My Sabremetric rant

[Senser81]

I'm a big fan of Bill James. I liked his writing style, his story-telling, his admitted biases, and his candid approach of statistics might not paint the whole picture.

It seems like too many contemporary Sabremetric guys are just flunkies from some Ivy League school that are more like roadside preachers than statistical analysts. They are constantly trying to prove why they are "right", instead of letting the facts emerge on their own and then assessing the situation. I don't know how many times I've been told by Sabrezealots like Dan Bernstein that "Derek Jeter is the worst fielding SS in history!" or "Sometimes Adam Dunn striking out is a good thing!". Its the same type of crap spewed by the old-timers, its just coming from the statistical side.

My biggest amazement with this Sabre-craze is that even with all this data and all these guys getting "Baseball Stat" PhD's from NYU, we still have teams batting their best hitter in the #4 spot and using their best reliever in the bottom of the 9th. I guess some idiocy will never change.

 

[Senser81]

Sabermetric percentages says that your best hitters should bat 1st, 2nd, and 4th. Using your best hitter to bat in the 3 hole is by percentage a waste.

So why did Jim Riggleman always bat Sosa 3rd?

 

[dell71]

I'm a fan of Sabremetrics, but not the way most people use them. Most people simply want to replace everything about the old way of doing things. They're like calculators with no feel for actual baseball. They use terms like "counting stats" as if there is something inherently dirty about saying a guy has x # of homeruns and thumb their noses at anyone who arrives at a decision about a player without performing multiple equations. I think Sabremetrics are great for comparing and contrasting players, particularly those we haven't seen (or haven't seen in a long time) and across eras (some stats), or even for the purposes of putting together a team. However, some level of trust in baseball instinct is needed to operate a team on a day by day basis and to make in-game decisions that might involve knowingly going against the grain.

Speaking of baseball instinct, I'd always been led to believe that your best hitter should bat 3rd, for the most part. Maybe, that's my baseball purist upbringing, but I'm unaware of any stats that say otherwise, so please explain this:

Sabermetric percentages says that your best hitters should bat 1st, 2nd, and 4th. Using your best hitter to bat in the 3 hole is by percentage a waste.

 

[dell71]

Tango's book sounds interesting. Title?

I understand the argument quite well and tend to fall on that side of things when comparing players including almost everything that you wrote. However, I also recognize that the simple longevity of guy's like Rose & Murray is to be commended. There is something to be said for a guy to be good enough & healthy enough to compile those numbers. Too often, dedicated sabreheads just off-handedly dismiss the notion as if the compiler just sucks at baseball. And I've said nothing of how they scoff at any mention of "intangibles" like leadership, baseball IQ, etc.

 

[NAHSTE]

Tango's book sounds interesting. Title?

"The Book"

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

I already ranted on this in my FIwOBA thread, but my biggest gripe is the new trend of "luck" based metrics being invented every 5 minutes. The obsession with the so-called "three true outcomes", and subsequently chalking up everything else to luck, is nothing short of retarded.

I think advanced stats culture has peaked. You had guys like Pete Palmer in the early days, and the guys who came later cleaned up what those guys started, but now everybody wants to create a stat, and most if not all of them either tell you nothing or tell you something we already knew.

 

[Slateman]

So why did Jim Riggleman always bat Sosa 3rd?

Riggleman isn't what I would call a good manager

 

[NAHSTE]

I already ranted on this in my FIwOBA thread, but my biggest gripe is the new trend of "luck" based metrics being invented every 5 minutes. The obsession with the so-called "three true outcomes", and subsequently chalking up everything else to luck, is nothing short of retarded.

I think advanced stats culture has peaked. You had guys like Pete Palmer in the early days, and the guys who came later cleaned up what those guys started, but now everybody wants to create a stat, and most if not all of them either tell you nothing or tell you something we already knew.

I'm sure they said that in 1960 too. And 1980.

There's always going to be more information available with better technology. FieldFX and PitchFX alone are going to lead to a major shift in how front offices evaluate players. To say "Advanced" anything has peaked is inherently false to begin with, shit is ADVANCED for a reason.

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

I'm sure they said that in 1960 too. And 1980.

There's always going to be more information available with better technology. FieldFX and PitchFX alone are going to lead to a major shift in how front offices evaluate players. To say "Advanced" anything has peaked is inherently false to begin with, shit is ADVANCED for a reason.

There are only so many ways to slice these numbers. Case in point, FIwOBA, with is an example of try hard, or FIP, which is redundant.

To me, the only real area left to conquer is fielding stats.

 

[Villain]

http://www.mikesciosciastragicillness.com/2012/07/14/marcus-hayes-is-so-doing-it-wrong/12293

Awesome blog post absolutely shredding an anti-SABR article. Good fun reading.