Once upon a time, sabermetrics was an interesting field. Better, it meant something. Those curious about how baseball worked were lifting the veil and understanding the mechanics of the game. New metrics were developed that gave us a better idea of not only what a player was worth but how to puzzle that particular question out. Following the logic behind the new wave of baseball statistics was a ride through the logical skeleton of the game. Understand the stats, and you understood baseball. And there were a bevy of talented writers to guide you down that route.
Now, things are more than a little different. Sabermetrics seems to have lost its way.
Proper sabermetrics is something that has to come from the top down (baseball-driven) rather than the bottom up (mathematics/data driven), and to lose sight of that causes a whole host of issues that are plaguing the field at present. Every single formula must be explainable without recourse to using ridiculous numbers. Every analyst must be open to thinking about the game in new ways. Every number, every graph in a sabermetric piece must tell a baseball story, because otherwise we're no longer writing about the sport but indulging in blind number-crunching for its own sake.
What do you think? Do you agree or disagree with MacAree's points in the feature?
This entry was posted on Sunday, July 24th, 2011 at 10:06 am and is filed under Bloops. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.