I feel sorry for people that ignore most of the new stats and want to use terms like momentum. I feel like they like umpire human error and wish all games were still day games. Stats tell far more of the picture than the eye test and it will never go back.

Which would make me by default, the joke teller.

 

This is getting out of hand. We're probably a lot closer to having the same opinion than what we've said on here recently. I in know way think Frazier is great he's just not their worst player or starter. He's cheap and serviceable and if Votto isn't going to hit 2nd I would rather it be him than Cozart or Izturis. Frazier certainly needs to have better at bats though.

I feel sorry for people that ignore most of the new stats and want to use terms like momentum. I feel like they like umpire human error and wish all games were still day games. Stats tell far more of the picture than the eye test and it will never go back.

 

Yeah, because momentum is irrelevant. How many stats do you have to show a guy that hit one on the screws and got out? Or blooped one in on a terrible swing/pitch? None. But keep thinking you can just look in baseball reference and be a good manager.

 

And not at any point did I say the stats are useless. I just don't use them solely to determine a players worth. Hell, if numbers alone worked the A's would win a lot more games.

 

I'll stand by my statement, and every college coach I know, that quality at-bats is the standard for measuring a hitter's worth.

Yeah, because momentum is irrelevant. How many stats do you have to show a guy that hit one on the screws and got out? Or blooped one in on a terrible swing/pitch? None. But keep thinking you can just look in baseball reference and be a good manager.

 

And not at any point did I say the stats are useless. I just don't use them solely to determine a players worth. Hell, if numbers alone worked the A's would win a lot more games.

 

I'll stand by my statement, and every college coach I know, that quality at-bats is the standard for measuring a hitter's worth.

 

Momentum probably doesn't exist:

 

Nomentum in Sports, Part 2 - The Triangle Blog - Grantland

 

I'm not arguing against quality at bats. I'm saying ignoring stats is dumb. For every blooper that is a hit there is a liner that is an out. It usually all evens out over 162 games. If someone has a fluky baseball year statistically (and it can happen) it doesn't happen the next year.

 

Also I'm not saying I would be a good manager on stats alone. I'm saying Dusty is a total and complete idiot for not knowing the stats that mean the most. Him wanting the 2nd best hitter in baseball to change his hitting approach is absurd.

Momentum probably doesn't exist:

 

Nomentum in Sports, Part 2 - The Triangle Blog - Grantland

 

I'm not arguing against quality at bats. I'm saying ignoring stats is dumb. For every blooper that is a hit there is a liner that is an out. It usually all evens out over 162 games. If someone has a fluky baseball year statistically (and it can happen) it doesn't happen the next year.

 

Also I'm not saying I would be a good manager on stats alone. I'm saying Dusty is a total and complete idiot for not knowing the stats that mean the most. Him wanting the 2nd best hitter in baseball to change his hitting approach is absurd.

 

I am not shocked you found a stats guy to say that momentum isn't a part of the game. They can keep telling themselves that. Every sports psychologist on the planet knows how momentum, which turns into confidence, impacts a team. I can't believe we're even debating this.

 

From one of the best college baseball coaches in the country, “Never forget that momentum is a cruel mistress. She can turn on a dime with the smallest mistake. She is ever searching for the weak place in your armor. That one tiny thing you forgot to prepare for.”

 

If you want to take the word of a sportswriter this discussion is pointless.

Crash, are you ignoring stats?

Crash, are you ignoring stats?

 

I don't know how many times you can state that you don't ignore all stats but there are still additional ways to determine the worth of a player. I stand by my statement that the A's would be a heck of a lot better every year if the game was played based on stats alone.

 

Go play fantasy baseball. Real baseball is fun to watch.

I don't know how many times you can state that you don't ignore all stats but there are still additional ways to determine the worth of a player. I stand by my statement that the A's would be a heck of a lot better every year if the game was played based on stats alone.

 

Go play fantasy baseball. Real baseball is fun to watch.

 

Nobody and I mean nobody has said stats tell the whole story. This is getting stupid. You two keep saying I ignore everything except stats which is wrong and you think I'm saying you ignore all stats which is wrong. 20 years from now we will laugh in the face of all the momentum believers that were slower believing is SOME stats. No biggie.

Nobody and I mean nobody has said stats tell the whole story. This is getting stupid. You two keep saying I ignore everything except stats which is wrong and you think I'm saying you ignore all stats which is wrong. 20 years from now we will laugh in the face of all the momentum believers that were slower believing is SOME stats. No biggie.

 

You say were both wrong. I say were both right.

You say were both wrong. I say were both right.

 

I say I'll be one old cat in 20 years.

Yeah, because momentum is irrelevant. How many stats do you have to show a guy that hit one on the screws and got out? Or blooped one in on a terrible swing/pitch? None. But keep thinking you can just look in baseball reference and be a good manager.

 

And not at any point did I say the stats are useless. I just don't use them solely to determine a players worth. Hell, if numbers alone worked the A's would win a lot more games.

 

I'll stand by my statement, and every college coach I know, that quality at-bats is the standard for measuring a hitter's worth.

 

Ummmm..... The A's do win a lot of games.... 73 and 57 at this point... Is that good?

I don't know how many times you can state that you don't ignore all stats but there are still additional ways to determine the worth of a player. I stand by my statement that the A's would be a heck of a lot better every year if the game was played based on stats alone.

 

Go play fantasy baseball. Real baseball is fun to watch.

 

I'm not saying momentum doesn't matter. I'm saying that stats do. At the end of the day, everyone calls certain hitters 'clutch hitters.' Everyone right now says Allen Craig is the best hitter with runners on like... ever. But I would bet you a pretty penny that by the end of his career he is going to hit within a few points of his overall BA with RISP.

Honestly, it doesn't matter what #'s you put in front of Spindoc or Crash, because they are traditionalist that like to use the "eye test." Nothing wrong with that really, but just can't ignore useful stats. There is extremely valuable information that can be given to you by looking at the numbers. There is a 'feel' to it too, but a manager or scout were to go with a 'hunch' or 'gut feeling' and rather than the numbers and be wrong then they are at much more of a risk to lose their jobs or be criticized. That's just the game today. EVERY team has someone who's only job is to analyze the numbers. Maybe multiple someones. They have people looking at their minor leagues, major leagues, other teams etc. All to get information about match-ups, how players will progress, and some advanced stuff like how they will perform in high leverage situations. These are USEFUL statistics. If you want to play the game based on hunches, then do it, but be criticized more often than not. It would be unwise not to use the technology and advancements we have. But if you want to play it that way, hey, at least we'll all get a good idea as to how they thought and managed back in the early days of baseball.

Ummmm..... The A's do win a lot of games.... 73 and 57 at this point... Is that good?

 

This year, last year, and the "Moneyball" year. Point was that if it's based on statistics alone, and they make moves because of those statistics, they would be good a lot more consistently than 3 times in the last 8 years.

 

Is 74-88 good? What about 75-87?

I'm not saying momentum doesn't matter. I'm saying that stats do. At the end of the day, everyone calls certain hitters 'clutch hitters.' Everyone right now says Allen Craig is the best hitter with runners on like... ever. But I would bet you a pretty penny that by the end of his career he is going to hit within a few points of his overall BA with RISP.

 

Agreed.