Jason Whitlock's column. Anyone else disagree?

Re: Jason Whitlock is dumb

The very premise of Whitlock's screed is wrong. Sabermetrics advocates, at least in general, aren't trying to shut down conversation or debate. They are trying to shift it to the numbers that actually matter. Sometimes, that widens the debate rather than narrowing it. Fifty years ago, when my dad was growing up, his dad told him that anyone with a below .300 batting average wasn't very good. My dad laughs when he recalls tossing a Mickey Mantle baseball card into the suck pile and jettisoning it.

 

Re: Jason Whitlock is dumb

Tiger Woods removed all the magic and mystery of go....oh, forget it.

 

Re: Jason Whitlock is dumb

My biggest problem with sabermetric deniers was they claimed it was "ruining baseball" without ever telling us how it ruined baseball.

 

Re: Jason Whitlock is dumb

If you are right then Whitlock's article just got dumber. If ESPN is trying to introduce a passer rating stat to replace a passer rating stat that has existed for 40 years yet doesn't drive the argument of who is the best QB and is barely on the radar of football fans and analysts, then how in the world will a new passer rating stat which replaces the old one change Whitlock's enjoyment of football?

 

Re: Jason Whitlock is dumb

That's a very benevolent view of sabermetrics. When the statheads are incensed that Jimmy Rollins was the MVP, or when they heap Internet abuse on the one voter who dared not to give Lincecum a first-place Cy Young vote, it turns into an attempt at mind control, and an unsightly one.

 

Re: Jason Whitlock is dumb

I suppose I just ran into the hazard of trying to explain anything Whitlock writes or ESPN does. I think we had this ESPN TQR discussion a few months ago and all agreed it was pretty stupid. ESPN in particular seems to have a newfangled stat for everything, just to help them keep their TV display interactive. It falls easily by the wayside.

 

Re: Jason Whitlock is dumb

Strenuously making your point with evidence = "Mind control."

 

Re: Jason Whitlock is dumb

It goes a little beyond that. Just on this board I have been told (by Mark McGwire) that Joey Votto was hands-down the best player in the National League in 2010 because his OPS was 1.024 and Pujols' was 1.011.

You should read back on some of the flaming that went toward Chris DeLuca of the Sun-Times -- a.k.a. The Guy Who Didn't Vote For Lincecum.

 

Re: Jason Whitlock is dumb

And if it were 10 years ago, they would have found some other reason to flame him for voting for the guy they didn't believe was worth of the Cy Young.

 

Re: Jason Whitlock is dumb

And you don't think that kind of staking out of a position happened before sabermetrics?

You don't think that voters thought that Andre Dawson was "hands down" better than Jack Clark in 1987 because Dawson had 49 home runs and Jack Clark had 35?

I am not understanding what you think sabermetrics has wrought that wasn't present before.

 

Re: Jason Whitlock is dumb

I don't think the debate ever reached "I'm Right You're Wrong" levels in the past the way it has with sabermetrics, which has led some people to believe they have "proof" of their position.

To clarify, I am relying more and more on sabermetrics to understand baseball. I still think WAR and VORP are a step too far because they are the creator's interpretation of what's important, but stats like OPS and FIP and BABIP -- which are raw numbers -- have opened my mind.

But the part I most agreed with in Whitlock's column (which he didn't say very well and would have been better to say without all the insults) is that this kind of analysis doesn't fit football and basketball.

 

Re: Jason Whitlock is dumb

I disagree with your premise that people used to sing "Cumbaya" about awards and player debates before "Moneyball" came along and pitted everyone against each other.

My problem with something like WAR is that the creators can't even agree on it. There's one WAR for Baseball Reference. Another for Fangraphs. Another for another site. It's an interesting aggregating tool, I suppose, but I take it with a grain of salt right now.