From: djohnson@cayley.waterloo.edu (David Johnson)
Subject: Re: Value of Stats
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 14:52:03 GMT

In article <3391@blue.cis.pitt.edu.UUCP> dtate+@pitt.edu (David M Tate) writes:
>In article <Brp463.n3v@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu> djohnson@cayley.waterloo.edu (David Johnson) writes:
>
>>In article <1992Jul17.174622.2155@adobe.com> snichols@adobe.com (Sherri Nichols) writes:
>
>>>I LIKE BASEBALL JUST AS MUCH AS YOU DO!
>
>>Sorry if I offended anybody with this post 
>
>You did.
>
>>but what I was getting at is that 
>>in r.s.b statistics are used too much and other factors such as the players
>>attitude, effort and enthusiasm is rarely mentioned.  
>
>How much is "too much"?  Do you have a reason that you could share with us
>for thinking that some particular amount is "too much"?
>
>>I believe that these
>>are very important to a players evaluation and should definitely be used
>>more often when evaluating players.  
>
>Could you explain to us why you believe that?  Some of us have taken the
>trouble to explain, at great length and repeatedly, why we believe that
>these are *not* very important to a player's evaluation, and why even if
>they were we couldn't know enough about them to draw valid conclusions about
>individuals.  We eagerly anticipate rebuttals to these arguments, but seldom
>see any.  What we *do* get are untutored comments suggesting that we get a
>life (the one I have is keeping me plenty busy, thank you), go see some games
>(I do already), and abandon our misguided beliefs on your say-so (why?).
>
>>I was not trying to suggest that you don't like or watch baseball
>
>Then perhaps you should have refrained from saying exactly that.
>
>>but that players can't be evaluted on 
>>statisics solely and I would like to see more evaluation on players effort
>>and attitude.
>
>When you say "evaluation" here, do you mean trying to figure out just how
>much effort and attitude help a team win, or do you mean ranking players by
>their degree of effort and attitude, sort of like the "cutest buns" ranking
>going on in another thread at the moment?
>
>Look, I have no personal animosity toward you, and I'm sorry about jumping
>on you with both feet like this.  The problem is that you aren't the first
>person to say things like these (you're more like the tenth in the last 
>couple of years), and you offer a recent and convenient example of what I
>find so trying.  Your opinions are not well thought-out (or, if they are,
>you haven't conveyed that in presenting them so far), and yet you leap to
>the conclusion that anyone who doesn't agree with them must simply be an
>ignorant neophyte.  I find that insulting, but I'll forgive all and thank
>you effusively if you will take the time to organize and present a few
>arguments in favor of the value of trying to estimate and incorporate effort
>and will and leadership and attitude into evaluating the worth of players.
>For my part, I prefer quantitative arguments to qualitative ones, qualitative
>arguments to hearsay, and hearsay to bald assertion.  Your mileage may vary.

I will say this once again because it seems that people don't understand.  I
think that statistics are very important to show a players ability but baseball
is a TEAM sport and there are 25 men on a team and a player with a good 
attitude and a player that works hard and enjoys playing makes the game more
fun for both himself, his team mates and the fans.  In anything that anyone
does in life for any reason IF THEY ENJOY WHAT THEY ARE DOING THEY WILL BE 
BETTER AT DOING THAT.  A player like Dave Winfield really like to play
baseball and is a hard worker and thus in turn is a good influence on younger
inexperienced players.  This makes Dave Winfield a better player than another
player even if thay have the same numbers because the other player doesn't
create this good atmosphere in the clubhouse.  Not many teams win if there
is no winning spirit and dedication to winning in the clubhouse.  Remember
this is a team sport and the players should play as a team.

>
>At this point, I'd like to grovel at the feet of the other analysts out there
>to ask that they please go easy on Mr. Johnson, in hopes that we can maybe get
>a real dialogue going.  (You know who you are.)

I agree.  This is my opinion.  You may not agree with it but that is up to
you.  This may be my last post on this subject unless i feel that there is
something that I haven't stated clearly and you don't understand.

>
>
>-- 
>   David Tate   | "When tomatoes last in the bullpen bloom'd,
> dtate@unix.cis |  And the great star early troop'd to the showers in the night
>    .pitt.edu   |  I mourned, and yet shall mourn with ever-returning spring."
>   IE, U. Pitt  | 	--Walt "Lefty" Whitman

Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball