Re: [情報] WAR is the answer

看板MLB作者 (台灣加油)時間13年前 (2013/02/20 11:27), 編輯推噓0(0推 0噓 30→)
留言30則, 5人參與, 最新討論串2/2 (看更多)
※ 引述《abc12812 ()》之銘言： : sport, like the world, is messy. But the bottom line is that WAR works. In : 2012 the correlation between Baseball Prospectus' WAR and team victories was : 0.86 (where 1.0 would have meant a perfect correlation). The correlation : between batting average and victories was 0.27. Teams with more WAR win more : games. Teams with better batting averages don't. Sure. WAR is a better statistic than the batting average. I do not think that many people disagree. You can check the correlation between victories and the differences of the runs forced and the runs allowed. It would give you a higher correlation. Does that mean R+RBI is a better statistic for offensive players? Furthermore, WPA (win probability added) would give you a perfect correlation to victories. Would you consider it? There is no doubt that WAR is a good answer. But is it THE answer? Could be, but little support from your long arguments. : at a certain point, the question in any debate against science is: What are : you really fighting and why? You should ask this to yourself, and answer it seriously. -- ※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 140.109.74.113
→
02/20 12:59, , 1F
context
02/20 12:59, 1F
→
02/20 13:02, , 2F
wut
02/20 13:02, 2F
→
02/20 13:06, , 3F
runs scored minus allowed has higher correlation??
02/20 13:06, 3F
→
02/20 13:08, , 4F
even if it's true, wut is that to say about R+RBI??
02/20 13:08, 4F
→
02/20 13:09, , 5F
WPA has a perfect correlation? have you done teh math?
02/20 13:09, 5F
→
02/20 13:37, , 6F
For the same season (2012), Corr(RS-RA, W)=0.947
02/20 13:37, 6F
→
02/20 13:39, , 7F
You wont believe that Corr(R+RBI, W)is about the same?
02/20 13:39, 7F
→
02/20 13:40, , 8F
I said for offensive player, so I roughly divide each
02/20 13:40, 8F
→
02/20 13:40, , 9F
run to the player scores, and that the player drives in
02/20 13:40, 9F
→
02/20 13:41, , 10F
Now, for the WPA, do you know the definition? Even if
02/20 13:41, 10F
→
02/20 13:42, , 11F
you do not know, how about taking the total WPA of any
02/20 13:42, 11F
→
02/20 13:43, , 12F
team to see if W=81+WPA? If you still do not believe
02/20 13:43, 12F
→
02/20 13:44, , 13F
that correlation=1, you can check with any calculator
02/20 13:44, 13F
→
02/20 13:47, , 14F
Sorry, I did not mean to say Corr(R+RBI,W), I meant
02/20 13:47, 14F
→
02/20 13:48, , 15F
Corr(R+RBI,RS) is nearly 1, so I use it to evaluate the
02/20 13:48, 15F
→
02/20 13:48, , 16F
offensive performance
02/20 13:48, 16F
→
02/20 13:49, , 17F
I was not going to argue that R+RBI is better. I want
02/20 13:49, 17F
→
02/20 13:50, , 18F
to say that it is better by the logic of the author
02/20 13:50, 18F
→
02/20 13:50, , 19F
http://tinyurl.com/a37ngwx not the nats but the giants
02/20 13:50, 19F
→
02/20 13:54, , 20F
are you sure that you added both batting and pitching?
02/20 13:54, 20F
→
02/20 13:56, , 21F
R=RS and RBI≒R I am not sure wut u goona proof here
02/20 13:56, 21F
→
02/20 13:58, , 22F
OK, my bad, so u know the def of WPA
02/20 13:58, 22F
→
02/20 13:59, , 23F
but don't know wut it designed to answer?
02/20 13:59, 23F
→
02/20 14:20, , 24F
I don't know what makes you think so. Anyway, whether I
02/20 14:20, 24F
→
02/20 14:22, , 25F
I know or not is irrelvant. I just follow the author's
02/20 14:22, 25F
→
02/20 14:22, , 26F
logic to present WPA as a superior statistic
02/20 14:22, 26F
→
02/20 14:24, , 27F
For R&RBI, as I mentioned above, it would also be a
02/20 14:24, 27F
→
02/20 14:25, , 28F
better statistic from his logic.
02/20 14:25, 28F
→
02/20 20:36, , 29F
my dick is so big
02/20 20:36, 29F
→
02/20 22:18, , 30F
mom, i am here
02/20 22:18, 30F
‣ 更多 tlchen 的文章
文章代碼(AID): #1H94ALyo (MLB)
討論串 (同標題文章)
本文引述了以下文章的的內容：
完整討論串 (本文為第 2 之 2 篇)：
排序： 最新先 | 最舊先 | 留言數
在新視窗開啟完整討論串 (共2篇)
‣ 更多 tlchen 的文章
文章代碼(AID): #1H94ALyo (MLB)