Baseball Pissing Match

[MarquetteFan94]

Look at the title of the thread dude, it's a CUBS and BREWERS pissing match...

Oh, thanks.  I get it now.

[MarquetteFan94]

He looked like Bill Buckner on that little dribbler.

Interesting analogy.  In what way did he look like Bill Buckner?  The fact the he is black, was playing for a different team, let the ball go under the glove to the right of his body, the play took place in LF vs. at first base, that the game was played in May vs. a World Series game 23 years ago or that his team won the game?

[MarquetteFan94]

The results are skewed anyway because Soriano completely takes plays off.

Yes, good point.  That is easily proven and well documented.  I would much rather see Soriano making failed diving attempts to rob someone of a single and send his frail ass to the DL again.

[BrewCity83]

Interesting analogy.  In what way did he look like Bill Buckner?  The fact the he is black, was playing for a different team, let the ball go under the glove to the right of his body, the play took place in LF vs. at first base, that the game was played in May vs. a World Series game 23 years ago or that his team won the game?

He plays in the Major Leagues, for a cursed team, was moving slowly toward the ball; he let it go under his glove; it cost his team at the time it happened; it was a routine play.

[LON]

Yes, good point.  That is easily proven and well documented.  I would much rather see Soriano making failed diving attempts to rob someone of a single and send his frail ass to the DL again.

Sorry Mr. Sarcasm Police, I guess I should have used teal.

[MarquetteFan94]

He plays in the Major Leagues, for a cursed team, was moving slowly toward the ball; he let it go under his glove; it cost his team at the time it happened; it was a routine play.

Please stop comparing yesterday's error by Soriano in LF to Bill Buckner's error in the 1986 World Series that allowed the winning run to score forcing a Game 7.  Does every routine error by any position player then rightfully get compared to Buckner?  Honestly, you're way off on this one and you know it.  Quit while you're behind.

[Moonboots]

I didn't read anyone saying that all is well in Wrigleyville...quite the contrary.  Given that state of the team thus far and the way players have performed, I'll take the 23-22 record and hope to continually improve the remainder of the season.  The expected level of performance for this team is pretty clear.  With the roster they had coming out of spring training they were the consensus favorite to win the division.  So far players not living up to repuatation/previous performance levels and injuries have prevented that from happening.  Maybe/hopefully it'll improve, maybe it won't. 

What does Braun's being a punk have to do with Zambrano?

Kudos to you for finding a wealth of fielding statistics that nobody uses showing Braun is a better LF than Soriano (I'm assuming that's what this sabermetrics discussion was about)...guess we can close the book on that one.  That debate was ridiculous anyway.

RE: Braun being a punk in relation to Zambrano - Just pointing out a double standard, that Z's outburst is equivalent to or worse than whatever Braun's antics are perceived to be, but Z gets worshipped for it.  "Stud." "Emotion." Right.


RE: Sabermetrics argument.  I know ptm (I believe?) has said in this thread that he'll "take on that argument anytime" because "he has the numbers back it up."  I'm assuming he was referring to sabermetric fielding numbers, and if I'm wrong, then I'd be happy to listen to what his justification is.  In any case, I said I think the numbers are skewed and meaningless as it is and never use them as any sort of justification vs. the "eye test" of watching fielders.  Even so, Braun's numbers are STILL better than Soriano's this year, so that can't even be used as a justification.  I'm just interested to hear what ptm has to say about the issue since his last reply on the subject (not to me) was "Do you want to argue that?"  Well, I did.

[mu-rara]

By the way, I like how not a word was spoken while the Scrubs were on an 8 game losing streak.  Let me guess, it was the holiday weekend and I was the only 1 who wastes my time on here on holiday weekends, right?  8 days is a long time for a weekend.  But now that they have 2 wins in a row, those Scrubs fans are out in full force!  Weird...

That is typical Chicago frontrunning.  If the Cubs sucked, Wrigley would be empty...EMPTY.....Well, not empty, but there would be room for all the REAL Cub fans....the fans who show up when the team is losing.

[wadesworld]

Kudos to you for finding a wealth of fielding statistics that nobody uses showing Braun is a better LF than Soriano (I'm assuming that's what this sabermetrics discussion was about)...guess we can close the book on that one.  That debate was ridiculous anyway.

http://vault.sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1153911/index.htm
Yes MF94, nobody uses sabermetrics.  Nobody at all.  Take the time to read this article.  I know you will still be too arrogant to accept the fact that it IS indeed used to turn around baseball teams (the Rays) and that you, as a Scrubs fan, are most certainly correct no questions asked, but this statistic is used by teams to decide who to draft, trade for, go after in free agency, etc.  It is VERY widely used and VERY helpful.
But yes, he found a statistic that nobody uses.


"It has taken three decades, but the mystery of defensive analysis, perhaps the last frontier in the statistical ether, has been cracked by sabermetricians who have devoted 15, 20 years to the cause. The clunkily named metrics that have emerged within the last five years may sound like topics at a symposium for mechanical engineers—Probablistic Model of Range, Defensive Regression Analysis, Special Aggregate Fielding Evaluation, Ultimate Zone Rating—but not only have they become accepted by analysts like James as accurate tools, they have also infiltrated the daily vernacular of front offices."

[BrewCity83]

Please stop comparing yesterday's error by Soriano in LF to Bill Buckner's error in the 1986 World Series that allowed the winning run to score forcing a Game 7.  Does every routine error by any position player then rightfully get compared to Buckner?  Honestly, you're way off on this one and you know it.  Quit while you're behind.

Hey, I just said "He looked like Bill Buckner on that little dribbler."  You're just sore because Buckner was a revered Cub before he went on to infamy for that other cursed team.  And now you're seeing what an inconsistent and nonchalant defensive player your beloved Sorry-ass left fielder is.

[MarquetteFan94]

Hey, I just said "He looked like Bill Buckner on that little dribbler."  You're just sore because Buckner was a revered Cub before he went on to infamy for that other cursed team.  And now you're seeing what an inconsistent and nonchalant defensive player your beloved Sorry-ass left fielder is.

It sure seemed like you were comparing the two plays in your last post....maybe I misunderstood.  What Buckner did in Boston has no bearing on how I felt about him as a Cub.  He won a batting title while in a Cubs uniform and that's what he'll be remembered for in Chicago.  I've already said this, Soriano will win way more games with his bat than he'll lose with his glove...end of story.  Yesterday's error didn't end up costing the team a thing.

[MarquetteFan94]

http://vault.sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1153911/index.htm
Yes MF94, nobody uses sabermetrics.  Nobody at all.  Take the time to read this article.  I know you will still be too arrogant to accept the fact that it IS indeed used to turn around baseball teams (the Rays) and that you, as a Scrubs fan, are most certainly correct no questions asked, but this statistic is used by teams to decide who to draft, trade for, go after in free agency, etc.  It is VERY widely used and VERY helpful.
But yes, he found a statistic that nobody uses.


"It has taken three decades, but the mystery of defensive analysis, perhaps the last frontier in the statistical ether, has been cracked by sabermetricians who have devoted 15, 20 years to the cause. The clunkily named metrics that have emerged within the last five years may sound like topics at a symposium for mechanical engineers—Probablistic Model of Range, Defensive Regression Analysis, Special Aggregate Fielding Evaluation, Ultimate Zone Rating—but not only have they become accepted by analysts like James as accurate tools, they have also infiltrated the daily vernacular of front offices."

Wow, nice Google search.  I'll take a pass on the article, but thanks.  So now we're comparing ourselves (the layman fan) to the front office staff and talent scouts of MLB franchises in the use of statistics?  Let me clarify...by "nobody" I'm referring to the everyday fan...the people in the seats....the people that waste their holidays on these boards. 

I don't recall an announcer EVER saying..."well Ron that error really doesn't surprise me given his Probablistic Model of Range decrease of 2.4 compared to last year's 3.7....combine that with his UZR rating of -1.7 and I could've told you he wasn't going to make that play."

I'll stick with the eye test, errors, assists, nice catches/throws and gold gloves when it comes to fielding.  This of course all stems from a Soriano/Braun LF debate which has been, and will continue to be, pointless...they are both worse than average...if you want to use UZR to say that Braun is not quite as worse than average then more power to you.

[Moonboots]

Where has PTM gone?  You figure he's been salivating to prove this point about Soriano vs. Braun for months now, and when given the chance, he disappears...


To justify what I said about the statistics being misleading, fan graphs puts FAR too much emphasis on the arm factor, which is the only thing keeping Soriano above water at this point.  Last year, Soriano had an Ultimate Zone Rating (UZR) of 2.5, of which 4.7 came from the arm factor, meaning the rest of his ability (range, errors) were below average. 

Furthermore, Soriano has tanked performance-wise in each of his three years in left field with the Cubs.  His UZR dropped from 18.4 (again... all arm) in '07 to 2.5 in '08 and -2.1 so far this season.  Meanwhile, Braun went from a -3.2 UZR last year to a -1.7 thus far this season (coincidentally... better than Mr. Soriano). 

Braun's not there yet, but he's close.  He's playing farther in now and allowing his athleticism to let him range back on balls easier.  The days of Braun getting consistently eaten up by balls in the gaps because of bad angles started disappearing about August of last season, but PTM will fondly reference this as if it were fact present day.  All of this comes at the expense of Braun being in his second full season at left field.  Ever. At any level. 

I know most of these numbers will mean nothing to most of you, but I know PTM knows what I'm talking about and planned on holding it over the heads of those who don't really follow advanced statistics.  That's not gonna cut it. Braun is improving in his second year at the position and Soriano is on a steady decline.

And if you feel these statistics are abstract and meaningless like I do... there's also the eye test, which puts Braun FAR ahead of Soriano in the field this year, probably to stay. 

Meanwhile, John Dewan (you know.. the writer of The Fielding Bible.. http://www.fieldingbible.com/) has Braun rated as a 7 to Soriano's 5 this year. 

And if you really want to get into it PTM, we could talk about how much of a fraud UZR statistics are to begin with.

http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=3410&position=3B/OF#fielding

http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=847&position=2B/OF#fielding

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/glossary/

There's the numbers and a glossary, in case anyone wants to take a look.

Looks like we're on the same page then, MF94.

[MarquetteFan94]

Looks like we're on the same page then, MF94.

I agree.

[wadesworld]

Wow, nice Google search.  I'll take a pass on the article, but thanks.  So now we're comparing ourselves (the layman fan) to the front office staff and talent scouts of MLB franchises in the use of statistics?  Let me clarify...by "nobody" I'm referring to the everyday fan...the people in the seats....the people that waste their holidays on these boards.  

I don't recall an announcer EVER saying..."well Ron that error really doesn't surprise me given his Probablistic Model of Range decrease of 2.4 compared to last year's 3.7....combine that with his UZR rating of -1.7 and I could've told you he wasn't going to make that play."

I'll stick with the eye test, errors, assists, nice catches/throws and gold gloves when it comes to fielding.  This of course all stems from a Soriano/Braun LF debate which has been, and will continue to be, pointless...they are both worse than average...if you want to use UZR to say that Braun is not quite as worse than average then more power to you.

Haha I google searched for this article because it was a 6 page article in Sports Illustrated a month ago.  I have a subscription to Sports Illustrated and I read the article, so when you said "nobody uses" sabermetrics I knew you were sorely mistaken.  It actually is a very interesting article.  It gives props to your left fielder, saying he is a better left fielder than most people give him credit for.  Whether or not you're scared of it proving my point, if you enjoy baseball it is worth the read.

I personally will take what professional scouts outlook over what the average fan "sees" as far as deciding who is a better fielder.  I'm pretty sure, but could be wrong, that a professional baseball scout for an MLB team has a better idea of who is a better outfielder than just some random person who watches 16 games of Ryan Braun in a season and thinks he is bad.

But it is as I thought, you see what you see with red and blue glasses on and you're convinced you're right, even if there are people out there who do this stuff for a living and will disagree with you.

Regardless, my point still stands.  These stats are used, and now the "average fan" who has a Sports Illustrated subscription knows the importance of these statistics too.  So no, I didn't just google search "sabermetrics" and happen to fall upon it.  I read a great article and you said nobody uses it, and conveniently I knew otherwise because of this article.

[MarquetteFan94]

Haha I google searched for this article because it was a 6 page article in Sports Illustrated a month ago.  I have a subscription to Sports Illustrated and I read the article, so when you said "nobody uses" sabermetrics I knew you were sorely mistaken.  It actually is a very interesting article.  It gives props to your left fielder, saying he is a better left fielder than most people give him credit for.  Whether or not you're scared of it proving my point, if you enjoy baseball it is worth the read.

I personally will take what professional scouts outlook over what the average fan "sees" as far as deciding who is a better fielder.  I'm pretty sure, but could be wrong, that a professional baseball scout for an MLB team has a better idea of who is a better outfielder than just some random person who watches 16 games of Ryan Braun in a season and thinks he is bad.

But it is as I thought, you see what you see with red and blue glasses on and you're convinced you're right, even if there are people out there who do this stuff for a living and will disagree with you.

Regardless, my point still stands.  These stats are used, and now the "average fan" who has a Sports Illustrated subscription knows the importance of these statistics too.  So no, I didn't just google search "sabermetrics" and happen to fall upon it.  I read a great article and you said nobody uses it, and conveniently I knew otherwise because of this article.

Yes....and I corrected my statement saying the everyday (casual or avid) fan does not use sabermetrics...if you disagree with that you're out of your mind.  I'd guess that less than half the MLB teams themselves are even using them.  I don't need to see Soriano's UZR rating to know he has a better than average arm that will save his ass and save the Cubs runs.  I also don't need it to know that he'll misplay balls and look lost out there at times.  Teams are way more interested in a player's offensive production than their UZR...especially corner outfielders.

There are plenty of scouts that use the eye test and emphasize offensive production over how many runs they may be able to save their team based on a statistic that's not universally adopted.

My point still stands...."nobody" uses sabermetrics outside of a few actuaries and statisticians hired by a handful of teams.  Next time you're at Miller Park and ask 20 people what Cameron's UZR is.

[Brewtown Andy]

That is typical Chicago frontrunning.  If the Cubs sucked, Wrigley would be empty...EMPTY.....Well, not empty, but there would be room for all the REAL Cub fans....the fans who show up when the team is losing.

Cubs averaged 25K in 1987 when Dawson won the MVP playing for a last place team & haven't been under 25K since then.

http://www.baseball-almanac.com/teams/cubsatte.shtml

[wadesworld]

I'd guess that less than half the MLB teams themselves are even using them.

There are plenty of scouts that use the eye test and emphasize offensive production over how many runs they may be able to save their team based on a statistic that's not universally adopted.

See there's where you're wrong.  If you read the article it says that all but about 3 teams use the sabermetrics.  And not too many scouts use only their eye test at all.  Defense is 50% as important as offense.  So you are correct, good offense is going to create more runs than bad defense will give up, but that is a much higher percentage than most people think.  Otherwise players like Mat Gamel would be playing every single day.

[pillardean]

See there's where you're wrong.  If you read the article it says that all but about 3 teams use the sabermetrics.  And not too many scouts use only their eye test at all.  Defense is 50% as important as offense.  So you are correct, good offense is going to create more runs than bad defense will give up, but that is a much higher percentage than most people think.  Otherwise players like Mat Gamel would be playing every single day.

Come on WadesWorld you should know you can't talk baseball with a Chubs fan.  I know, it's difficult dealing with incompetent fans but you have to get used to it.  The only real knowledge a Cubs fan has of baseball, in association with performance, is a sh**** 16 inch bar league while drinking Old Style.



One thing the Grub fans would watch, or read--but they would rather wait for the video highlight, would be a commercial or article about what energy drink Z is currently chugging.  Then the next day they would buy a case to cure their hangover as they crash in their daddies' condos alongside the Lake.

To finish my piss, Braun will be a gold glover in three years and childish names for the Cubs are still pretty damn funny.     

[MarquetteFan94]

Cubs averaged 25K in 1987 when Dawson won the MVP playing for a last place team & haven't been under 25K since then.

http://www.baseball-almanac.com/teams/cubsatte.shtml

Not to mention the 3+ million they drew for that horrendous last place team in '06...not sure the point he was trying to make anyway.

[Brewtown Andy]

Not to mention the 3+ million they drew for that horrendous last place team in '06...not sure the point he was trying to make anyway.

I was going to ignore that aberration, since attendance was trending upwards and that team was expected to do well when most of the tickets were sold.

[MarquetteFan94]

See there's where you're wrong.  If you read the article it says that all but about 3 teams use the sabermetrics.  And not too many scouts use only their eye test at all.  Defense is 50% as important as offense.  So you are correct, good offense is going to create more runs than bad defense will give up, but that is a much higher percentage than most people think.  Otherwise players like Mat Gamel would be playing every single day.

I have my doubts the article says that but I'll take your word for it.  Until teams have a clue how to interpret these numbers (which they don't) they'll still have no idea how to transfer it to a player's contract or comparison value.  Until that day comes offensive stats will take precedence...followed by the stats that are universally/traditionally used for defense.

Point remains, if all of the MLB teams are not using it (even if it's only 3 that aren't as you suggest), surely fans of the game or not using it either.  I'm not sure how you can disagree with that?  I don't recall UZR showing up on any rotisserie baseball scoring.  Again, next time you're at Brewers game ask 20...no, 50 fans what Braun's UZR is...I'd put the over under on the people knowing the answer at 1.

[wadesworld]

I have my doubts the article says that but I'll take your word for it.  Until teams have a clue how to interpret these numbers (which they don't) they'll still have no idea how to transfer it to a player's contract or comparison value.  Until that day comes offensive stats will take precedence...followed by the stats that are universally/traditionally used for defense.

Point remains, if all of the MLB teams are not using it (even if it's only 3 that aren't as you suggest), surely fans of the game or not using it either.  I'm not sure how you can disagree with that?  I don't recall UZR showing up on any rotisserie baseball scoring.  Again, next time you're at Brewers game ask 20...no, 50 fans what Braun's UZR is...I'd put the over under on the people knowing the answer at 1.

Alright, fair enough, I will give you that an average fan won't know their team's UZR, so you're right on that, but I still believe that the majority of people that really matter when it comes to analyzing talent (those who put together teams) do utilize these statistics, and it helped to make a MAJOR turnaround (worst team in baseball to best team in baseball in 2 years) for the Rays.  So I don't think that these statistics should be thrown to the side as useless statistics.

[mu-rara]

Not to mention the 3+ million they drew for that horrendous last place team in '06...not sure the point he was trying to make anyway.

The point I was making is that Cub fans all hide when THEIR team is losing, but get them on a little winnig streak, they're all out then.  I can hardly wait for the Cubs to be uncool again.

[Mayor McCheese]

Cubs averaged 25K in 1987 when Dawson won the MVP playing for a last place team & haven't been under 25K since then.

http://www.baseball-almanac.com/teams/cubsatte.shtml

To argue attendence is pointless.  I know a Brewer fan brought it up, and I will agree that Wrigley is packed just about every game.

However, playing in Chicago sure helps.  The population in Chicago and the surronding area of Chicago is huge compared to Milwaukee and the subarbs of Milwaukee.  For the Brewers to sell out is a much bigger feat than the Cubs, and it has nothing to do with performance or fan support, but instead sheer numbers.  There are a lot more Cub fans than Brewer fans.

The thing that the Brewers fan forgot to mention was the quality of the fan that goes to the game.

To argue attendence is pointless, but go right ahead.