MLB Exec: Moneyball is a Flop
By Mike Silva ~ November 13th, 2009. Filed under: Sabermetrics.
In a week where war over WAR broke out at NYBD, I spoke to Vince Gennaro of Diamond Dollars, and the sabr community again doesn’t get my position on the utilization of statistics NYBD reached out to a MLB executive to see his thoughts on moneyball and advanced metrics. Mind you this is not just anybody; this is a high ranking official with one of the 30 big league clubs. Here was his response:
Among other sewage that has oozed to the surface is the erroneous belief that statistics are the end-all in baseball today, a myth perpetrated by the garbage called “MoneyBall.” Moneyball geniuses have flopped like DePodesta, Ricciardi, and even the infamous Billy Beane whose exploits have all lacked a World Series trophy. It is all a tool to be used by the uninitiated. I’ll take a good scout and player development people anytime; the statistics are very secondary. How do you account a .220 hitter for being the hero of the World Series or a guy who hits three home runs a year wins the pennant clincher with a home run? Pitchers often get the best of hitters in the playoffs. There are a million examples of things going against the logic of statistical analysis.
I agree with the above statement – to an extent. First, you need to apply certain business principles of moneyball in order to compete if you are a smaller market team. Asking Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, Kansas City, etc. to be perfect in every aspect of player development is not realistic. I believe the value of advanced metrics is more on the financial evaluation side than building a team. That is why I challenge the thought process that someone like Mike Cameron is better for the Mets than Jason Bay or Matt Holliday. There are aspects about that analysis that may be true for certain teams (i.e. the Yankees), but you can’t blanket that across the MLB spectrum. That is where I agree with having good scouting and player development. They should drive the car while the GM weighs aspects of finances and advanced metrics on the backend. From what I have learned teams have their own metrics and don’t necessarily use fangraphs (which is a great site) or other advanced theory. If a longtime scout believes Bengie Molina is a top defensive catcher I probably would trust him over numbers created by some mathematician. I am not dismissing the numbers, but rather giving credence to experience. I still stand by my belief that leaders in the advanced statistics movement are trying to establish themselves in the mainstream for employment purposes. This thought of doing it for the “love of the game” is preposterous. Everyone has an ego and the want for power. These guys are no different and, based on some of their comments to this site, they yearn for it more than others.
Just like in all walks of life there needs to be a balance in ones approach. Advanced metrics play a part in that, but for any individual, or website, to believe they have all the facts about why Alex Cora is or is not worth $2 million is patently absurd. Obviously everyone, including me, is entitled to their opinion, but the truth probably lies somewhere in between. It’s the mindset that someone has all the answers that bothers me, not the fact they disagree.
November 13th, 2009 at 11:04 am
“How do you account a .220 hitter for being the hero of the World Series or a guy who hits three home runs a year wins the pennant clincher with a home run?”
Really, someone needs to have that explained to them?
And I’d love to meet the scout or player development person who can predict which .220 hitter will be the World Series hero.
November 13th, 2009 at 11:29 am
i cannot take seriously anyone who says that cameron is a better fit than holliday or bay. they dont watch games. u can spin any stat to make one player better than another. thats why u need scouts watchig games and using common sense.
who would ever say cameron is better than those guys??
November 13th, 2009 at 11:53 am
“How do you account a .220 hitter for being the hero of the World Series or a guy who hits three home runs a year wins the pennant clincher with a home run?”
This statement says all you need to know about the idiocy of some baseball executives and the general BS that you set forth on this site.
November 13th, 2009 at 12:03 pm
http://www.diamondvues.com/Boston%20Red%20Sox%202007%20WS%20Ring.jpg
November 13th, 2009 at 12:31 pm
“the erroneous belief that statistics are the end-all in baseball today”
No sane person believes that. Sounds like an attack from some immature player development guru who feels threatened by the sabermetric community. In reality, there’s plenty of common ground between the two groups. Absolutely no reason for him to get all defensive like that. I’m sure he’s glad you didn’t publish his name because he looks like a fool.
Intelligent people quit doing the stats vs. scouting argument years ago. It’s not a me vs. them thing, anymore. Trying to draw out that facet of the discussion demonstrates this person’s immaturity. He’s fighting straw men, putting words in people’s mouth. Nobody alleged that statistics are the end-all in baseball today. Arguing with these people is a fools errand, anyway, because they’re also misinformed.
Smart people realize that both groups can contribute to the success of a baseball franchise and value their contributions accordingly. Ignorant people continue to try and make it personal and refuse to value the contributions of others.
Yes, this happens on both sides of the debate, of course, but that doesn’t mutually excuse it. Two sides acting foolish doesn’t mean they’re both correct for doing so. It means they’re both foolish. The unnamed “high ranking official” is being foolish.
“I’ll take a good scout and player development people anytime”
I will, too, given the choice BETWEEN the two, but why not have both? It’s silly not to use all of the resources at your disposal. This response was clearly given by an ignorant person working in a dumb organization (most likely the Mets). An organization that would rather lose than acknowledge the fact that people that have never played baseball–though much smarter than a great deal of the people involved with scouting/player development today–are just as valuable as they are when it comes to roster construction.
Why would you print such a silly argument? There are PLENTY of smart, successful baseball executives working in competent organizations that would give you a correct and intelligent response. Why print this (when it was clearly given in anger by a most likely unqualified, uneducated individual working in a bad front office)? I see only two reasons:
1) You’re trying to increase page views by ruffling a few feathers. Which is fine, I guess, it’s a business. Or…
2) You’re trying to encourage ignorance. And that is simply unforgivable. I hope nobody takes this seriously, either way.
November 13th, 2009 at 1:39 pm
Is this satire? I don’t get it.
It’s way too childish and illogical to have been written by a serious adult, but not quite funny enough to be good satire.
November 13th, 2009 at 1:40 pm
“If a longtime scout believes Bengie Molina is a top defensive catcher I probably would trust him over numbers created by some mathematician.”
So when you are buying a car, would you rather trust a consumer guide survey of 3,000 car owners, or one random schmuck?
November 13th, 2009 at 2:06 pm
i cannot take seriously anyone who says that cameron is a better fit than holliday or bay.
I cannot take seriously anyone who can’t be bothered to writer proper grammatical sentences.
November 13th, 2009 at 3:39 pm
they don’t call them stat “geeks” for nothing. seriously, I love statistical analysis. I think OPS is a great stat. I love guys who get on base. I hate pitch counts but they seem to have some validity. The truth is though that things change in crunch time and in the playoffs. I don’t think stat guys deny this. I think the tendency ican be to go overboard and try to explain the minutiae with stats. If I tried to conduct my personal life by statistical analysis I would be a lonely guy
November 13th, 2009 at 4:13 pm
Mike, did you just make up the anonymous baseball exec again?
November 13th, 2009 at 4:21 pm
Yes, just like I made up Backman going to Brooklyn. Your jealousy and bitterness is showing – grow up. I am working hard to create dialogue and develop contacts. Believe what you want. It seems that things that you guys disagree with are false, but things that you agree with are true.
I have sources that agree with firing Jerry Manuel – happy now
November 13th, 2009 at 4:52 pm
“The truth is though that things change in crunch time and in the playoffs.”
Alex Rodriguez Career Slash Stats:
Regular Season: .305/.390/.576/.965
Postseason: .302/.409/.568/.977
Derek Jeter Career Slash Stats:
Regular Season: .317/.388/.459/.847
Postseason: .313/.383/.479/.863
Look, baseball is random. David Eckstein can have a better 5 or 6 game stretch than Albert Pujols. If it comes in June, nobody’s gonna notice. If it comes in October, he’s gonna live in the annals of baseball history. And no “stat geek” will ever tell you that there’s a 100% certainty that Pujols will do better over a 7 game stretch than Eckstein, b/c they all know that baseball is random, and anyone can shine in a short sample. That doesn’t change the fact that Albert Pujols is a far, far better baseball player.
November 13th, 2009 at 4:56 pm
I think the height of absurdity is when people put Ben Zobrist, a very nice player, in the same league as Pujols because of WAR. There is very little defensive attributes that can close the gap with the best hitter in baseball.
You guys don’t get the point. It’s more about people tiring of your “know it all” attitude and lack of common sense with player development. Many of these moneyball principles need to be balanced between the team and business. Remember Vince Gennaro said it was part art/part science, not all art or all science.
November 13th, 2009 at 5:22 pm
You say that you’re tiring of the “know it all” attitude in a post where you seemingly support a statement like, “How do you account a .220 hitter for being the hero of the World Series or a guy who hits three home runs a year wins the pennant clincher with a home run?”
Listen, we get it, you’re down because the Mets suck, the Yankees won the World Series and you’re trying to generate site traffic with these ridiculous posts.
But don’t expect to post stuff like this and not be called out for your shenanigans.
November 13th, 2009 at 5:42 pm
Hey Mike,
Don’t listen to the nasty posters amongst the rest. Their rudeness is all you need to know.
I also agree that sabermetrics has gotten way out of hand and people have become obssesed with fragments of usless info that have no real world value on the diamond and merely parse hairs for what I believe is the intellectualization needs of those who can’t seem to get enough of such.
There’s plenty info to be gleamed from the more basic stats properly applied in conjunction with player talent, effort, athleticism, game saavy, work ethic and the tell all – good old fashioned observation applied to results. I’m not at all swayed by some sabermetric stat geek’s artificial elevation of Matt Holliday’s on-field value to the ridiculous, or that somehow Danny Murphy is one of the top defensive first basemen in the NL. I see, I watch, I observe for four decades and know my stuff. Sabermetrics misapplied, is poor substitution for common sense.
November 13th, 2009 at 5:42 pm
Mike, I have no jealousy of you. I don’t understand where you got that from
November 13th, 2009 at 7:33 pm
FJN
Just being facetious. No worries, believe what you want. I welcome the criticism and appreciate you taking the time to comment on the site. It’s baseball it’s suppose to be fun!
November 14th, 2009 at 5:08 am
So Mike, you’re saying that a player who saves ~30 runs on defense isn’t equal to a player who creates ~30 runs on offense. That makes perfect sense!
November 14th, 2009 at 7:57 am
Evan
Again you are taking man made advanced statistics to talk in absolutes. How do you know that person saved 30 runs? Could the 30 runs driven in by Player A be more valuable than the 30 saved? How do you honestly know if a run is saved?
Using totally one side or the other is, with all due respect, very shallow thinking.
November 14th, 2009 at 10:30 am
LongTimeFan — I truly wish you could have an argument with the likes of Quine, Putnam or Hempel because your reasoning is laughable. Effort, work ethic, game savvy are all accidental generalizations that almost appeal to an authority and are not falsifiable which turns this into a Creationism vs Darwinian theory argument.
We will NEVER find the “perfect” statistic much like Quantum Mechanics may one day be falsified like Aristotilian Physics and Newtonian Mechanics.
For a few years win shares was a big one, then VORP, now WAR. Each one albeit imperfect was a MASSIVE upgrade over W/L, Saves, Errors etc which at one time were very useful in gauging player evaluation. The SABRmetric community is attempting to progress and understand baseball better while willingly admitting and discarding out-dated or flawed statistics. Why are some people SO fearful of progress?
I don’t believe WAR is the unified theory of baseball evaluation due to the relatively strong arguments against UZR and +/-. I agree a run saved against a run created can be equal (and there are strong arguments saying a run saved can be more important) but we can’t take these advanced defensive stats in isolation, they play into the entire picture.
Also, the SABRmetric community EMBRACES the scouting aspect of baseball as shown by explosion of Pitchfx. Go to amazinavenue.com or fangraphs and at least once or twice a week a thread is created discussing certain players pitch location and stuff for the game and in regards to the playoffs on fangraphs each Burnett start was broken down by pitchfx.
Finally, the Dan Murphy argument is the ultimate straw man. You create some blanket statement with zero research. UZR is a statistic that the creators emphasize is best utilized on a three year sample size. Murphy played about 2/3rds of a season at 1B and prima facie looked pretty good over there. It is a mild indicator of future success at 1B but were he to turn into Giambi, nobody would be surprised.
November 15th, 2009 at 12:51 pm
He can tire all he wants. If he’s (1) not giving his name, (2) not naming who he’s criticizing, and (3) distorting the meaning of the book, he’s not being very honest at all.
Scouts classically rate player skills on a 20-80 scale. This is data, so there’s clearly some data he puts stock in. The point is finding which data — or combination of data — are the best predictors.
If he’s more enlgihtened than everybody else, let him give his name and shove some of his championship trophies up everybody’s asses.
The truth is that baseball humbles us all.