peeker643 wrote:Ths is funny. I've been around this board for about five years even. This argument has woven it's way through threads consistently over that time and probably always will.
Yeah, this. It's why I haven't chimed in on this thread yet, despite a few opportunities to do so. People have their opinions, and I don't think this - or any other - thread is going to change them. But just a few small points.
One of the things that I think is important is that the issue of statistics has to do with scale. One play, one at bat, statistically irrelevant. But when you're trying to evaluate several hundred players across 2,000+ major league games per season, that's where stats start to show some meaning. Not to mention, stats might give you a notion that somebody you haven't heard of before is having a good season and is worth watching.
One other thing that is incorrect is this notion that stats = Moneyball = OBP = walks. I don't think that's the case, because it leads into argument by anecdocte, such as "An out would be better than a walk in situation X, therefore the stats are bunk." (I do note, however, that many of those situations have - as a prerequsite - someone already being on base by hit, walk, error, HBP, any way, any how). And anyway, stats themselves have different purposes. I don't think that RBI and wins are "meaningless," it's more that they are much more helpful in a narrative ("What happened?") sense than in a comparative ("Who's better?") or predictive ("What's likely to happen in the future?") sense. Those RBI happened, they meant that real runs were scored...but they don't necessarily tell you that a guy with 110 RBI is actually better than a guy with 85, because they depend on the strength of the team around him.
Finally, to make the point one more (but definitely not the last) time: Pitch F/X and similar technologies are warping this whole issue. Consider the following link:
http://espn.go.com/blog/sweetspot/post/_/id/24470/time-to-start-paying-attention-to-mike-trout and scroll down to the heat map(*) of Jesus Montero (bonus action photo of Asdrubal included in the link). The information is "statistical" in the sense that it is showing outcomes over numerous events and interprets it mathematically, but it also is trying to understand that information on a level that is usually the question that scouts and other visual evaluators are trying to make: Not just why did player X do what he did, but why did he do it?
(*) Full disclosure: A buddy of mine wrote the software that ESPN uses to generate these heat maps, so I am irrationally biased in their favor.