Maybe l'm out of line but

[ledzepp8]

I think this is a worthwhile topic. I too enjoy the advanced metrics and digging into numbers. However, now I hyper evaluate players to the numbers and there is always something that leaves me wanting on each and ever player. Numbers have helped create a player on paper that I judge eveyone against and it's really not fair.

So yes I do agree that to a degree numbers have taken away from simply just enjoying a player because I'm always holding them to this amazing OBP, power, stikeout to walk ratio paper monster.

There is truth to this. Since they've established all of the advance stats, people think if you aren't worth 5-6 WAR per season, then you aren't worth having...at least imo. Not everyone in the lineup is going to be Mike Trout.

[srock]

Arguing the stats is fun.

So is just enjoying the games.

Its true the former sometimes dominates the latter around here.

That being said, Markakis makes great plays, but at the same time the numbers aren't wrong because he simply doesn't get to enough balls to be a good outfielder. When he does get to them, they yes, he makes great plays. And his arm is fantastic.

[DrungoHazewood]

I think this is a worthwhile topic. I too enjoy the advanced metrics and digging into numbers. However, now I hyper evaluate players to the numbers and there is always something that leaves me wanting on each and ever player. Numbers have helped create a player on paper that I judge eveyone against and it's really not fair.

So yes I do agree that to a degree numbers have taken away from simply just enjoying a player because I'm always holding them to this amazing OBP, power, stikeout to walk ratio paper monster.

The numbers do nothing. They're just information. What's taken away from your enjoyment of the game is your inability to process information in some way that doesn't interfere with your enjoyment.

Maybe all the folks who can't watch baseball without being overwhelmed by a flood of numbers should follow a sport that isn't so readily quantized and analyzed. Soccer fits that bill quite well. Most of my enjoyment of soccer is at a much more subjective level, following the game mostly to witness moments of great athleticism and joy.

[CA-ORIOLE]

Maybe all the folks who can't watch baseball without being overwhelmed by a flood of numbers should follow a sport that isn't so readily quantized and analyzed. Soccer fits that bill quite well. Most of my enjoyment of soccer is at a much more subjective level, following the game mostly to witness moments of great athleticism and joy.

Ehh, I always look for the dribbling ratio.

[Can_of_corn]

Ehh, I always look for the dribbling ratio.

I don't. I find that it is a skill that generally peaks when the player is an infant.

[Guest rochester]

"Many youngsters have learned more math and geography from baseball than in school" ~ me.

[JR Oriole]

While I love the numbers, I think there are players (and moments) over the course of a game or season that seem to go beyond those numbers. In a big situation where the game may hinge on one play, regardless of what you have done up to that point, are you able to come through in that singular situation or not?

The 1995 Braves won 90 games out of 144, and obviously they had great pitching. But their team batting average was .250....which is really low for a world series winner, and especially low given that it was the mid-90s. But that team was a clutch hitting machine....they seemed to get base hits only when it really mattered, and in spots that would just demoralize the opponent. Or they would make a defensive play in a key situation that would just kill you.

Our game last night turned on two plays.....the first was the defensive gem by Markakis. The second was the two-out, bases clearing double by Schoop. These two events killed the White Sox. Markakis' defensive flaws and Schoop's batting average did not matter because in key moments 1 and 2, they absolutely delivered. That is how championships are won.

They have yet to develop a truly accurate stat for a "clutch play" or a "clutch player," but I know it when I see it and I don't need any numbers to validate it.

[DrungoHazewood]

They have yet to develop a truly accurate stat for a "clutch play" or a "clutch player," but I know it when I see it and I don't need any numbers to validate it.

That's the best part about things that are so inscrutable that you can't even prove that they exist: they can be anything for anyone at any time. Whatever you feel at the moment, that is reality. Your favorite player is clutch, because try to prove he isn't.

[weams]

That's the best part about things that are so inscrutable that you can't even prove that they exist: they can be anything for anyone at any time. Whatever you feel at the moment, that is reality. Your favorite player is clutch, because try to prove he isn't.

Well, Nick's Knocks prove he is a magician with the bat.

[flyhighbirds]

Exactly. That's the problem with the eye test. Everybody thinks what they are seeing is what everyone is seeing. When I see balls hang in the air for so long that Jones ends up about as close to it as Nick' date=' the eye test doesn't tell me about Nick's defense that it does other's. It's all subjective.[/quote']

I haven't seen anything drop in front of him that Jones would have caught. I think some of you are really exaggerating how slow he is.

They said Marcus Allen and Jerry Rice were too slow also.

[Tony-OH]

I understand the sentiment, but that's why you don't have to read or contribute to every thread. Some people just like to "enjoy the ride" while others enjoy the analysis portion of the sport. It's ok to be either or.

[Can_of_corn]

I haven't seen anything drop in front of him that Jones would have caught. I think some of you are really exaggerating how slow he is.

They said Marcus Allen and Jerry Rice were too slow also.

I have never seen either one of them come charging in full speed and catch a fly ball before it dropped for a hit.

[JR Oriole]

That's the best part about things that are so inscrutable that you can't even prove that they exist: they can be anything for anyone at any time. Whatever you feel at the moment, that is reality. Your favorite player is clutch, because try to prove he isn't.

I tend to actually notice "clutch" more when I look at the opposition. I feel like there were many instances this year in our games versus the Angels when Trout could have done some damage and really hurt us and we got him out. Compare this to guys like Bernie Williams and Tino Martinez, who spent the entire decade of the 90s destroying us in key situations.

One good stat is RBI that either tie the game or put your team ahead. That is a pretty good measure of clutch for a run producer. You could even take that a step further and measure it from the 6th inning on. But maybe you are a guy that seems to come up with a big walk or hit that puts you on base late in a tight game. I am sure there are stats that track that as well.

Nevertheless, without looking at the numbers I know who I want up in a key situation and who I don't.

[DrungoHazewood]

Well, Nick's Knocks prove he is a magician with the bat.

I consider him more of an offensive thaumaturge, but to each his own.

[DrungoHazewood]

Nevertheless, without looking at the numbers I know who I want up in a key situation and who I don't.

I'm quite sure that you do.