PDA

View Full Version : Interesting Stat


billnahorodny
01-05-2005, 05:49 PM
Last year, the Sox lead the league in "offensive O Zone percentage", which measures a teams ability to score runners in scoring position. Interestingly, they were also last in the league in "defensive O zone percentage" which measures a team's ability to prevent the other team from scoring their RISP.

http://chicago.whitesox.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/mlb/stats/ozonefactor.jsp?leagueCode=MLB&filterType=std&columnType=RS_RISP_PCT&c_id=cws

sullythered
01-05-2005, 05:54 PM
I would like to see where we ranked in the ability to put runners in scoring positon. That was where we came up short last season.

mdep524
01-05-2005, 06:04 PM
I would like to see where we ranked in the ability to put runners in scoring positon. That was where we came up short last season. Third from last, ahead of only the Expos and Diamondbacks in all of baseball: http://chicago.whitesox.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/mlb/stats/ozonefactor.jsp?leagueCode=MLB&filterType=std&columnType=RISP&c_id=cws

That is totally unacceptable. The "percentage" means nothing if you can't get guys on base!

If Team A puts 20 runners in scoring position and scores 10 runs (50%) and Team B puts 10 runners in scoring position and scores 7 of them (70%), who has a better chance to win the game?? Team A wins 10-7, despite their worse percentage.

sullythered
01-05-2005, 06:08 PM
Third from last, ahead of only the Expos and Diamondbacks in all of baseball: http://chicago.whitesox.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/mlb/stats/ozonefactor.jsp?leagueCode=MLB&filterType=std&columnType=RISP&c_id=cws

That is totally unacceptable. The "percentage" means nothing if you can't get guys on base!

If Team A puts 20 runners in scoring position and scores 10 runs (50%) and Team B puts 10 runners in scoring position and scores 7 of them (70%), who has a better chance to win the game?? Team A wins 10-7, despite their worse percentage.

Thanks for the stat. My point exactly. We were an all or nothing team last season (the last few, for that matter) and I like the changes we've made. I'd much rather put guys on base and move them over every inning, than always knock in the one or two guys we actually get into scoring position per game.

eastchicagosoxfan
01-05-2005, 08:17 PM
I'll always harken back to the 1983 season, because I recall it so well. Baines had ?23? game winning rbi's. The guy hit in the clutch. Someone on the team has to go to the plate with ice water in his veins. Last season, I'll bet the Sox had three guys hit into 15 double plays.

zach074
01-05-2005, 09:00 PM
Last year, the Sox lead the league in "offensive O Zone percentage", which measures a teams ability to score runners in scoring position. Interestingly, they were also last in the league in "defensive O zone percentage" which measures a team's ability to prevent the other team from scoring their RISP.

http://chicago.whitesox.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/mlb/stats/ozonefactor.jsp?leagueCode=MLB&filterType=std&columnType=RS_RISP_PCT&c_id=cws
Wow i never heard of that before, at least we lead in something!:bandance:

Paulwny
01-06-2005, 11:15 AM
I'll always harken back to the 1983 season, because I recall it so well. Baines had ?23? game winning rbi's. The guy hit in the clutch. Someone on the team has to go to the plate with ice water in his veins. Last season, I'll bet the Sox had three guys hit into 15 double plays.
I believe the game winning rbi stat is now history. If a batter in the 1st inning drives in a run and his team maintains the lead throught the game he was credited with the game winning rbi, even if the final score was 15 to 13.

Don Mattingly was always one of the leaders in this catagory. In the 1st inning Ricky Henderson would get on 1st, steal 2nd, advance to 3rd on a grounder to the right side and score on a Mattingly sac fly or ground out. Mattingly received credit for the game winning rbi as long as ny maintained the lead. Another yankee may have hit a grand slam and ny may have won 5 to 4 but as long as ny never lost the lead , Mattingly had the game winning rbi.
It was a useless stat.

voodoochile
01-06-2005, 11:17 AM
I believe the game winning rbi stat is now history. If a batter in the 1st inning drives in a run and his team maintains the lead throught the game he was credited with the game winning rbi, even if the final score was 15 to 13.

Don Mattingly was always one of the leaders in this catagory. In the 1st inning Ricky Henderson would get on 1st, steal 2nd, advance to 3rd on a grounder to the right side and score on a Mattingly sac fly or ground out. Mattingly received credit for the game winning rbi as long as ny maintained the lead. Another yankee may have hit a grand slam and ny may have won 5 to 4 but as long as ny never lost the lead , Mattingly had the game winning rbi.
It was a useless stat.
It was, but IIRC they changed it to the guy who drives in the deciding run (your team wins 10-4, the guy who drove in the 5th run gets the GWRBI). Still pretty meaningless unless it is a walk off RBI, IMO.

Paulwny
01-06-2005, 11:44 AM
It was, but IIRC they changed it to the guy who drives in the deciding run (your team wins 10-4, the guy who drove in the 5th run gets the GWRBI). Still pretty meaningless unless it is a walk off RBI, IMO.
I did a search - from The Baseball Almanac: "Game winning runs batted in were once an official record kept by Major League Baseball. The statistic started in 1980 and ended eight years later."

I agree a walk off rbi is more important.

voodoochile
01-06-2005, 11:46 AM
I did a search - from The Baseball Almanac: "Game winning runs batted in were once an official record kept by Major League Baseball. The statistic started in 1980 and ended eight years later."

I agree a walk off rbi is more important.
Thanks. I was sure I had seen it used more recently than that, but maybe it's not an official stat, just something someone pays attention to, or maybe I am just nuts - wouldn't be the first time...:smile: