Mark McGwire
Member
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2007
- Messages
- 949
Yeah, I gotta agree with JC. It doesn't matter if he's leading off for the 1927 Yankees, pitchers are gonna throw Ichiro breaking junk, cause he swings at breaking junk off the plate.
Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Double Down said:LongTimeListener said:OPS, K/BB ratio and such stats are a fine new way to look at the game.
VORP and its brethren are complete bullshirt, manipulated according to the "stat" creator's view of the one and only way to play baseball.
I used to feel this way too, but I'm coming around on WAR and VORP. [More so on VORP.] I don't know that it's that hard to say "X is what we can expect a minimum cost resplacement player to produce based on the league average" and "Y is the statistical value of the player in question" and then calculate the difference between the two.
I think where non-seamheads (and I think I'm still one) err is is their belief that every sabernerd looks at something like VORP as an absolute. It's just another way to quantify something speculative. Really, it's not that much different than saying "How much better is he than an average player at his position?"
Mark McGwire said:How did anyone get where they were going before there were cars? They didn't go places. No one is suggesting baseball can't exist without advanced metrics. Just that you're silly to dismiss them because you only need RBI to tell the difference between Rafael Furcal and Albert Pujols. Of course anyone can tell that difference. Better data allows us to answer more specific questions, like the one I posed above: Who was the more valuable player in 2010, Albert Pujols or Joey Votto? And the answer is Votto, despite the fact that Pujols had the edge in two of the three traditional triple crown statistics. Again, if you choose not to understand that, that's your right. But it's silly to degrade people who actually are interested in the answer to that question. And, yeah, since folks here cover sports for a living, I kind of expect them to be the type of people who ARE interested in the answers to such questions. And the strain of anti-intellectualism that infects the anti-statistics people is a pernicious American problem that can be measured all around us. Also in politics, deck. Also in politics.
Mark McGwire said:Are you arguing that Pujols had the better year?
Mark McGwire said:So you just want to preserve the "No right answer" option? That's it?
Well, no. Someone had to be the MVP. They don't get a too-close-to-call bubble on the MVP ballot. And Votto was more valuable. And he won. You're right their seasons were close. Pujols had a monster year. But Votto had a slightly better year. And that was reflected, I might add, in the voting.
Joey Votto got 31 of 32 first-place votes. So you look sort of silly proclaiming "No right answer." Close, yes. But there was a right answer. Just because something is close doesn't mean there isn't a right answer.
Which was the point of my original post, I might add.
LongTimeListener said:Double Down said:LongTimeListener said:OPS, K/BB ratio and such stats are a fine new way to look at the game.
VORP and its brethren are complete bullshirt, manipulated according to the "stat" creator's view of the one and only way to play baseball.
I used to feel this way too, but I'm coming around on WAR and VORP. [More so on VORP.] I don't know that it's that hard to say "X is what we can expect a minimum cost resplacement player to produce based on the league average" and "Y is the statistical value of the player in question" and then calculate the difference between the two.
I think where non-seamheads (and I think I'm still one) err is is their belief that every sabernerd looks at something like VORP as an absolute. It's just another way to quantify something speculative. Really, it's not that much different than saying "How much better is he than an average player at his position?"
DD, I can get behind your first paragraph. The second paragraph, though, I just don't believe that's true. FJM used to be a daily repository of how stupid everyone was for not looking at VORP and WAR and realizing how aweseome Adam Dunn is. Last year the Votto-Pujols MVP debate brought its own special brand of absolutism, and here I return to the fond memory, in a previous thread, of Mark McGwire's take:
Mark McGwire said:How did anyone get where they were going before there were cars? They didn't go places. No one is suggesting baseball can't exist without advanced metrics. Just that you're silly to dismiss them because you only need RBI to tell the difference between Rafael Furcal and Albert Pujols. Of course anyone can tell that difference. Better data allows us to answer more specific questions, like the one I posed above: Who was the more valuable player in 2010, Albert Pujols or Joey Votto? And the answer is Votto, despite the fact that Pujols had the edge in two of the three traditional triple crown statistics. Again, if you choose not to understand that, that's your right. But it's silly to degrade people who actually are interested in the answer to that question. And, yeah, since folks here cover sports for a living, I kind of expect them to be the type of people who ARE interested in the answers to such questions. And the strain of anti-intellectualism that infects the anti-statistics people is a pernicious American problem that can be measured all around us. Also in politics, deck. Also in politics.
So there you go. Last year there weren't merely opinions on Pujols-Votto, there was an absolute right and wrong answer. Same as Ichiro-Jeter.
Mark McGwire said:It wasn't too close to call. It was close. Votto was better. Votto won the slash stat triple crown.
And Felix Hernandez won the Cy Young despite going 13-12 for a terrible team. So, no, I don't grant your hypothetical.
You want to take your hesitancy to embrace VORP and transfer it to something like OPS? Is that it?
I don't consider on-base or on-base plus slugging to be even up for debate, really. If you're talking about VORP, that's one thing. But if you're trying to say it's too close to call when one player was clearly -- slightly, but clearly -- better at getting on base and hitting for power than another, then you're just not making sense.
The voters are changing Dooley and I would bet you they did use those stats.dooley_womack1 said:A corollary to Bill James' Ruth-Lemke argument: Any system that posits that Ichiro as a Hall of Famer is not a sure proposition has some 'splaining to do. I know that's not your argument, Mac, but it sure seems to be that of "JonnyD".
And I'm not sure it's a corollary or not if a 130-120 pitcher makes the Hall of Fame. And building a team, I would take Pujols over Votto in a second, regardless of who won the MVP. I'm not questioning your arguments, Mac (and I do wish they would call it Player of the Year and not Most Valuable Player). I do think part of the vote was many people saying it was someone else's turn to win. I doubt most voters used the stat you mentioned as their determiner.