Stats! Stats! Stats!
Chris Cathcart
means, but if it's like stats, it's good!
So what do the cordial lads of this group think about stats?
Wait let me guess: they're pretty neat, right?
Chris
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
Ray Kerby
"Cordial Boy!" <sta...@home.com> wrote in message
news:ylTa4.78009$eh2.1...@news2.rdc1.on.home.com...
>
> Ah, that's too bad. Stats are ok as long as you're not using them to
> calculate the efficiency of individuals in isolation from their
> teammates. But since you don't know what efficiency is, we don't
> have to worry about it, do we? Always count the rings but aside from
> that stick to HR, BA and RBI and you'll be ok!
Dan Szymborski
says...
>
> >Ah, that's too bad. Stats are ok as long as you're not using them to
> >calculate the efficiency of individuals in isolation from their
> >teammates. But since you don't know what efficiency is, we don't
> >have to worry about it, do we? Always count the rings but aside from
> >that stick to HR, BA and RBI and you'll be ok!
>
> is defined as On base Plus Slugging, or the OBA + SLG. You will find
> that OPS measures a player's worth much better than BA or OBA average
> alone.
>
> For an excellent treatment of OPS, please refer to Rob Neyer's column
> on espn.com.
You're unfamiliar with He that is Roger L. Maynard, aren't you? Cordial
Boy is a professional troll.
--
Dan Szymborski
Cze...@mindspring.com
Dan Szymborski
> Isn't BA a measure of efficiency?
Yeah, but it's the Efficiency of Celebration.
Since all runs aren't equally exciting, I wonder why Roger doesn't just
bring a notebook to the game and measure the decibel level.
> "Cordial Boy!" <sta...@home.com> wrote in message
--
Dan Szymborski
Cze...@mindspring.com
Cordial Boy!
>Stats are great! I like stats.
So do I.
>Don't know exactly what "efficiency" means, but if it's like stats,
>it's good!
Ah, that's too bad. Stats are ok as long as you're not using them to
calculate the efficiency of individuals in isolation from their
teammates. But since you don't know what efficiency is, we don't
have to worry about it, do we? Always count the rings but aside from
that stick to HR, BA and RBI and you'll be ok!
cordially, as always,
rm
Jason Chamberlain
>Ah, that's too bad. Stats are ok as long as you're not using them to
>calculate the efficiency of individuals in isolation from their
>teammates. But since you don't know what efficiency is, we don't
>have to worry about it, do we? Always count the rings but aside from
>that stick to HR, BA and RBI and you'll be ok!
Actually, you will be better served to stick to HR, RBI, and OPS. OPS
is defined as On base Plus Slugging, or the OBA + SLG. You will find
that OPS measures a player's worth much better than BA or OBA average
alone.
For an excellent treatment of OPS, please refer to Rob Neyer's column
on espn.com.
Thanks,
JPC
Cordial Boy!
>Isn't BA a measure of efficiency?
Not efficiency of performance. It is, however, a measure of
efficiency of celebration and is much better at sorting out the
exciting players than OBP.
cordially, as always,
rm
Steven Thornton
> have to worry about it, do we? Always count the rings but aside from
> that stick to HR, BA and RBI and you'll be ok!
Shut up, Rog. Go away. You have nothing to contribute.
--
--
Steve Thornton, Nancy Man ste...@eskimo.com
Email indiepop-l...@eskimo.com with Subject: subscribe
Steven Thornton
> Not efficiency of performance. It is, however, a measure of
> efficiency of celebration and is much better at sorting out the
> exciting players than OBP.
You don't know what you're talking about. "Efficiency of celebration" is a
meaningless phrase. You are a meaningless individual. Go away. You're not
welcome here.
Michael Cox
sta...@home.com (Cordial Boy!) wrote:
> Always count the rings but aside from
> that stick to HR, BA and RBI and you'll be ok!
Does that mean we have to cut Otis Nixon in half to determine his true
age?
MC
Douglas T. Massey
>> that stick to HR, BA and RBI and you'll be ok!
>
I'm putting *you* in my kill-file, because all you do is respond
to RLM. Why does *anyone* bother? The only exception I can think
of is to warn newbies of his tiresome antics -- but doing that by
email would work . . .
Doug
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
___, IBM Microelectronics Division, Burlington, Vermont
\o ASICs Product Development Engineering |>
| Phone: (802)769-7095 t/l: 446-7095 fax: x6800 |
/ \ E-mail: mas...@btv.ibm.com |
. Doug's Homepage: http://members.tripod.com/~masseyd (|)
Cordial Boy!
>> Always count the rings but aside from
>> that stick to HR, BA and RBI and you'll be ok!
>Does that mean we have to cut Otis Nixon in half to determine his true
>age?
Now now. Whatever it is you wish to say about Nixon, he is hardly a
tree-stump.
cordially, as always,
rm
Michael Hilchie
"Dan Szymborski" <Cze...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.12d5f5f37...@news.mindspring.com...
>
>
I like this concept - responding for Maynard.... takes him pretty much out of it.
Steven Thornton
> In article <ylTa4.78009$eh2.1...@news2.rdc1.on.home.com>,
> sta...@home.com (Cordial Boy!) wrote:
> > Always count the rings but aside from
> > that stick to HR, BA and RBI and you'll be ok!
> Does that mean we have to cut Otis Nixon in half to determine his true
> age?
No way, man. Core sample'd do it. Here, you get it.
Sean Duffy
wrote:
>In article <84hfq5$bb8$1...@eskinews.eskimo.com>,
> ste...@eskimo.com (Steven Thornton) writes:
<snip>
>> Shut up, Rog. Go away. You have nothing to contribute.
>
>I'm putting *you* in my kill-file, because all you do is respond
>to RLM. Why does *anyone* bother? The only exception I can think
>of is to warn newbies of his tiresome antics -- but doing that by
>email would work . . .
You'll have to forgive Steven. He has this problem with obsessing
over people he doesn't like and posting 1 line "flames" repeatedly. I
used to be on a mailing list he ran; imagine Maynard with the ability
to control the forum in question...