It sounds like you're ultimately spinning an anti-sabermetric approach in the context of this nigh-mythical group of "casual fans" who are even aware of the types of stats you're describing, much less who are "throwing them around." Where are you encountering these people? And why are you talking about them like they're somehow less informed or more mistaken or whatever than the vast, vast majority who don't even fully understand basic things like BA, RBI, OBP, SB/CS, pitching W/L or ERA? It would be a joyous miracle if there was a bunch of fans out there casually using things like WARP or VORP or UZR because it would likely mean they at least fully "got" the easy stuff. "Nigh-mythical group" huh? Well you're in it pal. From a recent discussion of the 100 best players in baseball: Fielder's a lot lower than I would have assumed. VORP is position-adjusted, so the number is relative to others at the position. So, a player that plays SS that had Fielder's stats would have a significantly higher VORP than Fielder does at 1B. So, whlie his numbers overall are pretty good in comparison to the rest of the league, he's just the 9th most effective 1B. OK, that makes more sense than what I was remembering VORP as. Thanks. You go ballistic on anyone that has anything bad to say about sabermetrics, and spout off with your smarter-than-thou smugness, but yet display a fundamental misunderstanding of one of the most basic and widely-used sabermetrics... not realizing VORP is position-adjusted. Priceless. And exactly what I'm talking about. Actually, scratch the longer response I had; this post is stupidly hilarious enough just be to quoted again in all of its glory.