The all inclusive "2015 Predictions" thread

[Kimmi]

 

Oh I think that I understand the conversation just fine. I will let it drop. I certainly don't want to argue with you over anything. The use of data or whatever you would like to refer to it as is there for all and should be considered. It certainly doesn't tell the whole story. The Yankees used the data and got lucky. They didn't simply get lucky but I don't think that it would have been a big surprise to anyone if that scenario had not worked out the way that it did.

 

 

cp, to say the Yankees got lucky with Swisher (although I won't argue against them being a very lucky team the past couple of years) is undermining the very nature of analytics. It wasn't blind luck. It wasn't a 50-50 chance that Swisher would perform well. It's a highly educated and informed decision based on data. The data doesn't tell the whole story, but it often tells the underlying story of why someone performed how they did and why some of the other numbers might not be a true representation of the player. These analytics guys know what they're doing. Give them some credit.

[cp176]

 

 

cp, to say the Yankees got lucky with Swisher (although I won't argue against them being a very lucky team the past couple of years) is undermining the very nature of analytics. It wasn't blind luck. It wasn't a 50-50 chance that Swisher would perform well. It's a highly educated and informed decision based on data. The data doesn't tell the whole story, but it often tells the underlying story of why someone performed how they did and why some of the other numbers might not be a true representation of the player. These analytics guys know what they're doing. Give them some credit.

 

Kimmi - Give me some credit here. I always bring up the significance of using available data on this site. It is simple suicide not to. Just trying once again with I small touch of futility to point out that there are other issues in play. It isn't just an either or situation. I am sure that the Yankees based their decision on very good data but the story could have gone the other way just as easily. You get to call it what you like. An educated hunch maybe a data backed hope possibly even a little luck. I think they made a very good decision. I give the analytic guys all kinds of credit just not all of it. If it was that easy, no mistakes would ever be made.

[Spudboy]

Fred, didn't we conclude that polyanna is an insult? If you can call people "polyannish" then people should be able to call you "Negative Nellyish" without you getting up in arms about it. The best idea is to just stop it with the name-calling. Period. Why is that so hard?

 

Yeah but I want to call Henry Pruneface.

 

It fits. Just like calling Tex Horseface.

 

Or Lackey, for that matter.

[a700hitter]

Yeah but I want to call Henry Pruneface.

 

It fits. Just like calling Tex Horseface.

 

Or Lackey, for that matter.

 

Also, is it insulting if it is accurately descriptive?

[Kimmi]

 

Kimmi - Give me some credit here. I always bring up the significance of using available data on this site. It is simple suicide not to. Just trying once again with I small touch of futility to point out that there are other issues in play. It isn't just an either or situation. I am sure that the Yankees based their decision on very good data but the story could have gone the other way just as easily. You get to call it what you like. An educated hunch maybe a data backed hope possibly even a little luck. I think they made a very good decision. I give the analytic guys all kinds of credit just not all of it. If it was that easy, no mistakes would ever be made.

 

 

Analytic guys are not always right. Scouts are not always right. In the case of Swisher, I don't think it was a 50-50 chance. I think that the chances of Swisher doing well were better than him not. An assessment made based on analytics. That's all I'm saying.

[SoxnCycles]

 

 

Analytic guys are not always right. Scouts are not always right. In the case of Swisher, I don't think it was a 50-50 chance. I think that the chances of Swisher doing well were better than him not. An assessment made based on analytics. That's all I'm saying.

 

Playing half the games in Yankee Stadium didn't hurt either.

I'm sure that was taken into account.

[Kimmi]

Yeah but I want to call Henry Pruneface.

 

It fits. Just like calling Tex Horseface.

 

Or Lackey, for that matter.

 

 

Hate to say this Spud, but you have gone all Fred on me again.

[Kimmi]

Playing half the games in Yankee Stadium didn't hurt either.

I'm sure that was taken into account.

 

 

I'm guessing you're right.

[Spudboy]

Hate to say this Spud, but you have gone all Fred on me again.

 

Not really.

 

Horseface is a standing joke around here.

 

Pruneface is a G rated version of what I call Henry!

[Kimmi]

Also, is it insulting if it is accurately descriptive?

 

 

The Fellowship of the Miserable should be fair game then. ;-)

[Kimmi]

Not really.

 

Horseface is a standing joke around here.

 

Pruneface is a G rated version of what I call Henry!

 

 

LOL Spud. Carry on then.

[User Name]

The Fellowship of the Miserable should be fair game then. ;-)

 

That's not a game I think he should be desiring to play.

[a700hitter]

The Fellowship of the Miserable should be fair game then. ;-)

I have posted several times in recent days that it is a reality around here, so it is no biggie. And neither are the descriptive terms for the other side of that spectrum.

 

Now, if you insist on being on my lawn, please mow and water it once a week.

[Kimmi]

I have posted several times in recent days that it is a reality around here, so it is no biggie. And neither are the descriptive terms for the other side of that spectrum.

 

Now, if you insist on being on my lawn, please mow and water it once a week.

 

At the risk of sounding really stupid, I don't know what you mean by being on your lawn.

[a700hitter]

At the risk of sounding really stupid, I don't know what you mean by being on your lawn.

Don't sweat it.

[sk7326]

 

 

Analytic guys are not always right. Scouts are not always right. In the case of Swisher, I don't think it was a 50-50 chance. I think that the chances of Swisher doing well were better than him not. An assessment made based on analytics. That's all I'm saying.

 

Let's put it this way - I am sure the Yankees did not sign Swisher without watching him play. The analytics people reveal that he is terrific on base and power guy relative to cost ... the scouts can tell you that he can get by in the outfield in NY (i.e. what worked with Oakland was not temporary) and you put it together.

 

I think there is a perception at work here - that some orgs only have grumpy old scouts who have "seen it all", and that some only have mathematicians, and that you only use one set of tools to make a decision. Gotta have both, and the two disciplines complement each other.

 

I will also note that "scouting" is a misused term in some ways - amateur and pro scouting are completely different areas and treated separately by the organizations.

[Kimmi]

Let's put it this way - I am sure the Yankees did not sign Swisher without watching him play. The analytics people reveal that he is terrific on base and power guy relative to cost ... the scouts can tell you that he can get by in the outfield in NY (i.e. what worked with Oakland was not temporary) and you put it together.

 

I think there is a perception at work here - that some orgs only have grumpy old scouts who have "seen it all", and that some only have mathematicians, and that you only use one set of tools to make a decision. Gotta have both, and the two disciplines complement each other.

 

I will also note that "scouting" is a misused term in some ways - amateur and pro scouting are completely different areas and treated separately by the organizations.

 

 

I think a common misconception among traditionalists is that the analytic people don't really understand the game or that they can't truly appreciate and enjoy baseball. In most cases, nothing could be further from the truth. I have always had a good understanding and appreciation of the game, but I'm telling you, after I was introduced to the world of sabermetrics, that understanding and appreciation has grown tenfold. It absolutely has to be the two disciplines working together.

[a700hitter]

I think a common misconception among traditionalists is that the analytic people don't really understand the game or that they can't truly appreciate and enjoy baseball. In most cases, nothing could be further from the truth. I have always had a good understanding and appreciation of the game, but I'm telling you, after I was introduced to the world of sabermetrics, that understanding and appreciation has grown tenfold. It absolutely has to be the two disciplines working together.

"Traditionalist"? There you go with the labels again. Some people could get offended.

[Kimmi]

"Traditionalist"? There you go with the labels again. Some people could get offended.

 

 

LOL Yes, I can see why traditionalists would be offended to be traditionalists. They should be.

 

I'm just wondering if I'm still on your lawn.

[a700hitter]

LOL Yes, I can see why traditionalists would be offended to be traditionalists. They should be.

 

I'm just wondering if I'm still on your lawn.

I've been on my back porch tonight so I haven't checked the front lawn.

[Ogden]

Be glad you have a lawn to be seen. My disappeared under the snow a couple months ago and I may not see it again until April.

[Kimmi]

Be glad you have a lawn to be seen. My disappeared under the snow a couple months ago and I may not see it again until April.

 

We are reaching 70 degrees today, and will be having some more snow/sleet tomorrow. Go figure.

 

I think I'll go camp out on my own lawn today, and soak up some warmth.

[sk7326]

I think a common misconception among traditionalists is that the analytic people don't really understand the game or that they can't truly appreciate and enjoy baseball. In most cases, nothing could be further from the truth. I have always had a good understanding and appreciation of the game, but I'm telling you, after I was introduced to the world of sabermetrics, that understanding and appreciation has grown tenfold. It absolutely has to be the two disciplines working together.

 

My favorite quote (iirc) came from John Hollinger, the Memphis NBA VP and former ESPN basketball writer ... He sees it more as "guys who love the sport so much they're willing to do the boring math to try to figure out what happened"

[cp176]

LOL Yes, I can see why traditionalists would be offended to be traditionalists. They should be.

 

I'm just wondering if I'm still on your lawn.

 

What do you consider a traditionalist to be? There may be some who are more traditional than you might be but I can't see any posters dispelling the use of available data to some extent.

[seabeachfred]

What do you consider a traditionalist to be? There may be some who are more traditional than you might be but I can't see any posters dispelling the use of available data to some extent.

 

Those who accuse "traditionalists" of bagging on sabermetrics data are off their charts. Data like that is very valuable and a great tool to measure performance but it is not an end all either. What I see is that the Saber people simply will not concede without a fight the idea that old school ideas are still very effective is now combined with new technology. One thing sabermeterics cannot measure is determination, heart, guts and balls of a player. Constant observation is the only way to judge that and even then it is not foolproof.

[User Name]

Those who accuse "traditionalists" of bagging on sabermetrics data are off their charts. Data like that is very valuable and a great tool to measure performance but it is not an end all either. What I see is that the Saber people simply will not concede without a fight the idea that old school ideas are still very effective is now combined with new technology. One thing sabermeterics cannot measure is determination, heart, guts and balls of a player. Constant observation is the only way to judge that and even then it is not foolproof.

 

fred, this is wrong. You are wrong. Most of the prominent statistical data proponents do nothing but rave about the value of scouting and advocate for the mixture of both in order to gain effective insight into performance valuation of prediction.

 

Almost all of the proponents for statistical analysis on here (or anywhere for that matter) say the same thing: Combining both approaches is what works best, but nothing is foolproof. You are suffering from a case of selective reading here.

[mvp 78]

If I had to rate it:

 

Stats>performance on Xbox>number of twitter followers>professional scouts>college scouts>HS coaches>little league coaches>any animal picking an object on tv to determine who the winner is>talksox posters whether included in other categories or not

[User Name]

There are no good baseball video games on Xbox goddamn you.

[seabeachfred]

fred, this is wrong. You are wrong. Most of the prominent statistical data proponents do nothing but rave about the value of scouting and advocate for the mixture of both in order to gain effective insight into performance valuation of prediction.

 

Almost all of the proponents for statistical analysis on here (or anywhere for that matter) say the same thing: Combining both approaches is what works best, but nothing is foolproof. You are suffering from a case of selective reading here.

 

Well I thought that's what I said---that there is room for both. I have found, though, that there some of the new era saber types who don't give much slack to those so-called "older" methods of evaluation. I hope we're both on the same page now.

[User Name]

Well I thought that's what I said---that there is room for both. I have found, though, that there some of the new era saber types who don't give much slack to those so-called "older" methods of evaluation. I hope we're both on the same page now.

 

Where are those new era cyber types? I don't see them.