Quote:
Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins
It's not a scout's opinion. He hits the ball shorter and he hits the fairway less often. I don't know how more simple it could be.
Your problem is that you don't understand the statistics that you use. You assume that Total Driving is a useful metric. Someone like Tiger can be outside of the Top 50 in both categories yet rank in the top 20. It's a stat that rewards mediocrity rather than identifying excellence. There is nothing sabermetric or analytic about Total Driving. It adds his total rank in the two categories and assumes that they are equal. They aren't. Distance is more important than accuracy on the tour. Moreover, the stat can be easily gamed.
|
Distance and accuracy are about equal in terms of importance for driving effectivness. And driving is not as important as GIR or putting:
http://www.thesportjournal.org/artic...hampions-tours
Quote:
your total rank would be 191. That would make you 97th in total driving, essentially right in the middle. That's the very definition of a flawed stat.
You're using RBI when you think you're using wOBA.
|
I've listed a comparison between PGA Tour ranks for Tiger 07 (dominant) and Tiger 13 (still very good). This is very interesting:
Driving2007 2013
Distance 12 63
Accuracy 152 58
Total 45 20
Approach
50-125 4 37
150-200 1 75
>200 2 26
Putting
Gained 3 4
Overall 14 1
Scrambling 20 118