Why do people resist change/improvement in understanding baseball...

[obxyankeefan]

Yeah, but that's not what it measures

oh I agree with you on that. But as I was saying anything with numbers can be read different ways, and Rmilia is not alone in that thinking.

 

[handicappers]

By the way, this is an intelligent response that had no usage of statistics. The person gave a real life example and claimed a cause and effect. He didn't prove it quantitatively, but then something like that is hard to do in this case. Notice he did not attack me when he disagreed, he did not call me a nerd, he didn't claim he was inherently superior in intellectuality because his opinion is different than mine. He simply disagreed and gave an example that is based in logic to back it up.

@handicappers @Iffster @dougplayer @rmilia1 take notes...

You have a TWL rating of 1.0058 and you can't dispute that.

 

[Iffster]

By the way, this is an intelligent response that had no usage of statistics. The person gave a real life example and claimed a cause and effect. He didn't prove it quantitatively, but then something like that is hard to do in this case. Notice he did not attack me when he disagreed, he did not call me a nerd, he didn't claim he was inherently superior in intellectuality because his opinion is different than mine. He simply disagreed and gave an example that is based in logic to back it up.

@handicappers @Iffster @dougplayer @rmilia1 take notes...

Here is a note Omar to you....stick an axe handle up your ass, sit on it, and spin around.

AND YOU ARE A F*ING NERD! FIND A VAGINA SON, FIND A VAGINA.

 

[rmilia1]

I wasn't referring to you when I mentioned the name-calling. You're more in the "disagreed and failed to give a logical explanation to back it up" category.

I don't know what you mean by "value." Do you not value wins? If you're trying to lose, I wouldn't want Bryce Harper on my team either. But other than that, I really haven't a clue what you're talking about with your "valuing"

OK let me explain to you. Didn't get into it earlier because I didn't want to derail a good thread but I'll use last year as an example. Primary value for me is wins but what does that entail? To me I value wins over quality teams, how a player performs in those games is vital ino. I also care very much about how a guy performs when the game is late innings or when his team is tied or trailing. In all those instances Harper's number drop off and in games vs teams over .500 they dropped off precipitously. Not sure where he ended up but with a few weeks left in the season he was batting .223 in games vs teams with a winning record and his OBP, RBI per game, HR per game were all dramatically lower than in his other games. He also hit .175 with RISP in those games and his performance was a large part of why the Nats record in those games was horrendous. Simply put he fattened up vs crap teams and did so excellently but his performance vs quality teams was BAD. I don't know how to figure WAR but if you did it for Harper in only games vs decent teams it'd be next to or below zero. The Nats won 83 games so knowing Harper's WAR was like what 9? 10? Can you tell me the value, to the Nats, if going 83-79 instead of 73-89?? I'll answer for you. It's nothing. Zip. Harper was bad vs good,teams and his team was realistically no better off because of his performance vs other bad teams.

 

[Iffster]

OK let me explain to you. Didn't get into it earlier because I didn't want to derail a good thread but I'll use last year as an example. Primary value for me is wins but what does that entail? To me I value wins over quality teams, how a player performs in those games is vital ino. I also care very much about how a guy performs when the game is late innings or when his team is tied or trailing. In all those instances Harper's number drop off and in games vs teams over .500 they dropped off precipitously. Not sure where he ended up but with a few weeks left in the season he was batting .223 in games vs teams with a winning record and his OBP, RBI per game, HR per game were all dramatically lower than in his other games. He also hit .175 with RISP in those games and his performance was a large part of why the Nats record in those games was horrendous. Simply put he fattened up vs crap teams and did so excellently but his performance vs quality teams was BAD. I don't know how to figure WAR but if you did it for Harper in only games vs decent teams it'd be next to or below zero. The Nats won 83 games so knowing Harper's WAR was like what 9? 10? Can you tell me the value, to the Nats, if going 83-79 instead of 73-89?? I'll answer for you. It's nothing. Zip. Harper was bad vs good,teams and his team was realistically no better off because of his performance vs other bad teams.

God another guy with no balls. Stand up to this egotistical punk. Be a man. Letting a 17 year old wussy like this call you out and you give him some "oh, you hurt my feelings" response??????????

 

[SlinkyRedfoot]

OK let me explain to you. Didn't get into it earlier because I didn't want to derail a good thread but I'll use last year as an example. Primary value for me is wins but what does that entail? To me I value wins over quality teams, how a player performs in those games is vital ino. I also care very much about how a guy performs when the game is late innings or when his team is tied or trailing. In all those instances Harper's number drop off and in games vs teams over .500 they dropped off precipitously. Not sure where he ended up but with a few weeks left in the season he was batting .223 in games vs teams with a winning record and his OBP, RBI per game, HR per game were all dramatically lower than in his other games. He also hit .175 with RISP in those games and his performance was a large part of why the Nats record in those games was horrendous. Simply put he fattened up vs crap teams and did so excellently but his performance vs quality teams was BAD. I don't know how to figure WAR but if you did it for Harper in only games vs decent teams it'd be next to or below zero. The Nats won 83 games so knowing Harper's WAR was like what 9? 10? Can you tell me the value, to the Nats, if going 83-79 instead of 73-89?? I'll answer for you. It's nothing. Zip. Harper was bad vs good,teams and his team was realistically no better off because of his performance vs other bad teams.

I bet there isn't a shred of accuracy in any of that.

 

[Omar 382]

I bet there isn't a shred of accuracy in any of that.

Yep. No

 

[rmilia1]

God another guy with no balls. Stand up to this egotistical punk. Be a man. Letting a 17 year old wussy like this call you out and you give him some "oh, you hurt my feelings" response??????????

?? He asked a question and i answered. That's what's done on message boards. I don't disagree with him completely. If I did I'd tell him. I got no issues doing that.

 

[Iffster]

Omar....you've found your heaven! Work it man!

 

[mr.hockey4242]

Harper not being as good as least year is much lower than 50/50. Harper being better than Gyorko is much, much higher than 50/50

Take it you haven't seen Horrible Bosses 2

 

[mr.hockey4242]

By the way, this is an intelligent response that had no usage of statistics. The person gave a real life example and claimed a cause and effect. He didn't prove it quantitatively, but then something like that is hard to do in this case. Notice he did not attack me when he disagreed, he did not call me a nerd, he didn't claim he was inherently superior in intellectuality because his opinion is different than mine. He simply disagreed and gave an example that is based in logic to back it up.

@handicappers @Iffster @dougplayer @rmilia1 take notes...

It's a little concerning you included Dougy in this. His schitick is pretty clear lol. Dougy gonna Dougy.

 

[Omar 382]

Take it you haven't seen Horrible Bosses 2

No, first one was one of my favorite comedies ever, but 2 was below 30% on RT and I just haven't found the time. I'll get to it eventually

 

[handicappers]

Derp

 

[mr.hockey4242]

No, first one was one of my favorite comedies ever, but 2 was below 30% on RT and I just haven't found the time. I'll get to it eventually

Decent movie.

There is just a small quip poking fun at the whole 50/50 thing. It just came to mind ha

 

[broncosmitty]

Take it you haven't seen Horrible Bosses 2

Say NickKurtDale Inc three times fast.

 

[broncosmitty]

I don't know why some of you even like baseball.

Fuckin' wannabe robot weirdos.

 

[rmilia1]

Man you guys were right. Harper really turned it on finishing 59-231 vs over .500 teams. That's a sweet .258 BA. REALLY turned it on once the games were irrelevant. That's the great thing about facts. They're easy to check. If it makes you feel better he only batted 10 points worse vs playoff teams... didn't bother to check the other stuff because I did it last year. Of you're going to complain about people not using advanced metrics the way you want and then pretend other stats aren't facts then you have no argument. .258! All time great!

 

[broncosmitty]

Man you guys were right. Harper really turned it on finishing 59-231 vs over .500 teams. That's a sweet .258 BA. REALLY turned it on once the games were irrelevant. That's the great thing about facts. They're easy to check. If it makes you feel better he only batted 10 points worse vs playoff teams... didn't bother to check the other stuff because I did it last year. Of you're going to complain about people not using advanced metrics the way you want and then pretend other stats aren't facts then you have no argument. .258! All time great!

Doin' your part to make baseball fun again?

 

[rmilia1]

Doin' your part to make baseball fun again?

Lol. It's hilarious. In a thread about people ignoring stats to see people ignoring stats. Solid stuff.

 

[broncosmitty]

I'd respond to this, but my rates for counseling are $25 a word for reading and $15 a word for responding.

I take all major credit cards. No checks.

Can you write scripts for more pills?