Pitching strategy evaluation via stratified analysis using propensity score

IF 16.4 1区 化学 Q1 CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Accounts of Chemical Research Pub Date : 2022-08-06 DOI:10.1515/jqas-2021-0060
Hiroshi Nakahara, K. Takeda, Keisuke Fujii
{"title":"Pitching strategy evaluation via stratified analysis using propensity score","authors":"Hiroshi Nakahara, K. Takeda, Keisuke Fujii","doi":"10.1515/jqas-2021-0060","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Recent measurement technologies enable us to analyze baseball at higher levels of complexity. There are, however, still many unclear points around pitching strategy. There are two elements that make it difficult to measure the effect of a pitching strategy. First, most public datasets do not include location data where the catcher demands a ball, which is essential information to obtain the battery’s intent. Second, there are many confounders associated with pitching/batting results when evaluating pitching strategy. We here clarify the effect of pitching attempts to a specific location, e.g., inside or outside. We employ a causal inference framework called stratified analysis using a propensity score to evaluate the effects while removing the effect of confounding factors. We use a pitch-by-pitch dataset of Japanese professional baseball games held in 2014–2019, which includes location data where the catcher demands a ball. The results reveal that an outside pitching attempt is more effective than an inside one to minimize allowed run average. In addition, the stratified analysis shows that the outside pitching attempt is effective regardless of the magnitude of the estimated batter’s ability, and the proportion of pitched inside for pitcher/batter. Our analysis provides practical insights into selecting a pitching strategy to minimize allowed runs.","PeriodicalId":1,"journal":{"name":"Accounts of Chemical Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":16.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounts of Chemical Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/jqas-2021-0060","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Recent measurement technologies enable us to analyze baseball at higher levels of complexity. There are, however, still many unclear points around pitching strategy. There are two elements that make it difficult to measure the effect of a pitching strategy. First, most public datasets do not include location data where the catcher demands a ball, which is essential information to obtain the battery’s intent. Second, there are many confounders associated with pitching/batting results when evaluating pitching strategy. We here clarify the effect of pitching attempts to a specific location, e.g., inside or outside. We employ a causal inference framework called stratified analysis using a propensity score to evaluate the effects while removing the effect of confounding factors. We use a pitch-by-pitch dataset of Japanese professional baseball games held in 2014–2019, which includes location data where the catcher demands a ball. The results reveal that an outside pitching attempt is more effective than an inside one to minimize allowed run average. In addition, the stratified analysis shows that the outside pitching attempt is effective regardless of the magnitude of the estimated batter’s ability, and the proportion of pitched inside for pitcher/batter. Our analysis provides practical insights into selecting a pitching strategy to minimize allowed runs.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
用倾向得分分层分析评价投球策略
最近的测量技术使我们能够在更高的复杂水平上分析棒球。然而,在投球策略上仍有许多不清楚的地方。有两个因素使我们很难衡量投球策略的效果。首先,大多数公共数据集不包括接球手需要球的位置数据,而这是获取电池意图的必要信息。其次,在评估投球策略时,有许多与投球/击球结果相关的混杂因素。我们在这里澄清投球尝试到一个特定的位置,例如,内部或外部的影响。我们采用一种称为分层分析的因果推理框架,使用倾向评分来评估影响,同时消除混杂因素的影响。我们使用了2014-2019年举行的日本职业棒球比赛的每一球数据集,其中包括接球手需要球的位置数据。结果显示,外场投球比内场投球更能有效地减少失分。此外,分层分析表明,无论估计击球手的能力大小,以及投手/击球手的内投比例如何,外投尝试都是有效的。我们的分析为选择投球策略以减少失分提供了实际的见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Accounts of Chemical Research
Accounts of Chemical Research 化学-化学综合
CiteScore
31.40
自引率
1.10%
发文量
312
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Accounts of Chemical Research presents short, concise and critical articles offering easy-to-read overviews of basic research and applications in all areas of chemistry and biochemistry. These short reviews focus on research from the author’s own laboratory and are designed to teach the reader about a research project. In addition, Accounts of Chemical Research publishes commentaries that give an informed opinion on a current research problem. Special Issues online are devoted to a single topic of unusual activity and significance. Accounts of Chemical Research replaces the traditional article abstract with an article "Conspectus." These entries synopsize the research affording the reader a closer look at the content and significance of an article. Through this provision of a more detailed description of the article contents, the Conspectus enhances the article's discoverability by search engines and the exposure for the research.
期刊最新文献
Intentions to move abroad among medical students: a cross-sectional study to investigate determinants and opinions. Analysis of Medical Rehabilitation Needs of 2023 Kahramanmaraş Earthquake Victims: Adıyaman Example. Efficacy of whole body vibration on fascicle length and joint angle in children with hemiplegic cerebral palsy. The change process questionnaire (CPQ): A psychometric validation. Prevalence and predictors of hand hygiene compliance in clinical, surgical and intensive care unit wards: results of a second cross-sectional study at the Umberto I teaching hospital of Rome.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1