Sabermetrics, My Take

[brianod]

Of course not, but they can still be complementary, even in that case. Also consider that more unconventional statistical data, tools and models are probably being utilized much ore at this level much than they were were 10-15 years ago. That would be my guess at least, but I guess stotle could answer that.

The whole point of this post is that they should be complementary. Both sides should be considered. IMO, for young players, the eye test and judgement of scouts is much more important then for free agents.

[Stotle]

Of course not, but they can still be complementary, even in that case. Also consider that more unconventional statistical data, tools and models are probably being utilized much ore at this level much than they were were 10-15 years ago. That would be my guess at least, but I guess stotle could answer that.

I agree with you. I'd also add that analytics as useful tools reliant on big body data for projection purposes may have limited utility for younger players or still-developing profiles, but there are plenty of areas of advanced analytics that simply address better measuring the value of real time production, and those areas have equal utility across the board regardless of age/experience/etc. of the player.

[brianod]

Hah. So you ignore the word of someone that actually works with a FO? Are you ignoring it because it goes against what you want to believe?

I respect that but I don't agree that it never happens. If we went by the sabermetrics for Paredes, we would have cut him.

[Crazysilver03]

Of course not, but they can still be complementary, even in that case. Also consider that more unconventional statistical data, tools and models are probably being utilized much ore at this level much than they were were 10-15 years ago. That would be my guess at least, but I guess stotle could answer that.

Organizations use their own sabremetrics that are even more developed and proprietary than what fans know of. I think Stotle has talked to this before. Or Boston spoke about it.

[Stotle]

I respect that but I don't agree that it never happens. If we went by the sabermetrics for Paredes, we would have cut him.

You think Paredes was acquired in defiance of analytics and not upon consultation with analytics?

And, yes, there is no scenario where a major league hitting coach is going to be lobbying some unidentified "stats guy" to draft a kid because the coach "can work with him and get him to where he needs to be." I don't even know where that conversation would happen.

Maybe an area scout meeting with a regional supervisor or SD/ASD at the end of the spring goes to bat for a player he likes that had a bad spring from a statistical standpoint, but the only way that player is being discussed on draft day is down the board in a scenario where the team is investing tens of thousands, not hundreds of thousands or millions (and the conversation isn't going to be heated or even that interesting).

The people making the decisions at the top of the board aren't having this conversation no matter how Moneyball the movie makes these decision-making sessions look.

[Crazysilver03]

I respect that but I don't agree that it never happens. If we went by the sabermetrics for Paredes, we would have cut him.

True. And Drungo is probably the fiercest critic of Paredes. But there are a lot of "stats" guys that saw something in Paredes, but his stats were upticking when he was in the majors last fall as well.

[CA-ORIOLE]

The whole point of this post is that they should be complementary. Both sides should be considered. IMO, for young players, the eye test and judgement of scouts is much more important then for free agents.

Nobody disagrees with that.

It's your overall impression and comments of how you think things ARE at the professional level (probably based off your experience on here) that I (and apparently some others, including stotle) find to be off base.

[Rufus]

"Harmony" in decision making isn't something a successful organization should strive for. Having each scout grade out players independently, with no consultation with other scouts, is far superior to having scouts come to a consensus (at least was the case with some football consulting I've done). In one project I did, I know for a fact that the team hired other stats people to tackle the same project, since having multiple independent, informed opinions is superior.

[brianod]

I agree with you. I'd also add that analytics as useful tools reliant on big body data for projection purposes may have limited utility for younger players or still-developing profiles, but there are plenty of areas of advanced analytics that simply address better measuring the value of real time production, and those areas have equal utility across the board regardless of age/experience/etc. of the player.

Again, we agree. Both sides need to be listened to. When they agree, it's easy. I suspect they don't always agree and that's when you need good management at all levels.

[Can_of_corn]

I respect that but I don't agree that it never happens. If we went by the sabermetrics for Paredes, we would have cut him.

I think it is a safe bet that neither of us fully understand the proprietary analytics teams use.

The "free versions" that we have is probably a garment cut from a baser cloth.

[CA-ORIOLE]

Organizations use their own sabremetrics that are even more developed and proprietary than what fans know of. I think Stotle has talked to this before. Or Boston spoke about it.

That's true and I am aware of that at the ML level, but I was leaning towards was how much has been developed for use at the lower/mil levels. I am guessing mil level scouts have a lot of new toys these days.

[brianod]

Nobody disagrees with that.

It's your overall impression and comments of how you think things ARE at the professional level (probably based off your experience on here) that I (and apparently some others, including stotle) find to be off base.

Maybe you are right. I do run an adult baseball program full of college players and ex-college players and we have been fortunate enough to win our league championship three years running. I obviously know that it doesn't compare to the major leagues, not even close. But, if I see a player who goes 0-10 but looks like he can play, I'm all over it. Results measured over a short term are much less reliable then results measured over years.

[CA-ORIOLE]

Maybe you are right. I do run an adult baseball program full of college players and ex-college players and we have been fortunate enough to win our league championship three years running. I obviously know that it doesn't compare to the major leagues, not even close. But, if I see a player who goes 0-10 but looks like he can play, I'm all over it. Results measured over a short term are much less reliable then results measured over years.

Fair enough Brian.

[Stotle]

That's true and I am aware of that at the ML level, but I was leaning towards was how much has been developed for use at the lower/mil levels. I am guessing mil level scouts have a lot of new toys these days.

That was my thought, too, but actually my experience has been the opposite. Seems like (generally) front offices want scouts to scout and really don't like them to over think it. They want the write-up to be a pure scouting write-up, and that is used as a separate data point to be run in concert with the analytics.

However, I do believe certain orgs have scouts accumulating more data, and very different data, than they did ten years ago. But my feel is it's more data gathering than actual analytics utilized by scouts in their write-ups. I do know some area scouts that use some analytics to cross-check their own scouting (did my looks at this player this spring miss anything).

[CA-ORIOLE]

That was my thought, too, but actually my experience has been the opposite. Seems like (generally) front offices want scouts to scout and really don't like them to over think it. They want the write-up to be a pure scouting write-up, and that is used as a separate data point to be run in concert with the analytics.

However, I do believe certain orgs have scouts accumulating more data, and very different data, than they did ten years ago. But my feel is it's more data gathering than actual analytics utilized by scouts in their write-ups. I do know some area scouts that use some analytics to cross-check their own scouting (did my looks at this player this spring miss anything).

That's surprising to me. Thanks for all the info. Really appreciate it.