I look at scorekeeping like a financial statement. There are rules for how you account for things and it gives some information.
While it give you an overall impression of how you did, you need to add in other metrics to really drill down into how you are doing.
If I have 2 catchers and 1 has 10 PB and the other has 5 in the same number of innings can I assume the one with 5 is better?
The one with 10 might have blocked 100 would be WP with runners on 3rd while the other has me so afraid to call change ups. Scoring
doesn't really account for that. Do I want a SS with less errors who has no range verses one that will occasionally throw a ball away trying to
make a great play? Again if I just look at errors it's easy.
A P with a lot of wild pitches could mean she is terrible or it could mean she has crazy movement.
I really think that GC and Iscore will evolve from just a scorebook to really statistics. How hard would it be to add a Catcher block to a pitch. You see it in the major league
stats where they measure range of infielders. How about measuring scoops by 1B to really measure how good they are. You could give off the book errors on OF for misplays,etc. In the old days it would have been too time consuming to calculate, but we have it now.
Stats are a tool. They take some deciphering at times. If you have a drop ball pitcher who has more WP/game witch catcher number one over catcher number two, you might team her up with catcher two. But then again, maybe her ERA is lower with catcher one. Then there is win/loss records. So many variables.