Werth: "Super-Nerds" are killing baseball

Sports Journalists Forum – Media, Newsroom & Reporting Talk

Help Support Sports Journalists Forum:

Ya - it was much better when wins really mattered. DeGrom and his six wins would not merit the NL Cy Young. Winners win.
 
tenor.gif
 
Outside of some "unwritten code" - why don't more players bunt to beat shifts?
 
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases. Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change.
The fastballs of relievers going up an average of two miles per hour in the last decade has something to do with it, too.

Funny thing is Werth was a really solid sabermetric player. Like Joe Morgan, he doesn't actually understand why he was valuable.

The aesthetic argument isn't the concern of the baseball side of these organizations. Baseball teams shouldn't be purposefully inefficient so you are more interested in the sport. Solving that would require rules changes. A team shouldn't bunt against shifts if they believe it produces less runs because a man is yawning on the couch.
 
The fastballs of relievers going up an average of two miles per hour in the last decade has something to do with it, too.

Funny thing is Werth was a really solid sabermetric player. Like Joe Morgan, he doesn't actually understand why he was valuable.

The aesthetic argument isn't the concern of the baseball side of these organizations. Baseball teams shouldn't be purposefully inefficient so you are more interested in the sport. Solving that would require rules changes. A team shouldn't bunt against shifts if they believe it produces less runs because a man is yawning on the couch.

But that's part of sabermetrics. Teams didn't value velocity and strikeouts until the discovery of DIPS, BABIP and three true outcomes. Pitching to contact was a vaunted skill.

It's a meathead rant by Werth. It isn't entirely wrong. More right than wrong, actually, if we're talking about the game as a spectator event and not merely the wins and losses.
 
The valuing of HRs and walks over contact is also killing the game. Who wants to see 20 Ks in a single game, as the White Sox did in the extra-inning loss to the Yankees the other day?
 
I want to see the first team to go back to the old ways. There's a reason it won't happen.
 
With a 162-game season, baseball is built to measure success over the long term.

It's exactly the sort of thing data science was invented for.
 
With a 162-game season, baseball is built to measure success over the long term.

It's exactly the sort of thing data science was invented for.
And that’s the real point that baseball has changed for the worse. A 1 game playing followed by 2 short series to get to the World Series is disrespectful of the long baseball season.
 
And in the 1990s, the way to play pro basketball was to beat the other guys up until they succumbed, and to slow the game down until 90 points was a winning score. People hated watching it. So the NBA changed the rules.

Baseball has this hallowed spot in our sepia-toned memories, so nothing can change about the game ever. Even the stuff that's patently obvious -- like the Astros and lots of other pitchers doctoring the ball -- they won't do anything about it. But unlike in the past, skills and (especially) strength have developed and will continue to develop far beyond the point where the game balances out.
 
And that’s the real point that baseball has changed for the worse. A 1 game playing followed by 2 short series to get to the World Series is disrespectful of the long baseball season.


As a Nats fan, I've chosen to celebrate regular-season success, since it's the true measure of a good team.


Felt the same way about hockey, too, right up until about mid-June of this year ....
 
As a Nats fan, I've chosen to celebrate regular-season success, since it's the true measure of a good team.


Felt the same way about hockey, too, right up until about mid-June of this year ....
As a Nats fan I’ve begun yelling at FP
 

Latest posts

Back
Top