| |
Reputation:94
Level:All-Star
Since:Oct 22, 2007
|
so you don't like the numbers that conflict with your opinion but you do like the numbers that don't.....that's shockingAnd what are you doing differently?
A system that no one uses that agrees with you is good....but a universally accepted stat system is just phooey....gotcha....
And you laughed the first time someone brought up OPS, because it wasn't yet "universally accepted."
Excuse me for preferring numbers that look at the actual plays rather than saying you should get anything that's hit in an arbitrary zone, regardless of positioning or how hard the ball is hit (Zone Rating). Or I guess I could go by Range Factor, where you get a higher rating simply for having more balls hit to you. It's better than FP, but not at all a complete statistic.
Here's a summary of how the +/- numbers are determined.
Video Scouts at BIS review video of every play of every major league game and record detailed information on each play, such as the location of each batted ball, the speed, the type of hit, etc. Using this in-depth data, we’re able to figure out how each player compares to his peers at his position. How often does Derek Jeter field that softly batted ball located 20 feet to the right of the normal shortstop position, for example, compared to all other major league shortstops?
A player gets credit (a "plus" number) if he makes a play that at least one other player at his position missed during the season, and he loses credit (a "minus" number) if he misses a play that at least one player made.
To call it a system that no one uses couldn't be farther from the truth. Check out their website and see who their panel consists of. It's an impressive list of baseball minds.
What's really funny is that according to your "bible" the only AL recipients deserving of their GGs are Pedroia and Adrian Beltre....lol....everyone else must have just been robbed....
Well, they actually had Mark Ellis ahead of Pedroia, but I think you could make an argument that the actual voting for GG is enough of a joke that most of the actual winners were not the best defensive players.
And they look at far more than just the +/- numbers, if you were wondering. Chase Utley ste the +/- record this year with +43, but the panel chose Brandon Phillips over him based on what they saw.
|
Reputation:94
Level:All-Star
Since:Mar 5, 2008
|
And what are you doing differently?
using a widely accepted system....
And you laughed the first time someone brought up OPS, because it wasn't yet "universally accepted."
I did? Quote please...
Excuse me for preferring numbers that look at the actual plays rather than saying you should get anything that's hit in an arbitrary zone, regardless of positioning or how hard the ball is hit (Zone Rating). Or I guess I could go by Range Factor, where you get a higher rating simply for having more balls hit to you. It's better than FP, but not at all a complete statistic.
Here's a summary of how the +/- numbers are determined.
Video Scouts at BIS review video of every play of every major league game and record detailed information on each play, such as the location of each batted ball, the speed, the type of hit, etc. Using this in-depth data, we’re able to figure out how each player compares to his peers at his position. How often does Derek Jeter field that softly batted ball located 20 feet to the right of the normal shortstop position, for example, compared to all other major league shortstops?
A player gets credit (a "plus" number) if he makes a play that at least one other player at his position missed during the season, and he loses credit (a "minus" number) if he misses a play that at least one player made.
To call it a system that no one uses couldn't be farther from the truth. Check out their website and see who their panel consists of. It's an impressive list of baseball minds.
Cool....now show me which MLB affiliation it has....none? Its not listed on the MLB official website....however, you can find other fielding statistics there....the one's you don't like coincidentally....shocking
Well, they actually had Mark Ellis ahead of Pedroia, but I think you could make an argument that the actual voting for GG is enough of a joke that most of the actual winners were not the best defensive players.
And they look at far more than just the +/- numbers, if you were wondering. Chase Utley ste the +/- record this year with +43, but the panel chose Brandon Phillips over him based on what they saw.
So, the +/- system is flawed....if the panel chooses someone other than the empirical winner, then the system is damaged....you just killed your own argument....
|
Reputation:94
Level:All-Star
Since:Oct 22, 2007
|
I claimed it was one of the best performances in the AL, he asked who said it wasn't. I said you did.
I must just be confused, because I figured if you considered it one of the best performances in the AL, you wouldn't have said the following...
Not MVP Material....like I said, shouldn't have been considered....
|
Reputation:94
Level:All-Star
Since:Mar 5, 2008
|
I claimed it was one of the best performances in the AL, he asked who said it wasn't. I said you did.
I must just be confused, because I figured if you considered it one of the best performances in the AL, you wouldn't have said the following...
Not MVP Material....like I said, shouldn't have been considered....
ummmm I'm pretty sure MVP would be THE best....not one of the best....and Pedroia was not THE best....therefore, not MVP material...He put up great numbers but did not have a better year than at least 3 other guys....
Got it?
|
Reputation:94
Level:All-Star
Since:Oct 22, 2007
|
I did? Quote please...Meant to prove the point that to discount a statistic because it is not "universally accepted" is a practice that doesn't make much sense.
Cool....now show me which MLB affiliation it has....none? Its not listed on the MLB official website....however, you can find other fielding statistics there....the one's you don't like coincidentally....shocking The only thing worse than discounting a statistic because it's not "universally accepted" is discounting it because it's not on mlb.com
So, the +/- system is flawed....if the panel chooses someone other than the empirical winner, then the system is damaged....you just killed your own argument....Literally every statistic ever is flawed. However, some are more flawed than others. I've provided reasons why I prefer +/- to FP, ZR, or RF and your best response has been that it isn't on mlb.com.
The reason I brought up the Fielding Bible to begin with was to show that Pedroia was far more deserving of his GG than Jeter was of his three. The Fielding Bible had Pedroia as the second best 2B in the AL, while Jeter placed in the bottom five in all of baseball during each of his GG years.
By the way, Bill James, who created ZR, works on the panel and voted Pedroia as the 2nd best AL 2B. I wonder how much consideration he put into Zone Rating?
|
|
Reputation:94
Level:All-Star
Since:Mar 5, 2008
| |
