It's only not close if you assume, for some odd reason, that he has insight that people at the ballparks, in-person, don't have. It's not a question of math, it's a question of limitations that he's not there in person to actually see the trajectory. All he has at his disposal is replays where often times the ball isn't seen until the last few frames. With all due respect to him, his methodology is seriously suspect due to the limitations of what he's basing his math off of. At best it's pick your poison... not sure why his numbers are being taken as gospel.
I trust the ballparks to know their dimensions and the trajectory of the ball more accurately than some guy sitting at his computer. That's not to say I don't respect his work, his efforts or that his math isn't correct, but he simply doesn't have a very complete perspective without seeing the balls in person.
Last edited by Brutus; 08-18-2012 at 06:33 PM.
"No matter how good you are, you're going to lose one-third of your games. No matter how bad you are you're going to win one-third of your games. It's the other third that makes the difference." ~Tommy Lasorda
I will trust the guy who with the help of slo motion replay who calculates the angle of the ball off of the bat, the speed off of the bat and several other things over someone at the ballpark using a rough estimator on distances.
"No matter how good you are, you're going to lose one-third of your games. No matter how bad you are you're going to win one-third of your games. It's the other third that makes the difference." ~Tommy Lasorda
There's a famous story of Bo Jackson hitting a home run that was so low the pitcher reached up thinking he had a shot at catching it. It'd be interesting to see with today's tech how different the estimates would have been
"I never argue with people who say baseball is boring, because baseball is boring. And then, suddenly, it isn't. And that's what makes it great." - Joe Posnanski
That's your prerogative. But let's not act like it's perfect science. It's still prone to error just like the people at GABP. I'm not suggesting the ballpark estimates are without flaws, but neither is this guy's work. So we will never know which estimate is more accurate.
Personally, I prefer the people at GABP because the software they use takes into account the same concepts but they get a better read on the actual ball since they're seeing it in front of them. They're all using the same mathematical concepts, though. The software used at ballparks are using the same things we're taught in geometry class.
"No matter how good you are, you're going to lose one-third of your games. No matter how bad you are you're going to win one-third of your games. It's the other third that makes the difference." ~Tommy Lasorda
There is no software they use. You can go to their website and use the exact same thing that they use to estimate the home run distance. You click where it lands and the trajectory and it spits out how far it went.
Crap, wrong thread again. I'm a disaster.
"I never argue with people who say baseball is boring, because baseball is boring. And then, suddenly, it isn't. And that's what makes it great." - Joe Posnanski
"No matter how good you are, you're going to lose one-third of your games. No matter how bad you are you're going to win one-third of your games. It's the other third that makes the difference." ~Tommy Lasorda
Both big blasts. Just another thing to get in a p1$$!n contest about.
The guy isn't using anything complex either, Doug. It's basic geometry. What he's doing is nothing more than simple physics. The math would be the same that any software is programmed to calculate. It's basically a situation where in both his spreadsheet and the ballparks' software, y=mx+b. If y=distance, we can solve the equation by knowing m and b.
The problem isn't with that guy's formulas or the software's formulas. They are calculating the same things... because again, it's geometry. The issue is that he admits he has to make some "best guesses" when it comes to the ball coming off the bat, estimating the speed based on how long it took the ball to land, etc. Because he has to guess on a few of these things, the calculations can be incorrect. Same with the guys at the ballpark. They have to estimate on their inputs, which can leave room for error.
I assure you, Doug, they're using basically the same concepts. It's simple geometry. It's just a matter of human error when guessing the inputs to make the calculations.
Last edited by Brutus; 08-18-2012 at 09:04 PM.
"No matter how good you are, you're going to lose one-third of your games. No matter how bad you are you're going to win one-third of your games. It's the other third that makes the difference." ~Tommy Lasorda
I can't wait until Stanton is a Red.
Not sure how this one only rates 456/460 but it was an impressive one by our old friend.
http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?co...67391&c_id=mlb
http://hittrackeronline.com/detail.p...13&type=hitter
Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please. |