Interesting GM Analysis on MLBTR

[Sammys Boombox]

Spreadsheet analysis of trades made by GMs in the NL Central. Have to download an Excel spreadsheet.

 

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2010/01/gm-trade-histories-nl-central.html

 

EDIT: Oops. Meant to put it in General Baseball Discussion.

[wvcbxl]

EDIT: Oops. Meant to put it in General Baseball Discussion.

 

I moved it for you. :wink:

[UMFan83]

The best part is reading the comments- made by fans of all teams. They all seem in agreement that Hendry is easily the worst gm in the division.

[SouthSideRyan]

I didn't read it, but what case could possibly be made for Ed Wade over Hendry?

[UMFan83]

I didn't read it, but what case could possibly be made for Ed Wade over Hendry?

 

chose the better player between soriano and lee and got him for less money and years?

 

Seriously the ones that put Hendry in 5th insted of 6th but Wade last except one person randomly put Huntington last.

[SouthSideRyan]

I didn't read it, but what case could possibly be made for Ed Wade over Hendry?

 

chose the better player between soriano and lee and got him for less money and years?

 

That was Purpura

 

You should've been able to figure this out when you realized Carlos Lee wasn't a reliever

[TruffleShuffle]

is there any evidence that hendry or anyone else within the cub organization is heavily into advanced metrics? the reason i ask is that a publication i read - forget if it was BA prospect handbook or BP - they said that hendry tends to judge players too heavily on the simple stats like batting average and ERA, and is often suckered in by players with mediocre metrics who had a good year because of good luck, or gives up on players too quickly when bad luck was to blame for a down year or two. in fact, i believe it was written about randy wells, who they said the cubs gave up on too easily (when he went to the blue jays in the rule 5 draft) because his peripherals were solid but he had poor luck on balls in play for a year or two.

 

if there aren't people within the cub org who give a [expletive] about advanced metrics, then i hope the ricketts care about it and install some better people who understand the direction the game is headed.

[jersey cubs fan]

is there any evidence that hendry or anyone else within the cub organization is heavily into advanced metrics?

 

None.

 

They moved a guy from PR, or media relations or something to some stats position, and it was around this time that press releases about acquisitions started saying things like "he hit .300 in day games on the road" or "had hit .350 with men on base last year" and nonsense like that. It wasn't until a couple years ago that they admitted to finally "looking at things like OBP", as simple a stat as that is. Hendry and the guys who have his ear have been openly hostile to the concept of objective analysis and are pretty much the polar opposite of what anybody would consider an advanced metrics oriented team.

Edited January 8, 2010 by jersey cubs fan

[SouthSideRyan]

Hendry and the guys who have his ear have been opening hostline to the concept of objective analysis

 

Hardcore.

[fromthestretch]

Hendry and the guys who have his ear have been opening hostline to the concept of objective analysis

 

Hardcore.

 

How much alcohol was involved in the typing of that sentence?

[jersey cubs fan]

Hendry and the guys who have his ear have been opening hostline to the concept of objective analysis

 

Hardcore.

 

How much alcohol was involved in the typing of that sentence?

 

Not enough, jesis chriminy, what is wrong with me.

 

Openly hostile to the concept.

 

I better check the email I was writing to a client at that time.

[imb]

hahahaha, move over "the initial notice was a robot black" there's a new king in town

[Guest]

is there any evidence that hendry or anyone else within the cub organization is heavily into advanced metrics? the reason i ask is that a publication i read - forget if it was BA prospect handbook or BP - they said that hendry tends to judge players too heavily on the simple stats like batting average and ERA, and is often suckered in by players with mediocre metrics who had a good year because of good luck, or gives up on players too quickly when bad luck was to blame for a down year or two. in fact, i believe it was written about randy wells, who they said the cubs gave up on too easily (when he went to the blue jays in the rule 5 draft) because his peripherals were solid but he had poor luck on balls in play for a year or two.

 

if there aren't people within the cub org who give a [expletive] about advanced metrics, then i hope the ricketts care about it and install some better people who understand the direction the game is headed.

I also think it's important for the person to understand that some of the "advanced" metrics aren't any good either. The important thing is that the person has to understand statistics well and not just what the metrics are supposed to mean. That person must be able to understand the importance of standard deviations when comparing players to the norm or mythical average player. The biggest problem I have here and elsewhere is that people accept things like UZR, WAR, and the like (really any stat that uses normative data) without any understanding of the underling assumptions.

 

I think the best use of advanced metrics is clearly with pitchers and on the offense, but a lot of what has been developed is really not very important in terms of understanding the game. It's mostly mental masturbation.

[TruffleShuffle]

is there any evidence that hendry or anyone else within the cub organization is heavily into advanced metrics? the reason i ask is that a publication i read - forget if it was BA prospect handbook or BP - they said that hendry tends to judge players too heavily on the simple stats like batting average and ERA, and is often suckered in by players with mediocre metrics who had a good year because of good luck, or gives up on players too quickly when bad luck was to blame for a down year or two. in fact, i believe it was written about randy wells, who they said the cubs gave up on too easily (when he went to the blue jays in the rule 5 draft) because his peripherals were solid but he had poor luck on balls in play for a year or two.

 

if there aren't people within the cub org who give a [expletive] about advanced metrics, then i hope the ricketts care about it and install some better people who understand the direction the game is headed.

I also think it's important for the person to understand that some of the "advanced" metrics aren't any good either. The important thing is that the person has to understand statistics well and not just what the metrics are supposed to mean. That person must be able to understand the importance of standard deviations when comparing players to the norm or mythical average player. The biggest problem I have here and elsewhere is that people accept things like UZR, WAR, and the like (really any stat that uses normative data) without any understanding of the underling assumptions.

 

I think the best use of advanced metrics is clearly with pitchers and on the offense, but a lot of what has been developed is really not very important in terms of understanding the game. It's mostly mental masturbation.

 

i agree on that although i think even having someone who understands that UZR is a good tool when used over a multi-year stretch is better than someone who believes a guy is a good defender because a scout who saw him play three games saw him make two really nice plays.

 

i think the general thought of the comment that BP made about hendry - and this is really depressing - was that he judges guys too much on batting average or ERA or [expletive] W-L record. remember steve trachsel? everything about the guy screamed HORRIBLE PITCHER except for his ERA, and they traded for him. i don't necessarily need a GM or someone with a big role in the org. who is at the cutting edge of every advanced metric - just someone who understand that a batting average is heavily dependent on luck, ERA can fluctuate a lot based on things like BABIP, LOB%, and you need to look deeper at a guy's K-rates and things like that.

 

if you look at steve trachsel and say "this guy has an ERA in the mid 4's and we need a few starts, he could be useful", then you're clearly not doing your job properly.