Re: Old school stats vs. new school stats
posted at 1/27/2013 1:32 AM EST
the first thing i learned in statistics class is that if you cant control all factors that influence the said activity, then your measurement is not valid...
No baseball stat or metric is totally valid. Nobody is arguing any are. That does not mean they have no significance at all. Correlations have been identified between certain stats and runs scored or allowed or not. Runs scored and allowed are clearly related to improving the chances of winning or not. Winning more games certainly improives your odds of winning a ring.
Stats do not win games. Nobody here is claiming they do. This is a thread about what stats better reflect a player's true skill level... the old traditional ones or the newer ones. The game is still played on the field.
is the wind being measured? the sunny field? the wet, heavy air? the velocity of the ball hit? are all ballparks the same size? do all players have the same reflexes (wouldnt that make as much sense as tracking their positioning?) the variables are endless which makes UZR moot...
Just because a stat is flawed does make it meaningless.
Remember, this is the stat that said Cameron was a better center fielder than Elllsbury...why would anyone even consider this stat useful?
You find one example and that throws out any possible validity of UZR? Did they teach you that is stats class? Besides, UZR did not "say" anything about Cam vs Ells. Theo & Tito did. Past UZR is not a predictor of future UZR, especially at the age differences between Cam and Ells.
Using your eyes is a much more accurate way of judging a fielder....your brain is the greatest computer ever created and it is quite capable of judging a ball player defensivily.
So, do you watch every play every player has made or not made over a season? How can simple observation ever tell you that a player is the best, worst of average by just watching a tiny fraction of all the plays made over a season?
It's like saying that because in the game I watched Verlander pitch this year, he got lit up, I can't trust any stats I read that show he had a great year, because my great computer of a brain beats out any stats or metric effected by the sun, moon, and stars. Verlander stunk last year, because I saw it with my own two eyes.
Give me a break!