Stat guys

by niekromurphy on Aug 1, 2008 7:37 PM EDT Comment 27 comments

I am I the only one that has had it with the holier than thou attitude of some stat guy types? I occasionally read Firejoemorgan.com sometimes. I agree that that statistical analysis is important and that stats tell a lot of the story. What I don't like is the snarky, we know everything attitude that some stat heads have. To me this a manner of balance. Please don't think this is a shot at everybody who is into stats or the use of stats. It is not at all.

0 recs | Comment 27 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Do you want to cite any specific example?

Or is trolling really more of your angle here?

Sheesh.

by mburris1 on Aug 1, 2008 8:05 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Anyone with a snarky, we know everything attitude is just annoying, whether they are sabermetric guys, traditional stat guys, or guys who think Jeter is awesome cause of his calm eyes.

As a “stat guy” myself, I hate it when people make a claim and don’t have anything other than their gut to back it up. Teix is unclutch, anyone? Though I was guilty of this early when I said Burrel benefits from that tiny park when his career Home/Away split is almost identical. Moral of the story: check your facts! And, to be honest, people who don’t use stats are more guilty of this since, well, they don’t use stats.

by VictorW on Aug 1, 2008 8:06 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

New Plan

Don’t feed the trolls.

by mburris1 on Aug 1, 2008 8:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I understand...

what you are saying, and as much as I like stats (I bet I was reading Bill James before some of you were born, so respect your elders, sonny boys) I get a little tired of having to “back up” everything I say. And you are also right about the condescending attitude some stats people have. Can’t we all just love baseball and get along?

p.s. I know trolls, and you are not a troll.

by sddbaker on Aug 1, 2008 8:26 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Just to clarify...

I do not intend to say that his position is wrong.

He is a troll because he makes a blanket statement about people who he does not identify while also not posting ANY supporting evidence.

If he wants to have a reasoned discussion about the uses of statistics in evaluating players from a fans perspective, that is all fine and dandy, I think people from all persuasions would be willing to have. This, however, does nothing to further that cause. The sole purpose from my view is to incense anyone who may or may not think of themselves as a “stat guy,” or, more generally, someone niekro THINKS is a “stat guy.”

Neither productive nor tactful, if you ask me.

by mburris1 on Aug 1, 2008 8:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm assuming

he was trying to be polite in not naming names. My guess he is referring to the discussion between myself, ejruiz, the beard and himself in the “more kotchman analysis thread”. Near the end.

http://www.talkingchop.com/2008/8/1/583929/more-casey-kotchman-analys#comments

by scstrato on Aug 1, 2008 8:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well, I assume nothing.

Furthermore, if that is the discussion he wanted to bring up, fine. Say so.

Don’t just blast a group of people and then walk away.

by mburris1 on Aug 1, 2008 9:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Way to prove his point

“Well, I assume nothing.” But you ARE assuming … that he is a troll. And you assume that he doesn’t have a point because he speaks in generalities and doesn’t list specifics. Taking such a “hard line” against a subject before you know the details is what prompted him to post this i’m my belief.

C’mon man, have some understanding and at least debate before you strike.

by scstrato on Aug 1, 2008 9:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Actually, I backed that up.

It wasn’t a “my gut tells me he is…” thing at all.

I will concede I was a bit combative. However, I will not admit that I just “decided” he was anything. He did mention firejoemorgan.com, so I apologize for that.

There is, however, no specific evidence of what he is talking about. If he wants to discuss a specific thread, fine, bring it up. Just don’t say that certain people rub you the wrong way.

I could say, “People from Texas are dumb.” If, however, I do not show a specific example as to why I think that, what recourse does the other side have to say anything?

Like I said, there is a real conversation to be had here; a conversation I don’t think anyone should shy away from, but this wasn’t the way to go about having it.

by mburris1 on Aug 1, 2008 9:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Two sides to every coin

Completely agree with most of what you said, however, there is another side. I would guess, since I don’t consider myself a “stathead” per se but I do rely heavily on stats, they see some of our posts as being complete devoid of factual basis. Maybe it’s sometimes best to overlook the “holier than though” attitudes and dig into the meat of the subject. There is usually a good basis for debate in these cases. At least IMO.

by scstrato on Aug 1, 2008 8:57 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Victor W: I agree. Traditionalists can be real bad too. I’d don’t have much patience for the Brosius was better than A-Rod crowd.

Scstrato: Thanks for having my back. I’m not anti-stat either. I have a lot of respect for guys like Bill James, etc.

Mburris: Sorry I rubbed ya the wrong way man. No offense. I made reference to firejoemorgan.com

by niekromurphy on Aug 1, 2008 9:17 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

No worries.

I was a bit combative. I shouldn’t have been, and I apologize.

I refer you to my above post about what I think. I haven’t taken a position on whether “stat guys” and “traditionalists” are right or wrong, just that I think that this wasn’t an effective way of going about having that conversation.

Sorry if I offended you or whatever, didn’t mean it that way. Ad hominem is just as bad as anything else.

by mburris1 on Aug 1, 2008 9:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

It’s all good.

by niekromurphy on Aug 1, 2008 9:46 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

i’m pretty much the king of all stat-marks, and let me say this. if you can break something as intricate and awesome as baseball down into simple numbers that can tell you anything you want, why don’t you do it? the absolute only factor in baseball that is NOT summarized with numbers is “luck”, and i actually read something about a “luck factor”

Following the Braves...one long hard drink at a time.

by bigjoe on Aug 1, 2008 10:29 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Why?

...because even though baseball is numbers, it is also words and pictures and feelings.

by sddbaker on Aug 1, 2008 10:53 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

after tonight, i have no compassion for children

Following the Braves...one long hard drink at a time.

by bigjoe on Aug 1, 2008 11:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

It sure is, “statheads” aren’t immune to such feelings contrary to popular belief, we simply dislike when actual analysis is preformed with such feelings rather than numbers.

by 17843 on Aug 1, 2008 11:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

It's Me!!!

I can be a prick and I know it; for that, I apologize. I guess it’s pretty clear that one of my pet peeves is when people state things as fact when they are actually “feeling”. When I come back at those people with stats or other forms of proof, I can have a nasty attitude and I’m sorry. That said, “Feeling” guys state their cases just as unequivocably (Owings is trash, Kotchman compares more to Jackson/Teixeira than Tracy, etc.) if not in so many words.

In the future, if you have a problem with me, I suggest you bring it up… with me! I’m obviously willing to engaged in reasoned conversation. If your beef if with someone else, I’d suggest you bring it up with them rather than create a fanpost to rally support for your position in an argument you don’t wish to have! By the way, is there anything more “holier than thou” than this FanPost? I mean, “what’s with those stat guys anyway???”. The only shade uglier than arrogance is hypocrisy, I guess.

Please check out my blog at http://thefulldeck.blogspot.com/ , now redesigned and recommited!

by ejruiz on Aug 1, 2008 11:55 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Well...

I’ll tell you what I have a problem with. I have a problem with people who can’t seem to read carefully. While you won’t find the quote “what’s with those stat guys anyway” in my post. You will find this little inflammatory gem: “Please don’t think that this is a shot at everyone who is into stats or the use of stats”.

I’m a relative newbie to posting on the boards. In the short time that I’ve been posting, I’ve differed with a few people. Some have been nice while respectfully disagreeing with me. Others have seen fit to call me a troll or infer that I’m a hypocrite. It doesn’t have to be that way.

by niekromurphy on Aug 2, 2008 12:10 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Now it's Me!!

Thanks for being sensitive enough to not mention me by name. That would’ve cut deep…

In all seriousness, this was a troll post. You made a blanket statement about an entire group of people, possibly aimed at a particular person, but apparently not, since you mentioned firejoemorgan.com, with which no one at this site has anything to do, and then proceeded to back up your blanket statement with absolutely no specific evidence with which to engage you on. How can we discuss anything with you substantively when your original post offers no substance of its own?

Either you were sniffing around for a fight, trying to rally the troops around your cause, or just musing aloud to yourself about something you have stuck in your craw. The first one is just plain unnecessary, the second one is almost noble, but ultimately leads to the first one, and the third on is probably just the first two by another name.

On that note, and because I don’t want to just bitch without offering solutions, let me say this: Please offer a specific example about when and where the “stat guys” have gone awry and we can discuss it.

I am not saying I will agree or disagree with you or anyone else about stats guys and their attitudes, but when you just assault someone’s character without even so much as mentioning something they did, you aren’t really doing anything but stirring the pot.

by mburris1 on Aug 2, 2008 12:48 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

You're Right.

Apologies are in order. I’m sorry. I hope in the future we can avoid posts attacking some vague category of commenters and, more importantly, the actions that would inspire such an action in the first place.

Please check out my blog at http://thefulldeck.blogspot.com/ , now redesigned and recommited!

by ejruiz on Aug 2, 2008 1:49 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Mighty big of you EJ

and on the Flip side of that coin, those of us who fail to back our claims should probably put a little more thought into our posts before clicking our favorite little button. I know I’ve been guilty of that in the past. So, no more “heat of the moment” responses from me.

Now what say we all meet up at Cheers for a brewsky and listen to Norm shoot off a couple of his famous “one liners” ... “it’s a dog eat dog world out there, and i’m wearing milkbone underwear!”

by scstrato on Aug 2, 2008 10:51 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Interesting

The first step in even hoping to resolve a conflict is to find common ground – no matter how stretched it is, it stops the nos and gets multiple sides to stop and say yes to something.

So that being said, can’t we just ditch the labels and hide the lines, and fall back into the appropriate title we all share in common, otherwise, we wouldn’t be participating Talking Chop members?

Some people come here and spout off comments that I like to call “bar talk”; the nonsensical things you can get away when in a boisterous environment, possibly a little inebriated – loosely meaning, the “feeling” type people. And some people come here to engage in debate of insightful, researched opinions, to which as expected, not all will always agree upon. But the fact is, we all found this website, and engaged in participation because we’re all Braves fans (I certainly hope), and that’s the one thing we all have in common.

And to cap off this corny retort, the crown jewel of hoping for peace – “Can’t we all, just get along?”

No wonder nobody likes you, Tuttle... everything's a (Pujols) damn debate.

by royhobbs on Aug 2, 2008 1:33 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Thanks for the responses

Thanks for the apologies and for the constructive criticism. Thanks for the “can’t we all just get along”. Blessed are the peacemakers.

Like I said, I’m a newbie to posting (but I’ve been a Braves fan since the 70s). I’m not looking to feud with anybody.

by niekromurphy on Aug 2, 2008 9:12 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

What do you want from us? We are fans. I, for one, can’t even watch Braves games most nights because I live in West Virginia. The only way I have to analyze a players performance is with, Ta-Da!: stats. I consider myself a a scout type of guy, but when I have no means of observing a player I have to find another way to draw some form of analysis. Stats would fit the bill.

by yondaime4 on Aug 3, 2008 4:54 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs