Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Tuesday, November 17, 2009

The League of Ordinary Gentlemen: sports metrics and the problem with unconventional wisdom

or…“If most people think you should punt, you probably shouldn’t.”

The more that I think about it, the more that I think the “metrics” school of sports analysis is the perfect example for understanding the limitations of insurgent intellectual movements. I have never known any ideology, group or position so likely to throw the baby out with the bathwater than the movement often (and unhelpfully) referred to as the “Moneyball” tendency.

That sucks, because I find the new metrics in sports, and particularly in baseball, to have an awful lot of useful, generative ideas about strategy, about talent evaluation, and about sports appreciation. But it’s sometimes so buried in such absurd, over-the-top “us-vs.-them”-ism that it becomes very difficult to separate the wheat from the chaff. It is indeed true that OBP was for a long time a criminally underrated stat; it is not true that “a walk is as good as a hit”. (Just ask the coach with a man on third and two outs playing a team with a great double play combo.) It is true that Joe Morgan says a lot of stupid things about baseball; it is not true that the Fire Joe Morgan crew “knows more” about baseball than Joe Morgan. Who we should choose to listen to about effective baseball strategy is a different question. But who knows more? The guy who played and coached and lived baseball for decades. That’s who. Sorry.

...Ultimately, the problem with these new metrics is that their apostles are so consumed with the desire to buck the conventional wisdom that they cloud their own ability to reasonably evaluate sports. The tendency to reflexively contradict the conventional wisdom is just as distorting as the tendency to reflexively support it. More so, I would argue; the conventional wisdom is often conventional because it is banally true. Which is exactly why we should take the valid and valuable criticisms and minor revolutions that go on in insurgent intellectual movements to heart, and use them to our advantage, but to also approach them with a healthy amount of skepticism.

Repoz Posted: November 17, 2009 at 08:07 PM | 18 comment(s) | Login to Bookmark
  Related News: GeneralSabermetricsProjections

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. Chris Needham Posted: November 17, 2009 at 08:24 PM (#3389758)
Vote for Zobrist or Die, Ahole!
   2. Shooty: Applying to be Fearless Leader Posted: November 17, 2009 at 08:27 PM (#3389763)
It would be a horrible thing for humanity if people can no longer reasonably evaluate sports.
   3. sunnyday2 Posted: November 17, 2009 at 08:33 PM (#3389769)
The main point seems to be to side with the second-guessers re. Bill Belicheck's controversial decision the other day. It didn't work and so it was the wrong decision, the writer says. Belicheck and others say it was the right decision because it would have resulted in a better outcome X percent of the time, assuming that percentage is greater than 50.

The irony here is that the writers says

But who knows more? The guy who played and coached and lived baseball for decades. That’s who. Sorry.


But I guess that this doesn't apply to football because in this case, it's the guy who has played and coached and lived football for decades AND the metrics crowd on one side, while the writer is on the other, and so the guy who has played and coached and lived football is wrong in this case.

So it really has nothing to do with whether a guy has played and coached and lived, it's whether I agree with them or not.
   4. haven Posted: November 17, 2009 at 08:50 PM (#3389784)
But I guess that this doesn't apply to football because in this case, it's the guy who has played and coached and lived football for decades AND the metrics crowd on one side, while the writer is on the other

To be fair to the writer, from what I've seen as a reaction just about everyone else except Belichick that played or coached football agree with the writer. Even those with ties to Belichick.
   5. SoSH U at work Posted: November 17, 2009 at 08:54 PM (#3389791)
But I guess that this doesn't apply to football because in this case, it's the guy who has played and coached and lived football for decades AND the metrics crowd on one side, while the writer is on the other, and so the guy who has played and coached and lived football is wrong in this case.


Well, it should be properly listed as "Every other coach and player plus this writer on one side vs. Belichick and the metrics crowd" on the other.

I generally support the idea of going for it on fourth down more than football teams typically do. I wouldn't have done it if I were the Pats, in part because, from what I've seen, I'm not sure all of the studies can really address the specific situations in the proper context.

Or, to put it another way, to the best knowledge, teams that go for the first down inside their own 30 while leading by 6 with a little more than 2 minutes left end up losing 100 percent of the time.
   6. JPWF13 Posted: November 17, 2009 at 08:55 PM (#3389792)
it is not true that “a walk is as good as a hit”

Never heard a "stathead" or "Moneyball tendency" say that, I think it's most often said by little league coaches
he tendency to reflexively contradict the conventional wisdom


That's funny, I haven't noticed that, what I have noticed is the tendency of the MSM and some "old time" baseball guys to reflexively contradict whatever the "statheads" say- even if all the staheads have effectively done is rephrase something the MSM/old timer believes in or believed in anyway.
More so, I would argue; the conventional wisdom is often conventional because it is banally true.

sometimes yes, and sometimes conventional wisdom is not wisdom at all, it's "conventional" because it's what a plurality at any given time THINKS, and the plurality THINKS what or does because it has been taught to. When I was growing up I thought the most important baseball stat was batting average, why? because I was told it was, and virtually everyone agreed, it was (and remained for a long time) conventional wisdom that the guy who won the "batting" title was the best "hitter".

Of course being a fan of a team that had a habit of losing despite "doing things the right way", I was quite receptive to the idea that much of what passed for conventional wisdom was crap.

Also I have always found it hard not to notice that what may be "conventional wisdom" to one person is no such thing to someone else. Someone may think that A is true, and may think that everyone else also thinks A is true, therefore A is conventional wisdom- except that person may be wrong, they may be a minority in thinking A is true.
   7. Cris E Posted: November 17, 2009 at 08:57 PM (#3389795)
Which is exactly why we should take the valid and valuable criticisms and minor revolutions that go on in insurgent intellectual movements to heart, and use them to our advantage, but to also approach them with a healthy amount of skepticism.

And by that I think he means

But who knows more? The guy who played and coached and lived baseball for decades. That’s who. Sorry.

This guy is dumb, a bad writer, or dumb AND a bad writer. He wants to judge decsions strictly by their outcomes, but you can't *make* decisions by their outcomes. You have to use some criteria beforehand, and this is where you judge: did I include all relevant data? did I disregard chaff? did I weight things correctly? Did I listen to the right people or trust my gut? Getting to the right answer (assuming everything is black and white enough to so judge) is part of it, but hardly everything.

Is choosing heads or tails correctly a good decision? Is weighing all the evidence well but having something not work always wrong? This guy is a knob.
   8. JPWF13 Posted: November 17, 2009 at 08:58 PM (#3389796)
I generally support the idea of going for it on fourth down more than football teams typically do.


There was one college coach who once said that the way to decide whether or not to go for it on 4th was to ask yourself, what does my opponent want? If he's going to be relieved that I'm punting, if the last thing he wants to see is me going for it, then I should go for it.
   9. whygavs Posted: November 17, 2009 at 09:07 PM (#3389813)
It is indeed true that OBP was for a long time a criminally underrated stat; it is not true that “a walk is as good as a hit”. (Just ask the coach with a man on third and two outs playing a team with a great double play combo.)


I'll grant him that I'd rather have a hit in that situation, but why, exactly, does a double play combo matter at any point in an inning in which there are two outs?
   10. JPWF13 Posted: November 17, 2009 at 09:34 PM (#3389862)
but why, exactly, does a double play combo matter at any point in an inning in which there are two outs?


"great double play combo" = good 2b +SS

a good 2b and a good SS matter whenever there is a runner on 3rd with less than 2 outs, because it is less likely he'll be able to score on an infield out...

and well gee, umm, that guy on 1st is simply an added force out opportunity?


Ok, I got nothing
   11. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: November 17, 2009 at 09:41 PM (#3389869)
This guy is dumb, a bad writer, or dumb AND a bad writer.
This is stupid, and pleasantly ironic.

It's not a well-argued piece. But deBoer is one of the better writers on the internets, and we shouldn't let one poor outcome - this bad article - lead us to judge the broader quality of his writing. I don't really get what he thinks he getting at - that we make generalizing judgments by extrapolating from a large sample of outcomes in no way prevents us from distinguishing between better and worse decisions with similar outcomes. But the precise problem with the piece enjoyably rebounds on this ludicrous bit of commentarial name-calling.
   12. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: November 17, 2009 at 09:43 PM (#3389872)
I also definitely agree with Freddie on the FJM thing. Ken Tremendous can turn a phrase, but his analysis consisted of collating VORP. I'd much rather hear what Morgan has to say - when he talks about how to play the game of baseball, rather than how to build a team, he's consistently interesting.
   13. JPWF13 Posted: November 17, 2009 at 10:16 PM (#3389909)
Ken Tremendous can turn a phrase, but his analysis consisted of collating VORP.


Analysis? What analysis?
I kind of liked him because I agreed with his conclusions most of the time, but seriously, if I wasn't sabr inclined nothing in his rants would have persuaded me towards his views, he'd say that looking at vorp is better than looking at RBIs, I agree, but if I didn't agree, if I was ambivalent, he would have given me no reason whatsoever to look at Vorp over RBI, he never explained or justified anything, ever as far as I can tell.

Yes I know, trying to explain to the MSM why RBIs are overrated is tedious, and repetitive and some people will never get it, but sometimes you just have to give it a shot.

why is OPS (or even better OPS+) better than batting average? It's not hard to explain that IN TERMS THE CASUAL FAN CAN UNDERSTAND, it really is not. Batting average is hits/AB, that means it values a bunt single the same as a home run- that's not right, no one denies that. Ok OBP values a walk as much as a homerun, but slugging % values a HR as 4* a single, and doesn't value walks at all*, add OBP and SLG them together and voila.

*BTW OPS times PAs times a Constant makes for a better run estimator than any metric used in baseball prior to Pete Palmer... OPS+ works even better, it scales up remarkably well with actual runs scored...
   14. Blackadder Posted: November 17, 2009 at 11:06 PM (#3389947)
Ugh, in TFA he has a criticism of Barnwell's discussion of the Belichick decision that is just shockingly confused.
   15. Bob Dernier Cri Posted: November 17, 2009 at 11:27 PM (#3389961)
a criticism of Barnwell's discussion of the Belichick decision that is just shockingly confused

Agreed, though the "confusion" may just be hyperbole. (Barnwell is a bit hyperbolic, too.)

Basically, if the odds were with you, you shouldn't give up your strategy because you failed in a single instance. Sticking to your guns after one bad outcome does not mean that you've abandoned the entire notion of inductive reasoning.
   16. Harry Balsagne's transparent jealousy Posted: November 17, 2009 at 11:47 PM (#3389972)
I'm starting to dislike the influx of "yeah conventional baseball analysis is flawed and stats are OK sometimes but not so great either" articles more than the shrill "stat-zombies are teh devil" ideology-war articles. This one is only interesting because it bizarrely skews into an anti-intellectual diatribe.
   17. PreservedFish Posted: November 18, 2009 at 12:14 AM (#3389994)
I have said this before, but the general tenor of statheadism is much friendlier, and much more open to conventional wisdom, than it was years ago.
   18. John DiFool2 Posted: November 18, 2009 at 12:43 AM (#3390007)
The main point seems to be to side with the second-guessers re. Bill Belicheck's controversial decision the other day.


Has this been discussed on the site the past two days? I rarely peek into the Dugout (and never in the Lounge). Odd that we wouldn't tackle it.
   19. I Munson'ed myself (BBF) Posted: November 18, 2009 at 04:44 AM (#3390175)
This title is already taken in movies. And its a great sad documentary on the PBA.
Page 1 of 1 pages

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Rough Carrigan
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogJeff Sullivan: The Worst Team Ever Projected?
(10 - 5:19pm, Feb 09)
Last: RJ in TO

NewsblogSources: Cubs’ Starlin Castro Accused Of Sexual Assault
(5786 - 5:18pm, Feb 09)
Last: SugarBear Blanks

NewsblogGrantland/Bill James: An Open Letter to the Hall of Fame About Dwight Evans
(5 - 5:17pm, Feb 09)
Last: Famous Original Joe C

NewsblogJustice: 5 things that could make the 2012 season a successful one for the Astros
(26 - 5:13pm, Feb 09)
Last: Jose Can You Seabiscuit

NewsblogOT: NBA Monthly Thread, February 2012
(356 - 5:13pm, Feb 09)
Last: channeling my inner STEAGLES

NewsblogWHYGAV: Burnett to Pirates a Good Idea?
(12 - 5:10pm, Feb 09)
Last: Jose Can You Seabiscuit

NewsblogNY Daily News: Brian Cashman's accused stalker says Yankees GM misled feds on steroid probe
(42 - 5:09pm, Feb 09)
Last: snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster)

NewsblogRICH HARDEN TO MISS 2012 DUE TO SHOULDER SURGERY
(12 - 5:06pm, Feb 09)
Last: cpass

NewsblogThe Book Blog: MGL: Today on Clubhouse Confidential
(60 - 4:55pm, Feb 09)
Last: SoSHially Unacceptable

NewsblogGuelph Mercury: Argos will likely be turfed out of Rogers if Jays get grass
(21 - 4:53pm, Feb 09)
Last: Harmon "Thread Killer" Microbrew

NewsblogFangraphs: Cameron: The 10 Worst Transactions Of The Winter
(79 - 4:50pm, Feb 09)
Last: snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster)

NewsblogOil Can Boyd says he used cocaine with Red Sox
(43 - 4:39pm, Feb 09)
Last: billyjack

NewsblogNYT: Alderson Remakes Needy Mets From Bottom Line Up
(19 - 4:36pm, Feb 09)
Last: toratoratora

NewsblogStrange Times in Baseball: 1891-1895
(8 - 4:22pm, Feb 09)
Last: Steve N

NewsblogESPN: Law: Top 100 Prospects (paywalled)
(4 - 4:19pm, Feb 09)
Last: Slivers of Maranville (SdeB)

Buy MLB playoff tickets, plus 2011 World Series, 2011 ALCS tickets and NLCS game tickets. We also have Texas Rangers playoff schedule, tickets to Red Sox games and Yankees game tickets. Plus, buy Phillies baseball tickets, Tigers playoff tickets and the biggies like ALDS baseball tickets and 2011 NLDS tickets.

Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats

 

 

 

AllianceTickets.com has cheap MLB Tickets. Get all your Colorado Rockies Tickets, Seattle Mariners Tickets, San Francisco Giants Tickets and all your favorite baseball tickets here. We also carry cheap Denver Broncos Tickets, Seattle Seahawks Tickets and Denver Nuggets Tickets.

Page rendered in 1.0948 seconds
40 querie(s) executed