PDA

View Full Version : Sox' all important VORP critically deficient...


Tragg
10-24-2005, 08:03 PM
in this series against the Astros. As we all know, HOuston's 3rd to best pitcher is Oswalt, and he is better than the Sox best, MB, which gives the Astros an immense pitching edge in 6 of the potential 7 games.
Or so says Baseball Prospectus, which, along with a 72 win club participating in the world series, should have credibility at about zero right now.

Oh, and our pythagorean isn't too sporty either; we didn't take the hypoteneuse of the triangle, I suppose.

Ol' No. 2
10-24-2005, 08:07 PM
in this series against the Astros. As we all know, HOuston's 3rd to best pitcher is Oswalt, and he is better than the Sox best, MB, which gives the Astros an immense pitching edge in 6 of the potential 7 games.
Or so says Baseball Prospectus, which, along with a 72 win club participating in the world series, should have credibility at about zero right now.

Oh, and our pythagorean isn't too sporty either; we didn't take the hypoteneuse of the triange, I suppose.As long as we win 88% of the series, who cares?:wink:

MRKARNO
10-24-2005, 08:10 PM
http://media.scout.com/Media/Image/18/189287.gif
"My **** doesnt work in the postseason"

Palehose13
10-24-2005, 08:19 PM
in this series against the Astros. As we all know, HOuston's 3rd to best pitcher is Oswalt, and he is better than the Sox best, MB, which gives the Astros an immense pitching edge in 6 of the potential 7 games.
Or so says Baseball Prospectus, which, along with a 72 win club participating in the world series, should have credibility at about zero right now.

Oh, and our pythagorean isn't too sporty either; we didn't take the hypoteneuse of the triangle, I suppose.

Is that English?

FarWestChicago
10-24-2005, 09:35 PM
BP crap belongs here since it has all the validity of a conspiracy theory. :redneck

soxfan26
10-24-2005, 10:03 PM
BP crap belongs here since it has all the validity of a conspiracy theory. :redneck

FWC - Your new sig is incredible!

Banix12
10-24-2005, 10:10 PM
You know, I'll bet even Billy Beane probably wants a lot of the Sabremetric fan boys to kind of take it easy on the hero worship.

This world series though could very well be the worst nightmare of a lot of these guys.

FarWestChicago
10-24-2005, 10:20 PM
FWC - Your new sig is incredible!Thanks. It's a gift from Michelle. :thumbsup:

NardiWasHere
10-24-2005, 11:59 PM
Does anyone actually read that junk and think it makes sense? I can't even follow some of the logic for argument sakes

P.S.- I love these sabrmetric threads because Ol No 2 is usually good for one or two hillarious posts....

Banix12
10-25-2005, 12:23 AM
Does anyone actually read that junk and think it makes sense? I can't even follow some of the logic for argument sakes

P.S.- I love these sabrmetric threads because Ol No 2 is usually good for one or two hillarious posts....

I can understand the concepts though I don't agree with all of them and I understand why a lot of GM's think it is a good idea to try and work some risk management into baseball signings and drafting since they are giving millions of dollars to someone who might not pan out.

However Baseball Prospectus is just rediculous. Very smug, their models are never wrong even when it can't come close to predicting accurately. My problem lies with their site and a lot of the sabremetric fanboys more than the actual GM's that subscribe to this tenant.

doublem23
10-25-2005, 01:02 AM
I think it's pretty clear that if we square the number of hits each team had against left-handers during the regular season and then divide that number the mean of hits given up by Pettitte and Buehrle, that should give us a pretty fair estimate of how each team should have preformed in Game 2, only once we factor in such variable like the park size, number of churros sold between the 2nd and 5th inning, and the amount of crap that was spewing out of Tim McCarver's mouth.

Basically, the Astros should have won that game, and the series is now tied at 1-1. You can't play the actual game out on the field for 9 innings, that's just too small a sample size.

OEO Magglio
10-25-2005, 01:06 AM
I think it's pretty clear that if we square the number of hits each team had against left-handers during the regular season and then divide that number the mean of hits given up by Pettitte and Buehrle, that should give us a pretty fair estimate of how each team should have preformed in Game 2, only once we factor in such variable like the park size, number of churros sold between the 2nd and 5th inning, and the amount of crap that was spewing out of Tim McCarver's mouth.

Basically, the Astros should have won that game, and the series is now tied at 1-1. You can't play the actual game out on the field for 9 innings, that's just too small a sample size.
Just because mlb says that games are 9 innings doesn't mean that they are.

DSpivack
10-25-2005, 01:10 AM
I'm not a FOBB or a Sabermetrician, but I do think that some stats are useful; OBP as opposed to batting average, the SLG and OPS as opposed to home runs, etc. Relying solely upon tools when studying a player doesn't work, and relying solely upon statistics won't work, either. Stats are a great tool to use in baseball, but only represent one side of the equaton. Many people throw them out as ridiculous and useless, but they are a good means, FOBBs make a mistake in viewing them as an end.

OEO Magglio
10-25-2005, 01:15 AM
I'm not a FOBB or a Sabermetrician, but I do think that some stats are useful; OBP as opposed to batting average, the SLG and OPS as opposed to home runs, etc. Relying solely upon tools when studying a player doesn't work, and relying solely upon statistics won't work, either. Stats are a great tool to use in baseball, but only represent one side of the equaton. Many people throw them out as ridiculous and useless, but they are a good means, FOBBs make a mistake in viewing them as an end.
I don't think you'd get an argument out of anyone that stats are a useful tool but some stats now a days are just so ridiculous and like you said some people view them as the end all be all. VORP, win shares, the pythagreon, blah blah blah, all those things are complete crap. Some idiot at BP is going to look at a chart and tell me how many games a team should have won. ARE YOU KIDDING ME??????????

DSpivack
10-25-2005, 01:18 AM
I don't think you'd get an argument out of anyone that stats are a useful tool but some stats now a days are just so ridiculous and like you said some people view them as the end all be all. VORP, win shares, the pythagreon, blah blah blah, all those things are complete crap. Some idiot at BP is going to look at a chart and tell me how many games a team should have won. ARE YOU KIDDING ME??????????

VORP to me can be useful, as it measures the overall effectiveness of a player. Win shares are BS, but pythagorean even moreso. What does it measure? The scores of games! That's it!:?:

Erik The Red
10-25-2005, 01:19 AM
:rolling:

:threadrules:

PaulDrake
10-25-2005, 09:13 AM
You know, I'll bet even Billy Beane probably wants a lot of the Sabremetric fan boys to kind of take it easy on the hero worship.

This world series though could very well be the worst nightmare of a lot of these guys. Didn't they call the Sox "outliers"? They'll say the Sox are the exception that proves all their rules.

Ol' No. 2
10-25-2005, 09:37 AM
VORP to me can be useful, as it measures the overall effectiveness of a player. Win shares are BS, but pythagorean even moreso. What does it measure? The scores of games! That's it!:?:VORP doesn't measure any such thing. It's basically just OPS, dressed up with a little lipstick and a push-up bra to try make it seem like more than it is.

Flight #24
10-25-2005, 09:48 AM
VORP doesn't measure any such thing. It's basically just OPS, dressed up with a little lipstick and a push-up bra to try make it seem like more than it is.

And it give you a "come hither" look and says "C'mon baby, just turn off your brain & I'll make all your analysis easy as pie.".

Stats are useful datapoints, but they need to be taken as such. Not as the primary determinant of the quality of a player/team. And stats compiled over a full season or multiple seasons aren't as useful in a different scenario such as the playoffs when the quality of everything goes up significantly, especially pitching.

nasox
10-25-2005, 10:13 AM
Thanks. It's a gift from Michelle. :thumbsup:

I like it a lot too, but why'd you use the pic of comiskey before the renovations? Still, a nice piece of work. :thumbsup:

veeter
10-25-2005, 10:41 AM
I get the feeling sabermetric is alien for "I've never picked up a ball in my life."

FedEx227
10-25-2005, 10:48 AM
Oh it is... one of the chief inventors of Sabermetrics Voros McCracken was working at a Lawyer's office in Chicago living in his parents basement when he realized he wanted to come up with goofy baseball statistics.

I can't hate on all FOBB, because OBP is a great stat, it really shows you a players ability to hit/walk in a way that BA cannot... but OPS is ridiculous, why combine two numbers when I can just look at them seperately and get the same effect.

Michelle
10-25-2005, 06:51 PM
I like it a lot too, but why'd you use the pic of comiskey before the renovations? Still, a nice piece of work. :thumbsup:
I didn't realize it was open for critique, but thanks....

.... I think.

EastCoastSoxFan
10-26-2005, 08:57 AM
Oh it is... one of the chief inventors of Sabermetrics Voros McCracken was working at a Lawyer's office in Chicago living in his parents basement when he realized he wanted to come up with goofy baseball statistics.

I can't hate on all FOBB, because OBP is a great stat, it really shows you a players ability to hit/walk in a way that BA cannot... but OPS is ridiculous, why combine two numbers when I can just look at them seperately and get the same effect.
I recently ordered a copy of "Moneyball" off Amazon just 'cause I was curious (after hearing it discussed and dissected on this site for so long), and between the length of the game last night and especially the length of the damn commercial breaks I managed to get through the ENTIRE BOOK!
All in all it was an interesting read. I'm all for people bringing scientific thinking to bear on baseball and for challenging "conventional wisdom"; but by this point enough time has gone by that many of the basic tenets of this book have become "conventional wisdom". So now it is time to start asking questions like:
1) If our (i.e., the A's and teams like it) approach is so well-reasoned and staistically well-founded, how come we haven't even reached the World Series when two other limited-budget teams ('03 Marlins & [soon] '05 White Sox) have won the WS and the Astros reached the WS on a limited budget?
2) In the absence of a well-reasoned answer to 1), do we need to either throw out our basic tenets and start over again or look for other types of baseball stats/information that will give us further insight into the game of baseball.
I think the '05 White Sox and, for that matter, the '05 Astros have both proven that there is more than one way to win a baseball game, which means that being excessively dogmatic (i.e., dismissing the stolen base, hit-and-run, and sacrifice out of hand) robs a team of possible ways to win.
Aw, hell, I'm too damn tired to think anymore this morning. Games that end at 2:20 Eastern Time will do that to you. Who the hell cares?
LET'S FINISH THIS THING OFF TONIGHT!!!!!