I've got some sort of hardon for only "counting" stats.
Off: BB, R, K, TB, AVG (if we count walks, we don't need OBP; AVG is better there)
Def: K, Outs, TB, ER (not ERA), WHIP
2 rate stats, 2 neg stats, little duplication. Me encanta.
[Update:] I guess there is some duplication: K (for pitchers) is a subset of Outs. I like tracking outs, though. Maybe Ks are a particularly useful form of out? But not really. I dunno what to suggest. [Update2:] Perhaps this: Outs, TB, BB, H, ERA ? Or substitute in Ks for Outs.
[Update3:] This is in response to Ramó's hate. We didn't list preferences in order to stage a vote, as such, but rather to see where everyone is. As Pete has pointed out, simply taking the top five preferences might lead to something incomprehensible. I waited so that I could see what people liked, and see what the reasons were. Don't be like the GOP and cast an air of "inevitability" over 5x5, though I may have helped that by not being wordier in my defense of these stats. Simply put, I think these stats limit the external contributions of other players--as a complete package--more than other suggestions. I limited rate stats since I think I agree that because all stats are, effectively, ultimately rate stats, we don't need to add any more division. And, finally, by not having saves or steals, I think I've sussed out orthogonal stats, which no one likes. Why track SB instead of, say, E?
omar's response - first of all, taking the top 5 is NOT incomprehensible. Alot of people, in the end, wanted something similar to the classic 5x5. Like i said, I know that you want what you wrote, and I want what i wrote but in the end thats meaningless. We need to pick a winner so I tried to list the choices that I culled from reading everyone's preferences. If you dont like it you can choose as such. If a vote of no-confidence on my choices is called then so be it. But instead of just talking about what I want i decided to see what everyone wants.
Pete's response to omar's response to moacir's updates (ha ha)
well, technically, you decidd to see which of your editorializations everyone wants. i realize there's almost no way to pick the stats without someone actually getting what they want. what i want to avoid is getting what individual people specifically do NOT want. what i meant about "incomprehensible" is that the way we tallied up teh preferences only depicts individual stats as acceptable, not collections of 5 stats. this is already getting ornately silly/complicated. I voted above, which should help.
omar's response to pete's response... well you know
i agree but it has to start somewhere. now that we have everyones preference we need to move forward. and thats also why i included the option to note choose either (but still vote so we know if everyone voted). if it turns out my choices were bad then someone else come up with a better way. but at some point we need to get 'er done (i hate myself now).