Guys, there is no need to fight. Give love this holiday season...
...and my DVD, Baltimore Orioles Legends - Cal Ripken Jr. Collector's Edition , available at Amazon and all higher quality retail stores!
Printable View
Guys, there is no need to fight. Give love this holiday season...
...and my DVD, Baltimore Orioles Legends - Cal Ripken Jr. Collector's Edition , available at Amazon and all higher quality retail stores!
Whatever guys. HGM is like a god on these boards. So ridiculous.
There can be only one.Quote:
Originally Posted by metsguy234
LOL. Quit trolling.Quote:
Originally Posted by metsguy234
I commandeth ye two to stop.
Ripken hath spoken.
HNAAIUEGFBNEUFUEWF Just. Quit.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
God, this thread sucks.
God forbid HGM tell you guys you're wrong when you try to tell him how much he likes baseball. Do you noobs really expect anyone to respond favorably when you say things like "What you are doing is ruining the thing that I like because you don't actually like it"? Because when people say that whole "you don't know/care about baseball, you just care about numbers" to me, I take great exception to that. That doesn't have a place on this forum (unless the Joe Morgan schtick is saying it).
The HGM/Dickay conversation was actually going in a positive, civil, and informative direction, which doesn't happen that often. Then reflections had to say something stupid, and then metsguy had to be metsguy, and now here we are.
Someone bring the Ripken schtick back.
Ok. Well although I didn't think it would turn into some name calling fest, I do understand the importance of the advancement of baseball numbers...but when I read a book like "Crazy '08 How a Cast of Cranks, Rogues, Boneheads, and Magnates Created the Greatest Year in Baseball History", it doesn't have me thinking about UZR, WARP or any of those. I understand when evaluating players it is far better to use those than the old compiling numbers....but in the conversation that preceded....it just seemed as though it was all about numbers (the Ozzie/Tejada/Fernandez and Cameron/Bay discussions). I love the SABR site but I guess I didn't word it at all correctly.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
As far as the guy who said I said something stupid. That's fine. I've loved baseball since I was 4 and saw my first Dodger game in 1979. I guess i'm just a stupid fan that collected baseball cards, played strat-o-matic and always tried to find a game that would encompass the entire history of baseball (i had to use my own collection of baseball cards to actually get close to that).
And your strawman theory. No. It was just the same numbers being used over and over again trying to tell who was better that got to me (I wasn't saying the numbers were wrong or not important), but as usual I guess I knew there would be a name calling match in there afterwords...That is what the internet turns into.
Okay? Nor should it...What's the point here?Quote:
Originally Posted by reflections
Well, this thread IS about statistics...so I don't know why we would suddenly start talking about crazy stories of baseball's funniest characters or something...Naturally, a thread about statistics will be largely about the statistical side of things...Quote:
Originally Posted by reflections
And calling something a "strawman" isn't name-calling. Sorry if you took it that way. It's simply tiresome though that whenever there's a serious statistical discussion, there's always someone that has to start throwing out the whole "making the game only about numbers" crap. It is a strawman. Just because there's a discussion about the advanced statistics of the game doesn't mean anybody is "making the game only about numbers."
He's an internet tuff guys; don't mess with him broshef!Quote:
Originally Posted by OregonDuck1989
See, this here is a strawman, because you think that I called you stupid because you like the sentimental side of baseball. I did not do that. I called your comment stupid, because you went into a thread ABOUT STATISTICS and said, essentially, "when you talk about your stats, you are taking all the fun out of the game." For one, it's dumb to jump into a conversation other people are having and criticize what they're talking about anyway. And secondly, the game has always been about numbers so these are just different numbers, so I don't see why that's any different.Quote:
Originally Posted by reflections
That's ok, we all make stupid comments now and again. I make stupid comments. HGM makes stupid comments. No big deal.
I happen to like the fact that there are people using new formulas and statistics to review baseball players performanced. I do think many have an elitist attitude towards those who don't subscribe immediately to the so called "geniuses" that put these together, but thats not unlike any scientific advance that has questioned popular opinion since the beginning of mankind. I realize and believe much of what they claim.
however....those who use these stats should be careful not to discredit the obvious. Not to discredit good scouting and in some cases the simple "eye test". There are IMO alot of things that these newage methods can't yet factor yet try to unsuccessfully. I'm learning that defense is definetly one of them. I admit, normally its unfair for me to make that claim not knowing all that goes into their equation, but my eye test in this situation is more than enough for me to make that claim IMO. I simply can never buy the claim that factoring in all factors (bay 09 LF performance in Boston vs. cameron 09 CF performance in MIL) that Cameron was worth 20+% more in terms of dollars than Bay. Thats a fail.
The newage stats make me question alot of the determinations I've made over the years using some of the previously accepted stats and the eye test. I think this Cameron / Bay debate amongst others surely should cause the statiticians to question their currently accepted stats.
After all, I hope history would tell them not to be so foolish as to believe their newage stats won't one day be in the "previously accepted" category as well. Scouting, common sense, and a keen eye have been IMO the only measurement that has remained constant throughout baseballs history. Even in this newage statistical period, teams still have scouts that watch major league and minor league players. If they were irrelevant and teams TRULY BELIEVED the numbers were 100% accurate they'd simply save tons of money by firing them all and using only computers.
As for all this other crap.....both sides benefit from accepting other possibilities. Many of those against the stats refuse because they don't understand it (ignorance)...many of the statiticians refuse because they think they are better and more advanced and refuse to see fault (arrogance). both are wrong.
Wow, an interesting Christmas on the Forum indeed. Great to see people act so grown up and being so nice to each other. It looks like the Christmas spirit or even common courtesy has become a "strawman." as well...
Excellent post dickay. The only quibble I would have is that there's absolutely no f**king need for the two sides in the game to be having this pi$$ing contest. If only both sides would realize they are both right and get together and combine their knowledge, wisdom and abilities, player evaluation would take a quantum leap forward. Inroads are already being made in this area as most team front offices use some combination/hybrid of the two.Quote:
Originally Posted by dickay
Tom Tango is currently one of the leading sabermetricians in the game, but that doesn't prevent him from enlisting the support of fans of all 30 teams every year to help compile his annual "Scouting Report For The Fans By The Fans". It's not quite the diametrically opposed warring factions anymore, that really got stoked by the book "Moneyball" by Michael Lewis (yes that's right Joe Morgan, Billy Beane did not write that book), which is still one of the most misunderstood books out there.
"Moneyball" is about looking for market inefficiencies in the game in order to find less expensive options to fill out a roster, but to this day, people seem to think it's a book about how OBP is the only thing that matters in baseball, or that it's about fat, slow, mostly white dudes whose only redeeming feature is that they can draw walks, or that it's about a bunch of computer nerds hunkered down over their spreadsheets searching for future stars in the reams of numbers on their monitors.
The A's used these methods because they didn't have much money for a scouting department. Personally I think that's backwards. I think teams should put as much as they can into scouting, development, draft bonuses, and yes statistics etc because if you do that and build up a system that produces year after year, you don't have to go buying free agents or locking up your own players to free agent type contracts, when they get close to free agency as you would otherwise. Big money contracts for players that are usually older are easily the most inefficient way that any team can spend their revenue, yet time after time teams do it. I would bet that a scouting/development department, complete with draft bonuses and international free agent bonuses (parts of the world where you have to pay $50 million+ for the privilege of speaking to the player excluded ;) ) can be run optimally on a per year basis for less than the cost of 1 premium free agent over the term of his whole contract and if done right that system can produce at least one premium major leaguer per year.
A couple of examples that cost pennies in baseball franchise terms are proper nutrition and proper coaching/training in the minor leagues. The per diem mandated by MLB for minor leaguers is $20 per day - can you say fast food and fast food only? How much does the average minor league coach/trainer cost? In relative terms peanuts, and when you consider the type of ROI you can get from the very good ones, it's a no brainer to seek out only the best for these positions.
You mention the "eye test". Just like Mark Twain's saying about lies, damned lies and statistics, our eyes can fool us as well. Ask any cop about the reliability of eyewitness statements, particularly when there are cases involving multiple eyewitnesses. The eyes can lie every bit as much as the numbers do. That's why it behooves every MLB organization to have representatives from both factions involved in decisions regarding player personnel, even if they disagree. Disagreement is healthy for an organization, provided the animosity and resentment that can arise from it are dealt with in a timely, respectful manner.