2022 marks the fortieth anniversary of the first national publication of the Bill James Baseball Abstract, which one could posit was the beginning of a roughly thirty year process that took sabermetric analysis from something that had previously been the domain of a small group of pioneers (e.g. George Lindsey, Earnshaw Cook, Pete Palmer, Dick Cramer, Steve Mann) to an accepted part of the public’s collective conventional wisdom of baseball.
Good stuff Patriot. And I agree, a good idea to have a reference study.
Tiny note for those who don't see this as obvious. This:
next_W% = .65983*PW% + .17001
Which if we round is this:
next_W% = .66*PW% + .17
Can be rewritten as this:
next_W% = .66*(PW% - .500) + .500
In other words, we regress by 34%.
That .66 therefore can be rewritten as this:
162 / (162 + 83 )
That 83 is the "ballast". And this means you can have a generalized equation for any number of games. If you had for example only a 60 game season, then the predictor would be this:
Related stuff...https://books.google.com/books?id=hR8sDAAAQBAJ&pg=PT95&lpg=PT95&dq=Bill+james+plexiglass+principle&source=bl&ots=IpKf-c_SD8&sig=ACfU3U3SscjWhXG5ZiWMfaTNlLV30HgmJQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjay7LU47T2AhV6mWoFHSu1D5gQ6AF6BAgDEAE#v=onepage&q=Bill%20james%20plexiglass%20principle&f=false
Good stuff Patriot. And I agree, a good idea to have a reference study.
Tiny note for those who don't see this as obvious. This:
next_W% = .65983*PW% + .17001
Which if we round is this:
next_W% = .66*PW% + .17
Can be rewritten as this:
next_W% = .66*(PW% - .500) + .500
In other words, we regress by 34%.
That .66 therefore can be rewritten as this:
162 / (162 + 83 )
That 83 is the "ballast". And this means you can have a generalized equation for any number of games. If you had for example only a 60 game season, then the predictor would be this:
next_W% = .42*(PW% - .500) + .500