State of the Art Stats

RLakin

All Star
Joined
Sep 14, 2002
Posts
572
Reaction score
0
Location
North Glendale
State-of-the-Art Stats
By Mark Starr, Newsweek
http://www.msnbc.com/m/pt/printthis_main.asp?storyID=885218

Peering down from his office above the third-base stands at the Red Sox spring-training field in Ft. Myers, Fla., general manager Theo Epstein can be forgiven if even he can't tell the players without a scorecard. Since Epstein was named GM in November, he has wheeled and dealed ceaselessly to recast his ball club; as a result, some 40 percent of Boston's roster is new, a turnover rate double that of any other major-league team.

IT ISN'T THE numbers, though, but rather the names--or lack of them--that have Sox fans abuzz. Instead of following the strategy of previous Sox regimes, obtaining diamond studs like Pedro Martinez and Manny Ramirez, Epstein has corralled a host of no-name journeymen for short-term deals at relatively short money.
Why? Largely because Epstein, just 29 years old, is turning to sophisticated computer analyses of baseball statistics to evaluate players, rather than relying on century-old standards like batting average, home runs and runs batted in.

The working theory is that baseball stats can be analyzed to predict future performance and help identify hidden gems in both the minors and the majors. Teams like the Red Sox are now crunching numbers too obscure for barroom debate. Among the most prized is OPS, which combines two key stats: on-base percentage (reflects hits and walks, i.e., ability to get to first base) plus slugging (reflects extra-base hits, i.e., power).This winter the Red Sox dumped six veteran hitters whose combined salaries approached $20 million and whose average OPS was .714, replacing them at about half the cost with players whose OPS's averaged 100 points higher.The Red Sox even hired Bill James, the godfather of the baseball math called sabermetrics, as a consultant. "The real question is why did it take baseball this long to wake up to it," says James, whose books have been informing rabid fans for decades. "But it's scary being at the table. For years I've expressed opinions and the only consequence of a bad call was that people made fun of me."

REINVENTING THE WHEEL
Some call the new stat mania "the revenge of the nerds." Which may account for why its most outspoken proponent is Oakland A's GM Billy Beane, whose credibility is enhanced by a big-league playing career that spanned six seasons. Oakland pioneered this approach in the '90s--forced by fiscal reality to reinvent the wheel in order to compete with wealthier, big-market clubs. The results have been impressive. Oakland has won 11 more games than the Yankees over the past three seasons with about one third the payroll. While most teams rely on talent assessments by scouts whose instincts have been honed over decades in the game, Beane's staff is populated by young guys who haven't swung a bat since Little League and who, a decade ago, might have pursued careers as investment bankers. "What we're trying to do is produce tangible evidence," he says. "Because all those intangibles that go into a scout's prediction of what an 18-year-old kid will look like in eight years just haven't been good enough."

While this revolution in America's most hidebound sport didn't start in Boston, it is --the Red Sox--with their fervent following, their epic history of futility and their new boy-wonder GM--that have emerged as its most conspicuous face. That reverses many years wasted mimicking the Yankees' free- spending approach, which only New York can truly afford. Now the Red Sox aim to be a rich Oakland rather than a poor New York. "We lose when we give in to temptation just to make a big splash or to go for a quick fix," says Epstein. "Finding real value for every dollar you spend has never been tried by an organization with our resources. So if we can get more bang for the buck, our bang is going to be pretty loud."

Epstein, who began his baseball career interning with the Orioles while still an undergraduate at Yale, says computer analysis can render a finite bottom line, a calculation of each player's value to the Red Sox. Epstein took a barrage of criticism for rookie mistakes after he failed to land any big-name free agents--especially Cuban star pitcher Jose Contreras, who signed with the Yankees. But he insists he wasn't outmaneuvered, simply outbid at a price he refused to pay. "At some acquisition cost, player X is no longer an asset to our team," he says."There is no greater way of hamstringing a franchise for a decade than getting stuck with players who aren't worth their contracts."

HOARDING DRAFT PICKS
In the past, Boston always mortgaged its future, trading draft picks and hot, young prospects for pricey veterans who might provide an immediate shot at ending the 85-year championship drought. Now Epstein is hoarding draft picks. And this winter he refused a swap of pitchers that past Sox GMs would have made in a heartbeat: an unproven kid, Casey Fossum, for ace Bartolo Colon, who won four times as many games as Fossum in 2002, but whose 2003 salary is 24 times higher. If fans were mystified by trades the Red Sox didn't make, they were baffled, too, by ones they did--like the acquisition of Yankee slugger Jason Giambi's younger brother, Jeremy. On paper, Giambi's 2002 stats are uninspiring, a .255 batting average with 20 homers and 45 RBIs. But on the computer, Giambi had an extraordinary on-base percentage of .414 (he walks often) and an OPS of .919, numbers that approach his superstar brother's (.434 and 1.034).

Only a few teams have fully embraced the stats revolution and some remain adamantly opposed. Seattle GM Pat Gillick, who has built powerhouse teams in several cities, insisted, "We're not on OPS yet," adding, "Frankly, I don't know how much more technology we need in our lives." Beane isn't concerned about skeptics. He worries about the growing number of imitators who are neutralizing any edge Oakland once held. "When a team like Boston shares your belief system and has more money," says Beane, "it forces you to be more creative to stay ahead of the curve."

Soon he may find the Red Sox around that bend. Boston already has its own R&D crew working to invent a category of stats that will measure the impact of a player's defensive skills. And BoSox researchers have attended biomechanics symposiums, hoping to someday create a model that will reveal how a pitcher's usage affects his long-term health. "If we can make our pitchers 25 percent healthier, that's worth tens of million dollars and is a huge competitive advantage," says Epstein. History suggests the Red Sox need every advantage they can get.
 

schillingfan

All Star
Joined
Sep 14, 2002
Posts
672
Reaction score
0
Location
Northeastern Pennsylvania
I consider this to be the equivalent of chasing the holy grail. I would suspect that real-life pitchers such as Curt38 would find it amusing.

And BoSox researchers have attended biomechanics symposiums, hoping to someday create a model that will reveal how a pitcher's usage affects his long-term health. "If we can make our pitchers 25 percent healthier, that's worth tens of million dollars and is a huge competitive advantage," says Epstein.
 

Derek in Tucson

Veteran
Joined
Dec 4, 2002
Posts
179
Reaction score
0
Of course the Red Sox haven't totally reversed their free spending ways since they are still in the top 5 in payroll. The article also doesn't mention that salaries were down league wide and not just in Boston.

And I guess your passages in bold type are just your flippant way of directing criticism towards the DBacks. Of course this article is also runs counter to your opinion that a bench player like Donnels is worth keeping around for his "versatility" even though his lifetime OPS is .674.

It'll be interesting to see though just what the Red Sox do about Pedro Martinez and his demand that they excersize the $17 million option year on him for 2004. I'm wondering just what kind of longterm offer they'll make to Pedro, and what the fans reaction will be if they don't end up re-signing him.

And although some improvement in the health of pitchers can be done at the major league level, really this kind of biomechanics symposium stuff should be invested in players at the little league level. My theory is that pitchers are "abused" long before they're even drafted...when young kids still growing put stresses on their arms they shouldn't be doing by pitching when they're 12 years old. That's where the mindsers and routines need to be changed, when they're young, and not when they're a professional. By then a lot of times it's too late.
 

DWKB

ASFN Icon
Joined
May 15, 2002
Posts
18,224
Reaction score
7,490
Location
Annapolis, MD
Originally posted by schillingfan
I consider this to be the equivalent of chasing the holy grail. I would suspect that real-life pitchers such as Curt38 would find it amusing.

Frankly it doesn't matter what Curt (or other "real life" pitchers) opinion is on the subject. I wouldn't ask a world renowned chess player to explain the process of synapsis in thier head as they play, nor would I ask a ballet dancer to explain the equilibrium theory that allows them to keep their balance. I wouldn't go ask a profession "real life" pitcher to explain the effects pitching has regarding long term effects.

There are several team which are already using technology similar to this and are having major successes with it. OAK has a technique, CIN, I believe has one, ATL has one.
 
OP
OP
R

RLakin

All Star
Joined
Sep 14, 2002
Posts
572
Reaction score
0
Location
North Glendale
Originally posted by Derek in Tucson
And I guess your passages in bold type are just your flippant way of directing criticism towards the DBacks. Of course this article is also runs counter to your opinion that a bench player like Donnels is worth keeping around for his "versatility" even though his lifetime OPS is .674.

Not really since it would take 53.5 Chris Donnels' to fill that $20 million.
 
Last edited:

Derek in Tucson

Veteran
Joined
Dec 4, 2002
Posts
179
Reaction score
0
Ah, but the goal is to replace those millionaires with cheap quality talent, not just cheap players. All you accomplish with 53.5 Chris Donnels' is to have a cheap team that won't score any runs, and who'll lose 100 games or more. The idea is still to win as many games as possible and having a team full of Chris Donnels' isn't going to get you to that goal.
 

AZZenny

Registered User
Joined
Feb 18, 2003
Posts
9,235
Reaction score
2
Location
Cave Creek
"Now the Red Sox aim to be a rich Oakland rather than a poor New York."

Gee, call me soft-science, but this struck me as potentially the most innovative thing Epstein can bring to the BoSox - If he can truly change the old bitterly jealous, totally Yankee-enmeshed mindset (speaking from childhood experience), he'll have created a brand new franchise, for all intents and purposes. (Man, wouldn't that piss off George!)

Sounds like Epstein (and James?) are not satisfied with existing methods to measure the impact of defensive skills - now THAT's interesting, since defense is my favorite part of the game, and none of the defensive stat stuff I've seen described around here has seemed very compelling.

As to the biomechanics - hey, folks what the hell do you think RJ was doing on his own time this winter? Researching tall-guy biomechanics and also muscle-recovery rates at his age - nothing wrong with using good science, as long as it doesn't use you.
 
OP
OP
R

RLakin

All Star
Joined
Sep 14, 2002
Posts
572
Reaction score
0
Location
North Glendale
Originally posted by Derek in Tucson
Ah, but the goal is to replace those millionaires with cheap quality talent, not just cheap players. All you accomplish with 53.5 Chris Donnels' is to have a cheap team that won't score any runs, and who'll lose 100 games or more. The idea is still to win as many games as possible and having a team full of Chris Donnels' isn't going to get you to that goal.

I'm not suggesting a team full of Chris Donnels'. Rather that this article does not derail my previous arguments (about Donnels) since they are talking about getting rid of 6 players whose salaries equal $20 million, when it would take getting rid of 9X as many Chris Donnels' to do the same.
 

Derek in Tucson

Veteran
Joined
Dec 4, 2002
Posts
179
Reaction score
0
Again, all you're saying is that you should be getting rid of salaries for the sake of chopping payroll when you bring up Donnels. If you replace those millionaire players with ones who are well below average performers, you've done nothing to actually improve the team beyond it's balance sheet. Anyway, that's my point.
 

DWKB

ASFN Icon
Joined
May 15, 2002
Posts
18,224
Reaction score
7,490
Location
Annapolis, MD
Originally posted by AZZenny

Sounds like Epstein (and James?) are not satisfied with existing methods to measure the impact of defensive skills - now THAT's interesting, since defense is my favorite part of the game, and none of the defensive stat stuff I've seen described around here has seemed very compelling.
[/COLOR]

What we know today in regards to defense and the coexistance with the pitcher is light years ahead of what we knew 5 years ago. I suspect in 5 years what we have learned will be light years ahead of what we know now.
 

Derek in Tucson

Veteran
Joined
Dec 4, 2002
Posts
179
Reaction score
0
What we know today in regards to defense and the coexistance with the pitcher is light years ahead of what we knew 5 years ago. I suspect in 5 years what we have learned will be light years ahead of what we know now.

I think it's going to be interesting to see how this plays out. Obviously the stathead community(not exactly an endearing term, but for lack of a better term...) doesn't place that much emphasis on defensive ability. Or I would say they prize offense production much more than defensive ability. Anyway, recently we've had teams with very good defenses who've been quite successful. Seattle was the best defensive team by every account I've read when they won 116 games, and the Angels were the best defensive team last season. I wonder which model will win out as the ideal one to pursue...a big hitting team that's short on defense, or a team that hits for a high average and plays good defense? Sure there's more than one way to build a team, but don't you see emulation is sports where things like the west coast offense in the NFL are mimicked around the league?
 

schillingfan

All Star
Joined
Sep 14, 2002
Posts
672
Reaction score
0
Location
Northeastern Pennsylvania
Interesting discussion.

I agree with Zenny that all the studies that can be done of biomechanics can't hurt. What I was calling the holy grail was the fact that they intend to develop a "model" based on what they learn.

I think pitchers are far too individual to apply a model to their pitching routines, plans, etc. And as Derek says a lot of injuries may have their genesis in little league, and I don't know if data on that is collectible. Pitch counts? It will be interesting.

DWKB, developing a model doesn't help if you can't get the pitchers to buy into it, which was my point. Plus it seems to me that it's a least useful to hear what pitcher's who've had arm surgery say about what kinds of stresses their arms felt.
 

DWKB

ASFN Icon
Joined
May 15, 2002
Posts
18,224
Reaction score
7,490
Location
Annapolis, MD
Originally posted by schillingfan

DWKB, developing a model doesn't help if you can't get the pitchers to buy into it, which was my point. Plus it seems to me that it's a least useful to hear what pitcher's who've had arm surgery say about what kinds of stresses their arms felt.

Well I of course think that you need input from the pitcher in regards to how they react and feel when the pitch, just like a doctor asking you what symptoms you have when you're sick.

I interpreted your post as saying Curt would scoff at the idea and that you see him as more of an authority and his opinion superior to the people analyzing arm injuries. That's the way it came off. I don't think Curt would react that way in the first place and if he did, I don't really think it would be his place to anymore than it is ours.
 

DWKB

ASFN Icon
Joined
May 15, 2002
Posts
18,224
Reaction score
7,490
Location
Annapolis, MD
Originally posted by Derek in Tucson
I think it's going to be interesting to see how this plays out. Obviously the stathead community(not exactly an endearing term, but for lack of a better term...) doesn't place that much emphasis on defensive ability. Or I would say they prize offense production much more than defensive ability. Anyway, recently we've had teams with very good defenses who've been quite successful. Seattle was the best defensive team by every account I've read when they won 116 games, and the Angels were the best defensive team last season. I wonder which model will win out as the ideal one to pursue...a big hitting team that's short on defense, or a team that hits for a high average and plays good defense? Sure there's more than one way to build a team, but don't you see emulation is sports where things like the west coast offense in the NFL are mimicked around the league?

I actually think MLB teams are some of the worst at going with "the next new thing" and it hinders a lot of teams. I'm surprised that more pitching staffs haven't adopted Leo Mazzone's pitching techniques in between starts. Seems to have worked for ATL for some time now.

Regarding the OAK model vs. the ANA/SEA model. I think the key for both of them to succeed offensively is to have that OBP in the top of the league. I think it's how we succeeded so well last year. Defense and Offensive Power aren't mutually exclusive by any means. I think the degree of defense needed to succeed is reliant on your pitching staff also.
 

unc84steve

Veteran
Joined
Oct 16, 2002
Posts
168
Reaction score
0
Location
Phoenix AZ
Originally posted by Derek in Tucson
I think it's going to be interesting to see how this plays out. Obviously the stathead community(not exactly an endearing term, but for lack of a better term...) doesn't place that much emphasis on defensive ability. Or I would say they prize offense production much more than defensive ability.
I agree with you basically (about stathead attitudes), but maybe it's because "defensive ability" has been hard to measure. But I think this is changing in the "stathead communitity" :)

Just to use gross stereotypes all around. It's much easier to measure individual offense than defense. Thus statheads like hitters over fielders (A-Rod over Vizquel), (Piazza over I-Rod) or (Durazo over Grace), even if statheads have to use "hidden values" like walks & power.

However, the recent focus on seeing "pitching" as more "defense" composed of "pitching" and "fielding" is making people (like me!) realize the importance of individual defense, even though it's hard to measure.

Leo Mazzone may help Tom Glavine & Greg Maddux never miss a start. However, Andruw Jones is the one gobbling up all the balls in play because those two don't strike anybody out anymore.

The Yankees may have a top-to-bottom All-Star batting order & a 7-day a week rotation, but they have trouble catching those balls hit in play (especially up the middle). This leads to intangible trouble compounded with a high-pressure owner in that media market.
 

schillingfan

All Star
Joined
Sep 14, 2002
Posts
672
Reaction score
0
Location
Northeastern Pennsylvania
Originally posted by unc84steve
Leo Mazzone may help Tom Glavine & Greg Maddux never miss a start. However, Andruw Jones is the one gobbling up all the balls in play because those two don't strike anybody out anymore.

The Yankees may have a top-to-bottom All-Star batting order & a 7-day a week rotation, but they have trouble catching those balls hit in play (especially up the middle). This leads to intangible trouble compounded with a high-pressure owner in that media market.
I agree with you on both points, the Yankees and the Braves. One cannot understimate the significance of Andruw in the outfield, he's amazing.

Perhaps it's long most things in life - balance and well-roundedness. Can't completely ignore defense, but a great defense won't help you win if the players can't score runs.
 

Derek in Tucson

Veteran
Joined
Dec 4, 2002
Posts
179
Reaction score
0
I think we're starting to see just how little clubs think of a big hitter who can't field. Brad Fulmer had a good year, and all he got was a $1 million deal from the Angels. Robert Fick was pitcked up by the Braves and he was once considered a very good prospect(although that was before he gave up catching). Jeremy Giambi was traded twice for not much in return even though he's put up some great numbers. David Ortiz was another DH type with plenty of p0ower that didn't get much on the free agent market. Jack Cust was traded once again....this time for a journeyman OFer.

I think teams have come to realize that these players who are slow afoot, and can't play all that well with a glove on, are a dime a dozen and it doesn't do a team any good to throw a lot of money at them.
 
Top