So park effect comes in in step 4 as well to partly determine hit or out - here I assume it is the overall park effect and not the + or - ratings on specific kinds of hits that matter (?).

Those come in in steps 7 and 9. 

This helps resolve an issue that is discussed on another thread on and off - namely whether HRs are converted into outs, doubles or triples by park effect - it is clear from your explanation contrarian that HRs are never turned into outs by the SIM, but once a hit is determined to be or not to be a HR  (in the roughly 60/40 proportion batter-pitcher you show above, then adjusted for park effect in step 7), it is determined to be a single, double or triple based on those same relationships of batter-pitcher shown in the breakdown and park effect. 

The other very interesting thing here is that in steps 6 and 8 ABs that have already been determined to be hits or outs are transformed into the other by range factor. This I did not know and would not have guessed to be the case.

Thanks. By the way, the WIS presentation you refer to is still available in this forum if you go back to that time by doing a search and setting the time frame to "all" (the default is for a month). I found it some weeks ago in my ongoing, but often delayed and inconsistent, re-reading of all the extant forums here one page at at time from the oldest existing ones from 2007 to today.

It will be somewhere around pages 50 to 60 I think and I do not recall the title of the forum, so it will take a little searching to find it. It was a link posted inside a forum thread by someone, not the original post in that thread if I remember correctly, so you will need to read through and see where the person who did so posted the link to the conference. 

It winds up boiling down to the singles park rating that's used in the determination of hit or out.

Posted by dahsdebater on 7/26/2012 2:54:00 PM (view original):
It winds up boiling down to the singles park rating that's used in the determination of hit or out.

This has been my understanding as well. 

So in a park like Wrigley, you'll have outs turned into hits by the +2 singles rating; whereas in a park like the Kingdome, you'll have hits turned into outs by the -2 singles rating. However, both parks will convert roughly the same number of hits into HR with their +2/+2 HR ratings. 

just4me, that is not what I read in steps 7 and 9: there it says that park effect determines whether it is a homerun (step 7) and then later in step 9 what kind of hit it is. 

I don't see any point where park effect with respect to the plus or minus ratings for singles, doubles, etc. play any role at all in determining whether the AB is a hit or an out. 

Maybe I am mis-reading it. 

I see. I thought it was just the overall park effect of whether and how much it favored pitchers or batters, not any specific rating for type of hit. 

So according to you three, representing a million times more experience and study of the SIM than I have, it is the rating for singles that helps determine hit or out. 

I concede the debate and defer to your combined and individual expertise. 

Excuse me if I am repeating this all over again.  So the park effect that considers singles comes into play only in step 4 when determing a hit.  It does not come into effect when determing if the hit is a single as in step 9.

In reviewing the Powerpoint slides from that presentation, it appears Step 4 uses the 1B factor to help determine Hit or Out, and that's the only time it's used.  Steps 7 and 9 then use the HR, 2B, and 3B factors to determine if the hit is one of those types.  Everything not determined to be a 2B, 3B, or HR then by default is just a single.  That's how it appears to me anyway.

The Powerpoint actually says the "hits multiplier" is used in what is Step 4 above, which could only be the 1B factor because the 1B factor is not mentioned anywhere else in the slides.

I probably am not smart enough to say this the right way but I have a question:

Why in the world would a BB% be 56.5% dependant on the hitter vs. the pitchers ability to throw a strike.  I would think it would be closer to 50/50 at best.  If you look at the hits, it is much more heavily weighted towards the hitter.  I understand that because once it is determined to be a hit, of a pitch, it is all up to the hitter, how far, hard, high he hit the ball. 

Never understood how a BB is more dependent on hitter season that pitcher season.  

Posted by The_Creeper on 11/30/2013 7:31:00 PM (view original):
I probably am not smart enough to say this the right way but I have a question:

Why in the world would a BB% be 56.5% dependant on the hitter vs. the pitchers ability to throw a strike.  I would think it would be closer to 50/50 at best.  If you look at the hits, it is much more heavily weighted towards the hitter.  I understand that because once it is determined to be a hit, of a pitch, it is all up to the hitter, how far, hard, high he hit the ball. 

Never understood how a BB is more dependent on hitter season that pitcher season.  

If I remember correctly, it's based on matchups throughout the history of baseball.  When a batter who draws a lot of walks faces a great control pitcher, the results are closer to the batter's stats.

Yes, if you actually study the issue, it is very clear that the identity of the batter is a greater factor than the identity of the pitcher in determining whether a PA ends up as a BB.

In reviewing this thread, I'm curious about contact hitters with low K totals. Since "hit or out" is determined earlier in the decision-making process than the type of out, is the only benefit to using low K hitters that they could generate more errors or - plays for the defense with more balls in play?

Posted by Jtpsops on 6/6/2017 1:52:00 PM (view original):
In reviewing this thread, I'm curious about contact hitters with low K totals. Since "hit or out" is determined earlier in the decision-making process than the type of out, is the only benefit to using low K hitters that they could generate more errors or - plays for the defense with more balls in play?

That's not that bad of a benefit in a world where most teams don't have A+++ range

It's not the only benefit, but it's certainly not a bad one either.

I wasn't implying it was a bad one. But you could also argue high K hitters cause pitchers to throw more pitches.

Since hit/out is decided first, it would seem that having low K hitters doesn't have as big of a benefit as it has in RL.