Garza isn't as bad as you think

[AddisonStation]

show me a stat that isn't.

obp?

 

[DewsSox79]

Show me a stat that isn't.

It really isnt even a stat. I would know just a tad about stats from my schooling and career. It is not real, it is more of a hypothesis on a specific pitcher.

"Obviously, pitchers do have an influence on some of the balls in play. Some hits go right to the pitcher, who has to make a play and sometimes it is the pitcher's fault if a ball falls for a hit rather than being an out. This equation assumes that a pitcher has absolutely no control over a ball in play. Unfortunately, this assumption is wrong."

 

[AddisonStation]

The ONLY difference is that xFIP uses league-average HR rate instead of their own. Beyond that, xFIP too shows what they actually did.

I hope you know that FIP isn't even all that good. It completely takes balls in play out of the equation, which may seems good, but there are issues with that.
FIP=[(13HR+3BB-2K)/IP]+3.10

So if a pitcher lobs it right down the middle of the plate, the batter is going to swing and make solid contact that often the defense would have no conceivable chance of playing. But with FIP, the pitcher gets away with that completely and it is not reflected at all. It takes away defensive mistakes, yes, but it also takes solid contact pitchers allow completely out of the equation, which is why I don't like it.

Whats wrong with a stat that shows how well a pitcher does on aspects of the game he has complete control over?

I'm not going to use FIP or any stat or metric on its own but i don't the problem with FIP. It definitely gauges what pitchers have entire control over.

 

[DewsSox79]

obp?

Fact: A statistic does not have flaws.

So when we talk about sabermetrics, we should NOT be using the word STATISTIC along side it. I do that out of habit and I should probably stop.

 

[DewsSox79]

Whats wrong with a stat that shows how well a pitcher does on aspects of the game he has complete control over?

I'm not going to use FIP or any stat or metric on its own but i don't the problem with FIP. It definitely gauges what pitchers have entire control over.

Well played.

 

[Captain Obvious]

The ONLY difference is that xFIP uses league-average HR rate instead of their own. Beyond that, xFIP too shows what they actually did.

I hope you know that FIP isn't even all that good. It completely takes balls in play out of the equation, which may seems good, but there are issues with that.
FIP=[(13HR+3BB-2K)/IP]+3.10

So if a pitcher lobs it right down the middle of the plate, the batter is going to swing and make solid contact that often the defense would have no conceivable chance of playing. But with FIP, the pitcher gets away with that completely and it is not reflected at all. It takes away defensive mistakes, yes, but it also takes solid contact pitchers allow completely out of the equation, which is why I don't like it.

You don't need to tell me what fangraphs says, I've read it.

FIP most certainly is *that* good.

How is a pitcher in control of the ball once it is in play? The short answer is he isn't. Unless you can prove to me otherwise, which honestly, I'd love to see you try.

 

[Jntg4]

Whats wrong with a stat that shows how well a pitcher does on aspects of the game he has complete control over?

I'm not going to use FIP or any stat or metric on its own but i don't the problem with FIP. It definitely gauges what pitchers have entire control over.

Is it not the pitcher's fault if he puts a fastball right down the middle and the batter hits it off the wall?

Point is, CO treats FIP as if it determines how good a pitcher is, when all it really determines is how often he gives up home runs, walks batters, and or strikes out batters. There is more to pitching that homers, walks, and K's.

 

[DewsSox79]

You don't need to tell me what fangraphs says, I've read it.

FIP most certainly is *that* good.

How is a pitcher in control of the ball once it is in play? The short answer is he isn't. Unless you can prove to me otherwise, which honestly, I'd love to see you try.

it ignores the defense on both sides, good and bad plays.

 

[Jntg4]

You don't need to tell me what fangraphs says, I've read it.

FIP most certainly is *that* good.

How is a pitcher in control of the ball once it is in play? The short answer is he isn't. Unless you can prove to me otherwise, which honestly, I'd love to see you try.

Batter gets solid contact on a terrible pitch, a sinker that stayed up and didn't break) and it hits the Green Monster. is that the outfielder's fault he didn't catch it when it was impossible to, or the pitcher's fault that he left it up in the zone?

 

[DewsSox79]

Batter gets solid contact on a terrible pitch, a sinker that stayed up and didn't break) and it hits the Green Monster. is that the outfielder's fault he didn't catch it when it was impossible to, or the pitcher's fault that he left it up in the zone?

:rofl:

Well, he technically didnt have control over that. haha

stupid debate.

 

[Captain Obvious]

obp?

OBP most certainly is flawed. Last year, Nyjer Morgan and Cliff Pennington both had .319 OBPs. That says that they are equal. However, they certainly aren't, as Pennington has a much higher SLG. We could get into base running, but I think you see the point.

It really isnt even a stat. I would know just a tad about stats from my schooling and career. It is not real, it is more of a hypothesis on a specific pitcher.

"Obviously, pitchers do have an influence on some of the balls in play. Some hits go right to the pitcher, who has to make a play and sometimes it is the pitcher's fault if a ball falls for a hit rather than being an out. This equation assumes that a pitcher has absolutely no control over a ball in play. Unfortunately, this assumption is wrong."

How is it not a stat? I would love to know this.

Yes, the pitcher has a very slight control over a ball in play. However, that is so small and he doesn't have complete control over it.

Whats wrong with a stat that shows how well a pitcher does on aspects of the game he has complete control over?

I'm not going to use FIP or any stat or metric on its own but i don't the problem with FIP. It definitely gauges what pitchers have entire control over.

Fact: A statistic does not have flaws.

So when we talk about sabermetrics, we should NOT be using the word STATISTIC along side it. I do that out of habit and I should probably stop.

How does a statistic not have a flaw? Where do you see this at?

You can look at just about every definition of sabermetrics, they all use the words statistical or statistics. So I don't see why we shouldn't use the words next to each other. I would love to hear your reasoning behind it.

 

[AddisonStation]

Fact: A statistic does not have flaws.

So when we talk about sabermetrics, we should NOT be using the word STATISTIC along side it. I do that out of habit and I should probably stop.

It is if you use it wrong. Like comparing Pujols and Ichiro on batting average.

 

[Jntg4]

OBP most certainly is flawed. Last year, Nyjer Morgan and Cliff Pennington both had .319 OBPs. That says that they are equal. However, they certainly aren't, as Pennington has a much higher SLG. We could get into base running, but I think you see the point.



How is it not a stat? I would love to know this.

Yes, the pitcher has a very slight control over a ball in play. However, that is so small and he doesn't have complete control over it.





How does a statistic not have a flaw? Where do you see this at?

You can look at just about every definition of sabermetrics, they all use the words statistical or statistics. So I don't see why we shouldn't use the words next to each other. I would love to hear your reasoning behind it.

OBP isn't flawed because it isn't meant to show slugging, it is meant to show how often a player gets on base, and it does.

Fine then, OPS.

 

[AddisonStation]

OBP isn't flawed because it isn't meant to show slugging, it is meant to show how often a player gets on base, and it does.

Fine then, OPS.

OPS is flawed because it weights OBP and SLG the same.

 

[Captain Obvious]

Is it not the pitcher's fault if he puts a fastball right down the middle and the batter hits it off the wall?

Point is, CO treats FIP as if it determines how good a pitcher is, when all it really determines is how often he gives up home runs, walks batters, and or strikes out batters. There is more to pitching that homers, walks, and K's.

I'm not saying it isn't. But it goes both ways, if a pitcher makes a perfect pitch and the batter makes contact and hits a bloop double, is it the pitchers fault? No.

it ignores the defense on both sides, good and bad plays.

Exactly. It's non-objective. The pitcher can't control who is behind him(and in front of him)

Batter gets solid contact on a terrible pitch, a sinker that stayed up and didn't break) and it hits the Green Monster. is that the outfielder's fault he didn't catch it when it was impossible to, or the pitcher's fault that he left it up in the zone?

See above.

:rofl:

Well, he technically didnt have control over that. haha

stupid debate.

Not really. It's a pretty decent debate.

 

[Captain Obvious]

OBP isn't flawed because it isn't meant to show slugging, it is meant to show how often a player gets on base, and it does.

Fine then, OPS.

Really you can take any stat and use it the right way or the wrong way. Moral of the story, don't use just one stat. Every statistic is flawed.

 

[DewsSox79]

It is if you use it wrong. Like comparing Pujols and Ichiro on batting average.

The specific statistic BA does not have a flaw. Which has nothing to do with my opinion on BA as a evaluation point.

The simple mathmatics behind BA, is as basic of a statistic you are going to find.

CO has no idea what I am trying to say, I dont expect him to.

OBP most certainly is flawed. Last year, Nyjer Morgan and Cliff Pennington both had .319 OBPs. That says that they are equal. However, they certainly aren't, as Pennington has a much higher SLG. We could get into base running, but I think you see the point.



How is it not a stat? I would love to know this.

Yes, the pitcher has a very slight control over a ball in play. However, that is so small and he doesn't have complete control over it.





How does a statistic not have a flaw? Where do you see this at?

You can look at just about every definition of sabermetrics, they all use the words statistical or statistics. So I don't see why we shouldn't use the words next to each other. I would love to hear your reasoning behind it.

for one, stop stating in each post how you would "love to hear this" you sound like a fucking 12 year old.

Again, the use of the word statistic is used incorrectly, it is a fact that projections, what ifs, Coulda woulda shoulda are not considered what I learned in school as a statistic which was my minor.

They are not 100% known to be true, that is why they cannot be called statistics.

 

[AddisonStation]

The specific statistic BA does not have a flaw. Which has nothing to do with my opinion on BA as a evaluation point.

The simple mathmatics behind BA, is as basic of a statistic you are going to find.

CO has no idea what I am trying to say, I dont expect him to.



for one, stop stating in each post how you would "love to hear this" you sound like a fucking 12 year old.

Again, the use of the word statistic is used incorrectly, it is a fact that projections, what ifs, Coulda woulda shoulda are not considered what I learned in school as a statistic which was my minor.

They are not 100% known to be true, that is why they cannot be called statistics.

I get what your saying. With stats like BA it is what it is. You go 1-3 in a game and you average IS .333. Nothing can change that fact. And ya you're right the stat itself isnt flawed its the misuse and overemphasis of it.

 

[DewsSox79]

I get what your saying. With stats like BA it is what it is. You go 1-3 in a game and you average IS .333. Nothing can change that fact. And ya you're right the stat itself isnt flawed its the misuse and overemphasis of it.

ok now you see what im saying. phew.

 

[Jntg4]

I'm not saying it isn't. But it goes both ways, if a pitcher makes a perfect pitch and the batter makes contact and hits a bloop double, is it the pitchers fault? No.

Are those Homers hit always the pitchers fault? No, but they count in FIP.

RedBalcony > Home Run off Canseco`s Head

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eP2dkn_-GR8]YouTube - Curtis Granderson Inside The Park Homerun[/ame]

etc.

So HR shouldn't count then either I presume? The pitcher couldn't control either of the two I posted. :shrug: