Dominican University Operations Analytics in Action Discussion OPERATIONS ANALYTICS IN ACTION:Decision Analysis at Bat*There has been a lot of attention on

Dominican University Operations Analytics in Action Discussion OPERATIONS ANALYTICS IN ACTION:Decision Analysis at Bat*There has been a lot of attention on using data analytics for recruiting players and determining strategies (including the book Moneyball by Michael Lewis and the resulting blockbuster film Moneyball (2011)). What are your thoughts on using data and operations analytics for decision making within sports? (You can also discuss the “business of sports”.)Can you give other examples in baseball or other sports where mathematical decision making or data analytics is used to make “better” strategic decisions to improve the success of the team and/or athlete?please refer to the rubric Decision Analysis at Bat*
Evan Gattis took a circuitous route to major league baseball. His path to becoming a 26-yearold-rookie on the 2014 Atlanta Braves’ roster has earned comparisons to Roy Hobbs, the
mythical baseball player central to the novel and movie The Natural. As in the story of Roy
Hobbs, Gattis dropped completely out of baseball for several years before returning in a big
way. In his first month in the major leagues, he hit six home runs and was named the National
League’s Rookie of the Month. He duplicated both feats in his second month – he hit six more
home runs and was again named the National League’s Rookie of the Month. But what is most
unusual about Gattis is that he may be the first major league baseball player to give credit to
management science and decision analysis for his success.
While in the minor leagues Gattis began reading the work of University of Texas Professor J. Eric
Bickel, who has used decision analysis to determine the optimal decisions for a hitter to make in
each count. “One paper I wrote was how to act on different pitch counts,” Bickel said.
“Sometimes the batter will just let a pitch go by on purpose. If it’s three balls, no strikes, a lot
of times the coach will say, ‘Don’t swing at the pitch, no matter what.’”
What Bickel said is that most people don’t understand why a batter would take a pitch on a 3-0
count. Because one more ball will result in a walk and put the batter on first base, under these
circumstances the opposing pitcher will usually put a very hittable fastball through the heart of
the strike zone on the next pitch. However, Bickel’s research demonstrates why taking a pitch
when the count is three balls and no strikes rather than swinging at what will likely be a very
hittable pitch increases the probability the batter will ultimately get on base.
“About 38% of all batters eventually get on base,” Bickel said. “At 3-0, 77 percent of batters
eventually get on base. Suppose you’re sitting there with a 3-0 count. If you let the pitch go by,
and the pitcher throws a strike, you’re down to a 63% chance of getting on. If you instead put
that ball in play, you only have a one-third chance of getting on base, or take a strike and still
have a 63 percent chance of getting on base. That’s why you take it.”
Bickel has used decision analysis to determine a batter’s optimal strategies for all ball-strike
counts. His decision analysis and his lucid explanation of the resulting ball/strike counts have
helped shape the way Gattis approaches each pitch when he is at bat.
*Based on Joe Lemire, “The Photo Is Just One Good Reason You Need to Know the Story of Evan
Gattis,” Sports Illustrated (June 10, 2013) and “Mastering the Numbers Game – Sports
Illustrated Coverage,” Petroleum and Geosystems Engineering News, University of Texas at
Austin, http://www.pge.utexas.edu/news/136-eric-bickel (Links to an external site.).
Discussion Participation Rubric
Criteria
Participatio
n in
Discussion
Content
and Focus
Strong:
Provides
comments
and new
information
in a regular
and
equitable
manner.
Interacts
with a
variety of
participants
by posting
queries,
comments,
and
thoughtful
responses.
25 points
Strong:
Postings are
accurate,
original, and
relevant.
Even better
than telling
us
something
new, they
raise new
questions
that lead to
further
discussion
from a
variety of
people.
Reveals a
solid
understandi
ng of the
topic as
evidenced
by
Proficient:
Provides
comments
and some
new
information
in a fairly
regular
manner.
Interacts
with a few
selected
participants
by posting
queries,
comments,
and
thoughtful
responses.
20 points
Proficient:
Makes
significant
contribution
s to the
discussion.
Reveals
adequate
understandi
ng of the
topic as
evidenced
by posting
telling us
something
new.
20 points
Ratings
Points
Satisfactory
:
Sporadically
provides
comments
and some
new
information.
Interacts
with only
one or two
participants
by posting
queries,
comments,
and
thoughtful
responses.
15 points
Weak:
Provides
minimal
comments
and
information
to other
participants.
Participates
infrequently
in online
discussions
or email;
and
postings are
irrelevant or
superficial.
10 points
Unacceptab
le: Does not
enter the
discussion.
0 points
25
Satisfactory
: Postings
consist
largely of
personal
opinions or
experiences
. Reveals a
restricted
understandi
ng of the
topic
limited to
information
that could
be derived
from prior
posts.
15 points
Weak: Adds
little to the
substantive
discussion
by may
contribute
but may
contribute
to the social
aspects of
the course.
10 points
Unacceptab
le: Does not
enter the
discussion.
0 points
25
Critical
Thinking
Evidenced
by Posting
Skilled
Communica
tion
thoughtful
responses
and
questions.
25 points
Strong:
Offer a
critical
analysis of
an existing
posted idea
or
introduces a
different
interpretati
on to an
existing
idea.
25 points
Strong:
Highly
skilled
presentatio
n of ideas.
Engages
reading.
Work
exceeds
expectation
s for this
level of
student.
Absolutely
no errors in
spelling,
punctuation
, or
grammar
noted.
25 points
Proficient:
Agrees or
disagrees
with
existing
discussion
and
provides
limited
justification
or
explanation
(e.g., text
readings,
resources).
20 points
Proficient:
Explicitly
presents
ideas. Work
appropriate
for this level
of student.
No spelling
or grammar
errors
noted. A
few minor
punctuation
errors
identified.
20 points
Satisfactory
: Agrees or
disagrees
with
existing
discussion,
but
provides no
justification
or
explanation
(e.g., text
readings,
resources).
15 points
Weak:
Provides no
evidence of
agreement
or
disagreeme
nt with
existing
discussion.
10 points
Unacceptab
le: Does not
enter the
discussion.
0 points
25
Satisfactory
: Able to
present
ideas.
Comes close
to
expectation
s for work
at this level.
Some
punctuation
and spelling
errors by no
errors in
grammar
identified.
15 points
Weak:
Limited
ability to
convey
ideas noted.
Below
expectation
s of work at
this level.
Errors noted
in spelling,
punctuation
, and
grammar.
10 points
Unacceptab
le: Does not
enter the
discussion.
0 points
25

Purchase answer to see full
attachment