# Team statistics applied to individual players **URL:** \ **Category:** The Game Room\ **Created:** [December 2, 2009, 6:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/team-statistics-applied-to-individual-players/519735 "2009-12-02T18:54:28Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 12\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f475e1/32.png) [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jimmy_Chitwood)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2009, 8:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/team-statistics-applied-to-individual-players/519735/21 "2009-12-02T20:58:14Z")
> [@RealityChuck](#): > > In any case, no matter how you choose to measure a pitcher’s performance over a career, and no matter how you select your top pitchers, you’ll find your selection won a lot of games (and had a good W-L percentage – especially when compared to how well his team did without him). Over the course of a career, the times the pitcher has a hard-luck loss and the times he has a good-luck win tend to even out, so ultimately the W-L record indicates someone who can pitch well. It’s a crude measurement to be sure (and cruder nowadays), but it is a very good rule of thumb. You’re also pretty likely to find that your top pitchers have [walked a lot of batters](http://www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/BB_p_career.shtml), [thrown a lot of wild pitches](http://www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/WP_career.shtml), [given up a lot of hits](http://www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/H_p_career.shtml), and [lost a lot of games](http://www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/L_career.shtml). In fact, if you compare those lists to the leaders in [winning percentage](http://www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/win_loss_perc_career.shtml), I think you’ll find that those other numbers are as good or better indicators of value in a particular pitcher’s career. Walter Johnson is #116 in winning percentage, Tom Seaver’s 104, Carlton is 205, Dazzy Vance 163, Don Drysdale is 285, Don Sutton is 278. Meanwhile look at the top 20. Plenty of greats, certainly, but not all. I’d even put my money on the top 15 all-time loss leaders vs. the top 15 leaders in winning percentage, for instance. So the question is, if it’s such a crude measurement, why is it also a very good one when there’s so much else to compare? ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2009, 9:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/team-statistics-applied-to-individual-players/519735/22 "2009-12-02T21:00:03Z")
That plus-minus system is intriguing: I’ve been saying since college that there needed to be some way to account for that. Kerry Kittles, the star of our basketball team, never had very impressive stats himself, but anyone who watched the games would notice that the rest of the team always seemed to do better when he was on the court. ---
**Author:** ![Munch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/munch/32/5281_2.png) [@Munch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Munch)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2009, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/team-statistics-applied-to-individual-players/519735/23 "2009-12-02T21:01:33Z")
> [@RealityChuck](#): > > It’s a crude measurement to be sure (and cruder nowadays), but it is a very good rule of thumb. Here’s the thing though - it’s a terrible rule of thumb. It’s still a team statistic, and you’re still trying to jam that square peg into a round hole. > [@](#): > > So? The contributed to the win more than any other player. I don’t care how many runs you score, you still need a pitcher who allows fewer. If you were to ask a manager “Hey, do you care how many runs your team scores?” I highly doubt his answer would be “I don’t care, it’s all about the pitcher”. Wins - the most important team statistic of them all - is a team statistic. It relies on pitching, defense and offense. The pitcher contributes to one of those. Why reward him for pitching terribly when his team scores 23 runs, and why penalize him for pitching brilliantly when his team gets shut out? It’s incongruous. > [@](#): > > If you have the skill to keep the other team from scoring, then that’s something to be desired. It’s just that in the dead ball era, the pitcher was responsible for the entire game. No - the pitchers were still just responsible for 1/3 of the game (if we split pitching, offense and defense equally). 1/2 if the pitcher is so good as to take defense completely out of it. > [@](#): > > In any case, no matter how you choose to measure a pitcher’s performance over a career, and no matter how you select your top pitchers, you’ll find your selection won a lot of games (and had a good W-L percentage – especially when compared to how well his team did without him). I really like your parenthetical “when compared to how well his team did without him”. The inverse of that is “how well he did without his team”. This suggests that there are statistics that aren’t team-based that you can use to determine how well an individual did. Which is exactly the point being made in this thread. > [@](#): > > Over the course of a career, the times the pitcher has a hard-luck loss and the times he has a good-luck win tend to even out Know what else evens out? Every single individual-based statistic. ---
**Author:** ![Jeff\_Lichtman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jeff_lichtman/32/1531_2.png) [@Jeff\_Lichtman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jeff_Lichtman)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2009, 9:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/team-statistics-applied-to-individual-players/519735/24 "2009-12-03T09:04:30Z")
Even the RBI is to some degree a team statistic - a hitter can’t drive in many runs unless there are runners on base ahead of him. Runs, too - the guys hitting behind you have to drive you in. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2009, 12:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/team-statistics-applied-to-individual-players/519735/25 "2009-12-03T12:17:36Z")
> [@Tom\_Scud](#): > > Ah, interesting. Not sure if I think the basketball system is better or not - it would kind of suck to be the guy who backs up Michael Jordan or Lebron James under the basketball system you outlined. Heh. Reminds me of the hypothetical one of my professors hit again and again and again: imagine a super-Jordan who always scores, even with a man covering him. And now figure every other team (a) realizes this, and so (b) invariably has two men cover him while the remaining three play Jordan’s four teammates. Now, he’s the best player on the team. Heck, he’s the best player in the league. But none of his stats reflect that unless you include plus-minus stuff; after all, he’s the best player even if he never touches the ball all season. ---
**Author:** ![Munch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/munch/32/5281_2.png) [@Munch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Munch)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2009, 1:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/team-statistics-applied-to-individual-players/519735/26 "2009-12-03T13:47:36Z")
> [@Jeff\_Lichtman](#): > > Even the RBI is to some degree a team statistic - a hitter can’t drive in many runs unless there are runners on base ahead of him. Runs, too - the guys hitting behind you have to drive you in. Eh. I tried to word the OP in a way that would eliminate RBIs and Runs. It certainly depends on other players, but the same way an Assist or a Reception does. Another thing about Wins - a pitcher can come into a game, pitch 8 scoreless innings, have his team score 12, and still not get a win if the reliever blows it. Clearly, he should have pitched so well as to give the other team negative runs… :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Tom\_Scud](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/f08c70/32.png) [@Tom\_Scud](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tom_Scud)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2009, 2:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/team-statistics-applied-to-individual-players/519735/27 "2009-12-03T14:40:44Z")
> [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](#): > > Yes indeedy, and as you might expect, there’s [more information](http://hoopnumbers.com/allAnalysisView?analysis=RAPM&discussion=True) [on the attempts to adjust for those factors](http://www.82games.com/ilardi1.htm) [than you probably care to read](http://basketballvalue.com/index.php). Interesting (only read the first one) - too bad that in their adjustments, they stepped so far away from the basic stat. One of the advantages of plus-minus, in my mind, is that it’s such an easy concept to grasp: “did this player’s team outscore its opponents, or vice versa, when he was in the game?” With all the adjustments and so on, you’re pretty much trusting in your computer program, which is a pity. Like the difference between OPS and VORP, but magnified. ---
**Author:** ![Hawkeyeop](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/958977/32.png) [@Hawkeyeop](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hawkeyeop)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2009, 2:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/team-statistics-applied-to-individual-players/519735/28 "2009-12-03T14:58:58Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#): > > Heh. Reminds me of the hypothetical one of my professors hit again and again and again: imagine a super-Jordan who always scores, even with a man covering him. And now figure every other team (a) realizes this, and so (b) invariably has two men cover him while the remaining three play Jordan’s four teammates. > > Now, he’s the best player on the team. Heck, he’s the best player in the league. But none of his stats reflect that unless you include plus-minus stuff; after all, he’s the best player even if he never touches the ball all season. Ignoring the fact that a double team isn’t going to prevent Jordan from scoring, the point is well taken. Now, imagine the same player on a team with a 2nd weapon. All of a sudden player 1 gets the ball more and double teamed less, because player 2 needs to be covered as well. The team also performs much better, perhaps even winning a championship. Thus player 1 transforms from a mediocre player on a mediocre team to a great one who knows how to win, even though he didn’t become anymore talented. In most team sports it is very difficult to seperate individual success from team success. Is a qb good because his line gives him time, his receivers get open and make quality catches, his back takes the defensive focus away from him, his coaches call quality plays, or because himself is just quite talented? How can you tell? Baseball is a little easier, because most matchups are individuals. You still got to pitch to every hitter and face every pitcher. This I think is why it can be so frustrating. In baseball we do, for the most part, have the ability to measure how good a player individually was, and yet many people still rely on team stats that do not remotely serve this purpose or wild guesses on the quality of a player’s character. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2009, 12:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/team-statistics-applied-to-individual-players/519735/29 "2009-12-04T00:12:22Z")
I would suggest that in hockey, team effects on individual statistics are enormous. Goalies, for instance. Obviously you’re not going to win a lot of games if your team can’t score, but a goalie’s supposedly “individual” statistics will also be affected by his team. An inept defense will allow more shots, more high-quality shots, and offer more screening opportunities than a solid defense that blocks shots, clears pucks, interferes with passes, and clears the front of the net. Skater statistics are heavily influenced by role, teammates, and ice time. A third line player who doesn’t see action on the power play is doing one hell of a job if he scores 25 goals; a center whose linemen are elite players and who plays a lot on the power play who scores 25 goals might not be up to the task. ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2009, 11:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/team-statistics-applied-to-individual-players/519735/30 "2009-12-06T23:18:30Z")
> [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](#): > > Plus-minus is not really a team stat in basketball, though, since the point is to compare points scored and allowed while the player is on the court vs. points scored and allowed while the player is not. If it’s correctly done it isolates the impact of the individual. That’s not the way the hockey one works, though. > > I think the main team stat that gets attributed to individuals is rings. “He’s never won the big one.” That is the one I hate the most. Guys dis Barry Sanders because he never won a Superbowl, except when he played the Lions made the playoffs. Since he retired he demonstrated clearly what a horrible organization the Lions really are. ---
**Author:** ![Superhal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b4bc9f/32.png) [@Superhal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Superhal)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2009, 12:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/team-statistics-applied-to-individual-players/519735/31 "2009-12-07T00:54:47Z")
It’s crap in football. On offense, every single play is predicated by offensive line play, yet WR/RB/TE/QB get the yardage ratings, OL get nothing. Probably the only significant stat OL get are “sacks allowed.” On defense, every single play is predicated by the defensive line play. However, the DL gets a much better share of the stats, from sacks, hurries, tackles w/loss, forced fumbles, etc. What really irritates me is that the flow of the game indicates who gets which stats. If you are down by 30, the running back sits down and the QB airs it out for the rest of the game. If you win using this strategy, your QB gets 300+ yards, 3-4 TD’s, and the receivers get a bunch as well. If you lose, the QB gets a bad rating, 2-3 interceptions, 3+ sacks, etc. On the other hand, if you are up by 30, the Qb sits down and the RB gets double or triple the number of carries as when the game is close or they are losing. If your team steamrolls everybody week after week, the backup QB might be in the game by the third quarter. Also, the kicker gets a lot more chances, as you don’t have to go for it on 4th down. The one that really pissed me off was Oakland a few years ago. They had, supposedly, the “best pass defense” in the league, when they were losing every game by 20+ points so their opponents stopped passing by the 2nd quarter. ---
**Author:** ![Tanbarkie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/a698b9/32.png) [@Tanbarkie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tanbarkie)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2009, 4:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/team-statistics-applied-to-individual-players/519735/32 "2009-12-07T04:34:24Z")
> [@Jeff\_Lichtman](#): > > Even the RBI is to some degree a team statistic - a hitter can’t drive in many runs unless there are runners on base ahead of him. Runs, too - the guys hitting behind you have to drive you in. [Joe Posnanski](http://joeposnanski.com/JoeBlog/2009/10/03/theo/) eloquently makes the point (with some help from Red Sox GM Theo Epstein) that RBIs are themselves an antiquated stat, using one of my favorite underrated players, J.D. Drew, as an example. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/team-statistics-applied-to-individual-players/519735.md?page=1)