Jerad Eickhoff -- Earned Run Value

#49107  6/7/2017 9:55 AM

Ken,

There are like 14 or so pitchers tonight that according to the earned run value in the projections are expected to lose more points due to earned runs than Eickhoff. There aren't 14 pitchers though facing teams with higher run totals than the 4.9 Atlanta is projected for against Eickhoff. I know innings play a role as the longer the pitcher is in the game, the more likely he is to give up the runs as opposed to a reliever but something still seems a bit off.

Look at Blach for example. Both he and Eickhoff projected for 13.50 for innings value. Blach's opposing team is projected for 4.7 runs and Eickhoff 4.9. Why is Blach's earned run value against substantially worse than Eickhoff's? Should be the other way around I would think.

Just curious how you calculate these and want to make sure they're fully accurate. Thanks!

#49107  6/7/2017 9:55 AM

By the way, the run totals I'm referencing are sourced from Pinnacle.

ken_admin  6/7/2017 10:12 AM

I'll give this a look and get back shortly.

#49107  6/7/2017 11:07 AM

Take Buck Farmer for example ... innings pitched value is only 11.25 relative to Eickhoff's 13.50, yet Farmer projected to let up more runs in the projections despite (a) pitching less innings and (b) Farmer's opponent having a lower Vegas run total than Eickhoff's. Seems really odd.

Thanks for looking into Ken.

#49107  6/7/2017 11:08 AM

And btw, I don't just mean there's something wrong with Eickhoff specifically and exclusively, I'm wondering about the methodology in general as I'm sure he isn't the only one with strange numbers like this as far as runs.

ken_admin  6/7/2017 11:45 AM

I'll have to look a little deeper, but here's what I've found so far.   The runs vs. a team are split between the SP and the RPs for the team.  In the case of PHI, their bullpen is worse than other teams so they get a higher percent of the projected runs.  The quality of the SP obviously affects this too.

As mentioned, I'll have to invest a little time looking into the methodology, and I'll be able to do that tomorrow morning.

#49107  6/7/2017 12:04 PM

Thanks as usual Ken. Appreciate it.

#49107  6/12/2017 9:18 AM

Any update, Ken? Thanks!

ken_admin  6/12/2017 1:22 PM

I have made some adjustments, allowing the odds to have a large effect on the projections.  Are you still seeing similar issues?

#49107  6/12/2017 3:37 PM

Nope, looks good, thanks so much. Just wanted to follow-up with you.