October 30, 201312 yr This thread has brought clarity for me about a lot of things. What's that? That the game is moving more and more to a sabremetrics method of analysis, and you "eye test" guys are going to be left behind if you don't adjust?
October 30, 201312 yr What's that? That the game is moving more and more to a sabremetrics method of analysis, and you "eye test" guys are going to be left behind if you don't adjust? Serious statement. Considering 100% of the scouts refuse to use someone else's radar gun reading, I seriously doubt the eye test will go away anytime soon. You can have 3 scouts sitting right next to each other with the same type of gun but they will all take their own reading and won't trust the other guy. Baffling.
October 30, 201312 yr My rule has always been if you can make an intelligent argument as to why someone should have won then they got it right. Except if you try to argue anyone other then Molina should have won at the catchers spot. In that case your just an idiot whose opinion and stats mean squat.
October 30, 201312 yr My rule has always been if you can make an intelligent argument as to why someone should have won then they got it right. Except if you try to argue anyone other then Molina should have won at the catchers spot. In that case your just an idiot whose opinion and stats mean squat. Has to be the easiest pick they make.
October 30, 201312 yr 2012 Phillips: 637 TC, 241 PO, 391 A, 5 E, 73 DP, .992 FPCT, 4.33 RF Barney: 731 TC, 311 PO, 418 A, 2 E, 96 DP, .997 FPCT, 4.70 RF So Barney had 94 more total chances, 70 more putouts, 27 more assists, 3 less errors, turned 23 more double plays, had a higher fielding percentage and a higher range factor. I'd say he's in the same stratosphere. One huge thing here that you cannot stat. BP range is much greater than anyone's, therefore, he might make errors on balls that others cannt even get to. He may be the best defensive 2nd baseman I have ever seen.
October 30, 201312 yr One huge thing here that you cannot stat. BP range is much greater than anyone's, therefore, he might make errors on balls that others cannt even get to. He may be the best defensive 2nd baseman I have ever seen. That's just flat-out not true. That's what RF and DRS take into account.
October 30, 201312 yr One huge thing here that you cannot stat. BP range is much greater than anyone's, therefore, he might make errors on balls that others cannt even get to. He may be the best defensive 2nd baseman I have ever seen. That would be fine except for, in the example listed in the post that you quoted, Barney handled 94 MORE chances and made 3 less errors.
October 31, 201312 yr While I'm sure defensive and even some offensive metrics aren't perfect the eye test people realize the stats are constantly getting better right? Like you can say 10 years ago the defensive metrics were flawed big time, but they've been refined. They're far better than people watching and judging by the eye test. Sure they can always get better but they're good now. Hell I don't understand them b/c they're too detailed now but I'm not dismissing the math b/c I think I've seen something and I must be right.
October 31, 201312 yr Author What's that? That the game is moving more and more to a sabremetrics method of analysis, and you "eye test" guys are going to be left behind if you don't adjust? Yeah, that's it. Because you guys who couldn't play that game need the math to help you cipher all of it out. Just sayin':wave:
October 31, 201312 yr Yeah, that's it. Because you guys who couldn't play that game need the math to help you cipher all of it out. Just sayin':wave: You played in the majors? I will say this the guys in Vegas that set the lines and the guys that make a living betting against them are far and I mean far batter analysts than ex players at every sport there is. They don't understand the game nearly as well as ex players but they understand far more of what's really important than ex players. SABR teams with GM's and managers that figured that out have a huge advantage over the ones that haven't yet.
October 31, 201312 yr That's just flat-out not true. That's what RF and DRS take into account. I checked out DRS and I still see a flaw. There is still a dependence on the location and type of ball hit toward the defensive player. If it happens that very few balls get hit in the right vector and speed then that will impact the DRS and the defensive player has no control over it. Like almost all stats, you can't just pin a judgment of a player down to one number. You have to factor in all the stats and yes, the eye test, to judge who gets a gold glove.
October 31, 201312 yr I checked out DRS and I still see a flaw. There is still a dependence on the location and type of ball hit toward the defensive player. If it happens that very few balls get hit in the right vector and speed then that will impact the DRS and the defensive player has no control over it. Like almost all stats, you can't just pin a judgment of a player down to one number. You have to factor in all the stats and yes, the eye test, to judge who gets a gold glove. Quantifying it with stats is far better than the eye test, but nobody is saying that the eye test doesn't help. Sure you need to watch guys too to make a fair judgement but the stats are far better than people want to admit. They're not perfect but they're pretty good.
October 31, 201312 yr Yeah, that's it. Because you guys who couldn't play that game need the math to help you cipher all of it out. Just sayin':wave: Maybe we're just intelligent enough to see the impact that stats have on the game....
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.