What new stats should be kept to better describe what actually took place:
IE: Mental error
I'd like to see WP changed to a true WP vs say a curve ball in the dirt that the catcher can't block.
Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
I think having the scorekeeper start handing out "mental errors" would lead down a road that would not be worth traveling.
Sounds like your objection to WP is the use of the word "wild".
OBR says, "A WILD PITCH is one so high, so low, or so wide of the plate that it cannot be handled with ordinary effort by the catcher."
While "wild" maybe makes it sound like the ball is sailing over the backstop, I wouldn't count on seeing any changes in the current usage.
And if your thought is to charge the catcher with a PB in the scenario you described, I think you'll have a tough time getting too many sympathetic ears on that one as well.
But ... you do raise something to think about. Because there are a number of grey-area situations where no scoring designation seems to quite fit it perfectly.
Thanks.
Sounds like your objection to WP is the use of the word "wild".
OBR says, "A WILD PITCH is one so high, so low, or so wide of the plate that it cannot be handled with ordinary effort by the catcher."
While "wild" maybe makes it sound like the ball is sailing over the backstop, I wouldn't count on seeing any changes in the current usage.
And if your thought is to charge the catcher with a PB in the scenario you described, I think you'll have a tough time getting too many sympathetic ears on that one as well.
But ... you do raise something to think about. Because there are a number of grey-area situations where no scoring designation seems to quite fit it perfectly.
Thanks.
obrady;
A question I would like considered by the group is "What new stats should be kept to better analize such things as which centerfielders have the best range, which middle infielders successfully turn the most difficult double plays, which pitchers best field their position, etc.?". Nothing novel on my part as others more knowledgable than me are trying to come up with scoring tools that better provide answers to these important questions [at least I consider them improtant] such as the above. One attempt to find an answer involves breaking down the field into seperate grids and line drive/fly balls into descernable catagories based on height and time in the air. These and other innovative measures carry with them the assumption that our present method of keeping stats cannot answer any of the above questions. After all, does anyone that follows baseball as closely as those who peruse and speak out on this website really believe the commission of errors or no errors in itself determines the best fielder at a position. I think we would all agree that the answer is a resounding NOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!
For example only. The middle infielder with no range that can always field the ball hit directly to him cleanly and make the perfect throw to first base every time as compared to the player that can range far to his left and to his right and make those plays [in addition to the "routine hit right at him" play] 95% of the time would find the 100% player lacking vakuable defensive skills with any rational manager or coach. Does placing 4-3 or 6-3 in the scorebook to denote the out or 1B with a line up the middle of the infield to show a hit provide us with the appropriate mechanism to compare these two very different defensive players. I think not.
New stats? Yes, we need them. Are we there yet? No but we must keep trying.
TW344 [back after a long layoff].
A question I would like considered by the group is "What new stats should be kept to better analize such things as which centerfielders have the best range, which middle infielders successfully turn the most difficult double plays, which pitchers best field their position, etc.?". Nothing novel on my part as others more knowledgable than me are trying to come up with scoring tools that better provide answers to these important questions [at least I consider them improtant] such as the above. One attempt to find an answer involves breaking down the field into seperate grids and line drive/fly balls into descernable catagories based on height and time in the air. These and other innovative measures carry with them the assumption that our present method of keeping stats cannot answer any of the above questions. After all, does anyone that follows baseball as closely as those who peruse and speak out on this website really believe the commission of errors or no errors in itself determines the best fielder at a position. I think we would all agree that the answer is a resounding NOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!
For example only. The middle infielder with no range that can always field the ball hit directly to him cleanly and make the perfect throw to first base every time as compared to the player that can range far to his left and to his right and make those plays [in addition to the "routine hit right at him" play] 95% of the time would find the 100% player lacking vakuable defensive skills with any rational manager or coach. Does placing 4-3 or 6-3 in the scorebook to denote the out or 1B with a line up the middle of the infield to show a hit provide us with the appropriate mechanism to compare these two very different defensive players. I think not.
New stats? Yes, we need them. Are we there yet? No but we must keep trying.
TW344 [back after a long layoff].