Posted by bad_luck on 7/13/2016 11:53:00 AM (view original):

Posted by Jtpsops on 7/13/2016 11:15:00 AM (view original):
RBI isn't mentioned anywhere in that post. Once again...reading comprehension.

Unless you're saying "stats" is equal to "RBI"? As in RBI is the only stat there is?

For someone who's all about the stat sheets, you sure don't seem to know much about them.

You're the kind of person who gets stuck inside a building with unlocked doors because they aren't labeled pull.

Once again, just so we're clear, I WAS USING RBI AS AN EXAMPLE.

See where it says, "for example?"

Here:

"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.

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?

And, side note, of the "advanced metrics" that you love to hate, WAR is the only mainstream stat that is calculated in two different ways. OPS+, UZR, FIP, wOBA, wRC+, etc., etc., are all only calculated one way.

"Just to be clear." Again, shouldn't require clarification. Who the hell would use HR or stolen bases to determine how many runs a guy knocked in?

You're an idiot. Plain and simple. Can't say it anymore clearly than that. You're an idiot.

I'm not getting sucked back into to another one of your delusional, circular and misguided "debates". We're done here.

Posted by Jtpsops on 7/13/2016 12:26:00 PM (view original):
"Just to be clear." Again, shouldn't require clarification. Who the hell would use HR or stolen bases to determine how many runs a guy knocked in?

You're an idiot. Plain and simple. Can't say it anymore clearly than that. You're an idiot.

I'm not getting sucked back into to another one of your delusional, circular and misguided "debates". We're done here.

You wouldn't use WAR either. Hence my request for clarification.

When you say "stats are more accurate that advanced metrics," you're making a comparison. You're saying they are more accurate at something. When asked what that something is, you say:

"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.

Ignoring the fact that almost all advanced metrics don't vary in that way either, your entire point seems to be that the stat that measures X tells you X more accurately than the stat that measures Y. Which isn't exactly groundbreaking stuff.

Now, make sure your tampon is locked and loaded, I'm about to give you an example. This is just an example. Again, it's an example.

For example, if someone were to say HR is a more accurate stat than wRC+, and clarified that by saying HR tell you how many HR a player hit. They aren't exactly breaking any new ground there, right? Obviously wRC+ isn't going to tell you how many HR a player hit. That's not something worth discussing.

If they instead clarified that first statement by saying HR is a better indicator of the player's power than wRC+, they may or may not be right, but it's worth discussing.

Does my example make sense to you?

16 years on this site and I've never blocked anyone. I must say, it feels good not to have to read his gibberish anymore. You don't realize how dumb it's making you until you stop reading it.

Like I said before, you're the only person on the internet literally too dumb to argue with.

Posted by bad_luck on 7/13/2016 1:05:00 PM (view original):
Like I said before, you're the only person on the internet literally too dumb to argue with.

Stop with the self analysis. We all already know this about you.

Apparently Papi may get fined for tampering for saying at the ASG that Encarnacion should replace him next year. Classic.