Jump to content

Emerging from the Stone Age

Frobby

By Frobby
in Orioles Talk

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 57
  • Created
  • Last Reply
oriole Veteran All-Star

oriole

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Going Underground said:

Has the game improved for the fans? More strikeouts,games are slow and not that entertaining. Baseball knows they are in trouble.

Baseball is going to be in trouble if they don’t adopt some live in market streaming services. I have barely watched any games the last couple of years because cable is too much and I have to deal with long contracts. I can’t be the only one. I don’t think the analytics will be much of a problem, especially if it’s helping your team win.

 

Though baseball did get less exciting when home plate collisions and stuff like that was implemented. It’s like live chess. Which is fine and I love it all the same but the human species is a sucker for a blood sport. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
now Perennial All-Star

now

Posted
Posted

There's another, less visible side to the whole analytics revolution that I find intriguing. And that's the focus on chemistry. Which seems unmeasurable, until you start delving into social science methodology, which does manage to classify personality types and leadership styles and then match with measurable results. 

I approached Tom Tango on Twitter awhile ago about this subject and he basically dismissed the inquiry as "unactionable." Today I got some new leads from Jon Shepherd (isn't that you,  @DrungoHazewood?) and found some illuminating info from a Google search on measurable qualities of team chemistry. To summarize briefly:

The Harvard Business Review, "The New Science of Team Chemistry" - identifies four personality types in an organization and counsels how they can better work together. My takeaway is that yes, different types can be identified, and they do impact team performance in different ways.

American Management Association, "Does Team Chemistry Really Matter: A Lesson From Red Sox Nation" - gets closer to the clubhouse with some relevant examples from the 2012-2013 Red Sox, who turned around a disastrous 69-win season to 97 wins and a WS crown. Writing I'm guessing partway through the 2013 season, the author details the kinds of conscious overhaul that was done in both management and the roster... acquiring “'good clubhouse' players (e.g., Shane Victorino, Mike Napoli, David Ross, Ryan Dempster, and Jonny Gomes), average players who are known as upbeat leaders and cheerleaders for their teammates."  

Fangraphs, "Measuring Team Chemistry Through Social Science Theory" - not an exhaustive study, but it correlated team-centered leadership, as defined by language used by key players on 8 teams in 2012, with on-field success. The key finding: "The higher the level of team cohesion, the better the team performance."

All of these types of observations have an uncanny resemblance to statements and hirings we're seeing with Elias and Hyde, and throughout the organization's overhaul. And it puts context to the recent acquistions of Young and Escobar, and comments we're hearing about their character. The analytics might not be strong on their baseball skills, but we're hearing their personal skills touted by Hyde: “Character is huge for me,” he said. “Having a high-character clubhouse, having high-character players. You want to have an awesome atmosphere and those kinds of character guys just add to it. Especially if it’s an older veteran player who’s had good experiences. Those are definitely positive factors in the shaping of your roster.”

Bottom line, there is the tech data side of analytics which we're hearing so much about, but meanwhile it's evident that there is a whole other level of social-psychological analytics in play to complement those more measurable skill sets. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Luke-OH Hangout Grand Counsel

Luke-OH

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, now said:

There's another, less visible side to the whole analytics revolution that I find intriguing. And that's the focus on chemistry. Which seems unmeasurable, until you start delving into social science methodology, which does manage to classify personality types and leadership styles and then match with measurable results. 

I approached Tom Tango on Twitter awhile ago about this subject and he basically dismissed the inquiry as "unactionable." Today I got some new leads from Jon Shepherd (isn't that you,  @DrungoHazewood?) and found some illuminating info from a Google search on measurable qualities of team chemistry. To summarize briefly:

The Harvard Business Review, "The New Science of Team Chemistry" - identifies four personality types in an organization and counsels how they can better work together. My takeaway is that yes, different types can be identified, and they do impact team performance in different ways.

American Management Association, "Does Team Chemistry Really Matter: A Lesson From Red Sox Nation" - gets closer to the clubhouse with some relevant examples from the 2012-2013 Red Sox, who turned around a disastrous 69-win season to 97 wins and a WS crown. Writing I'm guessing partway through the 2013 season, the author details the kinds of conscious overhaul that was done in both management and the roster... acquiring “'good clubhouse' players (e.g., Shane Victorino, Mike Napoli, David Ross, Ryan Dempster, and Jonny Gomes), average players who are known as upbeat leaders and cheerleaders for their teammates."  

Fangraphs, "Measuring Team Chemistry Through Social Science Theory" - not an exhaustive study, but it correlated team-centered leadership, as defined by language used by key players on 8 teams in 2012, with on-field success. The key finding: "The higher the level of team cohesion, the better the team performance."

All of these types of observations have an uncanny resemblance to statements and hirings we're seeing with Elias and Hyde. And it puts context to the recent acquistions of Young and Escobar, and comments we're hearing about their character. The analytics might not be strong on their baseball skills, but we're hearing their personal skills touted by Hyde: “Character is huge for me,” he said. “Having a high-character clubhouse, having high-character players. You want to have an awesome atmosphere and those kinds of character guys just add to it. Especially if it’s an older veteran player who’s had good experiences. Those are definitely positive factors in the shaping of your roster.”

Bottom line, there is the tech data side of analytics which we're hearing so much about, but meanwhile it's evident that there is a whole other level of social-psychological analytics in play to complement those more measurable skill sets. 

Jon posts here on occasion but isn't Drungo. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
weams Hangout Grand Counsel

weams

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, now said:

There's another, less visible side to the whole analytics revolution that I find intriguing. And that's the focus on chemistry. Which seems unmeasurable, until you start delving into social science methodology, which does manage to classify personality types and leadership styles and then match with measurable results. 

I approached Tom Tango on Twitter awhile ago about this subject and he basically dismissed the inquiry as "unactionable." Today I got some new leads from Jon Shepherd (isn't that you,  @DrungoHazewood?) and found some illuminating info from a Google search on measurable qualities of team chemistry. To summarize briefly:

The Harvard Business Review, "The New Science of Team Chemistry" - identifies four personality types in an organization and counsels how they can better work together. My takeaway is that yes, different types can be identified, and they do impact team performance in different ways.

American Management Association, "Does Team Chemistry Really Matter: A Lesson From Red Sox Nation" - gets closer to the clubhouse with some relevant examples from the 2012-2013 Red Sox, who turned around a disastrous 69-win season to 97 wins and a WS crown. Writing I'm guessing partway through the 2013 season, the author details the kinds of conscious overhaul that was done in both management and the roster... acquiring “'good clubhouse' players (e.g., Shane Victorino, Mike Napoli, David Ross, Ryan Dempster, and Jonny Gomes), average players who are known as upbeat leaders and cheerleaders for their teammates."  

Fangraphs, "Measuring Team Chemistry Through Social Science Theory" - not an exhaustive study, but it correlated team-centered leadership, as defined by language used by key players on 8 teams in 2012, with on-field success. The key finding: "The higher the level of team cohesion, the better the team performance."

All of these types of observations have an uncanny resemblance to statements and hirings we're seeing with Elias and Hyde, and throughout the organization's overhaul. And it puts context to the recent acquistions of Young and Escobar, and comments we're hearing about their character. The analytics might not be strong on their baseball skills, but we're hearing their personal skills touted by Hyde: “Character is huge for me,” he said. “Having a high-character clubhouse, having high-character players. You want to have an awesome atmosphere and those kinds of character guys just add to it. Especially if it’s an older veteran player who’s had good experiences. Those are definitely positive factors in the shaping of your roster.”

Bottom line, there is the tech data side of analytics which we're hearing so much about, but meanwhile it's evident that there is a whole other level of social-psychological analytics in play to complement those more measurable skill sets. 

Jon Shepherd is @jsbearr

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing


×
×
  • Create New...