Announcement

Collapse

Updated Baseball Fever Policy

Baseball Fever Policy

I. Purpose of this announcement:

This announcement describes the policies pertaining to the operation of Baseball Fever.

Baseball Fever is a moderated baseball message board which encourages and facilitates research and information exchange among fans of our national pastime. The intent of the Baseball Fever Policy is to ensure that Baseball Fever remains an extremely high quality, extremely low "noise" environment.

Baseball Fever is administrated by three principal administrators:
webmaster - Baseball Fever Owner
The Commissioner - Baseball Fever Administrator
Macker - Baseball Fever Administrator

And a group of forum specific super moderators. The role of the moderator is to keep Baseball Fever smoothly and to screen posts for compliance with our policy. The moderators are ALL volunteer positions, so please be patient and understanding of any delays you might experience in correspondence.

II. Comments about our policy:

Any suggestions on this policy may be made directly to the webmaster.

III. Acknowledgments:

This document was based on a similar policy used by SABR.

IV. Requirements for participation on Baseball Fever:

Participation on Baseball Fever is available to all baseball fans with a valid email address, as verified by the forum's automated system, which then in turn creates a single validated account. Multiple accounts by a single user are prohibited.

By registering, you agree to adhere to the policies outlined in this document and to conduct yourself accordingly. Abuse of the forum, by repeated failure to abide by these policies, will result in your access being blocked to the forum entirely.

V. Baseball Fever Netiquette:

Participants at Baseball Fever are required to adhere to these principles, which are outlined in this section.
a. All posts to Baseball Fever should be written in clear, concise English, with proper grammar and accurate spelling. The use of abbreviations should be kept to a minimum; when abbreviation is necessary, they should be either well-known (such as etc.), or explained on their first use in your post.

b. Conciseness is a key attribute of a good post.

c. Quote only the portion of a post to which you are responding.

d. Standard capitalization and punctuation make a large difference in the readability of a post. TYPING IN ALL CAPITALS is considered to be "shouting"; it is a good practice to limit use of all capitals to words which you wish to emphasize.

e. It is our policy NOT to transmit any defamatory or illegal materials.

f. Personal attacks of any type against Baseball Fever readers will not be tolerated. In these instances the post will be copied by a moderator and/or administrator, deleted from the site, then sent to the member who made the personal attack via a Private Message (PM) along with a single warning. Members who choose to not listen and continue personal attacks will be banned from the site.

g. It is important to remember that many contextual clues available in face-to-face discussion, such as tone of voice and facial expression, are lost in the electronic forum. As a poster, try to be alert for phrasing that might be misinterpreted by your audience to be offensive; as a reader, remember to give the benefit of the doubt and not to take umbrage too easily. There are many instances in which a particular choice of words or phrasing can come across as being a personal attack where none was intended.

h. The netiquette described above (a-g) often uses the term "posts", but applies equally to Private Messages.

VI. Baseball Fever User Signature Policy

A signature is a piece of text that some members may care to have inserted at the end of ALL of their posts, a little like the closing of a letter. You can set and / or change your signature by editing your profile in the UserCP. Since it is visible on ALL your posts, the following policy must be adhered to:

Signature Composition
Font size limit: No larger than size 2 (This policy is a size 2)
Style: Bold and italics are permissible
Character limit: No more than 500 total characters
Lines: No more than 4 lines
Colors: Most colors are permissible, but those which are hard to discern against the gray background (yellow, white, pale gray) should be avoided
Images/Graphics: Allowed, but nothing larger than 20k and Content rules must be followed

Signature Content
No advertising is permitted
Nothing political or religious
Nothing obscene, vulgar, defamatory or derogatory
Links to personal blogs/websites are permissible - with the webmaster's written consent
A Link to your Baseball Fever Blog does not require written consent and is recommended
Quotes must be attributed. Non-baseball quotes are permissible as long as they are not religious or political

Please adhere to these rules when you create your signature. Failure to do so will result in a request to comply by a moderator. If you do not comply within a reasonable amount of time, the signature will be removed and / or edited by an Administrator. Baseball Fever reserves the right to edit and / or remove any or all of your signature line at any time without contacting the account holder.

VII. Appropriate and inappropriate topics for Baseball Fever:

Most concisely, the test for whether a post is appropriate for Baseball Fever is: "Does this message discuss our national pastime in an interesting manner?" This post can be direct or indirect: posing a question, asking for assistance, providing raw data or citations, or discussing and constructively critiquing existing posts. In general, a broad interpretation of "baseball related" is used.

Baseball Fever is not a promotional environment. Advertising of products, web sites, etc., whether for profit or not-for-profit, is not permitted. At the webmaster's discretion, brief one-time announcements for products or services of legitimate baseball interest and usefulness may be allowed. If advertising is posted to the site it will be copied by a moderator and/or administrator, deleted from the site, then sent to the member who made the post via a Private Message (PM) along with a single warning. Members who choose to not listen and continue advertising will be banned from the site. If the advertising is spam-related, pornography-based, or a "visit-my-site" type post / private message, no warning at all will be provided, and the member will be banned immediately without a warning.

It is considered appropriate to post a URL to a page which specifically and directly answers a question posted on the list (for example, it would be permissible to post a link to a page containing home-road splits, even on a site which has advertising or other commercial content; however, it would not be appropriate to post the URL of the main page of the site). The site reserves the right to limit the frequency of such announcements by any individual or group.

In keeping with our test for a proper topic, posting to Baseball Fever should be treated as if you truly do care. This includes posting information that is, to the best of your knowledge, complete and accurate at the time you post. Any errors or ambiguities you catch later should be acknowledged and corrected in the thread, since Baseball Fever is sometimes considered to be a valuable reference for research information.

VIII. Role of the moderator:

When a post is submitted to Baseball Fever, it is forwarded by the server automatically and seen immediately. The moderator may:
a. Leave the thread exactly like it was submitted. This is the case 95% of the time.

b. Immediately delete the thread as inappropriate for Baseball Fever. Examples include advertising, personal attacks, or spam. This is the case 1% of the time.

c. Move the thread. If a member makes a post about the Marlins in the Yankees forum it will be moved to the appropriate forum. This is the case 3% of the time.

d. Edit the message due to an inappropriate item. This is the case 1% of the time. There have been new users who will make a wonderful post, then add to their signature line (where your name / handle appears) a tagline that is a pure advertisement. This tagline will be removed, a note will be left in the message so he/she is aware of the edit, and personal contact will be made to the poster telling them what has been edited and what actions need to be taken to prevent further edits.

The moderators perform no checks on posts to verify factual or logical accuracy. While he/she may point out gross errors in factual data in replies to the thread, the moderator does not act as an "accuracy" editor. Also moderation is not a vehicle for censorship of individuals and/or opinions, and the moderator's decisions should not be taken personally.

IX. Legal aspects of participation in Baseball Fever:

By submitting a post to Baseball Fever, you grant Baseball Fever permission to distribute your message to the forum. Other rights pertaining to the post remain with the ORIGINAL author, and you may not redistribute or retransmit any posts by any others, in whole or in part, without the express consent of the original author.

The messages appearing on Baseball Fever contain the opinions and views of their respective authors and are not necessarily those of Baseball Fever, or of the Baseball Almanac family of sites.

Sincerely,

Sean Holtz, Webmaster of Baseball Almanac & Baseball Fever
www.baseball-almanac.com | www.baseball-fever.com
"Baseball Almanac: Sharing Baseball. Sharing History."
See more
See less

Should Bill James be inducted to the HoF as a "pioneer"?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by jalbright View Post

    This is one of the things that gets lost in the narratives versus stats argumetnts. If the math is properly done and the common wisdom is usually correct (and it usually is--if you watch enough games, you'll usually realize who can make more plays than most people. The most deceptive part of the eye test on defense are the guys who don't have much range but makes flashy looking plays like infielders diving for balls). If the data typically disagrees with the common wisdom, the data approach needs predictive value to prove itself and/or some other compelling explanation of why the common wisdom is in error.
    The mistake people make about the 'math' is assuming that just because it is math, and logical, and done by 'smart' people, that it is always correct. We merely need to look at the huge differences in the various metrics to see that this just isn't so. One metric says Jeter is an all time great, and another says that he is so bad in the field that he is an average player for his career. One version of WAR says Larry Walker is a definite HOFer, and another says he is well below the borderline. Sometimes the different math equations look at the same thing and differ as much as they do from the narrative and eye test.

    If some math problem can be so off about Jeter, for whom we have video footage of literally every inning he played, imagine how off it can be about a guy like Pie Traynor, who we have zero footage of.

    It's much ado about nothing...we pretty much end up right where we started.
    Last edited by willshad; 12-04-2018, 03:28 PM.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by willshad View Post

      The mistake people make about the 'math' is assuming that just because it is math, and logical, and done by 'smart' people, that it is always correct. We merely need to look at the huge differences in the various metrics to see that this just isn't so. One metric says Jeter is an all time great, and another says that he is so bad in the field that he is an average player for his career. One version of WAR says Larry Walker is a definite HOFer, and another says he is well below the borderline. Sometimes the different math equations look at the same thing and differ as much as they do from the narrative and eye test.

      It's much ado about nothing...we pretty much end up right where we started.
      Math is a tool. Some people don't know how to use the tools properly. Baseball statistics, especially the ones that predate computers, may be more limited that we'd like If you know how to do things like regressions, there's very sound ways to find the correlations between various statistics Everybody knows hits and home runs are related to runs and that runs are related to wins. Properly applied math can provide solid answers to those questions. Defense is still an area that the statistical community is trying to figure out, since the historical data we had wasn't well designed to help us answer the questions. Once the newer ideas are better tested, we'll have a better fix on how that old data is best interpreted, though even then, the holes in the data will always cause us some difficulty. Face it, though, even the approaches we have now have a high correlation to the common wisdom of who was good defensively and who was not. When those two differ, it often comes down to the player didn't make as many plays as one would expect a great defender to make (or made a lot more plays than we'd expect a poor defender to make). Maybe there's an explanation in the pitching staff or something, but it's certainly information worth having.

      Catching defense, especially with respect to historical data, may be so poorly documented that it may be impossible to sort out very well. Other positions, though, seem to generally be dealt with in a reasonable fashion.
      Seen on a bumper sticker: If only closed minds came with closed mouths.
      Some minds are like concrete--thoroughly mixed up and permanently set.
      A Lincoln: I don't think much of a man who is not wiser today than he was yesterday.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by JR Hart View Post
        I've read on here many times regarding fielding metrics, "Isn't something better than nothing?" The answer is "NO" not if it's flawed
        Wow! I'm surprised to see you advocating for the abolition of the Win, Save, RBI and the Error. Party on, Wayne!
        "It is a simple matter to erect a Hall of Fame, but difficult to select the tenants." -- Ken Smith
        "I am led to suspect that some of the electorate is very dumb." -- Henry P. Edwards
        "You have a Hall of Fame to put people in, not keep people out." -- Brian Kenny
        "There's no such thing as a perfect ballot." -- Jay Jaffe

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Chadwick View Post
          Wow! I'm surprised to see you advocating for the abolition of the Win, Save, RBI and the Error. Party on, Wayne!
          there is a big difference.

          Neither I nor others look at those stats above as the absolute concrete be all. as many here do with WAR. If we are going to call something "value", and measure all things by it, then it had better be pretty darned accurate. And please don't say posters don't do that, they do.
          This week's Giant

          #5 in games played as a Giant with 1721 , Bill Terry

          Comment


          • Originally posted by JR Hart View Post

            there is a big difference.

            Neither I nor others look at those stats above as the absolute concrete be all. as many here do with WAR. If we are going to call something "value", and measure all things by it, then it had better be pretty darned accurate. And please don't say posters don't do that, they do.
            I feel like I'm one of the stronger advocates for sabermetrics/WAR based analysis, but besides Savoy's strong language tendencies (and behind the curtain has an open mind to non-WAR things when you look at his personal hall), I'm not sure anyone here is pumping WAR as full proof. WAR like measures greatly enhance our understanding of player value, and with new statcast and classic Retrosheet data, incremental improvements continue to enrich our knowledge base. To say it's perfect is fool hardy, but it's awesome that we are given these tools to help evaluate players.
            Jacquelyn Eva Marchand (1983-2017)
            http://www.tezakfuneralhome.com/noti...uelyn-Marchand

            Comment


            • Originally posted by JR Hart View Post

              there is a big difference.

              Neither I nor others look at those stats above as the absolute concrete be all. as many here do with WAR. If we are going to call something "value", and measure all things by it, then it had better be pretty darned accurate. And please don't say posters don't do that, they do.
              This is largely misleading. Those stats have absolutely formed majority of how most people evaluate players for 100+ years. And people have felt STRONGLY about the value and correctness of those numbers for just as long. People have been using those stats to fiercely argue theri points for decades.

              The biggest mistake you make is acting like traditionalists are different/beyond stubborness. In fact, if I llok around this place - many, if not a majority of the most stubborn and unyeilding regulars ae not those who look at WAR. I hear a lot more people in the WAR community discussing issues with WAR than traditionalists openly evaluting the issues connected with RBIs and the pitcher win, etcs.

              Where is the discourse about the problematic issues with these EXTREMELY flawed stats on your side on this site?
              1885 1886 1926 1931 1934 1942 1944 1946 1964 1967 1982 2006 2011

              1887 1888 1928 1930 1943 1968 1985 1987 2004 2013

              1996 2000 2001 2002 2005 2009 2012 2014 2015


              The Top 100 Pitchers In MLB History
              The Top 100 Position Players In MLB History

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Bothrops Atrox View Post

                This is largely misleading. Those stats have absolutely formed majority of how most people evaluate players for 100+ years. And people have felt STRONGLY about the value and correctness of those numbers for just as long. People have been using those stats to fiercely argue theri points for decades.

                The biggest mistake you make is acting like traditionalists are different/beyond stubborness. In fact, if I llok around this place - many, if not a majority of the most stubborn and unyeilding regulars ae not those who look at WAR. I hear a lot more people in the WAR community discussing issues with WAR than traditionalists openly evaluting the issues connected with RBIs and the pitcher win, etcs.

                Where is the discourse about the problematic issues with these EXTREMELY flawed stats on your side on this site?
                Branch Rickey openly discussed the flaws with traditional stats way back in the early 1950's. He said as much in his famous 1954 Life Magazine essay on baseball statistics. Rickey also stated that walks are very important as well. Rickey said this about RBI:

                "As a statistic RBI is not only misleading but dishonest. They depend on managerial control, a hitter's position in the batting order, park dimensions, and the success of his teammates in getting on base ahead of him."

                Branch Rickey, with the help of Allan Roth, was truly a sabermetric GM.
                Strikeouts are boring! Besides that, they're fascist. Throw some ground balls - it's more democratic.-Crash Davis

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Honus Wagner Rules View Post

                  Branch Rickey openly discussed the flaws with traditional stats way back in the early 1950's. He said as much in his famous 1954 Life Magazine essay on baseball statistics. Rickey also stated that walks are very important as well. Rickey said this about RBI:

                  "As a statistic RBI is not only misleading but dishonest. They depend on managerial control, a hitter's position in the batting order, park dimensions, and the success of his teammates in getting on base ahead of him."

                  Branch Rickey, with the help of Allan Roth, was truly a sabermetric GM.
                  Absolutely. There have been progressive thinkers capable of change depending on new information since the beginning of sport.
                  1885 1886 1926 1931 1934 1942 1944 1946 1964 1967 1982 2006 2011

                  1887 1888 1928 1930 1943 1968 1985 1987 2004 2013

                  1996 2000 2001 2002 2005 2009 2012 2014 2015


                  The Top 100 Pitchers In MLB History
                  The Top 100 Position Players In MLB History

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Honus Wagner Rules View Post

                    Branch Rickey openly discussed the flaws with traditional stats way back in the early 1950's. He said as much in his famous 1954 Life Magazine essay on baseball statistics. Rickey also stated that walks are very important as well. Rickey said this about RBI:

                    "As a statistic RBI is not only misleading but dishonest. They depend on managerial control, a hitter's position in the batting order, park dimensions, and the success of his teammates in getting on base ahead of him."

                    Branch Rickey, with the help of Allan Roth, was truly a sabermetric GM.
                    I don't think that anyone ever thought that RBI weren't team affected. That doesn't make them absolutely worthless as some here feel.


                    Where is the discourse about the problematic issues with these EXTREMELY flawed stats on your side on this site?
                    again (and again) I don't post RBI as the gospel truth, end of discussion stat.
                    This week's Giant

                    #5 in games played as a Giant with 1721 , Bill Terry

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by JR Hart View Post





                      again (and again) I don't post RBI as the gospel truth, end of discussion stat.

                      I never said you did. I am asking why you and your trad friends don't have open discourse about how flawed RBIs and team wins, etc. are. You expect WAR followers to question its components (whch most do), but when is the last time you question the reliability of the things you cling on to? When it is brought up how flawed RBs and wins (or anything of the sort are) you all just get defensive.

                      And who is this person who thinks WAR is the gospel truth? Savoy just two days ago said that somebodies narrative is too strong to kick him out of the HOF. He still has Pie Traynor in the HOF despite what WAR says. He constantly has guys like M. brown and Rivera WAY higher in his rankings than WAR would indicate. Who are these WAR as Gospel Truth people? I have too much respects for the intelligence of the people here to assume anyone is looking at one thing and one thing only. Even if narrative and traditional stats are what people key-in on the most.
                      1885 1886 1926 1931 1934 1942 1944 1946 1964 1967 1982 2006 2011

                      1887 1888 1928 1930 1943 1968 1985 1987 2004 2013

                      1996 2000 2001 2002 2005 2009 2012 2014 2015


                      The Top 100 Pitchers In MLB History
                      The Top 100 Position Players In MLB History

                      Comment


                      • Mlb teams now definitely do use war and similar stats to make their decisions. You can argue about it but it is the state of the art currently. Also most sabermetricians don't really care about whether base Ruth or Barry bonds was greater, they want to use this on current baseball and projections.
                        I now have my own non commercial blog about training for batspeed and power using my training experience in baseball and track and field.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by JR Hart View Post

                          I don't think that anyone ever thought that RBI weren't team affected. That doesn't make them absolutely worthless as some here feel.
                          Branch Rickey thought RBI was worthless as an evaluation tool.

                          Strikeouts are boring! Besides that, they're fascist. Throw some ground balls - it's more democratic.-Crash Davis

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by dominik View Post
                            Mlb teams now definitely do use war and similar stats to make their decisions. You can argue about it but it is the state of the art currently. Also most sabermetricians don't really care about whether base Ruth or Barry bonds was greater, they want to use this on current baseball and projections.
                            Exactly. It's not designed to accurately analyze era's before its creation.
                            "No matter how great you were once upon a time — the years go by, and men forget,” - W. A. Phelon in Baseball Magazine in 1915. “Ross Barnes, forty years ago, was as great as Cobb or Wagner ever dared to be. Had scores been kept then as now, he would have seemed incomparably marvelous.”

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by bluesky5 View Post

                              Exactly. It's not designed to accurately analyze era's before its creation.
                              For HOF war will never be the only measure. Advanced stats are used more but thinks like milestones, batting average and so on do matter. Vlad Guerrero has less war than jim Edmonds but he was an iconic hitter who hit 320 with 40 homers in his prime. In votings that matters.
                              I now have my own non commercial blog about training for batspeed and power using my training experience in baseball and track and field.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by dominik View Post

                                For HOF war will never be the only measure. Advanced stats are used more but thinks like milestones, batting average and so on do matter. Vlad Guerrero has less war than jim Edmonds but he was an iconic hitter who hit 320 with 40 homers in his prime. In votings that matters.
                                Yes - but that does not mean WAR in the numbers. And that is the mental step a lot of people take. WAR could be "right" and people still choose Vlad over Edmonds.
                                1885 1886 1926 1931 1934 1942 1944 1946 1964 1967 1982 2006 2011

                                1887 1888 1928 1930 1943 1968 1985 1987 2004 2013

                                1996 2000 2001 2002 2005 2009 2012 2014 2015


                                The Top 100 Pitchers In MLB History
                                The Top 100 Position Players In MLB History

                                Comment

                                Ad Widget

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X