Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

TSN Awards / HOF class of 2013

Expand Messages
  • Sean Lahman
    Thanks for pulling the TSN awards together, Kevin. I ll add them to the next release, which I ll post after the HOF results are announced this afternoon.
    Message 1 of 7 , Jan 9, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      Thanks for pulling the TSN awards together, Kevin.  I'll add them to the next release, which I'll post after the HOF results are announced this afternoon.  While preparing for that, I realized that I never added the 2012 HOF voting results, so that will be in there, too.

      Once this is out of the way, I'll start tackling the creation of the supplementary tables -- primarily with splits from retrosheet.  We've had some good discussion about what splits should be created, but none about design.  Should we have one large table with all of the splits, or separate ones for each category (left/right, home/road, etc.)?  What do you folks think?

      --Sean

      ---
      Sean Lahman
      http://seanlahman.com
    • Tim Collins
      I would think it would be easier from a design/maintenance perspective to have one table with a column designating the split.  It s really (IMO) the same
      Message 2 of 7 , Jan 9, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        I would think it would be easier from a design/maintenance perspective to have one table with a column designating the split.  It's really (IMO) the same concept-- you're taking a subset of his performance and totaling it.

        That way, if you want to add/subtract a stat, or add a category, you're doing it in one place rather than 10.



        From: Sean Lahman <seanlahman@...>
        To: BB-Databank (yahoo) <baseball-databank@yahoogroups.com>
        Sent: Wednesday, January 9, 2013 10:17 AM
        Subject: [baseball-databank] TSN Awards / HOF class of 2013

         
        Thanks for pulling the TSN awards together, Kevin.  I'll add them to the next release, which I'll post after the HOF results are announced this afternoon.  While preparing for that, I realized that I never added the 2012 HOF voting results, so that will be in there, too.

        Once this is out of the way, I'll start tackling the creation of the supplementary tables -- primarily with splits from retrosheet.  We've had some good discussion about what splits should be created, but none about design.  Should we have one large table with all of the splits, or separate ones for each category (left/right, home/road, etc.)?  What do you folks think?

        --Sean

        ---
        Sean Lahman
        http://seanlahman.com


      • Mike Emeigh
        I don t have a strong preference one way or the other; the tables aren t really large enough where it matters from a performance standpoint, so I think it
        Message 3 of 7 , Jan 9, 2013
        • 0 Attachment
          I don't have a strong preference one way or the other; the tables aren't really large enough where it matters from a performance standpoint, so I think it really comes down to two things:
           
          1. how easy it will be to update each year
          2. whether the typical types of split analyses that people do are better supported by a combined table or several smaller tables.
           
          I suppose if you're only looking at one type of split it's easier from an analytical sense if you know where the data is, but from an update standpoint it's probably easier to have the tables combined.


          On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 10:17 AM, Sean Lahman <seanlahman@...> wrote:
           

          Thanks for pulling the TSN awards together, Kevin.  I'll add them to the next release, which I'll post after the HOF results are announced this afternoon.  While preparing for that, I realized that I never added the 2012 HOF voting results, so that will be in there, too.

          Once this is out of the way, I'll start tackling the creation of the supplementary tables -- primarily with splits from retrosheet.  We've had some good discussion about what splits should be created, but none about design.  Should we have one large table with all of the splits, or separate ones for each category (left/right, home/road, etc.)?  What do you folks think?

          --Sean

          ---
          Sean Lahman
          http://seanlahman.com




          --
          Mike Emeigh
          MWE55inNC@...

          "ManagementSpeak: Phase II. Translation: Never." -- Bob Lewis
        • Tangotiger
          I think Ted might have mentioned it, but I d go with adding identifier fields, and have one table called SPLITS, with these two key fields (plus all the other
          Message 4 of 7 , Jan 9, 2013
          • 0 Attachment
            I think Ted might have mentioned it, but I'd go with adding identifier
            fields, and have one table called SPLITS, with these two key fields (plus
            all the other standard key fields, player_id, year_id, team_id, and the
            standard fields, like pa, etc):

            SPLIT_ID,SPLIT_CD

            So:

            SPLIT_ID,SPLIT_CD
            all,all

            runners,bases empty
            runners,runner(s) on

            location,home
            location,away

            entrance,start
            entrance,substitution

            opphand,rhp
            opphand,lhp

            bathand,lhh
            bathand,rhh

            batopphand,lhh v lhp
            batopphand,lhh v rhp
            batopphand,rhh v lhp
            batopphand,lhh v rhp

            park,BOS
            park,BAL
            park,...

            inning,1
            inning,2
            inning,...
            inning,10+

            score,-5 or worse
            score,-4
            score...
            score,0
            score...
            score,5 or more

            And you just keep extending with whatever splits you want to create, like
            fielding position, batting lineup slot, etc.

            Naturally, that's going to be one biga$$ table. If that's too much, give
            each split its own table, and then the users can merge them easily enough
            like so:

            select * from SPLIT_RUNNERS
            union all
            select * from SPLIT_LOCATION
            union all
            ...

            Tom
          • Tangotiger
            I guess at least three tables: SPLIT_BATTING, SPLIT_PITCHING, SPLIT_FIELDING. Tom
            Message 5 of 7 , Jan 9, 2013
            • 0 Attachment
              I guess at least three tables: SPLIT_BATTING, SPLIT_PITCHING, SPLIT_FIELDING.

              Tom
            • Chris Lambrou
              I d vote for one large splits table as long as the corresponding field is the next column : )   -Chris ________________________________ From: Sean Lahman
              Message 6 of 7 , Jan 9, 2013
              • 0 Attachment

                I'd vote for one large splits table as long as the corresponding field is the next column : )
                 
                -Chris


                From: Sean Lahman <seanlahman@...>
                To: BB-Databank (yahoo) <baseball-databank@yahoogroups.com>
                Sent: Wednesday, January 9, 2013 9:17 AM
                Subject: [baseball-databank] TSN Awards / HOF class of 2013

                 
                Thanks for pulling the TSN awards together, Kevin.  I'll add them to the next release, which I'll post after the HOF results are announced this afternoon.  While preparing for that, I realized that I never added the 2012 HOF voting results, so that will be in there, too.

                Once this is out of the way, I'll start tackling the creation of the supplementary tables -- primarily with splits from retrosheet.  We've had some good discussion about what splits should be created, but none about design.  Should we have one large table with all of the splits, or separate ones for each category (left/right, home/road, etc.)?  What do you folks think?

                --Sean

                ---
                Sean Lahman
                http://seanlahman.com


              • Sean Lahman
                Neil, thanks for bringing this to my attention. I ll look into it. I know that the SchoolsPlayers table has not been updated for a similar stretch of time.
                Message 7 of 7 , Jan 9, 2013
                • 0 Attachment
                  Neil, thanks for bringing this to my attention.  I'll look into it.  I know that the SchoolsPlayers table has not been updated for a similar stretch of time.

                  --Sean

                  ---
                  Sean Lahman
                  http://seanlahman.com


                  On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 10:52 AM, Neil Walls <nwalls2000@...> wrote:
                  Sean - thanks so much for the work on this.

                  In regards to the HOF, I noticed the finalGame field in the Master hasn't been updated for the last few years for retired players. Is there a way to get this updated for the next release?

                  Neil


                  From: Sean Lahman <seanlahman@...>
                  To: BB-Databank (yahoo) <baseball-databank@yahoogroups.com>
                  Sent: Wednesday, January 9, 2013 10:17 AM
                  Subject: [baseball-databank] TSN Awards / HOF class of 2013

                   
                  Thanks for pulling the TSN awards together, Kevin.  I'll add them to the next release, which I'll post after the HOF results are announced this afternoon.  While preparing for that, I realized that I never added the 2012 HOF voting results, so that will be in there, too.

                  Once this is out of the way, I'll start tackling the creation of the supplementary tables -- primarily with splits from retrosheet.  We've had some good discussion about what splits should be created, but none about design.  Should we have one large table with all of the splits, or separate ones for each category (left/right, home/road, etc.)?  What do you folks think?

                  --Sean

                  ---
                  Sean Lahman
                  http://seanlahman.com



                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.