All Forums > SimLeague Baseball > MLB > Defensive Metrics
9/6/2013 12:05 PM
I'll take your word on it but the numbers don't sound right to me.    If a RF gets two plays a game, he's been a busy fellow.     I don't think it's much of a stretch for a SS to field 4 balls and throw 2 to first to complete the DP. 

Nonetheless, if a SS gets 400 chances in a season and a RF gets 200, why does the SS need 1200 chances while the RF only needs 600 to get a good feel for the defensive metrics you tout?
9/6/2013 12:11 PM
Posted by jsakicno19 on 9/6/2013 12:05:00 AM (view original):
Posted by mountainjack on 9/5/2013 6:42:00 PM (view original):

lad_buck, at the risk of having you create a new screen name to heckle me (jack_mountain?) your posts would be more effective if you wrote in complete sentences and used a capital letter once in a while.  I agree with some of your points but it's difficult to read.  If you are trying to hide who you really are with that style I suppose it's working but it's irritating.

For those who completely disregard and badmouth sabermetrics and the new stats, let me know how the next flat earth meeting goes.  Most MLB teams are using them extensively, regardless of what ESPN and the rest of the media does.  Some of the stats are more effective than others, and they all need to be used in context.  Some people do use them too much or the wrong way to try to make a point and/or bore people to death so I understand the backlash.  However, you can still be a true baseball fan and love watching the game while still appreciating the new stuff.  It does not have to be an either/or thing but it's human nature to turn debates into just that.

Serious implications... U witness heckling, & risk jack-mountain's appearance
as a part of what ???... Is there a modus operandi (M.O.), of repeated instances,
of this where U R here to help 'heckling" be more effective ???...

U've opened a door, but it implies that usernames are not the real issue that is
related to the topic of the thread...  What irritates U can be remedied, by buying
a discount fly-swatter... If sticks & stones break bones, then this thread ain't 4U,
as names ain't supposed 2 hurt U... R U a kindergarten graduate, or not ???...

Your numbers are a fad, come-&-go, just like the GWRBI... Eddie Murray, 4 the
short time that stat existed, was the king, as a switch-hitter... So what if the stat
proved the the whole nerd-nation wrong...

The designated runner, and MLB experimented, but could not sign Carl Lewis,
or any Willie May's Hay's types, & the nerds lost it totally, as far as any credibility
or ability to predict an event... Have a few more beers... The 5th inning is next...

Eye witnessed someone in that college class make an astute point... Same 1...
The very same bell curve that was the measure, & so necessary 2 the equation,
of Bill Jame's abstract stuff, because the bell curve was not meant as a 'predict'
tool... His equated predictions, are the death-knell of a mathematician...

The bell-curve works here in ALL games on this web-site, simplified 2 resemble
a dollar bill, lite as paper, & heavy as coin... Linear weights MUST stand-up 2 very
certain mathematical proving grounds of validation... 

Number fads... Crystal balls... The designated hitter was first brought to MLB, by
number nerds during the BlackSox scandal... A way 2 shave those overwhelming
odds when Ruth batted, & other teams could not counter... Number geeks, for 100
years, always trying 2 change baseball...

Seems it would be a different stage to perform on, if bad-luck wasn't self-flattered
as the poster-child and spokesperson on behalf of ******* WAR !!!... 
I didn't say it hurt my feelings, just that it's irritating to read, so ok I won't read it any more.  Get off Twitter once in a while and take an English class (at least you figured out where the shift key is). 

You pretty much missed my point that you don't have to either worship the new stats or hate them.  Some of the numbers are a fad but a lot of them are not.  Call your local MLB team and ask them what they are using, they are using a lot of these stats.  They are another tool to use in addition to scouts watching the players.

You can still love and watch baseball the same way it has been done for 120+ years without even thinking about the "new" stats but to say all of them are a passing fad is ignoring reality.  Talk to you in 20 years and we can debate this again, by that time everyone will probably be using the same Twitter writing style that you use.

9/6/2013 12:11 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 9/6/2013 12:05:00 PM (view original):
I'll take your word on it but the numbers don't sound right to me.    If a RF gets two plays a game, he's been a busy fellow.     I don't think it's much of a stretch for a SS to field 4 balls and throw 2 to first to complete the DP. 

Nonetheless, if a SS gets 400 chances in a season and a RF gets 200, why does the SS need 1200 chances while the RF only needs 600 to get a good feel for the defensive metrics you tout?
It's just a rough guideline.
9/6/2013 12:13 PM
Posted by mountainjack on 9/6/2013 12:11:00 PM (view original):
Posted by jsakicno19 on 9/6/2013 12:05:00 AM (view original):
Posted by mountainjack on 9/5/2013 6:42:00 PM (view original):

lad_buck, at the risk of having you create a new screen name to heckle me (jack_mountain?) your posts would be more effective if you wrote in complete sentences and used a capital letter once in a while.  I agree with some of your points but it's difficult to read.  If you are trying to hide who you really are with that style I suppose it's working but it's irritating.

For those who completely disregard and badmouth sabermetrics and the new stats, let me know how the next flat earth meeting goes.  Most MLB teams are using them extensively, regardless of what ESPN and the rest of the media does.  Some of the stats are more effective than others, and they all need to be used in context.  Some people do use them too much or the wrong way to try to make a point and/or bore people to death so I understand the backlash.  However, you can still be a true baseball fan and love watching the game while still appreciating the new stuff.  It does not have to be an either/or thing but it's human nature to turn debates into just that.

Serious implications... U witness heckling, & risk jack-mountain's appearance
as a part of what ???... Is there a modus operandi (M.O.), of repeated instances,
of this where U R here to help 'heckling" be more effective ???...

U've opened a door, but it implies that usernames are not the real issue that is
related to the topic of the thread...  What irritates U can be remedied, by buying
a discount fly-swatter... If sticks & stones break bones, then this thread ain't 4U,
as names ain't supposed 2 hurt U... R U a kindergarten graduate, or not ???...

Your numbers are a fad, come-&-go, just like the GWRBI... Eddie Murray, 4 the
short time that stat existed, was the king, as a switch-hitter... So what if the stat
proved the the whole nerd-nation wrong...

The designated runner, and MLB experimented, but could not sign Carl Lewis,
or any Willie May's Hay's types, & the nerds lost it totally, as far as any credibility
or ability to predict an event... Have a few more beers... The 5th inning is next...

Eye witnessed someone in that college class make an astute point... Same 1...
The very same bell curve that was the measure, & so necessary 2 the equation,
of Bill Jame's abstract stuff, because the bell curve was not meant as a 'predict'
tool... His equated predictions, are the death-knell of a mathematician...

The bell-curve works here in ALL games on this web-site, simplified 2 resemble
a dollar bill, lite as paper, & heavy as coin... Linear weights MUST stand-up 2 very
certain mathematical proving grounds of validation... 

Number fads... Crystal balls... The designated hitter was first brought to MLB, by
number nerds during the BlackSox scandal... A way 2 shave those overwhelming
odds when Ruth batted, & other teams could not counter... Number geeks, for 100
years, always trying 2 change baseball...

Seems it would be a different stage to perform on, if bad-luck wasn't self-flattered
as the poster-child and spokesperson on behalf of ******* WAR !!!... 
I didn't say it hurt my feelings, just that it's irritating to read, so ok I won't read it any more.  Get off Twitter once in a while and take an English class (at least you figured out where the shift key is). 

You pretty much missed my point that you don't have to either worship the new stats or hate them.  Some of the numbers are a fad but a lot of them are not.  Call your local MLB team and ask them what they are using, they are using a lot of these stats.  They are another tool to use in addition to scouts watching the players.

You can still love and watch baseball the same way it has been done for 120+ years without even thinking about the "new" stats but to say all of them are a passing fad is ignoring reality.  Talk to you in 20 years and we can debate this again, by that time everyone will probably be using the same Twitter writing style that you use.

Jesus Christ, you read all of that and then gave a response like you were responding to a rational person? Do yourself a favor and block jsak/lad.
9/6/2013 12:18 PM
Yeah, it hurts my head just to read his posts.
9/6/2013 12:44 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 9/6/2013 12:11:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 9/6/2013 12:05:00 PM (view original):
I'll take your word on it but the numbers don't sound right to me.    If a RF gets two plays a game, he's been a busy fellow.     I don't think it's much of a stretch for a SS to field 4 balls and throw 2 to first to complete the DP. 

Nonetheless, if a SS gets 400 chances in a season and a RF gets 200, why does the SS need 1200 chances while the RF only needs 600 to get a good feel for the defensive metrics you tout?
It's just a rough guideline.
Is it roughly 3 for infielders and 6 for corner outfielders? 1.5 for infielders and 3 for corner outfielders?
9/6/2013 12:51 PM
One point of infielders is worth two points of corner outfielders.

Or is it the other way 'round?

I'm so confuzzled.
9/6/2013 12:53 PM

And how do defensive metrics account for a ball-hogging CF who takes every single fly ball he can get to...?  Does that mean the RF/LF have lousy UZR numbers?

Or do they get credit for being close enough to make the play even if they're called off?

9/6/2013 12:55 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 9/6/2013 12:11:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 9/6/2013 12:05:00 PM (view original):
I'll take your word on it but the numbers don't sound right to me.    If a RF gets two plays a game, he's been a busy fellow.     I don't think it's much of a stretch for a SS to field 4 balls and throw 2 to first to complete the DP. 

Nonetheless, if a SS gets 400 chances in a season and a RF gets 200, why does the SS need 1200 chances while the RF only needs 600 to get a good feel for the defensive metrics you tout?
It's just a rough guideline.
While you're still not answering the question, how much weight to you place on "rough guidelines"?

Honestly, if a RF has a bad week and botches a bunch of balls, he'll have 1/2 to 1/3(depending on the real numbers) of the opportunities to right his flailing ship.   If a SS has a bad week and botches the same number of balls, he'll have plenty of time to get his house in order.    Does that seem fair to judge a RF on 1/2 to 1/3 as many opportunities?
9/6/2013 1:05 PM
Posted by toddcommish on 9/6/2013 12:53:00 PM (view original):

And how do defensive metrics account for a ball-hogging CF who takes every single fly ball he can get to...?  Does that mean the RF/LF have lousy UZR numbers?

Or do they get credit for being close enough to make the play even if they're called off?

No ****.  If my contract is somewhat based on my UZR number, I'm kicking that bastard in the sack if he takes my FB.
9/6/2013 1:35 PM
Now that would make for some entertaining defense.
9/6/2013 1:39 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 9/6/2013 12:55:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 9/6/2013 12:11:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 9/6/2013 12:05:00 PM (view original):
I'll take your word on it but the numbers don't sound right to me.    If a RF gets two plays a game, he's been a busy fellow.     I don't think it's much of a stretch for a SS to field 4 balls and throw 2 to first to complete the DP. 

Nonetheless, if a SS gets 400 chances in a season and a RF gets 200, why does the SS need 1200 chances while the RF only needs 600 to get a good feel for the defensive metrics you tout?
It's just a rough guideline.
While you're still not answering the question, how much weight to you place on "rough guidelines"?

Honestly, if a RF has a bad week and botches a bunch of balls, he'll have 1/2 to 1/3(depending on the real numbers) of the opportunities to right his flailing ship.   If a SS has a bad week and botches the same number of balls, he'll have plenty of time to get his house in order.    Does that seem fair to judge a RF on 1/2 to 1/3 as many opportunities?
No one said that the stat is perfect. The idea is that by using a rough guideline of 3 full years, you ensure that you have a reliable sample size. Obviously you get more opportunities and a more reliable sample when looking at SS, 2B, and CF's.

I love that you used stats like pitcher wins, RBI, and fielding percentage for years but suddenly set a extremely high standard for precision when working with the best fielding stat we have available.
9/6/2013 1:40 PM
Posted by toddcommish on 9/6/2013 12:53:00 PM (view original):

And how do defensive metrics account for a ball-hogging CF who takes every single fly ball he can get to...?  Does that mean the RF/LF have lousy UZR numbers?

Or do they get credit for being close enough to make the play even if they're called off?

No, the RF would get zero credit (positive or negative) for a ball the CF caught.
9/6/2013 2:05 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 9/6/2013 1:40:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 9/6/2013 12:55:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 9/6/2013 12:11:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 9/6/2013 12:05:00 PM (view original):
I'll take your word on it but the numbers don't sound right to me.    If a RF gets two plays a game, he's been a busy fellow.     I don't think it's much of a stretch for a SS to field 4 balls and throw 2 to first to complete the DP. 

Nonetheless, if a SS gets 400 chances in a season and a RF gets 200, why does the SS need 1200 chances while the RF only needs 600 to get a good feel for the defensive metrics you tout?
It's just a rough guideline.
While you're still not answering the question, how much weight to you place on "rough guidelines"?

Honestly, if a RF has a bad week and botches a bunch of balls, he'll have 1/2 to 1/3(depending on the real numbers) of the opportunities to right his flailing ship.   If a SS has a bad week and botches the same number of balls, he'll have plenty of time to get his house in order.    Does that seem fair to judge a RF on 1/2 to 1/3 as many opportunities?
No one said that the stat is perfect. The idea is that by using a rough guideline of 3 full years, you ensure that you have a reliable sample size. Obviously you get more opportunities and a more reliable sample when looking at SS, 2B, and CF's.

I love that you used stats like pitcher wins, RBI, and fielding percentage for years but suddenly set a extremely high standard for precision when working with the best fielding stat we have available.
Just looking for some consistency.     If a pitcher won 20 or a hitter drove in 110 or a fielder had a top 3 in F% at his position, I'm fairly confident in saying "He had a pretty good year."     When I'm "forced" to judge one player based on 300 chances while giving another 800 chances, I'm not as comfortable with that stat.
9/6/2013 2:25 PM
Really??? Top three in fielding percentage indicates "a pretty good year" but a 10 UZR year doesn't?

You should look for that consistency from yourself. How many chances did that top 3 in fielding percentage LF get? 300? Maybe? What about all the balls he didn't have the range to get to? It's tough to make an error on a ball that bounces four times before you get there.
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.