PDA

View Full Version : Another doubter who is using stats to dish the WS


FanofBill
07-15-2005, 12:49 PM
I guess this will happen until the magic number reach 0.

"entering the break, they actually had scored 52 fewer runs than they had in the same number of games last season."

Of course dummy, that's why we let go of Magglio and traded CLee for Pods, they have been saying that all off season, where have you been ?

http://www.sportingnews.com/exclusives/20050715/632268.html

soltrain21
07-15-2005, 12:54 PM
I am really getting tired of all these stat-heads. They miss so much of what is really going in the game. It is a shame because if they actually watched the games as opposed to looking at stat sheets they would see that baseball is actually a really fun game.

moochpuppy
07-15-2005, 01:07 PM
Funny that you never see them comparing the pitching stats. :rolleyes:

Like giving up 68 less earned runs.

Iwritecode
07-15-2005, 01:10 PM
I guess this will happen until the magic number reach 0.

"entering the break, they actually had scored 52 fewer runs than they had in the same number of games last season."

Wow, what a completely useless fact. Comparing this year's team to last year's is totally pointless.

Even with scoring 52 fewer runs, the team has still managed to score more runs than the team they were playing against 58 times this year. That's 10 mores times than the Twins. Compared to last year when they they had a 1/2 game lead at the break...

MUScholar21
07-15-2005, 01:11 PM
I am really getting tired of all these stat-heads. They miss so much of what is really going in the game. It is a shame because if they actually watched the games as opposed to looking at stat sheets they would see that baseball is actually a really fun game.

If they watched the games, they wouldn't have time to come up with obscure stats to tell us why the White Sox aren't going to win (insert division/wild card/ALCS/World Series here). And that just wouldn't be productive, now would it?

Flight #24
07-15-2005, 01:17 PM
Do you think this numbnuts realizes that in his own projection, he has the Twins winning up to 97 games (and that assumes they maintain their pitching rate, which would be record setting....gee, you think that might drop off?).

If the Twins win 97, the Sox have to win 98. Since they already have 58 wins, they have to go 40-35 the rest of the way, for a whopping .533 winning percentage. For a team that's winning so far at a .667 rate, that's a pretty huge collapse.

Exhibit ZZZZZZ in why some stat guys are actually morons. Any real analysis usually involves a step back to see if the result passes any "smell tests". And in this guy's case, there's a smell alright........

Iwritecode
07-15-2005, 01:18 PM
If they watched the games, they wouldn't have time to come up with obscure stats to tell us why the White Sox aren't going to win (insert division/wild card/ALCS/World Series here). And that just wouldn't be productive, now would it?

If the Sox were to win the WS in 6 games they would come up with a whole list of stats to explain why they didn't sweep...

patbooyah
07-15-2005, 01:23 PM
Funny that you never see them comparing the pitching stats. :rolleyes:

Like giving up 68 less earned runs.

i hope this isn't asking too much- but do you know the number of unearned runs this year vs. last?

MisterB
07-15-2005, 01:29 PM
My favorite line:

Though Ozzieball might be a great topic for the media and fans, it's not making that much difference on the field.

Hey, dip**** - take a look at this year's standings compared to last year's and tell me again how "it's not making that much difference on the field". What a ****ing idiot...

nebraskasox
07-15-2005, 01:29 PM
Here's a good example of stats telling only part of the story. The quote below ignores the intangible effect of base stealing threats on the hitter at the plate. An example is the fast balls Tadahito gets when Pods gets on base. I believe it was at Toronto where it seemed pretty obvious to me when Iguchi nailed a fastball into the seats as Pods was dancing around leading off first (or maybe he had already stolen 2nd?), that Scottie's presence affected the pitch to Iguchi. Pods & Tadahito are catalysts for this team that don't always show up in the stats. Besides, the best and ultimate stat is wins and losses. Ozzieball . . . it's an attitude!

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Though Ozzieball might be a great topic for the media and fans, it's not making that much difference on the field. Sure, the Sox lead the majors in stolen bases and attempts, but they've netted only 7.0 stolen base runs (a measure of stolen base efficiency), which is just slightly more than the Red Sox, who have constructed 6.7 stolen base runs on only 26 stolen base attempts. The White Sox's stolen bases aren't resulting in more runs -- entering the break, they actually had scored 52 fewer runs than they had in the same number of games last season."

miker
07-15-2005, 01:39 PM
Figures often beguile me, particularly when I have the arranging of them myself; in which case the remark attributed to Disraeli would often apply with justice and force: "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics."
- Autobiography of Mark Twain

MUScholar21
07-15-2005, 01:59 PM
Here's a good example of stats telling only part of the story. The quote below ignores the intangible effect of base stealing threats on the hitter at the plate. An example is the fast balls Tadahito gets when Pods gets on base. I believe it was at Toronto where it seemed pretty obvious to me when Iguchi nailed a fastball into the seats as Pods was dancing around leading off first (or maybe he had already stolen 2nd?), that Scottie's presence affected the pitch to Iguchi. Pods & Tadahito are catalysts for this team that don't always show up in the stats. Besides, the best and ultimate stat is wins and losses. Ozzieball . . . it's an attitude!

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Though Ozzieball might be a great topic for the media and fans, it's not making that much difference on the field. Sure, the Sox lead the majors in stolen bases and attempts, but they've netted only 7.0 stolen base runs (a measure of stolen base efficiency), which is just slightly more than the Red Sox, who have constructed 6.7 stolen base runs on only 26 stolen base attempts. The White Sox's stolen bases aren't resulting in more runs -- entering the break, they actually had scored 52 fewer runs than they had in the same number of games last season."

It isnt just that either. With nearly everyone a threat to run, defenses have to shift over, which creates bigger holes, and changes the tempo of the game. It dictates windups, forces every one on defense to be very mentally aware, and is generally held that it exhausts players trying to do this. It is more selective decision making, and coming up with a premise and then finding the statistics to prove yourself right.

If I said because it snowed every day I went to work, and didn't snow on the days I didn't go to work, I could say I dictate the weather by whether or not I go to the office. Never mind that I only went to work for two days in the middle of January. This is the kind of crap they are pulling-picking and choosing what they tell the reader.

ShoelessJoeS
07-15-2005, 02:06 PM
I guess this will happen until the magic number reach 0.

"entering the break, they actually had scored 52 fewer runs than they had in the same number of games last season."

Of course dummy, that's why we let go of Magglio and traded CLee for Pods, they have been saying that all off season, where have you been ?

http://www.sportingnews.com/exclusives/20050715/632268.html
ive stopped getting angry at ignorant idiots like this, it seems like everyday someone has something bad to say about the sox. we sox fans actually watch every game and just dont look at the numbers so we know how good they really are. forget all these mediots who have no business writing articles in the first place. ive said it once and ill say it again, but kenny said it best.....WE DONT CARE!

SoxFan78
07-15-2005, 02:08 PM
Why even play the games? Just give the WS crown to the previous winner every year, thats what this guy must think.

"They did X last year in the second half, so they will do X this year in the second half".

Watch a game drillrod

Man Soo Lee
07-15-2005, 02:27 PM
i hope this isn't asking too much- but do you know the number of unearned runs this year vs. last?

49 unearned runs in 162 games last year, 26 in 87 games this year. On the same pace.

fquaye149
07-15-2005, 02:35 PM
49 unearned runs in 162 games last year, 26 in 87 games this year. On the same pace.

But this isn't exactly the whole story, because as Royce Clayton might tell you, Unearned runs come from errors, and errors only come from balls you get to.

We've been making plays that we wouldn't have made last year a lot. We've been turning an insane amount of double plays that last year's combo of manos/willie( and uribe) wouldn't have even attempted.

Not to mention that as average an outfielder as Pods is, he and Dye make our outfield a lot better than the mediocrity (to be generous) of Maggs and Lee.

cheeses_h_rice
07-15-2005, 02:38 PM
I guess this will happen until the magic number reach 0.

"entering the break, they actually had scored 52 fewer runs than they had in the same number of games last season."

Of course dummy, that's why we let go of Magglio and traded CLee for Pods, they have been saying that all off season, where have you been ?

http://www.sportingnews.com/exclusives/20050715/632268.html

...and we won 28 more games than we lost.

Any other intelligent observations?

:rolleyes:

Chicago83
07-15-2005, 03:21 PM
I guess this will happen until the magic number reach 0.

"entering the break, they actually had scored 52 fewer runs than they had in the same number of games last season."

Of course dummy, that's why we let go of Magglio and traded CLee for Pods, they have been saying that all off season, where have you been ?

http://www.sportingnews.com/exclusives/20050715/632268.html

Because everyone knows the more runs you score the more you win.

Huisj
07-15-2005, 04:10 PM
What was Yogi Berra's old quote? "Baseball is 90% mental -- the other half is physical."

Ok, obviously it's dumb old cliche of a quote, but maybe these stat guys who think they know everything should take a look at it again. Stats tell what happened, and they may show trends in some situations, but they don't have some magical cause-and-effect power over the games that are yet to be played like these folks seem to believe.

Stat heads totally disregard how the mental aspect of certain situations can affect the outcome of a game. They treat players as robots who should always balance out to what they expect them to be, rather than treating them as humans who have emotions, strengths, and weaknesses that can be exploited or can boost performance.

fquaye149
07-15-2005, 07:17 PM
My favorite line:



Hey, dip**** - take a look at this year's standings compared to last year's and tell me again how "it's not making that much difference on the field". What a ****ing idiot...

lol - looks like ozzie ball is rubbing off on you! Looks like he's got an enemy and he doesn't know what you can do to **** him

Baseballfan22
07-15-2005, 08:08 PM
The amount of runs we've scored in relation to last year means nothing. What matters is when we score our runs, winning in close games, and solid pitching, which is what the sox have had all year.

MeanFish
07-15-2005, 10:19 PM
This is a horrible, horrible comparison in so many ways. Let's count them, shall we?

1.) Last year's team was in first place at this time too...and only fell off when we lost the middle of the batting order for the second half. Give me any team in the league and take away their 3 and 4 hitters. Then watch them plummet. Let's not pretend last year's team, if healthy, was bad, but let's not pretend this year's isn't a lot better either.

2.) Pitching, pitching, pitching. We have it this year, didn't last year.

3.) Defense, defense, defense. It's way better this time around.

4.) Frank Thomas. This guy could singlehandedly put us back on pace for the kind of run production we had last year when he was healthy. He's the catalyst, and they'd be retarded not to notice it.

5.) Despite being worse offensively, we're still an above-average team offensively. The Angels are often touted as a great offensive club, and last time I checked we were superior in almost every way. So what gives?