06-17-2010, 09:54 AM
<!--quoteo(post=101815:date=Jun 16 2010, 10:41 PM:name=KBwsb)-->QUOTE (KBwsb @ Jun 16 2010, 10:41 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Because Theo Epstein has repeatedly<i> said</i> he's followed Bill James ideas and plans?
Because it was Theo's idea to hire James in the first place?
Because Red Sox owner John Henry has repeatedly cited James's books and ideas as the bedrock philosophy that the entire organization is run by?
Because "Moneyball" itself was as much a book about Bill James as it was about Billy Beane? And that the Red Sox offered Theo's GM position originally to Beane ($12 M contract), which Beane turned down, and so Henry looked for a Beane-type, Bill James-lovin' replacement, and settled on Theo?
It's true that none of these facts <i>prove</i> anything. In fact, Theo might have hired James, and then as soon as James suggested something, Theo might have bellowed "Fuck off, pussy! I'm in charge here now, and I'm pulling a fuckin' 180!"
It's possible.
(btw, I just reread this, and I sound like an insufferable dickhead. Sorry, Dirk.)<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No, that's a good answer. I was asking because I honestly didn't know. Here's my take on the whole thing:
This was never a mater of Hendry not paying attention to stats. It's a matter of <i>which</i> stats he's looking at. It's not like any GM is going to sign a player to a 3-year deal then go look at the stats. I guarantee that Hendry looked at all the split and situational stats before he's even thought about acquiring any player. So then, it becomes a matter of what stats are Hendry ignoring that he needs to be looking at? I don't know what WAR, VORP or adjusted ERA is but I still think I can tell difference between a good player and a crappy player. I know what OPS, HR, WHIP, IP and K's are and those seem like perfectly reasonable metrics. There's no way in hell that Hendry doesn't pay attention to those stats. Guys with the best OPS are generally guys with good batting averages who hit HRs. Guys with good WHIP are usually the guys with good ERAs. Thus, I'd contend that the guys with good WAR or VORP are going to be the guys with the high OPS who hit a lot of HRs, they're going to be the guys already regarded as good. If that's not the case, then certainly there would be examples of guys with bad WAR/VORP but good BA, decent amount of HRs and guys with good WAR/VORP but poor BA, poor OPS, etc. Bottom line, why wouldn't I believe that the conventional metrics for evaluating players, the ones that EVERY GM is going to look at, aren't working?
Because it was Theo's idea to hire James in the first place?
Because Red Sox owner John Henry has repeatedly cited James's books and ideas as the bedrock philosophy that the entire organization is run by?
Because "Moneyball" itself was as much a book about Bill James as it was about Billy Beane? And that the Red Sox offered Theo's GM position originally to Beane ($12 M contract), which Beane turned down, and so Henry looked for a Beane-type, Bill James-lovin' replacement, and settled on Theo?
It's true that none of these facts <i>prove</i> anything. In fact, Theo might have hired James, and then as soon as James suggested something, Theo might have bellowed "Fuck off, pussy! I'm in charge here now, and I'm pulling a fuckin' 180!"
It's possible.
(btw, I just reread this, and I sound like an insufferable dickhead. Sorry, Dirk.)<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No, that's a good answer. I was asking because I honestly didn't know. Here's my take on the whole thing:
This was never a mater of Hendry not paying attention to stats. It's a matter of <i>which</i> stats he's looking at. It's not like any GM is going to sign a player to a 3-year deal then go look at the stats. I guarantee that Hendry looked at all the split and situational stats before he's even thought about acquiring any player. So then, it becomes a matter of what stats are Hendry ignoring that he needs to be looking at? I don't know what WAR, VORP or adjusted ERA is but I still think I can tell difference between a good player and a crappy player. I know what OPS, HR, WHIP, IP and K's are and those seem like perfectly reasonable metrics. There's no way in hell that Hendry doesn't pay attention to those stats. Guys with the best OPS are generally guys with good batting averages who hit HRs. Guys with good WHIP are usually the guys with good ERAs. Thus, I'd contend that the guys with good WAR or VORP are going to be the guys with the high OPS who hit a lot of HRs, they're going to be the guys already regarded as good. If that's not the case, then certainly there would be examples of guys with bad WAR/VORP but good BA, decent amount of HRs and guys with good WAR/VORP but poor BA, poor OPS, etc. Bottom line, why wouldn't I believe that the conventional metrics for evaluating players, the ones that EVERY GM is going to look at, aren't working?
