ESPN the magazine quantifies team chemistry

and says better diversity leads to more wins. OK.

Thoughts?

http://blog.philbirnbaum.com/2014/03/espn-on-clubhouse-chemistry.html

 

As usual I started out trying to figure out the accompanying chart and soon my eyes glazed over
and I started to get a headache . I've concluded that I just am not smart
enough to understand these ESPN type studies that try look at metrics in a different way

 

Another important problem: there are so many possible confounding factors that the effect ESPN found could be one of a million other things.

Yeah. That might be a problem, I suppose.

 

Basically a bunch of rookies and a meathead like Incognito doesn't work, or a positive thinker in the clubhouse like Millar can help keep a team motivated when it's down

Thanks for pointing that out, ESPN.

Or these spreadsheets need to create spreadsheets that do not really explain why their first spreadsheets don't work.

 

NERDS!!!111

CALCULATORS!!!!!ELEVENTYH!!

SPREADSHEETS!!!111

 

Everyone raves about the Indians clubhouse chemistry from last year with guys like Giambi and Swisher inspiring everyone. Then this rates them with blah chemistry. Stupid study.

 

Giambi certainly knows something about chemistry.

 

The key is to be like the Giants of 1997-2002, who averaged 91 wins a year and made the playoffs three times while Barry Bonds and Jeff Kent gave each other neck rubs.

 

Anybody who thinks Prince Fielder is going to help any team's 'team chemistry' is out of their goddamn minds.