Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site fisher.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!lll-crg!dual!qantel!ihnp4!mhuxn!mhuxr!ulysses!allegra!princeton!astrovax!fisher!david
From: david@fisher.UUCP (David Rubin)
Newsgroups: net.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Poll Results and other schtuff
Message-ID: <743@fisher.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 10-Aug-85 10:54:38 EDT
Article-I.D.: fisher.743
Posted: Sat Aug 10 10:54:38 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 13-Aug-85 02:45:47 EDT
References: <321@ltuxa.UUCP>
Organization: Princeton University.Mathematics
Lines: 50

> In regards to the David Rubin mega-comments:
> 
> One thing I don't see (in Pena-Carter Arguments 1985) is that to be
> a legitimate statistic, it cannot reflect ANY teammate interaction.

All statistics reflect, to some extent, teammate action.  Some,
however (such as R's and RBI's) are positively DOMINATED by it.
The best we can do is to rid ourselves of statistics which are
directly influenced by teammate actions; we cannot rid ourselves of
indirect infuences.  So I just did the best we could...

> I don't buy that.  Mr. Rubin states that for example, RBI's, Runs, 
> and Batting average are somewhat meaningless but on base percentage
> and slugging percentage aren't.

Runs and rbi's are almost meaningless (that I said) in judging
individual performance; batting average I merely regard as poorly
conceived.  It was established as a hitting statistic when power was
unimportant and walks exceedingly rare, i.e. under circumstances that
no longer hold.

>.............................Well, teammates affect walks (e.g.
> Coleman gets on base in front of you, or first base is open, etc.)
> I suppose one could say, and let's face it , it is a team sport.  So
> to only look at stats that are "individual" seems a bit simplistic.

Intentional walks should be subtracted off, but there are not so
frequent as to really screw up OBA.  OBA isn't perfect, just superior.

Indirect effects are often unproven (I don't think, for example, that
McGee is walking much more often than he did without Coleman in front
of him) and, when actually established, are far less significant than
direct effects in baseball.  Some error is inevitable (baseball, like
life, is not deterministic); however, OBA and SA both far outperform
any of the other standard stats in predicting run production (should
I post a summary on Pete Palmer's study of the issue?), and together,
they do VERY well, indeed.

> I personally would rather have a Carter than a Pena, but even with
> all the stats produced, I don't think anyone could give a DEFINITIVE
> answer to who is better.

Au contraire -- the evidence of an offensive difference is
overwhelming.  If you are not persuaded that this is so, there is
probably nothing that could persuade you.  We'd be left without a
decent way to carry on an argument beyond the level of SEZ WHO; now
what fun would that be?

					David Rubin
			{allegra|astrovax|princeton}!fisher!david