All Forums > SimLeague Baseball > MLB > WAR question
8/16/2013 9:34 AM
That's the problem I have with UZR. BIS's data is proprietary so we don't see the inputs, just the Fangraphs or ESPN outputs.

But, it is the consensus "best we have." And it seems to, for the most part, line up with what scouts say. It just gives us a way to quantify it.

I don't have a problem using it after one year knowing that it won't predict future performance. In the same way that one year of batting average isn't a big enough sample size.
8/16/2013 9:43 AM
**** sandwich.   Sometimes it's the best thing on the menu.   Maybe it's better to just be hungry.
8/16/2013 10:06 AM
Posted by bad_luck on 8/16/2013 9:34:00 AM (view original):
That's the problem I have with UZR. BIS's data is proprietary so we don't see the inputs, just the Fangraphs or ESPN outputs.

But, it is the consensus "best we have." And it seems to, for the most part, line up with what scouts say. It just gives us a way to quantify it.

I don't have a problem using it after one year knowing that it won't predict future performance. In the same way that one year of batting average isn't a big enough sample size.
There is no comparison whatsoever to batting average.

Batting average is a direct statistic. How many hits divided by how many at bats. It may not have deep predictive value (though it certainly has some) but it is a true, unarguable fact.

This is utterly untrue with UZR.
8/16/2013 10:50 AM
Posted by burnsy483 on 8/16/2013 12:31:00 AM (view original):
From what I understand, 0 is average for the league.
That is right - the runs are compared to average and than a replacement adjustment is made later.  I was thinking of WAR overall.
8/16/2013 10:56 AM

"Thus, a SS with a UZR of zero is exactly average as compared to a SS in the same year and in the same league."  Understand more about UZR before you rave about its merits.

Is that bolded part for me?  Hyperbole much?
8/16/2013 11:24 AM
Posted by MikeT23 on 8/16/2013 9:43:00 AM (view original):
**** sandwich.   Sometimes it's the best thing on the menu.   Maybe it's better to just be hungry.
Just like RBI and pitcher wins were the best thing we had for a long time. I don't remember hearing you argue that we shouldn't have used them.
8/16/2013 11:36 AM
Posted by bad_luck on 8/16/2013 11:24:00 AM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 8/16/2013 9:43:00 AM (view original):
**** sandwich.   Sometimes it's the best thing on the menu.   Maybe it's better to just be hungry.
Just like RBI and pitcher wins were the best thing we had for a long time. I don't remember hearing you argue that we shouldn't have used them.

There is no statnerd standing around saying "I think, on the whole, that the league average LF would have gotten an RBI in that situation."     You either drive in the run or you don't.    Not so much with UZR.    Some geek is determining if a ball should have been caught.

8/16/2013 1:50 PM
Posted by trsnoke on 8/16/2013 10:56:00 AM (view original):

"Thus, a SS with a UZR of zero is exactly average as compared to a SS in the same year and in the same league."  Understand more about UZR before you rave about its merits.

Is that bolded part for me?  Hyperbole much?
You and BL, yea.  I said I had issues with it and you guys are arguing for it, so, yea, understand what it is before you tell me that it's a good stat.
8/16/2013 1:54 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 8/16/2013 11:24:00 AM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 8/16/2013 9:43:00 AM (view original):
**** sandwich.   Sometimes it's the best thing on the menu.   Maybe it's better to just be hungry.
Just like RBI and pitcher wins were the best thing we had for a long time. I don't remember hearing you argue that we shouldn't have used them.
So because we're recognizing that the stat is flawed, we should just roll with it because we didn't recognize that RBIs were largely insignificant? 
8/16/2013 1:56 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 8/16/2013 11:36:00 AM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 8/16/2013 11:24:00 AM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 8/16/2013 9:43:00 AM (view original):
**** sandwich.   Sometimes it's the best thing on the menu.   Maybe it's better to just be hungry.
Just like RBI and pitcher wins were the best thing we had for a long time. I don't remember hearing you argue that we shouldn't have used them.

There is no statnerd standing around saying "I think, on the whole, that the league average LF would have gotten an RBI in that situation."     You either drive in the run or you don't.    Not so much with UZR.    Some geek is determining if a ball should have been caught.

Actually, it's a scout. How else can it be done?
8/16/2013 2:00 PM
A scout, and then a computer.  Right?
8/16/2013 2:01 PM
Posted by burnsy483 on 8/16/2013 1:54:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 8/16/2013 11:24:00 AM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 8/16/2013 9:43:00 AM (view original):
**** sandwich.   Sometimes it's the best thing on the menu.   Maybe it's better to just be hungry.
Just like RBI and pitcher wins were the best thing we had for a long time. I don't remember hearing you argue that we shouldn't have used them.
So because we're recognizing that the stat is flawed, we should just roll with it because we didn't recognize that RBIs were largely insignificant? 
No, two different points.
1) We don't have a better tool for evaluating defense. You say the stat sucks. Based on what? Variances in performance? I think it's reasonable that a player's defense could vary from year to year. I admit that the stat has limitations, but it's the best thing we have. Which brings up point 2. 

2) People are still(!) using RBI as the primary MVP stat. We know with 100% accuracy that RBI is a terribly inaccurate stat for measuring production.
8/16/2013 2:13 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 8/16/2013 2:01:00 PM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 8/16/2013 1:54:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 8/16/2013 11:24:00 AM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 8/16/2013 9:43:00 AM (view original):
**** sandwich.   Sometimes it's the best thing on the menu.   Maybe it's better to just be hungry.
Just like RBI and pitcher wins were the best thing we had for a long time. I don't remember hearing you argue that we shouldn't have used them.
So because we're recognizing that the stat is flawed, we should just roll with it because we didn't recognize that RBIs were largely insignificant? 
No, two different points.
1) We don't have a better tool for evaluating defense. You say the stat sucks. Based on what? Variances in performance? I think it's reasonable that a player's defense could vary from year to year. I admit that the stat has limitations, but it's the best thing we have. Which brings up point 2. 

2) People are still(!) using RBI as the primary MVP stat. We know with 100% accuracy that RBI is a terribly inaccurate stat for measuring production.
Yea, it doesn't pass the smell test.  I can say with some confidence that Mike Trout did not save his team 3 runs defensively in the last handful of games.  I feel like I would have seen a couple highlights on Sportscenter.  Did he do it subtly?  Is he reading balls of the bat better the last few games?  What the hell?  I could be wrong, but I'm pretty confident that you get UZR from a human being essentially guessing where a ball landed/would have landed, inputting the data into the computer, and the computer determines if he should have caught the ball or not.  So if a ball lands in shallow center and the computer determines that Trout should have caught it but didn't, does it also recognize that the outfield was playing no doubles defense up 1 run with a man on 1st in the 9th inning?  Pretty sure it's no, it would determine that Trout cost his team 0.3 runs or whatever.  It's kinda stupid.  

I'm not saying it's a useless stat.  But it needs to get better, so I'm not putting much stock into it, that's all.  It affects WAR quite a bit, and WAR has become a pretty popular stat of late.

As per #2, because people put too much stock into RBI, I should put too much stock into these UZR numbers?
8/16/2013 2:17 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 8/16/2013 1:56:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 8/16/2013 11:36:00 AM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 8/16/2013 11:24:00 AM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 8/16/2013 9:43:00 AM (view original):
**** sandwich.   Sometimes it's the best thing on the menu.   Maybe it's better to just be hungry.
Just like RBI and pitcher wins were the best thing we had for a long time. I don't remember hearing you argue that we shouldn't have used them.

There is no statnerd standing around saying "I think, on the whole, that the league average LF would have gotten an RBI in that situation."     You either drive in the run or you don't.    Not so much with UZR.    Some geek is determining if a ball should have been caught.

Actually, it's a scout. How else can it be done?
Maybe it's something that can't be done with any accuracy.    Maybe doing it is pointless because of that. 
8/16/2013 2:19 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 8/16/2013 9:43:00 AM (view original):
**** sandwich.   Sometimes it's the best thing on the menu.   Maybe it's better to just be hungry.
This is the response to "It's the best thing we have."

**** sandwiches can't be good but they can be the only thing to eat, right?
of 12
All Forums > SimLeague Baseball > MLB > WAR question

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.