Interesting Note In Rosenthal's Wednesday Morning Column

[clvclv]

"YOU CAN’T MEASURE IT, BUT ...

Some sabermetricians — I’m talking to you, Brian Kenny — dismiss the significance of intangibles, contending they are impossible to quantify and insignificant to winning.

Well, I wish Kenny could have heard Mets manager Terry Collins talk about the lift that David Wright gave his teammates upon meeting them at Dodger Stadium on Friday afternoon.

Wright had been away from the club while rehabilitating from spinal stenosis in Los Angeles. But he remains the Mets’ biggest star, the face of the organization, and his absence has left the team with more than just a void on the field.

Collins described the mood as “completely different” with Wright in the room, saying the players were laughing more, talking louder. No one would suggest that Wright’s presence is the reason the Mets won two of three from the Dodgers. But these things matter, more than some people think."

And...

"What is the problem?

● Shortly after trading right-hander Touki Toussaint, Diamondbacks general manager Dave Stewart said, “Guys are mentioning that he throws 96 mph. He hasn’t thrown 96 mph since he’s been here. We haven’t seen 96 once.”

Well, Toussaint touched 98 in his most recent start for the Braves’ Class-A Rome affiliate on Saturday night, pitching five scoreless innings."



http://www.foxsports.com/mlb/story/texas-rangers-trade-talks-shin-soo-choo-cole-hamels-wandy-rodriguez-070615

[Hawk]

I'd also point to Cameron Maybin as a sterling example of how, sometimes, pure statistical analysis is completely unable to account for a range of factors which might be contributive to the overall picture. I mean, are there stats for: doesn't feel valued, far away from family, back up against the wall competing for a position you clearly can't win?

Advanced metrics have opened new doors in the sport, not going to dispute that, but individuals who base 100% of their arguments on the numbers have always been easy targets because they tend to eschew reality.

I'm reminded of the catcher (Jeremy Brown) in Moneyball that the A's organization touted up and down and all around; the book poked at traditional scouts who couldn't see past the fact that Brown was FAT (and rather athletically inept). Sometimes it really is that simple.

Sure, there are aberrations and examples which can be provided to support both sides of the coin, but I guess my point is that fans should try avail themselves to all of the information floating around when making their prognostications.

[thethe]

I'd also point to Cameron Maybin as a sterling example of how, sometimes, pure statistical analysis is completely unable to account for a range of factors which might be contributive to the overall picture. I mean, are there stats for: doesn't feel valued, far away from family, back up against the wall competing for a position you clearly can't win?

Advanced metrics have opened new doors in the sport, not going to dispute that, but individuals who base 100% of their arguments on the numbers have always been easy targets because they tend to eschew reality.

I'm reminded of the catcher (Jeremy Brown) in Moneyball that the A's organization touted up and down and all around; the book poked at traditional scouts who couldn't see past the fact that Brown was FAT (and rather athletically inept). Sometimes it really is that simple.

Sure, there are aberrations and examples which can be provided to support both sides of the coin, but I guess my point is that fans should try avail themselves to all of the information available when making their prognostications.

And with Maybin that injuries may not be attributable to a deficiency in an ability to stay healthy.

Sports will always be played by humans. Therefore, sabermetricians use the generic term of "luck" when they are unable to explain a variation from expected results. Its ok to be humble and admit that not everything can be predicted with spreadsheets.

[atl717]

Numbers are far more accurate than human analysis, that is for sure.

[yeezus]

Numbers are far more accurate than human analysis, that is for sure.

that really wasn't the argument being made, but hello straw man.

[The Chosen One]

There is value to rah rah guys like Gomes even if he underperforms on the field.

Personalities are not quantifiable, and we know Bobby was a great manager of personalities and getting the most out of his players (except you Greg Norton and Klobber).

Maybin has a swag and spark to him that I think keeps some of thr guys on the team pumped to play. You can tell he loves being here and performing just like Simmons.

[The Chosen One]

Also why I hated losing Heyward. He had intangibles you can't quantify. His quiet professional demeanor with hustle and grit was more leadership than Freeman has ever shown. That sets the bar high for the clubhouse.

[Horsehide Harry]

You have to add context to mix with the stats.

As an example, I would offer Bobby Bonilla. The Mets signed him like he was an elite bat. They didn't look past the stats and figure in that he had been playing with one of the most feared hitters of all time while building his resume.

And, intangibles do matter, both good and bad, but you can't intangible your way into an MVP unless you are Terry Pendelton.

[The Chosen One]

I don't think Freeman would be as immature as he is if he played a full season under Bobby like Heyward. Bobby was the old grandpa you didn't want to disappoint. Fredi is like your laid back Uncle you hang out with.

[Millwood1Hitter]

You have to add context to mix with the stats.

As an example, I would offer Bobby Bonilla. The Mets signed him like he was an elite bat. They didn't look past the stats and figure in that he had been playing with one of the most feared hitters of all time while building his resume.

And, intangibles do matter, both good and bad, but you can't intangible your way into an MVP unless you are Terry Pendelton.

Bad example. Yes, the contract was bad at the time, but Bobby Bo wasn't like he was BJ Upton either for the Mets. In fact, he was pretty darn good offensively with the exception of his 1st year in NY, which had more to do with injuries and getting acclimated to the media cesspool that is NY. In fact, New York got exactly productivity wise pretty much what could be expected of him, his productivity exceeded that of his time in Pittsburgh in his full seasons there in the same lineup as Bonds.

Not his fault that the Met's and their fanbase perceived him as being their savior, as he definately wasn't. But a levelheaded individual and fan at that point in time should realize that Bobby Bo was exactly what he was perceived to be productivity wise, which was a quality middle of the order bat at an offensively starved position.