out there somewhere. Spoken? E-Mail? There would have to be someone somewhere that is jealous of the ARod millions that could come forward and say he broached the subject with me, but I never accepted it. I would think a light hitting 2B somewhere would want to get back at ARod and spill his guts?

Could you look at the stats of former teammates of his to see how they did in these situations? For example look at players on his All-Star teams? Former Mariners and former Rangers? Players that are rumored to be friends of his in the off-season? Others that hung out and worked out with him and Canseco? I would think that these are the players he would have had the most contact with and would have set up agreements with him. I am no MLB player, but I did play for many years, and I can not see myself looking to see what the SS is doing before each pitch unless I knew he was going to be helping me. There has to be 1 single player somewhere that was approached and told about it, that didn't like it and will now talk about it.

Without that, all the statistical analysis in the world will not add up to a smoking gun.

I doubt there is enough data to make a real analysis - but what about the same situations against Texas in the games he was sitting on the bench or not in the game? Then you keep the same pitchers ....

What about against Texas the year before he arrived and then the year after he left?

I am down on ARod, and have been for many many years - but these allegations seem pretty far fetched without some real hard evidence.

On second look, I see you adjusted for this alread...

2009-05-04T14:19:00.000-07:00

On second look, I see you adjusted for this already. Very good, and consider my comment withdrawn.

This is a very interesting study. My main note is ...

2009-05-04T14:07:00.000-07:00

This is a very interesting study. My main note is this--while your sample is enough to match more than one season's worth of plate appearances for an individual player, it doesn't make any allowances for the makeup of the sample. For example, what if Derek Jeter, Nomar Garciaparra, and so on and so forth made up the larger portion of those at bats singled out by your rules, and there were fewer at bats by the lesser middle infield types, over that sample?

Mathematically, this seems to me to be a very high probability lurking variable. Publishing the players who were at the plate along with the # of ABs they contributed to the sample woudl go a long way to legitimizing your findings (and might give you reason to moderate on your conclusion).

Best,

Will Moller
www.theyankeesdollar.blogspot.com

It does seem like the obvious thing to do. That's...

2009-05-03T20:08:00.000-07:00

It does seem like the obvious thing to do. That's actually how I found the blog I linked this on where someone was asking about this very thing: I was looking for more mainstream talk about trying to look for evidence one way or the other rather than just gossiping about it or expressing personal opinions. ESPN is even a client of the Elias Sports Bureau, as well as the employer of who knows how many interns: all they have to do is ask someone to check the numbers, and it's done for them. Yet for some reason, the only thing they seem to use that for is pointless trivia or interesting bits that, while entertaining, carry little analytical value. And there's nothing wrong with those things, but why not use them for analytical purposes as well when that is also part of their business? I would assume they have access to video footage as well that they could check. I don't really get why none of the larger outlets seems to care to do any of that.

I have a different opinion on this than you, but we are both arriving at our conclusions after looking at the evidence and reasoning out what it means. That doesn't seem like so much to ask.

Kincaid, thanks for checking out my blog and posti...

2009-05-03T19:54:00.000-07:00

Kincaid, thanks for checking out my blog and posting on it.

What I find fascinating is that not only did Selena Roberts not cite any stats or hard evidence to prove her game-tipping allegations, but that nobody in the mainstream media seems to be doing what we're doing - looking over the stats to see if there's anything hinky. It seems like an obvious thing to do, don't you think?

I don't think A-Rod is guilty here, for three reasons - his numbers are, for the most part, worse in blowouts. Baseball clubhouses are gossipy places - word would have leaked out long ago about this if it were the case. And finally, I just can't see Buck Showalter, the most micromanaging skipper around, not noticing A-Rod gyrating like a mime.

The Yanks over 182 games with no A-Rod are a bunch...

2009-05-03T18:57:00.000-07:00

The Yanks over 182 games with no A-Rod are a bunch of losers. Mediocre at best. You can't lose A-Rod Yankee fans. I'm sure Mark Texeira wants to lose A-Rod's protection. Look at his .187 batting average and think the Yankees are not in trouble. 2nd it's the fricking Rangers. If they were already losing running out the second best pitchers din that ball park then you know they will run up scores. This is the worse study ever by a guy who doesn't like A-Rod.

Late in games since 2000, middle infielders have h...

2009-05-03T12:57:00.000-07:00

Late in games since 2000, middle infielders have hit .023 points worse late in all 5+ run games (factoring games against Texas out of the equation will slightly drop that, but not by much). Non-MI saw about the same decrease.

This seems to go against intuition (since the pitchers are usually worse than normal), but it is probably due in part to a couple factors:

1)The batters feel less competitive in these situations and are likely slightly less focused. Pitchers, in general, may not feel the same let-down because these are pitchers who are more likely to be trying to earn more playing time or stay in the Majors, or it could be that the effect is simply more likely to affect a hitter's performance, given the relative difficulty of throwing a baseball compared to hitting one.

2)Umpires may be subconsciously more inclined to expand the zone a small amount to get the game over with once it is already more or less decided. There could be a subconscious effect of the players wanting to get the game over with and get home faster as well.

In any case, the increase seen in the study is not at all normal for what happens in the Majors in those situations.

So last question (and thanks for dealing with all ...

2009-05-03T12:26:00.000-07:00

So last question (and thanks for dealing with all of them)- how did the MI and non MI do in blowouts against Texas v. blowouts against everyone else?

With the Texas-only sample, 227 PAs, 214 ABs. Whi...

2009-05-03T12:22:00.000-07:00

With the Texas-only sample, 227 PAs, 214 ABs. Which is why I didn't want to split up the sample in the article. Whether he was tipping pitches in Seattle or not, it improves the study to look at them because:

1)It's unlikely he was tipping pitches simply because he was in Texas, so if he was doing it in Texas, there's a good chance he was doing it at least part of the time in Seattle too

and

2)Even if he wasn't tipping pitches at all in Seattle, the sample in Texas is too small to take at face value, and including the Seattle numbers at the very least serves to regress those numbers to the mean.

So for that reason, I would take the original numbers in the article as the better evaluation of what was gained than the numbers only in Texas, and the numbers in Texas as merely showing that the effect cannot be accounted for by looking at factors besides A-Rod (i.e. pitchers, park, etc.). The increase in OPS with A-Rod at short in Texas is big enough that it is a definite sign hitters were hitting better than they should. It's not enough to say they really hit .155 points better.

Walk rates do not seem to go up, which makes sense intuitively, since hitters are more likely to put a ball in play at some point in the at bat if they know what is coming. OBP goes up from an increase in AVG, but not nearly as much as SLG. The OPS increase is primarily from SLG (see tables in the original article for SLG/OBP breakdowns over A-Rod's career-the breakdown for just Texas is similar). You are right that if we wanted to translate this to a run-value, we would have to account for the OPS increase coming mostly from an increase in SLG rather than OBP, and that a .095 increase in OPS that is mostly SLG is not as damaging as an increase that is more OBP heavy. Since I am mostly looking for indications that A-Rod might have been tipping pitches, such as whether batters were hitting the ball better, I'm not all that concerned with assigning a run value, but your point is well-taken.

The +.080 and +.235 are how each group (non-MI and MI) hit late in blowouts compared to their season numbers. The non-MI hit .080 OPS points higher late in blowouts against Texas than their overall season numbers. The MI hit .235 OPS points higher late in blowouts against Texas (with A-Rod at short) than their overall season numbers. The MI gained .155 OPS points more late in blowouts against Texas than all other hitters gained late in blowouts against Texas.

Oh, and are those compared to their overall season...

2009-05-03T11:54:00.000-07:00

Oh, and are those compared to their overall season numbers, or numbers in blowouts?

Oh, and one last question- out of curiosity, how a...

2009-05-03T11:47:00.000-07:00

Oh, and one last question- out of curiosity, how about OBP rather than OPS (just bc OPS underweighs it)? Same deal?

How many AB's are we talking about?

2009-05-03T11:45:00.000-07:00

How many AB's are we talking about?

The numbers in the original article are the aggreg...

2009-05-03T11:42:00.000-07:00

The numbers in the original article are the aggregate for his whole career, including Seattle as well as Texas. The numbers I just posted in my comment are only with Texas. That is why they are different.

It seems like you are asking for the exact thing I just posted, except that I'm comparing to season numbers for hitters because I think what a hitter does that season is more reflective of what he should be hitting in those PAs than what he hit for his career.

non-middle-infielders, 2001-2003, against Texas late in blowouts: +.080 OPS compared to season numbers

middle infielders, 2001-2003, with A-Rod at short late in blowouts: +.235 OPS compared to season numbers

Oops, that was unclear. I want to know, from 2001-...

2009-05-03T11:29:00.000-07:00

Oops, that was unclear. I want to know, from 2001-2003, what non infielders did relative to their career numbers, as well as what middle infielders did in the same situations.

Basically, I want to know what happened to non inf...

2009-05-03T11:25:00.000-07:00

Basically, I want to know what happened to non infielders late in blowouts when a runner was not on second.

"Middle infielders hitting with A-Rod at short aga...

2009-05-03T11:23:00.000-07:00

"Middle infielders hitting with A-Rod at short against Texas in those years raised their OPS by .235 points. So with A-Rod at short for Texas, middle infielders raised their OPS by .155 points more than the control group."

One minute. this is not what your numbers above show. They show that they raised their OPS in those situations by .95 points.

I don't think there would be any point in looking ...

2009-05-03T11:15:00.000-07:00

I don't think there would be any point in looking at individual middle infielders. When you put them all together, there are enough PAs that the aggregate is meaningful, but that's the sum of a few hundred batter-seasons. There's no way to tell which middle infielders benefited the most from the handful of PAs each individual middle infielder got.

I did not look at what A-Rod hit in blowouts because I'm not all that concerned with whether he was reciprocated, and there's not been any indication that he widely was. It would seem from your numbers that he likely wasn't widely reciprocated.

This study is not only looking at what happened in Texas. The majority of the PAs are from his time in Seattle. I didn't want to break the numbers down further into what happened with each separate team because that starts cutting the sample size below what I'm comfortable with, but I'll go ahead and do that. Breaking the numbers down into what happened in Texas and what happened in Seattle shows that the numbers went up both places, although it does look like he did it more with Texas, or at least that he was not doing it his whole career with Seattle. Obviously, if I were looking only at Texas, park and pitchers would need to be accounted for, and perhaps I should have written a bit about that rather than simply let his time in Seattle cancel some of that effect out, so I'll go ahead and do that here and give only the results from Texas.

From 2001-2003, hitter besides middle infielders increased their OPS by .080 points late in blowouts against Texas. Most, if not all, of that is probably from the park and the pitchers.

Middle infielders hitting with A-Rod at short against Texas in those years raised their OPS by .235 points. So with A-Rod at short for Texas, middle infielders raised their OPS by .155 points more than the control group. So this is definitely not a result of Texas' pitchers or park.

Sorry if this was not clear enough in the article, but the selection bias of what pitchers were in the game is accounted for by looking at a control group of how hitters (both middle infielders and all hitters) hit in these exact situations when anyone other than A-Rod is at short. Their numbers didn't go up. In fact, they went down. So this isn't a result of simply hitting better because of the game situation.

hostile postulate wrote: "there are also flaws in...

2009-05-03T09:04:00.000-07:00

hostile postulate wrote:

"there are also flaws in pointing out that a-rod's numbers "were actually worse" in blow-out games, namely the fact that you're accounting for his stats for the entire game."

No, I'm not. As Yagottagotomo1 noted, the stats I listed were only his at-bats when his team was leading or behind by five runs or more.

"it's no surprise that a-rod's numbers were much worse in games where his team was trailing by 5 runs - after all, the rangers didn't have enough offense in those games to get within 5 runs of the other team."

No, Selena Roberts' point, such as it was, was that this sign-tipping was only going on in blowouts. She did not specify that it was in games the team was winning or losing - just that A-Rod was stad-padding in games that were out of reach either way.

"and with the exception of 2002 and his slugging from 2003, his numbers in games in which they were up by 5 runs are actually substantially better."

Not really. Put it this way. He had 52, 57, and 47 homers in 2001-03. In those blowout games where his team was winning by more than five runs, he had, respectively, 5 homers, 3 homers, and 1 homer. In games his team was losing by more than five runs, he had 4 homers, 2 homers, and 2 homers. Big whoop.

Oh, and Im pretty sure those are Alex's numbers wh...

2009-05-03T08:06:00.000-07:00

Oh, and Im pretty sure those are Alex's numbers when leading or trailing by that number of runs, not his stats in blowouts generally.

"pointing out texas' staff ops doesn't really refu...

2009-05-03T08:04:00.000-07:00

"pointing out texas' staff ops doesn't really refute anything here, especially when you consider this study is dealing exclusively with middle infielders."

Sorry, but it refutes the whole study. You may be willing to bet that their numbers against middle infielders werent as gaudy, but im sure you would concede that their numbers against Texas were better than their career numbers. You also ignored the fact that they were facing, at those points in games, the worst pitchers in the sport. Until you can control for that, this is worse than meaningless. It is an irresponsible misuse of stats that will lead some people to make conclusions that are unsupported by any sort of facts.

pointing out texas' staff ops doesn't really refut...

2009-05-03T07:53:00.000-07:00

pointing out texas' staff ops doesn't really refute anything here, especially when you consider this study is dealing exclusively with middle infielders. i'm willing to bet that their ops against middle infielders isn't as gaudy as their overall ops.

there are also flaws in pointing out that a-rod's numbers "were actually worse" in blow-out games, namely the fact that you're accounting for his stats for the entire game. this study only accounts for at bats that occurred in games with either a 7 run differential or a 5 run differential in the 7th inning or later. it's no surprise that a-rod's numbers were much worse in games where his team was trailing by 5 runs - after all, the rangers didn't have enough offense in those games to get within 5 runs of the other team. and with the exception of 2002 and his slugging from 2003, his numbers in games in which they were up by 5 runs are actually substantially better. again, this isn't a big surprise, as these were games in which texas obviously had their offensive mojo working.

"Ramiro Pena > Arod...in my book." T...

2009-05-03T07:26:00.000-07:00

"Ramiro Pena > Arod...in my book."

That book should be burned.

What about interleague play? Did you factor that i...

2009-05-03T07:24:00.000-07:00

What about interleague play? Did you factor that into your numbers?