Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Tuesday, April 10, 2001

A Little Help From His Friends

From what I’ve read, Bill James doesn’t like being referred to as a “statistician”. If that is indeed true, I’m sure he won’t like the beginning of this piece.

Jim Furtado Posted: April 10, 2001 at 11:54 AM | 3 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags:

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

   1. Robert Dudek Posted: April 10, 2001 at 07:43 PM (#66650)
Calling Bill James a statistician is like calling Stephen Hawking a technician.

What Bill James is is a thinker. He just happens to think a lot about baseball.
   2. Robert Dudek Posted: April 10, 2001 at 07:43 PM (#67107)
Calling Bill James a statistician is like calling Stephen Hawking a technician.

What Bill James is is a thinker. He just happens to think a lot about baseball.
   3. Robert Dudek Posted: April 10, 2001 at 07:43 PM (#67893)
Calling Bill James a statistician is like calling Stephen Hawking a technician.

What Bill James is is a thinker. He just happens to think a lot about baseball.
   4. scruff Posted: April 10, 2001 at 09:17 PM (#66651)
I haven't read past the first two paragraphs of the article, and this author already had me steamed. Excuse me if he explains himself later, but my impulsive personality drove me immediately to comment. It DRIVES ME INSANE when people slam the QS because in it's worst case scenario you can get one with a 4.50 ERA.

As James himself explained when introducing the stat (it was awhile ago, but this is how I remember it anyway), you can get an RBI while hitting a weak grounder to short with a man on 3rd. But if you get a 140 of them in a season, the odds are you didn't get too many that way.

Almost always, the league leaders in quality starts are the top pitchers in the league. Of course the stat is influenced by ballparks, etc. It is not a "precision metric" but an "eyeball metric" that is pretty solid at what it was designed to do; I'll bet the top 10 in QS are better than the top ten in Wins almost any year.

W/BBRef on the DL right now I can't run numbers to back my argument up (on W vs. QS) but I'm fairly confident I'm right here.
   5. scruff Posted: April 10, 2001 at 09:17 PM (#67108)
I haven't read past the first two paragraphs of the article, and this author already had me steamed. Excuse me if he explains himself later, but my impulsive personality drove me immediately to comment. It DRIVES ME INSANE when people slam the QS because in it's worst case scenario you can get one with a 4.50 ERA.

As James himself explained when introducing the stat (it was awhile ago, but this is how I remember it anyway), you can get an RBI while hitting a weak grounder to short with a man on 3rd. But if you get a 140 of them in a season, the odds are you didn't get too many that way.

Almost always, the league leaders in quality starts are the top pitchers in the league. Of course the stat is influenced by ballparks, etc. It is not a "precision metric" but an "eyeball metric" that is pretty solid at what it was designed to do; I'll bet the top 10 in QS are better than the top ten in Wins almost any year.

W/BBRef on the DL right now I can't run numbers to back my argument up (on W vs. QS) but I'm fairly confident I'm right here.
   6. scruff Posted: April 10, 2001 at 09:17 PM (#67894)
I haven't read past the first two paragraphs of the article, and this author already had me steamed. Excuse me if he explains himself later, but my impulsive personality drove me immediately to comment. It DRIVES ME INSANE when people slam the QS because in it's worst case scenario you can get one with a 4.50 ERA.

As James himself explained when introducing the stat (it was awhile ago, but this is how I remember it anyway), you can get an RBI while hitting a weak grounder to short with a man on 3rd. But if you get a 140 of them in a season, the odds are you didn't get too many that way.

Almost always, the league leaders in quality starts are the top pitchers in the league. Of course the stat is influenced by ballparks, etc. It is not a "precision metric" but an "eyeball metric" that is pretty solid at what it was designed to do; I'll bet the top 10 in QS are better than the top ten in Wins almost any year.

W/BBRef on the DL right now I can't run numbers to back my argument up (on W vs. QS) but I'm fairly confident I'm right here.
   7. scruff Posted: April 11, 2001 at 12:16 PM (#66653)
Sean C., the situation you describe is not a quality start. It isn't because the definition is 6 innings or more, 3 runs (earned?) or less. I think on the fringe of a quality start it could go either way, but overall, it's a solid eyeball metric.
   8. scruff Posted: April 11, 2001 at 12:16 PM (#67110)
Sean C., the situation you describe is not a quality start. It isn't because the definition is 6 innings or more, 3 runs (earned?) or less. I think on the fringe of a quality start it could go either way, but overall, it's a solid eyeball metric.
   9. scruff Posted: April 11, 2001 at 12:16 PM (#67896)
Sean C., the situation you describe is not a quality start. It isn't because the definition is 6 innings or more, 3 runs (earned?) or less. I think on the fringe of a quality start it could go either way, but overall, it's a solid eyeball metric.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

News

All News | Prime News

Old-School Newsstand


BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
A triple short of the cycle
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogOT: Wrestling Thread November 2014
(1914 - 4:38am, Mar 30)
Last: SouthSideRyan

NewsblogTHE B/R Q&A: ROB MANFRED WANTS MLB TO 'OWN THE NEXT GENERATION' OF SPORTS FANS
(199 - 4:24am, Mar 30)
Last: David Nieporent (now, with children)

NewsblogOTP 27 March 2017: Trump, Healthcare, and the Art of the Botched Deal
(522 - 4:07am, Mar 30)
Last: David Nieporent (now, with children)

NewsblogOT - March 2017 NBA thread
(1029 - 1:21am, Mar 30)
Last: maccoach57

NewsblogWhy baseball games are so damned long | 2017 MLB Season Preview
(56 - 1:12am, Mar 30)
Last: Like Flies On Sherbert

NewsblogInvestors say they are ready to bring baseball to Montreal
(50 - 12:30am, Mar 30)
Last: winnipegwhip

NewsblogMLB’s all 25-and-under team: Who are the best young players in baseball? | For The Win
(42 - 11:53pm, Mar 29)
Last: Man o' Schwar

NewsblogOT: March-April 2017 Soccer Thread
(195 - 11:03pm, Mar 29)
Last: Biff, highly-regarded young guy

NewsblogThe Baseball-Bowling Connection!
(50 - 10:58pm, Mar 29)
Last: gehrig97

NewsblogOT: NCAA March Madness 2017
(360 - 10:48pm, Mar 29)
Last: Joe Bivens, Floundering Pumpkin

NewsblogPosnanski: Soren journeys from MTV to 'Moneyball' art
(16 - 10:08pm, Mar 29)
Last: the Hugh Jorgan returns

NewsblogNick Piecoro: Zack Greinke goes 4 innings in final spring start
(5 - 10:03pm, Mar 29)
Last: the Hugh Jorgan returns

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 3-29-2017
(22 - 9:56pm, Mar 29)
Last: GGC for Sale

NewsblogAs Baseball Considers Change, It Should Look to Its Past - The New York Times
(9 - 9:44pm, Mar 29)
Last: Hank G.

NewsblogWhite Sox trade CF Peter Bourjos to Rays for cash
(34 - 9:21pm, Mar 29)
Last: Walt Davis

Page rendered in 0.3072 seconds
46 querie(s) executed