From: 91287041@ramsey.cs.laurentian.ca (roger maynard)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Value of Stats
Date: 27 Jul 92 15:58:47 GMT
Organization: Dept. of Computer Science, Laurentian University, Sudbury, ON

In <3797@blue.cis.pitt.edu.UUCP> dtate+@pitt.edu (David M Tate) writes:

>In article <1992Jul26.032220.13801@ramsey.cs.laurentian.ca> 91287041@ramsey.cs.laurentian.ca (roger maynard) writes:

>>In <1992Jul25.221458.15663@panix.com> spira@panix.com (Greg "Sarcasm Is A Way Of Life" Spira) writes:

>>>>Puckett had 195 hits in '91.  This is more than Salazar's output for
>>>>'90 and '91 combined. 

>>>Aha! Here we have a good example of how some people abuse statistics!
>>>No context whatsoever.  

>>The context is how much a player has contributed to the team's quest for
>>the WC.  This is quite clear if you have been reading my posts.  

>He meant the context of those 195 hits, not the context of your comments.
>As in, what *else* did Puckett do besides get 195 hits?  After all, Juan
>Samuel had 191 hits in 1984 and was barely above average offensively.  Willie
>Wilson had *230* hits in 1980, and wasn't nearly as valuable as Barry Bonds
>was last year.  You need to know what Paul Harvey would call "the rest of
>the story", and what Greg was calling "context".

We are comparing the contributions made, to their respective teams over-all
performances, by Puckett, who had 195 hits last year, and Salazar, who had 86.
86 hits!  Now the "rest of the story" may be relevant if we are comparing
195 hits to 150 in the context of the teams over-all performance but not 86.
RC27 is only relevant if they had approximately the same amount of total
RC in 91.  And they didn't.  91 to 39 isn't even close.  

>Such as, the fact that Puckett made 436 outs and grounded into 27 double
>plays, while Bonds made 387 outs and grounded into 8 double plays.  If you
>*really* are interested in measuring contribution toward the team's quest
>for the WC, then you need to add up both positive contributions and negative
>contributions.  Hits are positive.  Outs are negative.

Of course Bonds statistics are better!  That is why I made the Bonds/Puckett
comparison.  Did Bonds, with his better statistics, (and his questionable
attitude), contribute more to his team's success than Puckett contributed
to his?  The question would be meaningless if Bonds stats were not better. 

>>I think 
>>that Puckett's 195 hits were a significant contribution to that quest.  I
>>don't see how Salazar's RC is relevent in that context.  

>It wasn't Salazar's RC, it was Salazar's (and Bonds's and Puckett's) RC/27.
>The normalized version that says something about how much positive contribution
>the player is making per out consumed.  In other words, it includes more of
>the relevant information, by counting positives and negatives.

The only contribution that is relevant to this discussion is the total
contribution that each player actually made to his team's success.  In this
context the contribution indicated by Salazar's RC27 is diminished when you
take into account that he had barely half of Puckett's total at-bats.   

>>I was talking about the contribution two stars have each made to their team's
>>quest for the WC.  How is the RC27 of a less than full-time player relevant to
>>that contribution?  

>By giving a common standard for comparison. 

If, over the entire season, a player had 5 AB's and had 5 hits would his 
contribution to the team's success be fairly portrayed by RC27?  The only time
comparing RC27, for the purpose of determining total offensive contribution, is 
really useful is when the players have roughly equivalent total RC's.  And 
Puckett and Salazar don't.  Not even close.  And I don't even know why I have
to tell you this.

rm

>-- 
>        David Tate         |  "Complacencies of the fungo, and late 
>  dtate@unix.cis.pitt.edu  |   Infield and B.P. in a sunny field
>     "Sunday Afternoon"    |   [...]         mingle to dissipate
>  Wallace "Vern" Stevens   |   The holy hush of Pastime National..."
-- 
roger maynard                    
91287041@ramsey.cs.laurentian.ca