User Name

Bruh, 2013.

I like you.

I don't work with them. Dude, I wish I did. I usually just help handle paperwork for "trainers" (the guys who sponsor the kids from when they're in LL to when they sign, kinda like buscones but without the shady s***, because MLB is cracking down on that HARD). That's allowed me to visit some of the facilities for MLB summer leagues here in DR, (some of those are exceedingly nice, some are shitholes) but the one thing they all have in common is how much they've integrated statistical analysis to their handling of games/kids. One thing a700hitter was absolutely correct about is that these tools excel at looking at multiple players, and player-to-player comparisons. If they were the optimal tool for evaluating prospects of ballplayers individually, scouts wouldn't exist anymore. As I said before, for us common folk they're just a tool to further enhance the enjoyment of the game. Statcast won't tell you when a kid has "deer-in-headlights" eyes, or when a guy is stubborn about trying to uppercut everything, that's what scouts are for. However, that doesn't make them any less useful.

Are you a 1920's gangster? If not, please stop.

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?

I have never seen anyone own anyone else as hard as the Yankees own the Twins.

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

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.

No. No it wouldn't be. Stop.

I like Cora. Minimal amount of head-scratchers.

Hamstring strains/tears are brutal. The only type of strain/tear I consider more agonizing (from experience) are obliques.

They better not let Kimbrel walk.

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

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.

Sample size? My head is spinning.

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

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

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

It's hard to get. In layman's terms, it uses cameras, not the naked eye.

Except that's not how it works anymore. The data is gathered using the Baseball Info Solutions systems (essentially Statcast) to account for most defense-related events. Please look up how a stat/system works before forming an opinion. This stuff takes 30 seconds to look up and a couple minutes to read. https://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-fangraphs-uzr-primer/

Why isn't that in your sig?

Are you the new TalkSox historian?

Cheers, mate!

Liking Hanley's energy and attitude.

Y'all retirement home folk need to calm yo' tits.