Curious to get thoughts on what would be considered a good WHIP for HS level ball...
Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
HS stats are so weighted on the level of the competition it is difficult to give numbers.
That said my sons team who played in a very competitive SoCal league were 0.87-2.14. The three main starters were 0.87, 1.15, 1.39.
That said my sons team who played in a very competitive SoCal league were 0.87-2.14. The three main starters were 0.87, 1.15, 1.39.
It is difficult to say because of the level of scorekeeping that is out there.
I actully like to provide the WHIP stat but I also provide what I call EWHIP which takes into consideration any batter that reaches on error plus the walks and hits. To me, when you have a stat like that it makes it easier to know how a defense plays behind their pitcher and then the comparrison to WHIP can really tell a statistical story.
For our pitchers (I keep the book and I'm tougher than parents might like but just fine in the eyes of our coach) a good WHIP is 1.75 and our best pitchers are usually in the 1.2 to below 1.0 range - similar to what BOF mentioned.
I actully like to provide the WHIP stat but I also provide what I call EWHIP which takes into consideration any batter that reaches on error plus the walks and hits. To me, when you have a stat like that it makes it easier to know how a defense plays behind their pitcher and then the comparrison to WHIP can really tell a statistical story.
For our pitchers (I keep the book and I'm tougher than parents might like but just fine in the eyes of our coach) a good WHIP is 1.75 and our best pitchers are usually in the 1.2 to below 1.0 range - similar to what BOF mentioned.
quote:Originally posted by tzbookman:
Curious to get thoughts on what would be considered a good WHIP for HS level ball...
BOF is correct that its difficult to give a general answer because of the wide range of skills and competition involved. Its also pretty difficult to give a good answer because of the wide variations in scorers. You could go to MaxPreps and take a look at WHIPs and get some idea. They have over 3,000 school posting there, so the range is pretty wide.
OTOH, I have a little bit of personal data I’ll share. The link shows the last 5 years of data for our HS. It’s in the largest school category in Ca, and has been in the playoffs each of the last 5 seasons. We play mostly DI(large schools), but usually play a few games each season against DII or DIII schools, but they’re usually the better schools in those divisions.
http://www.infosports.com/scor.../images/whipplus.pdf
The 1st report is our pitchers. The 2nd report is how the schools have done and of course includes all pitchers for all schools.
Guys...thanks for the info!
I like the WHIP Plus and EWHIP, more formulae to add to the sheet now
Thanks again!
I like the WHIP Plus and EWHIP, more formulae to add to the sheet now
Thanks again!
I would agree with the other posts here...
I've seen HS players from small schools with WHIPs around .5 HS. When they compete at the pro-scout level, they rise to the 1.2-1.7 range against wood bats.
Likewise, I've seen kids from the big schools have WHIPs in HS ball in the 1.1-1.4 area play for the same pro-scout teams against wood bats and drop to the .7-.9 range.
Basically, they can move all over the place based on small sample size, poor scoring, poor/good competition, ability to pitch inside, bat type, etc.
I've seen HS players from small schools with WHIPs around .5 HS. When they compete at the pro-scout level, they rise to the 1.2-1.7 range against wood bats.
Likewise, I've seen kids from the big schools have WHIPs in HS ball in the 1.1-1.4 area play for the same pro-scout teams against wood bats and drop to the .7-.9 range.
Basically, they can move all over the place based on small sample size, poor scoring, poor/good competition, ability to pitch inside, bat type, etc.
quote:Basically, they can move all over the place based on small sample size, poor scoring, poor/good competition, ability to pitch inside, bat type, etc.
Agreed.
However, a good WHIP is about the same at every level. A WHIP under 1.0 (five hits and two walks per full seven inning game) is very good and a WHIP over 2.0 (10 hits and four walks) is probably too high to be consistently successful.
My son pitched for a small HS. His WHIP was about the same in HS and wood bat competition, around 1.0...I always assumed that the wood bats and better defense balanced out the metal bat, weaker defense...
Yes Hawk, a good WHIP is about the same at every level, but there’s something that needs to be kept in mind that most people don’t consider. A 1.0 WHIP in the ML has pretty much the same meaning or value no matter which team a pitcher is on or which league or division they play in, because the quality of the hitters they’re facing in general, is pretty much the same. Of course a pitcher in the NL does have the advantage of facing a fairly weak hitter at least twice a game though. 
That same thing could be said about all the players who play in a league or division where in general the players are all equally skillful. FI, a AAA WHIP has pretty much the same value across all of AAA, but a 1.0 in AAA doesn’t equate to a 1.0 in the ML. And that’s the way it goes down the ladder. A 1.0 on a DI team isn’t the same as a 1.0 on an NAIA team. It can be, but in general they aren’t because the competition is different.
When it gets to HS though, things go to Hell in a handbasket. Not only are there fewer games to make up the sample, but the competition can vary widely. FI, we’re a Ca school in the largest school division(DI). We played 31 games last season, 24 of which were played against teams in our same division. But those other 7 games were a mixture of good and bad. 5 were against DII schools, 1 against a DIII school and 1 against a DIV school.
Now don’t get me wrong, one of the great things about baseball is, on any given day any school can whup up on any other school, because pitching plays such a big part at that level. But in general, over the long haul smaller schools that have a more shallow talent pool to draw from, are at a disadvantage. The result is, a pitcher on a small school team with a WHIP of 1.0 probably wouldn’t have that same WHIP if he was playing on a big school team.
However, there is one thing that HS stats are very good at doing, and that’s comparing players on the same team or league, and that’s because the completion is generally the same for all the players. Then there are so many other factors involved, like coaching, pitch calling, defense, etc., its really hard to tell what one kid would do in another environment, and those are some of the things that make using HS stats to compare players is so very difficult.
The only way to really evaluate a player’s stats is to average together all the games in any venue. That way there would be a “true” average, rather than a bunch of different ones where each has to be considered differently.
That same thing could be said about all the players who play in a league or division where in general the players are all equally skillful. FI, a AAA WHIP has pretty much the same value across all of AAA, but a 1.0 in AAA doesn’t equate to a 1.0 in the ML. And that’s the way it goes down the ladder. A 1.0 on a DI team isn’t the same as a 1.0 on an NAIA team. It can be, but in general they aren’t because the competition is different.
When it gets to HS though, things go to Hell in a handbasket. Not only are there fewer games to make up the sample, but the competition can vary widely. FI, we’re a Ca school in the largest school division(DI). We played 31 games last season, 24 of which were played against teams in our same division. But those other 7 games were a mixture of good and bad. 5 were against DII schools, 1 against a DIII school and 1 against a DIV school.
Now don’t get me wrong, one of the great things about baseball is, on any given day any school can whup up on any other school, because pitching plays such a big part at that level. But in general, over the long haul smaller schools that have a more shallow talent pool to draw from, are at a disadvantage. The result is, a pitcher on a small school team with a WHIP of 1.0 probably wouldn’t have that same WHIP if he was playing on a big school team.
However, there is one thing that HS stats are very good at doing, and that’s comparing players on the same team or league, and that’s because the completion is generally the same for all the players. Then there are so many other factors involved, like coaching, pitch calling, defense, etc., its really hard to tell what one kid would do in another environment, and those are some of the things that make using HS stats to compare players is so very difficult.
The only way to really evaluate a player’s stats is to average together all the games in any venue. That way there would be a “true” average, rather than a bunch of different ones where each has to be considered differently.
The OP asked what was a good WHIP for HS level. I simply stated that a good WHIP is numerically about the same at any level.
I didn't say that small school teams are competitive with big school teams. I just agreed with JMoff that WHIP is affected by sample size, competition, etc
My son's WHIP however, is about the same in woodbat vs HS play. So there may be other factors involved besides where a pitcher plays HS ball....wood vs metal, etc...
I didn't say that small school teams are competitive with big school teams. I just agreed with JMoff that WHIP is affected by sample size, competition, etc
My son's WHIP however, is about the same in woodbat vs HS play. So there may be other factors involved besides where a pitcher plays HS ball....wood vs metal, etc...
quote:Originally posted by Hawk19:…My son's WHIP however, is about the same in woodbat vs HS play. So there may be other factors involved besides where a pitcher plays HS ball....wood vs metal, etc...
Don’t mind me, but “about the same” is a phrase I’d be more comfortable with if I knew how you defined it. Is a WHIP of 1.11 “about the same” as 1.45 to you?
My guess is, if your boy’s WHIP is within .2 or .3 between two typically very different venues, it had much more to do with coincidence than anything else. What were his WHIPs in the 2 different venues, and how many IPs in each did he have?
Great points stats, also the number 1 & 2 on most HS teams are only pitching against the top teams in their league not the "other" games which can skew stats dramitically.
quote:What were his WHIPs in the 2 different venues, and how many IPs in each did he have?
Ok, you got me....not the 'same' but not orders of magnitude different either...
His woodbat WHIP is 0.67, but he has only pitched 12 innings in showcase events...(5 hits and 3 walks)
His 2011 HS WHIP was 0.79 (68 innings)....So, percentage wise, closer to the 'same' than 1.11 is to 1.45...
Well Hawk,
I’m really happy you didn’t take what I said as any kind of insult or challenge, because it truly wasn’t. NORMALLY, when people get to talking about stats, they get pretty cavalier, and no one thinks a lot about using hyperbole to help make a point. Heck! I do it too, but usually I do it realizing what I’m doing.
When it comes to WHIP, if we compared my kid’s to yours, to many folks mine would look like a whimpering sissy, with a mere 1.28 in 162.67 varsity innings over a bit more than 2 seasons. But to those of us who look a bit beyond the numbers, all we’d see were 2 HS pitchers who were very likely the horses on their respective staffs, and not think all that much more about it because we know very little else about their situations.
I won’t even bother to tell you what the difference was in his WHIP between when he threw in wood bat venues and others. He was pitching when drop 5 Titanuims were the rage in HS, and there weren’t any limits on bats in tournaments, so when he and other good pitchers got to throw against wood, it was like night and day.
And sadly that happens a lot. Folks will see a player with 25 HRs and think WOW, that kid is a monster, but not realize he’s either a greyhound and plays on fields where there are no fences, or on fields with “bandbox” dimensions against weal competition. In the end, that’s why I’m not a big fan of trying to compare players using their stats, much outside of their respective leagues, or folks asking what a good … is.
I’m really happy you didn’t take what I said as any kind of insult or challenge, because it truly wasn’t. NORMALLY, when people get to talking about stats, they get pretty cavalier, and no one thinks a lot about using hyperbole to help make a point. Heck! I do it too, but usually I do it realizing what I’m doing.
When it comes to WHIP, if we compared my kid’s to yours, to many folks mine would look like a whimpering sissy, with a mere 1.28 in 162.67 varsity innings over a bit more than 2 seasons. But to those of us who look a bit beyond the numbers, all we’d see were 2 HS pitchers who were very likely the horses on their respective staffs, and not think all that much more about it because we know very little else about their situations.
I won’t even bother to tell you what the difference was in his WHIP between when he threw in wood bat venues and others. He was pitching when drop 5 Titanuims were the rage in HS, and there weren’t any limits on bats in tournaments, so when he and other good pitchers got to throw against wood, it was like night and day.
And sadly that happens a lot. Folks will see a player with 25 HRs and think WOW, that kid is a monster, but not realize he’s either a greyhound and plays on fields where there are no fences, or on fields with “bandbox” dimensions against weal competition. In the end, that’s why I’m not a big fan of trying to compare players using their stats, much outside of their respective leagues, or folks asking what a good … is.
I think there is universal agreement here on this topic.
I'll add that a WHIP of .7 is pretty dang good no matter what the other factors are...
Another data point, my son's WHIP in wood bat showcases this summer is .86 in 26 2/3 innings. Some of those were metal bat tournament innings, but I'm too lazy to do the math. His WHIP in 5A HS ball was 1.43 in 61 innings (not nearly the same competition level as a PG WWBA tournament though). There were a couple of games that swayed this computation and the summer has gone well, but the biggest contributor IMHO? He calls the pitches in summer ball but not HS ball...
I'll add that a WHIP of .7 is pretty dang good no matter what the other factors are...
Another data point, my son's WHIP in wood bat showcases this summer is .86 in 26 2/3 innings. Some of those were metal bat tournament innings, but I'm too lazy to do the math. His WHIP in 5A HS ball was 1.43 in 61 innings (not nearly the same competition level as a PG WWBA tournament though). There were a couple of games that swayed this computation and the summer has gone well, but the biggest contributor IMHO? He calls the pitches in summer ball but not HS ball...
quote:Originally posted by JMoff: … There were a couple of games that swayed this computation and the summer has gone well, but the biggest contributor IMHO? He calls the pitches in summer ball but not HS ball...
That’s been a real bug-a-boo of mine from the 1st time my boy threw a pitch in a game that was called from the bench! The rationale for doing that is all over the place from the coach simply feeling he needs to control every aspect of the game, to there being an actual plan in place to position defenders based on the hitter’s known tendencies and the pitcher’s ability to throw the ball reasonably close to where he’s trying to.
IMHO though, at least at the HS level there’s really more value in allowing the pitchers to throw what they feel most comfortable with than what benefit would be realized from keeping tight reins. My boy’s numbers were also much better when he was free to change whatever pitch he wanted, and while I believe confidence was very much a part of that, in my boy’s case not having to wait for signs to be relayed in allowed him to be just a tad quicker between pitches, and it made the perceived differences in those pitches by the batter, just that much more difficult to pick up.
FBs seemed faster compared to the previous OS pitch, OS pitches seemed slower when compared to previous FBs, and changing locations seemed to have a more pronounced effect. But, not every pitcher likes to work quick nor wants to take responsibility for his pitches, and those that don’t can thrive in a system where they’re little more than robots who react a certain way when a button is pushed. But its ok because it takes all kinds. The trouble is, when the system doesn’t take into consideration each pitcher’s differences, what it’s doing is producing clones that won’t all work the same way.
the key stat in hs is wins and losses
quote:Originally posted by TRhit:
the key stat in hs is wins and losses
Assuming you’re talking about pitchers, that’s a position that’s changed dramatically, especially over the last couple of decades. People have come to realize that a pitcher’s wins and losses are too much tied to how the rest of the players perform. Rather than being something strictly dependent on the pitcher. When a pitcher can get a win or a loss without even throwing a pitch, W’s and L’s lose a lot of their luster.
If you’re talking about a team perspective, then I agree to a certain degree.
quote:Originally posted by TRhit:
the key stat in hs is wins and losses
TR: That is a loaded response. If you're talking team W/L, I would say this is exactly the reason why HS pitchers are abused. Get as many wins as possible and if the kid doesn't survive to 19, who cares?
It depends greatly on the coach, how & if he develops #4-6 on his staff. Every big school has a couple of pitchers. The coach can ride them or keep them healthy. Depends on the opportunity you give the rest of the staff...
If you're talking about pitcher's individual W/L, I can see your point to some extent. The kid who can pitch effectively enough to win is the kid you want piching for you. He's the kid who can win 1-0 or 7-5 depending on the day. With a big lead, he pitches to contact on strike one, might give up some hits but doesn't walk anyone after the lead is established. In a close game, he paints the corners, goes deeper into counts, works for every out, etc.
Basically, he's the kid who competes to win the ball game. When the coach takes him out, he argues about it. He comes into the den when he gets home and wants to quit HS ball because that "old *** doesn't get it!" I live with one of those.
My point still holds, if the coach is calling the pitches, the pitcher can't be that pitcher unless the coach lets him compete.
I'd like to bump this thread just to see some opinions. We recently spoke with Vince Gennaro, president of SABR, on the HS Baseball Web Radio and he is a weekly contributor to Clubhouse Confidential on MLB Network. While watching the show, I've seen that a lot of emphasis is put on WHIP for pitcher evaluation. It got me thinking that there could possibly be an even more accurate way to evaluate in this respect.
I realize that this is nearly impossible to compute in high school for the same reasons listed above, but for college and above it is possible and quite easy for analysis. Here is my question:
Theoretically, wouldn't opponent's OPS be a better indicator than WHIP? OPS factors all aspects of WHIP into its calculation plus acknowledges if the hit was an extra base hit or not. There's a big difference between giving up 10 singles in nine innings and 5 singles, 3 doubles and 2 home runs in those same nine innings. The results may or may not show up in ERA, but it would most certainly always show up in opponent's OPS.
I realize that this is nearly impossible to compute in high school for the same reasons listed above, but for college and above it is possible and quite easy for analysis. Here is my question:
Theoretically, wouldn't opponent's OPS be a better indicator than WHIP? OPS factors all aspects of WHIP into its calculation plus acknowledges if the hit was an extra base hit or not. There's a big difference between giving up 10 singles in nine innings and 5 singles, 3 doubles and 2 home runs in those same nine innings. The results may or may not show up in ERA, but it would most certainly always show up in opponent's OPS.
Interesting thought....when I do the stats for my son's HS team, I do track OOPS.
In 2011, the lowest OOPS was .538, with a 1.14 WHIP
The team average OOPS was .774, with a 1.77 WHIP
In contrast, the highest OOPS was 1.06, with a 3.11 WHIP
In 2011, the lowest OOPS was .538, with a 1.14 WHIP
The team average OOPS was .774, with a 1.77 WHIP
In contrast, the highest OOPS was 1.06, with a 3.11 WHIP
tzbookman- Interesting. Could you provide the innings pitched that correlate with those figures?
This was for a relatively short season...
IP / WHIP / OOPS
28.0 / 1.14 / .538 (lowest)
9.0 / 3.11 / 1.06 (highest)
64.0 / 1.77 / .774 (average)
IP / WHIP / OOPS
28.0 / 1.14 / .538 (lowest)
9.0 / 3.11 / 1.06 (highest)
64.0 / 1.77 / .774 (average)
quote:Originally posted by J H:
…I realize that this is nearly impossible to compute in high school for the same reasons listed above, but for college and above it is possible and quite easy for analysis.
What are you saying is impossible to compute for HS pitchers?
quote:Here is my question:
Theoretically, wouldn't opponent's OPS be a better indicator than WHIP? OPS factors all aspects of WHIP into its calculation plus acknowledges if the hit was an extra base hit or not. There's a big difference between giving up 10 singles in nine innings and 5 singles, 3 doubles and 2 home runs in those same nine innings. The results may or may not show up in ERA, but it would most certainly always show up in opponent's OPS.
You’re asking a question based on what some of us consider a pretty worthless metric to begin with. ERA is about on the same level as BA, as far as telling much about a pitcher.
As for whether OPS would be a better indicator, there’s something that has to be 1st determined. Indicator of what? Who’s the best pitcher? If that’s it, what’s the pool used to compare them, team, league, state?
In the end, no matter what someone wants to use the numbers to determine, the more factors that can be taken into account, assuming they’re tracked and factored in correctly, the better. So, just like WHIP is better than ERA, OPS would be better than whip. And, if one were to factor in other things, that would be better than OPS. But it still all depends on what one is trying to determine.
To a V coach looking to promote someone from the JV, it doesn’t make a lot of difference that there’s a kid who has the best numbers in the state for JV pitchers. To a college scout, knowing a pitcher had the best numbers in the league doesn’t mean a lot if the kids SATs won’t get him in the door. IOW, there has to be a reason to measure them.
quote:You’re asking a question based on what some of us consider a pretty worthless metric to begin with. ERA is about on the same level as BA, as far as telling much about a pitcher.
I couldn't disagree with this statement more. ERA is one of, if not the most important statistic for a pitcher that exists. I've never heard a single baseball person, sabermetrician or not, say otherwise. As they look further into the category itself in different comparative ways (Ie. DIP ERA or ERA+), the premise remains the same. How many runs are earned towards the pitcher?
I said it may be nearly impossible because most HS scoring systems are flawed. There are, of course, exceptions to that rule.
My assumption was that OOPS would be more beneficial to an analyst than WHIP when looking at a pitcher in the same light...effectiveness of keeping runners off base and thus, from scoring. I assume there will always be a direct correlation between OOPS and WHIP and OOPS and ERA, just as there usually is between ERA and WHIP. I just think it may be even more accurate.
quote:Originally posted by J H:
I couldn't disagree with this statement more. ERA is one of, if not the most important statistic for a pitcher that exists. I've never heard a single baseball person, sabermetrician or not, say otherwise. As they look further into the category itself in different comparative ways (Ie. DIP ERA or ERA+), the premise remains the same. How many runs are earned towards the pitcher?
Its ok. Disagreeing doesn’t make you a bad person.
quote:I said it may be nearly impossible because most HS scoring systems are flawed. There are, of course, exceptions to that rule.
But what is it you’re saying is impossible to compute?
quote:My assumption was that OOPS would be more beneficial to an analyst than WHIP when looking at a pitcher in the same light...effectiveness of keeping runners off base and thus, from scoring. I assume there will always be a direct correlation between OOPS and WHIP and OOPS and ERA, just as there usually is between ERA and WHIP. I just think it may be even more accurate.
It sounds as though you’re assuming every analyst is looking for the same things you are, and that’s not true. Not everyone is looking for predictability for college or the pros. On any given team, there’s prolly only 1 headed for the pros, and if lucky 3 or 4 headed for college ball. That leaves one heck of a lot of players left to have to work into the equation for putting a team on the field.
I probably shouldn't have used the word impossible. But I was implying that because of the imperfections with the majority of HS scorekeepers, tracking opponent's OPS throughout an entire season would be very difficult to do because of those inaccuracies. I didn't mean it in any sort of negative connotation, just speaking from experience.
I completely agree with you about the predictability aspect. I am a college pitcher and therefore see things in a different light than high school players do, at least from a statistical standpoint. This probably isn't the most ideal forum for the question, but my focus would be more towards college or the pros, where the specific numbers involved are much more quantifiable for comparison.
Sorry for the confusion.
I completely agree with you about the predictability aspect. I am a college pitcher and therefore see things in a different light than high school players do, at least from a statistical standpoint. This probably isn't the most ideal forum for the question, but my focus would be more towards college or the pros, where the specific numbers involved are much more quantifiable for comparison.
Sorry for the confusion.
quote:Originally posted by J H:
I probably shouldn't have used the word impossible. But I was implying that because of the imperfections with the majority of HS scorekeepers, tracking opponent's OPS throughout an entire season would be very difficult to do because of those inaccuracies. I didn't mean it in any sort of negative connotation, just speaking from experience.
Ok, now I understand, and I agree with you 110%!
Hopefully this won’t hijack the thread, but I want to postulate why it is that the scorekeeping is so bad. I don’t want this to come out as attacking coaches, but the truth is, every head coach or manager at every level, is the person who controls that score book.
We’re talking about something most first graders could do. Its just not that complicated, so why is it that from t-ball to the pros, scorers are generally so poor? Like every other managerial position, the boss has only so many resources, and thus has to prioritize how they’re used. If the boss doesn’t think having valid numbers is something useful, chances are the person scoring isn’t going to do a very good job.
Please don’t get me wrong though. There are one heck of a lot of pretty good scorers at every level, just like there are a heck of a lot of good coaches at every level. The trouble is, there’s a lot more teams than either good coaches or good scorers, to there’s gonna be a lot of book kept poorly. But again, who has control of that?
Imagine how much the quality of scorers would improve, if the coach spent as much time training an SK as he does finding a team mom, someone to man the snack bar, order the team equipment, or join the booster club! Those things are all important because the team needs them, but unless a coach has had a truly good SK/statistician, he doesn’t realize that its really an assistant coach he doesn’t have, because there’s so many questions s/he could help with.
quote:I completely agree with you about the predictability aspect. I am a college pitcher and therefore see things in a different light than high school players do, at least from a statistical standpoint. This probably isn't the most ideal forum for the question, but my focus would be more towards college or the pros, where the specific numbers involved are much more quantifiable for comparison.
Its not that they more quantifiable. Its that they’re simply more available in a standardized format and in a centralized place. HS is getting a lot better because of the new scoring and stat programs, but they’re still woefully hard to find. I was talking to a fellow over at MaxPreps last year and he told me they’re the largest HS sports center for statistics in the county, and they’re only at about 5% of the total. That doesn’t sound like a lot, but you’d be amazed at the hardware and software they need to do that.
I can only guess that one reason the college numbers are so much better, is because there’s a lot fewer colleges than HSs. I assume another reason is, many college conferences or leagues require the calling in of stats to some central location. Some HS conferences and leagues require it too, but again, the numbers are much more significant.
I understand your focus, and that’s exactly where it should be. I hope you can understand that my focus isn’t on just getting to the next level, but rather simply showing what’s happening for every player, not just the studs. At the HS level, most players and parents will never see a college baseball field, let alone a pro field, but shouldn’t those players and their parents get see how they perform too? One reason I do a play-by-play newsletter after every game is so that every player will get to see his name in ink. I still get players and parents contacting me who come across the stats or a newsletter from back in the LL days. People can see that and remember the things that make baseball a lot of fun to play.
quote:Sorry for the confusion.
No problem at all. We have the capacity to communicate, and it only makes sense to do that to learn things we don’t know. Would you mind saying what school you play for?
I found this interesting so I went and calculated my son's for last year.
58 inn/ .444 ops / .91 whip
competent scorekeeper (me)
58 inn/ .444 ops / .91 whip
competent scorekeeper (me)
quote:I can only guess that one reason the college numbers are so much better, is because there’s a lot fewer colleges than HSs. I assume another reason is, many college conferences or leagues require the calling in of stats to some central location. Some HS conferences and leagues require it too, but again, the numbers are much more significant.
Colleges employ Sports Information Directors that are required to stay on the statistics of every team. I've never seen a team have a coach or player "keep the book." It is always computerized up in the press box.
I play at a DIII school in upstate New York called Oneonta State. Next spring, however, I will be transferring. I had Tommy John Surgery in July and therefore have to redshirt this spring. Because I am a senior and set to graduate, the NCAA has granted me another year of eligibility. I am going to therefore graduate and work towards a Master's degree while playing my last year. I don't know where I'm going yet, but every school I have been talking to is a Division I program. I will let the boards here know as soon as I make my commitment.
For the record, I just calculated my own OOPS during college:
OOPS: .566
WHIP: 1.21
ERA: 1.65
Innings pitched: 109
For what it is worth, I have found that D3 college scorekeepers can be just as bad if not worse than the HS scorekeepers. I've personally seen the following in college:
Pitcher charged with a loss - when he wasn't pitching in the game when the lead changed (e.g. left game after 7 complete not taking mound in 8th - winning team broke the tie in the 8th.)
Hitter credited with a hit on a three hop ground ball through the fielders legs
Pitcher charged with 3 earned runs on a bases loaded two out situation - where the batter hit a grounder to third, fielded cleanly and thrown into right field. 3B charged with an error - but all three runs counted as earned.
IMHO, until you have scorekeepers who are experienced and know what they are doing, not work study students working on their homework between pitches, you can't count on stats.
Pitcher charged with a loss - when he wasn't pitching in the game when the lead changed (e.g. left game after 7 complete not taking mound in 8th - winning team broke the tie in the 8th.)
Hitter credited with a hit on a three hop ground ball through the fielders legs
Pitcher charged with 3 earned runs on a bases loaded two out situation - where the batter hit a grounder to third, fielded cleanly and thrown into right field. 3B charged with an error - but all three runs counted as earned.
IMHO, until you have scorekeepers who are experienced and know what they are doing, not work study students working on their homework between pitches, you can't count on stats.
08dad- Wow! We've never come across anything like that, at least never that bad. There's always a situation where we may question a decision between a hit/error (usually the pitcher when he's coming off the mound), but nothing blatant like a deliberate lineup change that you mentioned. At my school, the SID or Asst. SID is always in attendance at every home game. Both played baseball through high school and although they aren't experts in the game by any means, they are more than competent to keep a solid score.
quote:Originally posted by #32 DAD:
I found this interesting so I went and calculated my son's for last year.
58 inn/ .444 ops / .91 whip
competent scorekeeper (me)
If I were in charge of the baseball gods, I’d make sure they had everything set up so that every team had a great SK, all stats were submitted to one central location, and everyone would have access to them, the way everyone has access to MLB data. That would pretty much be paradise to me from the standpoint of producing all kinds of numbers all kinds of different ways. But as good as that would be, there would still be hitch in the git-a-long.
At any level there’s a range of skills and talent available, and the higher the level, the less the range from the best to the worst. That makes it possible to be reasonably accurate in assessing ML players, but almost impossible to assess players at lower levels. A good example is those numbers for your son.
Assuming he’s in HS, whether he’s playing Fr, JV, or V ball, they are fantastic numbers. However, they would be more impressive if they were V numbers. Why? Of course its because the skills and range of skills for V is generally higher than either the Fr or JV range. But unfortunately, the difference doesn’t stop with the 3 levels of HSB.
Like college, almost every state has divisions of some kind, normally broken down by school size. Trouble is, one state may have 4 divisions and another 7. Right there you have problems, various things like distances and population have a severe limiting effect. But even at that, by the very nature of baseball, its possible for a small school to compete very well with the large ones. Not likely, but possible.
For a large part of most HS schedules, they play teams who’s talent pool is fairly equal. But other than that, things can get pretty wild. So what ends up happening is, its extremely difficult for any team to play all of its games against team with the same level of skill and talent. Now you end up with needing rules to stop embarrassing massacres. The end result is, no matter how honest and skilled an SK is, the numbers for his//her team could very easily be skewed tremendously. That’s how every year there are batters batting .600+ and pitchers having an ERA of 0.00. Perhaps one day they’ll come up with something like a BPF where the numbers all have something factored into them that takes into account the level of their competition.
But for me it really doesn’t matter because I don’t try to use the numbers for anything other than entertainment. Its when people try to use them to determine things like college scholarships or pro contract that it would cause any real problems.
Stats, numbers were for Varsity. Not ment to brag or anything just curious. Information in on MaxPreps for all to see. I am confortable with his ability. Looking forward to this his Junior year. Hope everyone has a great season.
quote:Originally posted by #32 DAD:
Stats, numbers were for Varsity. Not ment to brag or anything just curious. Information in on MaxPreps for all to see. I am confortable with his ability. Looking forward to this his Junior year. Hope everyone has a great season.
Didn’t take it as a brag at all, but rather a simple statement of fact. Hold on to your drawers for that Jr. year. For pitchers more than hitters, the Jr. year can be very “trying”. Many times a kid who makes it to the V as a So and does really well, gets a wakeup call the next year. Many people think that what happens is the opponents figger him out and he doesn’t have nearly the kind of great season, but it’s a bit more involved.
A kid winning in HS has a lot more to do with his team than it does about him. If he comes in as So and his team plays great defense behind him and they score lots of runs for him, if he throws at all well he’ll have a great year. As long as the team doesn’t change much and everyone has another good year, likely he’ll have another good year as well. Unfortunately though, HS teams have a way of losing their seniors every year, and with them most of their best players.
If those guys are replaced by players just as good or better, everything’s fine. But its not at all unusual for a good team to have a dip in performance the next year, especially if they lost a lot of good players. Of course it works the other way as well, where a weak team because of inexperience, breaks out the next year and everyone benefits.
We have a kid on our team who’s gonna be a Sr this season who’s had that happen to him. As a So, he won more games than anyone in the league by far, didn’t come close to getting beat, and pretty much made a shambles of every team he pitches against. Then last season he had a good year, but he got handled a few times. But, we’d lost 2 great infielders, 2 great outfielders, and 3 great hitters.
In 2010 he got 9.3 runs per game in support and the team made 6 errors behind him in 47 innings. In 2011 he got only 7 runs per game support, and they made 16 errors behind him in 54 innings. Heck, we had a pitcher last season who got drafted in the 3rd round, and his Sr year was a disaster compared to his Jr year too. What I’m saying is, a pitcher needs a lot of support to have a lot of success.
I hope your boy’s team doesn’t have a similar drop off, but it won’t make any difference. I’m sure he’ll take the rock and give it everything he can!
Here are the WHIPS for the staff my son's senior season along with what they did in and past HS along with their peak velocities in HS:
1.2 good lefty pitcher even better as senior (80+ mph), D1 outfielder
2.5 limited innings (84 mph), D3 outfielder/injured
1.54 #1 reliever w/ high ERA (upper 70s), Cut early from D3 as pitcher
1.51 staff ace, co-pitcher of year w/2nd round draft choice (87mph lefty), JC and D1 pitcher
1.47 mediocre starter(83 mph)probably tore UCL, DNP in college
1.4 very good pitcher next season (87 mph), lower tier D1 pitcher probably could have been mid to upper.
3.0 Limited innings in HS wild, but 1 bad inning threw off stats some (90+ mph), D1 pitcher
2.0 Limited innings 85+ mph, DNP in college to pursue academics
1.0 Very limited innings (87+ mph), turned down D1 walk-on for JC pitching, injured switched to track & field.
These all pitched in one of the country's best HS leagues. I can't see any correlation with WHIP to speak of. The kids with the better fastballs went on to pitch in college. It was as simple as that.
1.2 good lefty pitcher even better as senior (80+ mph), D1 outfielder
2.5 limited innings (84 mph), D3 outfielder/injured
1.54 #1 reliever w/ high ERA (upper 70s), Cut early from D3 as pitcher
1.51 staff ace, co-pitcher of year w/2nd round draft choice (87mph lefty), JC and D1 pitcher
1.47 mediocre starter(83 mph)probably tore UCL, DNP in college
1.4 very good pitcher next season (87 mph), lower tier D1 pitcher probably could have been mid to upper.
3.0 Limited innings in HS wild, but 1 bad inning threw off stats some (90+ mph), D1 pitcher
2.0 Limited innings 85+ mph, DNP in college to pursue academics
1.0 Very limited innings (87+ mph), turned down D1 walk-on for JC pitching, injured switched to track & field.
These all pitched in one of the country's best HS leagues. I can't see any correlation with WHIP to speak of. The kids with the better fastballs went on to pitch in college. It was as simple as that.
The average major league pitcher gives up just over 1 hit per inning and just under .4 walks per inning. The averag MLB whip is about 1.4. The 1.5 whip high prospect will be a strong arm, low hits per inning and high K per inning with a below 25% extra base hit percentage. (I'm guessing)
The best stat is OPS against.
The best stat is OPS against.
quote:Originally posted by baseballpapa:
The average major league pitcher gives up just over 1 hit per inning and just under .4 walks per inning. The averag MLB whip is about 1.4. The 1.5 whip high prospect will be a strong arm, low hits per inning and high K per inning with a below 25% extra base hit percentage. (I'm guessing)
The best stat is OPS against.
Whatever stat works for you is the best one. Personally, I study 15-20 different metrics for pitchers when I try to really evaluate their performances, because I believe there a lot more to performance than any one number can provide.
But I think the main mistake people make when talking HS stats, is comparing them in any way to ML stats. In my mind, what ML players do is totally irrelevant to how HS players perform. So little is the same in either quality or quantity, to me its really meaningless. Now if you have those above figures for ALL HS pitchers, then you have something.
You are right if winning at the high school level matters.
MLB has about 8% of all runs scored are unearned. College is roughly twice that. I have no idea about high school but would guess 1/4 of all runs are unearned. That makes a strikeout pitcher more valuable in high school. That pitcher can give up many walks as long as his strikeout ratio is greater than 3:1. A MLB average is 2:1.
I ground ball pitcher is more valuable as one plays up. You are right about the MLB stats not meaning as much in high school. Ground balls in high school produce unearned runs, in college and above they are usually outs.
My son always had a high WHIP but low ERA. His K stat was 1.4 per inning from high school to pro ball. This was too much. I tried to talk him into striking less out in college and pro ball but he hated contact. He was not made for pro ball with his mentality.
I will say those who ignore stats as a coach, are not doing their job. The player doesn't have to be paying too much attention, but the coaches better.
If you study MLB, the stat that explains runs scored more than any other is OPS. Batting average is not even close to this stat and is over-rated as a measure of a good hitter. IF OPS is the best measure to look at runs scored and offense, I suspect OPS against is a good measure for pitchers. However, the coach that adds errors to this is on to something for a high school stat. (He posted earlier.)
MLB has about 8% of all runs scored are unearned. College is roughly twice that. I have no idea about high school but would guess 1/4 of all runs are unearned. That makes a strikeout pitcher more valuable in high school. That pitcher can give up many walks as long as his strikeout ratio is greater than 3:1. A MLB average is 2:1.
I ground ball pitcher is more valuable as one plays up. You are right about the MLB stats not meaning as much in high school. Ground balls in high school produce unearned runs, in college and above they are usually outs.
My son always had a high WHIP but low ERA. His K stat was 1.4 per inning from high school to pro ball. This was too much. I tried to talk him into striking less out in college and pro ball but he hated contact. He was not made for pro ball with his mentality.
I will say those who ignore stats as a coach, are not doing their job. The player doesn't have to be paying too much attention, but the coaches better.
If you study MLB, the stat that explains runs scored more than any other is OPS. Batting average is not even close to this stat and is over-rated as a measure of a good hitter. IF OPS is the best measure to look at runs scored and offense, I suspect OPS against is a good measure for pitchers. However, the coach that adds errors to this is on to something for a high school stat. (He posted earlier.)
quote:Originally posted by baseballpapa:
…However, the coach that adds errors to this is on to something for a high school stat. (He posted earlier.)
Absolutely true, which is why I’ve added in errors in many many different metrics, both offensive and defensive. I always give the “book” metric, but often compute the same thing using errors as a positive rather than a negative, and display them both.
I started doing it to stop parents from buggin’ me, complaining that I didn’t score something right that happened to their kid. That way they thought they could have their cake and eat it too. Trouble is, for the most part it showed nothing because the same “adjustment” was being made to everyone. But, having another 15-50 points on a kids BA makes parents happy, even if it means nothing.
In the last few years, I’ve stated looking a lot more at BIP numbers. I find that in HS, with relatively so few games and thus PAs, putting the ball in play is very important.