- This topic has 304 replies, 34 voices, and was last updated 2 years, 8 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
The number of hits in AB’s does matter, BC, rats. BA is the majority of obp.
Obp is more important than slg%, so yes, BA matters as a limited metric. Should it be used as defining metric? Of course not, see dacs reply above.
Rats, declining to understand advance metrics is fine. It’s a choice everyone gets to make. Throwing stones at s***jazz metrics you declined to understand by choice, is lame.
Batting average is indeed a important metric. Sure it’s not the end all but it tells a lot especially if it’s consistent. But at same there are other important things to consider. I wouldn’t mind a few high average guys on our team though, of which we have none right now.
It’s sure something to look at along with other stats.
I guess if you are going to look at several stats, sure, it makes sense to look at batting average. But there are much better metrics out there that incorporate and weight all the different traditional box score stats into one easy to understand metric, which also adjusts for things like stadium effects and league performance as a whole. In your post earlier, you just listed batting averages to make your point. If you are going to just use one stat, there are better ones to use is all I was saying.
dac – a poster said that BA is a meaningless stat. I said it wasn’t a meaningless stat but needed to be incorporated into other stats to give a meaningful picture.
I then listed those other stats. That’s enough for this fan. Personal choice.
I don’t care to get into other “advanced metrics” that in my humble opinion are turning this game into robotics. I like the human side of the game too much.When somebody says BA doesn’t matter I think to myself the same thing as when somebody says, as to pitchers, that wins doesn’t matter. Doesn’t matter to whom?
When somebody says BA doesn’t matter I think to myself the same thing as when somebody says, as to pitchers, that wins doesn’t matter. Doesn’t matter to whom?
Even this one is another poor example because it’s a flawed stat. Team wins is important but pitcher wins is inherently a flawed stat. It generally captures some things well, like if a pitcher is going deep into games and is able to keep his own team in the ballgame, but again, if you are trying to measure those things there are better stats to look at. The reason pitcher wins is flawed is because it also captures how much run support a pitcher gets, which has nothing to do with pitching. Should DeGrom or Hernandez not have won their cy young’s because they had pedestrian win totals due to poor run support? There were old school baseball writers who thought so and it was completely ridiculous.
Yeah, those “old school” baseball writers
didn’t know what they were talking about.
Naive guys like Red Smith.Some pitchers are better able to kick it up a notch when that is what it takes to win. Wins, BA, the eye test, it is inaccurate to say that the old school cigar chompers types did not bring analytics to the table. They just did it without the computer and had the advantage of including aspects and intangibles that computers can’t see and wonks don’t appreciate.
Yeah, those “old school” baseball writers
didn’t know what they were talking about.
Naive guys like Red SmithI admittedly didn’t know who Red Smith was, so I googled him and apparently he was hugely influential in sports writing. I assume by choosing him you are saying essentially, “see, this important writer agrees with me, so I must be correct.”
Honest question bccran, have you ever had any kind of class or education in statistics, research methodology, or anything of that nature? I have when I was in grad school, and one of the biggest lessons you learn in those classes is that measuring things correctly is hard and people frequently look past the flaws of the metrics they are using which leads to poor conclusions. Over time, fields of study find better ways to measure things that improve upon the flaws of previous metrics, that is normal and a good thing. People who refuse to adapt tend to get left behind. It’s funny to me that in sports there is a large segment of people who think however things were measured 100 years ago is how we should measure things today, or that we’ve learned nothing new about what sort of things we should value in a sport since the days of Babe Ruth. That line of thinking makes no sense and would never be taken seriously in other fields, but with sports it’s ridiculously common. Red Smith can be a great sportswriter and still be very wrong about this particular topic.
How are Mozeliak’s computers and analytics working out on trades and contract extensions? Maybe he needs to hire a cigar chomper to save his butt instead of guys who write impressive (to him) academic papers on the draft that you know are loaded with ecstasy-inducing modern day analytics. And maybe the guys should be able to deliver a confidently and coherently spoken sentence in front of a camera.
dac – I sat in on a meeting with the Cardinals analytics guys one time. Understood very little what they were saying. But whatever they’re employing on the team right now doesn’t seem to be working. Other guys on here like me who have played D-1 and semi pro baseball can study a Cardinal player eyes on (in person) going to ST and regular season games and over a period of time tell you in our semi-educated opinion what he needs to work on, and how to work on it.
Bling boy, was Jack Flaherty a better pitcher than Jacob DeGrom this year when Jack was healthy? He had good peripheral stats and had way more wins than DeGrom at the time. If you are attributing the wins Flaherty got solely to his skill and not at all to the fact he was averaging something like seven runs of support from the Cardinals offense per game, then I guess Jack must have the superior intangibles to DeGrom. The year Gibson set the era record, Denny McLain won 31 games. With Mclains superior win total, he must have been the better pitcher that year, correct?
Eurodandy, so because Mozeliak has been bad, analytics are meaningless? Should the Dodgers stop using them? The Rays? The Giants? The Astros? Or maybe should we just ask if Mozeliak knows how to apply this stuff as well as those other front offices?
It’s not Mo, dac. It’s Girsch and his entire staff of analytics guys. That why Mo brought Girsch in. Do you know his background, and how/why he got the job?
VEB saying what we have mostly been saying on here. We don’t have hardly anything to sell even if we wanted to.
If the Cardinals sell, who are they trading? https://t.co/4Ji9esg9G0
— viva el birdos (@vivaelbirdos) July 6, 2021
I’m sure Girsch has a background steeped in analytics, just like every other front office executive in baseball at this point. That doesn’t mean he knows how to apply this stuff as well as other organizations. Some organizations seem to be really good at it, others not so much. That is why I’ve been advocating we poach executives from the front offices that are innovating in this stuff. Clearly, every front office uses analytics but they are not all equally good at it.
Now I’m just saying….. I know it was one game….. Pirates activated Nogowski for their game last night and batted him fifth at 1B (switched to the OF later on). The guy that couldn’t hit a cantaloupe with the Cards was 2 for 4 with 3 runs scored and an rbi. It would take him a month to do that here. Maybe getting a chance to start did something positive for him or the new setting for him to show the Buccos that he can help out. Just saying…. one game.
Terrific idea, Onyx. Who
do you want to bring in that wants to come here and has better credentials than Mo?gscott posted the VEB story on what the Cards should do at the deadline. We have very little to trade (Kim) that makes sense. Free agents for ’22 is the way to go. But IMO DeWitt is too busy with Baseball Village to care much at all about his once competitive baseball team.
He probably doesn’t even read the comments on The Cardinal Nation.
No offense to those who played the game at a higher level but just because you have played the game at a high level does not make you a good evaluator of talent or better than those who didn’t. I know a lot of good players who were terrible at talent evaluation. I also know a lot of people who didn’t play the game at a high level who are excellent at talent evaluation.
Forsch31. What matters .most is how much baseball you have watched live and up close, and paid attention to what was there to see. Pre-game, between innings,between batters, in the dugout. There is meaningful stuff to be gleaned. Playing gives you a ringside seat, unless you are playing games in the dugout, etc. Some guys who played know a lot, same as some guys who didn’t. My guess is a lot of Cardinas staff does6know didly.
True story from the day. Decades ago I had occasion to talk to a scout now and then who had his start in the Northern California area. He told a story about when he first started out he was sitting with an old chomper who said ,’see that kid in the dugout leaning on the railing, I’ve been watching him for some time and have never seen him sitting down in the dugout. Make a note of guys like that.’ That kid was Willie McGee.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.