The people who look-up WAR are the same people who look-up advanced metrics for defense.

Posted by MikeT23 on 7/12/2016 6:59:00 AM (view original):
I wonder why these people who are far more involved/informed about MLB than I keep talking about these useless stats? Just weird.

They know the audience.

Geriatrics don't change.

Posted by bad_luck on 7/12/2016 8:51:00 AM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 7/12/2016 6:59:00 AM (view original):
I wonder why these people who are far more involved/informed about MLB than I keep talking about these useless stats? Just weird.

They know the audience.

Geriatrics don't change.

Or "geriatrics" realize tangible/measurable stats are far more accurate than subjective formulas.

Posted by Jtpsops on 7/12/2016 9:44:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 7/12/2016 8:51:00 AM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 7/12/2016 6:59:00 AM (view original):
I wonder why these people who are far more involved/informed about MLB than I keep talking about these useless stats? Just weird.

They know the audience.

Geriatrics don't change.

Or "geriatrics" realize tangible/measurable stats are far more accurate than subjective formulas.

What do you mean by "more accurate?"

Posted by Jtpsops on 7/12/2016 9:44:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 7/12/2016 8:51:00 AM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 7/12/2016 6:59:00 AM (view original):
I wonder why these people who are far more involved/informed about MLB than I keep talking about these useless stats? Just weird.

They know the audience.

Geriatrics don't change.

Or "geriatrics" realize tangible/measurable stats are far more accurate than subjective formulas.

I see a new take on "You just don't understand ADVANCED METRICS!!!!"

I don't imagine it could possibly be because pitcher wins/RBI contribute to actual wins rather than "paper" wins like WAR, FIP, UZR and whatever else BL worships.

There are plenty of good arguments against WAR, FIP, UZR, etc.

"Pitcher W/L and RBI are better" is not one of them.

Posted by bad_luck on 7/12/2016 11:25:00 AM (view original):
There are plenty of good arguments against WAR, FIP, UZR, etc.

"Pitcher W/L and RBI are better" is not one of them.

Please give me an example of what YOU consider to be a "good argument" against WAR.

This should be fascinating.

Posted by tecwrg on 7/12/2016 11:32:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 7/12/2016 11:25:00 AM (view original):
There are plenty of good arguments against WAR, FIP, UZR, etc.

"Pitcher W/L and RBI are better" is not one of them.

Please give me an example of what YOU consider to be a "good argument" against WAR.

This should be fascinating.

For example, if you are trying to determine if player A will be better than player B for the rest of 2016, using season to date WAR would not be a good way to do that.

(It would still be better than WL or RBI, though).

RBI is a pretty good indicator of a guy's ability to plate baserunners. Sure, he has no control over who's on base when he hits - but he has control over getting those runners home in those situations.

Although for a guy who thinks sac flies and RBI groundouts have negative value, I wouldn't expect you to get that.

Posted by bad_luck on 7/12/2016 9:52:00 AM (view original):

Posted by Jtpsops on 7/12/2016 9:44:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 7/12/2016 8:51:00 AM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 7/12/2016 6:59:00 AM (view original):
I wonder why these people who are far more involved/informed about MLB than I keep talking about these useless stats? Just weird.

They know the audience.

Geriatrics don't change.

Or "geriatrics" realize tangible/measurable stats are far more accurate than subjective formulas.

What do you mean by "more accurate?"

What do you mean by more accurate?

I'm not doing this with you again. If you want to keep going in circles, go back to the other thread.

I'm not asking you to go in circles. You said "tangible/measurable stats are far more accurate than subjective formulas."

What do you mean by more accurate?

Go look in the other thread because I explained this to you there, when you showed you had no clue what subjective meant.

"Old school" stats are finite. They can be counted and there is no variance. If Player A has 35 home runs, he has 35 home runs. No matter who you ask, you'll get the same answer. Not so with advanced metrics.

Posted by Jtpsops on 7/12/2016 12:28:00 PM (view original):
RBI is a pretty good indicator of a guy's ability to plate baserunners. Sure, he has no control over who's on base when he hits - but he has control over getting those runners home in those situations.

Although for a guy who thinks sac flies and RBI groundouts have negative value, I wouldn't expect you to get that.

Of course he doesn't get it. He's a semi-functional retard. Sort of like Rainman counting matchsticks but freaking out when the water runs in the tub.