On the usage of statistics on the OH

[JERSEYORIOLE]

The problem wit this line of thinking is nobody can see enough to make an accurate comparison between the relative strengths and weaknesses of players. We may be able to see which OF on our team is the best defensively e.g., but even that is questionable. We certainly can't see other teams OF enough to make a comparison. And when we watch a game unless we are at the park watching off ball, as Buck likes to say, there is a lot we don't see about things like jumps and routes and positioning etc. So the numbers keep us honest when we think we see things that perhaps aren't there.

I do not say numbers have no place. I agree with you. I just dont think they should be the bible. Obviously players I dont see often I cant evaluate and therefore, id have to rely on stats more. But for instance, if we are talking about Pie Vs. Reimold or Tillman vs. Arrietta. I have seen 90% of every big league game they have played. Personally, Id go with what i see in those situations.

[JERSEYORIOLE]

Then why can't you even answer his question without displaying the kind of attitude you claim to dislike?

What was the question?

[Hooded Viper]

Well one thing is for sure, this has been one helluva thread. You have both sides of the fence spewing vitriol. I love it:)

[El Gordo]

I do not say numbers have no place. I agree with you. I just dont think they should be the bible. Obviously players I dont see often I cant evaluate and therefore, id have to rely on stats more. But for instance, if we are talking about Pie Vs. Reimold or Tillman vs. Arrietta. I have seen 90% of every big league game they have played. Personally, Id go with what i see in those situations.

If we don't revert to numbers as a sort of a bible, then we are left with a cacophony of subjective opinions based on inadequate iinformation, that becomes quickly tiresome.

[SrMeowMeow]

I do not say numbers have no place. I agree with you. I just dont think they should be the bible. Obviously players I dont see often I cant evaluate and therefore, id have to rely on stats more. But for instance, if we are talking about Pie Vs. Reimold or Tillman vs. Arrietta. I have seen 90% of every big league game they have played. Personally, Id go with what i see in those situations.

Numbers are numbers. They can be misused, but they really can't lie.

[JERSEYORIOLE]

If we don't revert to numbers as a sort of a bible, then we are left with a cacophony of subjective opinions based on inadequate iinformation, that becomes quickly tiresome.

OK, I submit. It's all about the numbers. I really wonder how this game was managed in any sensible way before all these stats were available. It's a wonder teams were not giving out absurd contracts to players that were not worth it. How did GM's 40-50 years ago know who to sign? Wow, those guys must have been brillant! I mean how did the O's know to trade for Frank Robinson without all these advanced numbers. I guess it was just dumb luck. I for one have been taught a lesson. Im sorry I paid for my MLB package or I would have used the money for a new computer and a slide ruler, so I could really enjoy the games.

[BaltimoreTerp]

OK, I submit. It's all about the numbers. I really wonder how this game was managed in any sensible way before all these stats were available. It's a wonder teams were not giving out absurd contracts to players that were not worth it. How did GM's 40-50 years ago know who to sign? Wow, those guys must have been brillant! I mean how did the O's know to trade for Frank Robinson without all these advanced numbers. I guess it was just dumb luck. I for one have been taught a lesson. Im sorry I paid for my MLB package or I would have used the money for a new computer and a slide ruler, so I could really enjoy the games.

Once again, the attitude.

I hope others see this exchange and learn something from it.

[BaltimoreTerp]

Numbers are numbers. They can be misused, but they really can't lie.

That's the difference between numbers and "eyes". Numbers themselves are facts. They can be analyzed in many different ways, good and bad, but at the basic level they are what they are.

However, anything that involves the human is fallible. That includes any analysis of the numbers beyond the most basic level, as well as any non-numbers analysis, such as all different depths of visual observation.

[JERSEYORIOLE]

Once again, the attitude.

I hope others see this exchange and learn something from it.

:laughlol:.......attitude is a good thing. If everyone got in line when the status quo got ruffled, we'd still be reporting to the British.

[BaltimoreTerp]

:laughlol:.......attitude is a good thing. If everyone got in line when the status quo got ruffled, we'd still be reporting to the British.

[JERSEYORIOLE]

Numbers are numbers. They can be misused, but they really can't lie.

Does anyone remember GWRBI? wasn't that worthless stat thrown around for a few years as though it had anything to do with being clutch. The implication was that it showed someone being a pressure player when in reality, it could have been the first run driven in, in a game won 16-15 by the team that never lost the lead.

[Tony-OH]

Really? Someone posting a stat to either add to a points relevance, or to make a counterpoint is somehow attitude related?

No, being told that you should be schooled by someone when you use OPS because you need to learn something is the attitude I'm talking about.

Again, when ONE PERSON is able to predict with their eye, on any scale of sample, better than stat engines, I will concede your point. Until then, stats > "feel". Your example is as meaningless as me bringing up all the prospects scouts have missed on.

Since you apparently not sharp enough to understand the difference between scouting the minor league and stats and my points are meaningless, I'll stop wasting my time with you.

[Tony-OH]

So, if the stats guys are labeled as arrogant or nerds, what are the scout guys labeled as since they resort to the name calling?

Can we just call scouts hacks because they are probably wrong more than right in most cases?

I guess I don't get why name calling has to come into play here.

Really, you are offended by the term nerd? Really? Sports guy, the king of the name caller, the king of the arrogant post is actually offended by the term "nerd?"

This is getting so blown out of proportion it's not funny. I expect people like BTerp to get all bent out of shape because he's made an OH career out of falling on his sword in these kinds of situations, but seriously, you of all people?

Guess what, I'm a stats guys too. I run a website about the Orioles. I've obviously got my nerd side as well to go along with my jock side.

This argument is not about stats vs traditional scouting, it's about the attitude that people must use certain new stats or they are somehow not worthy of being in a discussion.

I use OPS all the time, and will continue to do so because it gets the point across quickly and easily. That doesn't mean I won't dig into the other stats if I'm doing more detailed analysis.

Either way, I find your post to be hilarious considering your background around here.

[Sports Guy]

Really, you are offended by the term nerd? Really? Sports guy, the king of the name caller, the king of the arrogant post is actually offended by the term "nerd?"

Nah, i could care less...Its just very hypocritical on your part to complain about arrogance of one group and then turn into a name caller yourself. The irony is hilarious to me.

[SrMeowMeow]

Does anyone remember GWRBI? wasn't that worthless stat thrown around for a few years as though it had anything to do with being clutch. The implication was that it showed someone being a pressure player when in reality, it could have been the first run driven in, in a game won 16-15 by the team that never lost the lead.

So...uh...you're right. As I said, numbers can never be misused. Right?

Numbers are numbers. They can be misused, but they really can't lie.

Yup!

Using stats doesn't mean you turn your brain off. It's still really hard to analyze baseball. But stats are a powerful tool in the right hands. I mean, you can cut down a tree very quickly with a chainsaw, but if you don't know what you're doing, you'll hurt yourself.