LambeauLeap1250 WSSP


  
 [ 9 posts ]  New Topic   Add Reply

K/PA

Author Message
Offline  K/PA
#1

Posted: May 06, 2016, 8:26 AM Post
User avatar
Posts: 402
wondering if there's any merit to this. For pitchers, there's K/9 to judge strikeout proficiency, but wouldn't a more valuable statistic be K/PA? this would track the frequency of strikeouts as opposed to the total. For instance:
Pitcher A strikes out 3 in 3 innings for a 9.0 K/9, but faces 18 batters for a .166 K/PA
Pitcher B strikes out 3 in 3 innings for a 9/0 K/9, but faces 9 batters for a .333 K/PA

Pitcher B is by far the more proficient strikeout pitcher, but in a traditional K/9, they both have the same value. What essentially we want to know is not how many they get per inning, but what percentage of guys do they strike out.

Is this already a stat somewhere, and if so- how commonly is it utilized?


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: K/PA
#2

Posted: May 06, 2016, 9:50 AM Post
User avatar

Usability Director
Board Administrator
Posts: 15343
We've had this discussion before, and you're right. However, the caveat that one of our stat gurus explained a few years ago is that K/AB is more appropriate than K/PA. I can't split that hair and explain why. But either K/PA or K/AB would be better than K/9.

Essentially, a poor pitcher can have the same K/9 as a good one. The lousy one achieves his K/9 by facing more hitters, and the good one is penalized for not giving up hits and walks.

I'd submit that we use K/9 because it's conveniently offered by websites and because it paints an easy mental picture. Six Ks in nine innings is easy to picture. Numbers like .166 aren't. What would be great is an adjusted K/9, which would actually be K/AB multiplied by the average number of ABs in a game. That would make it look like K/9 and eliminate the learning curve that would come with understanding the number.

That’s the only thing Chicago’s good for: to tell people where Wisconsin is.
-- Sigmund Snopek


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: K/PA
#3

Posted: May 06, 2016, 2:06 PM Post
User avatar
Posts: 402
thanks casey- really helpful to know. sounds like ripe ground for a new stat- go for it!


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: K/PA
#4

Posted: May 10, 2016, 9:29 PM Post
User avatar
Posts: 2033
K/PA is available on Fangraphs as K% (and possibly under the advanced metrics on Baseball-Reference now as well?).


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: K/PA
#5

Posted: June 10, 2016, 7:26 AM Post
Posts: 10572
All I know is Brewers have several players with very high K/PA rates: Broxton, Santana, Carter to name just a few.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: K/PA
#6

Posted: June 12, 2016, 2:48 PM Post
Posts: 1345
All those guys have high BB/PA as well

When I look at Ks I care most about percentage over K/9. If I'm targeting a pitcher, I prefer them to be around 25%+ K/AB.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: K/PA
#7

Posted: July 22, 2016, 10:31 AM Post
User avatar
Posts: 1094
While using K/PA would be a better measure to determine the past efficacy and dominance of a pitcher, there is some value in using K/9 as well when determining how good a pitcher's pure "stuff" is, and how good he can potentially be if he could just get some better command of his pitches. A young Randy Johnson or Nolan Ryan might have the same K/PA as a Derek Lowe or Jamie Moyer, and might have even poorer FIP, WHIP and ERAs, which if just looking at the numbers one would/could conclude that those Johnson and Ryan guys stink. However, their through-the-roof K/9 stat might show you that they have something special hidden behind the control issues.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: K/PA
#8

Posted: August 04, 2016, 7:13 AM Post
Posts: 4
K/PA is a better measure. But in life, and especially baseball, people tend to stick to "the way things have been done before". So K/9 will remain the preferred statistic.

I'm not so sure, as others have claimed, that K/9 is easier to interpret. Sure people can have difficulty with proportions (decimals), but if you make K/PA a percentage then I think it is at least as easily understood as K/9.
- 10 strikeouts per 9 innings
- vs 30% strikeout percentage.


Another overly used statistic are innings limits. Not all innings are equal! You can have a 3 pitch inning (+ warmups), or a 30+ pitch inning. Pitch counts are a better measure, but even then, I would rather have my pitcher (for his arm's sake) give me six 10 pitch innings than two 30 pitch innings or three 20 pitch innings.


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Offline  Re: K/PA
#9

Posted: August 04, 2016, 11:57 AM Post
User avatar

Usability Director
Board Administrator
Posts: 15343
30% strikeout percentage

If I saw that stat without being familiar with it, my first question would be "percentage of what?" [smile]

I think teams are aware that not all innings and pitch limits are created equal. And I think most people who post here are aware of that too. It's just that we don't always bother to make that clarification every time we post.

That’s the only thing Chicago’s good for: to tell people where Wisconsin is.
-- Sigmund Snopek


 Top
 
Quote   Reply 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
 [ 9 posts ]  New Topic   Add Reply
  


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search this forum (phpBB search):
Jump to:  
Search entire board (Google search):
Google
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Test