Comments on: What “Moneyball” really means

By: 1943mrmojorisin1971

1943mrmojorisin1971 — Thu, 22 Sep 2011 19:57:58 +0000

Of course Ari would show up to discuss this one. One a so-called sabermetrician uses his analytical ability as grounds to insult others he’s a stats geek in my mind. It’s not exactly an insulting term anyway, just a more fitting one in my mind. I understand the value of sabermetric stats as well as most people but, as the article shows, there are still more ways to evaluate a player

By: Ari Collins

Ari Collins — Wed, 21 Sep 2011 22:12:54 +0000

Statisticians? Sabermatricians? Fans of understanding baseball?

By: aaronmoreno

aaronmoreno — Wed, 21 Sep 2011 21:45:45 +0000

For awhile Billy Beane was the smartest guy in the room, but he didn’t have a lot of resources. Now the rest of the room is pretty damn smart, and Beane is still broke. He doesn’t even have the fancy degrees that are swimming around in the game now. We spend a lot of time on a guy who didn’t exactly set the world on fire with fat DHs.

By: natstowngreg

natstowngreg — Wed, 21 Sep 2011 21:44:07 +0000

After taking over as the Nationals’ GM, Mike Rizzo got permission from ownership to beef up the front office. He hired more scouts and brought in very experienced baseball men (ex., Davey Johnson; Roy Clark, who helped build the Braves farm system). At the same time, he made the point that he wanted a balance between old-time scouting and player development, and new-time statistical analysis (and BTW, Davey Johnson was one of the first managers to rely on stats).

That’s one thing to get from Rosenthal’s excellent article: It’s not all one or the other. Teams are trying to find better ways to assess potential human performance, which is difficult to measure. Stats are useful, but so is personal observation.

Moneyball had its impact, but it’s been incorporated into how teams acquire talent. Times change, practices evolve. Someone comes up with something new, others copy or adpat it. Sorta describes the progress of society and technology, doesn’t it?

The thing I found especially interesting was near the end, about looking for ways to reduce injuries and speed rehab. Considering how much talent is missing from the field at any given time due to injuries, and considering that medicine keeps advancing, I’d agree there’s a lot of room for improvement.

By: aaronmoreno

aaronmoreno — Wed, 21 Sep 2011 21:40:09 +0000

It may certainly be true of some fans and journalists, but not of baseball organizations.

By: 1943mrmojorisin1971

1943mrmojorisin1971 — Wed, 21 Sep 2011 21:27:03 +0000

Maybe not the best choice of names but I’ll stand by it until you suggest something better

By: sabathiawouldbegoodattheeighthtoo

sabathiawouldbegoodattheeighthtoo — Wed, 21 Sep 2011 21:16:11 +0000

Moneyball was about how Beane exploited a market inefficiency, but that part gets lost along the way. I love when I hear people cite any player with a high OBP as a Moneyball player, when that was just the inefficiency of the time. The thing people were not paying that much attention to. It shortly thereafter became defensive efficiency, and lo and behold we have had 2 consecutive “years of the pitcher.”

So soon, HR and RBI will be so undervalued a small market team like the A’s will have no choice but to scour the earth for guys who can hit a ball 600 feet, while the big boys on the east coast are busy scouting sprinters in London.

By: Bill

Bill — Wed, 21 Sep 2011 21:13:21 +0000

Nothing like complaining about the incivility of discourse while calling people “stat geeks.” If you want respect, give it. Otherwise, don’t gripe about being treated dismissively.

By: 1943mrmojorisin1971

1943mrmojorisin1971 — Wed, 21 Sep 2011 21:00:49 +0000

Information is great and the more the better, but nothing drives me crazier than when some stats geek calls someone an idiot when they try to cite more traditional stats or what they actually see on the field as a means of evaluating a player. This article points out that traditional methods of evaluating players are in no way dead, they’re just no longer the be-all end-all. However, neither is sabermetric analysis

By: Bill

Bill — Wed, 21 Sep 2011 20:55:29 +0000

It may not be an accurate characterization of the attitudesof scouts, but “Damn you and your numbers! I don’t want any more information!” is a spot-on description of the attitude of a goodly number of baseball fans and journalists, many of whom are linked to (and laughed at) on this blog.

By: yankeesfanlen

yankeesfanlen — Wed, 21 Sep 2011 20:41:34 +0000

The Yankees have the money and play ball
Shields tries to close it out and takes the fall
Yanks throw in no name pitchers who stand tall
I just love the win, all and all

By: coryeuc

coryeuc — Wed, 21 Sep 2011 20:15:37 +0000

When I think of “Moneyball” I think of Douglas Hubbard’s “How to Measure Anything.” The challenge hasn’t been so much about overcoming a lack of desire for new information. That would be silly. Rather, I think of it as being about overcoming hesitation regarding the relevance or or the possibility of garnering new information from new types of measurements. It isn’t “stats vs. scouts.” It is “stats vs. ‘look at what these shiny new stats can do.’”