Manuel throws SABR-heads under bus

[HoustonGM]

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.

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.

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.

why,unlike "classical" statistical analysis

Sabermetrics is statistical analysis. It's just another name for it.

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.

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.

[etothep]

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?

[HoustonGM]

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.

[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.

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?

[dps]

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.

[HoustonGM]

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.

[kenny1234]

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.

[FRENCHREDSOX]

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:

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.

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!)

[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? 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'

[HoustonGM]

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".

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.

.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.

[HoustonGM]

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.

[kenny1234]

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.

& 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.

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.

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.

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.

[HoustonGM]

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.

[Swampdog]

Yeah, Bill James created Win Shares, and the lengthy formula for same is in his book.

[MeetDaMets]

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.


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 ?