How does this ignorance still exist?

[HoustonGM]

To get out of Moneyball what he did kind of misses the point.

Of course it does. Very few of the people that criticize Moneyball like this actually read it. It just so happens that, at the time that the book was written, on-base percentage was being undervalued, and thus, that's where the A's looked for cheap players. In part DUE to Moneyball, this is obviously no longer the case. And, because Moneyball was not about OBP and sabermetric stats, but was about exploiting market inefficiencies, this can be seen in the current makeup of the A's team. People still criticize the A's as "waiting for the 3 run home run" and "clogging up the bases" and whatever because that was sort of the way the Moneyball-era A's were constructed (due to OBP being undervalued in the marketplace), but look at the current A's - a speed-based team (4th in SB in 2009) with very good defense - nothing like the criticisms paint them to be. Why? Because recently, defense has been the main undervalued asset.

[HoustonGM]

Actually, by looking at their roster, I don't really know if you can say Dayton Moore knows anything about HR, RBI, or Avg either.

So far, the Dayton Moore evaluation seems to be "I saw this guy play once and he was sweet so, he is."

Good point.

[HoustonGM]

Another BTF comment:

The thing I can't get over is that the Sox are getting roasted by people claiming to be old-school for thinking a guy's glove and some decent offensive production will make him a positive member of the team. Did anyone think we'd reach the "Dave Concepcion, Sabermetric Darling" stage, and have the sportswriters be AGAINST it?

Heh. The majority of sportswriters nowadays don't seem to actually have any beliefs themselves. It just seems to be "Figure out what the hot sabermetric topic is and be against it."

[ragecage]

Jay Mariotti writes for the Herald too?

[gRYFYN1]

which became defined as the love of sabermetrics over old-school stats like HR and RBI

see that there sums up the whole stupidity of the topic

1st it dosen'y rely on sabrmetrics OVER old-school stats, but In addition to

2nd all those stats are part of sabrmetrics, as sabrmetrics is the evaluation of ALL stats, not just one or two.

[haveacigar]

Well, sabermetrics will evaluate HRs because they are important. They don't evaluate RBIs ever, because RBIs are stupid and meaningless.

[TheNamelessPoet]

[reflections]

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...all/index.html

There was another interesting article about Moneyball. Not ignorant like Borges, but interesting nevertheless.

I think Street Medic said it best
"To me, it was about an organization with a smaller budget than the "big dogs" looking to get the most bang for its payroll buck. The strategy they adopted was to spot "inefficiencies" in the player market by looking for under-valued talent they could pick up on the cheap-cheap. The tools they used to suss these out were sabermetric stats."

But if sportswriters have proven anything is that they would prefer to slam and trash anything they can in the name of a byline.

[metsguy234]

Someone won't use complicated stats?

Burn them at the stake!

[etothep]

Someone won't use complicated stats?

Burn them at the stake!

Yes, cause not using them is equivalent to ranting senselessly about their lack of merit or worth

[metsguy234]

Yes, cause not using them is equivalent to ranting senselessly about their lack of merit or worth

HGM and you guys can rant about the stats used by the MM.

The MM can't rant about the stats used by the sabermetric community.


Double standard?

[etothep]

Notice how these arguments don't come about til some clown who thinks that since the metric takes longer than 5 seconds to compute that it is thus some kind of fictional statistic of no value or use takes the swipe?

[OregonDuck1989]

HGM and you guys can rant about the stats used by the MM.

The MM can't rant about the stats used by the sabermetric community.


Double standard?

They can rant all they want if they have the evidence to back up their opinions.. This guy just spouted ignorance.

When it comes to a debate, you lose when you say one thing without factual evidence to back it up. Therefore, this guy just lost.

[metsguy234]

They can rant all they want if they have the evidence to back up their opinions.. This guy just spouted ignorance.

When it comes to a debate, you lose when you say one thing without factual evidence to back it up. Therefore, this guy just lost.

"I think RBIs are a useless stat"

FACTUAL STATEMENT RIGHT THERE!

[etothep]

"I think RBIs are a useless stat"

FACTUAL STATEMENT RIGHT THERE!