Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
If you can't access your old account but want to post, post as a guest. The permissions have been altered so guests can post.

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Official Stats Thread
Topic Started: Mon Apr 14, 2008 5:54 pm (1,080 Views)
sportslover
Member Avatar


dbacksfan
Apr 17 2008, 04:52 PM
whose EqA is .157
Apr 17 2008, 10:47 AM
I was looking through some threads last night and found this:

BDM
 

Problem with your analysis is you just straight rip the opinions other people have written with sabermetrics, you show no criticism of any of their stats and you use near mirror image phrasing that you find in moneyball or on baseball prospectus. It seems like you just read all this stuff, thought wow this is what's real, seriously when you type it just sounds brainwashed because you bring no unique twist on the stats. Sabermetrics are a nice tool, but only a tool, tell me exactly how a stat can eliminate ballpark factor? You can't, they just use #'s to adjust it, but fact it a ballpark's effect isn't based on #'s, and you can't just grab some #'s and average it out and assume that it exactly replicates what someone would do in another park or a level playing field park. Somethings just can't be forecast, and using averages it's going to adjust ballpark factor legitimately.

Explain to me why the #'s that they use to determine ballpark factor are the right #'s to prove how you would eliminate a ballpark's factor, and how exactly that works. Eliminating ballpark factor sounds nice, and would seem real useful when you read it as a stat, if you could actually do it, but you can't. Even many writers who like to use BP factor specifically state it's not perfect, and you should use it as if it were.

You can just say Pujols' OPS+ is better than Holliday's so plain and simple he's better, because OPS+ isn't a perfect stat.


I agree. :unsure: I was being a dick by just pointing to statistics without explaining why I stood for whatever it was I was arguing. I also see what he mean by lack of criticism for saber-stuff. Times have a-changed. -_-

Yeah but he talks about how the stat is not perfect and shit, well yeah, no stat will ever be 100% perfect but it sure as fuck does a helluva lot better analyzing a player then most of these other "traditional stats" that are more commonly used.

And at least the stat attempts to adjust a player to his respective ballpark, once again, sure it is not perfect, but it's the evidence we have to work with.

So then I would ask BDM what should we use to see if Pujols is really better then Matt Holliday, because their is a answer to it, but how BDM go about proving either one.

No, he wasn't defending new statistics nor was he attacking them. He was simply questioning the validity of my arguments, and he was correct in doing so.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
dbacksfan
I am a Ignorant Nazi Ass

sportslover
Apr 17 2008, 01:28 PM
dbacksfan
Apr 17 2008, 04:52 PM
whose EqA is .157
Apr 17 2008, 10:47 AM
I was looking through some threads last night and found this:

BDM
 

Problem with your analysis is you just straight rip the opinions other people have written with sabermetrics, you show no criticism of any of their stats and you use near mirror image phrasing that you find in moneyball or on baseball prospectus. It seems like you just read all this stuff, thought wow this is what's real, seriously when you type it just sounds brainwashed because you bring no unique twist on the stats. Sabermetrics are a nice tool, but only a tool, tell me exactly how a stat can eliminate ballpark factor? You can't, they just use #'s to adjust it, but fact it a ballpark's effect isn't based on #'s, and you can't just grab some #'s and average it out and assume that it exactly replicates what someone would do in another park or a level playing field park. Somethings just can't be forecast, and using averages it's going to adjust ballpark factor legitimately.

Explain to me why the #'s that they use to determine ballpark factor are the right #'s to prove how you would eliminate a ballpark's factor, and how exactly that works. Eliminating ballpark factor sounds nice, and would seem real useful when you read it as a stat, if you could actually do it, but you can't. Even many writers who like to use BP factor specifically state it's not perfect, and you should use it as if it were.

You can just say Pujols' OPS+ is better than Holliday's so plain and simple he's better, because OPS+ isn't a perfect stat.


I agree. :unsure: I was being a dick by just pointing to statistics without explaining why I stood for whatever it was I was arguing. I also see what he mean by lack of criticism for saber-stuff. Times have a-changed. -_-

Yeah but he talks about how the stat is not perfect and shit, well yeah, no stat will ever be 100% perfect but it sure as fuck does a helluva lot better analyzing a player then most of these other "traditional stats" that are more commonly used.

And at least the stat attempts to adjust a player to his respective ballpark, once again, sure it is not perfect, but it's the evidence we have to work with.

So then I would ask BDM what should we use to see if Pujols is really better then Matt Holliday, because their is a answer to it, but how BDM go about proving either one.

No, he wasn't defending new statistics nor was he attacking them. He was simply questioning the validity of my arguments, and he was correct in doing so.

When did BDM post this?
Quote Post Goto Top
 
sportslover
Member Avatar


wOBA, which I used in the Cubs preview:

http://www.insidethebook.com/woba.shtml

http://www.insidethebook.com/ee/index.php/...g_to_know_woba/

:thumbsup:
Quote Post Goto Top
 
aCutb
Member Avatar
I drink your milkshake

Hyltzn
Apr 17 2008, 06:40 PM

I liked what the articles said about relievers right here:

http://www.insidethebook.com/c08.shtml
Quote Post Goto Top
 
JoeCoolMan24
Member Avatar
I got Alicia Sacramone

The Hardball Times just put out their latest "Dartboard" rankings. These are the rankings off all teams and projected wins if they all played a nuetral schedule. Strength of schedule is factored along with performance to go into the rankings.

The Diamondbacks figure out to be at 123 wins. :eek: That obviously isn't realistic, or a prediction, but thats how good they are if they were to play the same schedule as everyone else.

The worst team on the list is the Giants at 43 wins.

http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/...-april-20-2008/

Quote Post Goto Top
 
dbacksfan
I am a Ignorant Nazi Ass

JoeCoolMan24
Apr 20 2008, 04:20 PM
The Hardball Times just put out their latest "Dartboard" rankings. These are the rankings off all teams and projected wins if they all played a nuetral schedule. Strength of schedule is factored along with performance to go into the rankings.

The Diamondbacks figure out to be at 123 wins. :eek: That obviously isn't realistic, or a prediction, but thats how good they are if they were to play the same schedule as everyone else.

The worst team on the list is the Giants at 43 wins.

http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/...-april-20-2008/

I personally like these standings right here.

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/statistics/ps_odds.php

Post season odds by baseball prospectus, Clay Davenport sims the season 1 million times every day and posts the chances of each team getting to the playoffs.

Dbacks currently have a 73% chance of making it to the playoffs. 63% chance as the division champion and 9% chance by the wild card.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
sportslover
Member Avatar


Uh-oh, guys. The nerdy stat-heads in their mother's basements are taking over this forum...

:sneer:
Quote Post Goto Top
 
CELTS20
Member Avatar
Mission 17: Complete

Joey Gathwright's OPS is .52

:lol:
Quote Post Goto Top
 
dbacksfan
I am a Ignorant Nazi Ass

Hyltzn
Apr 21 2008, 03:19 PM
Uh-oh, guys. The nerdy stat-heads in their mother's basements are taking over this forum...

:sneer:

:o And your responsible :mellow:
Quote Post Goto Top
 
jrmycmpfan
Member Avatar
Keep cool my babies

dbacksfan
Apr 21 2008, 07:08 PM
Hyltzn
Apr 21 2008, 03:19 PM
Uh-oh, guys. The nerdy stat-heads in their mother's basements are taking over this forum...

:sneer:

:o And your responsible :mellow:

He's brainwashing you all.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · United Sports · Next Topic »
Add Reply