Shanks Follows Up On His Heyward Article

[CyYoung31]

http://www.macon.com/2013/07/08/2548...rent-game.html

More "excellent" journalism from Bill. All of the oceans of the Earth couldn't cover all of the problems with this article.

Discuss.

[Carp]

Pompous jackass like he's always been. Someone had an awesome comment though:


"speaking of expectations.... I expected a well written article. I didn't read one."



I can't think of anyone who says Heyward is "great:, aside from may be some hardcore fanboys. Most "statheads" simply point out that he has been very good at a very young age. Even if he's never a superstar, he's still a very good player.

[ChapelHillMatt]

I'm not a stathead and I think it was a terrible article/comparison.

I also think Bill needs to develop thicker skin if he's going to continue to be publish these columns. He still comes across as a guy that HATES to be criticized.

Bottom line is Heyward is a young player still trying to figure things out. He was in the majors at the age of 20 and has had only one bad season. This one looks like it's going to end up being ok when all is said and done. Not bad, not great, just ok.

I'd love to ask Bill why he doesn't feel we should remain patient with young players anymore. What has changed? That used to be his stance all the time on players he liked. Remember how we were supposed to be patient with Davies, Reyes, Francoeur, KJ, LaRoche, etc?

Also he needs to stop acting like the difference in walks isn't a big deal, it's huge. Heyward sees the ball well out of the pitchers hand, Francoeur never did. I hold Francoeur personally responsible for how I view hitters now. Walking is one of the first things I look at. I used to think it didn't matter, now I do. You simply can't be a free swinger and be successful as a major league hitter. You have to show some sort of plate discipline. The fact that Heyward has already mastered this skill should have everyone excited about his future. There is so much talent here, it's amazing to me anyone would want to give up on him. He also works really hard and gives 100%, he's easy to pull for. I have no idea why Bill doesn't like him but it's pretty obvious he doesn't. All the things he's saying about Heyward now, he wasn't saying about Francoeur. He was solidly in his corner up until the day he was traded.

[Bdawg2309]

his terrible hitting vs lefties is an issue

[Carp]

his terrible hitting vs lefties is an issue

Pretty much all LHH don't hit LHP very well. Mac and Freeman hit them relatively well, but still are pretty pedestrian vs Lefties compared to how they hit vs righties.

[Carp]

I'm not a stathead and I think it was a terrible article/comparison.

I also think Bill needs to develop thicker skin if he's going to continue to be publish these columns. He still comes across as a guy that HATES to be criticized.

Bottom line is Heyward is a young player still trying to figure things out. He was in the majors at the age of 20 and has had only one bad season. This one looks like it's going to end up being ok when all is said and done. Not bad, not great, just ok.

I'd love to ask Bill why he doesn't feel we should remain patient with young players anymore. What has changed? That used to be his stance all the time on players he liked. Remember how we were supposed to be patient with Davies, Reyes, Francoeur, KJ, LaRoche, etc?

Also he needs to stop acting like the difference in walks isn't a big deal, it's huge. Heyward sees the ball well out of the pitchers hand, Francoeur never did. I hold Francoeur personally responsible for how I view hitters now. Walking is one of the first things I look at. I used to think it didn't matter, now I do. You simply can't be a free swinger and be successful as a major league hitter. You have to show some sort of plate discipline. The fact that Heyward has already mastered this skill should have everyone excited about his future. There is so much talent here, it's amazing to me anyone would want to give up on him. He also works really hard and gives 100%, he's easy to pull for. I have no idea why Bill doesn't like him but it's pretty obvious he doesn't. All the things he's saying about Heyward now, he wasn't saying about Francoeur. He was solidly in his corner up until the day he was traded.

You always hate to play this card, but pretty much all of those players have one obvious thing in common (well except for Reyes perhaps, but Bill was never really high on him as I recall).

[thethe]

Its silly to ignore stats at this point. Every front office in the game have a few guys who are analytical. Bill needs to get into the modern times.

[Gary82]

One of the guys from Talking Chop (formerly Capitol Avenue Club) writes a rebuttal to Bill's lousy excuse for an article.

http://www.talkingchop.com/2013/7/8/...e-a-journalist

Now that would just make the article bad. What makes the article laughably bad is the hubris that allows someone to write an article entirely about himself, and publish it in a small town paper. Bill devotes an entire paragraph about why he supposes that statheads don't like him. Which his belief is that it's due to him writing an anti-Moneyball book 8 years ago. I'll say that based on the book's sales, it's not even possible that this is a main (let alone the primary) reason why he's disliked. I've never even read Moneyball, and I don't even actually know anybody that read his anti-Moneyball book personally. I don't even dislike Bill Shanks, I think he's just incredibly awful at his job (unless that is, if his actual job is being unintentionally hilariously bad at his nominal job).

In all honesty, does Bill really think statheads hate him because he wrote Scout's Honor? I never read it. I think Neyer wrote a piece on hit and blasting it, but as far as I know, no one else has ever even mentioned the book.

[CyYoung31]

One of the guys from Talking Chop (formerly Capitol Avenue Club) writes a rebuttal to Bill's lousy excuse for an article.

http://www.talkingchop.com/2013/7/8/...e-a-journalist





In all honesty, does Bill really think statheads hate him because he wrote Scout's Honor? I never read it. I think Neyer wrote a piece on hit and blasting it, but as far as I know, no one else has ever even mentioned the book.

That was just a book plug. All the guy does is try to plug a ten year old book because he can't write anything else.

[nsacpi]

I'm one of the apparently small number of people who has read Scout's Honor. It is a pretty good read and I enjoyed it. It has lots of great stories about how scouts found various Braves prospects and how they evaluate players in general. It increased my appreciation of scouts.

Bill seems to think it was a refutation of Moneyball. I don't think so. I'm not sure Bill even understands what the "market inefficiency" approach is. And the idea that there is some sort of war between statheads and traditional scouting is a red herring/strawman/whatever you want to call it. Any decent front office will combine both strands of information.

[Knucksie]

One of the guys from Talking Chop (formerly Capitol Avenue Club) writes a rebuttal to Bill's lousy excuse for an article.

http://www.talkingchop.com/2013/7/8/...e-a-journalist



In all honesty, does Bill really think statheads hate him because he wrote Scout's Honor? I never read it. I think Neyer wrote a piece on hit and blasting it, but as far as I know, no one else has ever even mentioned the book.

Scout's Honor was presented as some sort of counter to Moneyball, but that wasn't even the gist of the book. Yeah, it's doubtful that it got much attention, outside of Braves fans. It had some interesting anecdotes, like finding out that the Indians offered Brett Butler back to the Braves for Komminsk. Even for a diehard Braves fans, it's non-essential reading. The books that have to be read by Braves fans are Glavine's, Leo's & Schuerholz's. For the record Schuerholz broached the subject of scouting and statistical analysis. He wrote simply, "we use both." That was the end of the discussion to my mind. Bill kept up as if it had to be one or the other. Both have their uses.

[ChapelHillMatt]

Its silly to ignore stats at this point. Every front office in the game have a few guys who are analytical. Bill needs to get into the modern times.

Depends what the stats are, I agree with Bill that some are just too much. I really don't pay any attention to most of them but I am big on OBP, OPS, and BABIP. I don't think I'll ever be big on the others that people use. I'm still very traditional in my thinking and like to look at a players AVG, OBP, RBI (how they hit with RISP), AND HR. Those numbers still matter to me. The stathead community wants to shove them out the door and replace them with new stats. I'm not ready for that and I doubt I ever will be.

I obviously don't agree with Bill on a lot but this is one of the few things I'm with him on.

[thethe]

Depends what the stats are, I agree with Bill that some are just too much. I really don't pay any attention to most of them but I am big on OBP, OPS, and BABIP. I don't think I'll ever be big on the others that people use. I'm still very traditional in my thinking and like to look at a players AVG, OBP, RBI (how they hit with RISP), AND HR. Those numbers still matter to me. The stathead community wants to shove them out the door and replace them with new stats. I'm not ready for that and I doubt I ever will be.

I obviously don't agree with Bill on a lot but this is one of the few things I'm with him on.

I think you also have to look at LD% and zone swinging percentages because they really give you a better indicator of what will happen in the future.

[jason27nc]

Its silly to ignore stats at this point. Every front office in the game have a few guys who are analytical. Bill needs to get into the modern times.

I agree but there are more to baseball than stats. You have to take into consideration good players can slump and still be playing good. For instance, a player may strike out 4 times in a game and on paper that look awful. In the game he may have fouled off a couple pitches and taking the pitcher to a 3 - 2 count. He may have just missed a home run that was foul by a foot. Then after 7 or 8 pitches he swings and misses. To me that was a good at bat but on paper in sucked. Then you have to take in to consideration luck and if a guy is hitting the ball hard. I know Heyward has hit some shots this year that was just caught.

[BremanFan88]

I agree but there are more to baseball than stats. You have to take into consideration good players can slump and still be playing good. For instance, a player may strike out 4 times in a game and on paper that look awful. In the game he may have fouled off a couple pitches and taking the pitcher to a 3 - 2 count. He may have just missed a home run that was foul by a foot. Then after 7 or 8 pitches he swings and misses. To me that was a good at bat but on paper in sucked. Then you have to take in to consideration luck and if a guy is hitting the ball hard. I know Heyward has hit some shots this year that was just caught.

There are stats for most of that though. Stats for pitches seen, stats to see if guys are swinging at pitches in the zone or out. In Heyward's case line drive percentage was showing he was hitting the ball hard and his BABIP shows how unlucky he's been.

[zitothebrave]

You always hate to play this card, but pretty much all of those players have one obvious thing in common (well except for Reyes perhaps, but Bill was never really high on him as I recall).

Bill was stupid high on Reyes. I was one of the few who thought he was a bum and would stay it. Bill had everyone drooling over his fastball and I said it stank.

[Julio3000]

I wonder what Bill Shanks would think of Glen Perkins.

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/qa-gl...-fip-and-math/

I wonder if the Braves have a player into the stats the way Perkins is.

We've had a couple of guys who were into tats. Close enough?

[jpx7]

We've had a couple of guys who were into tats. Close enough?

Something like this?

[TURBO]

Something like this?

Bet a lot of students wished this guy sat in-front of them during Algebra.

[Julio3000]

However, if he goes to his rubber while he's on the calculator, that's something else entirely.

/just the FIP