Comments on: There is science to be done, there is research to be run…

By: Mat

Mat — Thu, 18 Oct 2007 22:58:30 +0000

The whole point of graphic presentation is to simplify and to give a true picture in a glance.

This is the point which should be emphasized then, not silly rules like “zero must be included.” Concentrating on providing a true picture can lead to better graphical presentation of data, but concentrating on rules of thumb is a poor substitute for actively thinking about how the data ought to be presented, and can be counterproductive in many cases.

By: heyoka

heyoka — Thu, 18 Oct 2007 21:02:47 +0000

So the pitchers aren’t giving up homeruns, but other than that they are doing every thing else to prevent outs and increase opponent runs – aided and abetted mightily by our old nemesis, the glove.

The mariners had 9 more wins than their pythagorean w/l.

Last year’s success is not sustainable – it is a clear fluke.

By: scraps

scraps — Thu, 18 Oct 2007 20:41:35 +0000

28 makes the same point in fewer words.

By: bermanator

bermanator — Thu, 18 Oct 2007 20:41:31 +0000

[ot]

By: scraps

scraps — Thu, 18 Oct 2007 20:39:56 +0000

Derek, I take your point. I think I agree that if your graph is bounded by the actual extremes that ever occur in the data, you’re basically presenting a true graphic picture.

tgf and Evan, I disagree with the general point about labeled axes, particularly arguments like “If people look at graphs without looking at the axes to see the magnitude of the changes, they are misleading themselves” and “Just because people are bad at interpreting data unless you spell everything out for them doesnâ€™t mean youâ€™re misleading them by not doing it”. The whole point of graphic presentation is to simplify and to give a true picture in a glance. If people have to look closely at the labeling and adjust the picture in their minds accordingly, the graph is a distortion; it has created an untrue mind-picture that needs to be fixed with closer inspection. If you’re going to say “well, people shouldn’t be careless”, you might as well just give the raw data. (Again, I’m not arguing with Derek’s presentation here.)

By: Trev

Trev — Thu, 18 Oct 2007 20:39:50 +0000

What would these graphs look like with park adjustments?

By: heyoka

heyoka — Thu, 18 Oct 2007 20:38:37 +0000

Actually, I’ve seen some dishonest, clearly labelled graphs before. I had a annual stock report in which the y-axis for profits were labelled in the 10 millions, while debt was labelled in the billions. For the casual reader (most stock holders breeze through these things), debt LOOKED really small on its graph, while profits completely consumed its graph. The debts were in fact much larger than the profits.

What makes the graphs presented on this site not dishonest is the fact that they are relative. In this case the origin would be correctly identified as the average of the league averages, not the zero. A graph that included the zero would incorrectly make the data appear to be less varied.

By: Evan

Evan — Thu, 18 Oct 2007 20:34:22 +0000

how about a graph showing LOB â€¦ that would be a scary sight over the last few years.

Shouldn’t be too bad. To leave guys on base you have to get them there, first, and we haven’t been very good at that.

Actually, looking at the first graph, the our slugging lagged a lot farther behind league average than our OBP did in 2004, so the LOB would probably be terrible there.

By: msb

msb — Thu, 18 Oct 2007 20:30:16 +0000

Perhaps barely clinging to the topic because of the pitching graphs â€¦ did Seattle actually offer Rick Kranitz the job as pitching coach, or did they just interview him?

it doesn’t sound like they’ve offered it to anyone yet; they had an interview, he chose Baltimore (which apparently was not unexpected due to his prior relationships with MacPhail & Trembley)

By: S-Mac

S-Mac — Thu, 18 Oct 2007 20:27:12 +0000

The biggest advantage of the Weighted Companion Cube over the Moose? It will never stab you.