Old school stats vs. new school stats

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Old school stats vs. new school stats

    In response to phxvlsoxfan's comment:

    Great post.

    Being a stats nut I love both the old and new numbers, but honestly there is now and has always been only one stat that matters - WINS.  All old and new stats are essentially independent of the game situation.  How many times have the Sox crushed a team one game then lost 2 close ones.  The individual stats look great, but the series is lost.



    This seems to happen more to us than other teams, but I have never done a study on it.

    Timely hitting is one reason, but that is something very hard to plan for. Unstable starting rotations will also lend itself to this phenomena.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Old school stats vs. new school stats

    While Jeter''s defensive proficiency is certainly a topic for debate...

    Actually, I think it is beyond debate, but I know many feel otherwise, including the insane GG voters.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from mef429. Show mef429's posts

    Re: Old school stats vs. new school stats

    In response to RedSoxKimmi's comment:

    John Dewan, who initially developed UZR and subsequently the Plus/Minus system, did an interview on SOSH in 2009 detailing some of what goes into computing UZR and Plus/Minus ratings.  Here are a few quotes from that interview:

    "Both Plus/Minus and UZR factor in defensive positioning and give credit for it. Both systems account for both components of good defense – having good range and positioning well."

    "UZR has several minute adjustments, such as batter hand, pitcher hand, base/out state, and pitcher groundball/flyball tendencies. We remain focused on the value contributed to the team in the player’s specific context."

    "Plus/Minus accommodates plays where the first baseman holds the runner and middle infielders are covering second on hit-and-run plays. UZR adjusts for all base/out states."

    UZR does make adjustments for player positioning, along with several other factors.  As I mentioned in another thread, UZR and Plus/Minus are more comprehensive than most people realize.  This interview was almost 4 years ago.  I imagine even more advancements have been made.

    UZR and Plus/Minus are not perfect, but IMO, they are far better than any other defensive rating available, like fielding percentage.  There is no way that all variables will ever be accounted for, but UZR and other advanced stats do a pretty good job of adjusting for as many of them as possible.

    Anyone who wants some information on how the data is collected, read up on the BIS data tracking system.  Good stuff.

     




    thanks for the info Kimmi. BTW, can you post a link to that article?

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: Old school stats vs. new school stats

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    While Jeter''s defensive proficiency is certainly a topic for debate...

    Actually, I think it is beyond debate, but I know many feel otherwise, including the insane GG voters.

     



    It appears it's debateable whether it's a debate. While I agree his 5th GG was not deserved, (i.e, a sure handed SS with intangibles and postage stamp range does not merit a GG) the guys who vote on this likely see him day in day out far more than you do. However, as in life, reputations, good or bad, create a lag which adversely impacts proper assessment when things change.  

     

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from BMav. Show BMav's posts

    Re: Old school stats vs. new school stats

    I find almost every stat useful and at least somewhat informative. But some are better then others. I probably use the junior school stats[WHIP and OPS] more then any other stats, even though others may be more accurate[OPS+].

     

    As for UZR, the one concern I have with that stat is potential bias. How many people who judge UZR are Yankee or Red Sox haters?  Or what part does reputation play in the results? Manny sucked, so he should have made that play. Tulo is great so others probably would not have made that play. Etc. Still use the stat though.

    However, I probably trust RF-9 more then UZR. Its a meat and potato stat you can see with your own eyes. I especially like to compare RF-9 with every player at that position on the same team. Which is why I have some doubts about the greatness of Jose Iglesias's defense. He often has come up short in comparison to his SS team mates.Let alone dominate like he should have.

    I also am a huge believer in park factors and prefer looking at road OPS for players that play in extreme parks.

    I am a big user of WAR. However, I tend to reduce the numbers for extreme defensive guys, especially in the OF's. Basically cut about a half point for great defenders in the infield, .75 point for CF, and 1.25 for corner OF. Maybe Theo could have used my advice on that one. :)

     

     

     

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from SonicsMonksLyresVicars. Show SonicsMonksLyresVicars's posts

    Re: Old school stats vs. new school stats

    In response to georom4's comment:

    UZR <flush>


    Geo - It would be very interesting and lend you credibility if you were to write a few succinct sentences defining what UZR is, then a few more explaining why you don't think it has any value and what you use to evaluate the range of players, particularly those you rarely/never see play.

     

    Are you willing to do that, or are you sticking with "<flush>"?

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from notin. Show notin's posts

    Re: Old school stats vs. new school stats

    In response to nhsteven's comment:

     

     

    While Jeter''s defensive proficiency is certainly a topic for debate, so are these new fangled defensive metrics.




    Jeter's defensive proficiency is legendary. 

     

    And by legendary, I mean mythical.  As in, very few have seen it, and none of them who have are reliable.

     

    He should exchange his Gold Gloves and be awarded a Golden Sasquatch instead.

     

     

     

    How is THAT for debate?

     

     

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Old school stats vs. new school stats

    In response to nhsteven's comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    While Jeter''s defensive proficiency is certainly a topic for debate...

    Actually, I think it is beyond debate, but I know many feel otherwise, including the insane GG voters.

     



    It appears it's debateable whether it's a debate. While I agree his 5th GG was not deserved, (i.e, a sure handed SS with intangibles and postage stamp range does not merit a GG) the guys who vote on this likely see him day in day out far more than you do. However, as in life, reputations, good or bad, create a lag which adversely impacts proper assessment when things change.  

     



    I probably saw Jeter play more than some of the GG voters.

    The numbers don't lie either. They back up my observations.

    Since 2003, his UZR/150 has been:

    03  -6.0

    04  -0.7   GG   Joke

    05 -13.4  GG   Bigger Joke

    06  -7.7   GG   Joke

    07 -17.9

    08  -0.4

    09  +8.0  GG  Still a Joke

    10  -5.4   GG  Big Joke

    11  -8.8

    12  -16.4

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: Old school stats vs. new school stats

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    In response to nhsteven's comment:

     

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    While Jeter''s defensive proficiency is certainly a topic for debate...

    Actually, I think it is beyond debate, but I know many feel otherwise, including the insane GG voters.

     



    It appears it's debateable whether it's a debate. While I agree his 5th GG was not deserved, (i.e, a sure handed SS with intangibles and postage stamp range does not merit a GG) the guys who vote on this likely see him day in day out far more than you do. However, as in life, reputations, good or bad, create a lag which adversely impacts proper assessment when things change.  

     

     



    I probably saw Jeter play more than some of the GG voters.

     

    The numbers don't lie either. They back up my observations.

    Since 2003, his UZR/150 has been:

    03  -6.0

    04  -0.7   GG   Joke

    05 -13.4  GG   Bigger Joke

    06  -7.7   GG   Joke

    07 -17.9

    08  -0.4

    09  +8.0  GG  Still a Joke

    10  -5.4   GG  Big Joke

    11  -8.8

    12  -16.4

     



    Except I think UZR is a joke. One could also claim using one suspect defensive metric to draw global conclusions would fall under the category of cherry picking. As far as you seeing him more than some of the voters, while I believe you (based on what I know about you); you must watch alot of games. And I'm pretty sure most weren't in person, unless you're a scout.

     

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Old school stats vs. new school stats

    In response to nhsteven's comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    In response to nhsteven's comment:

     

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    While Jeter''s defensive proficiency is certainly a topic for debate...

    Actually, I think it is beyond debate, but I know many feel otherwise, including the insane GG voters.

     



    It appears it's debateable whether it's a debate. While I agree his 5th GG was not deserved, (i.e, a sure handed SS with intangibles and postage stamp range does not merit a GG) the guys who vote on this likely see him day in day out far more than you do. However, as in life, reputations, good or bad, create a lag which adversely impacts proper assessment when things change.  

     

     



    I probably saw Jeter play more than some of the GG voters.

     

    The numbers don't lie either. They back up my observations.

    Since 2003, his UZR/150 has been:

    03  -6.0

    04  -0.7   GG   Joke

    05 -13.4  GG   Bigger Joke

    06  -7.7   GG   Joke

    07 -17.9

    08  -0.4

    09  +8.0  GG  Still a Joke

    10  -5.4   GG  Big Joke

    11  -8.8

    12  -16.4

     



    Except I think UZR is a joke. As far as you seeing him more than some of the voters, while I believe you (based on what I know about you); you must watch alot of games. And I'm pretty sure most weren't in person, unless you're a scout.

     



    How many live games do you think the GG voters see of each and every SS in MLB over a season?

    UZR/150 is not a joke. It is based on actual observations of each and every play by each and every player over a full season.

    RF/9 does not lie.

    Other stats do not lie.

    Jeter is a statue out there and has been for 10 years.

     

    It's not some Yankee hating position I have, as I have given many a Yankee his due props. Jeter is a great offensive player who plays in the media center of the world. He gets all the hype. He gets the home field calls on errors. He has about the worst range I have ever seen in a SS. I've seen dozens of Yankee games live and many many more on TV, and yes, you can determine poor or great range from watching TV.

    Jeter has been horrible in the field, but because he makes the plays hit right at him and a few highlight reel nice plays, he gets the votes based on his offense, his WS rings, and his expansive exposure.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Old school stats vs. new school stats

    In response to notin's comment:

    In response to nhsteven's comment:

     

     

     

    While Jeter''s defensive proficiency is certainly a topic for debate, so are these new fangled defensive metrics.

     




    Jeter's defensive proficiency is legendary. 

     

     

    And by legendary, I mean mythical.  As in, very few have seen it, and none of them who have are reliable.

     

    He should exchange his Gold Gloves and be awarded a Golden Sasquatch instead.

     

     

     

    How is THAT for debate?

     

     



    ...thus spoke Zaranotin ...

     
  12. This post has been removed.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: Old school stats vs. new school stats

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    In response to nhsteven's comment:

     

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    In response to nhsteven's comment:

     

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    While Jeter''s defensive proficiency is certainly a topic for debate...

    Actually, I think it is beyond debate, but I know many feel otherwise, including the insane GG voters.

     



    It appears it's debateable whether it's a debate. While I agree his 5th GG was not deserved, (i.e, a sure handed SS with intangibles and postage stamp range does not merit a GG) the guys who vote on this likely see him day in day out far more than you do. However, as in life, reputations, good or bad, create a lag which adversely impacts proper assessment when things change.  

     

     



    I probably saw Jeter play more than some of the GG voters.

     

    The numbers don't lie either. They back up my observations.

    Since 2003, his UZR/150 has been:

    03  -6.0

    04  -0.7   GG   Joke

    05 -13.4  GG   Bigger Joke

    06  -7.7   GG   Joke

    07 -17.9

    08  -0.4

    09  +8.0  GG  Still a Joke

    10  -5.4   GG  Big Joke

    11  -8.8

    12  -16.4

     



    Except I think UZR is a joke. As far as you seeing him more than some of the voters, while I believe you (based on what I know about you); you must watch alot of games. And I'm pretty sure most weren't in person, unless you're a scout.

     

     



    How many live games do you think the GG voters see of each and every SS in MLB over a season?

     

    UZR/150 is not a joke. It is based on actual observations of each and every play by each and every player over a full season.

    RF/9 does not lie.

    Other stats do not lie.

    Jeter is a statue out there and has been for 10 years.

     

    It's not some Yankee hating position I have, as I have given many a Yankee his due props. Jeter is a great offensive player who plays in the media center of the world. He gets all the hype. He gets the home field calls on errors. He has about the worst range I have ever seen in a SS. I've seen dozens of Yankee games live and many many more on TV, and yes, you can determine poor or great range from watching TV.

    Jeter has been horrible in the field, but because he makes the plays hit right at him and a few highlight reel nice plays, he gets the votes based on his offense, his WS rings, and his expansive exposure.



    The GG voters from what I understand are coaches & managers. There is also a cogent difference between 2 dimensional narrow view TV (although HD has helped) and live. As far as "home" town calls, we're probably talking a couple a season, and this is not restricted to him. Also, while I in general I partly agree with you, I'm also going to have to agree that we partly disagree, metrics, Jeter, and so on. To each his own. 

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: Old school stats vs. new school stats

    I haven't read all the posts yet, but I just wanted to weigh in with a thought or two.

    Regardless of whether or not they're old school or new school, any one stat is useless unless they're used in context with other stats.

    For example, OPS is a great stat, but if the batter has a low BA w/RISP -- Drew a couple of years ago -- then in my opinion that great OPS loses some luster. If a hitter has 40 HRs, that looks great, but if he's batting .210 with 70 RBIs and a .280 OBP in 600 PA, then those 40 HRs aren't so great.

    ERA is a great stat and a lousy stat. A low ERA tells a lot about a pitcher. It's hard to distort a bad (or even mediocre) ERA with two or three great starts. Yeah, those great starts will help but only two a point. On the other hand, two or three really horrible stats can easily distort an otherwise great ERA. Look at Lester and Beckett last year. I forget the exact numbers, but Beckett and Lester each had ERAs in the mid- to high 4.00s (maybe even low) after 13 starts for Beckett and 15 (maybe 17 starts) for Lester. But if you took away their two worst starts, Beckett's ERA was around 2.50 and Lester's 3.50 -- something like that. (WHIP is the same way).

    So no matter what stats you are looking at, you need to look at more than one stat and you have too look deep into individual stats to see what's going on.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from notin. Show notin's posts

    Re: Old school stats vs. new school stats

    In response to georom4's comment:

    UZR <flush>



    You might think a history teacher would knoe that people resistant to new ways of thinking frequently become obsolete as fast as the opinions they defend...

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: Old school stats vs. new school stats

    what roy said

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedSoxKimmi. Show RedSoxKimmi's posts

    Re: Old school stats vs. new school stats

    In response to mef429's comment:

    thanks for the info Kimmi. BTW, can you post a link to that article?




    Here's the link to the chat:

    http://sonsofsamhorn.net/topic/46840-chat-with-john-dewan/

    The particular quotes I posted came from reply #27 and reply #36.

    Here's a link to FAQ on The Fielding Bible regarding the Plus/Minus system.  Towards the bottom there are some questions regarding the scouts who score these plays.

    http://www.fieldingbible.com/Fielding-Bible-FAQ.asp

    Here is a link to The Fielding Bible that explains BIS data collection, the data that is used for UZR and Plus/Minus rankings.

     

     

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedSoxKimmi. Show RedSoxKimmi's posts

    Re: Old school stats vs. new school stats

    Oops, forgot the last link:

    http://www.fieldingbible.com/methodology-bisdatacollection.asp

     

     
  19. This post has been removed.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: Old school stats vs. new school stats

    In response to notin's comment:

     

    In response to nhsteven's comment:

     

     

     

    While Jeter''s defensive proficiency is certainly a topic for debate, so are these new fangled defensive metrics.

     




    Jeter's defensive proficiency is legendary. 

     

     

    And by legendary, I mean mythical.  As in, very few have seen it, and none of them who have are reliable.

     

    He should exchange his Gold Gloves and be awarded a Golden Sasquatch instead.

     

     

     

    How is THAT for debate?

     

     

     



    I have seen Jeter not make plays that most others would have. I've also seen the opposite. He is IMO, a defensive paradox. And, just like me, you're entitled to your opinion.  

     

     
  21. This post has been removed.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedSoxKimmi. Show RedSoxKimmi's posts

    Re: Old school stats vs. new school stats

    In response to LR3683paw's comment:

    Read it all Kimmi, it just details for you how advanced they have become. I'm sure that many of the best franchises are on top of this and hire the best professionals to implement it. So much goes on that the average fan is not aware of. Of course the best analysis through data, models, software, all go down the drain is a team is saddled with injuries and underperformance.



    It's amazing what these guys can do with the technology that they have.  They have stats on everything, and they have become very advanced at accounting for so many of the different variables that go into every play.  UZR is a lot less subjective and random than fielding % is.  Personally, I love this stuff.

     

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: Old school stats vs. new school stats

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    In response to notin's comment:

     

    In response to nhsteven's comment:

     

     

     

    While Jeter''s defensive proficiency is certainly a topic for debate, so are these new fangled defensive metrics.

     




    Jeter's defensive proficiency is legendary. 

     

     

    And by legendary, I mean mythical.  As in, very few have seen it, and none of them who have are reliable.

     

    He should exchange his Gold Gloves and be awarded a Golden Sasquatch instead.

     

     

     

    How is THAT for debate?

     

     

     



    ...thus spoke Zaranotin ...

     



    Before or after the breakdown?

     
  24. This post has been removed.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Old school stats vs. new school stats

    In response to pinstripezac's comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    In response to pinstripezac's comment:

     

    so moon

    did you just debunk the theory

    about how important defense  up the middle is

     



    No. Where did I come close to doing that?

     

    To me, range at SS is one of the most undervalued aspects of many fan's view on what wins baseball games. I have consistently held and defended that view with numbers and observations.

     




    really moon

    U or notin have no idea where I'm coming from ?

     



    I hope it's not "if Jeter is the worst SS, how have the Yanks won with him as their SS if SS is so important argument."

    Baseball is a team sport, and maybe the one ring the Yanks won the last decade was due to having 7 guys with 22 or more HRs and the other 2 with 31 combined.

     

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share