Manuel throws SABR-heads under bus

[metsguy234]

Um ?? you mean like scoring more runs that the other guys .... mystery solved ?

No, the Mets scored more runs then the other guys overall, but they didn't know how to do it when it matters...

[etothep]

The thing is that the dynamics of baseball are entirely different than sports like football and basketball. It's more of a team game made up of a bunch of player vs. player match-ups, and there's no clock, unlike the other sports where each entire team is playing against each other at once, with a time limit.

I know, hence my issue of coming up with a similar scenario for baseball. The only thing that came to my mind is if pitchers would throw differently via the current setting of the game (inning, score, home/away, etc), but I could be completely off, and don't see how that would involve position players much, if at all.

[HoustonGM]

No, the Mets scored more runs then the other guys overall, but they didn't know how to do it when it matters...

It matters just as much in April as it does in September.

Also, they did score more runs than their opponents overall, which is why they were a good team this year. It just so happens that there was a better team in their division. This does not mean that the Mets "didn't know how to win." It just means, they weren't the best team in their division.

I just think its silly that people try to attribute winning and losing to some sense of character, when winning and losing comes down to...oh, I don't know...playing baseball.

[HoustonGM]

I know, hence my issue of coming up with a similar scenario for baseball. The only thing that came to my mind is if pitchers would throw differently via the current setting of the game (inning, score, home/away, etc), but I could be completely off, and don't see how that would involve position players much, if at all.

Yeah...like I said...in baseball, it's really just a meaningless cliche borrowed from other sports, in an attempt to attribute losing to a character flaw and winning to a sense of "better" character.

[metsguy234]

It matters just as much in April as it does in September.

Also, they did score more runs than their opponents overall, which is why they were a good team this year. It just so happens that there was a better team in their division. This does not mean that the Mets "didn't know how to win." It just means, they weren't the best team in their division.

I just think its silly that people try to attribute winning and losing to some sense of character, when winning and losing comes down to...oh, I don't know...playing baseball.

But when more pressure is put on them (Do or die games) they perform poorly...

[HoustonGM]

But when more pressure is put on them (Do or die games) they perform poorly...

1) Correlation does not imply causation.
2) I can find just as many such games where they did succeed as you can find where they didn't succeed.
3) Furthermore, it has nothing to do with "knowing how to win."

[gRYFYN1]

No, the Mets scored more runs then the other guys overall, but they didn't know how to do it when it matters...

1st thats why they were the 4th best team in the NL.

also when does "it matter" ?? Do games only matter in Sept? Aug?

Or more likely to all the games the same ?

Is it more likely that a sloppy bullpen that allowed too many runs and watched too many games slip away?

Or is it the stat geeks who point out the Delgados 726OPS for the 1st half of the season killed them?

Or, as Manuel seems to think, they can "learn to win" maybe "get their uniforms dirty" , "grind out more ABs", and "respect the game" and *poof* the wins will just roll on in?

[Swampdog]

Yeah, I think its that "poof" thing that Manuel believes in. So sorry, Mets fans.

[KowboyKoop]

If I were a Mets fan, I'd be crying right about now.

[etothep]

If I were a Mets fan, I'd be crying right about now.

you mean continue crying?

[dps]

If I were a Mets fan, I'd be crying right about now.

Not a Mets fan, but I'll throw in my 2 cents anyway.

First, I think that there is value in players putting the good of the team ahead of their individual statistics--in fact I'm pretty sure of it--and if I thought that was what Manuel meant, I'd be fine with that. But I don't think that's what he means.

His statements also could be taken to mean that the stats guys that the Mets have employed haven't done their jobs very well. I don't know enough about the Mets' internal organization to know if that's true or not, though they've made enough questionable moves that you have to think there might be something to it. But I don't think that's what he meant, either.

What he probably means is that he doesn't believe that statistical analysis has the value that some people think it does. And if that's true, yeah, I'd cry if I was a Mets fan, too.

[HoustonGM]

First, I think that there is value in players putting the good of the team ahead of their individual statistics--in fact I'm pretty sure of it--and if I thought that was what Manuel meant, I'd be fine with that. But I don't think that's what he means.

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.

What he probably means is that he doesn't believe that statistical analysis has the value that some people think it does. And if that's true, yeah, I'd cry if I was a Mets fan, too.

Yeah, that's what it seems like.

[haveacigar]

You know, here's an idea.

Maybe rather than scapegoating SABR heads, making up cliches about knowing how to win, etc. etc.

How about having a bullpen that has good pitchers besides Billy Wagner? They're probably in the playoffs if he doesn't go down, but Ayala wasn't that great at closing out games and no one else in that bullpen was useful at all in September.

I doubt there are any SABRmetrics proponents telling Omar Minaya not to get a capable bullpen.

[oriole^]

It matters just as much in April as it does in September.

Also, they did score more runs than their opponents overall, which is why they were a good team this year. It just so happens that there was a better team in their division. This does not mean that the Mets "didn't know how to win." It just means, they weren't the best team in their division.

I just think its silly that people try to attribute winning and losing to some sense of character, when winning and losing comes down to...oh, I don't know...playing baseball.

Now wait a second, here. You get on Jerry Manuel for saying something that doesn't mean anything, and you go and say this? "Playing baseball"? That's your explanation? Well, sure...the Mets would not win as many games if they didn't show up at Shea Stadium and instead went to the bar and knocked back a few. If that's not what you mean, then what exactly do you mean?

I think Manuel is in fact talking about the intangibles, and warning against reading too many statistics to find out what is "wrong" with his team. I mean, the Mets won 89 games this year. They're a good team, but they choked at the end, the same way they did the season before. There is the feeling that they underperformed. Now, it might be just luck of the draw. Statistically, that would be the given reason, because as you said, there's no difference between a game in May and a game in September. Or maybe the cause is something else...something that is not kept as a stat. Maybe they need to train harder, or not stay out all night, or ease off on the pressure on themselves...or maybe, the team requires a different confidence, a different attitude, something that could indeed collectively be called "knowing how to win".

In other words, put down the stat sheet and figure out what the hell's going on. Not that stats aren't important, but they aren't the most important thing in all cases - and this just might be one of those cases.

Heck, what else is the guy supposed to say? "Well, it's luck of the draw that we ended up this way, because all the games are equivalent. So I'm gonna manage them exactly the same way, and wait for the crapshoot at the end of the season. If we win, fine; if we don't, oh well! The Phils or the Marlins just happened to be better."

[HoustonGM]

Now wait a second, here. You get on Jerry Manuel for saying something that doesn't mean anything, and you go and say this? "Playing baseball"? That's your explanation? Well, sure...the Mets would not win as many games if they didn't show up at Shea Stadium and instead went to the bar and knocked back a few. If that's not what you mean, then what exactly do you mean?

I mean that winning and losing is about how well you play the game, not your sense of character.

In other words, put down the stat sheet and figure out what the hell's going on. Not that stats aren't important, but they aren't the most important thing in all cases - and this just might be one of those cases.

I think it's pretty obvious what the hell went on with the Mets, as others have said repeatedly in this thread. They blew late-game leads very often because their bullpen sucked outside of Billy Wagner, who missed the latter part of the season.

Heck, what else is the guy supposed to say? "Well, it's luck of the draw that we ended up this way, because all the games are equivalent. So I'm gonna manage them exactly the same way, and wait for the crapshoot at the end of the season. If we win, fine; if we don't, oh well! The Phils or the Marlins just happened to be better."

"We have to work on holding leads"?

I don't know. As I said:

Also, maybe they say it just to shut up the media that asks the same bland questions over and over again.

I hope that that's why Manuel said these things, and not that he really believes the problem is that they don't "know how to win" and that they have to "win and know how to win and not win with statistical people."