-
Archives
- February 2020
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- July 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- January 2015
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- November 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- April 2006
- August 2005
- July 2005
- June 2005
- May 2005
- April 2005
- March 2005
- November 2004
- October 2004
- September 2004
- August 2004
- July 2004
- June 2004
- May 2004
- April 2004
- March 2004
- February 2004
- January 2004
- December 2003
- November 2003
- October 2003
- July 1996
- June 1996
- May 1996
- April 1996
- March 1996
- February 1996
- October 1995
-
Meta
Tag Archives: elias analyst
The 1987 Elias Baseball Analyst by Seymour Siwoff, Steve Hirdt, & Peter Hirdt: a review
The best piece of research in the book is the Cleveland essay, where they discover that teams who win from far behind (rallies of five or more runs) are fairly likely to win the next game they play, but virtually certain to lose the fifth game after the comeback win. They offer, and dismiss, the pitching rotation as an explanation. This just screams for a followup study; I don’t know that it’s ever been done.
The 1986 Elias Baseball Analyst: a review
Far better than the first edition. The text portion of this book consists entirely of team essays, most of which are surprisingly playful investigations of issues raised by the team’s season or the team’s players. They are also more open about their methods in this volume. The best of these are quite fine.
1985 Elias Baseball Analyst: a review
But it’s a shallow book. There’s not much analysis, despite the title. You can sometimes see that real analysis has been done, but the presentation hides the work. The clear attitude is “Take our word for it, we’ve crunched the numbers.” Lots of us aren’t happy with that sort of presentation; but hey, it’s their book, they can do that if they want. But saying we can’t complain about it is a little unreasonable.