Sabermania

Soylent Green-

GREAT use of "irascible." 

Bad use of "good article."

This is a bunch of "get of my lawn" nonsense that was popular 20 years ago. If he wants to continue being a sportswriter, he should understand what he's writing about. If fans don't want to be in-tune with the metrics, that's fine. But being someone that relays information from sports teams to the public and openly bashing information that is 100% accurate and accepted league wide - and has been for a while - is horribly irresponsible. 

It's ironic that Ryan writes for the Globe and covers the Red Sox, perhaps the best example of how to use analytics successfully in the sport today.

Bob Ryan is a well-respected writer, and has been at it for a long time. But this is really, really awful.

JH - The article is not arguing whether advanced metrics are valid or not, he's basically agreeing that they are.  What he's asking is whether or not the fan base at large really cares.  They don't... And it's important for the league to remember this.  The way I would say it is this: you always sell the sizzle, not the steak.  Baseball is allowing sabermetrics to be too large a component of its core product offering... Too much metrics talk during broadcasts, too much stat analysis verses highlights/action on the various networks. Personalities drive the game... Sabremetrics reduces players and the game in general to dull analytics.  In short, it's poor marketing.  Sabermetrics has its place in front offices, fantasy drafts, and on message boards. Fans who want it can get it endlessly online... perfectly suited to the net.  But the fan base at large could care less and never will... It doesn't fill ballparks or draw eyeballs to the game.

By the way, I think Ryan is mostly retired from the Globe but writes now just on an ad hoc basis... So he's not covering the team or the league daily anymore.

Soylent- I couldn't disagree with you more. Fan bases are drawn to players and teams based on their performances, which are reflected statistically. Introducing unknown statistics to fans and allowing them to understand how to go about analyzing player performances will enable fans to be that much smarter and aware of the game. Understanding how to quantify a player's performance doesn't make the game more "dull," it enhances a viewer's ability to identify with the game. Currently, the majority of statistics that are leaned on in the media (all of which, not ironically, are highlighted in the Ryan piece), are outdated and not as accurate as many other readily-available statistics. If fans want to continue to be engaged in the game, as they have been for so many years, more knowledge about analysis cannot be a bad thing. At the end of the day, statistics drives interest - whether it's a player's batting average, on-base percentage, throwing velocity, RBI count, wins, WAR, whatever. The way players get to the results is what makes the game of baseball so interesting - that each player is different and that each player is unique. Understanding the process and the results together, to me, makes viewing a game wonderful.

Lastly, the game of baseball has NEVER been as popular or financially stable as it is right now. Younger generations are exposed to mass information at a far greater rate than we could ever imagine growing up. Keeping younger generations involved in the game must include enabling them to gather information at a rate with which they are familiar. Keeping statistics out of the game would be doing just the opposite of that, and would be very irresponsible.

What makes any "advanced" statistic in baseball different than something such as, say, Quarterback Rating in football? Why is it so difficult to get fans to understand statistical concepts and make the game better and more enjoyable? 

No, he's not so subtly suggesting that we don't really need all these new fangled stats and the nerds who created them don't and can't appreciate the game the way those old school baseball guys like him can.

About which he is of course comically wrong. It is not necessary to understand WAR to appreciate the game, nor is it necessary to appreciate the game to understand and make use of WAR. But as a fan, I'd rather have a GM that both appreciates the game and understands the math like I and my fellow nerds do.  Having Ruben Amaro in charge of the Phillies is the worst of both worlds.

Ryan has been semi retired for a few years. He was always recognized as one of the top basketball journalist in the country. He never covered the Red Sox.  In his era Peter Gammons covered the Red Sox. Nick Cadarfo covers the Sox now. Ryan is recognized as one of the top overall columnists of all time.

Baseball is not as popular as it's ever been. Baseball was passed a long time ago by football in popularity. Every poll taken shows football as America's sport.

I agree with Ryan. The inside baseball people and saber geeks are into the metrics. The average fan isn't. It looks like calculus to them. If they can't calculate the stat it suppresses interest. Similar to what Soylent is saying you sell the value of knowing what time it is, not how the watch works.

RJM- Just because baseball isn't as popular as football doesn't mean it isn't at it's peak in popularity. It's far more popular now than it's ever been in the past.

It's the responsibility of the media to relay information from teams to fans. Just like how fans learned to understand what Batting Average meant and what RBIs stood for, fans will learn to understand stats they aren't familiar with.

I'm sorry, I don't mean to sound harsh here, but every time I hear this argument I roll my eyes. The "numbers take away from the beauty of the game" crux of it is utterly ridiculous. I literally can't wrap my head around the fact that someone actually thinks LESS information is GOOD for the game. I've heard that for years and I've never been able to understand that. Why, on earth, would it be good to suppress knowledge in people, and in yourself as a fan?

If you don't like the metrics, fine. No problem. But don't bash them publicly, like Bob Ryan did (and has done in the past as well). The metrics are 100% better, and they're here to stay. It makes you look like an idiot.

I guess that was harsh. Oh well. I'm really tired of this nonsensical garbage from the media.

The average fan doesn't even know about them. I have had conversations with countless people who didn't know about advanced stats and after I explained it to them, they were really interested in learning more about them. Now, I could be a fantastic orator and arguer (i'm not) or fans do want to know more about this stuff and people like Ryan try to stifle that because they don't like it or don't understand.

You're right that my point is these numbers are very prevalent today. My point is also that it is a bad thing that those numbers are very prevalent today, because we now have numbers that are more accurate than those numbers. Once upon a time, those numbers didn't exist. Now they're commonplace. The "new" numbers will eventually become commonplace. It's illogical to keep them away from the fans. That's my point.

I'm going to bail out of the remainder of this discussion, for several reasons. Here's a link to a very good response piece to this moronic Bob Ryan article, I'd highly recommend reading both the article and the comments: http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs...esponse-to-bob-ryan/

I'll leave here with this: What people have believed to be true for a period of time does not necessarily make that thing true going forward. Change is not a bad thing. For every one person that isn't willing to grasp the new metrics (which actually aren't new at all, in truth), dozens more are. It's only a matter of time before baseball fans recognize them as commonplace. And when that time comes, the game will be better and more popular for it. That's the trend we're heading towards, and there aren't any signs that point to it being different.

As for the individuals like Bob Ryan, who state "the game was better in the old days"…I'm sorry for those people that they aren't able to enjoy progression and new information. I love learning and I love seeing new things. It's unfortunate that a man as well respected and as knowledgable as Bob Ryan can't understand how good the movement in the game is.

If you'd like to discuss this more, in a rational manner, I welcome DMs. As I said, there are several reasons why I wish to no longer comment on this thread about this topic.

And for the record - advanced metrics have very little to do with my everyday job responsibilities. 

No doubt.  Stats will always evolve.  Some will come and go... Including some of the latest and "greatest".  Some will gain wider acceptance among average fans... And average fans are the ones who fill parks... Or not.  No need to "keep them away from fans"... Also no need to cram them down their throats. That's what I took from Ryan's editorial and I agree with it.

Some people are just afraid of numbers.

I don't have an issue with all the newer stats. I understand them. I understand how valuable they are in evaluating talent for playing time and trades. But I don't think the "average" fan understands them all that well.

I might be one of the original saber geeks without knowing it the time. 40+ years ago we (my friends and I) used to draft player for our Start O Magic baseball leagues. While my friends were scooping up all the twenty game winners I drafted other players then selected the hard luck pitchers who had .500 records but good WHIPs (before the term was invented) and didn't give up a lot of homers.

It's what I took from the article as well. The " average" fan goes to the park as a social event to have a beer, hot dog, a good time and root for their team. I'll bet the "average" fan doesn't know the "old fashion" batting averages of each of the starting lineup within ten points.

Man, you guys have a really low opinion of fans.

I'm talking about the average fan. Not the devoted followers of a team and the game. Once the typical fan becomes an adult he/she has more important things to do with their life than be wrapped in stats. It's reduced to did the team win or lose and a general knowledge of the team and game. 

I do believe the average fan is going for a social event and all that other stuff.  I haven't been to a MLB game in years but when I was going the people around me had no clue what was going on other than the basics.  I never saw dad teaching son how the game was played.  I saw more conversations going on than watching the game.  So this is why I think most people don't have a clue about the new numbers.

I'm not a big fan of numbers period - old or new - but I also know how to use them in order to determine how good someone is.  My nature is to avoid numbers of any kind.  When the ugly math monster rears it's head I curl into the fetal position and cry because they hurt my head (I took algebra I three times in high school).  But if I want to give myself an edge on my opponent I take something for headaches and use the numbers.  Or if I'm trying to win my fantasy league (which is not going too well right now) then I will use old and new numbers.  But if I'm watching the game at the park or on TV - I could care less about the numbers.  I want to watch a beautiful 6-4-3 or that CF fly around the bases going 1st to 3rd on a hit and run.

The new numbers are here to stay.  The new numbers provide valuable information to help you win.  But you don't have to have them.  It will take time but these numbers will find a place in baseball and we won't have these conversations anymore.......or maybe not.

So knowing that wins are bull****, saves mean nothing and the flaws of RBI is now wrapped up in stats? You just need to know 2 things for hitters and realize that parks are different, OBP and SLG. For pitchers, K/9, BB/9 and GB%. It's such a hardship knowing these stats or hearing them explained on broadcast for 45 seconds.

Of course going to a baseball game is a social event, what else would it be? I don't go to games to talk about the intricacies of UZR. I can, but it rarely comes up. It's much more, grab a beer, hang out with friends and have good conversation and it's more 'oh man, that was a sweet play' or 'what the hell? he should have struck out if he was going to hit into a double play' or 'that ball was f'in mashed.' So I don't think you can consider what the average fan wants based on overhearing things at a game.

From reading the response, I still think you guys who don't think people want to hear the new stats have a very low opinion of most fans, even casual or 'average.'

Wait, how did JH edit OldSkool2's post, just above, are they the same guy?

I am a site moderator. There was language used in the post that I felt was inappropriate.

Pretty sure the only thing he edited was the cussword that's starred out.  I saw the post originally and it wasn't starred out.  That's one thing I'm really happy about with this board in how it's kept clean.

I just need to quote this, because this quite possibly is my favorite post I have ever read.

And i'm a big fan of the seven dirty words, so I am going to boycott everything J H writes from now on.

Did anyone see that full-out extended 2-out/runner-about-to-score catch by Brandon Phillips last night to push the game deeper in about the 12th inning last night?

How 'bout the one by Billy Hamilton in centerfield in the 13th or 14th...also with 2 outs and a runner about to score?

Man!  Thats why I watch baseball.  As a Reds fan who knows nearly every player on the Nationals - that was a blast to watch last night.  Thats why I'm a fan.

Yes, I'm an engineer and I trust math nearly completely.  And yes, I want those managing my favorite teams to use the best technology possible to make decisions.  But I also know models are models and they cannot predict everything...most especially the spectacular like last night.  Knowing someone who has faced many of the players in the game last night...and knowing who he thinks can hit his stuff and who can't, who raises their game when the chips are on the line and who folds...independent of what the numbers say across all pitchers and all situations...well thats far more interesting than the numbers...to me at least.  Calling someone 'moronic' or 'stupid' or whatever else for enjoying the game in their own way...well, I think thats kind of <fill in the blank>.

No one called anyone else 'moronic' for enjoying baseball in their own way.

I also don't understand why you can't both enjoy the athletic feats they produce and the math behind it? The data these players produce is vast and it is interesting. Everything the players do deals in averages and probabilities but outcomes are binary. He either got a hit or made an out he either threw a strike or didn't. So asking models to predict a certain outcome every single time is nonsense as you very well know. Anything can happen on any given pitch. Isn't that why we all watch? The tension of the unknown of what might transpire and the athletic prowess of the players.

In the old days we didn't have these stats readily available so people gravitated towards the stats they had available and were told by the media were valuable, just like people are gravitating towards stats we have available now. My problem is with people who want to stop the new stats (which I find tell the story of baseball far more interestingly with greater degree of accuracy and precision). Which is why I find the article written by Ryan so annoying, it seeks to stifle new information from being spread all because it wasn't around in the olden days so people aren't used to it (yet).

Interesting thread...  several posts regarding advanced stats but no mention of specifically which advanced stats we're talking about. 

Which ones do we think will be the standard for fans to refer to over the next five to ten years?

^^^ What he said 

I never called anyone "moronic" or "stupid." I called Bob Ryan's article "moronic," and I very strongly stand by that opinion. I have no doubt that he is an extremely intelligent man, which actually causes me to be surprised by this piece, and others he's written in a similar manner in the past. 

As for the question pertaining to "which" advanced metrics: here are a few glossaries, which provide both the statistic and the definition. Every statistic that occurs on the field is important in it's own right, and there is no such thing as a perfect statistic.

http://www.fangraphs.com/libra...hs-library-glossary/

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/glossary/

KISS

Originally Posted by cabbagedad:

Interesting thread...  several posts regarding advanced stats but no mention of specifically which advanced stats we're talking about. 

Which ones do we think will be the standard for fans to refer to over the next five to ten years?

Rule 10.02 lists the individual things MLB requires to be tracked, and 10.21 lists the different percentages that MLB requires along with the formulae for calculating them. I think those items and percentages can be generally cataloged as long time stats. Any items above and beyond those listed in 10.02, and any percentages not listed in 10.21 can generally be catalogued as advanced stats.

OPS has long been considered by many to be the superior stat for judging hitters and WHIP for pitchers. But the biggest “leap” in statistical analysis for baseball has come since BPFs have been introduced by the Sabers, and therein lies the disconnect for most fans. You see most become fans from playing the game themselves as kids or seeing their children play the game. Since there aren’t any BPFs for any level other than MLB, there’s no way the majority of fans even have the opportunity to use many of the truly advanced stats like WAR. Linear weights have also contributed immensely to advanced baseball metrics, but like BPF, they aren’t available for any level other than MLB.

All of the advanced stats can be calculated for MiLB, and almost certainly are by at least the teams (and I think they probably are by a number of amateurs as well, though I'm not going to go check right now).

The data appears to exist in reliable enough form for NCAA (at least Div I), as well. The incentive structure ($ mostly) isn't really there to cause anyone to pursue it too intensely, but it wouldn't surprise me too much to find there's some intern or AC at the big programs playing around with what they do have in an effort to find an edge. The math's not hard, the data's there, so the edge would effectively be free and we already know there are plenty of Luddite's in the NCAA ranks, so there's certainly an opportunity there for the taking.

No

I did base running and Base Runs and wRC+ for my softball team. It's not hard to do. It's also amazing what people will respond to. It was a bunch of people who only wanted to know about batting average, home runs and rbi's and then they started to really want to know about the advanced stuff.

Although I consider myself a person that does try to follow and to understand saber metrics, and why they are important, I actually agree with some things written in the article. 

I see this dilemma on a teams board that I follow, the stat guys are already arguing before the game about the lineup and within the game they are saying that the managers decision makes no sense due to stats.  Even when the team wins they are still arguing that it wasn't a good win.  This actually has chased many away who have come to just discuss the game, without out all that math stuff included.

The average fan is not a mathematician so not all should expect them to fully understand that aspect of the game. I saw the article as a defense to those that just can't quite grasp what some think are important.  I don't feel that I have to fully understand those new metrics to enjoy a really good game of baseball and ot be a great fan of the game.

FWIW, I don't think that half the players understand it either.

What stats are so hard to understand, exactly?

All or some of the ones listed in fangraphs that JH posted.

A lot of the stuff at FanGraphs is overkill for the casual fan.  That said, understanding OBP, OPS, ISO, BB and K rates for pitchers and hitters, BABIP and DIPS theory, maybe a few others would be a big help for a lot of people, and none of those is particularly complicated to calculate, or hard to grasp the value of conceptually.

Heck, wOBA isn't really any worse than QB rating as far as that goes.

Plus, you don't have to do any calculation yourself. It's done pretty much everywhere.