notin

You murder one little person with some pollution and you're labeled for life. But thank you for the knighthood..

First this board trashes Chicago and then Volkswagen. I'm a Volkswagen owner living in Chicago here...

The inner harbor is somehow a great place and a colossal armpit all at once...

It's like Curt Schilling. I don't agree with anything he has to say politically, but I will absolutely defend his rights to have those views. I'm not even sure why this quote from Martinez is supposed to be offensive. Because he quoted Hitler? He didn't do it in a way that supported Hitler, but rather he posited Hitler as the opposing point of view (i.e. taking away guns.) Have we reached a point in our society that we can't even mention history's greatest villains as opposing viewpoints? Also, I would not like JD if he killed a700's dogs and cats, unless a700 himself was using JD to perform so in a medical capacity. No video required. And I also would not like JDM if he opted out in two years and signed with the Yankees. But that goes without saying. I wouldn't like Mother Theresa if she was wearing pinstripes...

When you go car shopping, do you demand to see the engineering degrees from everyone at the auto plant? Email someone at Fangraphs for some details, if you like. Even they know the system is not perfect and is in a constant state of improvement. Presumably adding StatCast data is one way they have bolstered their metrics, but there will be others. Again, this doesn't negate the whole system, and doesn't make it worse than casual fan observations from television...

I'm ok with calling 1 for 18 a slump...

Well, there isn't much else to do in St. Louis...

The one thing I don't care about is getting 117 wins. In fact, I don't want the Sox to set that record. As a sports fan, the biggest disappointment for me was watching the Patriots go 18-0 and then lose the Super Bowl. I also saw the Mariners win 116 and even make the World Series, and I absolutely do not want to see the Sox in the same situation...

From what I've seen, a lot of people also just give up at it's mention. There are plenty of counterarguments out there...

We all do that. But there is a big difference in saying "JBJ is the best defensive CF I've ever seen" and "JBJ is the best defensive CF in the game today."...

Actually, Chicago's gun culture is blown a little out of proportion. https://www.thetrace.org/2018/04/highest-murder-rates-us-cities-list/ https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2018/02/21/states-most-and-least-gun-violence-see-where-your-state-stacks-up/359395002/

I admit I don't grasp the calculations. I've see the formulae, but that doesn't mean I know why they count everything the way they do or arrive at baserunning and defensive components. But I think most people attribute some element of faith to those who put in a lot of work that their observations and calculations are better than most fans can arrive at. Even if you don't believe in the exact numbers, as skr points out, it can be more of a directional component than an exact value. Especially since it can never be truly verified as it is. We will never know if the Red Sox had 8 fewer wins this year if Betts was not playing and, say, Aneury Tavarez or Rusney Castillo was manning RF. And honestly, I think the single biggest advantage Fangraphs' WAR (fWAR) values has over any of the other encompassing stats is their accessibility. B-R.com doesn't have any functions on their website to sort by bWAR or compare bWAR over spans of years. This may seem like a trivial reason, but if you are one of those who think WAR is a good debate starter, this can be very important as opposed to doing all the tedious research and browsing needed on other sites...

And for the record, she was not shot by Dee's father, former Sox pitcher Tom Gordon...

And maybe I am behind in my knowledge of how this data is tracked and recorded. It did all start out the way I said, and maybe some agency someplace is still watching it manually. But the bottom line is, every play made by every player is taken into account somehow, which is something we as fans simply cannot do for the reasons that spurred your doubts in the first place, among other reasons. That in itself is an advantage. That doesn't mean we as fans don't know a good play or a great play when we see one. It just means we have no idea who else is also making that play...

Well, by "every play", I was referring to every batted ball in play. No need to watch all the called strikes and balls and certainly no need to count home runs. Now somehow pitch-framing data is also accumulated. I am not sure if that is simply done by a computer or done by an observer. But as robot ump technology exists, it can easily be used to measure OOZ strike calls from an individual catcher. And maybe they do use computer-aided technology to monitor defensive ratings now. If they don't, it certainly cannot be that far off...

It may also not be as complicated as you think. For example, unless they are monitoring catchers for pitch-framing, etc, how many plays does it really entail? There are maybe 50 batted balls in a single game on average, which is all they need to focus on. (This is a guess on my part, but with an average of 66 plate appearances per game, 9 strikeouts per game and an average, 6 walks per game on average, and maybe about 1-2 HR/game that they don't need to make a call on, it's probably close.) By watching a game that is already over and fast forwarding to the batted balls in play, it won't take a full 3 hours to watch a game. They also may have access to camera angles we don't have access to when we watch a televised game. No one has said the system is perfect. In fact, everyone admits it is not. But that doesn't mean it is useless, either. In fact, right now it is the best system in place and th incorporation of StatCast data for launch angles and exit velocity has probably enhanced it even more...

"They" implies multiple people. Presumably they have set of guildelines and/or standards to judge plays against. There will be differences in opinion and judgment on a lot of calls, but every play from every team is taken into account. I also would suspect a game is watched by multiple observers to reduce bias. And I would be shocked if a single observer was assigned to a single team for that exact same reason...

And those are two very different statements. And really, considering that baseball has been attracting more athletic players for the past 20 years or so, it's not surprising we are seeing better defensive center fielders and fewer Jon Kruk/Greg Luzinski/Pete Incavliglia type (although there are a few non-pitcher, non-catchers out here. Hello, Russell Martin, Matt Adams, and of course, Panda.)

While people should be responsible for their tweets, that the media feels the need to incite this issue over tweets some of these players made in high school is the really annoying part. I don't think I have condoned or agreed with any of the controversial sentiments any of the players have tweeted. But a lot of them grew up in an era where this type of communication is more mainstream as opposed to (what I would use Twitter for) a time for a more careful communication. And I'd be crazy naive to think that every player in MLB is a wholesome gentleman without any controversial thoughts in his head. I used to say if I met most of the players on the Sox, I probably would not like a lot of them. It's probably still true...

Especially since a lot of people apparently think that is what the second amendment refers to - keeping the citizenry armed in case the government gets too powerful. I digress politically - back to baseball. Go Sox. Squish the fish!

Exactly. The key is that they watch every play from every game. Certainly they categorize some incorrectly for Bradley, but that also means they are mis-categorizing some of the catches made by other center fielders as well. A lot of it balances out...

Or purée it and give him a straw...

Well how about that?

Yeah that part is a little too reminiscent of the XFL...

Well, not really. The US has no official language (an amendment to make English our official language was introduced in 1981 but never ratified). And in the past couple decades, the US has certainly become more accommodating for Spanish-speaking citizens to the point where most government offices and many businesses have bilingual signs. I could foresee this happening with another language, although who knows which one will be next...