Just browsing around Wikipedia...

[Omar]

I was really bored. I stumbled upon something called the Neifi Index. I have never heard of it before, not even on NSBB.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neifi_Perez

Pérez's offense has attracted serious criticism, and has even led to him being the namesake of the Neifi Index

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neifi_Index

Kaufman, an admirer of sabermetrician Bill James, made his own contribution to baseball statistics by creating the Neifi Index[1]. Named for infielder Neifi Pérez, this statistic measures a player's ability to contribute to his team's success by not playing. Introduced as an award that "we, the great whiffing, grounder-booting, sedentary lifestyle-leading masses, wouldn't just have a chance of winning if we were allowed to play. We'd be a lock", the Neifi Index is the difference between a player's team's winning percentage when he does not play and when he does play. It is called the Neifi Index because when Kaufman first computed it, the San Francisco Giants winning percentage when Pérez did not play was .929, but was only .542 when he did play, thus giving him a Neifi Index of .387.

 

I still cannot believe how horrible he is.

[killthegoat06]

Hahaha

[OleMissCub]

Kaufman, an admirer of sabermetrician Bill James, made his own contribution to baseball statistics by creating the Neifi Index[1]. Named for infielder Neifi Pérez, this statistic measures a player's ability to contribute to his team's success by not playing.

 

TEARS....

 

can't stop laughing at that. What a terrible stat.

[Schwarber Fan]

Can anyone calculate Jock's Neifi Index?

[killthegoat06]

How did none of us come up with this?

[Amazing_Grace]

Kaufman, an admirer of sabermetrician Bill James, made his own contribution to baseball statistics by creating the Neifi Index[1]. Named for infielder Neifi Pérez, this statistic measures a player's ability to contribute to his team's success by not playing.

 

TEARS....

 

can't stop laughing at that. What a terrible stat.

 

I dunno. It seems pretty sound. Since you subtract the team winning percentage with him playing from the winning percentage with him not playing, you avoid differences caused by differences in overall team quality and ballpark factors. It could be flawed for certain positions like catcher, since some tend to play when only certain pitchers are on the mound.

 

The question is whether the stat is consistent over time. If a player has consistently the same or a similar Neifi index season after season over the course of his career, and/or if the Neifi index of players with similar numbers is similar over the whole of MLB, we can't simply dismiss the stat as gibberish.

[killthegoat06]

Kaufman, an admirer of sabermetrician Bill James, made his own contribution to baseball statistics by creating the Neifi Index[1]. Named for infielder Neifi Pérez, this statistic measures a player's ability to contribute to his team's success by not playing.

 

TEARS....

 

can't stop laughing at that. What a terrible stat.

 

I dunno. It seems pretty sound. Since you subtract the team winning percentage with him playing from the winning percentage with him not playing, you avoid differences caused by differences in overall team quality and ballpark factors. It could be flawed for certain positions like catcher, since some tend to play when only certain pitchers are on the mound.

 

The question is whether the stat is consistent over time. If a player has consistently the same or a similar Neifi index season after season over the course of his career, and/or if the Neifi index of players with similar numbers is similar over the whole of MLB, we can't simply dismiss the stat as gibberish.

 

:lol:

[CubColtPacer]

Can anyone calculate Jock's Neifi Index?

 

Games Jacque has started: 25-25 (.500)

Games Jacque has not stated: 9-14 (.391)

 

So his Neifi index would be -.109

[killthegoat06]

Can anyone calculate Jock's Neifi Index?

 

Games Jacque has started: 25-25 (.500)

Games Jacque has not stated: 9-14 (.391)

 

So his Neifi index would be -.109

 

 

Really? :shock:

[snoodmonger]

I'm just trying to figure out what dark, empty emotional place I'd have to be in to decide to wiki neifi perez.

[OleMissCub]

I dunno. It seems pretty sound. Since you subtract the team winning percentage with him playing from the winning percentage with him not playing, you avoid differences caused by differences in overall team quality and ballpark factors. It could be flawed for certain positions like catcher, since some tend to play when only certain pitchers are on the mound.

 

I'm not saying it's a BAD stat. I was saying it's terrible for Neifi and for anyone who gets associated with it.

[Amazing_Grace]

I dunno. It seems pretty sound. Since you subtract the team winning percentage with him playing from the winning percentage with him not playing, you avoid differences caused by differences in overall team quality and ballpark factors. It could be flawed for certain positions like catcher, since some tend to play when only certain pitchers are on the mound.

 

I'm not saying it's a BAD stat. I was saying it's terrible for Neifi and for anyone who gets associated with it.

 

Ah, I see what you meant. You mean it's a bad stat for someone to be leading in or score highly in. We'd have to test the stat over time to see if it's a BAD stat in the other sense. My post was sort of a goofy attempt at humor anyway :wink:

[imb]

Well, it's definitely a stupid stat, I don't think anyone would argue against that.

[Omar]

I don't think he was even trying to make a serious stat. Just doing it for fun. Parody of Bill James.

[B]

This is awesome.

[TruffleShuffle]

bottom line - more playing time for jock jones!

[Post Count Padder]

Haha, beautiful

[Coach C]

Totally awesome. I wonder what was Izturis' Neifi Index is...