Posts: 11,836
Threads: 390
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->a regular guy can know just as much or more about baseball than MLB managers, GMs, Scouts etc.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
They can. You don't have to be an official member of the baseball club or an ex-player to know a lot about the game. These guys aren't entitled to secret knowledge hidden in a vault buried underneath Yankee Stadium.
I'd put anyone on this board up against Joe Morgan. Saying shit like, "I remember when I played with Joe Schmoe and this happened...and then I did this..." doesn't make you a gifted analytical thinker. Don't buy into the mythology, Sipes.
Posts: 2,696
Threads: 47
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=65029:date=Oct 2 2009, 01:57 PM:name=Butcher)-->QUOTE (Butcher @ Oct 2 2009, 01:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <!--quotec-->a regular guy can know just as much or more about baseball than MLB managers, GMs, Scouts etc.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
They can. You don't have to be an official member of the baseball club or an ex-player to know a lot about the game. These guys aren't entitled to secret knowledge hidden in a vault buried underneath Yankee Stadium.
I'd put anyone on this board up against Joe Morgan. Saying shit like, "I remember when I played with Joe Schmoe and this happened...and then I did this..." doesn't make you a gifted analytical thinker. Don't buy into the mythology, Sipes.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The thing is, I can't watch a guy swing the bat and tell the way he swings creates a flat trajectory on his batted balls. Or watch a pitcher throw and know he'll run into injury problems in the near future. I can in extreme cases, but I haven't had the chance to sit and watch, analyze, and breakdown mechanics of a player to the point that I can make judgements by just watching. I think this is what a GM has that every day Joe's don't.
Posts: 11,836
Threads: 390
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=65033:date=Oct 2 2009, 02:09 PM:name=Scarey)-->QUOTE (Scarey @ Oct 2 2009, 02:09 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=65029:date=Oct 2 2009, 01:57 PM:name=Butcher)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Oct 2 2009, 01:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <!--quotec-->a regular guy can know just as much or more about baseball than MLB managers, GMs, Scouts etc.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
They can. You don't have to be an official member of the baseball club or an ex-player to know a lot about the game. These guys aren't entitled to secret knowledge hidden in a vault buried underneath Yankee Stadium.
I'd put anyone on this board up against Joe Morgan. Saying shit like, "I remember when I played with Joe Schmoe and this happened...and then I did this..." doesn't make you a gifted analytical thinker. Don't buy into the mythology, Sipes.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The thing is, I can't watch a guy swing the bat and tell the way he swings creates a flat trajectory on his batted balls. Or watch a pitcher throw and know he'll run into injury problems in the near future. I can in extreme cases, but I haven't had the chance to sit and watch, analyze, and breakdown mechanics of a player to the point that I can make judgements by just watching. I think this is what a GM has that every day Joe's don't.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If you spent maybe an entire summer or two doing nothing but watching baseball games, I'm sure you'd be able to pick up stuff like that too. It isn't some rare genetic skill that these guys have. They've just watched a shitload of games.
Posts: 2,696
Threads: 47
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=65035:date=Oct 2 2009, 02:17 PM:name=Butcher)-->QUOTE (Butcher @ Oct 2 2009, 02:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=65033:date=Oct 2 2009, 02:09 PM:name=Scarey)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Scarey @ Oct 2 2009, 02:09 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=65029:date=Oct 2 2009, 01:57 PM:name=Butcher)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Oct 2 2009, 01:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <!--quotec-->a regular guy can know just as much or more about baseball than MLB managers, GMs, Scouts etc.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
They can. You don't have to be an official member of the baseball club or an ex-player to know a lot about the game. These guys aren't entitled to secret knowledge hidden in a vault buried underneath Yankee Stadium.
I'd put anyone on this board up against Joe Morgan. Saying shit like, "I remember when I played with Joe Schmoe and this happened...and then I did this..." doesn't make you a gifted analytical thinker. Don't buy into the mythology, Sipes.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The thing is, I can't watch a guy swing the bat and tell the way he swings creates a flat trajectory on his batted balls. Or watch a pitcher throw and know he'll run into injury problems in the near future. I can in extreme cases, but I haven't had the chance to sit and watch, analyze, and breakdown mechanics of a player to the point that I can make judgements by just watching. I think this is what a GM has that every day Joe's don't.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If you spent maybe an entire summer or two doing nothing but watching baseball games, I'm sure you'd be able to pick up stuff like that too. It isn't some rare genetic skill that these guys have. They've just watched a shitload of games.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Right. They practice. That's kind of the point though, they've put in their time to hone their skill at evaluating players.
I agree, I could do that if given the time to. If you know where I can sign up to be a scout, let me know and I'll be all over it.
Seriously though, how does one become a scout?
Posts: 2,894
Threads: 72
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
I'd be interested in knowing what people like Sipes, Ruby, tom, etc. think about Keith Law.
To some, he'd come off as the ultimate stat-geek, a Harvard-educated one, at that. But his JOB is "scout." He's literally one of those guys with a radar gun who goes to high school games, who used to work for the Blue Jays, who hangs out with all the other scouts, who was talking about Strasburg's arm motion in graphic detail before I'd even heard of the guy.
I mean he's a SCOUT. But he also incorporates more modern stats into his thinking.
Would you guys think that he's acceptable, or is he a kind of ruining the game because he knows what VORP means? Like many of you, I'm not sure how I feel about trying to quantify everything in a beautiful, pastoral game, but I kind of like Law's approach.
There's nothing better than to realize that the good things about youth don't end with youth itself. It's a matter of realizing that life can be renewed every day you get out of bed without baggage. It's tough to get there, but it's better than the dark thoughts. -Lance
Posts: 2,806
Threads: 110
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=65040:date=Oct 2 2009, 02:26 PM:name=Scarey)-->QUOTE (Scarey @ Oct 2 2009, 02:26 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=65035:date=Oct 2 2009, 02:17 PM:name=Butcher)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Oct 2 2009, 02:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=65033:date=Oct 2 2009, 02:09 PM:name=Scarey)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Scarey @ Oct 2 2009, 02:09 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=65029:date=Oct 2 2009, 01:57 PM:name=Butcher)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Oct 2 2009, 01:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <!--quotec-->a regular guy can know just as much or more about baseball than MLB managers, GMs, Scouts etc.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
They can. You don't have to be an official member of the baseball club or an ex-player to know a lot about the game. These guys aren't entitled to secret knowledge hidden in a vault buried underneath Yankee Stadium.
I'd put anyone on this board up against Joe Morgan. Saying shit like, "I remember when I played with Joe Schmoe and this happened...and then I did this..." doesn't make you a gifted analytical thinker. Don't buy into the mythology, Sipes.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The thing is, I can't watch a guy swing the bat and tell the way he swings creates a flat trajectory on his batted balls. Or watch a pitcher throw and know he'll run into injury problems in the near future. I can in extreme cases, but I haven't had the chance to sit and watch, analyze, and breakdown mechanics of a player to the point that I can make judgements by just watching. I think this is what a GM has that every day Joe's don't.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If you spent maybe an entire summer or two doing nothing but watching baseball games, I'm sure you'd be able to pick up stuff like that too. It isn't some rare genetic skill that these guys have. They've just watched a shitload of games.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Right. They practice. That's kind of the point though, they've put in their time to hone their skill at evaluating players.
I agree, I could do that if given the time to. If you know where I can sign up to be a scout, let me know and I'll be all over it.
Seriously though, how does one become a scout?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I just signed up. I got my Weeblo badge a few weeks later. They also have a pinewood derby, but watch out for those scout leaders.
"I'm not sure I know what ball cheese or crotch rot is, exactly -- or if there is a difference between the two. Don't post photos, please..."
- Butcher
Posts: 11,836
Threads: 390
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation:
0
Here's the worst Morgan quote that I heard (that I can remember, at least).
It was an ESPN game (obviously) between the Cubs and Sox. Someone on the Cubs hit a homer into the basket. Morgan goes on and on about the baskets at Wrigley and talks about how he (and many others in baseball) called the baskets "Banks Boulevard." Implying that a good portion of Banks's homers were cheapies (barely getting out of Wrigley and landing in the baskets).
He was lying. Know why? Those baskets were installed in 1970. Banks retired after the 1971 season. Which means he played a total of two seasons with those baskets installed -- and only played in a combined 111 games in those two seasons, hitting a total of 15 homers (I'm not going to look up how many of those were at Wrigley, and I don't know if there's a way to figure out if any of the ones he hit at Wrigley went into the basket). Let's give Morgan the benefit of the doubt, though, and say Banks hit 8 of his 15 homers over those two years at Wrigley -- and all 8 of them went in the basket.
Yeah...fucking Banks Boulevard. Way to insult a Hall of Famer and the most beloved Cub of all-time with your bullshit that you completely pulled out of your ass, Morgan.
Fucking douchebag moron. I wonder why people don't respect Morgan's baseball knowledge...
Posts: 11,836
Threads: 390
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->In an ESPN.com chat, Morgan was asked what he thought of Moneyball. He confessed he had only read an excerpt in the New York Times Magazine, then went on to write: "It's typical if you write a book, you want to be the hero. That is apparently what Beane has done. According to what I read in the Times, Beane is smarter than anyone else. I don't think it will make him popular with the other GMs or the other people in baseball." Beane, just to clarify, did notwrite Moneyball, any more than Joe Morgan has read it. Later, in another chat, Morgan was asked what he would do with the A's if he were Billy Beane. "I wouldn't be Billy Beane first of all!!" Morgan replied. "I wouldn't write the book Moneyball!" (His authorial confusions are still fodder for baseball blogs across the Web, perhaps because they may very well be the quintessential Morganisms: indignant, self-righteous, and hopelessly ignorant.)<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
From a great article about Joe Morgan. I fucking hate this man.
Article on Morgan...
Posts: 1,795
Threads: 49
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
No one hates stats. That is silly.
Stats can be used as a predictor to project what a player may become...granted. Scouts can look at a persons athletic ability and make judgments as to what type of player and what ability a player might have...granted. To be able <i>to</i> scout one must develop a sense of connoisseurship that only develops over many, many years and much time spent watching baseball and watching players perform. So to say that anyone can simply become a scout by knowing how to analyze stats is silly. We can develop a greater understanding of the game, but not just anyone can be qualified as a scout that is actually worth a damn without any actual baseball related experience. That doesn't mean you have to have played or coached, but you sure as hell have to invest more time than just looking at stats in your spare time.
As for being a better baseball analyst, that is completely different. Most of those guys don't know what the fuck they're talking about.
If Angelo had picked McClellin, I would have been expecting to hear by training camp that kid has stage 4 cancer, is actually 5'2" 142 lbs, is a chick who played in a 7 - 0 defensive scheme who only rotated in on downs which were 3 and 34 yds + so is not expecting to play a down in the NFL until the sex change is complete and she puts on another 100 lbs. + but this is Emery's first pick so he'll get a pass with a bit of questioning. - 1060Ivy
Posts: 1,795
Threads: 49
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=65043:date=Oct 2 2009, 02:30 PM:name=PcB)-->QUOTE (PcB @ Oct 2 2009, 02:30 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=65040:date=Oct 2 2009, 02:26 PM:name=Scarey)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Scarey @ Oct 2 2009, 02:26 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=65035:date=Oct 2 2009, 02:17 PM:name=Butcher)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Oct 2 2009, 02:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=65033:date=Oct 2 2009, 02:09 PM:name=Scarey)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Scarey @ Oct 2 2009, 02:09 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=65029:date=Oct 2 2009, 01:57 PM:name=Butcher)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Oct 2 2009, 01:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <!--quotec-->a regular guy can know just as much or more about baseball than MLB managers, GMs, Scouts etc.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
They can. You don't have to be an official member of the baseball club or an ex-player to know a lot about the game. These guys aren't entitled to secret knowledge hidden in a vault buried underneath Yankee Stadium.
I'd put anyone on this board up against Joe Morgan. Saying shit like, "I remember when I played with Joe Schmoe and this happened...and then I did this..." doesn't make you a gifted analytical thinker. Don't buy into the mythology, Sipes.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The thing is, I can't watch a guy swing the bat and tell the way he swings creates a flat trajectory on his batted balls. Or watch a pitcher throw and know he'll run into injury problems in the near future. I can in extreme cases, but I haven't had the chance to sit and watch, analyze, and breakdown mechanics of a player to the point that I can make judgements by just watching. I think this is what a GM has that every day Joe's don't.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If you spent maybe an entire summer or two doing nothing but watching baseball games, I'm sure you'd be able to pick up stuff like that too. It isn't some rare genetic skill that these guys have. They've just watched a shitload of games.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Right. They practice. That's kind of the point though, they've put in their time to hone their skill at evaluating players.
I agree, I could do that if given the time to. If you know where I can sign up to be a scout, let me know and I'll be all over it.
Seriously though, how does one become a scout?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I just signed up. I got my Weeblo badge a few weeks later. They also have a pinewood derby, but watch out for those scout leaders.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
[img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/spit.gif[/img]
If Angelo had picked McClellin, I would have been expecting to hear by training camp that kid has stage 4 cancer, is actually 5'2" 142 lbs, is a chick who played in a 7 - 0 defensive scheme who only rotated in on downs which were 3 and 34 yds + so is not expecting to play a down in the NFL until the sex change is complete and she puts on another 100 lbs. + but this is Emery's first pick so he'll get a pass with a bit of questioning. - 1060Ivy
Posts: 2,894
Threads: 72
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
I think a better way to label the current view of stats is to not call it "stats," as if it's some new invention that Billy Beane came up with. Stats have been a huge part of baseball since long before Ty Cobb.
I think the better word is <b>context</b>. For example, in tom's example, the guy with the relatively low .750 OPS is balanced out by him being a great fielder, a spectacular base stealer, and a sterling human being. Plus, a .750 OPS put up in the Padres Petco Park translates to something like an .850 OPS if he played in Coors Field.
It's all about context, I think.
There's nothing better than to realize that the good things about youth don't end with youth itself. It's a matter of realizing that life can be renewed every day you get out of bed without baggage. It's tough to get there, but it's better than the dark thoughts. -Lance
Posts: 1,795
Threads: 49
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=65057:date=Oct 2 2009, 03:00 PM:name=KBwsb)-->QUOTE (KBwsb @ Oct 2 2009, 03:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I think a better way to label the current view of stats is to not call it "stats," as if it's some new invention that Billy Beane came up with. Stats have been a huge part of baseball since long before Ty Cobb.
I think the better word is <b>context</b>. For example, in tom's example, the guys relatively low .750 OPS is balanced out by him being a great fielder, a spectacular base stealer, and a sterling human being. Plus, a .750 OPS put up in the Padres Petco Park translates to something like an .850 OPS if he played in Coors Field.
It's all about context, I think.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well yea, stats are just arbitrary numbers without context.
If Angelo had picked McClellin, I would have been expecting to hear by training camp that kid has stage 4 cancer, is actually 5'2" 142 lbs, is a chick who played in a 7 - 0 defensive scheme who only rotated in on downs which were 3 and 34 yds + so is not expecting to play a down in the NFL until the sex change is complete and she puts on another 100 lbs. + but this is Emery's first pick so he'll get a pass with a bit of questioning. - 1060Ivy
Posts: 2,894
Threads: 72
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=65061:date=Oct 2 2009, 03:06 PM:name=bz)-->QUOTE (bz @ Oct 2 2009, 03:06 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=65057:date=Oct 2 2009, 03:00 PM:name=KBwsb)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (KBwsb @ Oct 2 2009, 03:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I think a better way to label the current view of stats is to not call it "stats," as if it's some new invention that Billy Beane came up with. Stats have been a huge part of baseball since long before Ty Cobb.
I think the better word is <b>context</b>. For example, in tom's example, the guys relatively low .750 OPS is balanced out by him being a great fielder, a spectacular base stealer, and a sterling human being. Plus, a .750 OPS put up in the Padres Petco Park translates to something like an .850 OPS if he played in Coors Field.
It's all about context, I think.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well yea, stats are just arbitrary numbers without context.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Bingo.
But <i>are</i> they arbitrary? We're brought up to think in terms like "He got 100 RBI's this year," or "he's a 20-game winner," or "he's a .300 hitter."
Out of context, those phrases are almost worthless. Ok, that's an exaggeration...they're not worthless, but they don't give you <i>nearly</i> enough information.
There are guys who have hit .300, but have very little value, like Juan Pierre without the speed.
For "value" to his team, guys like Pierre, IMO, have limited value.
But guys like my dad would say, "What are you talking about? <b>He's a .300 hitter!</b>"
BTW, Juan Pierre's career batting average, in over 5,500 at bats?
Exactly .300.
There's nothing better than to realize that the good things about youth don't end with youth itself. It's a matter of realizing that life can be renewed every day you get out of bed without baggage. It's tough to get there, but it's better than the dark thoughts. -Lance
Posts: 11,836
Threads: 390
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->There are guys who have hit .300, but have very little value, like Juan Pierre without the speed.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Fixed.
Posts: 540
Threads: 26
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
It is really not about loving or hating stats. I love stats. It is that I don't buy into the moneyball fanatasy. In order to believe that a guy sitting at home analysing stats can evaluate a player as well a proffesional baseball people you have to eliminate the human element. Clutch is random, results of balls put into play are random, hot/cold streaks are random, etc etc.
By living life, I have realized there is no way, the human element does not exist. Variations in health, confindence, sleep, partying, practicing, working out, and game conditions will effect performance. Question the math, not the humanity.
The 2nd pillar of the faith is that unless you understand and embrace the "new school" stats, baseball has passed you by. If you believe in old stats, intangibles, or a valuable out you are a dinosaur.
I like you guys a lot.
|
