A Little Help, Please
I asked the UrClown this question a couple of weeks ago and he couldn't help me, though he told me the question had been bugging him for years. Let me throw it out to you all:
Why don't we use the same stats to measure the success of pitchers and hitters? Isn't one's success a mirror image of the other's failure? And wouldn't this minimize the difficulty in comparing the two?
Assclown, any thoughts? How about you Lisa? Repoz? Ben? Anybody?
Why don't we use the same stats to measure the success of pitchers and hitters? Isn't one's success a mirror image of the other's failure? And wouldn't this minimize the difficulty in comparing the two?
Assclown, any thoughts? How about you Lisa? Repoz? Ben? Anybody?
1 Comments:
I know the answer is out there, but I struggle with it too. Probably a good question for the Primer Dugout if you can get in there early enough to guide the discussion in that direction.
And I wonder about the strikeout thing too, and all I've been able to come up with is: "Guys that the statheads really like tend to strike out a fair amount, therefore, they conclude that strikeouts aren't that bad for hitters, or else they would actually have to criticize something that embodies their belief system as it relates to offense."
Honestly, if it's bad for a pitcher to allow a ball into play, shouldn't therefore be good for a hitter to do that? I understand the idea that a strikeout is NOT a double play ball, so that's a good thing, but after that, it's a mystery. Of course, if you can combine low strikeouts with low GIDP numbers, then not striking out is probably a good thing, as was evidenced by the 2002 World Champion Anaheim Angels.
-Seitz
Post a Comment
<< Home