THE BOOK--Playing The Percentages In Baseball

Thursday, September 22, 2011

Jason Whitlock and Bill Baer

Jason Whitlock does something that none of the saber-detractors do: he argues against numbers, without using numbers to support him. 

Typically (as in always), when a mainstream media person argues against things like WAR and FIP, they say that the numbers don’t tell the whole story, and then go on to cite other numbers (pitcher wins and RBIs, and batting average, etc).  This is what burns me up about those guys.  My job is really about “number clarification”.  It’s about trying to interpret the numbers in some meaningful manner.

Whitlock, to his credit, does not go the mainstream media route.  Instead, he says things like this:

No one will ever convince me that John Elway isn’t the greatest quarterback/football player in NFL history. I know what I saw. I don’t care that Joe Montana won more Super Bowls. I don’t care that Dan Marino threw for more yards. I don’t care that Peyton Manning’s completion percentage is eight points higher.

I can and have argued credibly and passionately that Elway is the best QB and player in the history of the league. You are free to disagree. I invite you to disagree. I’d love to refute your erroneous position. Just bring more than stats to the table.

Which is fantastic.  Whitlock is saying that there’s two ways to have an argument: one based on compiled performance numbers and the interpretation of those numbers.  And the other based on… well, he actually doesn’t say, but whatever it is, he won’t be quoting numbers.  And this is really great.

See, our job as saberists is not to say that you MUST look at the numbers.  Our job as saberists is to say that IF YOU DECIDE to look at numbers, we’ll show you how to interpret those numbers in various ways.  That’s a conditional statement.  You choose the path.  You decide whether you want numbers in your argument or not.  If you choose to set the landscape such that numbers are not to be part of the debate, then great, let’s have a debate without numbers.  On the other hand, if you choose to set the landscape such that numbers are in the discussion, then be prepared for WAR and FIP and the like.

***

Bill Baer is suggesting that we don’t have to argue on their landscape.  Instead, let each world live and breathe and die on its own.  Some people love Canal St, and others love Times Square.  If you love being downtown, you can talk about Little Italy and China Town and the illicit purse market.  You never ever have to reference the lights and Broadway shows of Times Square.  You just be happy with what makes you happy, and you can show others why you are happy.  And, guess what, everyone remains happy!  It’s a no-lose scenario.  You want to talk to the hot chick, you want to find out what she likes and why she likes it, and then you can decide if she’ll make you happy, and if not, well, you move on. 

Instead of calling out Whitlock and telling him how ignorant and close-minded he is, tell him what he’s missing with Sabermetrics. Tell him what you like about it, rather than telling him the reasons he doesn’t like it are invalid.

And if Jason Whitlock doesn’t buy into it, then you are just not his kind of hot chick.