Comments on: Stupidest Statistic Ever

By: JeffSol

JeffSol — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 20:48:10 +0000

I know the Jackie Robinson thing gets sensitive, but I’d like to agree that while Jackie was clearly the right man, to say it would not have happened without him is spurious at best. Branch Rickey, on the other hand, or someone like him? If Jackie had turned down Rickey, do we think Branch woudl have closed up the idea and gone home? No, he would have moved on to another candidate. he chose Jackie, and against the accepted wisdon of the time, but I think the hostory is pretty clear that while he chose wisely, even without Jackie, Branch Rickey was going to break the barrier with someone.

By: Dave

Dave — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 18:29:09 +0000

Damon — I could cut and paste, but I would prefer a print button that does some very nice formatting for me.

By: Dusty

Dusty — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 03:33:53 +0000

the stupidest statistic ever is the cycle.

By: Chipmaker

Chipmaker — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 19:41:17 +0000

Years ago, I heard some activist for whatever cause or phenomenon or product — really wasn’t important — state (to uproarious applause) that women were the fastest-growing segment of whatever the market or demographic was. It fit the general “you go, girls” theme that the show was promoting.

Well, okay — but (a) “growth” as a statistic is always problematic and (b) if “women” is one segment, doesn’t that mean that there’s only one other segment, being “men”? And this area, whatever it was, was well-established among men; at saturation, really.

So — we have men, call it a population of one million, gaining maybe ten a day. Growth rate == 0.001%. Women population, call it ten, gaining ten a day, growth rate == 100% (for that first day).

Same gain, +10, vastly different rates. And that’s what the activist used as her applause point, conveniently side-stepping past that growth rates are ALWAYS larger in the early going.

sigh. I’m almost glad I don’t remember more details.

By: Buchholz Surfer

Buchholz Surfer — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 17:36:34 +0000

Range Factor is a terrible stat IMO, mostly because it’s misleading. It doesn’t measure range, it just counts the total chances a player makes per 9 innings, which might well have a lot more to do with the team’s pitchers and/or luck than it does with his own range.

It wouldn’t be so bad if it weren’t called Range Factor– its title claims to measure something that it doesn’t. It’s like if you called a pitcher’s winning percentage his Pitching Effectiveness Factor.

By: Chris

Chris — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 16:48:52 +0000

The Black Swan by Nassim Nicholas Taleb It is the best book I've read regarding the use (misuse) of statistics.

By: JYarnell

JYarnell — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 16:00:50 +0000

This just goes to show that many people will continue to believe what they want to, regardless of the evidence that is put in front of them.

By: Greg

Greg — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 14:29:50 +0000

“If there’s anything more important than my ego around, I want it caught and shot now.”
– Douglas Adams, The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy

By: Brett

Brett — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 14:27:52 +0000

Creston,

I’d have to vote for the win (and the loss) as a worse statistic than the save. The fact you can blow a save (come in to the game and fail to do your job) and get credit for the win is sort of rediculous. And the fact you can not allow any hits, but get the loss because of a run scoring on an error and your team being unable to score even one run, is even worse. I also think the “difference” between an earned run and and unearned run is stupid. (The home run Bannister allowed a couple starts ago was an unearned run because it was after the third out should have been recorded — how does the opposing team not earn it if they take you yard?) But even though sometimes unearned runs are the pitcher’s fault, it almost seems that there should be a rule that if you don’t give up any earned runs, you can’t be charged for the loss. Also, if I give up 10 runs in five innings, but my team scores 11, I can get the win. But if I give up 10 runs in five innings, but my team doesn’t score their 11th run until the 7th inning, I don’t get the win, even though I didn’t do anything different. Okay, this comment is now WAY too long, but I think I’ve made my point that the win has many flaws as a stat.

By: Owen

Owen — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 12:22:27 +0000

Yesterday a friend of mine had a quote by his gchat name that I could have sworn was from me. Actually I wasn’t sure, but I began searching through old stuff to try and find it. After I opened up the search to the internet at large, I found out that it was not me, but Bob Dylan. Ego is a funny thing.