Why is baseball discussion revolve around acronyms?

[Rush]

Just looking in some threads and usually arguments are made with many different variations of acronyms, most relating to some sort of formula with several different factors involved. Why is that?

I am not bashing it at a solid stance for discussion, but baseball seems to be one of the only sports where these acronyms are so heavily used and calculated. Anybody else ever notice this?

 

[DewsSox79]

Rush FTW

 

[The Bandit]

Because in baseball their are so many different stats and a lot of them factor into a lot of different things. Baseball revolves around them if you have a guy with a better UZR (im not a big stat freak) hes usually the better player overall. basketball the only stats there are is ft % shooting % 3pt % and etc. baseball there are far more stats used from uzr to rbis to homeruns to era to batting average, slugging, obp, ops etc etc etc etc.

 

[Captain Obvious]

I don't know about you, but I am not going to type out Fielder Independent Pitching every time. It's just easier.

 

[AddisonStation]

Because no one can watch every baseball game and people want stats that give a more accurate depiction of how skilled a player is. Many traditional statistics are extremely deceiving and dependent on other factors.

 

[Captain Obvious]

Because no one can watch every baseball game and people want stats that give a more accurate depiction of how skilled a player is. Many traditional statistics are extremely deceiving and dependent on other factors.

I love you.

 

[DewsSox79]

Because no one can watch every baseball game and people want stats that give a more accurate depiction of how skilled a player is. Many traditional statistics are extremely deceiving and dependent on other factors.

Like made up zones and such...i know.

 

[DewsSox79]

Just looking in some threads and usually arguments are made with many different variations of acronyms, most relating to some sort of formula with several different factors involved. Why is that?

I am not bashing it at a solid stance for discussion, but baseball seems to be one of the only sports where these acronyms are so heavily used and calculated. Anybody else ever notice this?

These acronyms are very rarely interpreted correctly or even understood. There are a couple of members, one for sure here that understands each one specifically, and uses them all correctly to evaluate talent.

The best part is the people on the radio, callers, message board users etc who throw them around like crazy but have no clue what they are talking about. It is good stuff, entertaining to say the least.

 

[Lefty]

Well Rush, mainly that is because baseball, as it is played, lends itself to statistical analysis, or at least the isolation of variables. In a given plate appearance, it is the batter, the pitcher and the ballpark, that's about it, everything else is a far-distant second (umpire, catcher, etc.). One-on-one matchups dominate the landscape, and because of that, variables are easily pinpointed, and random statistical noise siphoned out. I guess the only exception (which, in a twist of irony, proves the rule) is fielding: it is decidedly not a one-on-one matchup, and therefore there are many, many more variables that come into play to affect each situation, and thus the calculation of "value", "worth", "production" etc.

And awwww...I think Dew was talking about me!

 

[DewsSox79]

Well Rush, mainly that is because baseball, as it is played, lends itself to statistical analysis, or at least the isolation of variables. In a given plate appearance, it is the batter, the pitcher and the ballpark, that's about it, everything else is a far-distant second (umpire, catcher, etc.). One-on-one matchups dominate the landscape, and because of that, variables are easily pinpointed, and random statistical noise siphoned out. I guess the only exception (which, in a twist of irony, proves the rule) is fielding: it is decidedly not a one-on-one matchup, and therefore there are many, many more variables that come into play to affect each situation, and thus the calculation of "value", "worth", "production" etc.

And awwww...I think Dew was talking about me!

yep! you arent a copy and paste stats guy, and or a cherry picker of specific stats to back your point, you evaluate alot with saber, but in the correct way because you understand it and study the shit out of it. it is good to have someone on the forums that can translate more in depth.

 

[Captain Obvious]

yep! you arent a copy and paste stats guy, and or a cherry picker of specific stats to back your point, you evaluate alot with saber, but in the correct way because you understand it and study the shit out of it. it is good to have someone on the forums that can translate more in depth.

That's pretty frivolous. Grow some balls and say my name. If you are going to do it, do it right.

 

[DewsSox79]

That's pretty frivolous. Grow some balls and say my name. If you are going to do it, do it right.

you have a complex.

anyway, the comment is geared tords all of us, not just you. it is a compliment to him, not a diss to you. we all fall guilty of my post. lets be honest.

 

[AddisonStation]

I've only been reading, using, and learning about saber for a couple years now and I love what I've learned so far but there are definitely times I'm left dumbfounded.

My favorite stat, for that reason, is sill OPS. For me it is the most revealing stat that is easy to calculate and wrap my head around what the number actually means. I'm sure the more I learn the better I'll feel about other stats as well.

I suggest a stickied thread for questions about stats. Or is there already one?

 

[Lefty]

I've only been reading, using, and learning about saber for a couple years now and I love what I've learned so far but there are definitely times I'm left dumbfounded.

My favorite stat, for that reason, is sill OPS. For me it is the most revealing stat that is easy to calculate and wrap my head around what the number actually means. I'm sure the more I learn the better I'll feel about other stats as well.

I suggest a stickied thread for questions about stats. Or is there already one?

Eh, out of all the "new age" stats, OPS is kind of a touchy subject with the SABR community. It treats OBP and SLG as equal-opportunity contributors, which is hardly what all the research (at least the stuff I'm caught up on) indicates: some studies have pegged OBP as being almost four-times as important as SLG.

If you've got your head firmly around OPS, I suggest a move to OPS+. It's still OPS, only adjusted for league and park effects. League average is always 100, 120 is 20 percent above average (in OPS+ points, not OPS straight up) and so on. It's really cool because while it still contains the vagaries of mixing OBP and OPS, it is adjusted for league and park, meaning it is applicable to all players in all eras.

 

[poodski]

Just looking in some threads and usually arguments are made with many different variations of acronyms, most relating to some sort of formula with several different factors involved. Why is that?

I am not bashing it at a solid stance for discussion, but baseball seems to be one of the only sports where these acronyms are so heavily used and calculated. Anybody else ever notice this?

Because baseball correlates. It's really as simple as that. In football for instance there are just so many more intangibles. Turnovers play a huge part of this. A team could get a ton of yards, but if you turn the ball over a lot you are going to lose quite a bit. Look at the Chargers earlier in the year. Best offense, best defense, but can't hold on to the ball and can't create turnovers turns into a poor record.

Baseball I think works this way because its the only main stream sport where you are given this many chances. Once those chances are up its over. There is no fake out after 3 outs. Once you have three outs you are done. There is nothing you can do to keep the ball (hit again). You can't after you are done try an onside kick to get the ball back.

There is no way to score when on defense. The only thing you can do is prevent a score from happening. When you score you still get to try. Baseball is also the only sport where you are not done until you have used all your outs. You can be down by 20 runs with one out to go and still win. In football if you are down by 20 with 3 seconds left, you are done.

In baseball you are given 27 outs to play with. 3 at a time. You know exactly how many innings, and how many opportunities you have. With other sports you are on a time. You have no clue how many times you will get the ball.

Regardless the long and the short of it is, baseball is very defined. The goals are defined, the parameters are defined. Everything is set up. Football and basketball turnovers play such a huge part (especially when you take them back for a score without ever going on offense). This is why baseball correlates so well, and this is why statistics are so widely used.

 

[poodski]

I've only been reading, using, and learning about saber for a couple years now and I love what I've learned so far but there are definitely times I'm left dumbfounded.

My favorite stat, for that reason, is sill OPS. For me it is the most revealing stat that is easy to calculate and wrap my head around what the number actually means. I'm sure the more I learn the better I'll feel about other stats as well.

I suggest a stickied thread for questions about stats. Or is there already one?

If you are serious about wanting to learn more I would suggest you take a look at getting the following book:

[ame=http://www.amazon.com/Book-Playing-Percentages-Baseball/dp/1597971294/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&qid=1293028678&sr=8-5]Amazon.com: The Book: Playing the Percentages in Baseball (9781597971294): Tom M. Tango, Mitchel Lichtman, Andrew Dolphin, Pete Palmer: Books[/ame]

Its really the best book out there for learning the modern stats.

 

[Lefty]

What does this have to do with anything? And yes, Derek Jeter is a horrendous fielder, by many accounts the worst in the league. What do you want from me?

 

[AddisonStation]

Eh, out of all the "new age" stats, OPS is kind of a touchy subject with the SABR community. It treats OBP and SLG as equal-opportunity contributors, which is hardly what all the research (at least the stuff I'm caught up on) indicates: some studies have pegged OBP as being almost four-times as important as SLG.

If you've got your head firmly around OPS, I suggest a move to OPS+. It's still OPS, only adjusted for league and park effects. League average is always 100, 120 is 20 percent above average (in OPS+ points, not OPS straight up) and so on. It's really cool because while it still contains the vagaries of mixing OBP and OPS, it is adjusted for league and park, meaning it is applicable to all players in all eras.

If you are serious about wanting to learn more I would suggest you take a look at getting the following book:

Amazon.com: The Book: Playing the Percentages in Baseball (9781597971294): Tom M. Tango, Mitchel Lichtman, Andrew Dolphin, Pete Palmer: Books

Its really the best book out there for learning the modern stats.

Thanks guys. Ya ill do some more research on OPS+. Thats actually one stat I've not read much about. Ive been drawn to wOBA lately... Seems to have pretty good criteria. Thoughts on wOBA?

 

[poodski]

What does this have to do with anything? And yes, Derek Jeter is a horrendous fielder, by many accounts the worst in the league. What do you want from me?

By what accounts is Jeter the worst in the league?

He is bad sure but there are worse SS's out there. Specifically Yuni Betancourt, Orlando Cabrera, and Ronny Cedeno.

 

[poodski]

Thanks guys. Ya ill do some more research on OPS+. Thats actually one stat I've not read much about. Ive been drawn to wOBA lately... Seems to have pretty good criteria. Thoughts on wOBA?

wOBA is a nice stat when trying to figure out how much better a player is than another. Its pretty easy to break wOBA difference into runs.

Personally for 99% of discussions OPS/OPS+ is just fine. It gives you what you need to know, and it is pretty easily understood these days.

The difference between OPS and wOBA isn't really enough for it to matter on an internet discussion board, unless you are talking amongst several people that know what they are talking about.