Wait a minute. Hold on my man. You work with people who work with BIS. Baseball Info Solutions—a baseball data provider that relies on human input from video scouts (humans) and ballpark-based stringers (Interns that have taken an 8 week training course, more to the point, other humans). And you seem to have a problem with longtime baseball fans, more to the point, other humans’ input, because they haven’t marked it down on an iPad?
Take Statcast. Look, I’m all for Statcast. I’ve been pretty excited about it for years, before 2015 even (when it was fully implemented in EVERY MLB ballpark, not just a handful). But it’s still relatively new and not without flaws. Human flaws coupled with technology flaws and It’s only been 3 full years in every ballpark. It’s a baby. This technology WILL get increasingly better over time, but I do not believe it’s perfect in it’s present form. If it was perfect, why bother with BIS, or Inside Edge, or Trackman, or STATS, or PITCHf/X, or FIELDf/x on top of Statcast at all then? Why do some teams buy redundant data to find differences between them? Why question it all? Is the human brain the most flawed out of all of them? Yes. However, we wouldn’t have any of them without it, so maybe we shouldn’t totally dismiss an opinion outright.
My biggest issue with your post is the first line about ending the argument. Why the hell would I want to do that?