Should we have a Sabermetrics forum in the Cafe?

[ensanimal]

sounds like a good idea to me. don't know too much about this sort of stuff yet, just starting to get into it.

there is so much to learn though, i don't know where to start. this would be as good a place as any.

[mocabeenow]

Man i feel like a rookie. I've never heard the term Sabermetrics before. I first thought of Bret Saberhagen! Then i thought of some work out video... I'm so Lost. Get me off of this island!

~Moc

[Mustangs989]

A research and analysis forum would be a great idea. I've been trying to use some of the new formula's I've seen on this site such as ERAimp and WHIPimp. If you're interested in that go Here It'd be nice to discuss things like this with other Cafe members who are more knowledgable than I.

[FatGuyWithAMullet]

As much as I'd like a forum for it... it's going to be in all the forums anyway. Why make a forum for all the people who have reasoning behind their opinions?

Puh-lese. This is such an unsubstantiated remark it's almost funny, almost. Case in point - "Blah blah blah ZR is teh win blah blah blah". I've tried to explain to you why ZR does not work and is not even a statistic, but you won't listen because you're always right...about everything...all the time. I guess you got upset because I wouldn't listen to the Fantasy Baseball Cafe's resident genius.

I mean, I obviously don't have the benefit of all the modern day statistical knowledge that you have. I mean, ya know; your statistical background goes so deep that you clearly have a vast understanding on how to run statistical anaylsis with data points that have HUNDREDS of independent variables and very few consistent correlations. I mean, surely your statistical knowlege is vast and deep enough to draw conclusions contrary to what I've explained to you...isn't it?

...or maybe you're just a complete pud who parrots everything he hears from the BillJamesSchoolofBaseball and doesn't really understand one word of what he is talking about...I'm not sure.

[perlick29]

That said, another idea that I've been thinking about is a separate section devoted to research and analysis, in which sabrmetrics would no doubt play a key role. A fantasy laboratory, as it were.

From devising projection algorithms to tracking Coors Field performance, it could be both interesting and constructive to pool our resources and see what we can come up with. At the very least, this might be something fun for the off-season.

Thoughts?

Sounds like a great idea to me. There would be plaenty of intellectual discussions in there.

[LBJackal]

As much as I'd like a forum for it... it's going to be in all the forums anyway. Why make a forum for all the people who have reasoning behind their opinions?

Puh-lese. This is such an unsubstantiated remark it's almost funny, almost. Case in point - "Blah blah blah ZR is teh win blah blah blah". I've tried to explain to you why ZR does not work and is not even a statistic, but you won't listen because you're always right...about everything...all the time. I guess you got upset because I wouldn't listen to the Fantasy Baseball Cafe's resident genius.

I mean, I obviously don't have the benefit of all the modern day statistical knowledge that you have. I mean, ya know; your statistical background goes so deep that you clearly have a vast understanding on how to run statistical anaylsis with data points that have HUNDREDS of independent variables and very few consistent correlations. I mean, surely your statistical knowlege is vast and deep enough to draw conclusions contrary to what I've explained to you...isn't it?

...or maybe you're just a complete pud who parrots everything he hears from the BillJamesSchoolofBaseball and doesn't really understand one word of what he is talking about...I'm not sure.

Why don't you use some of that knowledge you claim to have to an advantage instead of flat-out denying a stat like ZR is more beneficial than mostly any out there, and certainly more accurate than sports writers' opinions?

Maybe you just like to watch baseball the old school way, or maybe you're just a bitter old man who was never good enough to actually paly the sport itself, I'm not sure...

[blankman]

As much as I'd like a forum for it... it's going to be in all the forums anyway. Why make a forum for all the people who have reasoning behind their opinions?

Puh-lese. This is such an unsubstantiated remark it's almost funny, almost. Case in point - "Blah blah blah ZR is teh win blah blah blah". I've tried to explain to you why ZR does not work and is not even a statistic, but you won't listen because you're always right...about everything...all the time. I guess you got upset because I wouldn't listen to the Fantasy Baseball Cafe's resident genius.

I mean, I obviously don't have the benefit of all the modern day statistical knowledge that you have. I mean, ya know; your statistical background goes so deep that you clearly have a vast understanding on how to run statistical anaylsis with data points that have HUNDREDS of independent variables and very few consistent correlations. I mean, surely your statistical knowlege is vast and deep enough to draw conclusions contrary to what I've explained to you...isn't it?

...or maybe you're just a complete pud who parrots everything he hears from the BillJamesSchoolofBaseball and doesn't really understand one word of what he is talking about...I'm not sure.

Why don't you use some of that knowledge you claim to have to an advantage instead of flat-out denying a stat like ZR is more beneficial than mostly any out there, and certainly more accurate than sports writers' opinions?

Maybe you just like to watch baseball the old school way, or maybe you're just a bitter old man who was never good enough to actually paly the sport itself, I'm not sure...

If you are at all relating this to Gold Gloves and I'm sure you are, remember that its Managers and not Writers who vote on Gold Gloves (just thought I should clarify that)

[FatGuyWithAMullet]

As much as I'd like a forum for it... it's going to be in all the forums anyway. Why make a forum for all the people who have reasoning behind their opinions?

Puh-lese. This is such an unsubstantiated remark it's almost funny, almost. Case in point - "Blah blah blah ZR is teh win blah blah blah". I've tried to explain to you why ZR does not work and is not even a statistic, but you won't listen because you're always right...about everything...all the time. I guess you got upset because I wouldn't listen to the Fantasy Baseball Cafe's resident genius.

I mean, I obviously don't have the benefit of all the modern day statistical knowledge that you have. I mean, ya know; your statistical background goes so deep that you clearly have a vast understanding on how to run statistical anaylsis with data points that have HUNDREDS of independent variables and very few consistent correlations. I mean, surely your statistical knowlege is vast and deep enough to draw conclusions contrary to what I've explained to you...isn't it?

...or maybe you're just a complete pud who parrots everything he hears from the BillJamesSchoolofBaseball and doesn't really understand one word of what he is talking about...I'm not sure.

Why don't you use some of that knowledge you claim to have to an advantage instead of flat-out denying a stat like ZR is more beneficial than mostly any out there, and certainly more accurate than sports writers' opinions?

Maybe you just like to watch baseball the old school way, or maybe you're just a bitter old man who was never good enough to actually paly the sport itself, I'm not sure...

Busting out with the insults already LBJackal? Can't even bother you conjure up a decent response when I call you out on something?

You're just further proving my point that you are a typical self proclaimed stathead that blindly overexaggerates the tennents of whichever statistical philosophy is being discussed without at all understanding the underpinnings that it is based on. This is why I dislike so many people who profess to be sabermatricians and statheads, they don't have a damn clue about statistics. Most have never even taken a single course in statistics to understand them and sure as hell couldn't tell you what a chi-square, t-square or an r-square is. There is a gross misunderstanding of how to apply statistics and it results in people merely parroting what they have read over and over again. That is what I hate and criticize - just because you have a calculator doesn't make you a statistician. My little brother can mimic me all day, but that doesn't mean he understands statistical process control, how to process statistics, what a correlation coeffcient is, or what to do with one if he had it.

[Lofunzo]

A few things come to mind.......Mullet, you were the first to use insults here. Your previous post was much more insulting that his was. I agree that arguing with Jackal is trying to run in quicksand but the facts are the facts. You insulted him and when he responded, you got defensive.

I will also say to get this back on point. Personal attacks are not welcome here. This is a good thread with good ideas. And this is coming from someone who likes to look at the other things as well as the numbers.

[FatGuyWithAMullet]

Fair enough, disregard the personal insults. It doesn't change the fact that Jackal is dodging every single one of my pertinent questions. Jackal, if you are so sure about the merits of defensive statistics I'd love for you to answer this question that I touched on earlier.

How do you run statistical analysis with data points that have hundreds of independent variables and very few consistent correlations?