Originally Posted by doublem23
This is mind boggling, you've just articulated perfectly why saves are such a pointless stat, that a guy can dominate and another one can be ****ty and wind up with the same number. This is so maddeningly logically inconsistent, it's insane.
Here, we've been over this before, here's the Stats 101 Guide to How to Discern "Good Stats" from "Bad Stats"
GOOD STATS - Rely heavily on the Batter vs. Pitcher, 1 vs. 1, feature that makes baseball so good for statistical analysis. EXAMPLES: On Base Percentage, Strikeouts per 9 IP, BABIP, FIP
BAD STATS - Rely heavily on the participation of outside influences (whether that be your teammates, arbitrary situations, or third parties). EXAMPLES: Runs Batted In, Saves, Pitcher W-L Record, Errors
My argument would be that there is no such thing as a good stat or a bad stat (though I reserve the right to change my mind), all stats tell a part of a picture. Some stats might tell more of a complete story than another, but I would argue that even the good stats need to be taken within context. A guy with a high OBP and nothing else isn't that valuable, nor is a guy with a high K per 9 and a high ERA (like Carlos Marmol), even a guy with a good BABIP and low average isn't that valuable. A guy like Beckham has a good BABIP because he has so many weak groundouts to the shortstop or pitcher.
So even the "good stats" can be as misleading as the "bad stats."