1. 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:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Chass: Intangibles good! Stats bad!

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Dick Whitman, Dec 13, 2010.

  1. RickStain

    RickStain Well-Known Member

    Halladay had 30 innings pitched and 0.44 ERA on Jiminez.

    Halladay gave up some extra unearned runs and played in a neutral park rather than a really good hitter's park.

    I don't think it's that controversial to say they were pretty close.
     
  2. Dick Whitman

    Dick Whitman Well-Known Member

    I don't think wins are a reliable indicator. Wins are "a number."

    Hence: You = Fail.
     
  3. LongTimeListener

    LongTimeListener Well-Known Member

    To return to the original point, and echoing spnited's earlier post, you have misrepresented what Murray wrote. And in bringing in the Sabathia question, FYI, B-R.com found 0.6 points of difference between Felix and C.C.; I guess that's outside the realm where you would consider it a debate, but -0.2 points is well within that realm. Good to know where the line is.

    I really don't know what your obsession is with Murray Chass.
     
  4. Dick Whitman

    Dick Whitman Well-Known Member

    He's been in the news lately because of the Verducci blow-up. I went to his site to read the Marvin Miller material. In a column I found there, I thought he misrepresented a bit what Pat Gillick said (although Spnited rightfully pointed out that, in the process, I accidentally kind of did the same to Chass). I thought that might make good fodder for discussion here. I posted it.

    No obsession.

    But to bring it back to the other point, I'm not really familiar enough with WAR to know whether a .2 difference is that much different than a .6 difference. I'm typically more interested in the stats with predictive value - for fantasy baseball purposes.
     
  5. Screwball

    Screwball Active Member

    Nolan Ryan was 324-292.

    http://amarillo.com/stories/010799/spo_UK5176.shtml
     
  6. dooley_womack1

    dooley_womack1 Well-Known Member

    His strikeouts and no-hitters and persona make that total utterly moot.
     
  7. outofplace

    outofplace Well-Known Member

    You think Citizen's Bank Park is neutral? Seriously?
     
  8. spnited

    spnited Active Member


    Don't worry, OOP, he's got some contrived saber stat to prove it ... even if it is totally absurd to think of Citizens as anything other than hitters' paradise.
     
  9. outofplace

    outofplace Well-Known Member

    I was thinking the same thing.
     
  10. secretariat

    secretariat Active Member

    http://espn.go.com/mlb/stats/parkfactor

    Citizens Bank Park was right in the middle of the pack of MLB stadiums. It's a homer-friendly park, but neutral in overall runs scored.
     
  11. outofplace

    outofplace Well-Known Member

    Which, of course, doesn't take into account the team playing in it. The Phillies' pitching kinda had something to do with that, too.
     
  12. secretariat

    secretariat Active Member

    That would be true if it weren't completely false.

    From the link: "Park Factor compares the rate of stats at home vs. the rate of stats on the road."
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page