2022 Spring Training

[S5Dewey]

And the gist of this latest rant is “metrics are not meant for fans and you people are ruining it for me.”

 

No thought for whether anyone else enjoys them, I guess…

 

No, the gist of the latest "rant" is that it irks me when someone makes assumptions and then tries to pass them off as facts.

[Old Red]

Shhhh your making too much sense man .One in particular poster can’t stand other views ! Careful

 

Oh there is more than one, and that what makes it so hilarious.😂🙈

[notin]

No, the gist of the latest "rant" is that it irks me when someone makes assumptions and then tries to pass them off as facts.

 

You mean like people who insist on comparing defensive skills solely with eye test?

 

Just because someone uses advanced metrics in a discussion doesn’t mean they’re passing it off as fact.

[Bellhorn04]

Oh there is more than one, and that what makes it so hilarious.😂🙈

 

Are you two playground pals now, whispering secrets to each other?

[Old Red]

Are you two playground pals now, whispering secrets to each other?

 

Real cute reply. COME ON MAN! You’ve been MOSSED.

[S5Dewey]

You mean like people who insist on comparing defensive skills solely with eye test?

No. I mean like when someone tries to discredit something based on their assumptions that theres a possibility it may not be true.

 

Look, it was a great line because (IMO) for most people it's true. Most people who enjoy baseball would rather enjoy baseball than doing their taxes.

 

I don't understand why anyone would take the time and effort necessary to try to discredit that.

 

Sheesh.

[jad]

Gotta go with Dewey on this one. A lot of folks followed Bonds to see if he could get 700 HR, Williams to see if he could get to .400, Pete Rose's streak. NO ONE has ever paid an admission fee to see player X move up on the dWAR list. And no one went to a football game to watch the QBR race. I'm glad folks in the GM office use adv. stats, and I'm also glad they hire professional designers for their uni's. I also think it's cool that some folks follow this; it just has nothing to do with what I experience when I watch a game. (my brother at age 12, listened to every game, compiling his version of adv. stats which was simply: no. of bases advanced by hitter and runners vs. no. of bases actually advanced: it was cool. I barely understood it, but it had nothing to do with the way we hit the ball around when we played).

[Bellhorn04]

Real cute reply. COME ON MAN! You’ve been MOSSED.

 

You and Swiharts Ghost would make a scary team, that's for sure.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

Maybe we should just agree that any baseball statistic can have beauty in the eye of the beholder.

 

It doesn't hurt to still respect opinions that find value in batting average or runs batted in or pitcher victories -- like many, many players, fans and writers did for a hundred years.

 

I hope I always will, even while appreciating stats like OPS and WHIP. Just don't group me with Ghost wins, runners or anything... when the shades come back to haunt the game.

[Bellhorn04]

Gotta go with Dewey on this one. A lot of folks followed Bonds to see if he could get 700 HR, Williams to see if he could get to .400, Pete Rose's streak. NO ONE has ever paid an admission fee to see player X move up on the dWAR list. And no one went to a football game to watch the QBR race. I'm glad folks in the GM office use adv. stats, and I'm also glad they hire professional designers for their uni's. I also think it's cool that some folks follow this; it just has nothing to do with what I experience when I watch a game. (my brother at age 12, listened to every game, compiling his version of adv. stats which was simply: no. of bases advanced by hitter and runners vs. no. of bases actually advanced: it was cool. I barely understood it, but it had nothing to do with the way we hit the ball around when we played).

 

Frankly, you guys just don't get why WAR can be useful or interesting.

 

I actually like it more for the positive aspects, like the way WAR confirms that Bogey is a very valuable player in spite of his defensive shortcomings. Or that JBJ only needs to OPS about .700 to be valuable because of his fielding.

 

It's not even that complicated, really.

[Old Red]

You and Swiharts Ghost would make a scary team, that's for sure.

 

You just can’t let it go. This isn’t the only time on here that someone mentioned how some on here don’t like different opinions, and all this metric stuff is a good example of that. I mentioned yesterday that there is nothing wrong with how i view things concerning metrics, and there is nothing wrong with how the metric people view things. It can’t get any simpler than that, but that isn’t any good for the metric worshippers.

[Old Red]

Frankly, you guys just don't get why WAR can be useful or interesting.

 

I actually like it more for the positive aspects, like the way WAR confirms that Bogey is a very valuable player in spite of his defensive shortcomings. Or that JBJ only needs to OPS about .700 to be valuable because of his fielding.

 

It's not even that complicated, really.

 

It’s not that we can’t get how useful WAR is to some, but I for one just don’t care.

[Bellhorn04]

You just can’t let it go. This isn’t the only time on here that someone mentioned how some on here don’t like different opinions, and all this metric stuff is a good example of that. I mentioned yesterday that there is nothing wrong with how i view things concerning metrics, and there is nothing wrong with how the metric people view things. It can’t get any simpler than that, but that isn’t any good for the metric worshippers.

 

I never said there's anything wrong with your opinion.

[Old Red]

Gotta go with Dewey on this one. A lot of folks followed Bonds to see if he could get 700 HR, Williams to see if he could get to .400, Pete Rose's streak. NO ONE has ever paid an admission fee to see player X move up on the dWAR list. And no one went to a football game to watch the QBR race. I'm glad folks in the GM office use adv. stats, and I'm also glad they hire professional designers for their uni's. I also think it's cool that some folks follow this; it just has nothing to do with what I experience when I watch a game. (my brother at age 12, listened to every game, compiling his version of adv. stats which was simply: no. of bases advanced by hitter and runners vs. no. of bases actually advanced: it was cool. I barely understood it, but it had nothing to do with the way we hit the ball around when we played).

 

Who is the batting champion? Who led the league in HR, or RBI? That’s what the average fan wants to know, and remembers, and has been that way for 100+ years of baseball.

[S5Dewey]

Well Dewey, no offense whatsoever, but if an old school fan like Old Red can just ignore the advanced metrics and not let them have any impact on his enjoyment, why can't you do the same? You seem to go out of your way to let the advanced metrics bother you.

 

(Just trying to stir up more discussion.)

Naw. Most of the advanced metrics don't bother me at all. When I look at B/R and see all of those numbers I just ignore them. I don't need all of that extraneous stuff in my life in order to enjoy baseball.

 

I'll admit that WAR is a pet peeve of mine though. When we consider that there are at least two entities that calculate WAR and they frequently get different totals WAR has to be considered an "inexact science." You're a numbers guy so you know that a small difference in the beginning of an equation can result in a big difference in the end. There are just too many moving parts in WAR (either one) for me to accept it as a true value.

 

That's not to say that I think WAR is useless. I just think that most discrepancies that show up in WAR also show up to the naked eye, and those that don't show up don't matter. I'm just here to enjoy the game.

 

That's my opinion and I'm entitled to it!!

[Bellhorn04]

It’s not that we can’t get how useful WAR is to some, but I for one just don’t care.

 

And that comment wasn't directed at you, it was directed at jad and Dewey.

[notin]

No. I mean like when someone tries to discredit something based on their assumptions that theres a possibility it may not be true.

 

Look, it was a great line because (IMO) for most people it's true. Most people who enjoy baseball would rather enjoy baseball than doing their taxes.

 

I don't understand why anyone would take the time and effort necessary to try to discredit that.

 

Sheesh.

 

But your entire argument is that these new school stats are “flawed assumptions” and the old school ones are concrete fact.

 

But are they? Aren’t there a ton of assumptions built into batting average? Like that hitters face equal pitching? Or hit into equal defense? Or play in parks with equal effect? And in front of official scorers with equal interpretations? And that, due to the large sample size, all of this equals out and creates a level playing field?

 

And sure, BA is a nice, simple consistent, easy-to-understand formula. Except it isn’t. And it hasn’t even always been calculated the same way.

 

One thing that will always bug me about BA is sac flies are not at bats. I get why sac bunts are not, but sac flies.

 

Well, from 1908 to 1931, they didn’t. Sac flies were at bats. In 1939, they were not at bats again. But from 1940 to 1954 hitters were suddenly charged with an at bat on a run scoring fly ball. This latter stretch shows the impact, as it has a major overlap with the career of Ted Williams.

 

If Williams played under the same rules as players before him, his legendary .406 in 1941 would have been .419. Williams also lost the 1949 triple crown because slap-hitting George Kell hit .0002 better. While I don’t have sac fly data for 1949, it’s not the most ridiculous assumption that Mr. Production Comes From Hitting The Ball In The Air had more than enough sac flies to win another triple crown.

 

And this same logic goes for a lot more old school stats. But we use them because 1) they’re relatable and 2) we always have. But none of that means there aren’t assumptions built in and they are perfect…

Edited April 3, 2022 by notin

[Bellhorn04]

Who is the batting champion? Who led the league in HR, or RBI? That’s what the average fan wants to know, and remembers, and has been that way for 100+ years of baseball.

 

What you're really talking about is the average old geezer fan.

[notin]

Who is the batting champion? Who led the league in HR, or RBI? That’s what the average fan wants to know, and remembers, and has been that way for 100+ years of baseball.

 

That’s how you enjoy it and that’s fine. Others have taken a different approach more recently. They’re not wrong for doing so..

[Old Red]

I never said there's anything wrong with your opinion.

 

And I never said there was anything wrong with yours. There has been many different opinions on here, and like I’ve mentioned before that this forum is a very small sample size of opinions of what’s out there in Red Sox Nation.

[Old Red]

That’s how you enjoy it and that’s fine. Others have taken a different approach more recently. They’re not wrong for doing so..

 

And I already mentioned all of this yesterday, but yet it still goes on.

[notin]

No. I mean like when someone tries to discredit something based on their assumptions that theres a possibility it may not be true.

 

Look, it was a great line because (IMO) for most people it's true. Most people who enjoy baseball would rather enjoy baseball than doing their taxes.

 

I don't understand why anyone would take the time and effort necessary to try to discredit that.

 

Sheesh.

 

 

They take the time because they have found enjoyment in new statistical interpretations. And while you might not like those arguments, no one presents them as fact. Harmony frequently uses Steamer projections, for example. Personally, I am not a fan so I counter with something else - sometimes my own (which seem to like JBJ at the plate a helluva lot more than any other system). That’s sometimes how these discussions go. And there’s nothing wrong with that…

[Old Red]

What you're really talking about is the average old geezer fan.

 

All the other forums, and talk shows I visit has nowhere near the amount of metric talk that is done on here, and they are not all old geezer fans who frequent them.

[moonslav59]

Yeah, I do love that quote. It's because it's true. Sabermetrics reduces the grand ol' game to nothing more than numbers and IMO that's a shame.

 

Do you have evidence that those weren't his words and that James didn't say it, the writers liked it and inserted them in the episode? Because "Bill James gets to deliver one line in his own voice: 'I made baseball as much fun as doing your taxes!"'

 

https://philipschaefer.com/2010/11/12/the-simpsons-recognize-bill-james/

 

If you've read James at all you know that he has a keen sense of humor and at times has alluded to how 'dry' sabermetrics makes baseball.

 

Do you think it's possible many people can love the game for what it is, just like everyone else, yet still really enjoy stats and metrics and complex rating systems?

 

I don't understand how some feel sabermetrics is ruining the game. I don't see how or why. Just watch the game and ignore all the numbers.

 

Hell, they just outlawed the shift, so now one big saber manifestation is no longer visible.

[notin]

What you're really talking about is the average old geezer fan.

 

I do find it funny that a lot of these older fans idolize Bob Gibson for never wanting to come out (largely due to his surly disposition, which he gets admired for for some odd reason. And then we deride today’s starters for only going through the e lineup twice.

 

Do we extend this admonishment of reduced roles to other sports? Is Tom Brady really the GOAT? I mean, good ol’ Sammie Baugh played QB and CB and returned kicks!! He never left the field. In fact he once lead the NFL in TD passes and interceptions (as a CB!) and I believe return yards. Is Tom Brady “soft” because he doesn’t play like Sammie Baugh?

 

(These are all facts about Baugh. Not extreme possibilities to make a point. He really did this stuff.)

[Bellhorn04]

All the other forums, and talk shows I visit has nowhere near the amount of metric talk that is done on here, and they are not all old geezer fans who frequent them.

 

Regardless, there's a lot of metric talk out there too. Globe writers like Speier and Finn quote the metrics a lot. Peter Abraham makes use of them. Shaughnessy avoids them like the plague. There's room for all of it.

[moonslav59]

 

Just because someone uses advanced metrics in a discussion doesn’t mean they’re passing it off as fact.

 

This is the crux of the whole thing, to me.

 

People had no beef with people who claimed so-and-so was better because he hit more HRs or had a higher BA, because the guy was just stating some facts that supported his opinion, but when people use WAR, somehow people think they are saying "s0-and-so is better because he has a better WAR- END OF DEBATE."

 

Not a single poster has ever said WAR is the be-all-end-all numbers that ends debate. In a way it is a fact, but in no way different than the amount of HRs a player hit is fact.

 

It's just a fact used to support opinions- something baseball fans have been doing for decades and decades.

[moonslav59]

WAR was never meant to end all debates.

[moonslav59]

You and Swiharts Ghost would make a scary team, that's for sure.

 

That's one reason I have both on ignore.

[notin]

WAR was never meant to end all debates.

 

It only ends them because it makes one party stop talking.

 

Heck the difference between bWAR and fWAR is debatable. Personally, I like bWAR better but the problem is Fangraphs has just made fWAR so much more accessible and user-friendly on their site.