Baseball Think tank
- Thread starter Horsehide Harry
- Start date
salmagundy
Boras' Client
Several years back, JS read some of the boards. He called out one poster calling him an uneducated, shallow baseball thinker. I can't remember the posters name, but it drew a lot of ire as the poster had a PHD and Masters degrees in several areas of Business and Statistics. We had many good to great posters with progressive and baseball fundamentally sound ideas.Does anyone remember the posters name or the episode I remember.
We also had some that made points thru humor. Most famous of which was, "Wes the Wonderhorse, with warning track power, has a beautiful swing and rarely does the ball interfere with it's graceful arc".
We also had some that made points thru humor. Most famous of which was, "Wes the Wonderhorse, with warning track power, has a beautiful swing and rarely does the ball interfere with it's graceful arc".
When all that is true, why aren't we supposed to discuss those facts?
I am confident there is a guy in the analytics group who comes up with most of the stuff we do on this board. None of what we discuss here is all that complicated or original.
The question is how much do the good ol boys listen to him? My guess...not very much.
msstate7
Well-known member
Fify
Odd. Didn't realize it posted like that. What I wanted to write was even though I don't agree with you always it's clear you are all sharp people.
Wow I need to know this!
GovClintonTyree
<B>Vencer a Los Doyers</B>
That's some funny **** right there
Was this here, at Scout or another board?
The uneducated part was an emotional reaction, but Schuerholz was probably right about the poster being a shallow baseball thinker. Possessing a PhD only means that there was additional research done and qualifies that person to teach at the college level (of which there is no shortage of overeducated idiots). Area of expertise extends no further that that.
rico43
<B>Director of Minor League Reports</B>
Don't know about his sons, but Steinbrenner had someone document every word written about himself or the front office. To the extent these kind of boards were around back then, they were included.
While I'm sure most organizations pay some level of attention to "everything", they're also aware of how much weight to put on those discussions.
The thought that more than a few folks that post here have or are better equipped to break down than people with access to the same numbers and information is comical.
If you guys think you've found numbers that the Braves - or any other team - haven't at the very least looked into, you're dumber than most posters here.
Don't think anyone thinks they have numbers the Braves don't have access to.
The argument is the Braves are making personnel decisions that are counterintuitive to what the stats say. They're either underutilizing those numbers or completely ignoring them at all.
The argument is the Braves are making personnel decisions that are counterintuitive to what the stats say. They're either underutilizing those numbers or completely ignoring them at all.
No, the typical argument here is that they don't understand them.
Whether they are making decisions based on them is certainly questionable, but assuming the group of assembled geniuses here can interpret those numbers better is hilarious.
Compared to what? Your insightful contributions? You have never, ever, been right. Not a single time. Zero.
Further, Coppy literally said the Swanson promotion was a spur of the moment decision. That's about as "not understanding the numbers" as it gets. Right genius?
We'll never know that.
What we do know is saber friendly teams have followed roughly a common blue print on how they construct teams. And you see teams making certain decisions based on advanced stats.
You see the Cubs whom could afford anyone make smart move like holding down Bryant from the opening day team and then see us rush guys without taking into consideration we are a mid payroll team that needs to maximize years on players. And it's not to say they aren't taking it into consideration but if they're going against the grain of what other successful teams have done just because it's The Braves Way and we have to be renegades then that's very dumb.
When Coppy says in a Q&A that he doesn't put as much stock into defensive metrics as others do it's alarming when he acquires Kemp who costs us runs on defense all the time. And if most people think Kemp's offense makes up or cancels out his atrocious defense they're clearly not watching
What we DO know is that if you believe every word that comes out of a figurehead's mouth, you're not particularly intelligent - where's Trump's wall???
The current board "genius" is a blackjack dealer and is someone that's threatened by me, and I'm a real estate nobody. Show me qualifications that make 30 MLB organizations idiotic for not hiring you, and I'd be happy to say they're all idiots for not approaching decisions the way you think they should. You, the blackjack dealer, tons of posters here, and I have opinions, and we're all simply FANS - if you're trolling message boards and don't understand that you're nuts.
Is Coppy the only person on the planet who's ever questioned defensive metrics?
Or is he just the one mentioned when you want to make that point?