From: niepornt@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (David Marc Nieporent)
Subject: Re: Statheads and park effects
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 07:07:21 GMT

In article <1992Dec21.034950.20545@cs.cornell.edu> tedward@cs.cornell.edu (Edward [Ted] Fischer) writes:
>In article <kbanaian.122.0@bernard.pitzer.claremont.edu> kbanaian@bernard.pitzer.claremont.edu (King Banaian) writes:

>>To all that's been said, add this:  park effects are computed on both 
>>visiting and home teams.  The correlation between home and visitor 
>>indices is usually quite similar.  Here is but one example:

>Not really...  It *is* true that players tend to play better at home.
>This tends to skew the results.

True.

>>	1990-1992 Fenway Doubles factor:
>>		By Boston hitters @ Fenway	506
>>		By Boston hitters on road	356	1.42

>>		By opp. hitters @ Fenway	431
>>		By opp. hitters on road*	384	1.12

>>Park effect is the result of averaging the two, so we say that Fenway gives 
>>a 27% increase in doubles.  The difference between the two looks 
>>striking, but really could be due to chance fluctuations.

>I doubt it.  See above.  (Not to mention that the Sox tend to stack
>their lineup with hitters who can take advantage of the Wall.)

>>And if you don't really believe in 
>>park effects, please tell me your guess to the number of doubles Jody Reed 
>>will hit next year, and how you arrived at that guess?  

>I doubt Reed will hit fewer than 30 doubles next year, unless he
>totally sucks like he did in 1992.  He got some doubles off of the
>wall, but most of his doubles were down-the-line shots that are
>doubles in any park.  He's primarily a line-drive hitter, and so
>should gain some advantage from the large turf parks in the NL.

Well, Bill James once said that he hits similar numbers of doubles at
home and on the road, but that was over a two year period or something.
I don't have 1992 splits, but from 1987-1991, his numbers

Home: 90 2bs, 1085 ABs  (8.29%)
Road: 63 2bs, 1023 ABs  (6.16%)

>And Boggs?  Don't be surprised if he hits 20 HRs.  He is (I think)
>an intelligent enough hitter to learn to pull the ball.

I hate to say this, Valentine, but bullschott.  Wade Boggs is 35 years
old with a bad back.  Other than the rabbit-ball year, where he hit 24
home runs, he has never hit more than 8 home runs in a year.  

His career high on the road (again, except for 1987) is 5 home runs.

If he were that intelligent, and if intelligence were all that mattered,
rather than home run ability, he would have pulled the ball on the road
during his career and hit a few more home runs.

If he were *healthy*, it would still be ridiculous, though I suppose
12-15 might not be completely out of the question.

But having a bad back?  Don Mattingly was a good hitter, and I'm sure
he's intelligent too.  And he had a lot more power than Wade Boggs.
But since he hurt his back, he hasn't hit more than 14 home runs in a 
season.

I say Boggs won't hit more than 10 home runs next year, either.

If I'm wrong, as my lawyer, Ted Frank will streak...  :)

-- 
David M. Nieporent   | Is it too early to start making predictions for 1993?
niepornt@phoenix.    | Probably, but that never stopped me before.
   princeton.edu     | ALE: Baltimore ALW: Chicago NLE: Montreal NLW: Atlanta
Baltimore Orioles 93 | AL MVP: Cal Ripken  AL Cy Young: Mike Mussina