Monday, March 28, 2005

hey, I love the world-view of saber guys who can't help but to judge things by their favorite pet stats:

Rob: Okay, okay, you’ve convinced me! I actually didn’t realize how well Hernandez had pitched in his career, though his strikeout rate does ring a few alarm bells, no? As a major leaguer, he’s struck out 5.04 batters per nine innings. And as I’m sure you know, it’s the rare major leaguer who can pitch effectively for long with that sort of K-rate.

I’m not saying this particular pitcher can’t do it, because of course I’m an Eternal Optimist. And K’s or no K’s, he probably does deserve that spot in the rotation (though I think Mike Wood might be just as qualified). But I’ve got a hard time believing that, long term, Hernandez has any sort of star potential.


wow, it's tough to predict a guy is not going to become a big star in the major leagues, huh? since it's so common and all.. mr. neyer has risen again to bring us this supreme nugget of wisdom: he'd rather see a pitcher strike out more guys per game! incisive! let's see, rob and company don't like low strike out rates, they don't like low doubles/triples/home runs percentage, they like guys that get on base a lot...well, goddamn why don't we just go out and get those high strike-out, power-hitting fellas? oh, wait, that's what every team in history has looked for in an effort to get better. you mean dominant strike-out guys aren't prevalent in MLB? you're telling me high-powered on-base machines don't come cheap in the age of extreme disparities among teams in the major leagues? teams don't take risks and draft guys like, oh, colt griffin and roscoe crosby in the hopes of enjoying the rare talents of those guys that actually have the ability to be the type of dominant player everyone -- stat guys and, um, "other" guys -- enjoy watching? you'd think every team would stock themselves up with power guys, instead of relying on an old low-strikeout mule like hernandez.

it's easy to play saber-baseball in the comfort of your computer screen, but you have to remember that every "good" draft pick becomes a success after the fact, and every team can't pick the "good" ones ahead of time. so, while every saber guy can wish for a high-strikeout pitcher to compliment your high OBP, slugging 3rd baseman, you have to remember that you've had scouts out there trying to find the best possible player at whatever position at every point in the scouting process. and, please don't think that finding a guy that can crush the ball and be selective at the plate, or throw strikes with every pitch and strike guys out at an amazing rate is an everyday thing. those guys are not available to every team, every year – it takes luck and/or money. there's not a high contingent of these "ultimate" players just waiting to join your team. so, in evaluating players, it's just as easy to take their saber-stat lines and project them as (mostly) nobodies and (a few) "prospective" stars as it is to scout players and draft them based on "potential" vs. "stats". basically, as much as the saber/stat contingent would like to believe they've corrupted the scouting area, I've really yet to be convinced that they've actually stumbled upon something that says anything different than what anybody with a bit of common sense already knows – basically, that good hitters will be able to look for good pitches, and that good pitchers will be able to take advantage of lesser-skilled batters. this is, obviously, complicated stuff. required all sorts of trigonometry and calculus-ish formulas. or, you know, common sense. this "sabermetric revolution" can calculate all the complicated formulas it wants, and all the numbers boil down to is commen-sense garbage that any intelligent baseball mind could comprehend: hitting = good. dominant pitching = good. ability to recognize strikes = good. ability to steal bases well = good (just now catching on with the saber-crowd). GOOD DEFENSE = good (though apparently, until the metrics are perfected, this is still a work in progress as far as being more that a sidenote in current discussions). numbers can tell you so much, but if you get caught up in them, you'll NEVER see the big picture. and, trust me, I love numbers as much as anyone. the problem is, you either get it or you don't. and, as much as numbers guys want to get it, some of them can't see outside of their own little sphere. baseball is not numbers itself, and if you can't appreciate an entirely different realm than just sabermetrics, you are missing out on half of the game.

until then, guys like runelvys hernandez will always be looked at questioningly, seeing as how the current pet stat says they probably won't ever be a star. and even if he were to become one, i'm sure someone would be quick to point out how his peripherals and assorted formulaic values show he's just "lucky" to succeed while defying whatever it is that's supposed to predict success these days..

No comments: