- Joined:
- May 4, 2010
- Posts:
- 27,077
- Liked Posts:
- 15,145
Your stats tell us that Soriano is good at defense.
Your stats suck. Go back to not posting.
Last edited:
Official Epstein Thread (Epstein baseball side prez/Hoyer is GM)
- Thread starter cubsneedmiracle
- Start date
- Status
Your stats tell us that Soriano is good at defense.
Your stats suck. Go back to not posting.
- Joined:
- Jul 31, 2010
- Posts:
- 4,967
- Liked Posts:
- 697
What tells us that Soriano is bad at defense then? Show me how your stats are better than mine.
- Joined:
- May 4, 2010
- Posts:
- 27,077
- Liked Posts:
- 15,145
Have you ever..ever watched a game of baseball where Soriano played?
I hate to break this to your stupid ass but defensive metrics are incredibly suspect and any metric that tells me Soriano is even tolerable as a MLB LF'er is immediately broken.
My eyeball test>>>>>>>>>>>Your shitty defensive metric.
- Joined:
- Jul 31, 2010
- Posts:
- 4,967
- Liked Posts:
- 697
So you are still stuck on the eyeball test? If the eyeball test is so good, why were advanced metrics even made? If my one metric is so bad, why do so many others agree?
- Joined:
- May 4, 2010
- Posts:
- 27,077
- Liked Posts:
- 15,145
Because the world needs ditch diggers?
Never underestimate the stupidity of people.
- Joined:
- Jul 31, 2010
- Posts:
- 4,967
- Liked Posts:
- 697
Because the world needs ditch diggers?
Never underestimate the stupidity of people.
Except it isn't people, it's numbers. The numbers are telling us that Soriano is good. See, I have evidence backing my point. What do you have? Something you saw, or thought you saw?
- Joined:
- May 4, 2010
- Posts:
- 27,077
- Liked Posts:
- 15,145
That people subjectively set value to and evaluate.
Defensive metrics aren't scientific fact. They aren't even mathematical "stats". They are theoretical equations...
They can be and in this case are highly suspect and wrong. If they weren't you wouldn't have a constant movement to improve them.
I want to act surprised that you don't understand this. But then again you're all of 12 years old.
I also have "numbers" telling me Soriano is a bad fielder. Such as errors. But you will quickly disregard that number showing how it's flawed etc. See where this is going?.......................Are you catching on at all?
- Joined:
- Jul 31, 2010
- Posts:
- 4,967
- Liked Posts:
- 697
That people subjectively set value to and evaluate.
Defensive metrics aren't scientific fact. They aren't even mathematical "stats". They are theoretical equations...
They can be and in this case are highly suspect and wrong. If they weren't you wouldn't have a constant movement to improve them.
I want to act surprised that you don't understand this. But then again you're all of 12 years old.
I also have "numbers" telling me Soriano is a bad fielder. Such as errors. But you will quickly disregard that number showing how it's flawed etc. See where this is going?.......................Are you catching on at all?
I never said they were fact. I don't put much weight on them. However, collectively they can give you a very good idea. Especially 5 seasons worth of data that tells you the exact same thing.
They are wrong because you say so? Just because they aren't perfect does not mean that they are wrong. I agree that they are no where near pitching and batting stats, but like I said when virtually every metric says the same thing for 5+ years, it's hard to argue with that. That kind of consistency in data is much, much, much more reliable than your eye test.
Except the problem with your stat is that it take into account Soriano's worst aspect of fielding. It doesn't take into account the things he does well. Whereas stats like UZR, RZR, etc. do.
- Joined:
- May 4, 2010
- Posts:
- 27,077
- Liked Posts:
- 15,145
:rolling:
It actually does. It means they can be wrong. Which is the entire god damn point.
Not if the metric is and has been flawed for 5 years.
Using a broken metric over and over again doesn't make it any less broken. It just means the information is getting compounded together incorrectly year after year after year.
Not if the data is acquired by using a broken metric.
And UZR disregards and cant measure his horrible paths to baseballs/instincts on flyballs and too easily discounts errors.
Blah blah blah blah blah
- Joined:
- Apr 16, 2010
- Posts:
- 8,003
- Liked Posts:
- 1,105
- Location:
- Behind you
- Joined:
- Apr 10, 2011
- Posts:
- 16,341
- Liked Posts:
- 5,990
That or banning them
Then again, that route failed miserably w/ hawks4realz
Couldn't they just create another screen name?
- Joined:
- Apr 16, 2010
- Posts:
- 8,003
- Liked Posts:
- 1,105
- Location:
- Behind you
That's what hawks4realz did, over 100 times...
I actually made dero and another poster (now banned) temp mods to deal w/ him. And by deal with him, I mean help me ban the account he kept creating.
Back to the topic: Theo>You
- Joined:
- Apr 10, 2011
- Posts:
- 16,341
- Liked Posts:
- 5,990
Theo > all.
:bow:
:bow:
- Joined:
- Jul 31, 2010
- Posts:
- 4,967
- Liked Posts:
- 697
Okay, but you can use any advanced metric and it will show you the same thing. As for it means they can be wrong, yes it does. I never said it didn't. But it doesn't 100% mean that. You have shown me nothing to think that it is wrong.
Sure UZR is flawed, every stat, metric, whatever is. But errors are the most overrated thing ever. Would you rather have a player who makes an error while getting to 9/10 balls or a player who makes no errors while getting to 6/10 balls?
I'm not saying that these stats are perfect, they are far from it. But what they do all have in common is that Soriano is at least an average defender.
- Joined:
- Apr 26, 2010
- Posts:
- 26,017
- Liked Posts:
- 3,297
- Location:
- Minnesota
My favorite teams
- Joined:
- May 28, 2010
- Posts:
- 7,474
- Liked Posts:
- 1,778
Keep it Jay Jackson and Flaherty + money.
That is over enough for Theo to bring as many as he wants.
That is over enough for Theo to bring as many as he wants.
- Joined:
- May 28, 2010
- Posts:
- 7,474
- Liked Posts:
- 1,778
That or banning them
Then again, that route failed miserably w/ hawks4realz
I'd rather show the guy exactly what he looks like.
- Joined:
- May 10, 2010
- Posts:
- 11,225
- Liked Posts:
- 788
Bud Selig wants this to be wrapped up by the World Series. Let's hope this is motivation to get the damn deal done.
- Joined:
- May 4, 2010
- Posts:
- 27,077
- Liked Posts:
- 15,145
............
Last edited:
- Joined:
- May 4, 2010
- Posts:
- 27,077
- Liked Posts:
- 15,145
Do you think it's a coincidence then that defensive metrics are constantly changing and even then they always come with the caveat of "you need 3 years worth of data"?
Are you able to grasp this concept at all?
As for it means they can be wrong, yes it does.
Defensive metrics are absolute dog shit.
I don't buy any of them in any substantial form.
Even stil DSR>UZR.....and that's really not saying much since they both suck.
Watch Soriano play the damn game.
Look at what themetric tells you.
Realize it's wrong.
?
Profit.
That's putting it lightly.
So great. The metric you use to say Soriano isn't terrible is "flawed".
Awesome work.
Soriano's range isn't that good as you imply above. Plus Soriano's range is fucked by the fact that he is sterrible at juding fly balls, hops, routes, etc. That is one of Soriano's biggest issues(along with being just awful at cacthing the ball) in the field and the metrics do not take that into account. Basically the metrics are devaluing or not measuring the two things Soriano is the worst at. So obviously that stat is going to be skewed.
Soriano actually runs himself into errors.
Would I rather have a player with great range who can't judge a fly ball to save his life/ is error prone or a player with marginal range who doesn't make errors?
Hmmmm....
- Status