The stats that people hate...but shouldnt

[ImSmartherThanYou]

When you claim that QS is a crappy stat because of the 4.5 ERA BS, and talk about how ERA and QS use the same data means they are the same stat then yes i can make that statement... If you are too stubborn to understand a stat, then dont hate on the stat... just ignore it...

I never said they're the same stat, you dolt. I simply said they evaluate the same elements, which is irrefutably true.

It's not a crappy stat because of "the 4.5 ERA BS" (though please remind me again where a 4.50 ERA is something to strive for). That's just one of the many flaws of the stat. The primary flaw is that the criteria are completely arbitrary and rigid. Who the fuck says that 6 IP/3ER is "quality"? Why isn't 5.2 IP/0 ER, or 9 IP/4ER not "quality"? It's arbitrary. Arbitrary statistics- such as saves- are weak.

Again, I understand the stat perfectly fine. Please stop suggesting I don't, because it just makes you sound like a total fool.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Who the hell said that 5 innings is an official game... Arbitrary doesnt matter if it is a constant...

 

[MilkSpiller22]

5 innings is more than half so it is logical...

as for QS 6 innings is better than 5 and the most logical progression

3 runs is logical since the league average is generally 4+ so 3 runs a pitcher leaves the game with there team still in position to win...

 

[MilkSpiller22]

I never said they're the same stat, you dolt. I simply said they evaluate the same elements, which is irrefutably true.

It's not a crappy stat because of "the 4.5 ERA BS" (though please remind me again where a 4.50 ERA is something to strive for). That's just one of the many flaws of the stat. The primary flaw is that the criteria are completely arbitrary and rigid. Who the fuck says that 6 IP/3ER is "quality"? Why isn't 5.2 IP/0 ER, or 9 IP/4ER not "quality"? It's arbitrary. Arbitrary statistics- such as saves- are weak.

Again, I understand the stat perfectly fine. Please stop suggesting I don't, because it just makes you sound like a total fool.

and when you ask those questions you clearly dont understand the stat so i will say that you dont understand the stat... and it seems like you are too stubborn to understand it, you just want to be a hater...

 

[soxfan1468927]

5 innings is more than half so it is logical...

as for QS 6 innings is better than 5 and the most logical progression

3 runs is logical since the league average is generally 4+ so 3 runs a pitcher leaves the game with there team still in position to win...

Can you link me to anything saying that this is the reasoning the cut offs were out there? And does it seem logical to you to maintain those exact same cut offs for every season since 1985 (when the stat was invented) despite the fact that baseball goes trough offensive peaks and valleys?

 

[soxfan1468927]

5 innings is more than half so it is logical...

as for QS 6 innings is better than 5 and the most logical progression

3 runs is logical since the league average is generally 4+ so 3 runs a pitcher leaves the game with there team still in position to win...

So what if a pitcher gives up 4 runs and leaves with a lead? What if they give up 2 and leave without a lead?

 

[DragonfromTO]

1. Quality Starts- this is one of my favorite stats in baseball, but it gets a bad rap... People look at this Stat and say how can a 4.5 ERA be better than a 4 ERA... But they dont understand that it is a separate stat totally... ERA and QS tell totally different stories and should be looked upon separately, its like how k/9 and k/BB tell 2 totally different stories even though they both include strikeouts...
Then people claim that 6 or more innings 3 or less runs are arbitrary parameters, but they are not...
An official game/start is 5 innings, to be quality you need to be better than 5 innings, so the logical minimum has to be 6...
as for runs, the league average in runs is 4+ in a game- to be quality you need to leave the game giving your team a chance to win. Less than 4 runs is going to do that.

The whole purpose of the stat is for a starter to leave the game giving his team the best chances to win.

Wins- people claim that this is a team stat, that is true, and that is the stats flaw, but every stat has its flaws... Even if this is true you can not discount the power of a winning pitcher, how many times when pitchers get big leads, give up the leads?? there are pitchers that just can not get wins, because when they are battling in close games, they will always give up that big hit... this happens all the time... So for every negative situation against the stat, there is a positive one... But it is an obvious stat- a stat where you can follow by watching the game easily

BA- this one puzzles me why people dont like this... it is such a simple statistic it is just HITS/at bats... how can that be bad?? people look at OBP and claim that it is a better stat... but they tell 2 different stories, OBP is how often you get on base,which predicts how often you have the potential to score a run. BA is just how often you get a hit...

Runs- another "team stat"... People claim that if a player is on a better offense then players should score more, this is true and that is this stats flaw. But just like every stat, there are flaws and then there are some good stuff... Runs shows good and smart baserunning skills(not necessary stolen bases). But it is an obvious stat- a stat where you can follow by watching the game easily

RBIs- another "team" stat... again, the flaw in this stat is that the better offense you are on the more RBIs you should get... But the positves of this stat are overwhelming, it shows that when it matters how productive you were... But it is an obvious stat- a stat where you can follow by watching the game easily

Stolen Bases- this stat ever since moneyball has been diminshing in importance, and i wonder why... successful stolen bases make you more likely to score a run, it intimidates and frusturates pitchers... It is a good way to get out of a double play situation. It gives power hitters better opportunities to get their HRs... It is losing popularity because you are giving the other team an out- But the benefits of having a good SB guy is too much to worry about the occasional giving up an out...


I will fight for any Stat- i find that the problem with stats now adays is that we have so many, and many that tell the same or similar stories a little better than others... We now take advanced stats for granted without understanding what they are telling us... Most advanced stats calculate theoretical runs and theoretical wins... that is great and all, and there is a lot of value in that, but they are more meant for predicting the future of players...

If this is the reasoning behind it, why does it make sense to use the average runs/9 as the standard bar for a quality start that will probably be less than 9 innings? If a pitcher leaves the game after 6 innings having given up 3 runs, he's leaving having given up MORE runs than the average pitcher would have. But you're seemingly crediting him for being better than average, even though he wasn't.

 

[DragonfromTO]

5 innings is more than half so it is logical...

as for QS 6 innings is better than 5 and the most logical progression

3 runs is logical since the league average is generally 4+ so 3 runs a pitcher leaves the game with there team still in position to win...

Sure, but that league average you're citing is calculated over 9 innings. If 4 runs is the magic number then a starting pitcher who left after having given up 3 runs in 6 innings would need his relievers to pitch better than he did to not exceed it.

 

[steveringo]

and when you ask those questions you clearly dont understand the stat so i will say that you dont understand the stat... and it seems like you are too stubborn to understand it, you just want to be a hater...

Someone else is being stubborn, and everyone else seems to know who it is.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Sure, but that league average you're citing is calculated over 9 innings. If 4 runs is the magic number then a starting pitcher who left after having given up 3 runs in 6 innings would need his relievers to pitch better than he did to not exceed it.

finally a good counter question... I made my comment, you accepted it and countered... The best answer i can give you is that the runs are irrelevant... if your offense is going to score 4 runs by you only allowing 3 runs you keep your team in the theoretical lead... as long as you leave the game with the theoretical lead then you are fine... Although since i can not find the origin of the stat, this is all my theory... I am just see the logic behind the what others call arbitrary... But the reason is really irrelevant as long as it is a constant...

 

[Villain]

1. Quality Starts- this is one of my favorite stats in baseball, but it gets a bad rap... People look at this Stat and say how can a 4.5 ERA be better than a 4 ERA... But they dont understand that it is a separate stat totally... ERA and QS tell totally different stories and should be looked upon separately, its like how k/9 and k/BB tell 2 totally different stories even though they both include strikeouts...
Then people claim that 6 or more innings 3 or less runs are arbitrary parameters, but they are not...
An official game/start is 5 innings, to be quality you need to be better than 5 innings, so the logical minimum has to be 6...
as for runs, the league average in runs is 4+ in a game- to be quality you need to leave the game giving your team a chance to win. Less than 4 runs is going to do that.

Quality starts are fine by me. They aren't the best indicator of how good a pitcher is, but more of how they're doing.

The whole purpose of the stat is for a starter to leave the game giving his team the best chances to win.

Wins- people claim that this is a team stat, that is true, and that is the stats flaw, but every stat has its flaws... Even if this is true you can not discount the power of a winning pitcher, how many times when pitchers get big leads, give up the leads?? there are pitchers that just can not get wins, because when they are battling in close games, they will always give up that big hit... this happens all the time... So for every negative situation against the stat, there is a positive one... But it is an obvious stat- a stat where you can follow by watching the game easily

Pitcher Wins/Losses are a complete waste of time. Especially for the bullpen.

BA- this one puzzles me why people dont like this... it is such a simple statistic it is just HITS/at bats... how can that be bad?? people look at OBP and claim that it is a better stat... but they tell 2 different stories, OBP is how often you get on base,which predicts how often you have the potential to score a run. BA is just how often you get a hit...

Batting average is a fine stat. What's wrong with batting average? I've never heard of someone saying that batting average doesn't matter.

Runs- another "team stat"... People claim that if a player is on a better offense then players should score more, this is true and that is this stats flaw. But just like every stat, there are flaws and then there are some good stuff... Runs shows good and smart baserunning skills(not necessary stolen bases). But it is an obvious stat- a stat where you can follow by watching the game easily

Runs do not show what you are saying they show.

RBIs- another "team" stat... again, the flaw in this stat is that the better offense you are on the more RBIs you should get... But the positves of this stat are overwhelming, it shows that when it matters how productive you were... But it is an obvious stat- a stat where you can follow by watching the game easily

RBIs aren't as useful as BA with RISP.

Stolen Bases- this stat ever since moneyball has been diminshing in importance, and i wonder why... successful stolen bases make you more likely to score a run, it intimidates and frusturates pitchers... It is a good way to get out of a double play situation. It gives power hitters better opportunities to get their HRs... It is losing popularity because you are giving the other team an out- But the benefits of having a good SB guy is too much to worry about the occasional giving up an out...

Stolen bases, as a stat, are perfectly fine. As a tactic to be used in a game, using a stolen base is all about risk versus reward. Sometimes gaining a base doesn't really help that much if the risk of an out is high.

I will fight for any Stat- i find that the problem with stats now adays is that we have so many, and many that tell the same or similar stories a little better than others... We now take advanced stats for granted without understanding what they are telling us... Most advanced stats calculate theoretical runs and theoretical wins... that is great and all, and there is a lot of value in that, but they are more meant for predicting the future of players...

There is no perfect stat. All stats need to taken into context in order to demonstrate an effective interpretation.

 

[ImSmartherThanYou]

5 innings is more than half so it is logical...

as for QS 6 innings is better than 5 and the most logical progression

3 runs is logical since the league average is generally 4+ so 3 runs a pitcher leaves the game with there team still in position to win...

5 innings is an official game because that's always been the rule. I actually think it's too short, myself.

The league average isn't always 4. It changes constantly. And giving up 3 still leaves 3 more innings for the bullpen (which is full of inferior pitchers) to give up more runs.

 

[ImSmartherThanYou]

and when you ask those questions you clearly dont understand the stat so i will say that you dont understand the stat... and it seems like you are too stubborn to understand it, you just want to be a hater...

And... again... I understand it just fine. You've demonstrated time and time again throughout these two threads that you don't know the first thing about pitching, so we'll let the posts speak for themselves on who understands what.

 

[ImSmartherThanYou]

finally a good counter question... I made my comment, you accepted it and countered... The best answer i can give you is that the runs are irrelevant... if your offense is going to score 4 runs by you only allowing 3 runs you keep your team in the theoretical lead... as long as you leave the game with the theoretical lead then you are fine... Although since i can not find the origin of the stat, this is all my theory... I am just see the logic behind the what others call arbitrary... But the reason is really irrelevant as long as it is a constant...

Dragon is not the first person to make this point. I made it myself. You just ignored it.

 

[ImSmartherThanYou]

Quality starts are fine by me. They aren't the best indicator of how good a pitcher is, but more of how they're doing.



Pitcher Wins/Losses are a complete waste of time. Especially for the bullpen.



Batting average is a fine stat. What's wrong with batting average? I've never heard of someone saying that batting average doesn't matter.



Runs do not show what you are saying they show.



RBIs aren't as useful as BA with RISP.



Stolen bases, as a stat, are perfectly fine. As a tactic to be used in a game, using a stolen base is all about risk versus reward. Sometimes gaining a base doesn't really help that much if the risk of an out is high.



There is no perfect stat. All stats need to taken into context in order to demonstrate an effective interpretation.

Nice post.

My one comment would be that batting average, while a perfectly nice statistic, has been historically overrated. OBP and SLG are clearly more telling statistics (without going into advanced stats like OPS+ or wOBA). Batting average ignores other methods of reaching base, and treats all hits the same. It doesn't really demonstrate a hitter's all-around skill, just their skill at getting a hit.

 

[Villain]

My one comment would be that batting average, while a perfectly nice statistic, has been historically overrated. OBP and SLG are clearly more telling statistics (without going into advanced stats like OPS+ or wOBA). Batting average ignores other methods of reaching base, and treats all hits the same. It doesn't really demonstrate a hitter's all-around skill, just their skill at getting a hit.

I agree.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Dragon is not the first person to make this point. I made it myself. You just ignored it.

No, the difference is that he was the first one to actually dispute the reasoning i gave for the 4 runs to be logical... you bring up the 4 runs to discredit the stat...

 

[ImSmartherThanYou]

No, the difference is that he was the first one to actually dispute the reasoning i gave for the 4 runs to be logical... you bring up the 4 runs to discredit the stat...

Nope. All my arguments were grounded in logic, common sense, and reality. But I don't think it really matters at this point.

 

[Hunter Montana]

finally a good counter question... I made my comment, you accepted it and countered... The best answer i can give you is that the runs are irrelevant... if your offense is going to score 4 runs by you only allowing 3 runs you keep your team in the theoretical lead... as long as you leave the game with the theoretical lead then you are fine... Although since i can not find the origin of the stat, this is all my theory... I am just see the logic behind the what others call arbitrary... But the reason is really irrelevant as long as it is a constant...

What do you mean runs are irrelevant? You then say you are assuming your team is going to score 4 runs and hold the other team to 3 runs. How are you so sure that your team would score 4 runs over 6 innings?

 

[MilkSpiller22]

What do you mean runs are irrelevant? You then say you are assuming your team is going to score 4 runs and hold the other team to 3 runs. How are you so sure that your team would score 4 runs over 6 innings?

QS is not about the pitcher getting the win it is about the team getting the win... Now what i meant by runs are irrelevant is that since the lead is theoretical it doesnt matter if it really happens or not...