- This topic has 134 replies, 17 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 6 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
The WPA stat is interesting, but I am not real big on it. The reason is that while it makes some sense that a big hit late is more important than one early, the late one may not have matter if the early one never occurred.
So weighting a home run higher in late-and-close situations is a bit misleading. You could have a two-run honer in the first inning, and go on to win 5-1 with a three-run bomb tacked on in the seventh. Or you could have a two run homer in the first, then trail 4-2 in the seventh and get the three-run bomb to pull out a 5-4 win.
Basically it takes a full team effort and a full 9 innings or more to win a ball game. That is why I still favor the old fashioned counting stat, RBIs. Give me a guy with a lot of RBIs, and that will be a guy that contributes to a lot of wins.
The WPA stat is interesting, but I am not real big on it. The reason is that while it makes some sense that a big hit late is more important than one early, the late one may not have matter if the early one never occurred.
So weighting a home run higher in late-and-close situations is a bit misleading. You could have a two-run honer in the first inning, and go on to win 5-1 with a three-run bomb tacked on in the seventh. Or you could have a two run homer in the first, then trail 4-2 in the seventh and get the three-run bomb to pull out a 5-4 win.
Basically it takes a full team effort and a full 9 innings or more to win a ball game. That is why I still favor the old fashioned counting stat, RBIs. Give me a guy with a lot of RBIs, and that will be a guy that contributes to a lot of wins.
The WPA stat is interesting, but I am not real big on it. The reason is that while it makes some sense that a big hit late is more important than one early, the late one may not have matter if the early one never occurred.
So weighting a home run higher in late-and-close situations is a bit misleading. You could have a two-run honer in the first inning, and go on to win 5-1 with a three-run bomb tacked on in the seventh. Or you could have a two run homer in the first, then trail 4-2 in the seventh and get the three-run bomb to pull out a 5-4 win.
Basically it takes a full team effort and a full 9 innings or more to win a ball game. That is why I still favor the old fashioned counting stat, RBIs. Give me a guy with a lot of RBIs, and that will be a guy that contributes to a lot of wins.
The WPA stat is interesting, but I am not real big on it. The reason is that while it makes some sense that a big hit late is more important than one early, the late one may not have matter if the early one never occurred.
So weighting a home run higher in late-and-close situations is a bit misleading. You could have a two-run honer in the first inning, and go on to win 5-1 with a three-run bomb tacked on in the seventh. Or you could have a two run homer in the first, then trail 4-2 in the seventh and get the three-run bomb to pull out a 5-4 win.
Basically it takes a full team effort and a full 9 innings or more to win a ball game. That is why I still favor the old fashioned counting stat, RBIs. Give me a guy with a lot of RBIs, and that will be a guy that contributes to a lot of wins.
The WPA stat is interesting, but I am not real big on it. The reason is that while it makes some sense that a big hit late is more important than one early, the late one may not have matter if the early one never occurred.
So weighting a home run higher in late-and-close situations is a bit misleading. You could have a two-run honer in the first inning, and go on to win 5-1 with a three-run bomb tacked on in the seventh. Or you could have a two run homer in the first, then trail 4-2 in the seventh and get the three-run bomb to pull out a 5-4 win.
Basically it takes a full team effort and a full 9 innings or more to win a ball game. That is why I still favor the old fashioned counting stat, RBIs. Give me a guy with a lot of RBIs, and that will be a guy that contributes to a lot of wins.
The WPA stat is interesting, but I am not real big on it. The reason is that while it makes some sense that a big hit late is more important than one early, the late one may not have matter if the early one never occurred.
So weighting a home run higher in late-and-close situations is a bit misleading. You could have a two-run honer in the first inning, and go on to win 5-1 with a three-run bomb tacked on in the seventh. Or you could have a two run homer in the first, then trail 4-2 in the seventh and get the three-run bomb to pull out a 5-4 win.
Basically it takes a full team effort and a full 9 innings or more to win a ball game. That is why I still favor the old fashioned counting stat, RBIs. Give me a guy with a lot of RBIs, and that will be a guy that contributes to a lot of wins.
Yeah, no question about it, Bikemike. RBI’s and runs scored are what put the numbers up on the board that formulate the only thing that really counts…The final score.
“come thru with the outcome in the balance”
A total rbi or runs scored count doesn’t define “coming thru”, those are opportunity based counting stats that don’t describe game context of any kind.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.