Quote:
Originally Posted by G1911
I never said the mathematicians were in their right mind  . I agree with you, Verlander is obviously the #1, an incredible season at age 39 after missing almost all of the last 2 years. I see no reasonable argument that Nola had a better year, but I’m pretty sure it’s primarily those 2 figures the advanced stats love being almost even that can lead to Nola winning their equation. |
Perhaps Nola 's pitches burn more calories on their way to the plate, or the balls hit off him have an average angle 0.174 degrees lower than Verlander, or his spin to velocity raiio on his curveball is better in games played on Tuesdays. Data is only useful IMO if the result somewhat comports with common sense and observation. I suspect their analysis of batters may be similarly flawed but have not reviewed yet.