All Forums > SimLeague Baseball > MLB > Defensive Metrics
9/4/2013 6:35 PM
If you're watching the Rangers/A's game right now, you know that if the sun isn't factored into defensive stats in that park, the defensive stats are bullshit. The sun is brutal today and the Rangers have misplayed three fly balls in this inning alone because of it.
9/4/2013 6:38 PM
Make that four.
9/4/2013 6:55 PM (edited)
Posted by The Taint on 9/4/2013 6:35:00 PM (view original):
If you're watching the Rangers/A's game right now, you know that if the sun isn't factored into defensive stats in that park, the defensive stats are bullshit. The sun is brutal today and the Rangers have misplayed three fly balls in this inning alone because of it.
no. this is the basic of defensive metrics. the managers moving outfielders into blinding sun.

its the latest offensive ploy. the hidden defensive metrics trick. did U look under the mound, too?

its all managers. kirk gibson-mvp-curse. he moves an outfielder so that bad_luck doesnt steal his mvp. kirk gibson is shrewd, and the hidden numbers will prove it, as it has defensive metrics, not pitchers, getting credit for making batters go 0-7...

same carnival ride, but he's the light-bulb tester.

i do like the idea of pitching-in, to get those numbers, so the thread can be treated with dynamite. if that is cool?
9/4/2013 6:54 PM
Posted by jsakicno19 on 9/4/2013 6:33:00 PM (view original):
What if the 'time-machine' only lets U go back to Babe Ruth's time,
back to the 1920's...

What if when U get there, the only baseball job u get is as a 'ump'
&, homeplate is all yours, evey 6th day (?)...

Will U '________________' ???

A.) Witness Babe Ruth hit monstrous amounts of homers, on balls
.     that weren't strikes ???...

B.) Stain your drawers ???

C.) Flash a hitch-hiking thumb @ a U.F.O. space-ship ???

D.) All of the above, in THAT order ???

he likes options, u know.

i can help u fill in the rest of the profile, with alphabet letters "e" to "z". that is a one in twenty-six chance of getting something right.
9/4/2013 6:55 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 9/4/2013 6:01:00 PM (view original):
Are you asking why sample sizes play a large role in the reliability of a stat?
You know exactly what I'm asking.  Don't play dumb.

Per you:
1)  We need three seasons of fielding data to get a good "feel".
2)  But not with hitters because they get 700 PA while fielders get 150-200 chances.

So, if it's a numbers game, and you're saying it is, do we need three years of fielding data for all positions?    If so, why?   As I recall, some positions get a lot more opportunities to field the ball.    Is it 600 chances?   What's the number?
9/4/2013 6:58 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 9/4/2013 6:55:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 9/4/2013 6:01:00 PM (view original):
Are you asking why sample sizes play a large role in the reliability of a stat?
You know exactly what I'm asking.  Don't play dumb.

Per you:
1)  We need three seasons of fielding data to get a good "feel".
2)  But not with hitters because they get 700 PA while fielders get 150-200 chances.

So, if it's a numbers game, and you're saying it is, do we need three years of fielding data for all positions?    If so, why?   As I recall, some positions get a lot more opportunities to field the ball.    Is it 600 chances?   What's the number?
whats the number. thats the point. its hidden. like fort knox. its in there.
9/4/2013 7:05 PM
Well-well... Nice 'bank-job', guys, -but eye saw BOTH
Clooney & Pitt try the same thing with casinos... They
had a plan... This doesn't look like a plan 2 me... No...
9/4/2013 7:07 PM
Dang it, will ya' just tell us how much the hidden
numbers cost ???...  This is a long sales pitch...
9/4/2013 7:11 PM
Must've dropped his glasses... Or, the sun knock'd 'em off...
9/4/2013 7:14 PM
i sure hope he's not looking for a coupon in the back of some old issue of "espn, the magazine"
9/4/2013 7:20 PM
What ???... U mean 3 EZ Payments of $19.99 ???...
What's he waiting 4, -the WalMart smiley-face ???...
2 change the price ???... No wonder he's worried,
about MTrout... Careful...

We don't need discount numbers... How much ???
9/4/2013 7:32 PM
excuse me. its the tension. i may yawn again. just a warning.
9/4/2013 7:35 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 9/4/2013 6:55:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 9/4/2013 6:01:00 PM (view original):
Are you asking why sample sizes play a large role in the reliability of a stat?
You know exactly what I'm asking.  Don't play dumb.

Per you:
1)  We need three seasons of fielding data to get a good "feel".
2)  But not with hitters because they get 700 PA while fielders get 150-200 chances.

So, if it's a numbers game, and you're saying it is, do we need three years of fielding data for all positions?    If so, why?   As I recall, some positions get a lot more opportunities to field the ball.    Is it 600 chances?   What's the number?
1) We need roughly three full seasons of UZR to reliably conclude that the number is a good indicator of the player's true talent. That three seasons isn't exact, it's just a guideline. 

2) When Taylor Teagarden posts a 1.200 OPS over 50 plate appearances, do you expect that to continue? Or do you consider it a fluke due to the sample size?

2b) Assuming that you consider it a fluke, would you stop using OPS because it doesn't reliably indicate a player's true talent when the sample size is small?


9/4/2013 7:36 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 9/4/2013 2:47:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 9/4/2013 2:24:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 9/4/2013 2:20:00 PM (view original):
Over the last 5 seasons, Everth Cabrera has played over 3100 innings at shortstop. Without looking at any stats, how good is his defense?
I'll be the first to say I don't even know who Everth Cabrera is. 

Therefore, I would not join an "Everth Cabrera sucks/is great at SS" debate.    

That said, I don't think anyone debated Brett Gardner vs. Mike Trout vs. Miguel Cabrera MVP last season.
You're right. So, without using stats, who was more valuable defensively in 2012, Cabrera or Trout?
You never answered this, by the way. Cat got your tongue?
9/4/2013 8:14 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 9/4/2013 7:35:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 9/4/2013 6:55:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 9/4/2013 6:01:00 PM (view original):
Are you asking why sample sizes play a large role in the reliability of a stat?
You know exactly what I'm asking.  Don't play dumb.

Per you:
1)  We need three seasons of fielding data to get a good "feel".
2)  But not with hitters because they get 700 PA while fielders get 150-200 chances.

So, if it's a numbers game, and you're saying it is, do we need three years of fielding data for all positions?    If so, why?   As I recall, some positions get a lot more opportunities to field the ball.    Is it 600 chances?   What's the number?
1) We need roughly three full seasons of UZR to reliably conclude that the number is a good indicator of the player's true talent. That three seasons isn't exact, it's just a guideline. 

2) When Taylor Teagarden posts a 1.200 OPS over 50 plate appearances, do you expect that to continue? Or do you consider it a fluke due to the sample size?

2b) Assuming that you consider it a fluke, would you stop using OPS because it doesn't reliably indicate a player's true talent when the sample size is small?


1)  So now it's "roughly" three seasons?    So maybe it could be two for some guys and four for others?   How do we differentiate who needs how many seasons?

2)  We've agreed, somewhat, that 700 PA can sort of tell us who can knock the **** out of the ball and who can't.   Why are you now using 50?

2b)  Please see 2.
of 23
All Forums > SimLeague Baseball > MLB > Defensive Metrics

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.