Batter's Box Interactive Magazine - Vernon Wells

As of Monday, Vernon Wells has 307 putouts, with an estimate of 334 balls in his "zone of responsibility". Zone rating (ZR) is simply balls caught per opportunity.

The play-by-play scorers make a note of exactly where in the field every ball landed or was caught using this grid:

ESPN arbitrarily sets the "zone of responsibility". I believe that this zone is static.

What are the issues?
* No man's land: not every zone is assigned. So, while the team ZR will be .70, the individual players, when totalled, will have a ZR of .85 or so. UZR takes care of this.

* Every zone is equally weighted: there is no distinction between catching a ball on the fringes of the zone, compared to catching an easy popup. UZR takes care of this too, by determining how often balls are caught on the fringes, and rewarding a fielder proportionately for catching those balls.

* Static zones: it's rather obvious that LH and RH have different spray patterns. I believe that ZR zones are the same. UZR takes care of this.

* FB/GB tendencies of the pitching staff: different types of pitchers will allow easier/harder flyballs to be caught. A FB pitcher will have a higher proportion of his flyballs caught than a GB pitcher. UZR takes care of this.

* Speed of batted ball: yada yada yada. UZR yada yada yada. Note: there is a scorer bias here, with an impact of which is yet to be determined. Probably 1 SD = 2 runs.

* Trajectory of batted ball: see above.

* Park factors: trying to catch a ball at Fenway or Coors is not the same as elsewhere. UZR catches this too.

* Base/out situation: you know the drill

* Inning/score: UZR *should* take care of this, but I don't know if the new version does yet.

* Double-counting: I have no idea what the current state is with the numerator in ZR, whether the DP counts as 2 outs and not 1, etc. It's one of those darn silly things where people are trying to force a stat beyond what it should be doing. Same thing with balls caught outside the zone. The fielder gets a "1" in his numerator, but "0" in the denominator.
* Shared zones: this probably impacts OF much more than IF. And this impact is probably not alot either, on the order of a couple of runs.

As you can see, there's alot to like about UZR. A tremendous amount. What's not to like is the dependency on the scorers for the trajectory/location issues. This might be captured somewhat in the "park factor".

***

Until UZR is published, we will have to stick with ZR. The league average is to convert 87% of balls in zone into outs. Therefore, an average CF, given the number of balls that Wells faced would have made 290 outs. Wells got 307, or +17 outs (which translates to about 15 runs). Repeating this for all CF, here are the top 10 and bottom 10 CF in ZR plus/minus:

ZR... +/-... BIZgames...
0.918 17 116 Vernon Wells, Tor ***
0.919 15 106 Aaron Rowand, CWS
0.901 12 127 Mark Kotsay, Oak
0.971 11 37 Nook Logan, Det
0.891 9 150 Carlos Beltran, KC/Hou
0.897 9 120 Corey Patterson, ChC
0.901 9 89 Milton Bradley, LA
0.889 8 132 Randy Winn, Sea
0.891 7 115 Torii Hunter, Min
0.954 6 23 Hiram Bocachica, Sea
0.931 5 31 Reed Johnson, Tor ***
...
0.783 (8) 30 Choo Freeman, Col
0.849 (8) 143 Juan Pierre, Fla
0.847 (9) 133 Tike Redman, Pit
0.799 (10) 46 Jeromy Burnitz, Col
0.803 (10) 51 Preston Wilson, Col
0.796 (12) 58 Craig Biggio, Hou
0.838 (12) 135 Marquis Grissom, SF
0.819 (13) 89 Bernie Williams, NYY
0.833 (17) 155 Andruw Jones, Atl
0.783 (19) 77 Ken Griffey Jr., Cin

I prefer the Plus/Minus figure than the rate because it's alot easier to grasp. .803? Hard to get much meaning out of it.

BIZgames is simply Balls in Zone divided by 2.88 (there are 2.88 BIZ per game in CF).

UZR knew all about Aaron Rowand last year, putting him in the same class as Erstad and Cameron. Will be interesting to find out more about this Nook Logan character. Wells did not fare well with UZR in the beginning, and only started looking decent last year.

Posted by TangoTiger on Thursday, September 30 2004 @ 02:50 AM EDT.

Vernon Wells - UZR's Gold Glove? | 39 comments | Create New Account

The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.

Mike Green - Thursday, September 30 2004 @ 03:14 PM EDT (#20086) #

One thing that can safely be said is that the Jay outfield defence is better this year than last. The pieces of evidence are:

-the ZRs for Wells, Rios and Johnson are all good or better (Rios, by the way, is probably the best defensive rightfielder in the league right now, but widespread recognition of this will have to wait)
-the DERs for the Jay flyball pitchers (Lilly, Speier, Hentgen, Glynn, Nakamura, Lopez) are much better than for their groundball pitchers (Halladay, Adams, Batista, Kershner, File).

Wells lost a fair bit of weight this past off-season, and his defence may have benefitted.

The zones are interesting. The chart anticipates that the centerfielder is playing 325' from the plate. That's very deep. The "no man's land" in zone rating is probably quite large. That would make Vernon, who does play deeper than many other centerfielders, look better than he actually is. His weakness is still coming in on balls, and I expect that his UZR will reflect it to some degree this year.

_Ron - Thursday, September 30 2004 @ 03:16 PM EDT (#20087) #

I think Wells will get serious consideration but I have a feeling the 3 winners in the AL will be Hunter, Ichiro, and Kotsay.

_tangotiger - Thursday, September 30 2004 @ 03:41 PM EDT (#20088) #

My guess is that the ZR zones for CF are LMNO, 250 to 350. I think it was listed in one of those fabulous STATS Scoreboards.

But again, all irrelevant in the UZR world.

For those who didn't get a clear picture as to what I was saying, each of those zones has a certain number of balls hit, and balls caught. That is, you have an out rate BY POSITION for each zone.

You multiply the league out rate for each zone by the number of balls that were hit for each zone, while Wells was in the game. This gives you the number of balls that would have been caught by an average CF, if he were facing the ball distribution that Wells was facing.

Compare that expectation to what Wells actually caught, and voila... you have a fielder's plus/minus.

Once you realize that the zones are one variable, you realize you have all those other variables I listed. So, you simply (or not so simply) create a probability function with all variables.

_Tassle - Thursday, September 30 2004 @ 03:44 PM EDT (#20089) #

Andruw Jones is one of the worst center fielders in baseball? Wow. Am I the last person in the world to realize this? I really thought he was still good...

Mike Green - Thursday, September 30 2004 @ 03:56 PM EDT (#20090) #

My guess is that the ZR zones for CF are LMNO, 250 to 350

If that's the case, the no-mans land zones are indeed huge. 200 to 250 LMNO is usually the centerfielder's ball (if anybody's) and the 300 to 350 JK and PQ are too.

Craig B - Thursday, September 30 2004 @ 03:56 PM EDT (#20091) #

Am I the last person in the world to realize this? I really thought he was still good...

I don't watch the Braves too much, because I hate hate hate them, but I think Jones is still good from what I've seen. Best CF in baseball I've ever seen at playing the ball hit in front of him (a highly underrated part of the CFs game).

_tangotiger - Thursday, September 30 2004 @ 04:05 PM EDT (#20092) #

http://www.tangotiger.net
One thing I wish the scorers would do is mark the position of the fielders (at some common point, like as the pitcher lifts his front leg, or some such).

It may very well be that Andruw Jones is still a great fielder, but he may be horribly positioned. That is, if every CF positioned himself like Jones, Jones might have the highest ZR of them all. (Just an illustration.)

Like in hockey, if Moog and Fuhr have only 1 defensemen, and they are always facing 2 on 1s, it's hard to have a high save%. But, on 2 on 1s, they may have had the highest. (Again, just an illustration).

_studes - Thursday, September 30 2004 @ 04:41 PM EDT (#20093) #

Will MGL actually publish UZR this year?

Pistol - Thursday, September 30 2004 @ 04:54 PM EDT (#20094) #

Andruw Jones is one of the worst center fielders in baseball? Wow. Am I the last person in the world to realize this? I really thought he was still good...

I believe Jones has been slipping in defense the past few years, likely as he's added weight (I'm not certain of this, but he does look bigger now).

_tangotiger - Thursday, September 30 2004 @ 05:08 PM EDT (#20095) #

Will MGL actually publish UZR this year?

I dunno... I guess that all depends on the agreement he signed with his team.

If you guys want to buy me the PBP data, I'd do it for free.

Craig B - Thursday, September 30 2004 @ 05:15 PM EDT (#20096) #

Tom, send me an e-mail telling me how much the data costs.

_Chuck Van Den C - Thursday, September 30 2004 @ 05:24 PM EDT (#20097) #

During the period that Andruw Jones has been believed to have been slipping (and chunking out it would appear), his SB numbers have gone into the crapper as well, perhaps confirming that he's indeed slowing down. From 2002 to 2004, inclusive, he's gone 18-12 on the bases.

Who would have believed that the impressive 19-year old can't miss HoFer we once saw would one day be 6-6 in SB-CS as a 27/28 year old? Were everyone's hopes too high for Jones, or has he simply not committed himself to staying in shape?

_Magpie - Thursday, September 30 2004 @ 05:26 PM EDT (#20098) #

That's the same grid of the field we use at STATS, by the way.

_tangotiger - Thursday, September 30 2004 @ 05:32 PM EDT (#20099) #

http://www.battersbox.ca/archives/00001991.shtml
Yes, if you blow up the picture, at the bottom left, it says "Edge 1.000", which I believe was the software that Dick Cramer, founder of STATS, developed.

Btw, Magpie, I posed a question, that the scorers were reluctant to answer. Can you shed some light? See link for that thread.

_Magpie - Thursday, September 30 2004 @ 05:54 PM EDT (#20100) #

tangotiger - I went through the thread, but I'm not sure what the question was?!

I can't think of anything I'd be reluctant to answer though.

I'm also working the press box this Friday and Sunday, if anybody cares.

I have to leave the house for about an hour or so, but I'll check here when I get back.

_Magpie - Thursday, September 30 2004 @ 06:09 PM EDT (#20101) #

But before I go (just found your question - DUH!) - I could be wrong, but I think that if a fielder makes a play outside his zone, it counts as both a play made and as an opportunity inside his zone.

As far as I know, the area of responsibility for outfielders is supposed to vary depending on whether the ball is a fly ball or line drive.

I actually don't know what the assigned zones are for the fielders. The only clue I have is when I have to enter something weird.

The software always asks the scorer if the location is "unusual." We are always asked if we're sure every time the shortstop crosses over to the second base side of the diamond, every time an outfielder gets within sixty feet of the infield to handle a high pop up.... etc.

Anyway, I can't explain Vernon's numbers.

_tangotiger - Friday, October 01 2004 @ 10:06 AM EDT (#20102) #

Magpie: a sidebar question - does the software let you mark two important items
- hang time
- position of fielders at a preset time?

Hang time is especially critical for OF. I understand that you mark things as "hard hit, medium hit, soft hit", and "flyball, popup, etc" and maybe even "trajectory", so that the combination of all that would lead you to a hang time.

But, hang time is such an easy thing to time, and is crucial in kickoffs and punts in NFL. They don't seem to have a problem. I'd certainly take the measurement error of whether the ball was in the air for 4.2 or 4.4 seconds, over whether someone thinks a ball was a medium hit rope, or hard hit FB, etc.

As well, stuff like time to release the ball, position of batter-runner when ball is caught by the IF, etc.... a whole bunch of sh-t.

I look at the NHL as doing a much better job of keeping real-time stats (ice-location of shot taken, type of shot, hits, giveaways, takeaways, etc) than MLB, and hockey doesn't have the start/stop luxury that baseball has.

Mike Green - Friday, October 01 2004 @ 10:21 AM EDT (#20103) #

Amen, Tango.

A side benefit would be that it might enable us to determine that certain fly balls (in specific zones with enough hang-time) are caught with such regularity that it tells us nothing about the fielder and should be credited to the pitcher in the same way that a K is. Defensive Regression Analysis treats pop-ups this way, and it might be that the out-conversion rate of certain fly-balls is about the same.

_Magpie - Friday, October 01 2004 @ 11:08 AM EDT (#20104) #

does the software let you mark two important items
- hang time
- position of fielders at a preset time?

No. Neither. A ball hit in the air to an outfielder is a flyball or a line drive (if its less than 230 feet it can't be a flyball, it has to be a popup) - and its hit either soft, medium, or hard.

That is all.

Re positioning: nothing at all. I have actually suggested that this would be quite easy to track on a certain basic level. If a team is playing a Delgado-type shift.

Plus I have always wished that we would just keep track of what happens when teams bring the infield in. This would be so easy to keep track of, and I think the results would be fascinating. What happens to batting averages? Is it worth it? How many times do runners stay on 3rd?

Just one little prompt - runner on 3rd, less than 2 outs. "Is the infield in? All the way or at the corners?" I'd love to know what difference it makes.

_tangotiger - Friday, October 01 2004 @ 11:47 AM EDT (#20105) #

Magpie,

I am disappointed by what is happening on this front. It's obvious that people who score these games must love baseball.

What I'm left to conclude is that there is a level of bureaucracy in these organizations, that people on the operations side has no influence on these matters.

I love the pitch location tracking that I've seen elsewhere (though I would also mark the location of the batter... I mean, again, such a simple static thing... his feet don't move).

I would go even crazier, like where are the batters elbows as the pitch is mid-flight. Where is the pitcher's hand and elbow at the release point? Is the pitcher in a full windup?

I shouldn't be surprised, as losing STATS Scoreboard when STATS was bought out immediately told me all I needed to know about how things are run.

For fielders, I'd want to know if he backhanded the ball, charged it, double-pumped it, one-hopped it, scooped it, did the 1B stretch, was he pulled off the bag, etc.

Like I said, I'm shocked by what they can do in the NHL, and MLB should be 20 years ahead of them.

_Smack - Friday, October 01 2004 @ 01:01 PM EDT (#20106) #

OT:
Where is this NHL information found?

_Magpie - Friday, October 01 2004 @ 01:09 PM EDT (#20107) #

I'm shocked by what they can do in the NHL

I'm pretty sure they have four people covering different aspects of the game for the NHL.

Its not enough - I've thought of any number of things that could be done with hockey that I don't think anyone is tracking. But the game is so damn fast.

STATS also does football, hockey, and basketball, and for basketball the scoring responsibilities are shared between three scorers - one is covering shooting/scoring and fouls; another tracks assists and turnovers; another tracks rebounds and blocks.

Pretty well everyone doing baseball is getting by with just one scorer. Alas, I really don't see how one guy can check the positions of seven fielders, the batter's stance, the pitcher's motion (why not? does it make an impact if he's working from the stretch or a full windup). I mean I can see it; I just don't know that it would be possible to get it all into the system before the next pitch... You might be able to do it before the at bat, but defenses often shift during the at bat, especially once they get two strikes on the hitter.

All this has to be done in real time, as well. Both STATS and MLB (the guy sitting beside me!) have clients who require this. The MLB data is going up on GameDay. Its worth noting that the data on pitch location (at SkyDome anyway)is being entered from three decks above field level, and not directly behind home plate (We're both a little bit on the first base side.) We need the monitors, and we need the four second delay on the monitors to feel confident about pitch locations. In real time.

people on the operations side has no influence on these matters.

They do solicit feedback and suggestions from us every year, I have to say that. And they tweak the software a little bit every year, add one or two new things. I would imagine there's some reluctance to completely overhaul the software. Whats currently in place works - it gets the desired job done. And I can't imagine they want several hundred game scorers all learning a new system at the same time. That could get pretty messy.

_tangotiger - Friday, October 01 2004 @ 01:42 PM EDT (#20108) #

My first question: why would the NHL and NBA have 3 scorers while MLB have only one? I thought that STATS has 3 scorers per game.

I agree that it would be a daunting task for 1 guy. But, if each scorer gets 100$ (or whatever) per game, bump that up to 300$ and get 3 scorers. With 2400 games, that adds half a million$ in cost. Doesn't seem to bother the NHL.

And, if they are going to introduce camera shots like Alan Schwarz is saying, that makes life alot easier. Now, the onus is on the software developer to convert real-time action into data that can be used.

As for the pitch location: !!!! I thought for certain that this would be done at field-level, and with multiple camera angles (overhead, from CF, and by the dugout).

All the more reason to introduce the FoxPuck to baseball (but for GPS tracking only, and not to color-code on the TV screen). Btw, I'd also introduce GPS tracking on players' uniforms. You'd instantly figure out where every player was at every point in time. (Would be great for NHL). How much could that cost?

_tangotiger - Friday, October 01 2004 @ 01:46 PM EDT (#20109) #

NHL real-time stats:

http://www.nhl.com/nhlstats/stats

Under "Individual Stats Reports"
Select: TEAM (Toronto)
Select: Report View (Time On Ice... last entry)

Bryan Mccabe spent 1930 minutes on ice, or an average of 25 minutes per game, on 28 shifts per game.

_Niles - Friday, October 01 2004 @ 01:50 PM EDT (#20110) #

As long as Orlando Hudson wins a gold glove. He's far and away the best defensive second baseman in the AL.

_tangotiger - Friday, October 01 2004 @ 03:00 PM EDT (#20111) #

Fans last year:
http://www.tangotiger.net/scouting/scout_Results.html

UZR in 2000-2003:
http://www.tangotiger.net/UZR0003.html

And ZR this year:
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/stats/fielding?groupId=9&season=2004&seasonType=2&split=80&sortOrder=true&sortColumn=zoneRating

all seem to agree that Adam Kennedy is a better fielder than Hudson.

Kennedy, again according to the fans, has better hands, and is a more accurate thrower, and is about even everywhere else.

_R Billie - Friday, October 01 2004 @ 03:05 PM EDT (#20112) #

UZR could still technically penalize an outfielder whose pitching staff did not give up as many linedrives or balls towards the gaps. A fielder who needs to make more difficult plays might be rated unfairly higher than a fielder who simply did not get as much opportunity to show off their range on difficult plays.

_tangotiger - Friday, October 01 2004 @ 03:14 PM EDT (#20113) #

Sure thing.

What you are suggesting is that in the 80% of normal plays, that the range between an average and great fielder is to making 90 to 95% of the plays.

But, that in the 20% extreme plays, that the range is between 30 and 50%. That is, a really good player will shine especially here.

So, as an illustration, say you have 2 great fielders (Erstad and Kotsay... I'm taking Erstad, because I still think it's incredibly silly that he's at 1B), with this data:

Erstad,
500 easy plays, converts 95% to outs, average converts 90% to outs
100 tough plays, converts 50% to outs, average converts 30% to outs

Kotsay: 400 easy and 200 tough, with same conversion rates

So, this is probably an extreme example, but it serves to illustrate the point.

What's the impact? Erstad is 45 plays better than average, while Kotsay is 60 plays better than average.

That works out to about 12 runs. I took a rather extreme example, so it's probably safe to say that we are talking about maybe a 4 or 5 run difference in the skew of available ball distributions.

Of course, after 4 years, and with the pitchers changing as much as they do, I'd find it hard to believe that the distribution could be anywhere near as this.

Mike Green - Friday, October 01 2004 @ 03:29 PM EDT (#20114) #

Actually, tango, it's pretty close between Hudson and Kennedy. Hudson is much better on the pivot of the DP, and it's reflected in the statistics. When asked to name a comparable to Hudson, Kennedy would be my choice.

It'll be interesting because they can't give it to Bret Boone again, can they?

_Rob - Friday, October 01 2004 @ 03:48 PM EDT (#20115) #

It'll be interesting because they can't give it to Bret Boone again, can they?

No, they can't -- he's only hitting .251 this year. ;)

I was just looking at the GG winners at BB-Ref and noticed that they give them to pitchers. How can you possibly determine who the best fielding pitcher is? I never knew they gave Gold Gloves to pitchers...
Winners:
Mike Mussina 1996-2003, except '00 and '02 (Kenny Rogers).
Greg Maddux 1990-2002 (13 years straight!), and Mike Hampton last year.
Four winners in 22 combined years.
Yeah, that's a real meaningful award.

And it's been said before, but Raffy's 1999 GG Award was just stupid. He automatically won it (since he was the reigning GGer) for the third year in a row despite playing only 28 games at first -- or only 21% of the innings that his own teammate (Lee Stevens) played.

_tangotiger - Friday, October 01 2004 @ 04:04 PM EDT (#20116) #

While I am no fan of how UZR handles DP, UZR has them as even.

However, how much difference does the DP make? Just making some guesses here, but:
# of DP opps with a GB hit
= 40 PA / game
x 162 games
x .20 man on 1b and less than 2 outs
x .65 out recorded
x .40 gb outs per out
= 337 ground ball outs with the DP in effect

Let's say that 200 of those are hit to the left side. Let's say, 50% of the time, the average guy turns the pivot. The range between worst to best would be .40 to .60.

So, a top-notch guy would turn an extra 20 DPs. That is a substantial amount (worth about 9 runs).

If Kennedy is that good a fielder, and he has better hands and better accuracy than Hudson, I have to believe he's at least as good as Hudson on the pivot.

Even if you want to give Hudson the edge, you'd only give him an extra couple of runs. More than that, and you'd have to back it up with something.

Mike Green - Friday, October 01 2004 @ 04:39 PM EDT (#20117) #

I don't know if UZR would account for the following. In 2002-03 especially, Hinske had horrible problems with his release, which made turning a 5-4-3 a near impossibility despite plenty of opportunities.

_tangotiger - Friday, October 01 2004 @ 05:16 PM EDT (#20118) #

http://www.tangotiger.net/catchers.html
No, UZR is deficient in this regard, and I told MGL as much. I know the correct way to do it (see my catcher article in the link). But, that may be simply too much work, for such little gain, and you'd need a few years of data.

You could do the same with OF/C pairs on throws to home, or OF/IF for cutoffs, etc. Whole bunch of them.

_Niles - Friday, October 01 2004 @ 08:10 PM EDT (#20119) #

I'd to see Kennedy handle the turf as well as the O-Dog.

_bill - Friday, October 01 2004 @ 11:18 PM EDT (#20120) #

"I dunno... I guess that all depends on the agreement he signed with his team."

Did MGL get hired by someone??

_Magpie - Sunday, October 03 2004 @ 10:29 AM EDT (#20121) #

I thought that STATS has 3 scorers per game.

All three are doing exactly the same thing. Its a backup. Where it really comes into play is when there are technical problems. If I'm in the press box, and my internet connection goes dead or my computer crashes... which happens. (I once dictated my game account, pitch by pitch by pitch, over the phone from the press box to another scorer whose computer was working.) They can switch over to the second guy until I'm back online and my game entry is caught up.

There are two major things being emphasized - the accuracy of what we're doing, and providing it in real-time. STATS is not a university foundation carrying out scientific research - its a company selling a service to clients. One of them is a wire service. They demand it in real-time, its what they're paying for, and if they don't get it from STATS they'll get it from somebody else. Which would be bad...

The multiple game accounts get compared to each other, and eventually compared to a video tape. Every time I miss a catcher blocking a ball in the dirt (which half the time I can't even see from where I'm sitting - its easier to spot on TV) I get to hear about it. (I don't get a hard time over it, everybody knows that the press box is the worst place to see that sort of thing.)

why would the NHL and NBA have 3 scorers

STATS does not do NHL and NBA from the arenas - they do them off the TV. STATS and the NBA had a protracted legal battle a few years back over the right to disseminate game data in real time. The NBA was trying to prevent it. STATS won the legal battle, but - surprise - they haven't been welcomed into the NBA press box.

I've done NBA and NHL - NBA is difficult on the TV because sometimes stuff happens really, really fast (you can have four missed shots in like two seconds), and - this is going to sound horrible and racist - all the players look alike. On TV, that is. The camera tends to stay back at a distance, and NBA unis tend to go for colour and number schemes that don't jump out on a TV, and at least half the players have the same body type and hairstyle (i.e. long, skinny, and bald). You can't distinguish individuals unless the camera comes in closer, which it generally doesn't do while the action is on. This is a problem for the opposing team - it takes the first quarter to get to know the other team. Anyway, I digress.

STATS isn't doing anything ambitious with hockey - just tracking scoring plays and shots on goal in real time.

pitch location: !!!! I thought for certain that this would be done at field-level, and with multiple camera angles (overhead, from CF, and by the dugout).

Once again. Real-time. MLB is putting this on GameDay as it happens.

I'd also introduce GPS tracking on players' uniforms. You'd instantly figure out where every player was at every point in time. (Would be great for NHL). How much could that cost?

Sure, but it doesn't matter what anything costs if no one wants to pay for it. You can find people willing to pay for real-time information. Much harder to find people willing to pay for anything else.

_tangotiger - Monday, October 04 2004 @ 10:06 AM EDT (#20122) #

Bill: MGL's made a few mentions to that effect at BTF.

_Dick Cramer - Tuesday, November 02 2004 @ 02:16 PM EST (#20123) #

just fyi. The scheme used to lay out that chart at the top of this thread was devised (by me) very early in the morning during the Oakland A's 1981 spring training, not sure exactly what day but Matt Keough had won in Hohokam by a score of something like 6-1 the day before. The original plan had been to use a light pen to indicate where balls landed, but on an Apple II running UCSD Pascal (the original EDGE 1.000 configuration as Tangotiger noted) it took way two much time to switch between the text and graphics displays. "Polar coordinates using letters to label the angle and taking advantage of the field to define the other distance coordinate" was the response that occurred to me at about 3 AM, and the concept was programmed ready for use in that afternoon's game (though I recall having to stand up a childhood friend for a breakfast get together that morning, one John Alcock who is still a professor of biology at Arizona).

_Dick Cramer - Tuesday, November 02 2004 @ 02:18 PM EST (#20124) #

Vernon Wells - UZR's Gold Glove? | 39 comments | Create New Account

The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.