Posted by Jtpsops on 7/12/2016 12:47:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 7/12/2016 12:45:00 PM (view original):
So, just to be clear, your argument is that, for example, RBI is a more accurate stat for determining how many runs a guy has knocked in than WAR or HR or stolen bases?
But not, "if we want to know which player is better overall, we should look at their RBI, since it will more accurately tell us who is better."
No, you're obviously not clear.
Those were two separate posts. One was explaining why RBI has value. The other was stating that "old school stats", overall, are more accurate and trustworthy than advanced metrics.
I see you're still struggling with that reading comprehension thing.
Clearly, I'm not getting your point.
Different stats do different things, and "more accurate" can mean different things depending on the stat.
RBI will give you a more accurate account of how many runs a guy has knocked in than HR. But HR gives you a more accurate indication of the player's ability to hit for power than RBI. Does that make sense?
So if I said RBI is more accurate than HR and left it at that with no explanation, whether I'm right or wrong depends on what I mean by more accurate.