Buy The Book
Fun stuff.
http://espn.go.com/espnradio/play?id=7639733
I like the story at the very very end. Listen to the last 2 minutes when Bill talks about steroids, and how prevalent it was back in the 1960s and 70s in football.
Some good tidbits in here, and some bad ones:
The most devout sabermetricians will try to tell you that there is no better way in the world to evaluate players than through their convoluted equations.
I’m one of those “most devout”. And, I would not try to say that in the least. I’d like the writer to source his claim.
but when it comes to evaluating talent, they are much more inclined to rely on human eyes than sabermetric calculations
Sure thing, that’s entirely possible. Performance analysis is limited to the sample size, and to the known environment. So, a 20-yr old kid with 75 PA in Rookie A ball? Yeah, definitely, human eyes will win the day there. 1500 PA for a 25 yr old in MLB? Then, no, human eyes won’t win the day there.
Everything has value, and it’s in direct proportion to the underlying sample size it was based on. There’s no fight here, except for those who want to enflame both sides… and then get paid to write about what they started. I don’t think this writer is doing that here, as he’s got a fairly balanced, dispassionate piece. But there are the gasbags on parade…
“From our perspective, it is important that we are aware of those things because there are other clubs that value them more than we do and look at them more than we do,” Proefrock said. “So that can give us an indication of what they may think of some of our players and what guys they value maybe even more than we do because of the metrics.”
I love that!
OPS - on-base percentage plus slugging percentage - is the sabermetric equation that has been most embraced by the traditional baseball community. In many places, it has become as common as RBI and batting average.
“I’ve always been a guy who looked at OPS and on-base percentage,” Phillies manager Charlie Manuel said. “I definitely think OPS is really good to look at. I think you gather as much information as you can, and that weighs into who you play and what your lineup is. It plays a little part in it.”
This gets to the crux of it. I would be happy to retire WAR and FIP and wOBA and LI… as long as RBIs, batting average, pitcher wins, and saves were to also retire. What sabermetrics does is show you the right way to look at performance numbers… IF YOU CHOOSE TO LOOK AT PERFORMANCE NUMBERS. You don’t have to look at performance numbers. You can go the whole time without ever looking at a performance number. But, the second that you decide that you will look at a performance numbers, then THAT’S where sabermetrics will shine. You can have a perfectly great career as a talent evaluator without looking at performance numbers.
“When you’re sitting there and a guy brings up sabermetrics, they don’t know nothing about that guy, and that may be the biggest thing,” Manuel said. “Sometimes a guy will look at you and say, ‘Why did you play that guy, he’s 1 for 16 against that guy with seven punch-outs?’ But when I’ve watched that guy, he might be 1 for 16, but nine of those at-bats the guy hit about three or four balls hard.
“Shane Victorino last year, for instance, was 2 for 16 or something like that against Derek Lowe, and before I played him we talked about it. He told me he had a plan for going up there against him, and he stuck with it, and he got three hits.”
If a follower of sabermetrics would ever dare suggest that 2 for 16 means something, please remove his sabermetrics card, then call the hotline and have him reported. We devoted half a chapter in The Book arguing precisely AGAINST using 2 for 16. Please, don’t ascribe the idea of resting someone that is 2 for 16 to sabermetrics.
There’s plenty of saberists in the Philly area that I’m sure would have loved to talk to this writer, like Eric Seidman and Matt Swartz. Why is there NO QUOTE from someone involved in sabermetrics, but the article is littered by quotes by those who don’t use sabermetrics?
This article could have been outstanding, but instead it’s just good. There was plenty of potential for this article to really have been a knockout. All he had to do is talk to a few people on the other side as well.
Fantastic job by Amada Rykoff for touching on all the sabermetric staples.
Not sure if this piece appears in places other than espnW, but it obviously has wide appeal.
***
Also a more in-depth BABIP primer.
I’ll be home in time to catch him on the 7:30pm broadcast. Should be fun!
I downloaded Bill James Baseball IQ onto my iphone (I don’t think it is available on droid phones, but I’m not sure). Here is the web site for the app on Acta Sports:
http://www.actasports.com/titles/bill_james_baseball_iq_app/
It is pretty cool. You can read a description and see some screen captures on the above site, but basically it allows you to see heat maps and color maps of batters and pitchers (in all combinations, counts, situations, etc.) for K zone, batted balls, pitch type, etc.
Best of all, the app is free! Seems to me that they could have charged for this one, but I know nothing about the best way to make money from apps. It also seems like they could use these graphics more often on TV broadcasts.
Anyway, give it a try and see what you think…
It’s not that RBIs are ”wrong”, it’s that the context is missing. Wins for pitchers aren’t wrong. But, the attribution pretends that the hitters, bullpen, and fielding is absorbed by the pitcher.
Sabermetrics is about the hidden game of numbers. It’s trying to give context, meaning to those numbers.
Numbers, that stand there by themselves, are meaningless, as surely as words strung together have no meaning without understanding the rules.
When I read that blog post above, I see someone who looks at the surface, sees some heads bobbing out of the water. But how can you tell which is Jessica Alba and which is not? You need to dive into the water, and that’s what sabermetrics does. You can swin along and not drown, or you can just wait for us to drain the water out of the pool.
They bought Big Lead Sports and Fantasy Sports Ventures. And Sean’s site is (partly) owned by FSV. So, congrats to Sean!
Wonderful, just wonderful.
This guy created a false rumor, to see how quickly a journalist would report it without any fact-checking. Of course, the journalist ends up shifting blame to the other guy.
Brian Kenny is turning into a saberist’s best friend. He has had Vince Gennaro, Joe Sheehan, Jay Jaffe, among others, and all have contributed positively. Now, it’s Dave Cameron’s turn on the hot seat.
It is time, once again, for the Sloan MIT Sports Analytics Conference! The only requirement to attend is that you must be able to type the word “analytics” in one second or less. Just kidding. Here is the official web site:
http://www.sloansportsconference.com/
The dates are March 2-3, in Boston of course.
It is a little pricey (if you are a current student anywhere, it is a steal), but if you are serious about your sports analytics, you want to stump for a job with a team, or you want to meet some truly interesting and sometimes brilliant personalities, you should seriously consider attending. There might even be an MGL sighting in the audience.
This is the Super Bowl of Sports Analytics conferences and is a veritable who’s who in the sports analysis and sports world.
Here are some of the speakers:
Bill James
Mark Cuban
Mark Shapiro
Jeff Luhnow
Darrel Morey
John Hollinger
Scott Boras
Bill Simmons
And more…
A Holy Writer decries how performances are synthesized into cold hard numbers, while in a bitter taste of irony, they themselves often REFER to some of those cold hard numbers. For example: if you get a shutout in Game 7, REGARDLESS of HOW the pitcher managed to get a shutout, is all that matters.
Someone who loves baseball will go back and watch the entire game, and shows how you should NOT TRUST THE NUMBERS, and instead, appreciate how the narrative could have easily changed, if not for one play.
The NHL not only tolerates YouTube, but they EMBRACE it with their own YouTube channel. And the video is really high quality. They have plays of the night, plays of the week. Whatever you want. NHL.com has 5-minute recaps of every game. Fans post NHL highlights, and they are still there. I mean, here’s Quebec v Montreal, and you see Guy Lafleur without his helmet. That one was uploaded Aug, 2011. Here’s one uploaded two years ago about the 1986 Roy/Rangers series. It’s when he made his legend.
Now Grant Brisbee (who I must say is one of my favorite bloggers) is suggesting that MLB has an archaic policy, especially since you can’t see the uploaded videos anywhere on MLB.com or purchase it from MLB. Now, I linked to a Raines video just yesterday, and we’ll see if it comes down soon enough. In my view, it’s more of an archaeological dig. You watch that Raines video, and it does nothing but GOOD for MLB.
I understand that you can argue copyright, yada yada yada. There are always two sides to every story. The NHL has chosen the fan-friendly side. MLB is in the EXACT same position as NHL. They are in the same business. They have the same history. They have the same passionate fans. Everything is really the same.
MLB has come around recently, with allowing us to EMBED videos in blog posts. Again, they had two sides to the story, with one being they want to force people to come to MLB.com to watch the video, and the other as using it as a loss-leader, to try to attract even more fans to come over. It’s a 51/49 argument. They FINALLY chose the 51 argument (i.e., fan-friendly).
Back in the 1990s, the “casual friday” was all the rage… except at my company. I knew EXACTLY the arguments: professionalism v employee-friendly. It was the same 51-49 argument. When I asked upper management, they gave me the professionalism line. ONE MONTH LATER, they decided to allow casual friday, citing employee-friendliness. You can literally justify any choice, and look reasonable doing so. The reality is that most choices are 51-49 choices. It makes no sense to make it seem like a 100-0 choice, when you can easily change your mind a month later.
Think of Jack Morris v Dennis Martinez. Those favoring Morris in will only cite the good things, while those favoring Martinez out will cite the bad things. It’s all very political, turning a 51-49 situation into a 100-0 situation.
It’s a foregone conclusion that MLB will relent here, if they haven’t already. It’s a 51-49 choice, and the deciding factor always ends up being the one that makes people the happiest. That’s the tie-breaker.
Amen.
If they get to report on the news they create, shouldn’t they declare how they contributed to that news?
Wonderful news!
I’ve been looking for a guy like this.
It’s not lost on me that if the Hall of Fame stakes weren’t there, the Tim Raines appreciation society might not get the same amount of public attention. But that’s exactly the problem. Instead of appreciating baseball for all it offers and enjoying its stars for all they give us—which really is so much—we chose to give ourselves ulcers over the injustices committed by the BBWAA.
...
Whining and whispering about which names on the Hall of Fame ballot may have used steroids is a new annual tradition. It’s not likely to go away anytime soon because Hall of Fame voters are losing a grip on the only world that they control — that world of illusions comprised of discarded Gold Glove trophies and dusty Hall of Fame plaques. In their world, morality consists of things like “clutchness” and “being a class act.” It also consists of not hitting home runs between say 1997 and the present because doing so makes you suspicious and suspicions are like fog and fog makes it harder to see.
I cede the floor to you Mr. Nusbaum, and any future ulcers. You are both a gifted writer, and a fan of baseball, exactly the kind of person who should be part of the solution.
This blogger points out that Barry Bloom manages to include Rafael Palmeiro, Mark McGwire and Fred McGriff on his ballot (all of which are justifiable to some extent), but Bloom is trying to argue that Jeff Bagwell does not belong with those guys, because he compares most favorably to… Steve Garvey? Well, if you strip out the huge HR and huge walk advantage, then, yeah, sure, maybe.
***
I like what Posnanski said the other day about his HOF voting, where one year he will vote for a guy on a ballot, and another year he won’t. And it’s not because the player did anything new (obviously he didn’t) but because Poz is looking at the evidence in a new way, a way he hadn’t considered.
So, let’s hope that Bloom will take the same approach next year, start Bagwell with a clean slate, and maybe he will come to see Bagwell as one of the greatest hitters of his generation. Unless of course Bagwell gets his deserved enshrinement this year.
***
And don’t get me started on the voter who wouldn’t vote for Raines and his 808 steals because right behind him is Vince Coleman and his 752 steals. Ok, you got me started. As I noted a few years back:
The biggest debates for me were Tim Raines, who obviously was overshadowed by Rickey Henderson, but also if you take Vince Coleman’s five top years, I would say he outperformed Raines, too, and I don’t see Coleman as a Hall of Famer.
— Tracy RingolsbyFACT
Just for fun, I took Coleman’s 5 best years. They were hard to find, but I settled on this: 85, 87, 89, 90, 92. That totaled 2818 PA. (If you prefer different seasons, let me know. ) I looked for Raines worst years (which includes alot of abbreviated seasons) to match that total. I came up with these years: 79, 80, 82, 91, 94, 96, 98, 99, 02. The total of Raines’ worst years was 2820 PA. Ok, so we have two partial careers of exactly the same length (in plate appearances), one for the guy at his best, and the other for the guy at his worst. Coleman outscored Raines, by 25 runs. Raines outRBIed Coleman by 78. Raines also did that while using up 99 less outs.
The batting line:
0.275 0.337 0.355 Coleman
0.266 0.363 0.371 RainesRaines, at his very worst, is better than Coleman at his very best.
I believe Ringolsby has seen the light, putting Raines on his ballot this year. So, it is possible to look at the same data in a new way, and be convinced that you were originally wrong. Congratulations to Ringolsby! Maybe that other voter who saw Raines and Coleman in the same boat will also see the light.
Good stuff!
There are some tiny mistakes, and I’ll email Kenny tonight about it. A couple like (IP/9) * BB should be BB / (IP/9)… that is BB per 9 innings. Or “BABIP can used for hitters as well as pitchers. “ when really it should be “mostly for pitchers, and somewhat for hitters”. In FIP, the “/IP” should apply to the whole thing, which is obvious of course, and no one would do it otherwise. UZR is MGL not Fangraphs.
Other than those little nits aside, a fantastic job really of explaining it as simply as possible. I was impressed with the wOBA explanation. Whoever on Kenny’s team worked on this: great job!
Glove-slap: NaOH
Seems all that note-passing in the 7th grade is finally paying off for all concerned.
These are my favorites. My second favorite is the best-fielding plays. Give me those two, and I’ll be sitting in front of channel 790 all day.
The one shocking one that I saw, was a game with Pascual Perez, where he was standing on the very edge (or even outside) of the batter’s box, and the Padres pitchers were throwing at him… all 4 times he was at bat. It was rather revolting, not to mention cowardly on the pitchers’ part. It’s one thing for players to self-police, but it’s another when it’s a tit-for-tat kind of situation, where one side gets to throw a punch (via throwing a baseball), while the other guy’s defense is to run away (via trying to avoid getting hit by a moving pitch). And then, his response is to do the same, or, have everyone get into a brawl.
What is a better way to avoid beanball wars? And please, don’t dismiss others’ ideas as being unworkable. This is a brainstorming session. All voices will be heard.
May 16 23:47
Dodgers’ win reversed because Mattingly did not attest to proper score!
May 16 23:35
Now you frame it, now you don’t
May 16 20:44
How to beat the shift
May 16 20:02
Sponsoring MLB jerseys
May 16 16:56
Did Manny Pacquaio actually quote Leviticus?
May 16 16:06
Does changing your pitch frequency lead to substantial change in results?
May 16 14:18
Extra Innings: One-minute review
May 16 14:16
This particular criticism of UZR is unfounded
May 16 13:21
Psst… wanna intern for the Astros?
May 16 12:23
Arena wars
THREADS
May 16, 2012
Now you frame it, now you don’t
May 16, 2012
Dodgers’ win reversed because Mattingly did not attest to proper score!
May 16, 2012
Does changing your pitch frequency lead to substantial change in results?
May 16, 2012
Sponsoring MLB jerseys
May 15, 2012
Andre The Hawk Dawson speaks
May 15, 2012
Euro 2012 Preview
May 15, 2012
How to beat the shift
May 15, 2012
Will Pujols end the season with at least 30 HR and .500 SLG?
May 15, 2012
Kershaw v Strasburg, part 2
May 15, 2012
Did Manny Pacquaio actually quote Leviticus?
Recent comments
Older comments
Page 2 of 342 pages < 1 2 3 4 > Last »Complete Archive – By Category
Complete Archive – By Date