Comments on: I will be embarassing myself on the radio at 4:30 today http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/14093 This and that about baseball stats. Tue, 16 Jul 2013 17:01:55 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=4.6 By: Fireworks http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/14093/comment-page-1#comment-139051 Sat, 20 Aug 2011 18:39:40 +0000 http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/?p=14093#comment-139051 Sean, you did a good job. You were going in there into hostile territory with typical 'sports guys'. The reactions to analysis that defies superficial counting stats and simple average stats are always the same: the ignorant people that do not understand how these things correlate with value, with wins, with runs, always respond that the game is played on the field, or that advanced stats take the mystery out of things, or any other excuse (whether polite or rude) they can find to be somewhat dismissive.

Personally I think that better analysis of the game only leads to a better understanding of it but that mystery still abounds. Drama still abounds. The thing that really separates sports entertainment from other forms of entertainment is that it is a true drama--it is not fiction, it is not fabricated in the mind of a writer, or controlled and manipulated like in a reality television show--and just because people like you and others endeavor to shed more illumination on what actually happened, to find a truer truth, that does not mean anything is lost. To me, things are gained.

And one thing I detest about the anti-saber argument is the dismissal in the form that baseball is not all numbers. Baseball has ALWAYS been about numbers and I don't know if anyone can be a hardcore fan without an attraction to numbers unlike any other sport.

...

BTW, in response to the Yankees thing, Cone talks about advanced stats all the time, all the time, he mentions B-R and Fangraphs and is a huge fan and I think someone here (?) linked to an article about Cone talking about it and it told me just how well he understood the value of it. The other broadcasters' response to Cone is at best slightly warm, usually lukewarm, rarely outright dismissive, and I really think that probably every broadcast team out there needs a Cone that is willing to challenge some of the inane convention.

]]>
By: Johnny Twisto http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/14093/comment-page-1#comment-138025 Thu, 18 Aug 2011 04:24:23 +0000 http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/?p=14093#comment-138025 Nope, Michael Kay wasn't there.

]]>
By: Doug B http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/14093/comment-page-1#comment-137941 Wed, 17 Aug 2011 21:26:38 +0000 http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/?p=14093#comment-137941 David Cone's 57.5 WAR puts him ahead of 33 pitchers already in the hall of fame (including Whitey Ford and Sandy Koufax).

]]>
By: Chuck http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/14093/comment-page-1#comment-137865 Wed, 17 Aug 2011 18:05:07 +0000 http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/?p=14093#comment-137865 It was David Cone, it was in response to the "fan poll" of the day, asking which of the traditional stats used on the network runs, RBI, average, HR, was more important.

Cone asked where WAR was, to which his partner, John Flaherty, responded, "we don't use it."

Michael Kay then changed the subject.

]]>
By: nightfly http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/14093/comment-page-1#comment-137767 Wed, 17 Aug 2011 13:42:28 +0000 http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/?p=14093#comment-137767 O'Neill only talks about food and stupid umpires.

This makes my morning.

]]>
By: Johnny Twisto http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/14093/comment-page-1#comment-137664 Wed, 17 Aug 2011 05:41:29 +0000 http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/?p=14093#comment-137664 Nightfly, I only paid attention to some of the game tonight, but I believe that was David Cone.

O'Neill only talks about food and stupid umpires.

]]>
By: nightfly http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/14093/comment-page-1#comment-137656 Wed, 17 Aug 2011 05:29:26 +0000 http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/?p=14093#comment-137656 The Yankees broadcasters mentioned WAR today - someone said he was a fan, but I didn't recognize the voice, I think it was Paul O'Neill. This was about two minutes after they praised someone for "not worrying about his OBP, he's there to swing."

I wish I had paid more attention, but that actually caught my notice in passing, so I can't be more specific.

]]>
By: Scott http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/14093/comment-page-1#comment-137605 Wed, 17 Aug 2011 03:20:48 +0000 http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/?p=14093#comment-137605 Stand by your article Sean. Let the radio men live with their antiquated statistics they rely on. 15 years from now sabermaticians will have their jobs.

]]>
By: Kahuna Tuna http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/14093/comment-page-1#comment-137568 Wed, 17 Aug 2011 02:20:51 +0000 http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/?p=14093#comment-137568 After all, WAR is a stat that you don't often hear on the game broadcasts, and you won't hear it at all in spanish broadcasts.

¿victorias/ganancias sobre reemplazo (VSR/GSR)? (-;þ

]]>
By: Luis Gomez http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/14093/comment-page-1#comment-137506 Wed, 17 Aug 2011 00:36:34 +0000 http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/?p=14093#comment-137506 Sean, I think you did pretty good on the interview. After all, WAR is a stat that you don't often hear on the game broadcasts, and you won't hear it at all in spanish broadcasts. Again, well done.

I also think that all this Howard-is-overrated-because-he-has-too-many-baserunners is similar to the Joe-Carter-is-not-a-HOFer thread from a couple a months ago.

]]>