Greg K's Thoughts on Sabermetrics and Money: I like them both.

On a less hilarious note...
I never understand people who claim that in depth statistical analysis make baseball boring. After my initial childhood fandom in around 1989-1995 there was a lull where I didn't follow baseball too closely for a few years, and it was sabermetrics that brought me back in. It's like people who say they really love a book or movie, but would never in a million years want to sit in a group and have a discussion about it. As if thinking about things ruined them or something.

As I told Howard in e-mail, I always appreciate when people suggest that there are criminal aspects to me not having more cash in my wallet.

However, Cool Ranch Doritos are very good. I can understand deriding lesser Doritos, but not the Lord of Buttermilk Deliciousness.

A couple weeks ago my wife told me of her fear of the "Tacos at Midnight" Doritos in her office's vending machine, so I brought a bag home as a joke. I tried them, and they tasted like suffering.

To really appreciate Howard's post you have to first read the Mike Silva post. Unfortunately, that requires reading the Mike Silva post, which is likely hazardous to your health.

About a month or so ago I bought Snickers Ice Cream from Breyer's or whatever it was and to me it tasted nothing like a Snickers bar. It reminded me of decomposing corpses. I think I had one or two tries and then just gave up and left it in the freezer for a couple of months and I never do that with ice cream.


The Chocolate Fudge Brownie Ice Cream and the Drumstick Sundae Cone Ice Cream are out of this world though. Two best new flavors I've had in a long time.

I love both "Tacos at Midnight"Doritos and Snickers Ice Cream bars. That is all.

I never understand people who claim that in depth statistical analysis make baseball boring. After my initial childhood fandom in around 1989-1995 there was a lull where I didn't follow baseball too closely for a few years, and it was sabermetrics that brought me back in. It's like people who say they really love a book or movie, but would never in a million years want to sit in a group and have a discussion about it. As if thinking about things ruined them or something.

I had the same experience. My late teens to early 20s when I had stopped playing ball competitively were real lulls in my fandom. The internet and sabremetrics were both huge factors in bringing me back to the baseball obsessiveness that I had as a kid.

Snickers Ice Cream bars are pretty good which is why I bought Snickers Ice Cream and Snickers Ice Cream is nothing like the Ice Cream bar.

I never understand people who claim that in depth statistical analysis make baseball boring. After my initial childhood fandom in around 1989-1995 there was a lull where I didn't follow baseball too closely for a few years, and it was sabermetrics that brought me back in. It's like people who say they really love a book or movie, but would never in a million years want to sit in a group and have a discussion about it. As if thinking about things ruined them or something.

I had the same experience. My late teens to early 20s when I had stopped playing ball competitively were real lulls in my fandom. The internet and sabremetrics were both huge factors in bringing me back to the baseball obsessiveness that I had as a kid.

Same here. Plus I lost my team. Which kind of hurts one's fandom of a game.

Kettle Chips have a new flavor: Fully Loaded Baked Potato. It's basically sour cream and onion, plus smokey bacon flavor. I recommend it.

A link to the post Howard was responding to would have been extremely helpful in Howard's post.

Agreed, though, that that piece, by Silva, is not worth reading.

About a month or so ago I bought Snickers Ice Cream from Breyer's or whatever it was and to me it tasted nothing like a Snickers bar. It reminded me of decomposing corpses.

Don Harvey died?

I hear that as part of his Socialist agenda, Obama is secretly replacing Coke with New Coke!

Ironically enough, it is the writers from Fangraphs, The Hardball Times and other such outlets- which I understand are far less profitable than Baseball Prospectus- who are making the biggest leaps in thinking.

After what's been said in the thread, I'm not going to look up the original post. But I think Howard touches on something here - it has nothing to do with baseball. How do you monetize the Internet? How do you pay people who have good ideas or good skills, while getting the chaff who just happen to have a distribution deal out of there?

I think it'll take the same sort of outside-the-box thinking that got Voros to develop DIPS - a smart guy (or girl, of course) who spends the time and energy to market baseball ideas rather than having new ones. The odds are against this person, though. Many smart people have tried and failed to find a way to make money from ideas on the Net.

If you have skills for assembling, parsing and analyzing large sets of data, and the desire to make substantial money off that skill set, then baseball is something like your millionth-best option.

Many smart people have tried and failed to find a way to make money from ideas on the Net.

And lots have made money from good ideas on the net as well.

Basically the companies that make money on the net are the companies that do all the heavy lifting for you and give simply button clicking tasks to complete your transactions. Amazon.com, EBay, Google, and such all make money because all make your life easier.

I think those trying to simply sell you information are the ones that have the uphill battle.

Amazon.com, EBay, Google, and such all make money because all make your life easier.

They're aggregators - for the most part, they sell other people's products, rather than generating their own. Is the future of commerce on the Net only bright for the companies which just compile and make easier the transactions which used to live elsewhere? To use your example from above, does Google make a mint if they're writing news stories, rather than linking to them? The entities that generate the content are taking a bath right now, and I wonder if there's much incentive to create something new, rather than to distribute something old, online.

I like Craigslist. But if all of the technology and all of the distributed ability of Internet users is only capable of an online classified section, then I would say that the Internet has been a failure.

Regular old not digital commerce is built on companies that compile and maker easier transactions.

What is a grocery store but an unplugged internet site? A bank? A credit card?

Give us money and we'll make your life easier. Planes, cars, restaurants, malls, so on and so on.

Considering that googling is spending a fortune mapping the country, scannin books, and so forth that it won't be long before they do purchase a news wire simply for the content.

Media companies purchased sports teams simply for content and they would purchase production companies as well if Wasserman had allowed it.

The internet isn't just a giant classifieds. It is so much more than that. It is a bookstore, a television station, a jukebox, giant billboard, a movie theater, a town hall, a garage sale, the local gathering place, so on and so on. And there are people making lots of money for each of those categories.

The internet isn't just a giant classifieds. It is so much more than that. It is a bookstore, a television station, a jukebox, giant billboard, a movie theater, a town hall, a garage sale, the local gathering place, so on and so on. And there are people making lots of money for each of those categories.

The problem is that when repackaging "old" media like television and movies on a giveaway platform, there's no money left over for the actual content producers to make scratch. If Google purchases a news wire, how do they make money giving it away? If they don't give it away, how do they make money from it sufficient to cover their costs?

*EDIT*

What is a grocery store but an unplugged internet site? A bank? A credit card?

Agree. The problem is that a grocery store charges enough for its products to pay off the wholesaler, the farmer, etc. The Tubes don't charge that sort of money.

It reminded me of decomposing corpses.

And you obtained your intimate knowledge regarding the taste of decomposing corpses . . . how?

The problem is that when repackaging "old" media like television and movies on a giveaway platform, there's no money left over for the actual content producers to make scratch. If Google purchases a news wire, how do they make money giving it away? If they don't give it away, how do they make money from it sufficient to cover their costs?

TV and radio give away their product and they have been doing it for decades.


And you obtained your intimate knowledge regarding the taste of decomposing corpses . . . how?

I'm a chef.

TV and radio give away their product and they have been doing it for decades.

Yes, but with ad space due to their mass followings
When the internet can come up with something as good as According to Jim, Mr. Belvedere or the Chevy Chase Show THEN the analogy will be apt.

And google sells ad space due to their mass followings.
The internet doesn't have to come up with anything it already exists. TV and internet are not mutually exclusive.

When I moved to DC I did not bring along a TV and yet I've seen every episode of House, Office, Always Sunny, Venture Bros, Eureka, True Blood, and Rescue ME.

Actually I agree with you. I was rather unsuccessfully trying to be ironic, as I actually don't think According to Jim or Mr. Belvedere are terribly good products (Though I've never see the Chevy Chase Show, the implication that it is a terrible show is based purely on hearsay)

EDIT: I also have never seen an episode of Always Sunny on TV, even though it is my favourite show in existence right now. Though that has more to do with the country I live in and its lousy channel options than the TV vs. internet battle

I never understand people who claim that in depth statistical analysis make baseball boring. After my initial childhood fandom in around 1989-1995 there was a lull where I didn't follow baseball too closely for a few years, and it was sabermetrics that brought me back in.

For me it was fantasy baseball (a DMB league to be precise). That led me back to the stat geek stuff, and that led me to try and come up with my own edge.

Googled, a history of Google by Ken Auletta which details how the company got to be what it is today, is a fascinating read.

-- MWE