Crunched By Numbers: Inside the voting for Cy
In his excellent recent article on Tim Lincecum’s victory in the 2009 National League Cy Young Award race, the Chronicle’s John Shea focused on the role "advanced" statistics played in the result. ...
about 2 years ago
CSN Bay Area
50 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
We already have a discussion on Shea's idiotic take
WHY IS BOCOCK?!
by Lars The Wanderer on Nov 24, 2009 3:27 PM PST reply actions
Mr. CSNBA is not reading or discussing posts, just advertising. Do not expect too much.
It's my blarg! Quick Pitch
And I tweet (more often than I blarg).
LOL Network Presence!
"Being a McCoven is like being a member of the Green party. It’s powerlessness is part of the appeal." - oldjacket
Contributions aren't exactly groundbreaking so far
"The BB's are out. The BB's are being arseholes to me." - Brian Wilson.
I'll bite
Sabermetrics and advanced statistics intentionally point analysts away from the field and from more intimate observation. Indeed, that is their avowed purpose: to find scientific tools for analyzing athletes more powerful than anything previously available. It’s a worthy goal, but the effectiveness of this technique has been greatly exaggerated.
You see, you’d need stats to prove this wrong!! And if you use stats, then you’re not being “intimate” enough, or sumpin’.
"The BB's are out. The BB's are being arseholes to me." - Brian Wilson.
You'll never see me use tools to evaluate a ball player!
Just give me a stopwatch and a radar gun and I’m good to go!
I know you nerds know NOTHING about the real game of baseball, or any other athletic endeavor requiring teamwork under physical stress.
Mr. F! | comics | art | New Nattowear | Unofficial McImage Directory
And you'll never see me evaluate a ballplayer based on his tools!
Just as long as he’s fast and can hit and plays pretty good defense!
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Nov 24, 2009 7:49 PM PST up reply actions
Wow. That is exactly the opposite purpose of advanced statistics.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Nov 24, 2009 7:48 PM PST up reply actions
/flagged
It's my blarg! Quick Pitch
And I tweet (more often than I blarg).
by can of corn on Nov 24, 2009 3:48 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
HI!
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Nov 24, 2009 7:49 PM PST up reply actions
Are you talking to me?
I know you nerds know NOTHING about the real game of baseball, or any other athletic endeavor requiring teamwork under physical stress.
Mr. F! | comics | art | New Nattowear | Unofficial McImage Directory
It’s okay. Long week. But once my 11 hour shift is done today, I’m home free.
You?
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Nov 25, 2009 8:04 AM PST up reply actions
Somehow I knew Your Devotion To The Religion Of Sabermetrics Would Insure You Wer Not One Of The Open Minded
by giantsrainman on Nov 24, 2009 5:25 PM PST up reply actions
My Mistake Then
I mistook your snark to be about the content not the typo.
by giantsrainman on Nov 24, 2009 7:10 PM PST up reply actions
There's room for both sides in Baseball
Mark Twain has been often linked to the saying: “Lies, damn lies, and statistics”, and I agree that many times stats can be misleading. (Though I use morbidity and mortality tables in my day job). I think the “stat heads” and the “go with my gut” group both can be right without canceling each other out.
A reasoned team approach would have both, and learn to use both. That most likely removes the Giants from that equation due to the reasoned approach, but one can’t have everything in life. But one, just one freaking world series win would be nice!!!!!
(42 years of cheering the Giants on and waiting…….)
My two favorite teams are the Giants, and whomever is playing the Dodgers!
by World Series or Bust on Nov 24, 2009 5:10 PM PST reply actions
TIM LINCECUM HAS A WARP FACTOR 9
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Nov 24, 2009 7:49 PM PST up reply actions
Engage
"Being a McCoven is like being a member of the Green party. It’s powerlessness is part of the appeal." - oldjacket
And for the love of God, don’t forget to calibrate the inertial dampeners this time.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Nov 25, 2009 8:05 AM PST up reply actions
WELL DO YOU WANT TO BE CRUSHED TO DEATH? LAST TIME WAS A CLOSE CALL!
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Nov 25, 2009 9:38 AM PST up reply actions
say hey nation is the Ralph Nader of McC.-Xanthan
by say hey nation on Nov 25, 2009 9:22 AM PST up reply actions
Traditional baseball stats possess two main merits separating them from VORP, FIP and the like: they comprise a real-world record of what the player actually did.
Sigh.
Wins, after all, are THE ENTIRE POINT OF PITCHING.
And WHIP – walks plus hits divided by innings pitched – is a newly popular stat that isn’t based on any arcane formula but relies on actual events, and it’s an accurate measure of pitching effectiveness.
Sabermetrics and advanced statistics intentionally point analysts away from the field and from more intimate observation. Indeed, that is their avowed purpose: to find scientific tools for analyzing athletes more powerful than anything previously available. It’s a worthy goal, but the effectiveness of this technique has been greatly exaggerated.
they are flesh-and-blood humans whose performances fluctuate, sometimes wildly, from year to year, for reasons that can’t always be quantified
…yeah, we know.
Compiling copious data is terrific for discovering general trends – but its aggregation can tell us little about the future fortunes of any particular individual
…really?
Harvard and Yale MBA’s were chief among those who brought us those incomprehensible derivatives that made many of them millionaires while beggaring millions of others
You already don’t understand baseball statistics, now you have to bring another subject you don’t understand into the mix?
Show me a baseball observer who would take the 2009 version of Vazquez or Haren over Lincecum, Carpenter or Wainwright, and I’ll show you one who feels more at home with Fantasy Baseball than real baseball. It’s a trend the game could do without.
Never played fantasy baseball. Could see a reasonable argument for taking Vasquez or Haren.
All in all, the level of sheer stupidity in this article insults me. It makes me sad that people read this crap and believe it. Most points made couldn’t miss the point, or even general concept, of statistics more. I guess it does make me feel a little better that David Koppett is fighting a losing battle, and probably knows it…
There Is Some Merit As Well As Error To All Of These Points If You Are Open Minded Enough To Look For It
This whole issue of New School vs Old School seems to me to be idential to what has become our modern political environment where both sides are either unwilling and unable to even attempt to understand the other sides point of view.
by giantsrainman on Nov 24, 2009 7:16 PM PST up reply actions
I don’t mind someone making fair points. I mind someone making flatly incorrect points. This is what the author does throughout. For instance, FIP is a measure of strikeouts, walks and HR’s – events that actually occur. The author basically claims it is not, yet then later trumps WHIP as a measure of things that actually occur. Wins are not the entire point of pitching – preventing runs is, that is another incorrect notion. His “greatly exaggerated” point is his opinion, and he clearly does not understand statistics, and thus doesn’t have a worthwhile opinion on how effective the current stats are. He makes a statement that basically says stats don’t tell us anything about the future – yet the stat guys do a better job of predicting future success then the non-stat guys. He brings derivatives into the mix, yet doesn’t show he has even a basic understanding of what that means. It’s not even relevant to the conversation!
I don’t consider myself part of whatever “new school” vs. “old school” battle there may or may not be going on. I just want people to understand the concepts before they feel the need to write an article like this. If someone wants to argue the merits of forecasting, that’s fine, I enjoy reasonable, educated discussions. If someone wants to argue against the effectiveness of FIP (something I believe there is a valid case for, as I do not think ignoring balls in play entirely is a good thing), that’s fine, as long as they have legitimate reasons why. This was an entire article of stupid. The guy is not educated on a single subject he discusses, does not bring up the valid points that probably exist…he actually fits your politics point pretty well – he’s like one of those people that’s picked a political party and is dedicated to his side winning, yet doesn’t know a single thing about the issues (in my opinion, that represents the majority of politically active people). It makes whatever readership he has less educated on the subject. That pisses me off, I can’t deny it. This article sucked.
by Missing Barry on Nov 24, 2009 7:29 PM PST up reply actions
You Missed The Point On FIP
What is not an actual real event is the value assigned by the FIP formula to HRs, Strikeouts, and BB+HBP-IBB. The author correctly states that these values are just an opinion (an educated one but none the less an opinion) not a fact.
by giantsrainman on Nov 24, 2009 7:39 PM PST up reply actions
…why do you bother nitpicking the way you do? If you have something to say about my post, why not say it? Do you agree or disagree with my opinions, do you have concrete examples/evidence to back up or disagree with them? Do you have an opinion of your own you wish to voice that’s on this topic beyond what you already said? Instead you just give me a little nitpick of one thing out of many that I said. What does that accomplish?
Sure, FIP assigns run values to the events, but it’s still just an equation based on these actual things (K’s, BB’s, HR’s), much like WHIP is an equation that adds walks and hits. Do you think this author would object if someone told him hits are twice as important as walks, and thus made an equation that was 2*hits + 1*walks? I don’t think so – my interpretation of his comments is he simply dismisses anything he doesn’t take the time to understand (FIP is not difficult, I mean, come on), but WHIP is easy that he got it the first time, so all of a sudden it’s ok? The point is they both “rely on actual events”, which is apparently acceptable in his world for the one he understands, but not for the one he doesn’t want to bother with…
by Missing Barry on Nov 24, 2009 7:55 PM PST up reply actions
Just Givng You Back Some Of The Medicine You Applied To The CSN Author.
I am not taking a position as I think the extremes in both camps are wrong just like I think both political extremes in US Politics are wrong. To me the correct answer in both cases in somewhere in the middle and can be only founld by those willing to listen to and consider all points of view.
by giantsrainman on Nov 24, 2009 8:10 PM PST up reply actions
And that’s a fair point; I actually agree with you on this. I just don’t feel there’s a need to defend the article, because it’s on the extreme and doesn’t make any effort to understand the topic before attempting to bash the other side. As for me, just to throw you a bone – I’ll say one thing that bothers me on awards voting is the fact that us “stat users” or whatever, as a group, tend to throw out context. I like WAR for what it is – a great player valuation tool – but I think it’s a mistake to drop context from an award. Maybe a guy doesn’t have any special “clutch” ability, but if he performs well in the clutch over the year – that has a tangible effect on a team winning games, and should be rewarded. It seems there’s a current fad to ignore that, just because it may not be a repeatable “skill”.
I definitely see reasonable arguments against the herd mentality both sides have at times, I just didn’t see a single reasonable argument in this guys article. As far as I can tell, he’s basically accusing people who use stats of being witches*.
- A little extreme, of course, but I assume you get the point I’m making? :)
by Missing Barry on Nov 24, 2009 8:21 PM PST up reply actions
Because You View The Author's Point Of View As Extreme Shouldn't Mean That It Is OK To Ignore It
I at least still want to understand it and take it into account. Even extreme points of view do have some cernal of truth in them.
by giantsrainman on Nov 24, 2009 8:26 PM PST up reply actions
Well, just to be clear here, my problem isn’t that he’s objecting to “sabermetrics”, per se, it’s more his thought process I have a problem with. There may be some good underlying points in the article, I just don’t think the author understands them or is making them himself – it’s more a process of you being more educated on the issue and being able to interpret his BS into a more reasonable take on the situation. I just don’t see the value in such a poorly thought out take on the issue. Leave the topic to people who have taken the time to understand it.
So basically, even if there may be legitimate issues with FIP and other metrics to be made, I don’t see the point in legitimizing some guys view who’s out for heads because he doesn’t want to believe the Earth revolves around the sun and not the other way around. If he wants to say things like, “the effectiveness of this technique has been greatly exaggerated” he has to show some knowledge of statistics or even just knowledge of legitimate arguments why these techniques aren’t as effective as many think. He doesn’t even bother on elaborating on this, just throws it in there. There’s no value in a conversation like that.
by Missing Barry on Nov 24, 2009 8:45 PM PST up reply actions
In Addition
What FIP chooses not to measure or value is also just an opinion. For example GB%, IFB%, LD%, and perhaps further breakdowns of these that are not yet measured.
by giantsrainman on Nov 24, 2009 7:55 PM PST up reply actions
That would be an extension of my point: “I do not think ignoring balls in play entirely is a good thing”. I agree with that. I don’t like that the notion of a pitcher doesn’t have control over batted balls that seems to have cropped up among Fangraphs and other sabersite readership. I don’t see the point in terms of our conversation, though. What’s the fundamental difference in deciding to measure walks, strikeouts and HR’s compared to deciding to measure walks + hits?
by Missing Barry on Nov 24, 2009 7:59 PM PST up reply actions
THANK YOU CSNBA SPAMBOTS!
Giant Dirtbags: John Bowker, Steve Hammond. MIA List: Todd Jennings, Brian Anderson
Jeremy Affeldt induces DP's
by Giant among Angels on Nov 24, 2009 7:28 PM PST reply actions
Exactly!
She types with her rack.
WHY IS BOCOCK?!
by Lars The Wanderer on Nov 25, 2009 8:01 AM PST up reply actions
Grant, shouldn't you be getting paid to distribute this PR material?
And if you are, good for you!
WHY IS BOCOCK?!
by Lars The Wanderer on Nov 25, 2009 9:20 AM PST reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
