So much for Bill James

[Can_of_corn]

Curiously, Word for word? I have to say, this entire thread has entertained me.

No, I just figured folks would only care about the response.

Let me try El Gordo's question, worded a bit differently. Nick Markakis and Adam Jones have had some pretty big home/road splits in defensive metrics, notably UZR. Maybe in +/-, too. OPACY is Oriole Park at Camden Yards, which is probably an abbreviation only the remaining 26 Oriole fans use. The UZR splits are markedly better on the road than at Camden Yards. But overall by most of these fielding metrics both players come out as average, at best, and often well below average. By reputation they're better. The original question was asking if you know anything about home/road splits in defensive numbers. The question would probably be better for John Dewan, he's the fielding bible guru, but if you have any insight that would be appreciated, too. You did vote for Markakis as the best defensive RFer in the AL, correct?

[CA-ORIOLE]

I got you. I know how hard it can be on a Kindle.

BILL JAMES: It is my opinion that, because we did not grow up with fielding metrics and because we do not have them in all of the permutations and combinations that we have with pitching and hitting numbers, we do not have the depth of understanding of them that we have of the other stats. In my opinion it IS possible for there to be park illusions in these numbers of which we have no understanding and no awareness.

Not exactly the enlightenment we had been hoping for, but not all that surprising. I'm pretty sure he knows more about this issue as related to Fenway Park.

[Gurgi]

Maybe Billy Boy is still smarting after the other "Boy Genius" got ran out town by Andino in OPACY?

[CA-ORIOLE]

I am not asking for specific data only if there is an indication that the same home/away splits are reflected in the FB numbers. As to TZ, I don't discount them any more than I discount UZR or FB numbers. I look to see where there is a general agreement between the 3For example they all agree that Jones is a subpar CF. But only UZR publishes splits. If TZ and FB show a similar home/away trend I would be more inclined to think there are park effects at work..

Well TZ (which I generally discount) does show year by year splits and actually shows Jones with an overall postive home split and a negative away split. Completely opposite of UZR. Also interesting that TZ shows Nick better at home than on the road.

I would also like to see if opposing team players also show poor numbers at Orioles Park at Cambden Yards

Wouldn't we all. Nothing that hasn't already been stated many times.

[Lucky Jim]

Not exactly the enlightenment we had been hoping for, but not all that surprising. I'm pretty sure he knows more about this issue as related to Fenway Park.

That's probably the only legitimate answer, though. I've long thought it likely that there were known-unknowns and unknown-unknowns out there related to (and problematizing) these stats.

[sangar]

Oh, so he isn't stupid, he's merely a liar?

Not at all, he is snarky.

[CA-ORIOLE]

Not at all, he is snarky.

I don't know Bill James personally, but I don't think so. He doesn't come off as a self professed know-it-all or try and talk down to you. He's not going to try and wow you with a mathematical equation that a common person might not understand. He has always impressed me as humble in his writings and the few times I've seen him on TV. I think the answer we eventually got is indicitave of that.

[DuffMan]

ZOMG WTF is up with BJ!?!? IDK what his BFF would think of that response but I was ROTFLMAO!

[Frobby]

It is my opinion that, because we did not grow up with fielding metrics and because we do not have them in all of the permutations and combinations that we have with pitching and hitting numbers, we do not have the depth of understanding of them that we have of the other stats. In my opinion it IS possible for there to be park illusions in these numbers of which we have no understanding and no awareness.

First of all, I want to reiterate my thanks to El Gordo for asking this question, and add my thanks to Drungo for asking it again. And, I'm glad we got a pretty responsive answer.

From the answer, I think James is saying that it is quite possible that the defensive nunbers are not properly taking into account the fields on which the players play. So, I think that just leaves me where I was before -- not totally disregrading UZR, +/- and the like, but not fully trusting them, either. Not very satisfying, but it is what it is.

[DrungoHazewood]

Here's an interesting follow up. James got a question about APBA, the dice and card baseball game, and it included some obscure references to how the game rates fielders. The guy tried to explain and the response was:

It's not really a question of whether I understand it. I can look it up. It's really a question of whether the audience understands it. Once a discussion starts using insider's slang (or argot. ...I think this is actually argot). . .once the discussion starts using that, the audience begins to narrow, and the focus of the discussion begins to narrow. I am always trying to open up the discussion.

[crawjo]

I don't know Bill James personally, but I don't think so. He doesn't come off as a self professed know-it-all or try and talk down to you. He's not going to try and wow you with a mathematical equation that a common person might not understand. He has always impressed me as humble in his writings and the few times I've seen him on TV. I think the answer we eventually got is indicitave of that.

He definitely has a snarky side. I mean, he wrote in his last Bill James Abstract that he was not going to do it anymore in part because he was tired of writing "Dear Asshole" letters to people who critiqued him. (Think about that: was he really spending time writing "Dear Asshole" letters to his critics?) He's always been very snarky. His entire comment on Jeff Bagwell in the Bill James Historical Abstract is simply the word "Pass." Every now and then he likes to be snarky. I'm pretty sure that he knew what OPACY referred to but decided to respond in that way because that's just a part of his personality.

[CA-ORIOLE]

He definitely has a snarky side. I mean, he wrote in his last Bill James Abstract that he was not going to do it anymore in part because he was tired of writing "Dear Asshole" letters to people who critiqued him. (Think about that: was he really spending time writing "Dear Asshole" letters to his critics?) He's always been very snarky. His entire comment on Jeff Bagwell in the Bill James Historical Abstract is simply the word "Pass." Every now and then he likes to be snarky. I'm pretty sure that he knew what OPACY referred to but decided to respond in that way because that's just a part of his personality.

Maybe so. I don't follow him that extensively or his website anymore. Dealing with the general public can be an annoyance imo. Maybe that has changed him. Drungo's response sounds like he didn't reply because it might be lost on his audience and he doesn't care for acronyms. Who knows. Lesson learned: when writing to BJ and hoping to get a response, don't use acronyms and you'll have a better chance.

[blid]

When you ask a question that concerns BALTO fans, involving Nick Markakis' and Adam Jones'UZR spliits, it doesn't take a genius to figure out that the park in question is the Orioles home park. Unless you have completely dismissed the question before giving it a second's thought.

Maybe strange acronyms is one of his pet peeves, and even though he could intuit what you meant he wanted to give a pissy answer.