There have been a number of posts regarding the number of errors with the baseball team. I did a quick scan of the box scores and tallied the following:

0 errors: 17 games 14-3
1 error: 18 games 13-5
2 errors: 9 games 3-6
3 errors: 7 games 4-3
4 errors: 1 game 1-0
5 errors: 3 games 0-3

In 64% of all games, Rice committed no more than 1 error. 25% of the total errors for the year were committed in 4 games. 53% of the errors were committed in 11 games (20% of total games). Not surprising, if you make fewer errors you win more games. Something I was unwilling to spend the time looking at was how many times there were multiple errors in one inning.

I also looked up the Rice fielding percentage, as well as that of Texas and A&M. They are as follows:

Rice 0.964
A&M 0.968
Texas 0.976

I would note that the difference between Rice and A&M is 4 errors per 1000 chances and between Rice and Texas is 12 errors per 1000 chances. If you have about 40 chances per game (and Rice typically has fewer due to their higher quantity of strikeouts) this works out to a difference of 0.16 errors per game with A&M and 0.48 errors per game with Texas. Rice would have to play 6 games before they would have one more error than A&M. If you look at a week with 4 games (typical week), Rice would have 0.64 more errors than A&M and 2 errors more than UT. THose don't seem like big numbers, especially if your pitchers can make up the difference with fewer free passes. I think the issue is not making multiple errors and combining them with walks, HBP, and WP in the same inning so that the damage is limited.

What about unearned runs? Doesn't it feel like the errors lead to bursts of scoring that drives some of the losses? I know that's Walt's (and a few others) contention, and while I don't follow every game, certainly feels that way to me.

Quick look says we gave up 233 runs of which 173 were earned.....60 uneared

A&M gave up 202 runs with 163 earned.....39 unearned

UT gave up 206 with 177 earned.......29 unearned.

Pretty big difference I would say. It is amazing that for the three teams the number of earned runs given up is so close.

(05-27-2015 03:21 PM)Tiki Owl Wrote:  Quick look says we gave up 233 runs of which 173 were earned.....60 uneared

A&M gave up 202 runs with 163 earned.....39 unearned

UT gave up 206 with 177 earned.......29 unearned.

Pretty big difference I would say. It is amazing that for the three teams the number of earned runs given up is so close.

We also seem to commit a series of errors when we need it the most (opinion from watching the games). We have lost several close games due to poor defense. Seems like we go into defensive meltdown mode when we're up 3-2 as opposed to up 9-1.

And the errors have been compounded by an unprecedented number of wild pitches and passed balls.

Also, you can't just go by error count and fielding percentage when evaluating infield defense. The UT defense and Aggies SS got to balls that we simply do not. Our guys have very little range.

(05-27-2015 03:48 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  And the errors have been compounded by an unprecedented number of wild pitches and passed balls.

Also, you can't just go by error count and fielding percentage when evaluating infield defense. The UT defense and Aggies SS got to balls that we simply do not. Our guys have very little range.

It seems to me that often, when we turn on the error machine, the pitcher gets rattled. For example Oreweiler in the ninth inning of our loss to UH.

(05-27-2015 03:48 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  And the errors have been compounded by an unprecedented number of wild pitches and passed balls.

Also, you can't just go by error count and fielding percentage when evaluating infield defense. The UT defense and Aggies SS got to balls that we simply do not. Our guys have very little range.

WP/PB/HBP

Rice 43/12/32
A&M 28/6/38
Texas 17/12/48

Of course this doesn't indicate situation when these happened.

(05-27-2015 03:48 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  Also, you can't just go by error count and fielding percentage when evaluating infield defense. The UT defense and Aggies SS got to balls that we simply do not. Our guys have very little range.

Important point that I was about to make. Defensive Efficiency is a much better way to look at team defense. You basically take the total number of balls-in-play and figure out how many times the defense turned that into an out. Over the course of a 50+ game season, most of the luck will be evened out (though teams with pitchers that allow more hard contact will have worse defensive efficiency). This takes into account the defense's reliability (i.e. errors, i.e. whether they are sure-handed and make accurate throws), range, and positioning.

Easy example: in 2010 Derek Jeter made 6 errors in 151 games and was regarded as a below-average defender. In 2013 Andrelton Simmons made 14 errors in 156 games and was regarded as an elite defender. The same is true at the college level, but unfortunately we don't have the statistics readily available to compare total team defense.

If someone is bored or has some time on their hands, they could try to compute defensive efficiency for some of the tournament teams (or past Rice teams) to see how this year's team stacks up. If you click on the links above, you can see that defensive efficiency = 1 - (H - HR) / (AB - SO - HR + SH + SF).

Obviously this isn't a perfect method (since there isn't a perfect method). If you have a pitching staff that gives up tons of fly balls and pop-ups, that should help the team's defensive efficiency. However, a pitching staff full of ground-ball pitchers (or meatball pitchers) will probably lead to a team having a lower defensive efficiency. Additionally, defensive efficiency doesn't take into account WP and PB. But it is still a much better method of measure team defense than just looking at errors or unearned runs, since those measurements do not account for range or positioning and also rely on the official scorer's subjective determinations.

Great analysis. It would be interesting how many errors the three are averaging per game versus time. For example, how many errors each team committed the last 10 games, the last 5 games?

(05-27-2015 04:21 PM)mrbig Wrote:  

(05-27-2015 03:48 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  Also, you can't just go by error count and fielding percentage when evaluating infield defense. The UT defense and Aggies SS got to balls that we simply do not. Our guys have very little range.

Important point that I was about to make. Defensive Efficiency is a much better way to look at team defense. You basically take the total number of balls-in-play and figure out how many times the defense turned that into an out. Over the course of a 50+ game season, most of the luck will be evened out (though teams with pitchers that allow more hard contact will have worse defensive efficiency). This takes into account the defense's reliability (i.e. errors, i.e. whether they are sure-handed and make accurate throws), range, and positioning.

Easy example: in 2010 Derek Jeter made 6 errors in 151 games and was regarded as a below-average defender. In 2013 Andrelton Simmons made 14 errors in 156 games and was regarded as an elite defender. The same is true at the college level, but unfortunately we don't have the statistics readily available to compare total team defense.

If someone is bored or has a lot of time on their hands, they could try to compute defensive efficiency for some of the tournament teams (or past Rice teams) to see how this year's team stacks up. If you click on the links above, you can see that defensive efficiency = 1 - (H - HR) / (AB - SO - HR + SH + SF).

(05-27-2015 04:27 PM)OldOwl Wrote:  Great analysis. It would be interesting how many errors the three are averaging per game versus time. For example, how many errors each team committed the last 10 games, the last 5 games?

(05-27-2015 04:21 PM)mrbig Wrote:  

(05-27-2015 03:48 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  Also, you can't just go by error count and fielding percentage when evaluating infield defense. The UT defense and Aggies SS got to balls that we simply do not. Our guys have very little range.

Important point that I was about to make. Defensive Efficiency is a much better way to look at team defense. You basically take the total number of balls-in-play and figure out how many times the defense turned that into an out. Over the course of a 50+ game season, most of the luck will be evened out (though teams with pitchers that allow more hard contact will have worse defensive efficiency). This takes into account the defense's reliability (i.e. errors, i.e. whether they are sure-handed and make accurate throws), range, and positioning.

Easy example: in 2010 Derek Jeter made 6 errors in 151 games and was regarded as a below-average defender. In 2013 Andrelton Simmons made 14 errors in 156 games and was regarded as an elite defender. The same is true at the college level, but unfortunately we don't have the statistics readily available to compare total team defense.

If someone is bored or has a lot of time on their hands, they could try to compute defensive efficiency for some of the tournament teams (or past Rice teams) to see how this year's team stacks up. If you click on the links above, you can see that defensive efficiency = 1 - (H - HR) / (AB - SO - HR + SH + SF).

Yup, and Rice pitching staff was amongst the national leaders in strikeouts.

(05-27-2015 04:35 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(05-27-2015 04:27 PM)OldOwl Wrote:  Great analysis. It would be interesting how many errors the three are averaging per game versus time. For example, how many errors each team committed the last 10 games, the last 5 games?

(05-27-2015 04:21 PM)mrbig Wrote:  

(05-27-2015 03:48 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  Also, you can't just go by error count and fielding percentage when evaluating infield defense. The UT defense and Aggies SS got to balls that we simply do not. Our guys have very little range.

Important point that I was about to make. Defensive Efficiency is a much better way to look at team defense. You basically take the total number of balls-in-play and figure out how many times the defense turned that into an out. Over the course of a 50+ game season, most of the luck will be evened out (though teams with pitchers that allow more hard contact will have worse defensive efficiency). This takes into account the defense's reliability (i.e. errors, i.e. whether they are sure-handed and make accurate throws), range, and positioning.

Easy example: in 2010 Derek Jeter made 6 errors in 151 games and was regarded as a below-average defender. In 2013 Andrelton Simmons made 14 errors in 156 games and was regarded as an elite defender. The same is true at the college level, but unfortunately we don't have the statistics readily available to compare total team defense.

If someone is bored or has a lot of time on their hands, they could try to compute defensive efficiency for some of the tournament teams (or past Rice teams) to see how this year's team stacks up. If you click on the links above, you can see that defensive efficiency = 1 - (H - HR) / (AB - SO - HR + SH + SF).

Yup, and Rice pitching staff was amongst the national leaders in strikeouts.

and you can bet if we are holding on to a 1-2 run lead in the ninth, the pitcher(hopefully Dittman) is going for the K

(05-27-2015 03:01 PM)Owl Is In Chains Wrote:  There have been a number of posts regarding the number of errors with the baseball team. I did a quick scan of the box scores and tallied the following:

0 errors: 17 games 14-3
1 error: 18 games 13-5
2 errors: 9 games 3-6
3 errors: 7 games 4-3
4 errors: 1 game 1-0
5 errors: 3 games 0-3

Thanks for the great research, Chains. Looks like we should all be pulling for 4 errors on Friday. Go Rice!!

(05-27-2015 03:01 PM)Owl Is In Chains Wrote:  There have been a number of posts regarding the number of errors with the baseball team. I did a quick scan of the box scores and tallied the following:

0 errors: 17 games 14-3
1 error: 18 games 13-5
2 errors: 9 games 3-6
3 errors: 7 games 4-3
4 errors: 1 game 1-0
5 errors: 3 games 0-3

In 64% of all games, Rice committed no more than 1 error. 25% of the total errors for the year were committed in 4 games. 53% of the errors were committed in 11 games (20% of total games). Not surprising, if you make fewer errors you win more games. Something I was unwilling to spend the time looking at was how many times there were multiple errors in one inning.

I also looked up the Rice fielding percentage, as well as that of Texas and A&M. They are as follows:

Rice 0.964
A&M 0.968
Texas 0.976

I would note that the difference between Rice and A&M is 4 errors per 1000 chances and between Rice and Texas is 12 errors per 1000 chances. If you have about 40 chances per game (and Rice typically has fewer due to their higher quantity of strikeouts) this works out to a difference of 0.16 errors per game with A&M and 0.48 errors per game with Texas. Rice would have to play 6 games before they would have one more error than A&M. If you look at a week with 4 games (typical week), Rice would have 0.64 more errors than A&M and 2 errors more than UT. THose don't seem like big numbers, especially if your pitchers can make up the difference with fewer free passes. I think the issue is not making multiple errors and combining them with walks, HBP, and WP in the same inning so that the damage is limited.

That worths out to about 2300 chances over the season (calculating the fielding pct and 83 errors). So the difference between Rice and TAMU should be 8 or so errors, UT 24. That shifts about 5 games from likely wins to likely losses (2/3 of the games had one error or less). An interesting part of the analysis would be whether TAMU had the same number of fielding chances as Rice, or significantly fewer... That's a measure of pitching quality and style, at first blush....

(05-27-2015 03:48 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  And the errors have been compounded by an unprecedented number of wild pitches and passed balls.

Also, you can't just go by error count and fielding percentage when evaluating infield defense. The UT defense and Aggies SS got to balls that we simply do not. Our guys have very little range.

So, what happened there? Wayne Graham has always talked about being strong up the middle. Did river eventually seek out on that for offense?

It seems that our best teams were anchored by amazing shortstops (Paul Janish and Kevin Joseph might have been our two best fielders?). Having elite level third basemen too seems to be a big factor (Anthony Rendon and Craig Stansberry maybe the best two?).

They aren't easy to come by, however.

are we worried mostly about infield defense?

team fielding percentage is a pretty gross statistic for assessing infield defense, I believe.

(05-28-2015 06:47 AM)MemOwl Wrote:  are we worried mostly about infield defense?

team fielding percentage is a pretty gross statistic for assessing infield defense, I believe.

Agreed, but since our defense has very little range at any position, the fielding percentage is a pretty good reflection on how bad we are. For example, UH's 3B Montemayor may have double digit errors, but he's got great range and has made numerous web gem worthy plays. Hoelscher was like that as well. Unfortunately, we don't have anyone like that on our current team's roster.

I just hope Byrdman is out of the dog house, and back on the active list for this weekend. We'll need him, particularly against left-handed pitching.

(05-27-2015 03:21 PM)Tiki Owl Wrote:  Quick look says we gave up 233 runs of which 173 were earned.....60 unearned
A&M gave up 202 runs with 163 earned.....39 unearned
UT gave up 206 with 177 earned.......29 unearned.
Pretty big difference I would say. It is amazing that for the three teams the number of earned runs given up is so close.

Excellent point.

Now I'm going to go SABR on you and plug them into Bill James's Pythagorean wins and losses formula (runs scored squared, divided by the sum of the squares of runs scored and runs allowed, times games played, equals expected number of wins). We have scored 317 and allowed 233, for a Pythagorean winning percentage of 0.649, or 35.7 wins in 55 games. We have actually won 35, so it's pretty close, as it tends to be.

If we have 21 fewer unearned runs, like A&M, the expected numbers go to 0.691 and 38.
If we have 31 fewer unearned runs, like Texas, the expected numbers go to 0.711 and 39.

Not quite the 10 wins that Walt claims, but somewhere between 3 and 4 additional wins is still a very significant number. Would that get us a host slot? If you assume that those 3 or 4 wins would most likely have come in games with our biggest defensive meltdowns, then it might well have:

1) given us a season series win over a team that is hosting,
2) kept us alive longer in the conference tournament, giving us a shot at 40 wins and the tournament title to add to the regular season title,
3) given us another win against a high profile opponent

And that probably at least gets us into the conversation.

At the very least, had we done those things I think the mood of this board heading into the tournament would be a lot more positive.

(05-28-2015 08:10 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(05-27-2015 03:21 PM)Tiki Owl Wrote:  Quick look says we gave up 233 runs of which 173 were earned.....60 unearned
A&M gave up 202 runs with 163 earned.....39 unearned
UT gave up 206 with 177 earned.......29 unearned.
Pretty big difference I would say. It is amazing that for the three teams the number of earned runs given up is so close.

Excellent point.

Now I'm going to go SABR on you and plug them into Bill James's Pythagorean wins and losses formula (runs scored squared, divided by the sum of the squares of runs scored and runs allowed, times games played, equals expected number of wins). We have scored 317 and allowed 233, for a Pythagorean winning percentage of 0.649, or 35.7 wins in 55 games. We have actually won 35, so it's pretty close, as it tends to be.

If we have 21 fewer unearned runs, like A&M, the expected numbers go to 0.691 and 38.
If we have 31 fewer unearned runs, like Texas, the expected numbers go to 0.711 and 39.

Not quite the 10 wins that Walt claims, but somewhere between 3 and 4 additional wins is still a very significant number. Would that get us a host slot? If you assume that those 3 or 4 wins would most likely have come in games with our biggest defensive meltdowns, then it might well have:

1) given us a season series win over a team that is hosting,
2) kept us alive longer in the conference tournament, giving us a shot at 40 wins and the tournament title to add to the regular season title,
3) given us another win against a high profile opponent

And that probably at least gets us into the conversation.

At the very least, had we done those things I think the mood of this board heading into the tournament would be a lot more positive.

Very interesting.

(05-28-2015 08:10 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(05-27-2015 03:21 PM)Tiki Owl Wrote:  Quick look says we gave up 233 runs of which 173 were earned.....60 unearned
A&M gave up 202 runs with 163 earned.....39 unearned
UT gave up 206 with 177 earned.......29 unearned.
Pretty big difference I would say. It is amazing that for the three teams the number of earned runs given up is so close.

Excellent point.

Now I'm going to go SABR on you and plug them into Bill James's Pythagorean wins and losses formula (runs scored squared, divided by the sum of the squares of runs scored and runs allowed, times games played, equals expected number of wins). We have scored 317 and allowed 233, for a Pythagorean winning percentage of 0.649, or 35.7 wins in 55 games. We have actually won 35, so it's pretty close, as it tends to be.

If we have 21 fewer unearned runs, like A&M, the expected numbers go to 0.691 and 38.
If we have 31 fewer unearned runs, like Texas, the expected numbers go to 0.711 and 39.

Not quite the 10 wins that Walt claims, but somewhere between 3 and 4 additional wins is still a very significant number. Would that get us a host slot? If you assume that those 3 or 4 wins would most likely have come in games with our biggest defensive meltdowns, then it might well have:

1) given us a season series win over a team that is hosting,
2) kept us alive longer in the conference tournament, giving us a shot at 40 wins and the tournament title to add to the regular season title,
3) given us another win against a high profile opponent

And that probably at least gets us into the conversation.

At the very least, had we done those things I think the mood of this board heading into the tournament would be a lot more positive.

Thanks for the above work.