Petition

[TonySoprano]

Why are you always signling me out? Isn't the rule generally to not discuss rep point matters on the main boards and to take it up on PM?

I got repped by 2 people because I called someone ignorant and made the mistake of throwing a 'freaking' in, for which I immediately apologized. One of them then proceeded to call me a ***** in his rep, and the other I would gladly explain to him over PM, while they're all talking to the board about how I'm so immature and such to do that while the adults are the ones typing to a kid that he's a ***** in a rep. LedZepp's conduct was despicable, not mine.

Since you're up on the rules, did you see this one?

13. Don’t openly complain about the moderation or how this board is run. You can always contact us personally to voice concerns, but quite simply, if you don’t like the way the board is run, you are free to go elsewhere.

Friendly advice, don't argue with the mods

[Fairfax Bird]

Ok the formula weights Walks, HRs, IBB, and other Indepedent stats that the pitcher does. So basically they take the Team's defense out of the Pitchers ERA. So it will put the pitchers alone. Does that help?

Yeah, I guess so. It seems to be faily accurate as a predictor. Where do you get your DIPS data from?

[TyCobb]

Yeah, I guess so. It seems to be faily accurate as a predictor. Where do you get your DIPS data from?

Espn has it. YOu have to go to sortable and go to Sab stats.

[TyCobb]

First off, it is DIPS not DISP.

As for the 65% thing you'll have to go back in this thread and read the post in which I said where I came up with that number.

I tend to agree with your second part - depending on what you mean by 1 point. If it is a question of 3.29 ERA vs 3.30 DIPS, then I agree pretty much completely.

I have also stated that it should just be one indicator. If there's a big difference between ERA and DIPS, the next step should be to try to figure out why.

Sorry, if you haven't notice I am a pretty bad writer. Ok what I mean by one point thing is this: IF Player A has an ERA of 4 and a DIPS of 3, I would think there would be around a 95% chance he is going to improve in ERA next season.

[PaulFolk]

Why are you always signling me out? Isn't the rule generally to not discuss rep point matters on the main boards and to take it up on PM?

I got repped by 2 people because I called someone ignorant and made the mistake of throwing a 'freaking' in, for which I immediately apologized. One of them then proceeded to call me a ***** in his rep, and the other I would gladly explain to him over PM, while they're all talking to the board about how I'm so immature and such to do that while the adults are the ones typing to a kid that he's a ***** in a rep. LedZepp's conduct was despicable, not mine.

I don't know what you mean by "always singling you out," since this is the first time I've mentioned it. I'm just talking about this thread in particular, in which many of your comments have been condescending, abrasive, and downright immature, as if you're trying to start a fight. We've seen in the past that you're a much, much better poster than this. You've got a lot of interesting things to say. Just work on how you say them.

That's the last I'll say of it in this thread, since there's an actual baseball discussion going on now.

[66-70-83-??]

I feel bad for people so uneducated in statistical analysis that they know less about baseball than everyone on the forum.

Completely untrue. That is a ridiculous statement.

Because one has the ability and enjoys crunching numbers doesn't mean he knows "baseball". It only means he knows baseball statistics.

"Baseball" is so much more than statistics.

[Fairfax Bird]

"Baseball" is so much more than statistics.

I can't believe you just said this! That can't be true.

[bryanman8]

Completely untrue. That is a ridiculous statement.

Because one has the ability and enjoys crunching numbers doesn't mean he knows "baseball". It only means he knows baseball statistics.

"Baseball" is so much more than statistics.

By your reasoning, no one on this message board that cares about baseball knows less about baseball than anyone.

Someone who completely distrusts stats entirely and still thinks BA is better than OBP and uses wins to evaluate pitchers and so on and so forth are TyCobb's list of statistical deficiencies is a perfect candidate to be the one who understands this day and age of baseball the least.

It may not be nice, but that doesn't make it untrue or ridiculous.

[TyCobb]

By your reasoning, no one on this message board that cares about baseball knows less about baseball than anyone.

Someone who completely distrusts stats entirely and still thinks BA is better than OBP and uses wins to evaluate pitchers and so on and so forth are TyCobb's list of statistical deficiencies is a perfect candidate to be the one who understands this day and age of baseball the least.

It may not be nice, but that doesn't make it untrue or ridiculous.

I don't know why you keep saying I don't know baseball. I guess that is your opinion but we all have bad days so I aint mad at ya.

[bryanman8]

I don't know why you keep saying I don't know baseball. I guess that is your opinion but we all have bad days so I aint mad at ya.

Yes, it is my opinion. You're well aware of it, and I'm well aware of your opinion that I've never watched a baseball game before.

[Fairfax Bird]

By your reasoning, no one on this message board that cares about baseball knows less about baseball than anyone.

Someone who completely distrusts stats entirely and still thinks BA is better than OBP and uses wins to evaluate pitchers and so on and so forth are TyCobb's list of statistical deficiencies is a perfect candidate to be the one who understands this day and age of baseball the least.

It may not be nice, but that doesn't make it untrue or ridiculous.

Stats are great and the fact that you all know stats so well is incredible, I appreciate the opportunity to learn new things from it.

That said, there is a guy I go to Frederick ball games with about twice a year. He has been watching baseball for 40 years. Doesn't do stats, but has forgotten more than you or I will ever know about the game of baseball. It is awesome, it isn't the end all be all.

[Fairfax Bird]

Yes, it is my opinion. You're well aware of it, and I'm well aware of your opinion that I've never watched a baseball game before.

You need to chill a bit.

[TonySoprano]

By your reasoning, no one on this message board that cares about baseball knows less about baseball than anyone.

Someone who completely distrusts stats entirely and still thinks BA is better than OBP and uses wins to evaluate pitchers and so on and so forth are TyCobb's list of statistical deficiencies is a perfect candidate to be the one who understands this day and age of baseball the least.

It may not be nice, but that doesn't make it untrue or ridiculous.

That's not what he meant. He didn't make a blanket statement about the posters here, unlike what you did. Anyone with a computer can look up the numbers. I have as much, if not more, respect for the knowledge of the people who understand the fundamentals and the strategies of how the game is played.

[mweb]

I have taken great pains to try to stay neutral in this discussion.

If you want to think I said the same thing, there's not a lot I can do about it. Depends on whether you consider 65% accuracy (by one simple measure) to be good or bad.

Again, I'm not saying 65% is bad, I think that's pretty good, I'm just saying that it's much lower than Bryan would have led everyone to believe, which is why I'm saying we are basically in agreement on the topic.

It doesn't matter because DIPS ERA is telling us how well the guy pitched independent of his defense in a particular season. Just as ERA is telling us how well he pitched with the help (or detriment) of his defense.

A lot of things that would seem to be logical aren't. I suspect that DIPS 3.0 (which takes batted ball data into account) would come closer to doing what you want. The one flaw with the version of DIPS used on ESPN is that it assumes the pitcher has more control over whether a flyball becomes a home run than he really does. To me, that is the biggest reason DIPS% doesn't necessarily correlate.

One thing I'd like to add is that generally speaking there is more season-to-season consistency with DIPS ERA than there is with ERA. There is also more consistency with x-FIP and DIPS 3.0 than there is with DIPS

.

I understand what DIPS is telling us, all I'm saying is it would seem that a guy with a 1.02 DIPS% should be more likely to have an ERA similiar to his prior year than a guy with a 1.31 DIPS%. So I guess you're saying that's not the case.

[bryanman8]

That's not what he meant. He didn't make a blanket statement about the posters here, unlike what you did. Anyone with a computer can look up the numbers. I have as much, if not more, respect for the knowledge of the people who understand the fundamentals and the strategies of how the game is played.

I didn't make a blanket statement either. My comments were made only in response to TyCobb, who is Joe Morgan without the understanding of fundamentals and the strategies of how the game is played, IMO.

Again, not the nicest comments in the world, but neither are his continuous insinuations that I don't watch baseball games. I wasn't talking about any poster but him.