A Realistic View at 2018: Part II

[S5Dewey]

It's not a low bar. The objectivity of defensive metrics is far better.

 

Do you have data to quantify the word "far"?

[jad]

There are two quite separate assertions in your response! Of course defensive metrics are better than "the eyes of a single fan"; who disputes that? [except maybe theself-appointed fan]. That strikes me as a rather low bar when the issue at hand is 'objectivity'. A really really really really low bar! really really really ... really low bar.

[a700hitter]

Do you have data to quantify the word "far"?

Of course she doesn't. It is just a fact. Her opinions are always facts.

[oldtimer]

You don't even understand how the system works, what it measures, and over what amount of chances. Your post is melting my brain.

 

How do you know what I understand. I have read the entire UZR description and know full well what it means and how it is applied. I also understand that it is best used with about 3 years of data, however by then, the players performance may well have significantly changed. It is more of a retrospective concept. Now with Moon listing UZR/150 for 2018, I just pointed out the numbers don't ring true with the performance we see with our players. Maybe it's you who doesn't understand.

[moonslav59]

You put the caveat in front that explains how meaningless the current UZR or /150 ratings are considering it's still April. Be consistent.

 

I am consistent. I still value defensive metrics, and did put in the caveat.

 

I'm just pointing out that the numbers, so far, look baffling and nearly backwards.

[moonslav59]

I don't care anything about sample size in this case. Any statistic that says that JDM has more range in LF than JBJ has in CF has a right to be called into question.

 

So, if Leon starts the season off 4 for 8 and Betts starts at 2 for 8, then BA and OPS are called into question?

[User Name]

How do you know what I understand. I have read the entire UZR description and know full well what it means and how it is applied. I also understand that it is best used with about 3 years of data, however by then, the players performance may well have significantly changed. It is more of a retrospective concept. Now with Moon listing UZR/150 for 2018, I just pointed out the numbers don't ring true with the performance we see with our players. Maybe it's you who doesn't understand.

 

Right. I'm the one who doesn't understand. Gotcha.

[User Name]

So, if Leon starts the season off 4 for 8 and Betts starts at 2 for 8, then BA and OPS are called into question?

 

Sample size? My head is spinning.

[User Name]

I don't care anything about sample size in this case. Any statistic that says that JDM has more range in LF than JBJ has in CF has a right to be called into question.

 

It's also not as cut and dry as this. You clearly don't have a grasp of how to interpret the stat in question. Stop.

[User Name]

That's likely because those who define and promote it work very hard to conceal the fact that there are many many "ask-the-human" type decisions and factors involved. No two balls hit are "the same" in nature; they are only "the same" when so perceived by a human eye and significant features (e.g., 'speed') defined as relevant by a human brain. The same goes for the definitions of atmospheric conditions, etc., and any number of refinements that could be build into these models. There are some types of 'neural network' types of analysis (insofar as I understand these!) that I believe can eliminate this 'ask-the-human' step, but UZR (at least from what I can tell) is not one of them. Mind you, I'm not opposed to this type of analysis, and it certainly beats the kind of approach critiqued and ridiculed so well in Moneyball (the scout's 'feel' for the game in particular!). But then, I'm not opposed to judging hitters by batting average either (or OBP or OPS). Statistics help. But few methods I've seen are completely objective (maybe the one my adolescent brother once used for a whole season: all he recorded over the year was a ratio for each AB: number of bases achieved vs. number possible. So 1-4 for a walk with no one on; 3-6 when a weak ground ball goes through the SS legs allowing the runner on second to score. No one, of course, either a traditionalist or a sabermetrician, would accept such a system as a standard on which to judge others).

 

Are you sure? Check out the primer. Some of your assertions are correct, some are not.

[moonslav59]

Sample size? My head is spinning.

 

That was the caveat about the small sample size for UZR/150.

 

Would Loen starting 15 for 45 and Betts 10 for 45 been a better hitting example?

[User Name]

That was the caveat about the small sample size for UZR/150.

 

Would Loen starting 15 for 45 and Betts 10 for 45 been a better hitting example?

 

No. No it wouldn't be. Stop.

[moonslav59]

No. No it wouldn't be. Stop.

 

It's actually proportionally a bigger sample size than some of these defensive ones.

 

Stop!

[User Name]

How about this to end the argument.

 

I love baseball. I watch it, I follow it in all formats, but why is it necessary for some fans to s*** on a part of the game that enhances the enjoyment of the sport for other fans? I pay money I shouldn't pay in order to watch the Red Sox online because I live in another country. Watch all the games, would go to a bunch of them if I lived over there, but I don't.

 

However, I like stats, I like crunching numbers and enjoy what I consider to be a more objective measurement of the sport I enjoy. If you don't like it, that's fine, but why the interest in discrediting it if you won't take five minutes to understand what stat A or B is trying to measure or how? It's annoying as f*** and very pedantic.

 

I probably know more about scouting kids at 32 than most of you know in your 50's and 60's, since I live in an area where baseball is everything, and have helped (and sometimes still do) guys who prepare ballplayers for a living prepare reports and paperwork for kids and young adults, and I do it for fun. I can tell a slider from a curve and a splitter just by release and spin. None of you know as much as you think you do. A bunch of guys who scout for a living here compile stats on ipads, and are installing BIS data collection units in team's facilities for summer league. But you know more than the people who do this for a living, and if they compile stats or follow stats they're idiots. Great.

 

Part of the reason I barely come here anymore is that I don't understand why it's so goddamn hard to live and let die. Stats are more objective than the human eye, because the human is almost always biased towards or against things. This is a demonstrable fact. If you don't like statistics that's fine, don't use them, but don't discount them because you think you're so smart due to what you watch on tv. At least take ten minutes to try and understand what they're trying to tell you before spouting a bunch of nonsense that contradicts what the data is trying to tell you.

 

For the common folk like us, they're just another tool to further enhance our enjoyment of the game. Not an enemy trying to spoil our fun. Like the Yankees and their fans. That's who you should point your anger at.

 

/endrant.

[User Name]

It's actually proportionally a bigger sample size than some of these defensive ones.

 

Stop!

 

You shouldn't use either, is what I'm trying to say. We're not trying to reinvent the wheel here.

[moonslav59]

How about this to end the argument.

 

I love baseball. I watch it, I follow it in all formats, but why is it necessary for some fans to s*** on a part of the game that enhances the enjoyment of the sport for other fans? I pay money I shouldn't pay in order to watch the Red Sox online because I live in another country. Watch all the games, would go to a bunch of them if I lived over there, but I don't.

 

However, I like stats, I like crunching numbers and enjoy what I consider to be a more objective measurement of the sport I enjoy. If you don't like it, that's fine, but why the interest in discrediting it if you won't take five minutes to understand what stat A or B is trying to measure or how? It's annoying as f*** and very pedantic.

 

I probably know more about scouting kids at 32 than most of you know in your 50's and 60's, since I live in an area where baseball is everything, and have helped (and sometimes still do) guys who prepare ballplayers for a living prepare reports and paperwork for kids and young adults, and I do it for fun. I can tell a slider from a curve and a splitter just by release and spin. None of you know as much as you think you do. A bunch of guys who scout for a living here compile stats on ipads, and are installing BIS data collection units in team's facilities for summer league. But you know more than the people who do this for a living, and if they compile stats or follow stats they're idiots. Great.

 

Part of the reason I barely come here anymore is that I don't understand why it's so goddamn hard to live and let die. Stats are more objective than the human eye, because the human is almost always biased towards or against things. This is a demonstrable fact. If you don't like statistics that's fine, don't use them, but don't discount them because you think you're so smart due to what you watch on tv. At least take ten minutes to try and understand what they're trying to tell you before spouting a bunch of nonsense that contradicts what the data is trying to tell you.

 

For the common folk like us, they're just another tool to further enhance our enjoyment of the game. Not an enemy trying to spoil our fun. Like the Yankees and their fans. That's who you should point your anger at.

 

/endrant.

 

Well said.

[S5Dewey]

It's also not as cut and dry as this. You clearly don't have a grasp of how to interpret the stat in question. Stop.

 

And you clearly don't have a grasp of common sense.

 

I'll say it again: Any statistic that says that JDM has more range in LF than JBJ has in CF has a right to be called into question.

[S5Dewey]

How about this to end the argument.

 

I love baseball. I watch it, I follow it in all formats, but why is it necessary for some fans to s*** on a part of the game that enhances the enjoyment of the sport for other fans?

 

For the common folk like us, they're just another tool to further enhance our enjoyment of the game. Not an enemy trying to spoil our fun. Like the Yankees and their fans. That's who you should point your anger at.

 

/endrant.

I agree completely. Stats are just another tool, along with experience and the eye test. Unfortunately there are posters here who insist that statistics tell the entire story of a player's abilities and I refuse to be shouted down by these people.

 

If you want to point your anger at people point it at those who want to quash those of us who have a differing viewpoint.

[a700hitter]

How about this to end the argument.

 

I love baseball. I watch it, I follow it in all formats, but why is it necessary for some fans to s*** on a part of the game that enhances the enjoyment of the sport for other fans? I pay money I shouldn't pay in order to watch the Red Sox online because I live in another country. Watch all the games, would go to a bunch of them if I lived over there, but I don't.

 

However, I like stats, I like crunching numbers and enjoy what I consider to be a more objective measurement of the sport I enjoy. If you don't like it, that's fine, but why the interest in discrediting it if you won't take five minutes to understand what stat A or B is trying to measure or how? It's annoying as f*** and very pedantic.

 

I probably know more about scouting kids at 32 than most of you know in your 50's and 60's, since I live in an area where baseball is everything, and have helped (and sometimes still do) guys who prepare ballplayers for a living prepare reports and paperwork for kids and young adults, and I do it for fun. I can tell a slider from a curve and a splitter just by release and spin. None of you know as much as you think you do. A bunch of guys who scout for a living here compile stats on ipads, and are installing BIS data collection units in team's facilities for summer league. But you know more than the people who do this for a living, and if they compile stats or follow stats they're idiots. Great.

 

Part of the reason I barely come here anymore is that I don't understand why it's so goddamn hard to live and let die. Stats are more objective than the human eye, because the human is almost always biased towards or against things. This is a demonstrable fact. If you don't like statistics that's fine, don't use them, but don't discount them because you think you're so smart due to what you watch on tv. At least take ten minutes to try and understand what they're trying to tell you before spouting a bunch of nonsense that contradicts what the data is trying to tell you.

 

For the common folk like us, they're just another tool to further enhance our enjoyment of the game. Not an enemy trying to spoil our fun. Like the Yankees and their fans. That's who you should point your anger at.

 

/endrant.

IMO, the trained eye is still better. Stats are good if you don’t have the time to see and evaluate hundreds or thousands of players. They are a necessary tools. It takes time to compile meaningful stats on a player, but a good scout can evaluate a player in a few games, imo.

 

I enjoy stats and use them all the time as I play lots of Fantasy baseball. When I watch a lot of a player, the stats almost always line up with my evaluations. The less I see a player the likelihood that my opinion lines up with the states decreases.

 

Where the derision of statheads comes up with me is when they state as fact things like hot streaks don’t exist, that it is a fallacy that good teams find ways to win close games etc. Let’s not even bring up the C word. LOL!

 

That being said, I would also have to question the usefulness of a stat that indicates that JBJ is a meh outfielder.

 

My nephew has been to the DR the last 3 Winters. Next winter, I am planning to go with him. I expect to see lots of awesome Baseball and to meet the famous U.N.

[Larry Cook]

Do we need another lefty in the bullpen?

[User Name]

And you clearly don't have a grasp of common sense.

 

I'll say it again: Any statistic that says that JDM has more range in LF than JBJ has in CF has a right to be called into question.

 

Funny, considering how many times the sample size issue has come up. "Common sense" dictates the ability to follow simple instructions in order to come to a conclusion. Who's missing what here?

[jacksonianmarch]

UN, when did you move away?

[Nick]

Is there a team UZR after each game? Did we win that last night?

[Bellhorn04]

Is there a team UZR after each game? Did we win that last night?

 

What you're sayin' is, the best stat in sport will always be represented by the letter Dubya.

[Hitch]

How about this to end the argument.

 

I love baseball. I watch it, I follow it in all formats, but why is it necessary for some fans to s*** on a part of the game that enhances the enjoyment of the sport for other fans? I pay money I shouldn't pay in order to watch the Red Sox online because I live in another country. Watch all the games, would go to a bunch of them if I lived over there, but I don't.

 

However, I like stats, I like crunching numbers and enjoy what I consider to be a more objective measurement of the sport I enjoy. If you don't like it, that's fine, but why the interest in discrediting it if you won't take five minutes to understand what stat A or B is trying to measure or how? It's annoying as f*** and very pedantic.

 

I probably know more about scouting kids at 32 than most of you know in your 50's and 60's, since I live in an area where baseball is everything, and have helped (and sometimes still do) guys who prepare ballplayers for a living prepare reports and paperwork for kids and young adults, and I do it for fun. I can tell a slider from a curve and a splitter just by release and spin. None of you know as much as you think you do. A bunch of guys who scout for a living here compile stats on ipads, and are installing BIS data collection units in team's facilities for summer league. But you know more than the people who do this for a living, and if they compile stats or follow stats they're idiots. Great.

 

Part of the reason I barely come here anymore is that I don't understand why it's so goddamn hard to live and let die. Stats are more objective than the human eye, because the human is almost always biased towards or against things. This is a demonstrable fact. If you don't like statistics that's fine, don't use them, but don't discount them because you think you're so smart due to what you watch on tv. At least take ten minutes to try and understand what they're trying to tell you before spouting a bunch of nonsense that contradicts what the data is trying to tell you.

 

For the common folk like us, they're just another tool to further enhance our enjoyment of the game. Not an enemy trying to spoil our fun. Like the Yankees and their fans. That's who you should point your anger at.

 

/endrant.

 

Absolutely brilliant post.

[Bellhorn04]

Yeah, it's a great post-except for the part about barely coming here anymore.

[cp176]

Have to say that I don't give a flying f*** about what anyone wants to believe in when it comes to baseball. I'm a fan who does feel that I have some education with respect to the game. I'm not interested in trying to discredit anyone or their particular opinion about the game although I will say that I enjoy reading and actually learning from the people who I believe have not only an extensive knowledge about the use of statistics as well as having some practical experience with the game itself. The beauty of it is i guess that I get to choose who these people are based upon what I read here. I have for me some pretty firm opinions and beliefs but I would never try to shove them down anyone's throat. What I see here are a few people who are so goddam sure that they are right about everything that they absolutely refuse to see more than just their own side of any arguement. I offer quite a few opinions here that I do not support with what some call quantifiable evidence because I don't think that they can be. This normally causes someone to claim that either my eyes and knowledge of the game is just f***ed up. That is when I react as do a few others here who share similar views. I don't have any need to be right at all but I do feel somewhat of a need to react when someone tries to paint me as an uneducated old dope with respect to my understanding of athletics in general. They might even be right but I don't need to constantly be reminded of it. Seems like we should be able to get along if we have the large goal - to support the team we love.

[cp176]

Absolutely brilliant post.

 

 

UN is a bright individual and it was a good post - one worth reading. it is also a post that if you change some of the wording, could be used to defend the points of view of the people who tend to have opinions that lean in the opposite direction. i don't necessarily buy into everything he said here but I still think that it is a good post. How about you Hitch - Do you feel the same way about some of the posts you read here that don't support you and your points of view? I hope that you do.

[Slasher9]

does UZR factor in the randomness of baseball?????

[Slasher9]

UN is a bright individual and it was a good post - one worth reading. it is also a post that if you change some of the wording, could be used to defend the points of view of the people who tend to have opinions that lean in the opposite direction. i don't necessarily buy into everything he said here but I still think that it is a good post. How about you Hitch - Do you feel the same way about some of the posts you read here that don't support you and your points of view? I hope that you do.

 

yes, it was a "hey kettle - you're black!" post. but well written.