OK, it's REALLY time to stop inventing baseball stats

[Warner2BruceTD]

FIwOBA

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/de-lucker-2-0-hot-fresh-new-xbabip/

That's "Fielding Independent Weighted On Base Average".

You know, when xBABIP isn't good enough. We've all been there, amirite? Fuckin' xBABIP and it's inherent flaws. Pfft.


Look, I like baseball stats. Actually, I love baseball stats. But this recent trend of chalking everything up to "luck" and turning everything into "FI" is not only annoying, but it's pointless. I don't need a convoluted stat to tell me Drew Stubbs strikes out a lot, hits a decent amount of HR's, and chalks up his suckiness to bad luck.

The biggest problem I have with "FI" stats and BABIP, is that what we consider to be 'luck' is whatever suits the argument. For a batter, batted ball outs are bad luck. For a pitcher, batted ball hits are bad luck. Huh? So which is it?

ENOUGH ALREADY

 

[Senser81]

FIwOBA

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/de-lucker-2-0-hot-fresh-new-xbabip/

That's "Fielding Independent Weighted On Base Average".

You know, when xBABIP isn't good enough. We've all been there, amirite? Fuckin' xBABIP and it's inherent flaws. Pfft.


Look, I like baseball stats. Actually, I love baseball stats. But this recent trend of chalking everything up to "luck" and turning everything into "FI" is not only annoying, but it's pointless. I don't need a convoluted stat to tell me Drew Stubbs strikes out a lot, hits a decent amount of HR's, and chalks up his suckiness to bad luck.

The biggest problem I have with "FI" stats and BABIP, is that what we consider to be 'luck' is whatever suits the argument. For a batter, batted ball outs are bad luck. For a pitcher, batted ball hits are bad luck. Huh? So which is it?

ENOUGH ALREADY

I enjoy regression statistical analysis which takes something that is fairly obvious, puts it through 15 equations, and then spits out some information in a slightly different manner, so the author can say "You thought Justin Verlander was the best pitcher in the AL the past few years...well, he's not! He's second best!" Who cares.

Reminds of the old Football Outsiders crew who came up with a regression statistical analysis which would show you how many points a team should have scored in a season. You would take their actual points scored, then multiply/divide a million times using constants taken out of thin air and applying them to rushing yardage, yards per passing attempt, completion percentage, etc. etc. etc....until finally a number would be spit out and the authors would say "the Bears scored 378 points, but they were only expected to score 352 points!". Then they would all congratulate each other, not really knowing what they discovered, and then I would say "So, the Bears defense and special teams made their offense look better than it actually was? You don't say. Has that ever happened before in NFL history?"

This makes me want to bump some Lefty34 threads.