Odd
by R.J. Anderson on Jan 18, 2009 6:08 PM EST
Email
PrintBay Bridge Baseball: (1/16/09)
I wanted to use some stats to get an idea of which combo is better defensively, but I wasn't sure what numbers to use, so I consulted Farhan Zaidi, the A's top Numbers Geek (a phrase I use with all due respect, of course). He pushed me toward the ol' FRAA at Baseball Prospectus.
The same Zaidi, on Sabernomics: (5/25/05)
The industry in general has gotten better at quantifying fielding value, through zone ratings and the like. The biggest issue is getting that kind of fielding data at the minor league and amateur levels. In those instances, we’re still fairly reliant on scouting assessments of fielding ability and potential.
That means either Zaidi:
A) Changed his mind.
B) Wanted to keep things simple for the writer.
C) Wants someone else to place false emphasis on FRAA.
Almost certainly B, right?
12 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
well, the writer goes on to say
Disclaimer time: It’s entirely possible that this number is really meaningless, because Yuniesky Betancourt and Derek Jeter came up as the two worst shortstops in baseball. That would be the guy who won three Gold Gloves (Jeter) and a guy who a lot of people think is actually the best shortstop in the league (Betancourt). So don’t take this as the gospel. Anyhow, back to our original question…
so i’m going to go for option “B”
when did we stop using adverbs proper?
by alea iacta est on Jan 18, 2009 9:34 PM EST reply actions
Also, saying a number is possibly entirely meaningless. . .
. . . because it disagrees with a pre-conceived, unsupported notion is an indication that there is no logic going on in one’s head.
Quote
Wow, the numbers back up what I thought in the first place. Guess that means these stats aren’t meaningless.
Seriously. . .
The writer's opinion wasn't really the point though.
Then again, it’s possible Zaidi gave him multiple numbers and the writer just picked one out.
by R.J. Anderson on Jan 18, 2009 10:19 PM EST up reply actions
Which ever supports his point the best.
Technically not lying, right?
For those children who claimed they’ve been a fan of their favorite team all their life, or even since they were about four or five years old: bullshit. There’s always that certain event or certain player that draws to the sport and draws you to a team. For me, Nomar Garciaparra was that reason. - Nick Coviello: I Try To See Rocco, But All I Think Is Nomar; 1/9/09
I don't think anyone who knows better is reading his stuff anyways.
by R.J. Anderson on Jan 18, 2009 10:31 PM EST up reply actions
True.
For those children who claimed they’ve been a fan of their favorite team all their life, or even since they were about four or five years old: bullshit. There’s always that certain event or certain player that draws to the sport and draws you to a team. For me, Nomar Garciaparra was that reason. - Nick Coviello: I Try To See Rocco, But All I Think Is Nomar; 1/9/09
The media is fixed.
For those children who claimed they’ve been a fan of their favorite team all their life, or even since they were about four or five years old: bullshit. There’s always that certain event or certain player that draws to the sport and draws you to a team. For me, Nomar Garciaparra was that reason. - Nick Coviello: I Try To See Rocco, But All I Think Is Nomar; 1/9/09
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Follow us on Twitter!
BTB: @BtBScore
Justin: @justinbopp
Satchel: @SatchelPrice
J-Doug: @RationalPastime
Josh: @garik16
Julian: @giantsnirvana
Bill: @BillPetti
Lucas: @DBITLefty
Jeff: @jeffwzimmerman
Lewis: @LewsOnFirst
