217 replies to this topic

[Russ]

Things like BABIP, P/PA, K/9, OPS, are fine.  They're straightforward stats that require minimal explanation.  And they tell you something important.  I've seen a couple of these used on MASN broadcasts.  Any stat that requires a long drawn out explanation isn't worth mentioning.     The thing with WAR is that it's sold as (or understood by a lot of people as) a stat like K/9.  But it's not.  I'd rather it not be brought up.  Too many people use it as an answer to a question, when it should be generating more questions.

I asked Weber once what the best way to explain WAR to my 9 year old Baseball fanatic kid...I still don't understand it. 

It's not even that really. It's claiming to be something that it's not. I don't get how people can feel so strongly in favor of a stat when a significant component of it (defense) is a little bit more than guesswork. Even the proponents of UZR say you need 3 years of data to get an accurate (or more accurate) representation of a player. Why should I have faith in this stat that uses just the current year?

[bnickle]

Weber needs to know how it works before he tries explaining it to anyone else

[Russ]

I didn't finish my thought there as it relates to broadcasting.  When you throw WAR around on a broadcast without explanation and the various caveats, you're misinforming people.  When I hear WAR brought up on TV, it's usually explained as what Dupin says, "it's an attempt to combine the various parts of the game into a meaningful stat" or something similar and that's not telling the whole story.  Not to get too dramatic about it though. It's not that big of a deal.

[mweb08]

Weber needs to know how it works before he tries explaining it to anyone else

So who's the troll?

[mweb08]

Very few people claim that WAR is the be all end all.

[Mackus]

I didn't finish my thought there as it relates to broadcasting.  When you throw WAR around on a broadcast without explanation and the various caveats, you're misinforming people.  When I hear WAR brought up on TV, it's usually explained as what Dupin says, "it's an attempt to combine the various parts of the game into a meaningful stat" or something similar and that's not telling the whole story.  Not to get too dramatic about it though. It's not that big of a deal.

 

That is the whole story of WAR, though.  Whether they succeed in that endeavor is certainly debatable if not downright laughable, but that's the entire story and purpose of the stat.

 

Maybe we should come up with two different words.  Numbers and statistics, or any other two similar meaning but slightly different words.  Numbers, or data, or events, or whatever are just the raw results from the box score, minimally manipulated, to try and give you the fast and dirty glimpse of that game.  BA, OBP, HR, RBI, R, SLG, ERA, R, H, WHIP, K, BB, SV, H, and whatever else that describes either what just happened on the field or at what rate (per at bat or PA or IP or game) something is happening.

 

Then statistics, or formulas, or whatever you like are further manipulations of subsets of those data, or other data collection methods.  Weighted OBA is the formula that's use to calculate the offensive contribution of WAR.  That's based on the numbers above, but each is given a different weight, and there is a constant applied to reach a consistent league average.  It's a manipulation of the raw details of the game intended to get to a consistent number that describes a player's contributions with the bat.  Other data collection methods, that rely on some form of outside party like almost all defensive stats or LD% or other things also would be in this category.  They are attempts at interpreting what happened in the game, rather than Joe Friday's just the facts.

[Russ]

That is the whole story of WAR, though.  Whether they succeed in that endeavor is certainly debatable if not downright laughable, but that's the entire story and purpose of the stat.

 

Maybe we should come up with two different words.  Numbers and statistics, or any other two similar meaning but slightly different words.  Numbers are just the raw numbers from the box score, minimally manipulated, to try and give you the fast and dirty glimpse of that game.  BA, OBP, HR, RBI, R, SLG, ERA, R, H, WHIP, K, BB, SV, H, and whatever else that describes either what just happened on the field or at what rate (per at bat or PA or IP or game) something is happening.

 

Then statistics, or formulas, or whatever you like are further manipulations of subsets of those data, or other data collection methods.  Weighted OBA is the formula that's use to calculate the offensive contribution of WAR.  That's based on the numbers above, but each is given a different weight, and there is a constant applied to reach a consistent league average.  It's a manipulation of the raw details of the game intended to get to a consistent number that describes a player's contributions with the bat.

I understand the intention. I don't think it's successful in its intention and I don't think it tells us anything we don't already know (which should be the goal).  You can look at a player's OPS, consider his home field, the run environment, his defensive reputation, and his baserunning skill, and come up with a list that would be very similar to the top 20 WAR.  You're going to have guys that are similar and close enough that they're hard to differentiate, but it's the same with WAR.  Is a guy with 7.8 WAR definitely better than a player with a 7.4 WAR?  The answer is still "I don't know."

[DJ MC]

That is the whole story of WAR, though.  Whether they succeed in that endeavor is certainly debatable if not downright laughable, but that's the entire story and purpose of the stat.

 

Maybe we should come up with two different words.  Numbers and statistics, or any other two similar meaning but slightly different words.  Numbers, or data, or events, or whatever are just the raw results from the box score, minimally manipulated, to try and give you the fast and dirty glimpse of that game.  BA, OBP, HR, RBI, R, SLG, ERA, R, H, WHIP, K, BB, SV, H, and whatever else that describes either what just happened on the field or at what rate (per at bat or PA or IP or game) something is happening.

 

Then statistics, or formulas, or whatever you like are further manipulations of subsets of those data, or other data collection methods.  Weighted OBA is the formula that's use to calculate the offensive contribution of WAR.  That's based on the numbers above, but each is given a different weight, and there is a constant applied to reach a consistent league average.  It's a manipulation of the raw details of the game intended to get to a consistent number that describes a player's contributions with the bat.  Other data collection methods, that rely on some form of outside party like almost all defensive stats or LD% or other things also would be in this category.  They are attempts at interpreting what happened in the game, rather than Joe Friday's just the facts.

 

Where would you draw the line, though? Technically, the only numbers you mentioned that would count as "raw" are hits , runs (and allowed), strikeouts, walks and home runs. Even "simple" stats like batting average, RBIs and wins are manipulations of data.

[Oriole85]

TV by the Numbers: CBS Sports Network Signs Agreement with Minor League Baseball

 

CBS Sports Network has reached an agreement with Minor League Baseball™ (MiLB™) to televise 15 games throughout the course of the 2014 season. The schedule features games from the MiLB- affiliated leagues including Triple-A® Baseball, and also allows for the opportunity to flex games based on possible appearances by Major League Baseball stars.

No games for Norfolk yet, just glad they are doing Flex scheduling!

[DJ MC]

TV by the Numbers: CBS Sports Network Signs Agreement with Minor League Baseball

 

No games for Norfolk yet, just glad they are doing Flex scheduling!

 

You notice the pic?

[Oriole85]

You notice the pic?

Nope, I was just checking to see if the Tides were in it. Glad they could give the Keys some recognition.

[DJ MC]

Report: Mitch Williams called a ten-year-old a “pu**y” and ordered a beanball to take out an opposing pitcher

[bnickle]

Report: Mitch Williams called a ten-year-old a “pu**y” and ordered a beanball to take out an opposing pitcher

Next time he is in Aberdeen go give him a piece of your mind.

Unlike watching 10 yr olds play baseball, that actually could be entertaining.

[DJ MC]

Next time he is in Aberdeen go give him a piece of your mind.

Unlike watching 10 yr olds play baseball, that actually could be entertaining.

 

Hey, if you endorse that behavior, that's on you.

[bnickle]

Not at all. Anybody who takes 10 yr old baseball seriously is an idiot. BTW...love how you're not one to judge, and jump to conclusions. Except, when you totally judge and jump to conclusions.

I just figured since you're right down the road, you might be interested in telling him how much he sucks on tv. Maybe get an autograph while you're at it. I bet he can get you Billy's too. Oh boy!

[SBTarheel]

"Mitch Williams is crazy"..

 

Not breaking news. 

[SammyBirdland]

Report: Mitch Williams called a ten-year-old a “pu**y” and ordered a beanball to take out an opposing pitcher

If he did that to my kid, he'd be eating the fat part of a bat.

[Oriole85]

Awful Announcing: HAWK HARRELSON CALLS ASIAN PITCHERS “ORIENTALS” FOR THE SECOND NIGHT IN A ROW

 

The polarizing White Sox broadcaster used the term “Orientals” on Comcast Sportsnet Chicago for the second night in a row on Thursday when discussing Boston Red Sox reliever Junichi Tazawa’s delivery.