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

In eight pages of dick measuring and pissing on each other's rugs, have any of you thought to address the point Bob Ryan made in the first place, that the average fan doesn't actually care about any of this shit?

 

Don't see you addressing the question, chump. Step away before getting your panties too much in a bunch.

 

I think he's right. There, I addressed it. Now bite me.

 

OPS mashes together two stats.

It'd be like adding up points and rebounds in basketball.

 

Actually, if you mashed together defensive stats and slugging percentage, that would be the better comparison to points and rebounds together. Sorry, but your comparisons on this thread really are not working.

Also, OPS tells us what happened through a given statistical lens rather than assigning a value to what happened. It is when you try to assign a value that subjectivity plays a larger role. I agree that it is less of an issue than WAR, but it is still an issue.

 

OPS assigns values. SLG assigns double two and home runs three. OBP assign home runs and walks 1.

 

Not the same as the subjective system used in vOBA, which chooses variables such as how many seasons are used to come up with the value and whether or not to take the player's particular lineup into account or not. You still haven't addressed that flaw in vOBA, by the way. A leadoff single in a lineup that produces 800 runs is not as likely to create a run as a leadoff single in a lineup that produces 900 runs.

Of course, you still haven't acknowledged any of the numerous failed comparisons you have tried to float on this thread, such as decisions by umpires, which impact the raw data, as opposed to decisions in how the data is analyzed.

 

Yes, I have. That's not a flaw. That's the point. The purpose is to isolate a player's value from the context of the lineup within which he bats. It's not literally telling you that every single is likely to create 0.7 runs or whatever the figure is.

By the way, this is also the purpose - isolating individual player performance - of batting average, on-base percentage, and slugging percentage. Not to mention hits, doubles, triples, and home runs. And stolen bases. And walks. And strikeouts. And errors.

 

OPS is literally not even a statistic, it's a metric.

 

People are intimidated by math; that's the crux of this thing. I don't know why people think OPS-plus is that much more complicated than ERA, but that's where we are.

But the advanced stats obviously have value, even on a mainstream level. I point to the Ryan Howard extension prior to the 2011 season as Exhibit A.

Almost all of the people who railed against that contract were the advanced metrics folks, the ones who knew how to cite history to objectively measure the fact that players of Howard's ilk did not age well. The traditional columnists almost uniformly supported the move, saying in so many words, "he has lots of RBIs, pay him."

 

I don't think you need advanced metrics to predict that players are likely to see their performances decline as they age, with the decline accelerating as age increases. That's been known in baseball since the 1890s. Howard got the extension because he was the team's biggest star, and fans really don't like it when a team cuts a star loose BEFORE performance has begun to deteriorate. Goodwill is a recognized accounting metric.

 

I don't know if "complicated" is the problem. I just believe fans need a reference point. If they know a good OPS from a great OPS from a bad OPS, then they will use it for analytical purposes. It needs to become ingrained.