Most Insignificat/Overrated stat in baseball

[snepp]

Re: Most Insignificat/Overrated stat in baseball

Right, the stats mentioned in this thread are the ones people use most frequently to make judgments on skills or values that the stats don't actually measure.

When you look at RBIs and say, "Wow, Ryan Howard sure has driven in a lot of runs this year!" that's fine. When you look at RBIs and say, "Wow, Ryan Howard is a better player than Albert Pujols,' you're misusing a stat.

It's the same as the people who judge fielding ability solely by errors or fielding percentage. Are they great stats? Not really, they can be quite subjective sometimes. They're probably decent at evaluating what they're intended to measure: how often a player mishandles a ball, resulting in a baserunner. But people get caught in the trap of using those stats as an all-encompassing defensive measure, which they're not.

Well said, that's exactly what I'm trying to saying.

[Knight165]

Re: Most Insignificat/Overrated stat in baseball

IMO there are actually no real "overrated" stats in baseball.....just those who poorly interpret their importance.
If you are looking at one stat in(even multiple variable ones like WHIP) to gauge a players effectiveness or ineffectiveness.....then the real problem is your shortsighted view.
Stop blaming the stats!....they have rights too!
:wink:



M.K.
Knight165

[CMH]

Re: Most Insignificat/Overrated stat in baseball

This has turned into a pretty good discussion.

I feel a little stung by YankeePride mentioning I didn't know about baseball-reference, it is on my tool bar. I knew there probably was a stat that would show it, I just worded it poorly.

Ah, my apologies. I actually didn't mean it in a mean way. I was only trying to let Coug know that you didn't quote the article writer.

I should have worded it differently as well.

[CMH]

Re: Most Insignificat/Overrated stat in baseball

Who determined that 6 innings pitched and 3 runs or less is the definitive official quality start? For instance Friday night. Aaron Cook of the Rockies coming off the DL, throws 5 innings of shutout ball. He exited the 5th with a 1-0 lead against Chris Carpenter and the Cardinals, a team that was 1 win away from clinching their division. Now, in my book, that is a quality start.

I think any starting pitcher that has gone at least 5 that has their team in a position to win the game, ie, game tied or ahead, should be considered having a quality start.

Love seeing comments from all the Official Baseball Rocket Scientists members. If we all just had beers in front of us, bellied up to bar watching a ballgame, this would be perfect.

I wouldn't have a problem if a quality start was changed to 7 innings and 3 earned runs. I think that's more in line with what you want from your starter. A 4.50 ERA start is not quality. It's average. A 3.85 ERA is below the league average and baseball has turned into a bullpen game with the setup man and closer, so I can stomach that.

Of course, if I had the choice, I would eliminate the stat completely because it fails to look at strikeouts, walks, and whether or not the pitcher is winning or losing.

I can see your point about 5 shutout innings, but I agree with everyone else that 5 innings isn't enough.

[Hammerhunker]

Re: Most Insignificat/Overrated stat in baseball

Ah, my apologies. I actually didn't mean it in a mean way. I was only trying to let Coug know that you didn't quote the article writer.

I should have worded it differently as well.

No worries, we're amoung our own here, actually no hurt feelings, just brought an arguement to the table without covering all my bases, a little embarrassing I learned quickly, when pulling up to this table, you better come prepared.

I wouldn't have a problem if a quality start was changed to 7 innings and 3 earned runs. I think that's more in line with what you want from your starter. A 4.50 ERA start is not quality. It's average. A 3.85 ERA is below the league average and baseball has turned into a bullpen game with the setup man and closer, so I can stomach that.

Of course, if I had the choice, I would eliminate the stat completely because it fails to look at strikeouts, walks, and whether or not the pitcher is winning or losing.

I can see your point about 5 shutout innings, but I agree with everyone else that 5 innings isn't enough.

I personally think there is no legitimate benchmark for a quality start. "Someone" created this benchmark to give a tangible view of a "good job." That stat alone can create a lot of discussion and disagreement.

[snepp]

Re: Most Insignificat/Overrated stat in baseball

I used to absolutely hate the quality start stat, not so much anymore (probably because I simply don't look at). It works alright at a macro level, not so much at the individual level.

[Hammerhunker]

Re: Most Insignificat/Overrated stat in baseball

I used to absolutely hate the quality start stat, not so much anymore (probably because I simply don't look at). It works alright at a macro level, not so much at the individual level.

Exactly, macro level. Like I said, the stat doesn't take into account, "circumstance."

[Ewing]

Re: Most Insignificat/Overrated stat in baseball

Couldn't have said it better myself.

I only use BA in splits with OBP and SLG, just to give an idea if it's relevant to the player's real production or not.

[Coug00]

Re: Most Insignificat/Overrated stat in baseball

I only use BA in splits with OBP and SLG, just to give an idea if it's relevant to the player's real production or not.

Yeah, I use BA the same way you do. Its a fine stat as long as its used as a small piece of the puzzle. Using it solely as an identifier that player A is a better hitter than B is wrong. You see and hear things like that all the time in the media and stadiums...and that's why I think its overrated.

[texans]

Re: Most Insignificat/Overrated stat in baseball

So what do you do if you're the D-Backs' hitting coach (or the Phillies with Howard)? Tell him that despite hitting for average, power, and taking a significant number of walks, 200 K's in a season is unacceptable and that he's got to change his approach? Unless you're supremely confident that Reynolds can cut back on the K's while maintaining a high AVG, SLG, and OBP, I'd leave him be. Not everybody can be Albert Pujols.

I agree but back-to-back 200 K seasons is crazy. One of the things Reynolds does is walk an above average amount too, so if I'm his coach I like him, he's not afraid to work a count and not afraid to hit with 2 strikes. Also, nobody can be Albert Pujols, the man's in a class of his own.

Insignificant? Absolutely. Overrated? No, since I can't think of a single commentator/writer/fan who gives a crap about holds.

But they do play a part in free agent negotiations.

[Hammerhunker]

Re: Most Insignificat/Overrated stat in baseball

I agree but back-to-back 200 K seasons is crazy. One of the things Reynolds does is walk an above average amount too, so if I'm his coach I like him, he's not afraid to work a count and not afraid to hit with 2 strikes. Also, nobody can be Albert Pujols, the man's in a class of his own.



But they do play a part in free agent negotiations.

Mark Reynolds and Ryan Howard are so similar with their stats. In strikeouts, Reynolds has k'd 210 times to Howard's 180. Reynolds has walked 74 times; Howard 70. Both of their OBP and Slg %s are nearly the same, and their homerun totals are close. BUT, it is in the RBI category that puts credence to my arguement: Howard has 36 more RBI. Again, if Reynolds were to shave at least 30 strikeouts, man, what would his RBI total be!

Can Mark Reynolds continue his production, even with the strikeouts? Sadly, he was at one time available in my league, and I passed on him because of his propensity to strikeout and my not believing that he could produce in spite of it.

[CMH]

Re: Most Insignificat/Overrated stat in baseball

But they do play a part in free agent negotiations.

By whom?

[snepp]

Re: Most Insignificat/Overrated stat in baseball

Mark Reynolds and Ryan Howard are so similar with their stats. In strikeouts, Reynolds has k'd 210 times to Howard's 180. Reynolds has walked 74 times; Howard 70. Both of their OBP and Slg %s are nearly the same, and their homerun totals are close. BUT, it is in the RBI category that puts credence to my arguement: Howard has 36 more RBI. Again, if Reynolds were to shave at least 30 strikeouts, man, what would his RBI total be!

This is all sorts of wrong, a prime example of why you can not use something like strikeouts and RBI to compare players. They provide none of the context required to arrive at an accurate conclusion.

Reynolds doesn't have Howard's RBI total not because of his strikeouts, but primarily due to a fluke-ishly low BABIP w/RISP (.259 compared to his typical .350-ish mark) and secondarily because of fewer opportunities. Howard has 36 more PA's with runners on base, 11 of those with RISP, while Howard's BABIP is basically in line with his career marks.

Give Reynolds those 36 more PA's with runners on and his typical BABIP and the RBI gap closes significantly.

[Chaos81]

Re: Most Insignificat/Overrated stat in baseball

Team wins. It doesn't matter if your team sucks, it only matters if the manager is a good baseball man and can look into his players eyes.


/Dayton Moore

[snepp]

Re: Most Insignificat/Overrated stat in baseball

Team wins. It doesn't matter if your team sucks, it only matters if the manager is a good baseball man and can look into his players eyes.


/Dayton Moore

"Trust the process."