Sabermetrician

I think you could argue either way. When the A's signed Hatteberg, there were only two teams after him (I'll have to double check that, but they were either the only one or competing with just one other). I actually thought I did use the Bill James definition. Thanks for pointing that out. For whatever reason, this was an instance where I thought I had something that I actually didn't. I can completely understand how you would confuse the definition I had with the regular stats... I do think Moneyball had a lot to do with it, particularly with the fans. I learned so much from Moneyball and I think everyone who read it did. However, you are probably right that it's too bold, any suggestions on how I could change it, still keeping that Moneyball has helped? Here's another instance that got me in trouble from the assumption of Moneyball then, I think. Okay, so what I meant to say is that the faults in some statistics are the way they're set up, for example BA is fault because it's over at bats and not plate appearances, measures how much a person gets on base but only by hits, etc... What's S? Plate Appearances - Walks - Hit By Pitch - Sac Flies - S? I'm not sure I agree with everything you say here. For such a long time (before OBP), batting average was the true measure of a hitter's ability, but it completely ignores some aspects of hitting which are important to a team. Maybe what I could say in the paper is batting average isn't flawed, it's the formula that leaves out some of those aspects. Same thing as above. What you're saying may be correct, but is OBP so flawless that a guy with a .350 OBP is better than one with a .340 OBP? That's not necessarily true, if the guy with the .340 OBP is getting on base by extra base hits and the one with the .350 OBP is getting on primarily by singles and walks, I'll take the .340 guy. The .340 guy is setting his team up for a greater chance to score when he does get on base. You're right here again, but dealing with slugging percentage as an aside, that is it's fault...that every base is created unequal. While 171 may seem like a lot, you have to take into consideration how many players there are in baseball each year, multiply by the number of seasons you're counting, and in the end you've got about 4 players per season doing that out of X amount of players per season. However, I could make a more extreme example. .350 BA and .400 SLG? How many players have done that? Also realized, I should have said rarely see. My arguing the entire time then should be how slugging percentage (or any stat) is set up, rather than arguing why the actual stat has faults, correct? Good to know. Player by player on a team, plugged into James's formula, and then added up to estimate how many runs the team would score vs. the actual amount they did. High correlation between the two. I never thought of it that way. I've always viewed SecA as a nice statistic for measuring power since it takes away singles. I'm just trying to make a point that park factors have contributed to success and for those that have hit in pitcher's parks, they've been hurt. Any suggestions to rephrase it? That was one thing I just added yesterday due to someone else's suggestion and I didn't check my facts. I just assumed AL would score more runs than the NL. Does the average AL team score more runs than the average NL team? You can tell more about a player looking at OPS+ than OPS, though. Same with ERA+ and ERA, which isn't included in the paper. Ok, mostly. I'm implying that they got good players in return for their two pitchers, and these players did play a role in the success of the A's. So in that way, yes, but their success wasn't directly because of the players they got back in the trades. :oops: Yup, the draft picks have been suggested and it's a good idea. But, if you were to weigh salary and production, Hatteberg was an excellent pickup. Did he really get $6.5 for each season, or was it a 3-yr., $6.5M contract? Maybe it would be better for me to mention the Blue Jays and Dodgers as a subpoint of the A's, as both those two guys were involved with the A's under Beane? I haven't cited any of my sources in-paper with the exception of the two Moneyball quotes. I know where they came from, and of course they'll be cited before it's done. Sabermetric stats > Traditional stats is the point of the conclusion, however I do want to redo the whole conclusion and I said that in my first post. I knew that this would be a problem for me when I chose the topic: we're suppoed to stay away from being entirely factual, I just don't know how I can do that. I can't prove sabermetrics are effective without proving facts. I can't say how teams have used sabermetrics without first explaining what they are, which is again...facts. 17. Thanks.

The thing is, an essay map needs to be incorporated into the paper somehow, and most essay maps really require three major points. The A's were the obvious choice and Boston because of the Bill James hiring and how they went on to win the World Series, but then there's no other obvious team that's been successful. The Braves seemed logical because they understand the value of their farm system, EqA, etc. I'll probably do Indians now that it's been mentioned, that one slipped my mind but it's a good example. By the way, I don't think I can be considered lazy for this paper...I'm been working on it for quite some time and I've posted a couple of topics on these forums already asking for advice. Also, is it lying? The Braves have been successful and I'm sure sabermetrics have been a part of it.

I actually thought books were underlined, but I was told by my teacher quotations, so I'm going with that. But I'll double check before handing it in.

Maybe I should take suggestions from you, the guy who runs the site which currently looks like this? ...

Thanks for all the suggestions. I fixed most of them and re-uploaded it. PieOnMyHands... Good thinking with the FA's and draft picks. A very important part of the A's success. I really like your conclusion. I think I will put it in somehow and add in UK's idea of where sabermetrics are going in the future. USSoccer... I liked all of your suggestions and word-by-word used your rephrasing of "The evolution..." and about OBP. Right now they are there are placeholders, don't worry about plagerism because I won't hand it in that way. :) UK... I too struggled with Atlanta and how the incorprate sabermetrics, but at the same time I couldn't think of a third team that really has had success because of sabermetrics, and two teams just didn't seem enough. I like your idea for a conclusion, I'll put that in as well. Also regarding the A's...that'll go in. Keep the suggestions coming - they're very helpful.

If anyone is interested in reading this and proofreading, let me know. I haven't yet read the entire thing to proofread, but I did go through as I read each paragraph and edit what I could find. http://www.nfldraftforecast.com/finalpaper.doc Be picky. This counts for the majority of my second marking period grade, so I want it to be good. Also, I'm not satisfied with my conclusion. Any suggestions, let me know.

Also, I cannot find who came up with these statistics: SecA (Secondary Average) OPS+ (Adjusted OPS)

Do you know if this quote is in that book? "The problem is that baseball statistics are not pure accomplishments of men against other men, which is what we're in the habit of seeing them as. They are accomplishments of men in combination with their circumstances." That's Bill James, but I don't know if it's Moneyball, one of his Abstracts, or just a quote online from him.

How about Ruben Sierra's stat line in 1993? .233/.288 101 RBI

Sorry to bump this thread, but do you have a page number for this quote? I tried to find it, but couldn't.

I hated both Mathemetician at the Ballpark and The Numbers Game. I tried to read The Numbers Game, but didn't get very far because I was incredibly bored with it. Mathemetician at the Ballpark had very little baseball information. Hidden Game is the best baseball book I've ever read, but it's out of print right now so if you have it, consider yourself blessed. Before I was able to find a copy on Amazon for $30, most on eBay were going towards $50 and even as high as $100. Mine is all highlighted up, but that's just a tribute to how good of an informational book it really is.

Latrell Sprewell... Oh - baseball only?

Biggest bargain of the offseason IMO.

Choi Career OBP .349 Jones Career OBP .327 It seems to me that many people look at batting average as the best indicator of hitting ability...when in fact it's really completely useless.

You should have seen Burnitz last year... And we're right about both...

I thought the Twins offered him arbitration and Jones declined it. Wouldn't that cost the Cubs a draft pick anyways? My mistake...

If the Cubs had waited until after midnight tonight, the Twins would have non-tendered him and it wouldn't have cost the Cubs a draft pick. Idiots.

IsoP is Isolated Power, but what does it mean? Also, SecA is Secondary Average, what does that tell you? I understand all the others - this site is bookmarked.

And my top SS option since the start of the offseason is out of the picture... (as if he was ever seriously looked at by the Cubs) :roll:

Why not? .302 .359 .436 in 82 games for a RF? That stinks. The production's not the problem. .359 would have placed him 6th in the MLB in RF OBP last year. It's the 82 games that's worrisome.

It's called Advanced Composition, a great writing course to prepare to college, we wrote 5 papers first semester and then here in second semester we're concentrating on one major research paper, and then (in my case) proving why or why not it's been successful. I choose Sabermetrics because I'm interested in them but I didn't understand all the different stats to the level that I wanted to.

Yep...he's trying to make nice. He doesn't want to be viewed as a troublemaker, and the O's probably said "We'll trade you, but we need you to help us do it." When has something like that ever happpened in baseball? I really doubt he gets traded. "Sammy - void the extra year you'd get if traded - and it'll be a lot easier to trade you - We'll get something done."

I will once again say it: And Brian Sabean is a good GM because.... ?

Yeah, that's the kind of stuff I'm looking for. I also remember something like "If baseball were done without stats and a casual fan watched two players often -- one a .250 hitter and the other a .300 hitter -- by season's end there would still be a 50% chance the fan says the .250 hitter is better." I know that's not exact, anyone have that quote?

I'm curious, for those that have read Moneyball, what information did they offer that was interesting to you? Let me just say that I have read it before and thought it was great, I wish I underlined some stuff so I could easily go back to it again, but I didn't and now I don't have the team to re-read it all again right now. So, anyone have it off hand that knows any of the stuff they have that might classify as "help" to organizations such as the A's?