別再用含混不清的WAR吧

看板MLB (美國職棒/大聯盟)作者abc12812時間13年前 (2012/10/08 21:47)推噓129(129推 0噓 99→)

留言228則, 39人參與討論串1/8 (看更多)

http://www.murraychass.com/?p=5302 It has taken 45 years for someone to win the Triple Crown of hitting statistics, and the statistics zealots want to take it away from Miguel Cabrera. As Cabrera was zeroing in on the rare achievement, ESPN.com had a column about the “’real’ Triple Crown.” It was written by someone from something called “Baseball Think Factory.” I may be displaying my ignorance in not knowing what that is, but it sounds like something where its advocates could do themselves a favor by not thinking so much and just watch games for the pure enjoyment of them. 花了45年才有人達成三冠王但數據狂熱分子卻想把桂冠從Cabrera手中奪去當Cabrera挑戰紀錄時 ESPN上登出一篇文章討論"'真'三冠王" 作者是從某個叫 Baseball Think Factory的網站來的或許是我孤陋寡聞但這聽起來像是個想太多數據卻缺少享受純粹棒球的樂趣的傢伙 I saw a commercial for an interview with Tony La Russa the other day, and he was saying that people forget that human beings play the games, a point I have long made to those who want to judge players strictly with statistics. Tony La Russa在日前的訪問中提到大很多人都忘了球賽是人在打的這正是我想對那些只用數據判斷球員的傢伙說的話 The ESPN.com column noted that Cabrera was “on the cusp” of doing something even rarer than winning the Triple Crown, and that was winning the Triple Crown without leading the league in wins above replacement,” a.k.a. WAR. Mike Trout, the column noted, was “significantly ahead of everyone in the A.L.” in WAR. ESPn的文章指出Cabrera正在達成一樣比三冠王更少見的壯舉-贏得三冠王但WAR落後文章上寫到Mike Trout的WAR遠遠領先美聯 Without getting into details, I note that the column inadvertently states one of the reasons I have no use for WAR. It cites two different versions of WAR, one computed by Baseball-Reference, another by FanGraphs. For all I know, there are still others. 我注意到文章有個我不喜歡WAR的理由它引用了兩種不同版本的WAR 一個是來自BR 另一個來自FG 就我所知還有其他的版本 Runs batted in are absolute. Home runs are the same wherever you look. Batting average is based on hits and at-bats. None of those statistics have different versions. If we accept new-age statistics, whom do we consult and trust, Baseball-Reference or FanGraphs or some other self-professed expert, Bill James perhaps? 打點是確定的全壘打在哪看都一樣打擊率是確定的這些數據沒有版本差異如果要我們接受新生代的數據那請問我們該相信BR的或是FG的還是其他所謂的"專家" 像是Bill James? This column goes further, suggesting there might be a better way of determining players’ relative value, but I didn’t learn what it is because reading more of the column would have required payment, and that’s not going to happen. 文章還提到可能有更好的衡量價值的方法但再看下去要花錢所以我也不曉得後面說了什麼 On the other hand, I would like to offer at no cost a little English quiz to the column’s writer and his editors. Like the statistics advocates I call zealots, I am zealous about the correct use of the English language. I believe that is far more important than WAR and VORP. So this is my quiz: 順便一提我可以給這位作家一點英文家教就像數據狂熱分子我也熱中於正確的英文使用我相信這比什麼WAR還是VORP的更為重要這是我給的小測驗: In ESPN.com’s Triple Crown column, find the grammatical errors in these sentences or phrases: 找出以下文句的文法錯誤 Cabrera would only be the second Triple Crown winner… The Tigers just have nine games left in the season… their is another trio of traditional stats that does a much better job of defining overall player value. Cabrera would only be the fourth… -- ※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 140.112.25.133

推

Rucca

10/08 21:48, , 1^F

10/08 21:48, 1^F

推

sexyfunny

10/08 21:50, , 2^F

10/08 21:50, 2^F

推

PennyHughes

10/08 21:50, , 3^F

10/08 21:50, 3^F