-
Re: Manuel throws SABR-heads under bus
Quote:
Originally Posted by
HoustonGM
The statistics obsessed nerd that doesn't watch games and cares only about numbers and thinks baseball games are played by number-compiling robots is a creation of the "anti-statistics" side of the argument. It misrepresents the "pro-statistics" side.
I'm a computer science major at a tech-oriented university. I once worked at a national particle accelerator laboratory. I'm about as nerdy as they come. And I actually watch games. (Never ran into one of these odd, non-game-watching creatures, either. I think they're about as real as unicorns.) And the funny thing is? Statistics usually reaffirm the sorts of things I see in the games. That's why statistics (especially good statistics, like sabermetrics) are useful in a game like baseball. They have useful correlative and predictive power. Sure, statistics can't tell you if B.J. Upton is going to get a hit in this particular at bat, but they can give you useful odds which can inform the decisions you would make as a manager. Tempered, of course, by on-field, non-statistical observations. (Example: This umpire is calling lots of low strikes today. I should pinch hit my low ball hitter for this high ball hitter.)
If a manager isn't using sabermetrics to help his team, he's completely shut out one entire hemisphere of data useful to predict performance in certain areas, situations, etc. It's foolish.
-
Re: Manuel throws SABR-heads under bus
If there is out there some stats dork who has attempting to quantify every part of baseball via charts and tables, without watching a single game, he sure as hell isn't working for a Major League Baseball team. Lets stop with that myth already.
-
Re: Manuel throws SABR-heads under bus
Quote:
Originally Posted by
BorgHunter
I'm a computer science major at a tech-oriented university. I once worked at a national particle accelerator laboratory. I'm about as nerdy as they come. And I actually watch games. (Never ran into one of these odd, non-game-watching creatures, either. I think they're about as real as unicorns.) And the funny thing is? Statistics usually reaffirm the sorts of things I see in the games. That's why statistics (especially good statistics, like sabermetrics) are useful in a game like baseball. They have useful correlative and predictive power. Sure, statistics can't tell you if B.J. Upton is going to get a hit in this particular at bat, but they can give you useful odds which can inform the decisions you would make as a manager. Tempered, of course, by on-field, non-statistical observations. (Example: This umpire is calling lots of low strikes today. I should pinch hit my low ball hitter for this high ball hitter.)
If a manager isn't using sabermetrics to help his team, he's completely shut out one entire hemisphere of data useful to predict performance in certain areas, situations, etc. It's foolish.
Very well said.
The bolded part reminded me of something. It seems to me that a lot of the "hate" for statistics stems from people "offended" when the statistics don't affirm what their perception leads them to believe.
-
Re: Manuel throws SABR-heads under bus
You mean that Metsguy isn't John Maine?
-
Re: Manuel throws SABR-heads under bus
Quote:
Originally Posted by
HoustonGM
Saying that you can't only use statistics is completely meaningless because nobody advocates only using statistics.
Like what I quoted in my above post, it's a ridiculous strawman used in a feeble attempt to discredit statistical analysis.
could you be a little more melodramatic ? :D
surely you dont believe managers have nothing else to do
then play "someone is wrong on the internet"
-
Re: Manuel throws SABR-heads under bus
Quote:
Originally Posted by
BorgHunter
I'm a computer science major at a tech-oriented university.
If a manager isn't using sabermetrics to help his team, he's completely shut out one entire hemisphere of data useful to predict performance in certain areas, situations, etc. It's foolish.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
HoustonGM
Very well said.
.
so a person who has played OR been around Baseball for 40 odd years,day in,day out (ie the Manager/Bench Coaches etc) is "foolish" because he doesn't use sabermetrics WHICH are notoriously:
1°Offense based
2° little or no Defense based
3° HAVE zero intangibles integrated
but uses his skills that he has honed.
Um would you allow a guy to run your University because he was a great business man in say the Oil Industry & was successful in making money or a "successful" Trader such as George Soros?
Which is EXACTLY what you are implying.........
I am not saying that sabermetrics have ZERO value but there VALUE is extremely limited & useful in only certain areas - as a Computer Science major you should realize better than anyone a theory is exactly that a THEORY,a LAW is however naturally correct.
Sabermetrics,in general,have multiple faults WHICH limit their usage & for a MLB team to use them in an "in game" situation would actually constitute foolishness as THEY only take into account CERTAIN TANGIBLE aspects & even then not all that are in "play" nor even in the actual situation .
Manuel,like all Managers' has multiple sources of INFORMATION & uses them in accordance - can Sabermetrics show if a player is hiding an injury ? Or if a player is out of sync ? Or simply if a batter is "seeing" the ball better ? No,No & NO.... thus there limits & even then most Sabermetric measures are inconsistent on year to year basis - simply put if they were CONSISTENT then they would be used as STANDARD MEASURING tools such as BA/OBP or ERA (although I find ERA+ a better equalizer measure).
-
Re: Manuel throws SABR-heads under bus
Quote:
Originally Posted by
FRENCHREDSOX
so a person who has played OR been around Baseball for 40 odd years,day in,day out (ie the Manager/Bench Coaches etc) is "foolish" because he doesn't use sabermetrics WHICH are notoriously:
1°Offense based
2° little or no Defense based
3° HAVE zero intangibles integrated
but uses his skills that he has honed.
Um would you allow a guy to run your University because he was a great business man in say the Oil Industry & was successful in making money?
Which is EXACTLY what you are implying.........
bingo.
monday morning quarterbacking is one thing. we all do it.
but
the sheer volume of people that behave (maybe im mispercieving it?)
as if there book knowledge and little league experience makes them more "qualified" then an actual mlb manager is just baffling to me..
for those who didnt actually watch met games and just looked at overall #'s heres the deal
you all know the bullpen sucked
did you know
they DIDNT HIT LATE AND CLOSE ?
yes, even david wright.
do you know they outscored the opposition by a wide margin from 1 to 3 inning.
were about even the mid 3
and basically got their butts kicked over the last 3 innings.
do you seriously thinks thats random distribution ?
do you think 3 for 42 (over 6 weeks) with the bases loaded is anything but character ?
thats not performing in the clutch.
thats not knowing HOW to win.
having your bullpen throw 3 perfect innings after coming in with a 6-0 lead (and then tacking on 4 meaningless runs for a 10-0 win)
doesnt mean squat if
you routinely stop scoring after the 6th inning with a 1 run lead while your bullpen gives up 2 runs.
-
Re: Manuel throws SABR-heads under bus
Quote:
Originally Posted by
FRENCHREDSOX
so a person who has played OR been around Baseball for 40 odd years,day in,day out (ie the Manager/Bench Coaches etc) is "foolish" because he doesn't use sabermetrics WHICH are notoriously:
1°Offense based
2° little or no Defense based
3° HAVE zero intangibles integrated
but uses his skills that he has honed.
I don't think anyone is suggesting that there is a statistical formula that will produce a winning team. If that is your argument - fine, you win. The question is whether the statistics are useful enough to contribute to a decision - and there is no question that is true. People have always used statistics in baseball to help make decisions - all sabermetrics does is attempt to measure the relevance of existing statistics and try to advance ones that are better.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
MeetDaMets
bingo.
monday morning quarterbacking is one thing. we all do it.
but
the sheer volume of people that behave (maybe im mispercieving it?)
as if there book knowledge and little league experience makes them more "qualified" then an actual mlb manager is just baffling to me..
for those who didnt actually watch met games and just looked at overall #'s heres the deal
you all know the bullpen sucked
did you know
they DIDNT HIT LATE AND CLOSE ?
yes, even david wright.
do you know they outscored the opposition by a wide margin from 1 to 3 inning.
were about even the mid 3
and basically got their butts kicked over the last 3 innings.
do you seriously thinks thats random distribution ?
do you think 3 for 42 (over 6 weeks) with the bases loaded is anything but character ?
thats not performing in the clutch.
thats not knowing HOW to win.
having your bullpen throw 3 perfect innings after coming in with a 6-0 lead (and then tacking on 4 meaningless runs for a 10-0 win)
doesnt mean squat if
you routinely stop scoring after the 6th inning with a 1 run lead while your bullpen gives up 2 runs.
But how is Manuel going to change this? All teams are trying to find "clutch" players, all teams are trying to find that magical player that "knows how to win". Are these factors inherent in certain players? Is Manuel going to change the personnel to bring in "clutch" players? And if that was possible I'm pretty sure all the teams would be trying to do that. Or is he going to teach the players "how to win"? I guess this is possible - maybe that is what a good manager does. But if these are all the ideas that the Mets have - I'm guessing the Phillies might have a long run on top of the NL East.
And no, I don't think that the run scoring in the last three innings is random - the Mets bullpen sucked. If the character Manuel is looking for is better relievers then it might work.
And yes, I think 3 for 42 with the bases loaded might be random.
-
Re: Manuel throws SABR-heads under bus
Quote:
Originally Posted by
kenny1234
I don't think anyone is suggesting that there is a statistical formula that will produce a winning team. If that is your argument - fine, you win. The question is whether the statistics are useful enough to contribute to a decision - and there is no question that is true. People have always used statistics in baseball to help make decisions - all sabermetrics does is attempt to measure the relevance of existing statistics and try to advance ones that are better.
Yes,but sabermetrics' are theoretical ANALYSES which don't hold up as yet UNLIKE other stats that is why they are MARGINAL stats - they fail to be constant over time (ie the formulae is constantly altered to "fit" the results eg Sabers of 1900/1950/2000 don't HAVE 1 constant whereas BA/OBP do have RELATIVE meaning which is the aim of statistical analysis) & as said are heavily weighted towards offensive performance & undervalue defensive qualities.
There is a major distinction between Statistics of the BA/OBP kind & the Sabermetric statistical theorems - the former are simply mathematical formulae of actual events WHICH are always constant in their result,whereas saberstats are a formulated theorem which supposedly add extra informative knowledge but are not standardised in their results - THAT is a major difference.In physics it is the difference between a LAW & a possible hypothesis.....
Also I was specifically answering this comment:
Quote:
If a manager isn't using sabermetrics to help his team, he's completely shut out one entire hemisphere of data useful to predict performance in certain areas, situations, etc. It's foolish.
& I ascertained that Sabermetrics actually MAY misinform because of their weights & there lack of intangibles,& basically the data RESULTS may or may not be inconclusive (at best) or wrong (at worst) which have as great implication in actual game CHOICES made.
Sabermetrics,like all stats has it uses BUT only as a subjective/hindsight tool within certain constraints - BorgHunter was implying that it is a predictive tool which it definitely is not & WOULD fail due to its bias.
Its main presumptions are exactly that presumptions which don't hold up in the real world - a common saber stat is for example VORP which uses the base line of Replacement Player being a AAA "zoner" & does NOT even consider his defense whereas IRL no team WOULD bring up:mind play a "deficit" player thus the baseline is in context redundant.It is a SHORT term stat (ie no analysis pre-1997) & all players hit the same .235/.300/.356 and have a RA of 5.85 but those numbers are not necessarily true/constant or even correct as a BASIS.
Again I re-iterate Saberstats are useful as a complementary tool but WITHIN a defined context of relative value & definitely not as a tool for manager-ship decision making IF anything the eye & team information is better than the numbers.
For example Win Shares are,as cited by Bill James' himself :
Quote:
Last year I heard at the SABR convention that you were modifying the formula for Win Shares. Is that true?
Bill James reply;
I've been working on Win Shares and Loss Shares. There are some things about it that are fouled up. . .about the way that I am figuring them. . .and I can't get the time to back off and straighten them out.
Even Sabermetricians counter EACH others' analyses & formulae,so who is right James,Woolner,Pete Palmer,McCracken or some other guy ? Because they all have different formulae & also differing results & outcomes....
So why would a manager USE them & RISK the game/series/season on an analysis that IS NOT constant nor predictive ? IMHO,it would be foolish to do so rather than the opposite,no ?
-
Re: Manuel throws SABR-heads under bus
Whatever you may or may not think of SABRmetrics, I still don't see what the hell SABRmetrics has to do with the Mets collapse. It just sounds like Manuel is scapegoating something to cover his ass.
-
Re: Manuel throws SABR-heads under bus
Quote:
Originally Posted by
FRENCHREDSOX
Sabermetrics,in general,have multiple faults WHICH limit their usage & for a MLB team to use them in an "in game" situation would actually constitute foolishness as THEY only take into account CERTAIN TANGIBLE aspects & even then not all that are in "play" nor even in the actual situation .
Manuel,like all Managers' has multiple sources of INFORMATION & uses them in accordance - can Sabermetrics show if a player is hiding an injury ? Or if a player is out of sync ? Or simply if a batter is "seeing" the ball better ? No,No & NO.... thus there limits & even then most Sabermetric measures are inconsistent on year to year basis - simply put if they were CONSISTENT then they would be used as STANDARD MEASURING tools such as BA/OBP or ERA (although I find ERA+ a better equalizer measure).
If you would bother to read my post, you'd find that I said exactly this. Sabermetrics is a tool, not the end all, be all of baseball knowledge. The fact that it doesn't have ultimate predictive power by itself is not an indictment of sabermetrics as a predictive tool—it only demonstrates that you should not use statistical analysis in a vacuum. And I don't think that anyone here has claimed that you should.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FRENCHREDSOX
Sabermetrics,like all stats has it uses BUT only as a subjective/hindsight tool within certain constraints - BorgHunter was implying that it is a predictive tool which it definitely is not & WOULD fail due to its bias.Its main presumptions are exactly that presumptions which don't hold up in the real world - a common saber stat is for example VORP which uses the base line of Replacement Player being a AAA "zoner" & does NOT even consider his defense whereas IRL no team WOULD bring up:mind play a "deficit" player thus the baseline is in context redundant.It is a SHORT term stat (ie no analysis pre-1997) & all players hit the same .235/.300/.356 and have a RA of 5.85 but those numbers are not necessarily true/constant or even correct as a BASIS.
VORP is an offensive stat, not a defensive stat. If you want defensive stats, look at Range Factor. VORP isn't intended to be used as the only thing you look at when evaluating a player. It's a measure of offensive success only—no one has claimed otherwise. It's like claiming that the amount of home runs a pitcher has hit is useless because it doesn't take into account his pitching. Of course it doesn't take into account his pitching. It was never intended to! But it certainly could help you figure out if you want to pinch hit for this pitcher, yes? (Among other stats, plus, as a you said, things not taken into account by stats.)
All in all, it seems like you're tilting at statistical windmills and inventing opinions for you to argue against. Sabermetrics do have useful predictive power, no matter what you say. But no one has ever said that they're the only damned thing that matters.
-
Re: Manuel throws SABR-heads under bus
Borg Hunter, I have to ask, what is a Borg?
-
Re: Manuel throws SABR-heads under bus
Quote:
Originally Posted by
RedsoxRockies
Borg Hunter, I have to ask, what is a Borg?
I take it you've never watched Star Trek: The Next Generation?
-
Re: Manuel throws SABR-heads under bus
-
Re: Manuel throws SABR-heads under bus
there should be noone throwing anyone under a bus its mean and im sure some type of assault
-
Re: Manuel throws SABR-heads under bus
Quote:
Originally Posted by
MeetDaMets
could you be a little more melodramatic ? :D
surely you dont believe managers have nothing else to do
then play "someone is wrong on the internet"
Manuel didn't use that strawman argument. It was brought up by someone else and I'm speaking about it in general terms, not specifically regarding the original Manuel quote.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FRENCHREDSOX
so a person who has played OR been around Baseball for 40 odd years,day in,day out (ie the Manager/Bench Coaches etc) is "foolish" because he doesn't use sabermetrics
Anybody who doesn't acknowledge the value of statistical analysis is being foolish, yes. Likewise, anybody who doesn't acknowledge the value of analysis through non-statistical means like scouting is also being foolish.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FRENCHREDSOX
WHICH are notoriously:
1°Offense based
2° little or no Defense based
This is completely, COMPLETELY false. Sabermetrics is just a term for "statistical analysis." Yes, the analysis of offense is more advanced and concrete than the analysis of defense, but to say that "Sabermetrics are little or no Defense based" is UTTERLY WRONG. There is A TON of work being done on defense within the statistical analysis community. Zone Rating, RZR, Range Factor, Revised Range Factor, FRAA, UZR, +/-, DRS, Fielding Win Shares, etc. etc. etc. etc.
Quote:
3° HAVE zero intangibles integrated
Gee, I wonder why. It wouldn't have anything to do with intangibles being...I don't know...INTANGIBLE?
Quote:
Um would you allow a guy to run your University because he was a great business man in say the Oil Industry & was successful in making money or a "successful" Trader such as George Soros?
Which is EXACTLY what you are implying.........
Um no, this analogy doesn't fit at all. The goal of a university is to educate, not make money, so no, I wouldn't have a person good at making money and that's it run by university. But that has nothing to do with baseball. Baseball is about winning, and in order to maximize winning, you need to understand the value of both statistical and non-statistical value.
Quote:
I am not saying that sabermetrics have ZERO value but there VALUE is extremely limited & useful in only certain areas
No. Sabermetrics are not extremely limited. Again, sabermetrics is just simply statistical analysis. Analyzing baseball statistically IS incredibly useful and FAR from extremely limited.
Quote:
Sabermetrics,in general,have multiple faults WHICH limit their usage & for a MLB team to use them in an "in game" situation would actually constitute foolishness as THEY only take into account CERTAIN TANGIBLE aspects & even then not all that are in "play" nor even in the actual situation .
Wow. So, using statistics in an in-game situation is foolish? Incredible.
Here's a hint: Nobody's saying that statistics should be the only thing used. We're saying they should be CONSIDERED and FACTORED INTO DECISIONS. Yes, there are non-statistical things that need to be considered as well, but using ONLY those is just as foolish as using ONLY stats.
And I'm repeating myself again. Sabermetrics = statistical analysis. By acknowledging the value of on-base percentage from your leadoff hitter, you're "using sabermetrics."
Quote:
Manuel,like all Managers' has multiple sources of INFORMATION & uses them in accordance - can Sabermetrics show if a player is hiding an injury ? Or if a player is out of sync ? Or simply if a batter is "seeing" the ball better ? No,No & NO.... thus there limits
Um, yeah, show me again where anybody said that sabermetrics are the only thing that people should use? :rolleyes: Once again, a strawman.
There are many things that statistics tell you that you wouldn't know otherwise, just like there are things that statistics can't tell you. This is why both statistical and non-statistical methods of analysis should be used. They COMPLIMENT EACH OTHER. By ignoring statistics, you're handicapping yourself. By ignoring the non-statistical factors, you're handicapping yourself.
Quote:
& even then most Sabermetric measures are inconsistent on year to year basis
There is more to sabermetrics than advanced metrics. Sabermetrics is just statistical analysis.
Quote:
- simply put if they were CONSISTENT then they would be used as STANDARD MEASURING tools such as BA/OBP or ERA (although I find ERA+ a better equalizer measure).
By using batting average, on-base percentage, and ERA, you are using sabermetrics. Sabermetrics is statistical analysis. Now, using only those things, is making incredibly poor use of statistics, but it's STILL USING STATISTICS.
Also, most sabermetric measures are more consistent from year-to-year than batting average and ERA. That's why they were created - because people realized the great variance that average and ERA exhibit and sought out better measures that are less prone to fluctutaion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MeetDaMets
do you seriously thinks thats random distribution ?
do you think 3 for 42 (over 6 weeks) with the bases loaded is anything but character ?
Yes. 42 at bats is too small a sample size to draw any conclusions from. It's especially too small a sample size to draw a conclusion about an ENTIRE TEAM from.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kenny1234
I don't think anyone is suggesting that there is a statistical formula that will produce a winning team. If that is your argument - fine, you win. The question is whether the statistics are useful enough to contribute to a decision - and there is no question that is true. People have always used statistics in baseball to help make decisions - all sabermetrics does is attempt to measure the relevance of existing statistics and try to advance ones that are better.
THANK YOU. It's not that hard to understand.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FRENCHREDSOX
Yes,but sabermetrics' are theoretical ANALYSES which don't hold up as yet UNLIKE other stats that is why they are MARGINAL stats - they fail to be constant over time (ie the formulae is constantly altered to "fit" the results eg Sabers of 1900/1950/2000 don't HAVE 1 constant whereas BA/OBP do have RELATIVE meaning which is the aim of statistical analysis) & as said are heavily weighted towards offensive performance & undervalue defensive qualities.
This is a very convoluted statement that I really cannot even begin to understand, except that it really shows an ignorance of sabermetrics. ONCE AGAIN, sabermetrics = statistical analysis. Sabermetrics included theoretical analysis AND non-theoretical analysis. Any analysis using statistics is sabermetrics.
Quote:
& I ascertained that Sabermetrics actually MAY misinform because of their weights & there lack of intangibles which have as great implication in actual game CHOICES made.
which is why they shouldn't be the only thing looked at. This is not a valid reason to completely ignore statistics.
-
Re: Manuel throws SABR-heads under bus
Quote:
Sabermetrics,like all stats
And herein lies what I've been trying to say this entire post. There is NO difference between "sabermetrics" and "other stats." Sabermetrics is simply the analysis of statistics. Wikipedia says it perfectly: "Sabermetrics is the analysis of baseball through objective evidence." THAT'S IT.
Quote:
BUT only as a subjective/hindsight tool within certain constraints - BorgHunter was implying that it is a predictive tool which it definitely is not & WOULD fail due to its bias
Are you friggen' kidding me? Seriously? Statistics have no use as a predictive tool? Wow.
Guess what? You know PECOTA? And ZiPS? That's sabermetrics buddy.
Quote:
Its main presumptions are exactly that presumptions which don't hold up in the real world
This is an incorrect generalization. Once again, this may be true for certain statistics and/or areas of statistical analysis, but it absolutely 100% cannot be applied to statistical analysis as a whole.
Quote:
a common saber stat is for example VORP which uses the base line of Replacement Player being a AAA "zoner" & does NOT even consider his defense
Yeah, because, it's an offensive stat. :rolleyes: I guess OPS sucks too because it doesn't consider defense.
Quote:
whereas IRL no team WOULD bring up:mind play a "deficit" player
Really? SERIOUSLY? In real life, no team calls up and play players that have a negative effect? You cannot possibly belief this. You're smarter than that.
Jose Vidro's 65 OPS+ as a DH wasn't a "deficit player"?
Quote:
.It is a SHORT term stat (ie no analysis pre-1997)
That's funny, because VORP goes back to 1957.
Quote:
all players hit the same .235/.300/.356 and have a RA of 5.85 but those numbers are not necessarily true/constant or even correct as a BASIS.
That's because this is not how VORP is calculated. The replacement level is different depending on the league. It's not a constant.
Quote:
Again I re-iterate Saberstats are useful as a complementary tool but WITHIN a defined context of relative value & definately not as a tool for manager-ship decision making IF anything the eye & team information is better than the numbers.
You're failing to understand that the use of sabermetrics and statistical analysis consists of more than just the advanced performance metrics.
"Eye and team information" is not better than the numbers. Both types of information have their uses. Both types of information are also useless without the other.
Quote:
So why would a manager USE them & RISK the game/series/season on an analysis that IS NOT constant nor predictive ? IMHO,it would be foolish to do so rather than the opposite,no ?
Win Shares are a stat to assess the value that a player has provided. It's useful in comparing the value that players have provided. Win Shares are a long-term stat, best used to compare full seasons and/or careers.
This is not a reason to ignore statistics when making a managerial decision.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BorgHunter
VORP is an offensive stat, not a defensive stat. If you want defensive stats, look at Range Factor. VORP isn't intended to be used as the only thing you look at when evaluating a player. It's a measure of offensive success only—no one has claimed otherwise. It's like claiming that the amount of home runs a pitcher has hit is useless because it doesn't take into account his pitching. Of course it doesn't take into account his pitching. It was never intended to!
Seriously. This VORP argument pops up every once in a while, and the "anti-VORP" people still cling to this idea that people use VORP as a be-all-and-end-all stat that is the ultimate stat and perfect for everything...when all it is is a stat to assess offensive value.
I'm still completely baffled by how people can't understand this.
Quote:
All in all, it seems like you're tilting at statistical windmills and inventing opinions for you to argue against. Sabermetrics do have useful predictive power, no matter what you say. But no one has ever said that they're the only damned thing that matters.
Exactly.
There seems to be a fundamental lack of understanding of what sabermetrics is. People are focusing on advanced metrics that measure performance, and that's only PART of sabermetrics, and they're speaking like that's the only thing sabermetrics consist of, when in reality, sabermetrics is a vast science, and encompasses ALL analysis of statistics.
-
Re: Manuel throws SABR-heads under bus
Quote:
Originally Posted by
BorgHunter
If you would bother to read my post, you'd find that I said exactly this.
I did read your post entirely & you clearly said that a manager would be follish NOT to use SABRmetric formulae/data & predictive analysis.I was simply answering you on THIS particular point
Quote:
Originally Posted by
BorgHunter
Sabermetrics is a tool, not the end all, be all of baseball knowledge. The fact that it doesn't have ultimate predictive power by itself is not an indictment of sabermetrics as a predictive tool—it only demonstrates that you should not use statistical analysis in a vacuum. And I don't think that anyone here has claimed that you should.
VORP is an offensive stat, not a defensive stat. If you want defensive stats, look at Range Factor. VORP isn't intended to be used as the only thing you look at when evaluating a player. It's a measure of offensive success only—no one has claimed otherwise. It's like claiming that the amount of home runs a pitcher has hit is useless because it doesn't take into account his pitching. Of course it doesn't take into account his pitching. It was never intended to! But it certainly could help you figure out if you want to pinch hit for this pitcher, yes? (Among other stats, plus, as a you said, things not taken into account by stats.)
All in all, it seems like you're tilting at statistical windmills and inventing opinions for you to argue against. Sabermetrics do have useful predictive power, no matter what you say. But no one has ever said that they're the only damned thing that matters.
Again I said,I think - that certain Sabermetrics as they stand are a "false" metric because of their presumptions & bias.
You believe they have a "predictive" value & that is your right but again I simply ask which SABR stats (as many contradict one another's results & even BASE line formulae) & why,unlike "classical" statistical analysis do their results not hold up over time leading to their creators continually re-altering their theses.
I do find,some Saberstats AS USEFUL COMPLEMETARY tools (such as DIPS,Pythagorean Expectation,FRAR or OPS) whereas others,which are often cited such as VORP,LIPS or Win Shares,can & are "poorly" constructed formulae.
That was all I was saying - no disrespect intended & it is likely Manuel was saying something similar concerning intangibles THAT all STATISTICAL analyses cannot,for whatever their worth,integrate into the decision making process.
-
Re: Manuel throws SABR-heads under bus
-
Re: Manuel throws SABR-heads under bus
Mikey, We need to get BMO back on track...especially IL30 which only has 22 owners.
-
Re: Manuel throws SABR-heads under bus
Quote:
Originally Posted by
FRENCHREDSOX
I did read your post entirely & you clearly said that a manager would be follish NOT to use SABRmetric formulae/data & predictive analysis.I was simply answering you on THIS particular point
He was saying that a manager would be foolish not to consider statistics in his decision making. And he's right.
Quote:
Again I said,I think - that Sabermetrics as they stand are a "false" metric because of their presumptions & bias.
Your presumptions and bias are inhibiting your ability to understand sabermetrics as a whole.
Quote:
You believe they have a "predictive" value & that is your right but again I simply ask which SABR stats (as many contradict one another's results & even BASE line formulae) &
Defense-independent pitching stats are one example of a stat with predictive value. Again, though, there are some statistics that don't have much predictive value, and there are some that do.
Quote:
why,unlike "classical" statistical analysis
Sabermetrics is statistical analysis. It's just another name for it.
Quote:
do their results not hold up over time leading to their creators continually re-altering their theses.
Their "creators" don't re-alter their stats in order to get the results they want the stats to get. They alter the stats to improve upon them and make changes. It'd be incompetent of them to not improve their stats if they find ways in which to do so.
Quote:
That was all I was saying - no disrespect intended & it is likely Manuel was saying something similar concerning intangibles THAT all STATISTICAL analyses cannot,for whatever their worth,integrate into the decision making process.
Yeah, there are some statistics that can't be used in some situations. Obviously. Every statistic has its use though, and all we're saying is that stats should be taken into account. That's IT. I've already said this but I feel as though this point can't be made enough in this discussion - You're extrapolating "advanced metrics" as being the only thing that makes up sabermetrics, when sabermetrics is MUCH more broad than that, and is simply statistical analysis of any kind.
Sabermetrics is about using the relevant stats at the relevant times. Yeah, it'd be stupid to pick a reliever for a certain at-bat because he has a higher VORP than another reliever. It would also be stupid to pick a reliever based on a gut instinct without consulting the facts. Consulting the relievers platoon splits, though, would be absolutely necessary to make the proper decision, and that's using sabermetrics aka statistical analysis.
-
Re: Manuel throws SABR-heads under bus
Quote:
Originally Posted by
HoustonGM
Um no, this analogy doesn't fit at all. The goal of a university is to educate, not make money, so no, I wouldn't have a person good at making money and that's it run by university.
Haha, you do go to a smaller school don't you? Hopefully, for your school, this is true, but this is most certainly not true of mine. If our school educates us, that's just a bonus that may lead us to become successful enough to make a sizeable donation to the school at a later date. Public universities get shut down if they stay in the red consistently (regardless of how well they educate) & private schools (being privately owned), most certainly have monetary goals in place unless they're started by someone with the last name Gates or Rockefeller.
Utopia does not exist
Sorry to interrupt. Continue your metrics matter VS metrics are useless debate. May I just ask those against metrics if managers should take batting average, slugging %, & OBP into account when making their lineup?
-
Re: Manuel throws SABR-heads under bus
Quote:
Originally Posted by
etothep
Haha, you do go to a smaller school don't you? Hopefully, for your school, this is true, but this is most certainly not true of mine. If our school educates us, that's just a bonus that may lead us to become successful enough to make a sizeable donation to the school at a later date. Public universities get shut down if they stay in the red consistently (regardless of how well they educate) & private schools (being privately owned), most certainly have monetary goals in place unless they're started by someone with the last name Gates or Rockefeller
Well, yeah, but you get the point.
-
Re: Manuel throws SABR-heads under bus
There is never going to be agreement on this issue - because I'm guessing our opinions aren't actually that different. All I (and Houston and others) have been arguing is that statistics have their place in improving decision making and denying that is stupid. I think that FrenchRedSox (and others) think that there is sometimes too much emphasis on statistics and not enough on intangibles. That may or may not be true - and I often find myself agreeing with it - in particular in judging past value.
The real question is what should the Mets do to get better next year? Should they improve a horrific bullpen by getting better pitchers? Or should they ask Jerry Manuel to teach their relievers "how to play the game"? Should they try and sign players that are clutch - or should they just find good players because the ability for GM's or anyone else to identify clutchness in the future is very limited?
-
Re: Manuel throws SABR-heads under bus
Quote:
Originally Posted by
HoustonGM
This is another concept I never quite understood. While, sure, it speaks better of the player's character if he cares about the team more than his statistics, but, does it really matter? The player that cares about posting good statistics, and does so, is automatically helping his team win. Frankly, I don't really care what the player wants, as long as he's producing wins on the field.
I'm thinking about situations where, say, a fielder is charged with an error and appeals to try to get it changed to a hit, and the pitcher objects and then the 2 players get into a fight (verbal or otherwise). Or when a player bitches about where he hits in the order because it will decrease his RBI chances and then sulks and tries to undermine the manager. Stuff like that. I have a hard time believing that that sort of behavior is good for the team.
-
Re: Manuel throws SABR-heads under bus
Quote:
Originally Posted by
dps
I'm thinking about situations where, say, a fielder is charged with an error and appeals to try to get it changed to a hit, and the pitcher objects and then the 2 players get into a fight (verbal or otherwise). Or when a player bitches about where he hits in the order because it will decrease his RBI chances and then sulks and tries to undermine the manager. Stuff like that. I have a hard time believing that that sort of behavior is good for the team.
True. Those instances aren't good.
-
Re: Manuel throws SABR-heads under bus
Right, and there are two reasons why most "sabermetrics" people would argue that errors and RBIs are very bad metrics on which to judge performance.
-
Re: Manuel throws SABR-heads under bus
Quote:
Originally Posted by
kenny1234
There is never going to be agreement on this issue - because I'm guessing our opinions aren't actually that different. All I (and Houston and others) have been arguing is that statistics have their place in improving decision making and denying that is stupid. I think that FrenchRedSox (and others) think that there is sometimes too much emphasis on statistics and not enough on intangibles. That may or may not be true - and I often find myself agreeing with it - in particular in judging past value.
I agree the differences are minimalistic & more of weight issue rather than actual differences ie I weight classical stats/scout heavier than what SABRstats & I assume you weigh SABRstats heavier than classic stats.I like certain stats & others I don't .
The point I was making,apparently badly,is that Sabermetric stats results are a compound of various other stats& by simple mathematical variance the more stats added can (& usually does) lead to greater errors induced in the final calculation of the result, & sometimes 2 "similar" Saber stats actually conclude to opposing results.
That is my "beef" if you want,I don't know if Win Shares or Total Player rating is right OR even how they get their analysis data/results.I guess I am not the only one whereas BA or OBP is well "simple" to understand & compare.
I understand that VORP is an offensive stat but does EVERYONE ?
Also most of time the stats are just thrown out there but without a COMPLETE analysis of what MAKES up the results eg for FRAR Baseball Prospectus says:
Quote:
an average catcher is set to 39 runs above replacement per 162 games, first base to 10, second to 29, third to 22, short to 33, center field to 24, left and right to 14.
but what is FRAR made up of ? What is the difference with say,FRAR2 & why do they obtain singularly different results to say UZR or PMR of the EXACT same player for exact same game/series or season.An article summarises quite well my forthcomings but without delving into what each considers is important ie is it POs,As,DPs,Es or what weight they attach & if there is a consensus considering the position played etc
That was why I have a "reservation" concerning certain Sabermetric data results because these answers don't corroborate with one another thus leading to my question of their intrinsic IRL use.
Quote:
The real question is what should the Mets do to get better next year? Should they improve a horrific bullpen by getting better pitchers? Or should they ask Jerry Manuel to teach their relievers "how to play the game"? Should they try and sign players that are clutch - or should they just find good players because the ability for GM's or anyone else to identify clutchness in the future is very limited?
Obviously the aim for the Mets is ALL those things in 1,LOL.However,it is clear that some players' do thrive under pressure & other do wilt FOR WHATEVER reasons.Being a professional baseball player is also teamwork,effort & "going that extra mile" & can be qualified as the "intangibles" - all these things cannot be seen in any statistical analysis but simply by good old information exchanges (talking,watching & learning too!)
-
Re: Manuel throws SABR-heads under bus
Hasn't it been Sabr-metrics that have proven that, for the most part, stealing, hit and running, and bunting is a bad idea? Of course they all have their place, but you have to learn when that is and Sabr-metrics have helped show when that is.....except maybe for Hit and Run.*
*I still cringe when i hear a manager defend using the H&R to either 'help a batter concentrate more' and 'help him break out of a slump'
-
Re: Manuel throws SABR-heads under bus
FRS, clearly, you're not opposed to using statistics in making decisions, and anybody that is actually concerned with making good baseball decisions wouldn't be opposed to using statistics. So this debate is moot. You're fine with using sabermetrics as a component of the decision-making process. I'm sorry that you can't (or won't) understand that sabermetrics = statistical analysis, and insist that sabermetrics is solely composed of compound overall performance based statistics like VORP.
Also, I'd just like to point out that that article you linked to right there completely disproves your misguided notion that "sabermetrics are notoriously offense based and little or no defense based".
Quote:
Originally Posted by FRENCHREDSOX
Obviously the aim for the Mets is ALL those things in 1,LOL.However,it is clear that some players' do thrive under pressure & other do wilt FOR WHATEVER reasons
No, that's not clear. And even if it was, which players "thrive" and which "wilt" is completely unclear.
Quote:
.Being a professional baseball player is also teamwork,effort & "going that extra mile" & can be qualified as the "intangibles" - all these things cannot be seen in any statistical analysis but simply by good old information exchanges (talking,watching & learning too!)
Great. It's already been clearly established that there's more to decision-making than just statistical analysis.
-
Re: Manuel throws SABR-heads under bus
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Pavelb1
Hasn't it been Sabr-metrics that have proven that, for the most part, stealing, hit and running, and bunting is a bad idea
Sort of. Statistics have shown that stealing at anything less than roughly a ~70-75% success rate is detrimental, and that getting caught stealing is worse than stealing a base is good. And they've shown that the sacrifice bunt is only worthwhile in certain situations (like when you absolutely need to score exactly one run and are willing to sacrifice your chances of scoring multiple runs in order to increase your chance of scoring one run), and that it's very dependent on the batter at the plate (ie. using a pitcher to sacrifice bunt is perfectly fine in nearly all situations, excepting the good hitting pitchers).
Like you said, the use of statistical analysis has helped to shown what the best situations to perform those tactics are.
-
Re: Manuel throws SABR-heads under bus
Quote:
Originally Posted by
FRENCHREDSOX
The point I was making,apparently badly,is that Sabermetric stats results are a compound of various other stats& by simple mathematical variance the more stats added can (& usually does) lead to greater errors induced in the final calculation of the result,
This is not generally true - if two stats are both driven by the same underlying process (ie. OBP and SLG are driven by hitting ability), an average of the two does not create errors any more than combining a players ability to hit singles and doubles creates errors with BA.
Quote:
& sometimes 2 "similar" Saber stats actually conclude to opposing results.
I hope so - if all stats had the same conclusion they would be much more boring.
Quote:
That is my "beef" if you want,I don't know if Win Shares or Total Player rating is right OR even how they get their analysis data/results.I guess I am not the only one whereas BA or OBP is well "simple" to understand & compare.
I'll agree here - I wish their analysis was public. And it does weaken a result to have the formulas private - though that doesn't make the stats wrong. The metric on which to judge statistics is predictive power - and that includes BA or OBP.
Quote:
That was why I have a "reservation" concerning certain Sabermetric data results because these answers don't corroborate with one another thus leading to my question of their intrinsic IRL use.
And they also don't corroborate traditional statistics. That doesn't make traditional statistics better - or worse. Again, one needs to decide what they are trying to predict.
Quote:
Obviously the aim for the Mets is ALL those things in 1,LOL.However,it is clear that some players' do thrive under pressure & other do wilt FOR WHATEVER reasons.Being a professional baseball player is also teamwork,effort & "going that extra mile" & can be qualified as the "intangibles" - all these things cannot be seen in any statistical analysis but simply by good old information exchanges (talking,watching & learning too!)
I wish I could agree. It is in no way clear that some players wilt under pressure. I have never seen a single statistical study that shows a measurable difference in clutch performance. Maybe it is there - but here is a challenge - identify a handful of players that will have poor numbers next season by some 'clutch' metric. And a handful that will have good numbers. Then we'll see if they do. (Good/bad numbers are relative to their usual performance.)
As for effort and 'going that extra mile', if they are on the baseball field, they are usually picked up in the statistics (ie. more hits because you run out ground balls). One place that this might be improved would be keeping track of how often each player gets on base due to an error. This would represent the pressure a player puts on the defense. I have no idea if this would be a persistent ability - or if this has already been measured.
To my knowledge, being a good teammate, and the effort that a player brings to the clubhouse are unmeasured. That doesn't mean they don't matter - and it doesn't mean they couldn't be measured. Given enough variation in where players play it is theoretically possible to judge the contribution individual players make to the ability of their teammates. I wouldn't expect much - it might be there but assigning a large value to this without much evidence seems pointless to me.
I would like to believe that teamwork matters. I would like to believe that a team filled with guys that just love to play baseball matters. But I'm not convinced that it does. Baseball is essentially a series of 1-on-1 confrontations - there is less teamwork in baseball than any other team sport that I can think of. So as long as people are playing hard, I don't think their motivation(wins, stats, money etc.) matters too much - with a couple of exceptions noted above.
-
Re: Manuel throws SABR-heads under bus
Quote:
Originally Posted by
kenny1234
I'll agree here - I wish their analysis was public. And it does weaken a result to have the formulas private - though that doesn't make the stats wrong. The metric on which to judge statistics is predictive power - and that includes BA or OBP.
Just to be completely fair, the only "organization" that I know of that has multiple "proprietary statistics", where the formulas aren't public, is Baseball Prospectus. The exact formulas for a lot of the stats they created like VORP, WARP, FRAA, etc. aren't public, although a good deal of what goes into each thing, like VORP especially, is. For statistics from other places, like the afformentioned Win Shares AND Total Player Rating, the formulas ARE public.
-
Re: Manuel throws SABR-heads under bus
Yeah, Bill James created Win Shares, and the lengthy formula for same is in his book.
-
Re: Manuel throws SABR-heads under bus
Quote:
Originally Posted by
HoustonGM
He was saying that a manager would be foolish not to consider statistics in his decision making. And he's right.
all we're saying is that stats should be taken into account. That's IT.
one problem
according to the quote posted.
manuel never said stats shouldnt be taken into account.
:D
he said they have to get away from it.
and to ME that means actually paying attention to the human element of the equation.
rememeber baseball is 90% mental the other half is physical.
90% mental meaning no matter what the bloody stats say, if a guy shows fear thru say walking most leadoff hiters faced all of a sudden.
get him the f out even though the sabr-folk say "but hes only walked 6 fist men faced over 3 years its just small sample size ! "
and at the end of the year heilmann walks 18 1st batters faced.
3 consecutive horrific outings with loss of 10 mph ?
gee small sample size !
no dude is hurt
no small sample size !!
and billy wagners career ends due to injury.
so whats the 5 pages really about ?
-
Re: Manuel throws SABR-heads under bus
Quote:
Originally Posted by
MeetDaMets
one problem
according to the quote posted.
manuel never said stats shouldnt be taken into account.
:D
Read my full posts. The very first line is:
Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
Manuel didn't use that strawman argument. It was brought up by someone else and I'm speaking about it in general terms, not specifically regarding the original Manuel quote.
-
Re: Manuel throws SABR-heads under bus
Quote:
Originally Posted by
MeetDaMets
3 consecutive horrific outings with loss of 10 mph ?
gee small sample size !
no dude is hurt
no small sample size !!
Just a comment regarding sample size. The importance of sample size depends on the variability of what you are measuring. When measuring hitting sample sizes need to be fairly large due to the inherent variability of hitting.
Your example is considering a metric that doesn't vary from start to start for most pitchers by more than a couple of miles an hour. If a guy that normally throws 90mph can't break 80mph - he shouldn't even get out of the bullpen. A 5-pitch (or less) sample size would be enough for a statistician to tell something is wrong with him.
But in general, I agree that a manager's job is to see small things that help predict the future performance of individual players before the sample size is sufficient to tell through statistical measures. And within the season I think this is reasonable - and is what makes some managers better than others.
For a manager to decide who pinchhits on a particular day because of some gut feeling - I'll believe the manager. For a manager to say that his team will be better next year if they learn to play better in the clutch - that is meaningless drivel.
-
Re: Manuel throws SABR-heads under bus
By the way, Jerry's at it again, spewing stuff that is even more nonsensical than the original quote in this thread, which I suppose can be construed into something approaching logic.
But, how about these gems?
Quote:
Manuel said spring training will be a time of teaching, for him to give "clarity" to players on his methods. Execution in the clutch is his emphasis, and the Mets likely will bring in new offensive players, most likely in the corner outfield spots.
There ya have it. Manuel wants to teach players how to "execute in the clutch."
And then:
Quote:
"You don't see a lot of guys that have statistical numbers play well in these championship series," Manuel said. "What you see is usually the little second baseman or somebody like that carries off the MVP trophy that nobody expected him to do. That's because he's comfortable in playing that form of baseball, so therefore when the stage comes, it's not a struggle for him."
FJM covered this, and I think that what they said with regards to these quotes was pretty dead-on accurate, and I couldn't have said it better myself.
-
Re: Manuel throws SABR-heads under bus
Quote:
We have to win because we have baseball players that know and can understand the game.
We have to put a value on say, moving a runner over. We have to put a value on getting a bases on balls. We have to put a value on infield back, [getting a] ground ball that's sufficient to score a run," he said. "Those types of things have to be accented in order for us, in my opinion, to kind of get to the next level
Yeah. Manuel is an absolute mad-man :rolleyes:
