Clipping:The value of statistical analysis; pitching stats
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
 |
| Add a Clipping |
| Date | Sunday, November 24, 1867 |
|---|---|
| Text | The properly-prepared statistics of a season’s play of a club are not only interesting to each club, but are valuable in pointing out the weak points of play, and the best batsmen and fielders of a nine. Figures don’t lie, and they are infallible in giving the true criterion of a man’s play. A, for instance, may make a dashing show in one or two games, and be generally rated as a splendid batsman, while B, as one of the quiet plodders, who go on making small but steady scores in a game, may be set down as second-class; but the analysis at the end of the season finds A a third on the bat, while the undemonstrative B ranks as No. 1. Especially is an analysis of the season’s play of the pitchers of the club important, and in this respect the statistics of balls called, and players retiring on strikes should be kept, and likewise the number of errors in the field in the way of missed catches, wild throws, muffed and passed balls; for these errors deduct from the list of failures ordinarily charged to pitchers. If the average of support in the field of a match shows, for instance, but 6 or 8 errors in a game and defeat is the result then the fielding may [sic: should be may not] be reasonably charged with weakness; but if the average of misplays reaches 15 or 20 in a game, then the fielding is to be looked to for the cause of defeat. In all these estimates the cause of a nine’s weakness will be discovered, and hence the value of these annual statistics. |
| Source | New York Sunday Mercury |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | Edit with form to add a comment |
| Query | Edit with form to add a query |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
| Origin | Initial Hershberger Clippings |
Comments
<comments voting="Plus" />