Statistics & You

[Outshined_One]

The Murray Chass thread got me thinking about something. While the majority of people on this board are comfortable with stats and are able to explain them, it seems like some people on this board are on completely different wavelengths when it comes to interpreting and understanding these statistics.

 

So, for example, I can calculate and explain some things like OBP, SLG, OPS, K/9, BB/9, IsoD, IsoP, and so on. I have a basic understanding of things like VORP, OPS+, EqA, and ERA+. For the life of me, I can't make heads or tails of WARP and advanced fielding metrics. I'd really like to learn more about them, don't get me wrong, but my current knowledge of them is not very good.

 

Getting down to the point of this thread, I have a few questions for all of you. I'm trying to get a better understanding of the breakdown of the people on this board when it comes to their opinions regarding statistics.

 

1) Do you prefer traditional statistics (AVG, RBI, ERA) or newer statistics (OBP, SLG, ERA+)? Why?

 

1a) If you prefer traditional statistics, do the newer statistics draw your interest? If not, why?

 

2) What particular statistics are you comfortable with using and interpreting?

 

3) What particular statistics might as well be a completely different language to you?

 

Perhaps we can use this thread to understand more about stats. That's my hope, at least. :D

[CuseCubFan69]

Go to heck stat boy!!!!

 

I like using all of them and looking or breaking down specific stats for a specific area that I'm trying to figure out. When someone throws out ERA as the barameter of how good a pitcher is it bothers me because I think there is a heck of a lot more than that to determine what makes him a good pitcher. I think ERA is ok but I like using WHIP, % of line drives hit of him, innings pitched, and yes...the horrible how does he do when he is struggling when he doesn't have his best stuff. I love to see it when a pitcher doesn't have his best stuff but fights it out long enough to help his team. How is that measured out stat wise, it isn't.

[daske17]

I certainly have no problem with the stats discussed on this board, even if I don't always understand them. The "newer" stats I'm more comfortable with are offensively based, OBP, OPS, SLG, etc. I'm still trying to wrap my head around the pitching stats like WHIP, bb/9, K/9, etc.

 

The minute you start talking WARP, VORP or anything like that, my eyes turn glassy and I start sucking my thumb.

 

I've never been good at stats or math to begin with, so I don't think I'll ever completely figure these things out.

[Tracer Bullet]

The Murray Chass thread got me thinking about something. While the majority of people on this board are comfortable with stats and are able to explain them, it seems like some people on this board are on completely different wavelengths when it comes to interpreting and understanding these statistics.

 

So, for example, I can calculate and explain some things like OBP, SLG, OPS, K/9, BB/9, IsoD, IsoP, and so on. I have a basic understanding of things like VORP, OPS+, EqA, and ERA+. For the life of me, I can't make heads or tails of WARP and advanced fielding metrics. I'd really like to learn more about them, don't get me wrong, but my current knowledge of them is not very good.

 

Getting down to the point of this thread, I have a few questions for all of you. I'm trying to get a better understanding of the breakdown of the people on this board when it comes to their opinions regarding statistics.

 

1) Do you prefer traditional statistics (AVG, RBI, ERA) or newer statistics (OBP, SLG, ERA+)? Why?

 

1a) If you prefer traditional statistics, do the newer statistics draw your interest? If not, why?

 

2) What particular statistics are you comfortable with using and interpreting?

 

3) What particular statistics might as well be a completely different language to you?

 

Perhaps we can use this thread to understand more about stats. That's my hope, at least. :D

 

1. Newer stats, I don't use traditional stats (AVG, RBI, etc) to compare the value of players at all anymore.

 

2 & 3) Sounds like you and I are in about the same boat. I can explain the "basic" newer stats, and know how to use many of them. Some (like WARP), I just haven't read enough about or tried to figure out. In theory I would like to know more about them and be comfortable using them, but realistically don't see that happening. I also don't spend a lot of time on the newer defensive metrics because I'm not convinced of their accuracy and/or usefulness in comparing or evaluating players. That might just be my ignorance though.

[CubColtPacer]

Hmm, this sounds like a winner to me.

 

1) If I had to pick one of each pair, I'd pick OBP, SLG, and ERA. I think AVG is an important stat to look also with OBP, and I think ERA+ is a good stat to look at, but I'm taking ERA for it's flexibility (ERA can be used inside of a game, during a season, or after a season-ERA+ is more accurate but has less times where it can be calculated and used).

 

1a)I do like several traditional statistics (although not nearly all of them), and yes, the newer statistics do interest me. I'm all for learning as much as I can about the game, and so anytime that I can find stats that refine the understanding of the game (OBP, SLG, OPS for example) I think that's a great thing. I also am very interested in the continuing research into several new stats that I don't put much stock in right now (fielding metrics for example) but that I know is continually improving and will be the future of analyzing those fields.

 

2)Hmmm-I use OBP, SLG, OPS, OPS+, ERA+, K/BB ratio, K/9, BB/9, and WHIP on a regular basis. There are many other stats that I understand and put pretty good value in but don't regularly use like ISOD, VORP, and other things like that, but I am always comparing things like VORP to what I think the stat would say about the player (if I have enough knowledge on the subject, like if it's my team). I also understand defensive stats like FRAA, even if I look at them with skepticism because of many aberrant numbers.

 

3) Most of the ones I don't know very well are only because I have only heard them a couple times, and so I can't remember their initials. However, there are a few stats out there that do sound like a different language, although I hope I can change that over time.

[CuseCubFan69]

Murray just e-mailed me and said this thread is just like the book my 2 mommies.

[cheapseats]

Murray just e-mailed me and said this thread is just like the book my 2 mommies.

 

Clearly a lie as Murray prefers the telegraph to electronic mail.

[TB_11]

The Murray Chass thread got me thinking about something. While the majority of people on this board are comfortable with stats and are able to explain them, it seems like some people on this board are on completely different wavelengths when it comes to interpreting and understanding these statistics.

 

So, for example, I can calculate and explain some things like OBP, SLG, OPS, K/9, BB/9, IsoD, IsoP, and so on. I have a basic understanding of things like VORP, OPS+, EqA, and ERA+. For the life of me, I can't make heads or tails of WARP and advanced fielding metrics. I'd really like to learn more about them, don't get me wrong, but my current knowledge of them is not very good.

 

Getting down to the point of this thread, I have a few questions for all of you. I'm trying to get a better understanding of the breakdown of the people on this board when it comes to their opinions regarding statistics.

 

1) Do you prefer traditional statistics (AVG, RBI, ERA) or newer statistics (OBP, SLG, ERA+)? Why?

 

1a) If you prefer traditional statistics, do the newer statistics draw your interest? If not, why?

 

2) What particular statistics are you comfortable with using and interpreting?

 

3) What particular statistics might as well be a completely different language to you?

 

Perhaps we can use this thread to understand more about stats. That's my hope, at least. :D

 

Nice question O_O.

 

I prefer newer statistics because they are a more accurate representation of a player's performance. That being said, it's still easier to interpret the older statistics, especially how day-to-day performance affects those statistics.

 

For instance, say in the middle of May Derrek goes 2-4 with 2 doubles and 3 RBI. I know his hits and doubles increase by 2, his runs scored doesn't change, and his RBI increase by 3. I have a rough idea of how much his OBP and SLG and even his EqA will increase, but have no idea what will happen to his VORP and WARP as a result of that one day.

 

For pitching I focus on K/9, BB/9, HR/9, IP, pitches/IP, as well as the traditional statistics of ERA, SO, and WHIP. Also I check out VORP for pitchers, but to the earlier point it's difficult to understand how one performance will affect a pitcher's VORP.

 

Defensive statistics at this point I fully ignore.

[cheapseats]

 

1) Do you prefer traditional statistics (AVG, RBI, ERA) or newer statistics (OBP, SLG, ERA+)? Why?

 

I far prefer "newer" stats. Batting average is next to useless. RBI is more of a team stat and is very influenced by where the batter hits in the order and whether Corey Patterson and Neifi Perez are hitting in front of him. ERA is misleading because it doesn't account for the difference between Great American Ballpark and PETCO.

 

2) What particular statistics are you comfortable with using and interpreting?

 

Any stats for which formulas are publicly available.

 

3) What particular statistics might as well be a completely different language to you?

 

Some of the advanced fielding metrics are difficult.

 

------------------

 

Ideally, I want statistics compare the actual contributions of players or teams on a level playing field.

[wade]

I like newer stats, despite having never, ever heard of them before coming to this site 5 or so years ago. And I considered myself a fairly knowledgable baseball fan. However, I now consider myself more so and even enjoy the game more because of it.

 

My take on stats is pretty broad, though, and encompasses the whole "small ball" style of play. As in, I can't stand it anymore. When people have thousands upon thousands of instances comparing runners scored from first w/ no outs with runners scored from second w/ one out, I get pretty convinced that in MOST instances, you shouldn't waste an out to try to move a guy over.

 

That said, in the broader spectrum, I think I still value the athleticism of a baseball player a little moreso than those I would consider "hardcore statheads", though in no way do I think they don't consider such attributes.

 

I strayed a little, but I think I got the gist. It's an interesting debate and one that could be terrific for both sides if some people would not ridicule those who don't share their opinion.

 

By the way, I think the non-stat people ridicule stat people more than the other way around, but that's been argued here before as well.

[Derwood]

I put most of my value in Win-Loss records for pitchers and Gold Gloves for fielders

[Soriano12]

1) Do you prefer traditional statistics (AVG, RBI, ERA) or newer statistics (OBP, SLG, ERA+)? Why?

 

 

ERA is considered a "new stat" ?

[goonys evil twin]

1) Do you prefer traditional statistics (AVG, RBI, ERA) or newer statistics (OBP, SLG, ERA+)? Why?

 

 

ERA is considered a "new stat" ?

 

ERA+

[radarluv1]

wheres the best resource that explains these in laymens terms? i think the + indicates a comparison to other players in the same year, but i'm not sure if park or league effects are thrown in and other wrinkles.

[Magnetic Curses]

I certainly have no problem with the stats discussed on this board, even if I don't always understand them. The "newer" stats I'm more comfortable with are offensively based, OBP, OPS, SLG, etc. I'm still trying to wrap my head around the pitching stats like WHIP, bb/9, K/9, etc.

 

The minute you start talking WARP, VORP or anything like that, my eyes turn glassy and I start sucking my thumb.

 

I've never been good at stats or math to begin with, so I don't think I'll ever completely figure these things out.

 

well, i'll help you with the more conventional stats like WHIP, BB/9, and k/9.

 

whip is how many baserunners per inning you allow, just think of it that way. anything around 1 is very good.

 

bb/9 and k/9 are simple enough, walks or k's per 9 innings--or how many walks or k's does a pitcher give up over the full length of a game. important stuff.

[CoolHandLuke]

wheres the best resource that explains these in laymens terms? i think the + indicates a comparison to other players in the same year, but i'm not sure if park or league effects are thrown in and other wrinkles.

 

here

 

Basically its a ratio comparing a player's era to the league average ERA with park adjustments thrown in, as far as I know.

 

100 is average, so if the league ERA is 4.50 and your park adjusted ERA is 4.50 then your ERA+ is going to be 100. I am not sure how they do the park adjusting calculations.

[MPrior]

I'm basically in the same boat as O_O and GRCubsFan: I pretty much just use the newer statistics. However, my knowledge of how the trickier ones are calculated and used is sketchy in many cases (VORP, WARP, WARP3, etc.).

 

For batters, I like a standard AVG/OBP/SLG line - I think OPS is overly used, and an inaccurate representation of a players' worth, as SLG is overrepresented in the overall stat (although OPS+ is very useful). I tend not to use statistics that I'm not sure of how they work, like EqA, VORP, WARP, WARP3, and so on, but when someone else uses them, I generally trust that they know what they're talking about - I just don't make use of them in my arguments.

 

For pitchers, I like all these (which have been mentioned before): ERA (sort of), ERA+, WHIP (sort of), H/9, BB/9, K/9, HR/9, K/BB, GB%, FB%, LD%. However, I'm also a big fan of OBP against and SLG against - I figure if they're good enough for batters, then they're good enough for pitchers. SLG against is particularly useful, because outside of HR/9, there's really no other stat that deals with how many XBH's a pitcher gives up, and that's pretty important.

[Magnetic Curses]

For batters, I like a standard AVG/OBP/SLG line - I think OPS is overly used, and an inaccurate representation of a players' worth, as SLG is overrepresented in the overall stat (although OPS+ is very useful).

 

UK has a very useful method for weighting OPS toward OBP, i can't remember what the exact weight is, though.

[Amazing_Grace]

I like the newer stats. To me, OBP is the single greatest measurement of a hitter's ability because it records the outcome of the most important part of the game, the individual battle between hitter and pitcher. OBP basically is how often, as a hitter, you win that battle. The more often you beat the pitcher as an offense, the better you're going to be. I also like SLG, P/PA, K/BB to tell me other things about what kind of hitter the hitter is. About the only traditional stat I find to have any value is AVG, as it's still a good way to see how good a hitter is at getting a hit, and whether it is consistent year to year will say a lot about whether a hitter is lucky or good. I'd like to see more sites carry peripheral stats like BABIP, LD%, and such because you can get even more in-depth into how good a hitter a player is vs. how lucky they are. I think OPS is a flawed stat because it overvalues SLG vs. OBP, but it's alright as a quick and dirty way to compare two players.

 

On the pitching side, I like OBP against and WHIP to evaluate pitchers. OBP against for the same reason as I like it on offense, and WHIP because it basically measures the same thing on a per inning basis and is a lot easier to look at to compare players. I must confess I don't know how ERA+ is calculated but would like to.

 

I don't know a lot about some of the really new stats like WARP, VORP, and I don't know anything about defensive stats. If someone has links to pages that explain them, that would be cool.

[Magnetic Curses]

I like the newer stats. To me, OBP is the single greatest measurement of a hitter's ability because it records the outcome of the most important part of the game, the individual battle between hitter and pitcher. OBP basically is how often, as a hitter, you win that battle. The more often you beat the pitcher as an offense, the better you're going to be. I also like SLG, P/PA, K/BB to tell me other things about what kind of hitter the hitter is. About the only traditional stat I find to have any value is AVG, as it's still a good way to see how good a hitter is at getting a hit, and whether it is consistent year to year will say a lot about whether a hitter is lucky or good. I'd like to see more sites carry peripheral stats like BABIP, LD%, and such because you can get even more in-depth into how good a hitter a player is vs. how lucky they are. I think OPS is a flawed stat because it overvalues SLG vs. OBP, but it's alright as a quick and dirty way to compare two players.

 

On the pitching side, I like OBP against and WHIP to evaluate pitchers. OBP against for the same reason as I like it on offense, and WHIP because it basically measures the same thing on a per inning basis and is a lot easier to look at to compare players. I must confess I don't know how ERA+ is calculated but would like to.

 

I don't know a lot about some of the really new stats like WARP, VORP, and I don't know anything about defensive stats. If someone has links to pages that explain them, that would be cool.

 

i agree that OBP is the single most useful conventional offensive statistic, no doubt.

[CubColtPacer]

I like the newer stats. To me, OBP is the single greatest measurement of a hitter's ability because it records the outcome of the most important part of the game, the individual battle between hitter and pitcher. OBP basically is how often, as a hitter, you win that battle. The more often you beat the pitcher as an offense, the better you're going to be. I also like SLG, P/PA, K/BB to tell me other things about what kind of hitter the hitter is. About the only traditional stat I find to have any value is AVG, as it's still a good way to see how good a hitter is at getting a hit, and whether it is consistent year to year will say a lot about whether a hitter is lucky or good. I'd like to see more sites carry peripheral stats like BABIP, LD%, and such because you can get even more in-depth into how good a hitter a player is vs. how lucky they are. I think OPS is a flawed stat because it overvalues SLG vs. OBP, but it's alright as a quick and dirty way to compare two players.

On the pitching side, I like OBP against and WHIP to evaluate pitchers. OBP against for the same reason as I like it on offense, and WHIP because it basically measures the same thing on a per inning basis and is a lot easier to look at to compare players. I must confess I don't know how ERA+ is calculated but would like to.

 

I don't know a lot about some of the really new stats like WARP, VORP, and I don't know anything about defensive stats. If someone has links to pages that explain them, that would be cool.

 

I'm quoting you, but I'll reference everyone. Sure, OPS is a flawed stat, but so are all the others-OPS still is the best indicator of runs scored out there. Sure, it's not complete, but shouldn't it still be held in high regard for how predictive it is?

[Amazing_Grace]

I like the newer stats. To me, OBP is the single greatest measurement of a hitter's ability because it records the outcome of the most important part of the game, the individual battle between hitter and pitcher. OBP basically is how often, as a hitter, you win that battle. The more often you beat the pitcher as an offense, the better you're going to be. I also like SLG, P/PA, K/BB to tell me other things about what kind of hitter the hitter is. About the only traditional stat I find to have any value is AVG, as it's still a good way to see how good a hitter is at getting a hit, and whether it is consistent year to year will say a lot about whether a hitter is lucky or good. I'd like to see more sites carry peripheral stats like BABIP, LD%, and such because you can get even more in-depth into how good a hitter a player is vs. how lucky they are. I think OPS is a flawed stat because it overvalues SLG vs. OBP, but it's alright as a quick and dirty way to compare two players.

On the pitching side, I like OBP against and WHIP to evaluate pitchers. OBP against for the same reason as I like it on offense, and WHIP because it basically measures the same thing on a per inning basis and is a lot easier to look at to compare players. I must confess I don't know how ERA+ is calculated but would like to.

 

I don't know a lot about some of the really new stats like WARP, VORP, and I don't know anything about defensive stats. If someone has links to pages that explain them, that would be cool.

 

I'm quoting you, but I'll reference everyone. Sure, OPS is a flawed stat, but so are all the others-OPS still is the best indicator of runs scored out there. Sure, it's not complete, but shouldn't it still be held in high regard for how predictive it is?

 

I'm not 100% sure on this one, but I think OBP is actually more predictive of runs scored. I think someone on this board calculated it a while back, that if you look at OPS, OBP, and SLG, OBP ends up being the best predictor of the three in runs scored. I don't remember enough of my stats classes to calculate it myself. Anyone else remember that thread?

[Magnetic Curses]

I like the newer stats. To me, OBP is the single greatest measurement of a hitter's ability because it records the outcome of the most important part of the game, the individual battle between hitter and pitcher. OBP basically is how often, as a hitter, you win that battle. The more often you beat the pitcher as an offense, the better you're going to be. I also like SLG, P/PA, K/BB to tell me other things about what kind of hitter the hitter is. About the only traditional stat I find to have any value is AVG, as it's still a good way to see how good a hitter is at getting a hit, and whether it is consistent year to year will say a lot about whether a hitter is lucky or good. I'd like to see more sites carry peripheral stats like BABIP, LD%, and such because you can get even more in-depth into how good a hitter a player is vs. how lucky they are. I think OPS is a flawed stat because it overvalues SLG vs. OBP, but it's alright as a quick and dirty way to compare two players.

On the pitching side, I like OBP against and WHIP to evaluate pitchers. OBP against for the same reason as I like it on offense, and WHIP because it basically measures the same thing on a per inning basis and is a lot easier to look at to compare players. I must confess I don't know how ERA+ is calculated but would like to.

 

I don't know a lot about some of the really new stats like WARP, VORP, and I don't know anything about defensive stats. If someone has links to pages that explain them, that would be cool.

 

I'm quoting you, but I'll reference everyone. Sure, OPS is a flawed stat, but so are all the others-OPS still is the best indicator of runs scored out there. Sure, it's not complete, but shouldn't it still be held in high regard for how predictive it is?

 

I'm not 100% sure on this one, but I think OBP is actually more predictive of runs scored. I think someone on this board calculated it a while back, that if you look at OPS, OBP, and SLG, OBP ends up being the best predictor of the three in runs scored. I don't remember enough of my stats classes to calculate it myself. Anyone else remember that thread?

 

OBP is more important, but SLG is important as well. there is a weight, as i mentioned.

[CubColtPacer]

I like the newer stats. To me, OBP is the single greatest measurement of a hitter's ability because it records the outcome of the most important part of the game, the individual battle between hitter and pitcher. OBP basically is how often, as a hitter, you win that battle. The more often you beat the pitcher as an offense, the better you're going to be. I also like SLG, P/PA, K/BB to tell me other things about what kind of hitter the hitter is. About the only traditional stat I find to have any value is AVG, as it's still a good way to see how good a hitter is at getting a hit, and whether it is consistent year to year will say a lot about whether a hitter is lucky or good. I'd like to see more sites carry peripheral stats like BABIP, LD%, and such because you can get even more in-depth into how good a hitter a player is vs. how lucky they are. I think OPS is a flawed stat because it overvalues SLG vs. OBP, but it's alright as a quick and dirty way to compare two players.

On the pitching side, I like OBP against and WHIP to evaluate pitchers. OBP against for the same reason as I like it on offense, and WHIP because it basically measures the same thing on a per inning basis and is a lot easier to look at to compare players. I must confess I don't know how ERA+ is calculated but would like to.

 

I don't know a lot about some of the really new stats like WARP, VORP, and I don't know anything about defensive stats. If someone has links to pages that explain them, that would be cool.

 

I'm quoting you, but I'll reference everyone. Sure, OPS is a flawed stat, but so are all the others-OPS still is the best indicator of runs scored out there. Sure, it's not complete, but shouldn't it still be held in high regard for how predictive it is?

 

I'm not 100% sure on this one, but I think OBP is actually more predictive of runs scored. I think someone on this board calculated it a while back, that if you look at OPS, OBP, and SLG, OBP ends up being the best predictor of the three in runs scored. I don't remember enough of my stats classes to calculate it myself. Anyone else remember that thread?

 

Nah, it was actually found that OPS was much better-I'll try to find that thread though.

[Amazing_Grace]

I like the newer stats. To me, OBP is the single greatest measurement of a hitter's ability because it records the outcome of the most important part of the game, the individual battle between hitter and pitcher. OBP basically is how often, as a hitter, you win that battle. The more often you beat the pitcher as an offense, the better you're going to be. I also like SLG, P/PA, K/BB to tell me other things about what kind of hitter the hitter is. About the only traditional stat I find to have any value is AVG, as it's still a good way to see how good a hitter is at getting a hit, and whether it is consistent year to year will say a lot about whether a hitter is lucky or good. I'd like to see more sites carry peripheral stats like BABIP, LD%, and such because you can get even more in-depth into how good a hitter a player is vs. how lucky they are. I think OPS is a flawed stat because it overvalues SLG vs. OBP, but it's alright as a quick and dirty way to compare two players.

On the pitching side, I like OBP against and WHIP to evaluate pitchers. OBP against for the same reason as I like it on offense, and WHIP because it basically measures the same thing on a per inning basis and is a lot easier to look at to compare players. I must confess I don't know how ERA+ is calculated but would like to.

 

I don't know a lot about some of the really new stats like WARP, VORP, and I don't know anything about defensive stats. If someone has links to pages that explain them, that would be cool.

 

I'm quoting you, but I'll reference everyone. Sure, OPS is a flawed stat, but so are all the others-OPS still is the best indicator of runs scored out there. Sure, it's not complete, but shouldn't it still be held in high regard for how predictive it is?

 

I'm not 100% sure on this one, but I think OBP is actually more predictive of runs scored. I think someone on this board calculated it a while back, that if you look at OPS, OBP, and SLG, OBP ends up being the best predictor of the three in runs scored. I don't remember enough of my stats classes to calculate it myself. Anyone else remember that thread?

 

Nah, it was actually found that OPS was much better-I'll try to find that thread though.

 

Ah, it was a while ago. Does the site have a search feature?