> ABs? I doubt Retrosheet would be any help this far back, so I'm not sure
> how to find this out.
>
>

Blasphemy!

You can do it yourself here:
http://www.retrosheet.org/boxesetc/1927/VNYA01927.htm

Or you can look at their compilation here:
http://www.retrosheet.org/boxesetc/1927/WNYA01927.htm

You can also download the files yourself.

Tom


---------------------------------------------
The Book--Playing The Percentages In Baseball
http://www.InsideTheBook.com

> Realize that you need to take any of these sources with a healthy dose of
> salt; there are thousands of discrepancies among data sources and they get
> worse the further back in history that you go. Retrosheet's researchers
> and
> Pete Palmer have done what they can to resolve many of them, but I think
> that the odds that any particular set of statistics for any team prior to
> about 1975 or so is exactly correct are pretty small. If you're trying to
> track down every last AB, good luck (and please report back any
> discrepancies that you find!)
>

I agree.  These things are not verifiable facts (therefore true and passes
the Reagan test).  They are assumptions of fact (which means good enough
in a court of law that will occasionally find an innocent person guilty).

Retrosheet researchers are just like any other researchers that try to
make sense of the various evidence they find.

Tom

Yeah, I didn't mean to imply I was looking for an absolute truth. I didn't check
retrosheet because I was mostly curious about why the discrepancy exists and
which source between the two is more accurate. I was under the incorrect
assumption that BDB and B-R.com use the same source data.

Anyway, retrosheet has a different number than either of the other two sources
(one fewer AB than baseball-reference.com), so it doesn't really help verify one
over the other.

Mr. Forman completely answered my question. You people are super responsive and
friendly. Three courteous and informative responses within minutes of an email
almost gives me faith in the future of internet dialogue. Almost.

--- In baseball-databank@yahoogroups.com, mwe55innc@... wrote:
>
> On Apr 25, 2011 9:21am, Tangotiger wrote:
>
>
> > > ABs? I doubt Retrosheet would be any help this far back, so I'm not sure
> > > how to find this out.
>
> > Blasphemy!
>
> > You can do it yourself here:
> > http://www.retrosheet.org/boxesetc/1927/VNYA01927.htm
>
> > Or you can look at their compilation here:
>
> > http://www.retrosheet.org/boxesetc/1927/WNYA01927.htm
>
> Realize that you need to take any of these sources with a healthy dose of
> salt; there are thousands of discrepancies among data sources and they get
> worse the further back in history that you go. Retrosheet's researchers and
> Pete Palmer have done what they can to resolve many of them, but I think
> that the odds that any particular set of statistics for any team prior to
> about 1975 or so is exactly correct are pretty small. If you're trying to
> track down every last AB, good luck (and please report back any
> discrepancies that you find!)
>
> Mike Emeigh
> MWE55inNC@...
>

> Anyway, retrosheet has a different number than either of the other two
> sources (one fewer AB than baseball-reference.com), so it doesn't really
> help verify one over the other.
>

I would presume(*) that Pete Palmer would use Retrosheet as his source of
facts if they had it.  And if he disagreed, he would either rely on
Retrosheet, or let Dave know that he disagrees and where he disagrees.
And Dave would presumably either remain disagreed, or change to match
Pete.

(*) Something I've inferred based on the way Pete has described things in
the past.

So, there is a strong relationship between the two (as best as I
understand it) to try to get to the truth.

Note that Retro updates sporadically (say two to four times a year), while
I presume Pete's update cycle is more frequent.

Tom

----- Original Message -----

From: aaron_carlisle

To: baseball-databank@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Monday, April 25, 2011 8:44 AM

Subject: [baseball-databank] Data Question

 

I've googled and checked FAQs, but I can't seem to find the answer to this. If someone could either point me in the direction of an answer, or tell me which one is right, I would appreciate it.

I had a question not easily answered through the baseball-reference.com website, so I downloaded the BDB-sql-2011-03-28 SQL file. There was a discrepancy when I looked on the baseball-reference.com site for details about one of my results, and I narrowed it down to this:

From BDB-sql-2011-03-28:
mysql> select AB from Teams where name = 'New York Yankees' and yearID = '1927';
+------+
| AB |
+------+
| 5347 |
+------+
1 row in set (0.00 sec)

Looking at http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/NYY/1927.shtml , I get 5354 total AB for the '27 Yankees (in the Team Totals line).

So, which is correct for the '27 Yankees? Did the team have 5354 or 5347 ABs? I doubt Retrosheet would be any help this far back, so I'm not sure how to find this out.

First of all, I think Clem meant to write 5354 below instead of 5434.

And it is correct that if you look at the batting splits page for the New York
Yankees that year, you get one fewer at bat, or 5353. The difference is in their
game on April 20th, where officially Mike Gazella had four at-bats while we
think he had only three. Other sources for the game agree that he had three
at-bats and if he did have four at-bats in that game, it would have meant that
his spot in the lineup came up five times, while the spots before and after him
had four and three plate appearances. So I'm pretty confident that this is an
official error.

In the pre-convention release, we should be releasing discrepancy files for this
(and many other years) and incorporating this data on our game, team and player
pages. The line in the discrepancy file for this issue looks like:

"1927A0103","gazem101",1927,"NYA","O",,"AB","PHA192704200",3,4,,,,

It contains a discrepancy ID, a retro-sheet player ID, year, team ID, "O" (for
an offensive discrepancy), "AB" (stat ID), game ID, our total, the official
total, and some note fields (not filled in at present).

Anyway, I figured some of you might be interested in this level of detail.

Tom Ruane

--- In baseball-databank@yahoogroups.com, "Clem Comly" <ccomly@...> wrote:
>
> First, if you sum the players ABs from batting.txt they come to 5434 which
matches B-R and Retrosheet.  The data Retrosheet (and I believe B-R) shows for
the team total for 1927 Yankees is the sum of the players stats from Pete
Palmer.  I've never seen the raw Palmer data set, but I believe Palmer's data
set does have separate team data from the official stats which may not show
5434.  The question is which is correct total for 1927 NYA.  There is no
guarantee 5434 is the correct total.
>
> As a matter of fact, if one goes through the individual box scores on
Retrosheet one gets 5353 ABs for 1927 Yankees.  For those of us who are lazy, we
can accomplish the same thing by looking at the Total line of the Retrosheet
batting splits page for 1927 Yankees.  By going through the splits of Yankee
batters one-by-one we find Mike Gazella has 115 ABs per Palmer and 114 per
Retrosheet boxes.  Retrosheet hopes to soon post identified discrepancies which
would allow the curious to see where the issues are and the industrious to
attempt to resolve.
>
> I suspect the problem is Teams.txt is not always updated when Fielding.txt,
Pitching.txt or Batting.txt are updated.  There are only a few stats in
Teams.txt that aren't simply the sums of individuals (Wins,
L,ties,ER,ERA,SHO,DP).  I see 2 courses: drop the other stat columns from
Teams.txt or recalculate them all after revisions to other tables.  The ER total
is also a sum till the team unearned run was created by what is now rule 10.18
back in the 1960s or 1970s.
>
> Clem Comly
>
>   ----- Original Message -----
>   From: aaron_carlisle
>   To: baseball-databank@yahoogroups.com
>   Sent: Monday, April 25, 2011 8:44 AM
>   Subject: [baseball-databank] Data Question
>
>
>
>   I've googled and checked FAQs, but I can't seem to find the answer to this.
If someone could either point me in the direction of an answer, or tell me which
one is right, I would appreciate it.
>
>   I had a question not easily answered through the baseball-reference.com
website, so I downloaded the BDB-sql-2011-03-28 SQL file. There was a
discrepancy when I looked on the baseball-reference.com site for details about
one of my results, and I narrowed it down to this:
>
>   From BDB-sql-2011-03-28:
>   mysql> select AB from Teams where name = 'New York Yankees' and yearID =
'1927';
>   +------+
>   | AB |
>   +------+
>   | 5347 |
>   +------+
>   1 row in set (0.00 sec)
>
>   Looking at http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/NYY/1927.shtml , I get
5354 total AB for the '27 Yankees (in the Team Totals line).
>
>   So, which is correct for the '27 Yankees? Did the team have 5354 or 5347
ABs? I doubt Retrosheet would be any help this far back, so I'm not sure how to
find this out.
>

I'm writing to this group because I've written several times to Sean Lahman to
request, as a normal courtesy, permission to use the data contained in his
baseball database in an R package, but have received no reply.

This is intended primarily for student use in a course I'm teaching, but would
be of wider interest to baseball enthusiasts who use R, and creates the
possibilities for interesting analyses and visualizations.
For example, as a proof-of-concept, I prepared a simple visualization of the
Teams data as a Google Motion Chart for my class at
http://www.psych.yorku.ca/lab/psy6140/bb/gvisTeams.html

I would like to develop this further, but I feel stymied by the restrictive
license Sean places on the baseball1.com web site, which says "Any commercial
use, or other dissemination of the
database in part or in whole is prohibited."

I understand the no-commercial use restriction, but I gather from this list and
from the readme58.txt file that there have been many contributors to this
database, and it is the "other dissemination of the database in part or in whole
is prohibited" that troubles me.

The R package used the .csv files, but then did some cleaning
transformations and adds R documentation and some R examples for each.  (In the
process, I discovered a number of errors in the readme58.txt file, and the
Appearances table has errors in the variable names, not yet fixed.)  Throughout
the package documentation I give total attribution to Sean Lahman as the source
of the data.

I consider this to be within "fair use", but would appreciate if readers of this
list would comment on this issue.

best,
-Michael

I'm sure someone can help you, notably Mike Emeigh.  You can check the
logs as Mike has explained this before.  I think it was Mussina once?

Anyone, I'm only replying to say that you used the word "correct".  The
right word is "official".  What is "correct" is whatever you can
reasonably argue in favor of.

I know in my case, if I'm preparing IP per GS, in no way would I include a
game where a pitcher faces 0 batters as a GS.

Tom

----- Original Message -----

From: Geoff Buchan

To: baseball-databank@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Saturday, September 24, 2011 5:46 PM

Subject: [baseball-databank] Games started definition question

 

Hi all - I was wondering if someone could point to an official definition of games started for pitchers.

I looked at the official MLB rules here:

http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/downloads/y2011/Official_Baseball_Rules.pdf

But alas, those don't mention games started as a statistic.

While this might seem simple and obvious, there's actually an  example from this season that's not so clear:

http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/gameday/index.jsp?gid=2011_08_19_phimlb_wasmlb_1&mode=box

Roy Oswalt was in the starting lineup on August 19th, but four batters into the game, a thunderstorm caused a long delay. The Phillies decided to replace Oswalt with Kyle Kendrick, so Oswalt never pitched to a batter, nor did he bat in the top of the 1st. But he was listed in the boxscore for both batting and pitching, and presumably he had "played" the game, and thus would not have been allowed to pinch hit, run, or otherwise reenter the game. The play-by-play for the game also says that Kendrick relieved Oswalt in the bottom of the first, before the first batter.

The game logs and stats on MLB.com don't credit Oswalt with an appearance for that game at all, but they do count it as both a game and  a game started for Kendrick. Is this "correct", or is there even a "correct" definition of a start?

I'm currently receiving a boxscore feed which does not list games started explicitly, so I'm inferring it from the pitching order. For this game, since Oswalt was listed in the boxscore, I credited him with the start and a game, and Kendrick's appearance was considered in relief.

Any guidance on this would be appreciated.

Regards,

Geoff Buchan

Michael,
Apologies if I didn't respond to your inquiry. What I always tell people is that
they're free to use the database in ways like you described. The prohibition
against commercial use was intended to stop folks from reselling the database or
using it for a commercial website without attribution.  If you find errors in
the documentation, please forward them to me so I can fix them in the next
release.

With the season about to end (and my team out of the playoffs), I'm getting
geared up to update the database with 2011 stats.  Anybody who'd like to help
out, please let me know.

Regards,
Sean Lahman

As an economist, what kind of incentive system considerations would you
have to make this work:

http://www.insidethebook.com/ee/index.php/site/comments/virtual_work_stoppage/

(Also read the comments in that thread.)

Tom

Sorry guys, that was meant for someone else.

Tom

Has anyone "picked up the slack" to continue the availability of these stats? If
not, are there other sources? I'm looking to continue the development of my
iPhone app, "Baseball Statistics 2011(now 2012) Edition".

I'd be willing to host the stats on my server if that would be helpful, but I
don't know what would be involved in collecting and compiling them.

Mark Knopper
mak (at) bgp.nu

--- In baseball-databank@yahoogroups.com, Sean Forman <sean-forman@...> wrote:
>
> BDB User Group,
>
> Just a note that I stepped down as maintainer of the databank last winter
> and WILL NOT be providing an update this year.  As I said in discussions
> after this announcement.  If you or your group would like to pick up the
> slack, I suggest shipping bits and the users will beat a path to your door.
>
> sean
> ---
> Sean Forman
> Sports Reference LLC, President
> http://www.sports-reference.com/
>

Mark,

There were multiple responses, but I think the key one is this from Sean
Lahman on April 16th:

  >There has been a lot of good discussion here, but frankly some of it
is getting far afield from the central question: how to carry on after
Sean Forman's decision to step down from his leadership role.
  >
  >After discussions with many of you on and offline, I think the answer
is simple. I'll resume an active role as point person for the project
and help ensure that the database is maintained and made available.
  >
  >We can continue to weigh new directions, but I think this answers the
immediate question that's on the table.
  >
  >Regards,
  >Sean Lahman

I also offered to host stats, but I gather that maintaining the database
is much more work than actually hosting the data.

Clay

On 11/14/2011 9:48 AM, mirv wrote:
>
> Has anyone "picked up the slack" to continue the availability of these
> stats? If not, are there other sources? I'm looking to continue the
> development of my iPhone app, "Baseball Statistics 2011(now 2012)
> Edition".
>
> I'd be willing to host the stats on my server if that would be
> helpful, but I don't know what would be involved in collecting and
> compiling them.
>
> Mark Knopper
> mak (at) bgp.nu
>

Clay,

Thanks for pointing this out. I had been using Sean Lahman's database until he
restricted it from commercial use. I wonder if he is now allowing that? I'll
contact him directly.

Mark


On Nov 14, 2011, at 4:14 PM, Clay Dreslough wrote:

> Mark,
>
> There were multiple responses, but I think the key one is this from Sean
Lahman on April 16th:
>
> >There has been a lot of good discussion here, but frankly some of it is
getting far afield from the central question: how to carry on after Sean
Forman's decision to step down from his leadership role.
> >
> >After discussions with many of you on and offline, I think the answer is
simple. I'll resume an active role as point person for the project and help
ensure that the database is maintained and made available.
> >
> >We can continue to weigh new directions, but I think this answers the
immediate question that's on the table.
> >
> >Regards,
> >Sean Lahman
>
> I also offered to host stats, but I gather that maintaining the database is
much more work than actually hosting the data.
>
> Clay
>
> On 11/14/2011 9:48 AM, mirv wrote:
>>
>> Has anyone "picked up the slack" to continue the availability of these stats?
If not, are there other sources? I'm looking to continue the development of my
iPhone app, "Baseball Statistics 2011(now 2012) Edition".
>>
>> I'd be willing to host the stats on my server if that would be helpful, but I
don't know what would be involved in collecting and compiling them.
>>
>> Mark Knopper
>> mak (at) bgp.nu
>>
>

--- In baseball-databank@yahoogroups.com, "mirv" <mak@...> wrote:
> Has anyone "picked up the slack" to continue the
> availability of these stats?

I'm going to make a release at the end of the month.  Just waiting for the MVP
awards to be announced, which is always the last piece of the puzzle.

Regards,
Sean Lahman

If Kemp and Verlander don't win, I'm going to have a stroke. So we
should just pencil those guys in.

(Just kidding: I realize that you still have to wait for MVP voting etc.)

Clay

On 11/15/2011 8:36 AM, anson2995 wrote:
>
> I'm going to make a release at the end of the month. Just waiting for
> the MVP awards to be announced, which is always the last piece of the
> puzzle.
>
> Regards,
> Sean Lahman
>

Sometime after the NL MVP is announced tomorrow, I'm going to post a beta
version of the 2011 database. I'll post a note here and a link when it's ready
for download.

Ideally, I'd like to let folks poke around with it for a few days to identify
bugs or errors.  Given that the release is going to be at the start of a holiday
weekend, I'm going to suggest that we allow a week or ten days for this process
before releasing the database out into the wild.

As always, email me or post here with any questions.

Regards,
Sean Lahman