Ohhh so I'm ignorant cause I don't get into the "smart" stats cause yeah all of you are all soooo smart, you know what know you offended me and insulted me, I don't care about the damn stats. I end this here, I'm not worthy speaking to the smart people here

 

Thank you for playing.

 

You really expected people to say nothing while you just spew bad things about something you don't know much about?

Edited May 28, 201213 yr by chw42

Again I DON'T Care.......

Again I DON'T Care.......

Then seriously, why are you in this thread?

Cause I was called a troll for no reason;)........

Cause I was called a troll for no reason;)........

If you want to make a case against UZR, or Bill James, or any type of modern stats, feel free to do so, and some of us would be happy to read. But what you did was basically just this:

Huh? I just said they're worthless, an opinion of mine that's about it, what's the fuzz? Why get all bent outta shape, and I didn't get you're icon...

Edited May 28, 201213 yr by JoshPR

Huh? I just said they're worthless, an opinion of mine that's about it, what's the fuzz? Why get all bent outta shape, and I didn't get you're icon...

Ok, here's my response.

 

You're wrong, those stats are great.

 

See the comparison?

 

(The image was "Old man yells at cloud).

Huh? I just said they're worthless, an opinion of mine that's about it, what's the fuzz? Why get all bent outta shape, and I didn't get you're icon...

You came into a sabermetrics thread to complain about sabermetrics. What did you think was going to happen?

Dude, that's fine, you guys like them cool man I don't. That's about it life goes on man

You came into a sabermetrics thread to complain about sabermetrics. What did you think was going to happen?

Lol I replied to the thread title, but hey whatever it's cool dude, being called a troll did bother me cause that I ain't

Lol I replied to the thread title, but hey whatever it's cool dude, being called a troll did bother me cause that I ain't

I don't know why I'm even wasting my time reading/replying to this, but coming into a thread about an advanced statistic and saying "it sucks and is worthless" is pretty much the exact definition of trolling, whether you actually believe that or not.

I don't know why I'm even wasting my time reading/replying to this, but coming into a thread about an advanced statistic and saying "it sucks and is worthless" is pretty much the exact definition of trolling, whether you actually believe that or not.

To be fair, he entered a thread called "UZR: worst stat ever?"

To be fair, he entered a thread called "UZR: worst stat ever?"

Thnk you, Jesus how many times, I'm more of a purist, sometimes stats doesn't tell all the story, the games have to be played out, I mean there has been discussions about how sabermetrics say a player is gonna perform and they are completly off, everything can't be trusted and faith be trusted on stats, that's my point of view how many times has any of these stats say something and another thing happens? That's why I say they are worthless, sometimes it doesn't take into consideration the intangibles the lil things, people tend to discard certain players because of what sabermetrics say but maybe certain player has that lil something he brings to the table that helps win. That's what I mean, but again if you guys follow them and put you're faith in them that's great(for the fricken 10th time I've said this), I respect that but I think it's unfair to be called BS cause I'm not with the crowd on something, but hey that's just me, IT'S MY OPINION that's all, it doesn't make ignorant or a troll, isn't that what the board is for? Sharing ideas and opinions?

 

. :gosox

Sabermetrics are, like, the best thing that's ever happened to the game of baseball. It takes a little effort, but once you've got a general understanding of them, they're just awesome tools to use to evaluate players. There was just no way to gauge one's defense 10-15 years ago unless you were a fan of a particular player's team and watched every game or if you caught Sportscenter highlights. People use Soriano as an example of how flawed UZR is. UZR isn't just about range (or in Soriano's case, being a moron). Soriano has always had a +arm and that's weighted into overall UZR.

Edited May 29, 201213 yr by Jordan4life

If you're going to cite a stat that EVERYONE knows doesn't become reliable for way longer than 45 games, you're just showing that you have no idea what you're talking about, not that there's anything wrong with the stat. Go look at the career numbers and tell me if they don't match up.

There are no bad statistics, just bad usage of statistics. In the end, it's things that actually happened multiplied, divided and occasionally added or subtracted together. You can choose to understand what the statistics are telling you, know their limitations, and use them to your benefit, or you can ignore them and just watch the games. Neither statistics nor your eyes are particularly good at predicting future results, though, so there's no reason to s**t on either one.

There are no bad statistics, just bad usage of statistics. In the end, it's things that actually happened multiplied, divided and occasionally added or subtracted together. You can choose to understand what the statistics are telling you, know their limitations, and use them to your benefit, or you can ignore them and just watch the games. Neither statistics nor your eyes are particularly good at predicting future results, though, so there's no reason to s**t on either one.

 

I'd say stats tend to be less biased and can be better indicators of future performance.

 

But you're right, there's no reason to s*** on either one...unless one side decides to s*** on the other first.

Edited May 29, 201213 yr by chw42

I'd say stats tend to be less biased and can be better indicators of future performance.

 

But you're right, there's no reason to s*** on either one...unless one side decides to s*** on the other first.

They can be, but the current White Sox are a great example of how advanced statistics describe last year, not this year. What was our PECOTA win% again? We could still meet it, but it sure seems like we won't.

 

The "eye test" employed by numerous experts predicted the exact same results. Everybody appears to be wrong, at this juncture.

They can be, but the current White Sox are a great example of how advanced statistics describe last year, not this year. What was our PECOTA win% again? We could still meet it, but it sure seems like we won't.

 

The "eye test" employed by numerous experts predicted the exact same results. Everybody appears to be wrong, at this juncture.

 

PECOTA sucks. It's been horribly inaccurate for years. I did a composite projection based on 4 projection systems and the Sox came out at .500. I know a lot of people who thought worse would happen.

 

What advanced stats aren't good at is predicting the future on players with little prior history. But when you're talking about established players, the right stat can tell you a lot.

Edited May 29, 201213 yr by chw42

PECOTA sucks.

 

Pulled

Estimates

Completely

Out of

Thin

Air