Andy | D3DataScience

I am excited to announce Hall Ledger. It’s a relatively simple site but it should be a more comprehensive hall of fame. You can find it here Hall-Ledger.com

@TheWARmonger_ I haven’t watch him enough but smith seems to be better by metrics then the eye test not that he’s bad by the eye test but he’s been crazy good with OAA at points

Current leaderboard of a top-secret proprietary defensive metric that doesn't have a name yet. (it's early and many fielders just don't have the opportunities for any defensive metric leaderboard. Can't fake your way to the top 10, though.)

😐

…what

The header has gone corporate

Is this the first mound charging since Harper?

@tangotiger @drivelinekyle What about Dauri Moreta

Statcast: Tatsuya Imai Mollweide Projection + Spin Axis Report His famous Fadeout-Slider is indeed spinning opposite of gyro-slider. Ive marked where gyro-slider spins for everyone His splitter/changeup are 1 seamers, but his splitter closer to his slider in seam orientation

I can’t believe they are retiring Tyrone Taylor’s number

thonny

@TheWARmonger_ That’s been my assumption and what’s always made me prefer FRV since it’s such a descriptive stat compared to FRV.

@D3DataScience My understanding is that's what they base their play values on, so a lot

One of the reasons I recommend always looking at both DRS and FRV (uses OAA), at least, is that defensive metrics aren't trying to measure the same things. How well each does their job is up for debate, I believe they're both excellent but with limitations. So many are too quick to say one is great and the other is garbage, and that's far from the truth. Jo Adell career metrics with last night... DRS: -14 to -9 (+5) FRV: -24 to -25 (-1)

@TheWARmonger_ How much then does the base out state play into it?

@D3DataScience It's context based for sure, but I'd say not nearly as subjective as many people think.

@BenResnic_ Perfect

@D3DataScience Yes it’s the posterior distribution not empirical

Hitting fly balls further than expected is actually a repeatable skill. A ton of variance goes into how far a batted ball goes (wind, spin, elevation, etc), so the posterior is wide. In 2025, Javier Sanoja led all of MLB averaging 10.6 feet further than expected on his fly balls.

@BenResnic_ Posterior in the title then is just saying it’s predictive I assume? That’s where I got confused because I saw it said predicted on the axis as well.

@D3DataScience Park effects, the distributions on the right are the same batted ball (100 mph EV, 30° LA hit to dead center) and at Coors the ball goes way further than at Fenway. Bottom left shows the park random effects

@whothatfel @TreIindor20 Do you have the time stamp?

@TreIindor20 In this YouTube interview, this guy (who is obnoxious btw) mentions him leaving and you can see all 3 of them freeze and then Gary gives credit to the people still there 😂 you can tell it’s real lmao youtu.be/e3SbnWJxYlw

I was kind of skeptical of the rumor going around of why he got fired but the fact that nobody on the broadcast has even uttered a word about him or his departure makes me think it was true sadly

@RobertStock6 @own_the_libs_ xBA was never meant to be used for single plays though which is where the issues come in when it’s applied to them.

MLB statistics are heavily skewed by selection bias, so at the MLB level a hitter's spray angle isn't very informative. It matters much more at every level below. And for a singular play, if you know the spray angle you have WAY more of an idea of what happened. That just doesn't inform you how things will shape up for the player over the whole season.

Brandon Lowe with a homerun that's gone in 50% of MLB parks but only goes for an expected batting average of .030 lol. (I'm going to assume xBA disregards spray angle, which is unintuitive for 99% of fans)

@RobertStock6 @own_the_libs_ I looked it up as well really quick and the reason it gave was because batters don’t truly control the spray angle of the ball so including it starts allowing for luck to be included into the number but I also do feel like I’ve heard the above reason as well.

@RobertStock6 @own_the_libs_ I may be wrong but I believe it didn’t increase correlation to future BA at all which was why they chose not to include it.

@own_the_libs_ @RobertStock6 It provides no statistical benefit is the thing

@D3DataScience @RobertStock6 it is very unintuitively completely random given how much broadcasts talk about batters trying to hit to specific parts of the field