Baseball Analysis 101: Top 5 Things that need to go

[chazmaniandevil]

we dont throw wins out for the reason we dont throw era, or whip out

when you sit down at the end of the day, you look at all the combined stats together to see the whole picture

you should be able to tell if the w-l number is appropriate by looking at the whole picture, the way you can tell if the era is appropriate by seeing what type of ballpark they pitch in, etc.

its an interesting argument, but useless to bicker about

 

[Senser81]

Does using "metric" instead of "stat" make you seem smarter or something?

I've seen it used a dozen times by the 643 guys.

LOL, put two and two together...

 

[Senser81]

No team would be that bad, but the reasoning behind using such extreme values in a thought experiment like that is to avoid all the "well what if..." comments that were to follow.

Awesome...another "statistical analysis" thread by a guy who can't understand statistics!

Here was Lefty's reason for dismissing batting average:

"I will dispense with the long-winded diatribe about why batting average is inferior and instead pose a simple question: who is more valuable to a baseball team, a player that has a batting average of .310 over the season with 10 home runs, 12 doubles and 35 walks, or a player that hits .250 while clubbing 45 HR’s, 30 doubles and walks 90 times?"

Ignoring the pointlessness of Lefty's fictional example where he is mixing in both power and OBP variables to "disprove" batting average, lets play along with the thought experiment of extreme values.

Two teams are playing each other. Team #1 is made up of players who have a 1.000 slugging percentage by hitting a home run every 4th at-bat. Team #2 is made up of players who have a 1.000 slugging percentage by hitting a single every at-bat. If these two teams played each other, Team #1 wouldn't score in the top half of the first inning, while Team #2 would have an infinite amount of runs in the bottom half of the first inning.

The point of offense in baseball isn't to hit home runs, its to avoid making outs.

 

[FedEx227]

we dont throw wins out for the reason we dont throw era, or whip out

when you sit down at the end of the day, you look at all the combined stats together to see the whole picture

you should be able to tell if the w-l number is appropriate by looking at the whole picture, the way you can tell if the era is appropriate by seeing what type of ballpark they pitch in, etc.

its an interesting argument, but useless to bicker about

Thankfully this year, I think we saw the movement away from ONLY looking at wins in the Cy Young voting. Greinke winning the Cy Young in the AL with 16 wins beating out 3 19 game winners really showed the progressive movement. Ditto for Lincy beating out a 19 and a 17 game winner and winning the Cy with only 15.

 

[NAHSTE]

Thankfully this year, I think we saw the movement away from ONLY looking at wins in the Cy Young voting. Greinke winning the Cy Young in the AL with 16 wins beating out 3 19 game winners really showed the progressive movement. Ditto for Lincy beating out a 19 and a 17 game winner and winning the Cy with only 15.

I don't think this is progressive, as the most wins has not guaranteed you a Cy Young ever. See Pedro Martinez winning the NL Cy in 1997 with 17 wins, or Clemens in 2004 (18 wins), or Brandon Webb in 06 (16).

The average baseball fan is not nearly as stupid as you think, especially not those who vote on awards. Looking at modern stats does not make you a smarter baseball fan, just a modern one like everyone else.

 

[Senser81]

I would have much rather you just taken the five extra minutes when I first asked you to show your work rather than what you did.

Such a great line....its like the retarded kid who smells like pee has commandeered the classroom and has assumed the role of "teacher".

I think I speak for everyone when I say "Fuck off".

 

[FedEx227]

I don't think this is progressive, as the most wins has not guaranteed you a Cy Young ever. See Pedro Martinez winning the NL Cy in 1997 with 17 wins, or Clemens in 2004 (18 wins), or Brandon Webb in 06 (16).

The average baseball fan is not nearly as stupid as you think, especially not those who vote on awards. Looking at modern stats does not make you a smarter baseball fan, just a modern one like everyone else.

No, of course it hasn't, but we've seen in the past the voters let higher win totals sway close votes.

2005 was a pretty glaring one: Bartolo Colon won the Cy Young going 21-8, 3.48 ERA, 1.15 WHIP, 122 ERA+ compared to Johan Santana (who finished 3rd) at 16-7, 2.87 ERA, .971 WHIP, 155 ERA+.

In the NL in 2005 there was a similar breakdown. Clemens went 13-8, 1.87 ERA, 1.006 WHIP, 266 ERA+ and lost out to Chris Carpenter who went 21-5, 2.83 ERA, 1.055 WHIP, 149 ERA+

My general point was the voters saw that Greinke, despite low win totals, was clearly a better pitcher throughout the year. His numbers weren't far and away better than CC or King Felix, and people could've clearly made the case for CC's or Felix's wins putting him over the top and voting for them.

Hell, Adam Wainwright got the highest number of first place votes in the NL despite having lower ERA, ERA+ and WHIP than Lincy and Carpenter.

And when exactly did I say I was a smarter baseball fan than anyone else...lol?

 

[Senser81]

In the NL in 2005 there was a similar breakdown. Clemens went 13-8, 1.87 ERA, 1.006 WHIP, 266 ERA+ and lost out to Chris Carpenter who went 21-5, 2.83 ERA, 1.055 WHIP, 149 ERA+

I can't believe that of the two examples you listed, this is one of them.

Clemens had a nice ERA, but he was handled with kid gloves all year. Carpenter was a workhorse...he led the league in complete games and was second in innings pitched. Not exactly a 1-to-1 comparison. Its like saying Ben Roethlisberger is better than Peyton Manning because he has a higher QB rating, and ignoring the fact that Roethlisberger throws only 20 passes a game while Peyton Manning who throws 35 passes a game.

 

[NAHSTE]

No, of course it hasn't, but we've seen in the past the voters let higher win totals sway close votes.

2005 was a pretty glaring one: Bartolo Colon won the Cy Young going 21-8, 3.48 ERA, 1.15 WHIP, 122 ERA+ compared to Johan Santana (who finished 3rd) at 16-7, 2.87 ERA, .971 WHIP, 155 ERA+.

In the NL in 2005 there was a similar breakdown. Clemens went 13-8, 1.87 ERA, 1.006 WHIP, 266 ERA+ and lost out to Chris Carpenter who went 21-5, 2.83 ERA, 1.055 WHIP, 149 ERA+

My general point was the voters saw that Greinke, despite low win totals, was clearly a better pitcher throughout the year. His numbers weren't far and away better than CC, and people could've clearly made the case for CC's or Felix's wins putting him over the top and voting for them.

Hell, Adam Wainwright got the highest number of first place votes in the NL despite having lower ERA, ERA+ and WHIP than Lincy and Carpenter.

When exactly did I say I was a smarter baseball fan than anyone else...lol?

Greinke was a no brainer this year, at least to me. He won an ERA crown (almost a run and a half over CC), a WHIP crown, and was 2nd in strike-outs (Sabathia was 7th in Ks with 197) in addition to finishing second in complete games and second in shut outs.

To vote Sabathia over Greinke for the Cy would have been criminal, 3 wins isn't enough to make up for 45 strikeouts, and 1.20 of ERA. That's before you factor in that ZG had unbelievable 1.07 WHIP (CC 1.14).

The Carpenter/Clemens case you mentioned could've gone the other way, but was closer on paper, at least IMO than CC's case over Greinke. Felix Hernandez had a better case than Sabathia last season.

And I have no idea how Johan Santana didn't win the 05 Cy Young. A sub 1.00 WHIP is just retarded, and he finished 2nd in ERA and led the league in Ks. That was a miscarriage of justice.

 

[FedEx227]

Yeah, ditto for Clemens in 2004 I believe...I think he had similar beef (Clemens), but I'm too lazy to look it up right now (aka should actually be doing work at work).

Nevermind, he won the Cy in 04. Carry on.

 

[Senser81]

What are your thoughts on the 1987 NL Cy Young?

 

[FedEx227]

I was about 6 months old when the voting went down, so I can't really tell ya.

From the looks of it, pretty odd year. A closer won. Closers suck, they shouldn't win Cy Young awards.

On the starter side you have Sutcliffe, who had a good overall W-L, but not overly impressive secondary numbers.

You had Nolan Ryan with the best ERA and ERA+ in the league but a god awful W-L and also gave up the most hits/9 in the league...in his defense also received only 3.2 run support, so I don't know. Very hard to reward a guy who is 8-16.

Going off strictly numbers and not watching a single game that year I'd probably give it to Orel. But I don't know. That's a pretty tough year.

 

[Senser81]

Yes, because I came up with a scenario that you don't like, I don't understand statistics. God you're a moron, thankfully all the other dolts on here love you, though.

You don't understand statistics. And your scenario was retarded (as expected), because you had two variables going against the "batting average" guy...not only did he hit with less power than the slugger guy, he also drew way fewer walks. Brilliant analysis! What's next...batting average is worthless because you did some number-crunching in your enormous cranium and figured out that Mike Schmidt was better than Al Oliver?

Here is my "analysis"! Completion Percentage is most important stat when it comes to ranking QBs. Don't believe me?? Well, which QB would YOU rather have?

QB A: 65% completion rate, 4000 yards, 30 TDs, 10 INTs

QB B: 55% completion rate, 2500 yards, 8 TDs, 32 INTs

 

[FedEx227]

You guys think we may be overdoing the Thanks/Groans in this thread?

Good lord. It's actually kinda funny really, I'm just amazed at how many we have.

 

[FedEx227]

:tiptoe:

Well now it's green again haha... da fuck?

 

[Senser81]

The scenario I used with batting average wasn't intended to be some manifestation of how batting average can be "fooled" or is subject to random statistical noise and whatnot. Rather, it was intended to point out that batting average tells you the least about a hitter when compared with other statistics (hence the variation in on-base abilities [OBP] and power-hitting abilities [SLG] of the two hitters in the scenario).

Anyone going off of batting average would say the .300+ hitter is more valuable, but when you look at better, more descriptive, statistics such as OBP or SLG, you can get a much better approximation of the hitter's total worth.

Wow, really? Has anyone ever brought forth this idea....that a combination of statistics tells you more about a player than just looking at one stat? Is that like saying QB rating is a better approximation of a QB's ability than Yards-per-Attempt, when in reality a QB rating is a combination of several stats?

Also, why did you groan me for saying "What are your thoughts on the 1987 NL Cy Young?"

 

[FedEx227]

I really wish we could have a baseball discussion on this site that doesn't have to turn into personal attacks and groanfests. Not only does it drag down the actual baseball talk, the threads are usually horribly derailed and it's really quite annoying and so "VSN".

I'm not siding with either side because it happens with both, but it's almost come to the point where any baseball discussion we have ends up in Lefty vs. Warner, Timer and Senser where both sides just tell each other how retarded they are, groan a bunch of times, make wild accusations and assumptions rinse and repeat on whatever the next topic is.

I think it shows by how little other people actually join in on these discussions and honestly I think it really hurts the level of actual baseball talk on this site.

Just my opinion though.

 

[FirstTimer]

Wow, really? Has anyone ever brought forth this idea....that a combination of statistics tells you more about a player than just looking at one stat? Is that like saying QB rating is a better approximation of a QB's ability than Yards-per-Attempt, when in reality a QB rating is a combination of several stats?

Also, why did you groan me for saying "What are your thoughts on the 1987 NL Cy Young?"

Exactly.

That's why the entire article he wrote was pointless. He took the time to write a long stat filled article that said nothing interesting and nothing thought provoking. He could have said: "You have to look at more than one stat when evaluating a player." And been done with it.

Rather than do that though he took the time to stroke his over stat processing cock and waste time over complicating a really simple theme/idea/thought that most any sports fan above a 5th Grader understands.

 

[FedEx227]

Funny how people commented that it was a good article when they thought Rush wrote it.

I will list my thoughts on each numbered point...

5) Agreed. Errors don't really happen all that frequently to begin with, and the scoring of errors is extremely subjective. They might be able to tell you who is really bad at fielding, but it doesn't really differentiate the fielders. I liken it to judging CBs by their INT total.

4) Somewhat disagree. Batting average is a nice, straight-forward statistic. You take from it what you will.

3) Somewhat disagree. Its all about production, and RBI is a good indicator of production. Its like an offensive player's TD total...sure, its somewhat dependent on their offensive teammates, but show me someone with a high TD total and I'll show you a pro bowl player (or Vince Young).

2) Agree, except in the case of Lefty34.

1) Agree completely. Bert Blyleven not being in the HOF is a great example of wins being overrated.

Some what of a different tone from Senser there... huh?

LOL lefty lives in his mom's basement.

Seriously though, I would agree with errors, a lot of times when an error happens, more than one player was at fault, handing out errors to individual players doesn't help anyone.

The other stats I'm fine with, obviously with baseball sabermetrics there are better statistics for hardcore fans to judge players, but with casual fans there's no sense in doing away with stuff like batting average and wins which have always been a part of the game.

More to my point that we'll never have a decent baseball discussion on this site because it will inevitably turn into Senser/Warner/First vs. Lefty where everyone who thinks differently or sees the game differently is retarded, a moron and should just kill themselves.

 

[NAHSTE]

Yeah the only baseball fan I know who still uses average as his sole basis of evaluating a hitter finishes last in our fantasy league every year so I just let him keep doing it.

I told him about OPS like 3 years ago, it was like the first time he heard the Beatles.