Speaking of stats, can someone run some numbers on the # of threads that ended up being closed prematurely due to Stats4Gnats intervening on a topic...or even number of threads closed that Stats started? Run those vs threads closed due to other people. That should give us some "proof" as to who has the real issues.
+1... JH has it right, Stats... There it is.
And like JH, I've received PMs from you too... Asking me to jump into this or that sabremetrics debate you're having at the moment. I guess you felt I knew enough about statisitics to be useful back then huh?
Like every other business major out there, I studied Statistics specifically and had other classes where statistics were applied as part of my BBA many years ago. I studied it all over again and more in depth getting an MBA not so many years ago. I'm no statisitical expert, but I asure you, Stats... I understand what you are TRYING to present. I would submit to you (and have) that it's you who simply doesn't understand some of the basics of the subject. For some reason, you won't hear it... And that's fine. (More than) Enough said.
I've been familiar with Stats on discussion boards for twelve years. He's already crowned me stupid and ignorant for stating repeatedly to his threads statistics in small samples have too large of a plus/minus factor to be of real value. I told him let me watch ten at bats and I'll go on what I see over statistics. I believe he's had me on ignore for a few years now since he doesn't respond to my posts in his threads. But what do I know? I have a BA in Economics with a concentration in Quantitative Methodology and an MBA with a concentration in market consulting. I've been using statistics my entire business career to determine markets and marketing strategies. I guess none of this translates to the potential to understanding baseball statistics.
Originally Posted by J H:
R and SQL are very, very good tools for statistical computations in the game. I doubt any of my bylined work would be something you'd come across - most of my time with Baseball Prospectus was spent on the prospects side. I do hope that the course sways into some metrics pertaining to catcher framing, as that is the "new" horizon of market inefficiency. Next will be preventative modeling for injuries - both much more daunting of a task and much more important. I've heard very good feedback about the course from many people and wish I could participate in some way, but I don't have much time these days.
The course really doesn’t go into much other than give the student the bare minimum tools from which they can ask and answer their own questions. Right now, the only 2 databases we’ve looked at are Leahman and Retrosheet. If someone wanted to get into framing, I suppose they could do it with those databases, but my guess is there are others much better for that purpose.
I wish I could say I’ve been a great student and totally understand everything that’s taken place, but the truth is I’m only a struggling student barely getting by, which is why I didn’t take it for a grade. I knew I was in over my head, but wanted a challenge for curiosity’s sake.
I won’t go into it here, but where a lot of people are thinking pitch framing’s one of the next great finds, I’m thinking that all the research into it might push the powers to be further toward calling pitches not swung at by technology, to get the umpire out of the equation.
No, it wasn't. Thank you.
I’m glad. I’ve really been looking forward to your response with great trepidation.
There are a lot of times when I read something on this website and I know, deep down, that my knowledge of the particular subject is far more advanced than the knowledge of the individual who typed the words I'm reading. I know that if I correct, or question, the individual in such a way, that person may take offense - as it may come off as me patronizing them. Stats, I have no doubt you are intelligent and progressive-thinking when it comes to statistical analysis. I have no doubt that you might have a more advanced grasp on the craft than some people here. I think you run into issues when you speak to people in (what seems to be) a tone that is proving them wrong and you right. Everyone here is trying to contribute to the best of their abilities. Trust me…I've had to catch myself quite often during my responses in fear of lashing out negatively to someone. I've been posting here a long time and I've watched a lot of people come and go. I'd urge you to reconsider the tone of your responses…not the message, because I think your message has some validity to it. But the tone. The tone is what creates the animosity and discontent from others. I think I'm speaking for everyone here when I say that stats aren't mean or scary. The way you sometimes present the information, however, is.
I get it. I really do. Unfortunately though, I’m an old man who realizes he hasn’t made much of an impact on the world and who’s time for doing that is running out rapidly. That makes me sometimes skip over the niceties so many believe are necessary. But I am still trying to go forward, and not just accept what has always been. I don’t do it only to be contrary, but to get others to try to think and ask questions as well. I love being challenged, and look forward to someone picking apart what I’ve done. What I don’t care for is the picking without alternative thought. I don’t do it out of respect for who I might disagree with, and when someone does it to me I take it as disrespect. I admit, I don’t deal well with it, but will try to do better.
Thanx for not responding without thought. I appreciate it. 
Originally Posted by Soylent Green:
…I'm no statisitical expert, but I asure you, Stats... I understand what you are TRYING to present. I would submit to you (and have) that it's you who simply doesn't understand some of the basics of the subject. For some reason, you won't hear it... And that's fine. (More than) Enough said.
I don’t know if it that you don’t want to believe me, or that my thinking is so radical no one can believe me, but I’ll try again.
I know I’m not a statistics whiz, and I pretty much know why. But for what I do with the stats, I don’t need to be an expert in the field. I don’t publish papers, but simply run numbers to see what they look like. If someone has a question, I try to answer it as best I can using the data I’ve accumulated over the years. If someone makes a statement of fact I find interesting, I do my best to see if its true. If it is or isn’t, I let the person know. If a coach feels I can run something that will help him, I don’t question him even if I don’t agree. I just do it and discuss it later.
I produce things for parents and players who’ve seldom if ever seen anything like it because the data just hasn’t been there, and they sure seem to love it. I try to explain why judging their sons, themselves, or their players by ML standards doesn’t work, and try my damnedest to document their HS experience as best I’m able. I produce literally hundreds of different metrics, most of which I didn’t dream up, to show that the game is one Hell of a lot more complicated than most people think it is. That’s likely why when the course instructor keep saying to keep asking questions and looking for answers to them, I identify with it. I identify with it because that’s what I’ve done my whole life. I love seeing all the new apps out there because now a lot of others are getting to see what I’ve seen for a long time.
I don’t need to have a PhD in Statistics, or even have a good foundation to do what I do. I will say it might help me do it better, but chances are if I was some kind of “expert”, I’d do what other experts do and move on to some higher level of the game because I wouldn’t have the resources to use what I knew. I don’t want to be just another person to move on. I’d rather try to be someone who improves the level I enjoy watching.
Originally Posted by Stats4Gnats:
Originally Posted by Soylent Green:
…I'm no statisitical expert, but I asure you, Stats... I understand what you are TRYING to present. I would submit to you (and have) that it's you who simply doesn't understand some of the basics of the subject. For some reason, you won't hear it... And that's fine. (More than) Enough said.
I don’t know if it that you don’t want to believe me, or that my thinking is so radical no one can believe me, but I’ll try again.
I know I’m not a statistics whiz, and I pretty much know why. But for what I do with the stats, I don’t need to be an expert in the field. I don’t publish papers, but simply run numbers to see what they look like. If someone has a question, I try to answer it as best I can using the data I’ve accumulated over the years. If someone makes a statement of fact I find interesting, I do my best to see if its true. If it is or isn’t, I let the person know. If a coach feels I can run something that will help him, I don’t question him even if I don’t agree. I just do it and discuss it later.
I produce things for parents and players who’ve seldom if ever seen anything like it because the data just hasn’t been there, and they sure seem to love it. I try to explain why judging their sons, themselves, or their players by ML standards doesn’t work, and try my damnedest to document their HS experience as best I’m able. I produce literally hundreds of different metrics, most of which I didn’t dream up, to show that the game is one Hell of a lot more complicated than most people think it is. That’s likely why when the course instructor keep saying to keep asking questions and looking for answers to them, I identify with it. I identify with it because that’s what I’ve done my whole life. I love seeing all the new apps out there because now a lot of others are getting to see what I’ve seen for a long time.
I don’t need to have a PhD in Statistics, or even have a good foundation to do what I do. I will say it might help me do it better, but chances are if I was some kind of “expert”, I’d do what other experts do and move on to some higher level of the game because I wouldn’t have the resources to use what I knew. I don’t want to be just another person to move on. I’d rather try to be someone who improves the level I enjoy watching.
Stats- The issue of moving toward "robot umps" will be a tricky one, in my opinion. I'm pretty much as "new school" a baseball fan as you'll come across and I have skepticism about it. As an economist? I'm all in. 100%. Anytime there's an opportunity to eliminate human error, the opportunity should be taken. But I grew up loving a particular brand of baseball. There's still an art form to the sport. I can't decide how much of that will be taken away by eliminating a substantial part of human element. It's an interesting discussion to be had.
Let me know if you need help with the course. I don't consider myself an expert data miner, but I can sift through some databases and organize stats by wRC+ and the likes with the best of 'em.
Maybe it is time to take a break for a history lesson of baseball.
http://www.pbs.org/kenburns/ba.../timeline/page9.html
I have a great book for you to read - "Camp Ford", a fiction book by John Boggs.
Baseball during the Civil War in a prison camp. Northern prisoners vs the Southern Guards.
No, I did not fight in that war!
Bob
Originally Posted by J H:
Stats- The issue of moving toward "robot umps" will be a tricky one, in my opinion. I'm pretty much as "new school" a baseball fan as you'll come across and I have skepticism about it. As an economist? I'm all in. 100%. Anytime there's an opportunity to eliminate human error, the opportunity should be taken. But I grew up loving a particular brand of baseball. There's still an art form to the sport. I can't decide how much of that will be taken away by eliminating a substantial part of human element. It's an interesting discussion to be had.
Yes, the road to calling pitches not swung at with technology is definitely a very long and very bumpy one. But with the introduction of so much technology into the game, the road has definitely been shortened and smoothed out from where it was even just 10 years ago.
For those who aren’t aware of how much things have changed, until the coming of the personal computer, the number of data points that could be tracked was limited to what a myopic scorer could reasonably and accurately keep track of with a paper and pencil. Although there were always some who were beginning to build the massive ML databases we now have, even as little as 25 years ago it was still possible to keep every possible data point for a game in a relatively simple spreadsheet. That’s expanded to the current estimate of 1 terabyte for every ML game played now, and there are estimated that the new system which will be rolled out in 2015 may increase that tenfold. http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article/mlb/mlbam-introduces-new-way-to-analyze-every-play?ymd=20140301&content_id=68514514
That’s a heap-‘o-data let me tell ya, and the numbers geeks can’t wait! And every time there’s a leap like that, pitches not swung at getting called by technology gets closer. The narrative for “getting it right” has become more and more the narrative of the day, and it should. Yes, the intrinsic atmosphere of the game is changing, but more and more people believe it’s moving in the correct direction. It would kill an entire current avenue of investigation, i.e. pitch framing, because the umpire who calls pitches now would be gone, and a machine can’t be fooled by the smooth, quick movements of a catcher’s glove because the pitch will have been called long before it gets within 3’ of the catcher. But that’s only a very minor example of what we’ll soon be seeing.
Let me know if you need help with the course. I don't consider myself an expert data miner, but I can sift through some databases and organize stats by wRC+ and the likes with the best of 'em.
I truly appreciate the offer, but I’m afraid that in order to get me up to high speed, you’d end up spending more time with me than your family. When you get to know me I’m not such a bad guy, but I doubt after a long day, anyone would prefer my company to even a quiet couple of hours by themselves with an adult beverage.
My plan is to go back and re-do every lecture and problem once the class is over, and if the class is offered again, I’ll try to get in. There’s just so much information, its mind boggling! I need to figger out how to dump some of the old garbage with spider webs hanging all over it that stored in my mind to make room for the new stuff.