Regressed Platoon Splits Calculator

by Whelk on Jan 25, 2012 9:17 PM EST

Last week, Jason Hanselman wrote about properly regressing projected platoon splits over at The Rays Way. If you haven't already, you should give it a read, as it explains the concept pretty well. This isn't anything new or groundbreaking (The Book, from which the methodology comes, was published in 2007), but it is rare. We sabre-inclined baseball fans too infrequently take the time to actually do the easy calculations, and instead just cite career splits.

Another Cubs Blog used to have a regression tool, but the link doesn't seem to work anymore, so I went ahead and made the spreadsheet myself. I was referencing their post by berselius as I made it. I shared my spreadsheet with the other writers here, but the Jeff Keppinger signing makes it pretty clear that everyone should have regression at their fingertips.

Feel free to download and use my Regressed Platoon Splits Calculator (version two). The white columns are objective stats. The orange column is for an overall wOBA projection. The green columns are the career and regressed splits (as a percentage), and the blue columns are the projected wOBAs against each handedness.

Edit: After a rereading of that chapter from The Book and some input from Sandy Kazmir and Sky Kalkman, I've added added switch hitters to the tool.

This post was written by a member of the DRaysBay community and does not necessarily express the views or opinions of DRaysBay staff.

Tweet Comment 7 comments | 4 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Great stuff

†††If you love Jesus Chris and are 100% proud of it, copy this and make it your signature!†††

by Sandy Kazmir on Jan 25, 2012 9:49 PM EST reply actions

How do you reflect switch-hitters?

Follow @jasoncollette

by Jason Collette on Jan 26, 2012 12:28 AM EST reply actions

I don't know.

The problem is that as a group they have neutral splits, but individually, they have larger splits than non-switch hitters. The Book says that you can trust it after 700 or so PAs, but as for regressing, I’m not sure what it should be against.

by Whelk on Jan 26, 2012 9:05 AM EST up reply actions

Sounds like you regress them towards no split.

The fact that they tend to vary widely is reflected in the low number of PAs (700) — doesn’t take a lot of evidence to limit the influence of regression.

Great tool, hopefully it will let folks do this more often.

@Sky_Kalkman

by Sky Kalkman on Jan 26, 2012 9:30 AM EST up reply actions