We noticed you're browsing in private or incognito mode.

To continue reading this article, please exit incognito mode or log in.

Not a subscriber? Subscribe now for unlimited access to online articles.

Emerging Technology from the arXiv

A View from Emerging Technology from the arXiv

New Statistical Method Ranks Sports Players From Different Eras

A new statistical approach reveals the intrinsic talent of sportsmen and women, regardless of the era in which they played.

  • March 3, 2010

It’s a problem that leaves brows furrowed on barstools across the world: how to rate the sportsmen and women of the day against the stars of yesteryear.

There’s no easy way to make meaningful comparisons when sports change so dramatically over the years. Even in endeavours like baseball where player stats have been meticulously kept for almost a hundred years, comparisons across the decades can be odious. Is it really fair to compare players from the 1920s against those of the last 20 years when so many external factors have changed such as the use of new equipment, better training methods and, of course, performance enhancing drugs?

In 1914, the National League Most Valuable Player was Johnny Evers with a batting average of 0.279, 1 Home Run and 40 Runs Batted In. That was impressive then but these stats would embarrass even a second rate player in today’s game.

But what if there were a way to remove the systematic differences to reveal intrinsic talent? Today, Alexander Petersen at Boston University and a few pals explain just such a method that “detrends” the data leaving an objective measure of a player’s raw ability.

The detrending process is a statistical trick that essentially rates all players relative only to their contemporaries. This effectively cancels out the effect of performance-enhancing factors which are equally available to everybody in a given era. The detrended stats then allows them to be objectively compared with players from other eras and the end product is a ranking of pure talent.

Petersen and co compare the detrended rankings against the traditional ones for several standard baseball metrics, such as Career Home Runs, Season Home Runs and so on.

The results will be an eye-opener for some fans and Petersen and co provide an interesting commentary on the new tables. For example, their new list of the top 50 individual home run performances by season does not contain a single entry after 1950. Not even the performance of Barry Bonds in 2001 or of Mark McGwire in 1998 make the list. In fact, Babe Ruth’s achievements from the 1920s fill seven of the top ten slots.

Petersen and co are at pains to point out why this is: “It behooves us to point out that these results do not mean that Babe Ruth was a better slugger than any other before or after him, but rather, relative to the players during his era, he was the best home run hitter, by far, of all time.”

The Boston team say their method can be applied to other sports with professional leagues such as American basketball, Korean baseball and English football. And it also works in ranking research scientists too.

Petersen and co may not actually settle any barstool brow-creasers with this paper but they’ve clearly had some fun in trying.

Ref: arxiv.org/abs/1003.0134: Detrending Career Statistics In Professional Baseball: Accounting For The Steroids Era And Beyond

Understand the technologies that will drive the global economy at EmTech MIT 2019

Register now
Want more award-winning journalism? Subscribe to Print Subscription.
  • Print Subscription {! insider.prices.print_only !}*

    {! insider.display.menuOptionsLabel !}

    Six print issues per year plus The Download delivered to your email in-box each weekday.

    See details+

    12-month subscription

    Print magazine (6 bi-monthly issues)

    The Download: newsletter delivery each weekday to your inbox

You've read of three free articles this month. for unlimited online access. You've read of three free articles this month. for unlimited online access. This is your last free article this month. for unlimited online access. You've read all your free articles this month. for unlimited online access. You've read of three free articles this month. for more, or for unlimited online access. for two more free articles, or for unlimited online access.