Starlin Castro All-Star?

[DewsSox79]

Your post here reminded something I thought about the old school stats vs sabermetrics, and that is really what is the function of stats. When looking at what players did I think there isn't a problem at looking at some of the older stats. So when determining an honor like being named to the All-Star Game looking at ERA is the right thing because what matters at the end of the day is the number of runs a pitcher gives up. Things like FIP and K/9 are much better predictors of future performance however. And that is where things like luck come into play, and where we can talk about Garza most likely going to be the Cubs best starter the rest of the way this year. A subtle distinction but an important one when we are talking about awards like this.

Sabermetrics are NOT stats, a stat is something known to be true. If you want to look at it and add it to an arsenal of stats available for the fans plus the eyes that is fine. you cannot use FIP to determine all star or by grading a pitcher solely on FIP. it isnt old skool vs saber here. FIP is way to subjective, and is highly flawed and not REAL

 

[Rice Cube]

I think we're being a bit circular here, but there is evidence suggesting that FIP is a better evaluator of pitching than ERA is, which we've discussed. Also, at one point, ERA wasn't a stat, and suddenly it was, so while FIP isn't an official MLB statistic, there's nothing that would prevent it from becoming one. Just like IBBs, saves, and quality starts. Nobody denies that SABR stats are flawed...in fact, the baseball nerds in their basements will be the first to tell you why they are flawed. But there's a reason MLB is hiring so many number crunchers into front offices.

 

[DewsSox79]

I think we're being a bit circular here, but there is evidence suggesting that FIP is a better evaluator of pitching than ERA is, which we've discussed. Also, at one point, ERA wasn't a stat, and suddenly it was, so while FIP isn't an official MLB statistic, there's nothing that would prevent it from becoming one. Just like IBBs, saves, and quality starts. Nobody denies that SABR stats are flawed...in fact, the baseball nerds in their basements will be the first to tell you why they are flawed. But there's a reason MLB is hiring so many number crunchers into front offices.

FIP will never be a stat unless the formula is changed to where the information gathered is actual fact.

 

[Rice Cube]

FIP will never be a stat unless the formula is changed to where the information gathered is actual fact.

The formula is weighted weird because they're trying to make it look like ERA to satisfy people who would otherwise be turned off by advanced metrics. The underlying fact is that if you were to pick a pitcher, you'd want one who walked few batters, struck out as many as possible, and gave up as few homers as possible. That's all FIP is meant to do.

At the end of the day I think most GMs just look at the pitchers who overall gave up the least amount of runs and pick them, because as the saying goes, it's better to be lucky than good

 

[DewsSox79]

The formula is weighted weird because they're trying to make it look like ERA to satisfy people who would otherwise be turned off by advanced metrics. The underlying fact is that if you were to pick a pitcher, you'd want one who walked few batters, struck out as many as possible, and gave up as few homers as possible. That's all FIP is meant to do.

At the end of the day I think most GMs just look at the pitchers who overall gave up the least amount of runs and pick them, because as the saying goes, it's better to be lucky than good

when you look at a career of a pitcher and see the run totals given up and when they are consistent from year to year minus a career year or a off year FIP gets thrown out as a single valuable stat.

 

[Jntg4]

Just the name of FIP makes it different...

Concrete vs. Abstract

Batting Average is concrete, while Fielding Independent Pitching is abstract.
Home Runs are concrete, while Isolated Power is abstract.
Errors are concrete, while Ultimate Zone Rating is abstract.

Not that it means much, but I think that's what Dews means by not real.

 

[Rice Cube]

Just the name of FIP makes it different...

Concrete vs. Abstract

Batting Average is concrete, while Fielding Independent Pitching is abstract.
Home Runs are concrete, while Isolated Power is abstract.
Errors are concrete, while Ultimate Zone Rating is abstract.

Not that it means much, but I think that's what Dews means by not real.

I'm okay with that.

 

[Jntg4]

I'm okay with that.

Ya, I like UZR, but FIP eludes too much IMO.

 

[Jntg4]

I'd like to point out that FIP wasn't meant to be used as a stat for the season, but a method of predicting future success, so it's a different context.

And I can not find a formula for SIERA, anyone know it?

 

[dabynsky]

Sabermetrics are NOT stats, a stat is something known to be true. If you want to look at it and add it to an arsenal of stats available for the fans plus the eyes that is fine. you cannot use FIP to determine all star or by grading a pitcher solely on FIP. it isnt old skool vs saber here. FIP is way to subjective, and is highly flawed and not REAL

And that is almost exactly what I said. I think there are two functions of stats and I use different stats to accomplish that. When I want to look at players retroactively for the value to the team, I tend to lean more towards older stats. When I look at stats to try to predict future performances, then I lean more towards newer statistics. Call it what you want, but a lot of the newer stats do a better job of predicting future outcomes then older stats do.

 

[DewsSox79]

Just the name of FIP makes it different...

Concrete vs. Abstract

Batting Average is concrete, while Fielding Independent Pitching is abstract.
Home Runs are concrete, while Isolated Power is abstract.
Errors are concrete, while Ultimate Zone Rating is abstract.

Not that it means much, but I think that's what Dews means by not real.[/QUOTE]

Statistics are numbers known to be true. If you pop a balloon with a dart at a carnival 9 out of 10 times, you are popping that balloon 90% of the time during those 10 attempted dart throws, that is known to be real. during one of the throws the wind gusted (variable in the throw) and the person missed due to the wind. At that time he still missed even though he was UNLUCKY (the new baseball word for the year) which still puts him at 90% That 90% doesnt change because he was unlucky, so you cannot use a formula to try to gauge the unlucky factor during the time of the throw, if you do the number is still false and not true. Do you get it wrigley?

 

[Jntg4]

Just the name of FIP makes it different...

Concrete vs. Abstract

Batting Average is concrete, while Fielding Independent Pitching is abstract.
Home Runs are concrete, while Isolated Power is abstract.
Errors are concrete, while Ultimate Zone Rating is abstract.

Not that it means much, but I think that's what Dews means by not real.

Statistics are numbers known to be true. If you pop a balloon with a dart at a carnival 9 out of 10 times, you are popping that balloon 90% of the time during those 10 attempted dart throws, that is known to be real. during one of the throws the wind gusted (variable in the throw) and the person missed due to the wind. At that time he still missed even though he was UNLUCKY (the new baseball word for the year) which still puts him at 90% That 90% doesnt change because he was unlucky, so you cannot use a formula to try to gauge the unlucky factor during the time of the throw, if you do the number is still false and not true. Do you get it wrigley?

Ya, I get it... I just suck at explaining.

 

[poodski]

Just the name of FIP makes it different...

Concrete vs. Abstract

Batting Average is concrete, while Fielding Independent Pitching is abstract.
Home Runs are concrete, while Isolated Power is abstract.
Errors are concrete, while Ultimate Zone Rating is abstract.

Not that it means much, but I think that's what Dews means by not real.

IsoP is not abstract....

regardless its not that we don't understand the difference between abstract and concrete. That still doesn't mean that the abstract thing doesn't show you what you want to see.

You all can call it some fake number all you want the fact remains it's still better than any of your concrete stats in determining who is the better fielder/hitter/pitcher.

The argument people keep making is "well they aren't real numbers" that's not an argument. That's a copout because people have no way to prove it doesn't do what we are saying it does. The quicker some of you realize that the better off we all will be.

 

[DewsSox79]

IsoP is not abstract....

regardless its not that we don't understand the difference between abstract and concrete. That still doesn't mean that the abstract thing doesn't show you what you want to see.

You all can call it some fake number all you want the fact remains it's still better than any of your concrete stats in determining who is the better fielder/hitter/pitcher.

The argument people keep making is "well they aren't real numbers" that's not an argument. That's a copout because people have no way to prove it doesn't do what we are saying it does. The quicker some of you realize that the better off we all will be.

It is not a cop out, it is just pure fact. They are NOT real numbers, so I am not going to buy into one metric as the end all be all for a pitcher that is subjective and not known to be true. Start looking at all the statisics that are available to you and use all the metrics that are available to you instead of just the cherry picked metric that backs up your case....the quicker you realize that the better off we will all be.

 

[poodski]

It is not a cop out, it is just pure fact. They are NOT real numbers, so I am not going to buy into one metric as the end all be all for a pitcher that is subjective and not known to be true. Start looking at all the statisics that are available to you and use all the metrics that are available to you instead of just the cherry picked metric that backs up your case....the quicker you realize that the better off we will all be.

LOL how many stats do I need to post? I am not going sit here and post 14 different stats to back up my statement, when one will suffice. Even when I post 14 different stats you will point out one you don't like there fore making my entire point null and void. It's generally a waste of time discussing things with someone like you who never goes on the offensive just goes on the defensive and rather thing bringing anything up yourself you would rather just pick apart what others bring to the table. I am not going to post AVG, OBP, SLG, OPS, WPA, wRC+, wRAA, OPS+, and a myriad of other stats when I can just use wOBA. It's just not going to happen. Rarely do you bring anything up you just wait for someone to slip up and say well those numbers aren't real.

Whether or not they are real or not is just about one of the dumbest arguments you can have about sabermetrics. I mean what do the "concrete" stats REALLY mean? I mean what good is a 350 OBP? I mean what does that REALLY mean? Sure it means they get on base in 35% of their PA, but what does that mean for the team? How many runs does that give them? How many wins does that net them? I mean what do they really mean? The point of baseball is not who gets on base the most or who has the highest BA or the lowest ERA. It's about scoring runs, and sabermetric stats like FIP and wOBA show that.

You can call them not real all you want, which is basically your only argument, but that doesn't change the fact that they are leap years ahead of "real" stats.

Oh and BTW, its a huge cop out.

 

[nwfisch]

Those numbers aren't presumed to be real because I don't understand them. I asked for clarifcation once, and I was called an idiot for not being able to use google. I looked up the stat and I still didn't know what it meant.

 

[Rice Cube]

Those numbers aren't presumed to be real because I don't understand them. I asked for clarifcation once, and I was called an idiot for not being able to use google. I looked up the stat and I still didn't know what it meant.

Which one? Talk to me on Facebook.

 

[daddies3angels]

Those numbers aren't presumed to be real because I don't understand them. I asked for clarifcation once, and I was called an idiot for not being able to use google. I looked up the stat and I still didn't know what it meant.

i agree. I dont care or do i want to ever care for those sabermetric stats. There was nothing wrong with regular stats for over 100 years.

 

[DewsSox79]

LOL how many stats do I need to post? I am not going sit here and post 14 different stats to back up my statement, when one will suffice. Even when I post 14 different stats you will point out one you don't like there fore making my entire point null and void. It's generally a waste of time discussing things with someone like you who never goes on the offensive just goes on the defensive and rather thing bringing anything up yourself you would rather just pick apart what others bring to the table. I am not going to post AVG, OBP, SLG, OPS, WPA, wRC+, wRAA, OPS+, and a myriad of other stats when I can just use wOBA. It's just not going to happen. Rarely do you bring anything up you just wait for someone to slip up and say well those numbers aren't real.

Whether or not they are real or not is just about one of the dumbest arguments you can have about sabermetrics. I mean what do the "concrete" stats REALLY mean? I mean what good is a 350 OBP? I mean what does that REALLY mean? Sure it means they get on base in 35% of their PA, but what does that mean for the team? How many runs does that give them? How many wins does that net them? I mean what do they really mean? The point of baseball is not who gets on base the most or who has the highest BA or the lowest ERA. It's about scoring runs, and sabermetric stats like FIP and wOBA show that.

You can call them not real all you want, which is basically your only argument, but that doesn't change the fact that they are leap years ahead of "real" stats.

Oh and BTW, its a huge cop out.

wow, you are a waste of time to argue with. you are just as bad as CO. This coming from a guy who would rather be a contender than win a ws because it is a crap shoot. get lost moron.

 

[Rice Cube]

i agree. I dont care or do i want to ever care for those sabermetric stats. There was nothing wrong with regular stats for over 100 years.

Regular stats are what made Jim Hendry give contracts to guys like John Grabow and Aaron Miles And in a way, it's what made Jim Hendry give a big fat contract to Alfonso Soriano.