Sabermetrics: Prepare to be destroyed

[Sammy Sofa]

I'm anti-acting like it's heresy to question sabermetrics.

 

Nobody is acting like that.

 

I'm anti-leaping to conclusions based solely on preconceived notions.

 

No, you're "anti" that because the book sounds like something you agree with. Stop with the act that you wait to cast judgment on anything until you've been exposed to the entire thing. You can know a movie sucks from a horrible trailer, you can know you won't like an album after hearing a single or two and you can know a book is going to be awful based on the hilariously dumb press releases hyping up what it's about and explaining what it's about.

 

Basically all you know is that this book purports to expose the flaws and shortcomings of sabermetrics. And based on that limited information alone, you condemn and mock it.

 

Based on the exceedingly stupid descriptions and hype coming from the authors and the publisher, yes. Their own claims of what the book is trying to are far more absurd and grandiose than what you keep trying to whittle it down to. Yeah, they're just trying to point out the flaws of sabermetrics (which anyone who follows it are familiar with to begin with BECAUSE THEY UNDERSTAND SABERMETRICS) while talking about how it's "doomed."

 

But yet at the same time, you are at least sensible enough to acknowledge that sabermetrics isn't perfect... i.e. it has flaws and shortcomings.

 

Yes, it's called common sense. The best sabermetric experts and books and sites repeatedly point out the limitations. This book will reveal nothing that people versed in sabermetrics don't already know, and will more often just make up things or flat out get them wrong. Yes, I know this. Because the authors' own hype is just riddled with stupidity.

[Illini Iceman]

It seems odd that people who don't appreciate Sabermetrics generally act as though pro-Sabermetric fans think that the statistics are perfect and don't take any enjoyment from actually watching the actual games when that couldn't be further from the truth.

 

But I guess if the goal of writing the book is to sell a bunch of them and make money then the way they are marketing it definitely will appeal to that Sabermetric hating crowd so it is probably a good strategy.

 

Personally I don't even understand the relevance of the whole bird thing since Sabermetrics never claims to accurately predict outcomes of specific at bats or games so one incident like this wouldn't do anything to affect the accuracy of the metric.

[Rob]

davearm, stop being so damned predictable. The premise of the book is clearly laid out in the press release, and you know as well as anybody that there's no way to defend it.

[Four and Twenty]

silly of me to think that a national author knows more about this then a bunch of internet message board know it alls.

One would hope you wield a position of skepticism when considering the writing of any author, national or otherwise. Furthermore, assuming the authors present a more intelligent argument than that of our very own NSBB residents simply on the basis that they have published a book is, yes, unequivocally silly.

 

Also, if you are going to decry name calling I suggest you refrain from doing so yourself.

 

The reaction here is ridiculous.

People joking off the cuff about a synopsis to a book on a private message board is not ridiculous. Taking their jokes and comments too seriously is ridiculous.

 

I suspect the "NSBB debunking of all things" book to be released with great fanfare later this summer.

Again, if you are going to decry bullying, I suggest you refrain from belittling others.

 

Perhaps reading something with an Slightly open mind might be better than simply making fun of something without even knowing anything about it.

Yes, perhaps. However, most around here already understand that statistics aren't the end all be all of the sport. We grew up loving the sport because of the players, because humans aren't always predictable and are capable of extraordinary efforts. Understanding the statistics and science behind the sport serves to foster a greater appreciation for those 'magical' moments.

 

Its ridiculous to completely discredit something without even reading it.

Jokes are fun. Being too serious is not. Also: internet.

 

Hopefully someone stops feeding you.

You should probably stop doing that yourself, then.

 

I guess I should have expected as such from this board. Someone disagrees, calls you on your stupidity and the name calling ensues. Clearly missing the point as usual but masking it with some supposed "witty" reply that makes no sense.

You realize that you disagreed, repeatedly questioned others' intelligence and called them names, right? Such hypocrisy is the sole reason I bothered to write this reply.

 

Thank you for adding to the examples in this thread of what is wrong with this community of bullies and jerks

Your hypocrisy aside, I find these sort of sentiments increasingly tired. Yes, there are some who could try to be a bit more civil, but this is the internet. Things said here should hold no sway over you. Bullying and insults are only as effective as the victim allows them to be. Either kindly disagree or take their criticism as possible things you could work on. Complaining about "bullies and jerks" only serves to make you appear a victim.

[Four and Twenty]

davearm, stop being so damned predictable. The premise of the book is clearly laid out in the press release, and you know as well as anybody that there's no way to defend it.

 

Yes. It isn't as if the synopsis to a romance novel is filled with jargon about plate tectonics. The function of a synopsis is to outline the content of the book. Such as it were, it is clear this book is rife with anecdotal evidence. Evidence that, while still valuable, is prone to the whims and wants of the human brain.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Not that I can add anything to this already awesome thread, but here's the simple fact that so many dumb people don't get:

 

The most important sabermetric discovery in the history of baseball was that random ish happens. Call it variance, luck, plexiglass principle, whatever, sabermetrics tells you that a whole lot of weird ish will happen during a baseball season that can't be predicted. Meanwhile, the anti-stathead crowd will act as if a baseball season is written in stone by God before a pitch was thrown.

 

And then when something weird happens, they'll say "Ha, your computers didn't predict that!" and act smug, as if their entire point of view hadn't just been debunked.

[davearm2]

davearm, stop being so damned predictable. The premise of the book is clearly laid out in the press release, and you know as well as anybody that there's no way to defend it.

Rob I respect your opinion and we can usually have a civilized discussion even when we disagree.

 

If you haven't picked up on it already, I'm mostly just pushing back against the mindset (clearly prevalent in this thread) that anything that is at all anti-sabermetric must automatically be a worthless pile of trash.

 

I'm explicitly not trying to defend the book or its premise, primarily since I haven't even read it.

 

I just think some of the pro-saber folks in here are coming off like pompous arrogant fools with their reflexive rush to judgement.

[TruffleShuffle]

they're coming to that conclusion based on the description of the book.

[biittner77]

I've never read Moneyball, wasn't it mostly about the business model of using what was being undervalued (OBP) by the market and then using that to maximum advantage? Why would anyone try to debunk such an idea?

 

Why are they using the Red Sox as an example of Sabre not working? Haven't the Red Sox won 2 WS since they started looking at new fangled stats and stuff?

 

Enough with the bird already.

 

I really would like someone to write a good, thought provoking book comparing the predictive value of new stats with the effect human psychology has on certain variables- such as where a player bats in the lineup.

 

I likely won't read this book but, as long as they're exposing how dumb stats are, I hope they have at least 2 chapters on how dumb wins are for pitchers and how batting average can be very misleading.

[Guest]

I've never read Moneyball, wasn't it mostly about the business model of using what was being undervalued (OBP) by the market and then using that to maximum advantage? Why would anyone try to debunk such an idea?

 

Yes, that is what Moneyball is about. No one would ever try to think that is crazy, so people like to make up things that Moneyball was about, like saying you can predict exactly what will happen in a baseball game/season. That one's a lot easier to write a book about.

[Sammy Sofa]

I likely won't read this book but, as long as they're exposing how dumb stats are, I hope they have at least 2 chapters on how dumb wins are for pitchers and how batting average can be very misleading.

 

It's a safe bet this book will be the last place you'll be able to find such conclusions.

[Sammy Sofa]

If you haven't picked up on it already, I'm mostly just pushing back against the mindset (clearly prevalent in this thread) that anything that is at all anti-sabermetric must automatically be a worthless pile of trash.

 

Anything "anti-sabermetric" is trash. That's a moronic position to take. Realizing sabermetrics aren't perfect is just common sense. Being "anti-sabermetric" is stupidly tilting at windmills.

[imb]

I just think some of the pro-saber folks in here are coming off like pompous arrogant fools with their reflexive rush to judgement.

 

excuse me but i prefer sabre

[Rob]

davearm, stop being so damned predictable. The premise of the book is clearly laid out in the press release, and you know as well as anybody that there's no way to defend it.

Rob I respect your opinion and we can usually have a civilized discussion even when we disagree.

 

If you haven't picked up on it already, I'm mostly just pushing back against the mindset (clearly prevalent in this thread) that anything that is at all anti-sabermetric must automatically be a worthless pile of trash.

 

I'm explicitly not trying to defend the book or its premise, primarily since I haven't even read it.

 

I just think some of the pro-saber folks in here are coming off like pompous arrogant fools with their reflexive rush to judgement.

 

Hey, I respect you enough to assume you knew the premise was indefensible.

 

I wont deny for a moment that there may be a few tasty morsels of corn in the dung heap that is this book. It'd be quite impressive if they managed to write up an entire book and not make a couple good points. But ultimately, the rush to judgement in this case has to be considered warranted. If they cannot even write a synopsis that isn't riddled with illogical conclusions like sabermetrics not working for the Red Sox, the odds this book is anything but a trainwreck are nearly insignificant... tasty corn morsels or no.

[davearm2]

davearm, stop being so damned predictable. The premise of the book is clearly laid out in the press release, and you know as well as anybody that there's no way to defend it.

Rob I respect your opinion and we can usually have a civilized discussion even when we disagree.

 

If you haven't picked up on it already, I'm mostly just pushing back against the mindset (clearly prevalent in this thread) that anything that is at all anti-sabermetric must automatically be a worthless pile of trash.

 

I'm explicitly not trying to defend the book or its premise, primarily since I haven't even read it.

 

I just think some of the pro-saber folks in here are coming off like pompous arrogant fools with their reflexive rush to judgement.

 

Hey, I respect you enough to assume you knew the premise was indefensible.

 

I wont deny for a moment that there may be a few tasty morsels of corn in the dung heap that is this book. It'd be quite impressive if they managed to write up an entire book and not make a couple good points. But ultimately, the rush to judgement in this case has to be considered warranted. If they cannot even write a synopsis that isn't riddled with illogical conclusions like sabermetrics not working for the Red Sox, the odds this book is anything but a trainwreck are nearly insignificant... tasty corn morsels or no.

The premise is not indefensible. A book detailing the weaknesses and limitations of sabermetrics is completely defensible.

 

Heck that's a book that a huge number of posters here needs to read.

 

Let me ask you this, just to use one example.

 

How many times have we read on here that Carlos Pena is bound to rebound, just look at how low his BABIP was last year.

 

The folks spouting this supposed saber-savvy insight are often completely oblivious to the fact that BABIP was actually an effect, not a cause. The cause was that Pena hit fewer line drives, fewer fly balls, and a lot more ground balls. If those trends don't improve, then Pena's BABIP probably won't either, nor will any of the more traditional metrics. But too many folks see that BABIP and think Pena was simply unlucky.

 

Hey let's be clear, I'm not the person to write it. But there's definitely a book to be written here, exposing this and many other misuses of, and misunderstandings about sabermetrics.

[Rob]

I wont deny people misunderstand and misuse numbers all the time, but what about the synopsis makes you think the book is trying to educate people about statistics? Barring some craziness like the authors mother writing the synopsis, it's pretty clear they're just pointing at singular incidents and indignantly saying "your numbers didn't say that was going to happen, did they?"

[davearm2]

One more quick example.

 

For years and years, the WARP values baseballprospectus puts out on its PECOTA cards have been the foundation for countless "Player A is better than Player B" type debates.

 

Yet nobody who doesn't actually work for baseballprospectus knows how WARP is actually computed! Nevertheless the supposedly enlightened saber-savvy fans quote these numbers as gospel.

 

That's not thinking critically and taking a full measure of the strengths and limitations of the metrics. In fact by keeping its algorithm for computing WARP secret, BP makes it virtually impossible to do so.

[davearm2]

I wont deny people misunderstand and misuse numbers all the time, but what about the synopsis makes you think the book is trying to educate people about statistics? Barring some craziness like the authors mother writing the synopsis, it's pretty clear they're just pointing at singular incidents and indignantly saying "your numbers didn't say that was going to happen, did they?"

That's certainly not the takeaway I had from reading the synopsis.

 

But then unlike some here, I didn't come away thinking this was a book was about baseballs hitting birds either.

[Guest]

You're essentially saying "if this book were something completely different than what it says it is, then all you people laughing at it would sure be put in your place". We get it, some people are blind to the whys of sabermetrics and have a tendency to be dogmatic. That doesn't mean that a book that appears to completely misunderstand Moneyball/sabermetrics in an attempt to "debunk" them isn't worthy of derision.

[imb]

http://c0016417.cdn2.cloudfiles.rackspacecloud.com/tlw.jpg

[Magnetic Curses]

maybe i missed the point of moneyball, but to me it seems like a semi-fictionialized account of a front-office-driven small market team attempting to compete in an uncapped sport by exploiting pertinent market irregularities. it's an easy, accessible read aimed at people who don't know what sabr is.

 

personally, if they want to take on the big boys, they should aim their critique at The Hidden Game of Baseball or something more high-brow and science-driven. though i doubt such baseball believers could get through something like that, and if they could, i doubt that they could mount anywhere near a valid argument against.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

For years and years, the WARP values baseballprospectus puts out on its PECOTA cards have been the foundation for countless "Player A is better than Player B" type debates.

 

Citation needed.

[mhuber92211]

Perhaps reading something with an Slightly open mind might be better than simply making fun of something without even knowing anything about it. Its ridiculous to completely discredit something without even reading it.

 

Pretend this part was written by FJM to Joe Morgan

 

these two words just blew my mind: "an Slightly."

 

why is an being used, and why is Slightly capitalized? possibly the most incredible two words in the history of internet forums.

 

Wow, why even point this out? You are calling out a punctuation error? Seriously? What is wrong with you?

 

For the record, I had a 5 month old baby on my lap while typing and he hit the keyboard and I thought I erased all of the errors he typed. I shall send him to bed without dinner for his egregious error. In the future, I will have you proofread all posts so any punctuation errors no longer offend.

[mhuber92211]

silly of me to think that a national author knows more about this then a bunch of internet message board know it alls.

One would hope you wield a position of skepticism when considering the writing of any author, national or otherwise. Furthermore, assuming the authors present a more intelligent argument than that of our very own NSBB residents simply on the basis that they have published a book is, yes, unequivocally silly.

 

Also, if you are going to decry name calling I suggest you refrain from doing so yourself.

 

The reaction here is ridiculous.

People joking off the cuff about a synopsis to a book on a private message board is not ridiculous. Taking their jokes and comments too seriously is ridiculous.

 

I suspect the "NSBB debunking of all things" book to be released with great fanfare later this summer.

Again, if you are going to decry bullying, I suggest you refrain from belittling others.

 

Perhaps reading something with an Slightly open mind might be better than simply making fun of something without even knowing anything about it.

Yes, perhaps. However, most around here already understand that statistics aren't the end all be all of the sport. We grew up loving the sport because of the players, because humans aren't always predictable and are capable of extraordinary efforts. Understanding the statistics and science behind the sport serves to foster a greater appreciation for those 'magical' moments.

 

Its ridiculous to completely discredit something without even reading it.

Jokes are fun. Being too serious is not. Also: internet.

 

Hopefully someone stops feeding you.

You should probably stop doing that yourself, then.

 

I guess I should have expected as such from this board. Someone disagrees, calls you on your stupidity and the name calling ensues. Clearly missing the point as usual but masking it with some supposed "witty" reply that makes no sense.

You realize that you disagreed, repeatedly questioned others' intelligence and called them names, right? Such hypocrisy is the sole reason I bothered to write this reply.

 

Thank you for adding to the examples in this thread of what is wrong with this community of bullies and jerks

Your hypocrisy aside, I find these sort of sentiments increasingly tired. Yes, there are some who could try to be a bit more civil, but this is the internet. Things said here should hold no sway over you. Bullying and insults are only as effective as the victim allows them to be. Either kindly disagree or take their criticism as possible things you could work on. Complaining about "bullies and jerks" only serves to make you appear a victim.

 

I am sure that splicing these quotes together took a fair amount of time. Thank you for pointing out my failings in my frustrated rants. I appreciate your excuses for the lack of civility from other posters here. However, I will disagree with your assertion that what people say here should not have an effect on someone else. Cyber-bullying is a very real and concerning issue that many youths struggle with. Texting has also affected this. No matter if it is typed somewhat anonymously or said in person insults, name calling, criticisms and off color comments are not something that can just be waved away simply because it was done on the internet.

 

What I find out of sorts is that you are singling me out as a problem here because I called out several posters for having bad form. Perhaps a different approach may be more effective but I suggest that instead of taking the time to splice my quotes and complain about them, you should have spliced the multiple people here who acted inappropriate in response. Since you haven't I take this to mean that you are implying that their actions are acceptable and mine are not. If that is the case, we will never see eye to eye. There are some regular posters here who get joy from putting others down. It is clear in this thread and getting joy from hurting others is never something that should be acceptable.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

For the record, I had a five-month-old baby on my lap while typing, and he hit the keyboard. I thought I erased all of the errors he typed. I shall send him to bed without dinner for his egregious error. In the future, I will have you proofread all posts, so any punctuation errors no longer offend.