Bob Ryan: I don't think the "average" fan cares about advanced metrics in MLB

Hence the polling numbers that have shown football to be far more popular than baseball for more than 40 years now.

 

More than any other team sport, baseball is a game of statistics and better statistics mean a better informed fan.

However, I do agree with Ryan that you if you just look to more complex and more minute statistics, it can suck the joy out of the game.

 

But who does that? It's such a fallacy. People who spend hours and years obsessing over the numbers get more joy out of baseball than most of us will ever know.

 

Uber-advanced stats won't drive fans from telecasts or cause them to lose sleep. If anything they'll just tune it out as white noise while they watch the game.

John Brenkus does a kick-ass job with his Sports Science segments on ESPN. I think there's a subtle way to present SABR stats the same way without going overboard.

I get that intellectual curiosity ain't for everyone but that shouldn't prevent the dissemination of information.

 

Advanced stats are already in every telecast anyway. How many times have you seen someone called a flyball pitcher? That isn't a guess. That's based on his flyout-groundout ratio, the number of home runs he allows, and all the other stuff.

Most people know "flyball pitcher" and that it entails a higher chance of home runs. I don't know that we need to hear what his xFIP is.

 

BTW, is Bob better with the 'stache or without?

 

Anybody who didn't just politely applaud when we finally had a Triple Crown winner instead of anguishing whether he would win an "undeserved" MVP award.

 

Many of the new metrics have no provable truth and therefore most average fans ignore them. All 'statistics' that measure a player against an average player orreplacement player are mere opinions, not real statistics.
Statistics are subject to interpretation when you apply them but they do not take into account an unprovable premise. RAA, WAA, WAR, Total Zone Fielding, these are not stats that have resonance with most fans because the comparison to the average player or replacement player is abstract, therefore not a provable premise. Put a name next to the average player or replacement player and now you are measuring the player next to a real standard.
Who is the replacement player that Babe Ruth is 155 career wins better than. And is Babe Ruth really only 155 wins, total, better than a AAAA player over 22 years? Is it a fact that Harold Baines was 40 wins better than some random scrub over 22 years, or is it an opinion? .289/.356/.465 is a fact. a 40 WAR is an opinion.

 

It's not an opinion. It's a baseline. It's not an opinion any more than, "It is 75 degrees Fahrenheit out today" is an opinion.

 

What is the baseline set off of? Who determines an average player?

I like OPS, OBP, batted balls in play (or whatever that is called), WHIP, HRs per nine innings and a lot of the other ways that the numbers are divided, added and multiplied differently than was done in the past. Most people can easily understand all of those (except maybe the batted balls in play).

But WAR is subjective. It's nice. It's cute. But I would not hang my hat on it.

 

By the way, happy 20,000th post, Dick ... if that IS your real number. Heh-heh.

 

What does it matter, really? It's arbitrary. Just like 0 degrees Fahrenheit.