Asking For A Stats Guru Explanation

[weams]

I'm not sure if my numbers were in the right order. I was just listing things that came to mind. A hit is better than a walk, but most times you'd rather have 7 hits and 3 walks in a game than 8 hits and no walks. But you might prefer six hits and no walks if three of the hits were homers. Over 162 games, OBP usually correlates better with runs than BA or SLG, but BA is the biggest and most important part of OBP. And it's hard to walk a lot unless you have some batters that pitchers fear, so SLG feeds OBP to an extent.

Thank you for the explanation. I appreciate your knowledge.

[Old#5fan]

I'm not sure if my numbers were in the right order. I was just listing things that came to mind. A hit is better than a walk, but most times you'd rather have 7 hits and 3 walks in a game than 8 hits and no walks. But you might prefer six hits and no walks if three of the hits were homers. Over 162 games, OBP usually correlates better with runs than BA or SLG, but BA is the biggest and most important part of OBP. And it's hard to walk a lot unless you have some batters that pitchers fear, so SLG feeds OBP to an extent.[/quote\]

Thanks. Even though some people here think I am a moron I do understand your fairly complex explanation that there are many stats that are inter-related and for that reason alone will vary in importance when trying to analyze why a team is under performing.

[weams]

I'm not sure if my numbers were in the right order. I was just listing things that came to mind. A hit is better than a walk, but most times you'd rather have 7 hits and 3 walks in a game than 8 hits and no walks. But you might prefer six hits and no walks if three of the hits were homers. Over 162 games, OBP usually correlates better with runs than BA or SLG, but BA is the biggest and most important part of OBP. And it's hard to walk a lot unless you have some batters that pitchers fear, so SLG feeds OBP to an extent.

Thanks. Even though some people here think I am a moron I do understand your fairly complex explanation that there are many stats that are inter-related and for that reason alone will vary in importance when trying to analyze why a team is under performing.

Cut the martyr bit. No one, and certainly not me, call you a name. In fact. I do not want you ever using that word here. And I do get to say that. You know exactly what you did. Frobby told you he did not rank the numbers for your edification or in order of importance. In fact what he just did was prove you wrong. So you don't need to keep this thread going I guess.

[scOtt]

Somehow I'll bet you're NOT asking for any explanation! Probably hoping NO one has an explanation. Just to "prove" how smart you and your "eye" is.

[BRobinsonfan]

I am reminded of something Mark Twain was fond of saying. "Some people use statistics like a drunk uses a lamp post. More for support than illumination."

[Old#5fan]

Cut the martyr bit. No one, and certainly not me, call you a name. In fact. I do not want you ever using that word here. And I do get to say that. You know exactly what you did. Frobby told you he did not rank the numbers for your edification or in order of importance. In fact what he just did was prove you wrong. So you don't need to keep this thread going I guess.

Well I agree and do not dispute anything you say but there was an inference or tone in a few posts in this thread that indicated my question were lacking value, wacky, etc. and you can't deny that either.

[ledzepp8]

I do get that of course - Frobby explained it extremely well in a singular response post. However, based on his explanation total hits would seem to rank no higher than maybe 5th or 6th on the scale of importance in scoring runs. This is actually what I am trying to gain a grasp thereof - so is that more or less a fair take?

You're trying to be obtuse aren't you? He didn't rank anything on a scale of importance. He simply pointed out that when someone like you looks solely at total # of hits, that you lack other contextual information needed like OBP, SLUG (getting extra bases instead of just singles), moving runners over, not making outs on the basepaths, etc.

[BRobinsonfan]

Well I agree and do not dispute anything you say but there was an inference or tone in a few posts in this thread that indicated my question were lacking value, wacky, etc. and you can't deny that either.

Everyone who has been here for any length of time knows EXACTLY what you were trying to do.

[ledzepp8]

Everyone who has been here for any length of time knows EXACTLY what you were trying to do.

Pretty much...

[weams]

Well I agree and do not dispute anything you say but there was an inference or tone in a few posts in this thread that indicated my question were lacking value, wacky, etc. and you can't deny that either.

Why don't you say who it was that questioned your virtue in this? Had the situation not been such that it was attempting to lead the witnesses...well. I will always allow you the trap door of "wackiness" if you choose to take it. But do not for one second think that I will allow those who are not familiar with your style points to have direction.

[weams]

You're trying to be obtuse aren't you? He didn't rank anything on a scale of importance. He simply pointed out that when someone like you looks solely at total # of hits, that you lack other contextual information needed like OBP, SLUG (getting extra bases instead of just singles), moving runners over, not making outs on the basepaths, etc.

Frobby was great here. And by deflection, the thread actually gained great value in helping those who may not know the math of runs scored to have a much easier understanding. It was unfortunately a ricochet from the OP's intent. The Orioles don't stink because they can't score all their baserunners. They don't score all of them because of all the issues Frobby pointed out. And even more reasons.

[BRobinsonfan]

Frobby was great here. And by deflection, the thread actually gained great value in helping those who may not know the math of runs scored to have a much easier understanding. It was unfortunately a ricochet from the OP's intent. The Orioles don't stink because they can't score all their baserunners. They don't score all of them because of all the issues Frobby pointed out. And even more reasons.

One of those being small sample size, which the OP pretends to never understand.

[Old#5fan]

M

Frobby was great here. And by deflection, the thread actually gained great value in helping those who may not know the math of runs scored to have a much easier understanding. It was unfortunately a ricochet from the OP's intent. The Orioles don't stink because they can't score all their baserunners. They don't score all of them because of all the issues Frobby pointed out. Andeven more reasons.

Yeah and after watching some of today's game as well as some of the Nats (who happen to be playing well, I am seeing that the Orioles don't just stink because their hits versus runs ratio is awful lately but their starting pitching stinks!!

[Old#5fan]

I am reminded of something Mark Twain was fond of saying. "Some people use statistics like a drunk uses a lamp post. More for support than illumination."

Twain was a brilliant writer and one of the greatest quoters ever. I like the one where he said a good sermon must be both clear and brief with the latter of the most importance (or something similar). :laughlol:

[BRobinsonfan]

M

Yeah and after watching some of today's game as well as some of the Nats (who happen to be playing well, I am seeing that the Orioles don't just stink because their hits versus runs ratio is awful lately but their starting pitching stinks!!

Old#5fan is never quite so happy as when the Orioles lose.