Holy crap - you mean they actually played the game before someone came up with BABIP, xFIP, and the like?
How on earth did people EVER watch those games??? What a bunch of idiots!!!
2018: The Year Of The Venezuelan Trout
- Thread starter SJ24
- Start date
Holy crap - you mean they actually played the game before someone came up with BABIP, xFIP, and the like?
How on earth did people EVER watch those games??? What a bunch of idiots!!!
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
Holy crap - you mean they actually played the game before someone came up with BABIP, xFIP, and the like?
How on earth did people EVER watch those games??? What a bunch of idiots!!!
aye...it is possible to just watch a ballgame for enjoyment and to have appreciation for modern analysis...both...i understand your cause but dont think you are doing much to advance it with posts like that
Because it doesn't support your narrative. It's really easy.
zitothebrave
Connoisseur of Minors
Why would you make a point and then prove the negative in the same basic sentence.
Williams only hit .400 once, his career BABIP was .328, years when he was well above the norm he was at his peak, years when he was below it he was a great hitter but less great. His career BA was .344. Of course Williams is also one of the greatest ever at being the positive of the 3 true outcomes, he hit a lot of homers (7% or so of his ABs were homers) he walked over 20% of the times he came to the plate, and he didn't strike out a ton (about 7% of plate appearances)
Reality is when you're facing a player who's almost as likely to hit a homerun as he is to strike out you're dealing with someone special.
Some players do have high career BABIP, because they usually do things to ensure that. If we look back to 1990 guys with at least 4000 PA, there are guys with very high BABIP. Mike Trout, Joey Votto, Austin Jackson, Derek Jeter, Paul Goldschmidt, All of them have a .350 or higher BABIP, the power hitters of them hit a lot of linedrives, good amount of grounders, and have a high HR/FB ratio. The non-power hitters have a lot of line drives a lot of ground balls, and spray the ball around very well (Jeter being a freak with almost a 33% split to all directions)
The earlier point - as well as this - actually fits "my narrative" perfectly.
It really is OK to just enjoy watching good players play the games without the new (or even old) numbers clouding things.
Not breaking everything down to useless numbers may get you put in "statistics jail" around here (these days), but that's certainly nothing to lose sleep over. You understood that good players were good players simply by watching them without needing to consult your calculator and missing something else happen.
Just because some of us don't worship at the altar of advanced statistics doesn't mean we don't appreciate the understanding they help to provide. It just means that we'd rather actually watch the action. I don't need a statistic to tell me Acuna (or others before him) hit the ball hard - I can see as much with my eyes. While it's nice to see where he ranks on a list of players who also hit the ball hard, it really isn't necessary - it's fun to watch because he does it, not because he does it better or worse than this guy or that guy.
The numbers didn't make great players great players - no matter what you try to make those numbers do 100 years after the fact.
DirkPiggler
Well-known member
That's all well and good, and a perfectly justifiable attitude to have as a fan. The problem comes in when the decision makers have a similar attitude. That's how we end up with Chris Johnson sucking the life out of a team on a long term deal.
As others have said, a guy that puts up great numbers with an unsustainable BABIP still had a great year. There's nothing wrong at all with enjoying and appreciating that fact. Just don't use that great year as the baseline on which to estimate future performance. Understand that the odds of that player repeating that season are slim at best.
Pulled directly from the Bible of the Casual Fan. This excerpt can be found just after the one about cheering for the team with the prettiest helmets.
There's nothing wrong with being an ignorant fan. Baseball relies on them financially. The problem comes when you (specifically, you) argue with intelligent fans from your pulpit of extreme ignorance about things like roster construction, game strategy, and projecting future performance as if your opinion carries any weight.
Jaw
It's OVER 5,000!
That's a somewhat reasonable approach to evaluating the players of the team you cheer for, if you are able to watch the majority of their games. Using the statistics allows you to evaluate all of the other teams' players as well. I am a casual fan. I'll be fortunate to watch 20 games this year. I like seeing the numbers that get posted here as it allows me to have a better understanding of how the team is playing even if I haven't seen them in a month. There just isn't a downside to using statistics to enhance your enjoyment of the game. We all did it with baseball cards as a kid, now we can look even more of them up with the internet. I don't see the problem.
BeanieAntics
Arbitration Eligible
The fact that you call them useless numbers makes me skeptical that you really appreciate the understanding that they help to provide.
And I'm not sure that anyone here is trying to retroactively say that Ted Williams didn't have a fantastic season. Of course he did. All we are saying is that there was a little bit of luck involved. And that if, at the time, you expected him to ever hit .400 again, odds are you would be wrong. And that turned out to be the case. He never hit .400 over a full season. That is what these "useless numbers" are actually useful for. They have predictive power. And when you are someone who is in a position to make roster decisions they should be the source of your primary focus because they can tell you far more than just looking at a player and saying "he is great"
Southcack77
Well-known member
I guess my objection is when its pretty obvious: Player goes 11/15 in a series with 4 HRs.
That was a really great series!
Well, don't expect him to do that every series out. he can't keep that up.
Yeah, no **** he can't.
That's really the point in a nutshell - as much as it pains some to admit it, everybody here is simply a fan. Nobody here is a decision-maker (thankfully, at times), and having a better handle on the numbers - new or old - doesn't make them a superior fan. There are plenty of folks (myself included) that appreciate the info and additional insight that info provides when they aren't so over the top about it, because there's no doubt it's helpful, but acting like that info has "changed the game" is a little much. I would never argue that it's changed the approach to it at times as well as providing more focused ways to use the information, but the pitching rubber is still the same distance from the plate as it's always been, etc..
At the end of the day, a lot of the information has shown us (among other things) that...
1.) Defense IS important when valuing a player - which might be why teams have always deployed their best defenders up the middle to begin with (so even the "dinosaurs" understood that to a point).
2.) Guys who can hit AND defend without needing to hide them have often been undervalued - which isn't exactly an epiphany.
3.) "Great hitters" aren't necessarily so great when you position yourself better defensively - which wasn't exactly ever ignored to begin with. Those numbers have helped convince teams to utilize extreme shifts, but it's not like they didn't SHADE hitters a certain way when they saw established tendencies years ago.
4.) Pitchers (especially those without a third pitch or those who don't sequence things well) aren't likely to make it through a MLB lineup more than twice no matter how good their two best offerings are. This isn't exactly breaking news either, but the numbers have certainly helped teams focus more on having Catchers who can affect the game in more ways than with their bats.
The point is that no one here has access to any information those decision-makers don't. I have no problem at all with someone saying they disagree with a decision that's been made and using the numbers to explain why they would have acted differently. The problem is when they act like they've "uncovered" something earth-shattering because they read it on a public internet site and can replicate the numbers. Like I said, most of us don't need some chart to tell us guys like Acuna (and the like) are going to be special players, it's pretty obvious if you just watch him play.
And anyone who doesn't understand that really just doesn't know much about the game.
BeanieAntics
Arbitration Eligible
Well I probably wouldn't do that anyway. Its only when a player has had long term luck (half season to a season) that you need to point out that he is very likely to regress a good bit.
Edit: And when I say "you need to point out"... I'm really saying that the decision makers need to take that into account.
BeanieAntics
Arbitration Eligible
I don't think it makes me a superior fan. I'm not sure something like that even exists lol. Can you quantify fandom? However I do think it makes me a more informed fan. I also don't think I have any information that the decision makers don't have. However I do think that many of the Braves' decision makers have an outdated idea of how to evaluate and utilize talent. I think that they have the numbers, but I think they either misinterpret them or don't care about them to the extent that they should. Exhibit A being Chris Johnson. If they would have taken all the factors into consideration and knew how to interpret them, there is no way that they would come to the conclusion that signing him to that contract was the optimal move. And you can point to several other moves that show me that the numbers don't play the role that they should in the front office. Or at least they didn't. I like Anthopoulos and I'm will to give him the chance to show me that he is more informed on the modern game.
Of course it was a great series. Then the stupidity comes next...
"He has really improved now that he lost weight. His trade value has just increased dramatically."
"Well, no it hasn't. He is still the same hitter based on exit velocity and launch angles. He has simply been lucky."
"You and those numebrs don't mean anything. Anyone who knows baseball and supply/demand knows he can be traded for a MLB SP with 2 years of control now."
The guy then gets non-tendered, and everyone who said he made real improvements and increased his trade value are suddenly silent on the issue, yet continue to spout other ignorant opinions.
Does that sound pretty familiar?
The fact you continue to spout the nonsense in bold after the old FO showed beyond all doubt they didn't have access to this data is laughable. After all, they thought it was a great idea to stick Kemp in LF.
If your 4 points are all you understand about advanced stats, it's no wonder you don't appreciate them.
And again, that's kinda the point - you and several others don't come off that way. It's just an approach, and "more informed" isn't necessarily the best term either, but who cares??? You're a fan like the rest of us.
The telling quotes are the ones (like aren't typically attributed to you and several others who are more numerically-inclined but worth following and conversing with) consisting of things like "I'm willing to give Anthopoulos the chance" to anything - I'm sure he appreciates that from people spending hours posting on internet message boards that are next in line to replace him. I'm quite sure most MLB front offices are monitoring this place looking to hire blackjack dealers as their next GMs after all.
chipchildress
Awaiting a Promotion
do people really have a superior handle on these numbers around here or are do they just happen to be aware of the latest made up stat and enjoy flaunting what they perceive to be an important data point?
chipchildress
Awaiting a Promotion
go back and look at maddux year by year. he was almost always better than the league.
so basically, he invalidates that entire ****ing stat. it's total bull**** to suggest that all balls in play are equal.
but basically with babip the claim is that the more hits you get, the luckier you are. you can just use batting average or anything else to demonstrate the same thing. but in reality, we've seen players who have abilities to effect how hard balls are hit and where and things like that. so again, babip is totally worthless. it might apply to 95% of the players out there but it's based on a principle that's a lie.
and again, ted williams hit .400 and this amazing babip stat is there to tell us that he probably won't hit .400 next year. lol. hopefully our new front office can use these amazing stats. game changer!!!