BBTF's Newsblog Discussion :: Bill Livingston: Baseball managers need more guts, less numbers

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

Friday, April 06, 2012

Bill Livingston: Baseball managers need more guts, less numbers

Uhh…Billy, A message to you.

When you always manage by the book, the book might as well manage.

The numbers that once defined baseball immortality—such as 500 career home runs or 60 homers in a season—were cheapened by steroid cheats. In their place came “sabermetrics,” new statistics devised by specialized analysis. Some of the concepts could probably be understood only by Bill James, the godfather of baseball figure filberts, and maybe Stephen Hawking.

All this fomented the information revolution in baseball that was popularized in the book and movie, “Moneyball.”

But when numbers rule the actual playing of the game, it becomes a kingdom of conformists. The stats enforce a safe orthodoxy. Woe betide the man who thinks for himself or the manager who plays a hunch. He’d better be right, because there is safety in numbers.

It is rare that someone goes with a gut feeling, or risks the second-guessing that comes with independent thought.

Repoz Posted: April 06, 2012 at 10:26 PM | 18 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
Tags: history, indians, 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.

1. Skloot Insurance Posted: April 06, 2012 at 11:50 PM (#4099810)

Livingston knows his audience. The commenters are (ironically?) supportive.

2. cmd600 Posted: April 07, 2012 at 12:08 AM (#4099814)

The commenters are (ironically?) supportive

Not ironic, sadly. And he does know his audience, they want to be angry that the team lost, and 20-20 hindsight shows exactly what the correct move was, they love to ##### and moan, and not be asked to think too hard in the meantime.. As everyone who bashes sabermetrics knows, if a move didn't work, it's because it was going to fail 100% of the time.

3. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: April 07, 2012 at 12:10 AM (#4099815)

If Masterson had remained in and given up the lead, I'm sure Livingston would have complained that Acta didn't go to the closer.

4. Dan Posted: April 07, 2012 at 12:21 AM (#4099816)

How do you blame anyone but the closer when he can't close out a 3 run lead in the 9th?

5. Grumbledook Posted: April 07, 2012 at 12:47 AM (#4099820)

I almost hate to admit it, but I agree with one of the posters that $5 million is too much for Sizemore. Devoting $5 million of a $78 million payroll (surprisingly high for this franchise) hoping against hope that Sizemore returns to form is hardly a recipe for success (neither is overpaying for the withered husk of Derek Lowe).

6. Jason Michael(s) Bourn Identity Crisis Posted: April 07, 2012 at 01:01 AM (#4099824)

For 5 million, Sizemore can be a below-average centerfielder and still be worth the money. The good Sizemore is a 20-million dollar superstar.

7. Bitter Calculus Instructor Posted: April 07, 2012 at 01:21 AM (#4099830)

Six posts in to a thread with "Baseball managers need more guts" in the title and no fat jokes?

8. bads85 Posted: April 07, 2012 at 02:48 AM (#4099836)

How do you blame anyone but the closer when he can't close out a 3 run lead in the 9th?

Perez threw all of three innings in ST. He isn't ready for the start of the season, and the Indians have other very good relievers. Acta should be easing Perez into the season.

9. Bhaakon Posted: April 07, 2012 at 03:33 AM (#4099838)

Considering the numbers that some managers seem to fall in love with (batter vs pitcher and similar microsplit nonsense), I'd say that they probably could use less access to stats. The gut, at least, isn't as predictable a manager who makes all his decisions based on what a player has done against platoon, during night games, on artificial turf.

10. bjhanke Posted: April 07, 2012 at 03:46 AM (#4099839)

Oh! It's"guts" with a "g." I thought it was "Baseball Managers need more OUTS, less numbers." My bad. - Brock Hanke

11. Shazbot Posted: April 07, 2012 at 03:54 AM (#4099841)

Today, we lament the dearly departed Fire Joe Morgan..

12. Random Transaction Generator Posted: April 07, 2012 at 09:12 AM (#4099859)

When the Indians brought in Perez on Thursday, the Blue Jays broadcasters (Tabler and Martinez) both stated that it was probably the wrong move, before Perez even threw a pitch.
They cited the fact that Perez hadn't gotten enough spring training time, and that the Jays hitters would be "relieved" not having to face Masterson again.

"Even Goose Gossage would look good compared to how Masterson was throwing." is what Tabler said.

13. cmd600 Posted: April 07, 2012 at 10:24 AM (#4099869)

hoping against hope that Sizemore returns to form

I don't think they were hoping for him to return to 2005-2008 form, but say 2009 form, 100 games of a 110 OPS+ and solid defense in center, or the first half of 2011 form where he played in 57 of 89 games with a .743 OPS.

14. Tricky Dick Posted: April 07, 2012 at 10:44 AM (#4099873)

Sabermetrics enforce an orthodoxy, a safety in conformity?

That assumes that most managers are following sabermetric principles. I don't think that is the case. By and large, most managers follow traditional managing by the book...bunting too much, playing for one run too much, not putting their relief pitcher in the highest leverage situations, etc. If the author has a concern about overly conformist managers, I don't think Bill James is to blame.

15. Shazbot Posted: April 07, 2012 at 05:51 PM (#4100058)

The other issue is that 'sabermetric principles', at their most basic, is looking for things which cost differently to their on-field value. You do this by questioning orthodoxy, not by chaining yourself to it. It can mean just about anything, like the Jay's international scouting in the last couple years, for instance.

16. smileyy Posted: April 07, 2012 at 06:13 PM (#4100073)

The other issue is that 'sabermetric principles', at their most basic, is looking for things which cost differently to their on-field value. You do this by questioning orthodoxy, not by chaining yourself to it.

Is it really? That's more "Moneyball" to me -- not the same thing: sabermetrics are the primitives that Moneyball is built on.

"At their most basic" sabermetrics is simply using numbers to understand and play baseball better.

17. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: April 09, 2012 at 10:39 AM (#4100951)

Baseball managers need more guts, less numbers

Fewer numbers, not less. Numbers can be counted.

18. PreservedFish Posted: April 09, 2012 at 10:58 AM (#4100967)

The other issue is that 'sabermetric principles', at their most basic, is looking for things which cost differently to their on-field value.

I agree with #15. This is not true at all.

"Sabermetrics" is neutral. It's like "geology." It is a search for knowledge for the sake of knowledge. Analyzing market inefficiencies is just one (marketable) application.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

<< Back to main

Friday, April 06, 2012

Bill Livingston: Baseball managers need more guts, less numbers

Reader Comments and Retorts

BBTF Sponsor

Support BBTF

Bookmarks

Hot Topics