Posted by MikeT23 on 8/21/2013 2:00:00 PM (view original):
1.   I repeat, learn the meaning of words if you want to use them.   The Triple Crown is not arbitrary.   There is one way, and one way only, to achieve it.    It's pretty much the anti-arbitrary.

2.  I'll try a different route.

Quality start is a bullshit stat.   6 innings, 3 earned runs or less allowed.   Is 4.50 ERA quality?  Is that even below league average these days?   While I assign ZERO value to a QS, I'm not going to argue that 6 innings, 3 earned runs or less allowed isn't a quality start per the accepted standard or that it's just arbitrary numbers throw together.   It's been established and accepted in the baseball community.   It just means virtually nothing to me.  Much like FIP.  Except when arguing the virtues of Nolan Ryan.

Are you sure you understand what arbitrary means?

Saying something is arbitrary doesn't mean that there are multiple ways to accomplish it. There is only one way to accomplish the triple crown. Great. So what?

I'm not arguing that what Cabrera did isn't a triple crown. I'm arguing that the triple crown itself is an arbitrary grouping of three stats for no reason other than the fact the a writer 70 years ago was trying to make an argument and those 3 stats fit his argument. He arbitrarily attached a label to those three stats and it caught on.

Going to your QS example, if a writer today picked out a pitcher who had the most quality starts, least intentional walks, and most infield pop outs and called him the scrumptious elbow winner, and it caught on (even for 70 years), it would still be an arbitrary grouping of three stats.

There's no reason to tie those three stats together. He just picked them because they fit what he was trying to do.

Into the 80s, BA, HR and RBI leaders were the only hitting leaders listed in local Sunday newspapers.   Still may be.   Is that an off-shoot of the craziness from the 30s?   Or are they stats that the general public associated "good hitters" with?   

I'm almost certain it's the latter.

FWIW, "The Triple Crown of Pitching" is W, ERA, K.    It never really caught on and it could be argued that there is no such thing. 

Arbitrary

“Triple Crown is cute, but there’s something very arbitrary and dated about its categories,” wrote Keith Law of ESPN

The Triple Crown may be just an arbitrary set of numbers, but it's difficult to achieve. 

So Keith Law doesn't know the meanings of words either.

Congrats?

Posted by MikeT23 on 8/21/2013 2:28:00 PM (view original):
So Keith Law doesn't know the meanings of words either.

Congrats?

Three writers use the term arbitrary to describe the triple crown.

The Merriam Webster dictionary gives a third definition of arbitrary that fits in context with the topic.

OR

Mike is right and no one else knows what arbitrary means.

If established achievements are now just arbitrary, nothing means anything.    Why does a road have to be an established path between two points?  Seems like an arbitrary definition to me. 

Three stats were grouped together and given a label.

The stats were chosen arbitrarily.

Not sure why you're having such a hard time with this fact.

I'll help you.

Definitively, not arbitrarily... 3 pinnacle categories... Not just
any 3 categories that YOU choose 2 make an argument...

WAR is unsubstantially full of directions that DO NOT show
Ruth as the greatest, no matter which way U steer it's USE
& justification... If WAR did substantiate Ruth, then U would
have a number worthy of the immortal...

My example here (sadly, & for want of another canvas) goes
in the direction of another recent thread here... In it, a "user"
has discovered a relief pitcher in Tampa... His numbers are
posted, & impressive... If WAR was truly the 'jewel', then the
numbers within the 1st post (34ish IP, 10ish H, & gazillions
of K's) might crack the Top-10 WAR-wise... So what...

However, when Nolan Ryan pitching spans are "broken-up"
over the course of any 1 season, for gazillions of seasons,
& not compared favorably in the WAR department, then why
does Nolan Ryan repeatedly ''pitch'' streaks of numbers, in
mirror-like clones of numbers, as that of the hot Tampa RP,
(this long-*** question WILL end w/o a question mark, as
it, in NO WAY is set-forth seeking any answer from U)

The "Christmas-Tree-Decorated" numbers of WAR (here),
now have produced a society that commences Forums in
favor of the D'Ray well-rested, 34ish IP 'gawd', while ALSO
tormenting us w/ an unfavorable Nolan Ryan thread...

Is it possible to Forum-Ferrett-Out the gopher in the mole's
den... That's what U got there, in WAR... That's what we got
here... Without thinking, then it ain't possible... 

4-sure, w/o bad_luck, --->>> it's even more possible...

(people always conclude that anyway... whatta' pun...)

Posted by MikeT23 on 8/21/2013 2:49:00 PM (view original):
I'll help you.

Three stats were grouped together and given a label.

The stats were chosen arbitrarily.

And the achievement has been established for some 70+ years. 

The Triple Crown is what it is.   Leading the league in three established categories.   Not arbitrary categories chosen to suit one's needs.

OK, we agree that the stats were chosen arbitrarily.

What the **** are you arguing about? 

Posted by bad_luck on 8/21/2013 2:53:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 8/21/2013 2:49:00 PM (view original):
I'll help you.

Three stats were grouped together and given a label.

The stats were chosen arbitrarily.

And the achievement has been established for some 70+ years. 

The Triple Crown is what it is.   Leading the league in three established categories.   Not arbitrary categories chosen to suit one's needs.

OK, we agree that the stats were chosen arbitrarily.

What the **** are you arguing about? 

I think 70+ years establishes a meaning.  Thus removing "arbitrary" from the equation.

You think you understand the meaning of words.  And you evidently do not.

That pretty much sums it up.

Posted by MikeT23 on 8/21/2013 2:54:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 8/21/2013 2:53:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 8/21/2013 2:49:00 PM (view original):
I'll help you.

Three stats were grouped together and given a label.

The stats were chosen arbitrarily.

And the achievement has been established for some 70+ years. 

The Triple Crown is what it is.   Leading the league in three established categories.   Not arbitrary categories chosen to suit one's needs.

OK, we agree that the stats were chosen arbitrarily.

What the **** are you arguing about? 

I think 70+ years establishes a meaning.  Thus removing "arbitrary" from the equation.

You think you understand the meaning of words.  And you evidently do not.

That pretty much sums it up.

You can think that 70 years establishes a meaning, fine. I think it's a cool piece of history. But there is nothing more special about leading in HR/RBI/BA than there is in leading the league in HR/RS/BA or BA/OBP/SLG.

The triple crown is only an accomplishment because we say it is. Three stats, arbitrarily chosen 70 years ago, that really aren't the best offensive indicators we have.

Posted by bad_luck on 8/21/2013 3:02:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 8/21/2013 2:54:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 8/21/2013 2:53:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 8/21/2013 2:49:00 PM (view original):
I'll help you.

Three stats were grouped together and given a label.

The stats were chosen arbitrarily.

And the achievement has been established for some 70+ years. 

The Triple Crown is what it is.   Leading the league in three established categories.   Not arbitrary categories chosen to suit one's needs.

OK, we agree that the stats were chosen arbitrarily.

What the **** are you arguing about? 

I think 70+ years establishes a meaning.  Thus removing "arbitrary" from the equation.

You think you understand the meaning of words.  And you evidently do not.

That pretty much sums it up.

You can think that 70 years establishes a meaning, fine. I think it's a cool piece of history. But there is nothing more special about leading in HR/RBI/BA than there is in leading the league in HR/RS/BA or BA/OBP/SLG.

The triple crown is only an accomplishment because we say it is. Three stats, arbitrarily chosen 70 years ago, that really aren't the best offensive indicators we have.

Is ANYONE arguing that those three stats are the best offensive indicators we have?


THAT"S the ******* point I'm making.    The value you, or me or anyone, assigns to the TC is arbitrary.   The TC itself is not.   It is established.  ****.

Posted by MikeT23 on 8/21/2013 3:05:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 8/21/2013 3:02:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 8/21/2013 2:54:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 8/21/2013 2:53:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 8/21/2013 2:49:00 PM (view original):
I'll help you.

Three stats were grouped together and given a label.

The stats were chosen arbitrarily.

And the achievement has been established for some 70+ years. 

The Triple Crown is what it is.   Leading the league in three established categories.   Not arbitrary categories chosen to suit one's needs.

OK, we agree that the stats were chosen arbitrarily.

What the **** are you arguing about? 

I think 70+ years establishes a meaning.  Thus removing "arbitrary" from the equation.

You think you understand the meaning of words.  And you evidently do not.

That pretty much sums it up.

You can think that 70 years establishes a meaning, fine. I think it's a cool piece of history. But there is nothing more special about leading in HR/RBI/BA than there is in leading the league in HR/RS/BA or BA/OBP/SLG.

The triple crown is only an accomplishment because we say it is. Three stats, arbitrarily chosen 70 years ago, that really aren't the best offensive indicators we have.

Is ANYONE arguing that those three stats are the best offensive indicators we have?


THAT"S the ******* point I'm making.    The value you, or me or anyone, assigns to the TC is arbitrary.   The TC itself is not.   It is established.  ****.

It's established as what?