Quote:
Originally Posted by StyxNCa
Sabermatricians have too much time on their hands. In the end, all that matters is did they win or not. I couldn't. Care less about the impact every single thing had an any given game. A solo HR, or any HR for that matter for a team that loses means nothing, even if that HR gave that team a temporary lead. The end result, they lost.
This trend of having to start analyzing every burp that happens in a dugout for it's impact on a game is silly.
My only question: did they win or lose. Even with all these new stats, the best teams still lose around 60-70 games and the worst teams generally lose around 90 games, just as it has been the entire history of the sport so I really don't see where all these sabermetric stats have made any difference. Just people with too much time on their hands looking for something to do.
|
You'll notice I made no comment on whether or not I think WPA is something worthwhile.
Anyway, if one extends your line of thinking to the logical conclusion, the only stat worth counting is team wins and losses. From that perspective, you could argue that any HR is meaningless even if your team wins, as it doesn't matter HOW you win, just whether or not you do. Personally, I think there's some merit to the idea that the be all end all stat of everything is championships won, followed closely by team wins and losses.
That said, wins and losses are based on the contributions of several individuals, so I also think there's some merit to trying to figure out how players contribute to wins and losses at an individual level. That's not a simple thing to do, and there's two sides of the coin: how much did they contribute to past wins and losses, and how much can a team expect them to contribute to future wins and losses. Every GM evaluates both of those things, as the former informs the latter. What stats you or anyone else uses to do that evaluation is ultimately up to you.