BBTF's Newsblog Discussion :: StatSpeak World Famous Roundtable: May 12

Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Monday, May 12, 2008

StatSpeak World Famous Roundtable: May 12

With Dave Cameron, Eric Seidman, R.J. Anderson, Pizza Cutter and Eddie Bane (Hey, you...off the stage!)

Question #4: A journalism student at a prominent college recently told me that he had an interview for a writing internship at MLB.com. The interview promptly ended, however, when he expressed his goal was for mainstream baseball writing to incorporate more analytical tools than just calling someone clutch, saying David Eckstein is a hard-nosed player, and grilling someone with small sample sizes. Of course those reading MLB.com or newspapers aren’t necessarily going to grasp all sabermetrics concepts, but analytical writing excluding the aforementioned issues does not entirely lean towards statistics. What does this tell you about the goals of mainstream writing?

Pizza Cutter: I made a New Year’s resolution that I wouldn’t see this type of thing as a grand conspiracy to keep Sabermetrics away from people. Surely, someone could write stories/content/posts with plenty of Sabermetric wisdom and have it be aimed at a non-math-major audience.

Consider the stir that was caused when Brian Bannister came out as a Sabermetrician this winter or when Moneyball was published. The people within any structure, including baseball, have a tendency to defend the structure as it is. Part of that is keeping out any ideas that might force the structure to change, whether or not that would be for the better. This sounds like one of those instances. But, of course, Sabermetrics has managed to infiltrate the establishment a little bit… and this next line has to be read in a dramatic whisper… we will not be ignored! Sabermetricians of the world, unite!

Repoz Posted: May 12, 2008 at 09:12 AM | 10 comment(s)
Related News: General, Sabermetrics

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 1 of 1 pages

1. Craig Calcaterra Posted: May 12, 2008 at 08:33 AM (#2777588)

Integration is happening slowly but surely. Just yesterday, a writer in my hometown Columbus Dispatch -- not known for its fabulous baseball coverage -- did a story analyzing free agent signings which employed VORP (a) correctly; and (b) without making a huge honking deal about using VORP (i.e. no long explanation or disclaimer for using it). Ten minutes ago one of my readers emailed me with a story about a viral conversation at Miller Park the other night in which people who otherwise don't consider themselves statheads were talking about OBP, etc.

As with most things, the grand statements and initial confrontations get all the headlines but don't lead to immediate change. They do, however, create an environment in which people feel that it's safe to do things or think about things in new ways on thier own timetable and in their own way.

2. Wheelhouse Posted: May 12, 2008 at 08:45 AM (#2777593)

As with most things, the grand statements and initial confrontations get all the headlines but don't lead to immediate change. They do, however, create an environment in which people feel that it's safe to do things or think about things in new ways on their own timetable and in their own way.

Definitely change is coming - ESPN's been in the vanguard - first with Neyer, but now a lot of guys are doing decent stats analysis on their site (Law, etc.), or at least trying to. With guys like Gammons now including stats stuff in their articles, the trickle-down effect has been obvious.

If the quote accurately sums up the college kid's approach to the job interview, though, I can see why MLB.com didn't want him. Why hire a guy who has bald contempt for your company's product? Had he just tried to get the job, rather than jump on a soapbox about how crappy the existing product was, he'd have been in a better position to actually try doing what he was advocating. As Herman Edwards might have said, you interview to get the job.

3. J.C. Bradbury Posted: May 12, 2008 at 09:49 AM (#2777637)

We don't know why this guy didn't get the job. For all we know the position was for a writer to cover games and do human interest stories. When the guy wouldn't shut up about how wonderful VORP is the employer ended the interview. I know that I have done interviews where the person talked himself out of a job, even though he looked good on paper. He might have thought it had something to do with philosophical disagreements that were discussed, when in reality it had to do with the fact that the guy wasn't the right fit for other reasons.

I see very little evidence of anti-sabermetric bias; though, I won't deny that there is some. Do mainstream publications often shun sabermetric writers? Yes, just as they shun non-sabermetric writers who aren't doing things that are of good quality. Most writing is not "sabermetric," because most readers are not interested in sabermetrics. There are some old farts who do fit the traditional caricature, but they are the exception. I talk to reporters frequently, and they are always interested in what the stats say. If you can explain what it means, then they like it. If you rant about what an idiot a manager is for playing one player and not another because VORP says there is a +5 advantage then they turn you off, just like I do.

4. Craig Calcaterra Posted: May 12, 2008 at 10:04 AM (#2777654)

My view: sabermetics are the potatoes, not the meat. While there are some great potato dishes out there and are worth enjoying once in a while, if you try to make a main dish out of it you're going to lose most people.

5. Dag Nabbit: formerly tolerant of lactose Posted: May 12, 2008 at 10:10 AM (#2777657)

Definitely change is coming - ESPN's been in the vanguard - first with Neyer, but now a lot of guys are doing decent stats analysis on their site (Law, etc.), or at least trying to. With guys like Gammons now including stats stuff in their articles

Hasn't Gammons always done this? He's probably more responsible for the rise of OPS than anyone else.

6. Robert Machemer Posted: May 12, 2008 at 11:13 AM (#2777707)

The turtle moves!

7. Barry`s_Lazy_Boy Posted: May 12, 2008 at 11:19 AM (#2777718)

Hasn't Gammons always done this? He's probably more responsible for the rise of OPS than anyone else.

He always seemed to be on the leading edge of stats when it came to the mainstream dudes. I agree he was on the OPS bandwagon a decade ago.

8. Sean Forman Posted: May 12, 2008 at 11:33 AM (#2777742)

While there are some great potato dishes out there and are worth enjoying once in a while

We've got a recipe we call "Yummy Potatoes." Sliced, roasted Potatoes, Lemon Juice, Kalamata Olives, Feta Cheese and Fresh Tomatoes over spring mix. Good stuff.

I honestly have a tough time getting worked up over this stuff. People who want to read about sabermetrics know where to go. I suspect that a lot of people are imagining the jobs they would have, "If only teams would appreciate us." The fact is plenty of teams already have multiple statheads working for them. The D'Backs have someone working for them with a Mechanical Engineering degree from MIT. At the winter meetings I've been approached by multiple people with elite college degrees in math, cs, econ, engineering, etc. The field is ridiculously competitive if you want to get into a front office as a stathead. And these people will work for nothing.

There just aren't very many jobs available in baseball. Even if we had a stathead full employment act there would probably only be 100 paid positions available.

9. Walt Davis Posted: May 12, 2008 at 02:40 PM (#2777943)

Dear Penthouse,

I am a journalism student at a prominent college. I'm not a bad looking guy but I never thought this would happen to me...

10. Repoz