George Will on MLB today

[dgalehouse]

There is a multitude of stats. Enough to satisfy all types of fans. The advanced metrics " nerd stats" ( see George Will ) can be useful for front offices looking to build a team. The average fan has little interest in that and prefers the more basic , traditional stats. In either case , stats are not the problem. MLB needs to figure out how to make the sport more appealing to more people.

[mvp 78]

There is a multitude of stats. Enough to satisfy all types of fans. The advanced metrics " nerd stats" ( see George Will ) can be useful for front offices looking to build a team. The average fan has little interest in that and prefers the more basic , traditional stats. In either case , stats are not the problem. MLB needs to figure out how to make the sport more appealing to more people.

 

They could try marketing their stars? That's a good trick!

[dgalehouse]

They could try marketing their stars? That's a good trick!

Absolutely. They are surely lacking in that area.

[notin]

You're really trying to equate ERA, which a grade school kid can calculate, with numbers like WAR? OK...

 

 

The bottom line is, at some point someone introduced ERA as a stat in a era where pitchers where solely judged by wins and losses. ERA, when compared to wins, is much more complicated and it was a whole new way of looking at pitching.

 

Fifty years from now, when dWAR is on the backs of baseball cards and as mainstream as Apple pie and crystal meth, the new analytical fans will be eschewing it in favor of some new wave of analytical stats based on video input through 4 dimensional hyperspace…

[S5Dewey]

There is a multitude of stats. Enough to satisfy all types of fans. The advanced metrics " nerd stats" ( see George Will ) can be useful for front offices looking to build a team. The average fan has little interest in that and prefers the more basic , traditional stats. In either case , stats are not the problem. MLB needs to figure out how to make the sport more appealing to more people.

 

...which was the crux of Will's position. Furthermore he made suggestions as to how to make it happen.

[Bellhorn04]

The bottom line is, at some point someone introduced ERA as a stat in a era where pitchers where solely judged by wins and losses. ERA, when compared to wins, is much more complicated and it was a whole new way of looking at pitching.

 

Fifty years from now, when dWAR is on the backs of baseball cards and as mainstream as Apple pie and crystal meth, the new analytical fans will be eschewing it in favor of some new wave of analytical stats based on video input through 4 dimensional hyperspace…

 

Still not buying that there isn't a huge difference between 1) dividing runs by innings and 2) computerized data analysis. Good effort on your part though.

[notin]

They could try marketing their stars? That's a good trick!

 

Ok.

 

Open discussion question.

 

If you were to market MLB around 5 players, who would you choose?

 

Top three seem like slam dunks - Trout, Betts, and Acuna.

 

Next two? I’ll pick Tatis and Buehler. But there are ton of potentially good answers here…

[notin]

Still not buying that there isn't a huge difference between 1) dividing runs by innings and 2) computerized data analysis. Good effort on your part though.

 

Of course WAR is not the only analytic. Don’t forget this new wave started with simple math stats like FIP and OPS…

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

I'd pick Soto and Ohtani before Acuna, Tatis and Buehler. Raffy and Vlad are always smiling, too. Edited March 18, 2022 by 5GoldGloves:OF,75

[notin]

I'd pick Soto and Ohtani before Acuna, Tatis and Buehler. Raffy and Vlad are always smiling, too.

 

 

I considered Vlad, but I wanted a middle infielder.

 

Ohtani was a stupid omission on my part…

[dgalehouse]

The average fan can easily calculate a player's batting average , home runs , RBIs , OBP , etc. Also , they can easily see a pitcher's wins , losses and saves. ERA and WHIP are also easy to calculate. However , that fan has no idea how fWAR is calculated. I dare say many of the folks who love that stat also don't know how it is derived. How many folks could sit down now and figure out a given player's fWAR . You are basically just trusting someone who has some sort of system. I am not saying that it has no value , just that the average fan simply is not that interested. And that goes for the whole , ever growing , alphabet soup of metrics as well.

[notin]

The average fan can easily calculate a player's batting average , home runs , RBIs , OBP , etc. Also , they can easily see a pitcher's wins , losses and saves. ERA and WHIP are also easy to calculate. However , that fan has no idea how fWAR is calculated. I dare say many of the folks who love that stat also don't know how it is derived. How many folks could sit down now and figure out a given player's fWAR . You are basically just trusting someone who has some sort of system. I am not saying that it has no value , just that the average fan simply is not that interested. And that goes for the whole , ever growing , alphabet soup of metrics as well.

 

But my point is that back in 1888, when casual fans talked about pitching, do you think ERA was the hot topic?

 

“Tim Keefe had a 1.74 ERA this year. They should name an award after him.”

 

“Well how many games did he win?”

 

“35.”

 

“So… less than two years ago? He’s slowing down”

 

“But his ERA was 1.74. That’s better than two years ago.”

 

“What in the name of President Garfield is ERA?”

 

“Why you just take earned runs and divide by innings pitch then multiply by nine.”

 

“With what? My slide rule? No one is going to invent the pocket calculator for 60 years!”

 

“But it’s a new smarter better way to look at pitching!”

 

“You can stick your ERA or whatever under the giant front wheel of my old timey bicycle. Wins are good enough for me, thank you.”

[notin]

The average fan can easily calculate a player's batting average , home runs , RBIs , OBP , etc. Also , they can easily see a pitcher's wins , losses and saves. ERA and WHIP are also easy to calculate. However , that fan has no idea how fWAR is calculated. I dare say many of the folks who love that stat also don't know how it is derived. How many folks could sit down now and figure out a given player's fWAR . You are basically just trusting someone who has some sort of system. I am not saying that it has no value , just that the average fan simply is not that interested. And that goes for the whole , ever growing , alphabet soup of metrics as well.

 

 

“Use old stats; the math is easier!”

 

How did MLB miss out on that slogan?

 

The real big problem here is MLB needs to successfully market itself to a new generation, and we have an older generation telling them how to appreciate with old stats.

 

The new stats are not the problem. The math doesn’t matter. Kids don’t watch sports for the math. In fact, many of them don’t like math.

 

But you know what they actually do like? Looking stuff up on their phones. They don’t care how fWAR is calculated; they only care that it’s accessible…

[jacksonianmarch]

The HR, K, and BB game of now is not exciting. Exciting is watching Ken Griffey Jr race from 1b for a game winning slide into the plate in the 95 ALDS series with the Yanks. Exciting is a guy on second sprinting home ahead of a throw after a well struck single to the OF.

 

The game of now is so dependent on the long ball that teams now won’t give up potential outs to maximize the chances of a long ball. Gone are the sacrifice bunts and even the stolen bases save a few extraordinary athletes. Banning the shift will bring that back. Add in a better chance of a single and the extra base is imperative to scoring a run. The steal and sacrifice will be worth it again. Also, big ball is fun when it’s not the only way to score. Small ball builds the interest and the game intensity. I miss it

[S5Dewey]

 

The new stats are not the problem. The math doesn’t matter. Kids don’t watch sports for the math. In fact, many of them don’t like math.

 

But you know what they [kids]actually do like? Looking stuff up on their phones. They don’t care how fWAR is calculated; they only care that it’s accessible…

 

Wow. There are some pretty big generalities there. When you say "kids" do you mean my 45 year old son or his teenage children?

 

Since we're talking in generalities.. "They'' (meaning teenage children) don't even care that WHIP and FIP are accessible - or even exist. What they care about when they go to a game is watching someone hit the ball, watching someone field the ball, and the final score, and when they use their phones they use the phone to text their friends.

 

IMO that's a part of the problem. Old people (that's us) have become so rapt in statistics that we think everyone is - or should be -when what is really wanted is simply baseball as a game.

[Bellhorn04]

But my point is that back in 1888, when casual fans talked about pitching, do you think ERA was the hot topic?

 

“Tim Keefe had a 1.74 ERA this year. They should name an award after him.”

 

“Well how many games did he win?”

 

“35.”

 

“So… less than two years ago? He’s slowing down”

 

“But his ERA was 1.74. That’s better than two years ago.”

 

“What in the name of President Garfield is ERA?”

 

“Why you just take earned runs and divide by innings pitch then multiply by nine.”

 

“With what? My slide rule? No one is going to invent the pocket calculator for 60 years!”

 

“But it’s a new smarter better way to look at pitching!”

 

“You can stick your ERA or whatever under the giant front wheel of my old timey bicycle. Wins are good enough for me, thank you.”

 

Well, you made me look it up.

 

ERA has been around since 1912.

 

A whole lot of time passed between 1912 and the advent of modern analytics.

[notin]

Well, you made me look it up.

 

ERA has been around since 1912.

 

A whole lot of time passed between 1912 and the advent of modern analytics.

 

I actually knew that. But if you look past the President Garfield and old-timey bicycle jokes, there was one subtle reminder that in 1912, ERA wasn’t exactly the easiest calculation, either…

[Bellhorn04]

I actually knew that. But if you look past the President Garfield and old-timey bicycle jokes, there was one subtle reminder that in 1912, ERA wasn’t exactly the easiest calculation, either…

 

It can be done on a piece of paper fairly quickly if you can multiply and divide.

[mvp 78]

Ok.

 

Open discussion question.

 

If you were to market MLB around 5 players, who would you choose?

 

Top three seem like slam dunks - Trout, Betts, and Acuna.

 

Next two? I’ll pick Tatis and Buehler. But there are ton of potentially good answers here…

 

Two SoCal guys: Trout and Betts

Southeast: Acuna

Northeast: Judge

Midwest: Robert

[mvp 78]

I actually knew that. But if you look past the President Garfield and old-timey bicycle jokes, there was one subtle reminder that in 1912, ERA wasn’t exactly the easiest calculation, either…

 

Its origins is mid 19th century.

[mvp 78]

Well, you made me look it up.

 

ERA has been around since 1912.

 

A whole lot of time passed between 1912 and the advent of modern analytics.

I’ve seen it listed as mid 19th century.

[mvp 78]

From MLB.com:

 

Statistician and writer Henry Chadwick gets credit for inventing ERA in the mid-to-late 19th century. His thinking was that win-loss record simply didn't go far enough in determining the mark of a good pitcher.

[notin]

Wow. There are some pretty big generalities there. When you say "kids" do you mean my 45 year old son or his teenage children?

 

Since we're talking in generalities.. "They'' (meaning teenage children) don't even care that WHIP and FIP are accessible - or even exist. What they care about when they go to a game is watching someone hit the ball, watching someone field the ball, and the final score, and when they use their phones they use the phone to text their friends.

 

IMO that's a part of the problem. Old people (that's us) have become so rapt in statistics that we think everyone is - or should be -when what is really wanted is simply baseball as a game.

 

There are truths in both of our generalities.

 

And ideally, enjoying watching and playing are tantamount to the game’s survival. On the plus side, travel leagues have exploded in the last few years, providing more playing opportunities. The actual down side effect is the proliferation of parents who view baseball not as a fun activity, but as a scholarship opportunity. (This is not all parents, but probably more than you realize.). I do think some kids enjoy the game less for this reason.

 

But my point that the aspects of fWAR that bother some people just don’t bother kids today does stand. Many would rather just Google abd don’t care about the math.

[notin]

I’ve seen it listed as mid 19th century.

 

 

It probably can be dual my credited. One created to the inventor, and one credit to the statistician who pushed for its widespread acceptance. These stats rarely gain any right away. Look how long OBP and SLG were around before anyone ever mentioned them…

[notin]

Two SoCal guys: Trout and Betts

Southeast: Acuna

Northeast: Judge

Midwest: Robert

 

 

Again, all good choices.

 

You, me and 5Gold clearly chose different strategies. I opted for more well-rounded players and wanted at least one pitcher. (And in hindsight, Ohtani was a much, much better option than Buehler.). 5Gold focused primarily on hitters. You went regional.

 

All good options. MLB needs to read this thread…

[notin]

It can be done on a piece of paper fairly quickly if you can multiply and divide.

 

Right.

 

Most people in 1912 looked at Christy Mathewson and said “310 innings pitched and 107 runs allowed. Give me a pencil and 45 minutes to work this out.”

[Bellhorn04]

Right.

 

Most people in 1912 looked at Christy Mathewson and said “310 innings pitched and 107 runs allowed. Give me a pencil and 45 minutes to work this out.”

 

45 minutes? Jeezus.

 

You must think people in 1912 had brains the size of cats' brains.

[notin]

From MLB.com:

 

Statistician and writer Henry Chadwick gets credit for inventing ERA in the mid-to-late 19th century. His thinking was that win-loss record simply didn't go far enough in determining the mark of a good pitcher.

 

This seems odd in hindsight.

 

Up until 1884, pitchers threw underhand and hitters told them where to throw it. The job of a pitcher in the “mid-19th century” wasn’t to get the hitter out like it is today. His job was just to get the ball in play and start the action.

 

I also wonder when scorers started differentiating between earned runs and unearned runs. Was that difference even in place in 1869?

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

Again, all good choices.

 

You, me and 5Gold clearly chose different strategies. I opted for more well-rounded players and wanted at least one pitcher. (And in hindsight, Ohtani was a much, much better option than Buehler.). 5Gold focused primarily on hitters. You went regional.

 

All good options. MLB needs to read this thread…

 

They need to market a pitcher ("70% of the game"), but I doubt kids would like the big money guys projecting grumpy personas on the mound (albeit contrived in the Bob Gibson/Randy Johnson mode).

[jad]

I knew about ERA more than 60 years ago, as did every baseball fan or casual player I knew, and the calculations were no more difficult than batting average (I realize long division may remain a mystery for some fans). I also knew how to add up Wins and Losses, although in those days, it was a lot easier to count W's than L's.