My position on this matter is simple, when teams start hiring computer programmers as scouts then stats is what counts. However that hasn't happen yet. Stats are a tool that helps decision-making, but it is not the entire story, numbers do lie sometimes, even Billy Beane sends out scouts to see and evaluate players. It is a combination of both.

I thought the joke was funny. When I first read it, I chuckled.

 

 

I mean, it's been told a million times already. Even the college kid who wrote that article about WAR not providing you the "real value" of a player (article that Broncobob cited indirectly from Wikipedia) told it.

My position on this matter is simple, when teams start hiring computer programmers as scouts then stats is what counts. However that hasn't happen yet. Stats are a tool that helps decision-making, but it is not the entire story, numbers do lie sometimes, even Billy Beane sends out scouts to see and evaluate players. It is a combination of both.

 

 

This position makes no sense, really. Stats and scouting don't necessarily need to be at odds with one another.

My position on this matter is simple, when teams start hiring computer programmers as scouts then stats is what counts. However that hasn't happen yet. Stats are a tool that helps decision-making, but it is not the entire story, numbers do lie sometimes, even Billy Beane sends out scouts to see and evaluate players. It is a combination of both.

 

 

This position makes no sense, really. Stats and scouting don't necessarily need to be at odds with one another.

 

 

I think he means that there are many people who define a player on statistics alone and that's just not baseball. You need to use your eyes AND look at the stats. Take the facts as well as your opinion and use them to judge a player accordingly.

 

This method is probably the reason why a player like Adeiny Hechavarria has a job. He passes the eye test defensively, and even offensively, but can't seem to actually put either skills into numbers at the big league level. I think he's a player worth having patience with based on what I have seen, but on a short leash for sure.

 

The eye test is fine for a player that is developing such as Adeiny, but if the stats ultimately don't improve, they will trump all.

Are there stats for the kid's family values? NO!

Are there stats for the kid's family values? NO!

 

It's a Dummy Variable. If he's white and Christian, it's a 1! Otherwise, 0.

Are there stats for the kid's family values? NO!

 

It's a Dummy Variable. If he's white and Christian, it's a 1! Otherwise, 0.No, you're a dummy!

My position on this matter is simple, when teams start hiring computer programmers as scouts then stats is what counts. However that hasn't happen yet. Stats are a tool that helps decision-making, but it is not the entire story, numbers do lie sometimes, even Billy Beane sends out scouts to see and evaluate players. It is a combination of both.

 

 

This position makes no sense, really. Stats and scouting don't necessarily need to be at odds with one another.

 

 

I think he means that there are many people who define a player on statistics alone and that's just not baseball. You need to use your eyes AND look at the stats. Take the facts as well as your opinion and use them to judge a player accordingly.

 

This method is probably the reason why a player like Adeiny Hechavarria has a job. He passes the eye test defensively, and even offensively, but can't seem to actually put either skills into numbers at the big league level. I think he's a player worth having patience with based on what I have seen, but on a short leash for sure.

 

The eye test is fine for a player that is developing such as Adeiny, but if the stats ultimately don't improve, they will trump all.

 

 

 

 

Visual analysis helps when judging defense, but numbers are needed to contextualize how much defense means in terms of overall value.

 

That's what you and Perry Hill fail to understand.

Are there stats for the kid's family values? NO!

 

It's a Dummy Variable. If he's white and Christian, it's a 1! Otherwise, 0.

 

 

A white player's value is directly proportional to how hard he prays.

I thought the joke was funny. When I first read it, I chuckled.

 

I mean, it's been told a million times already. Even the college kid who wrote that article about WAR not providing you the "real value" of a player (article that Broncobob cited indirectly from Wikipedia) told it.When I first read it from Perry Hill though, that was the first time I ever heard the joke. Honestly, I thought he made it up.

I thought the joke was funny. When I first read it, I chuckled.

 

I mean, it's been told a million times already. Even the college kid who wrote that article about WAR not providing you the "real value" of a player (article that Broncobob cited indirectly from Wikipedia) told it.When I first read it from Perry Hill though, that was the first time I ever heard the joke. Honestly, I thought he made it up.

 

 

 

 

I mean, type "war, what is it good for" and "baseball" into Google and see how many hits you get. And that's not even counting Twitter.

I thought the joke was funny. When I first read it, I chuckled.

 

I mean, it's been told a million times already. Even the college kid who wrote that article about WAR not providing you the "real value" of a player (article that Broncobob cited indirectly from Wikipedia) told it.When I first read it from Perry Hill though, that was the first time I ever heard the joke. Honestly, I thought he made it up.

 

 

 

Frankly I never heard it at all before I posted it. Obviously in the penguin's eyes that was a serious failing on my part. I should have checked Google and Twitter and YouTube and probably even the Baseball Encyclopedia first. If only I had known!

You must be new to baseball because there is no need to "check" anything.

You must be new to baseball because there is no need to "check" anything.

 

 

:lol Now that's funny!

My position on this matter is simple, when teams start hiring computer programmers as scouts then stats is what counts. However that hasn't happen yet. Stats are a tool that helps decision-making, but it is not the entire story, numbers do lie sometimes, even Billy Beane sends out scouts to see and evaluate players. It is a combination of both.

 

 

This position makes no sense, really. Stats and scouting don't necessarily need to be at odds with one another.

 

 

Did I say they were at odds? I say they both go hand in hand...what it is unclear to you?

I thought the joke was funny. When I first read it, I chuckled.

 

 

I mean, it's been told a million times already. Even the college kid who wrote that article about WAR not providing you the "real value" of a player (article that Broncobob cited indirectly from Wikipedia) told it.

 

 

Not entirely. Every article on the definition has words like "perceived" and phrases like "what a replacement minor leaguer should." IOW, making up a standard and then judging players by that made up standard. It's just not reliable on it's own merit. Too many other things need to be taken into consideration, many that can't have a # put on it. If people want to use WAR, then that's fine. But when they use it as the final answer, or the final analysis on any given player, then that's not fine.

Frank menechino was in the majors for 6 years, only had a BA of .240 with only 36 homeruns

 

Im I missing something? is this the best we could get

Often times, the best coaches weren't all stars. Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach.

I thought the joke was funny. When I first read it, I chuckled.

 

 

I mean, it's been told a million times already. Even the college kid who wrote that article about WAR not providing you the "real value" of a player (article that Broncobob cited indirectly from Wikipedia) told it.

 

 

Not entirely. Every article on the definition has words like "perceived" and phrases like "what a replacement minor leaguer should." IOW, making up a standard and then judging players by that made up standard. It's just not reliable on it's own merit. Too many other things need to be taken into consideration, many that can't have a # put on it. If people want to use WAR, then that's fine. But when they use it as the final answer, or the final analysis on any given player, then that's not fine.

 

 

 

 

I don't think you understand what WAR is. I also don't see what the first part of your post has to do with the second. WAR assesses value/talent but does so with respect to the average minor league call up. That's intended to establish a certain baseline, but the baseline applies to all players. What's the problem with that?

 

WAR is useful because it disregards biases. You and your eyes have proven to be incredibly biased. You seem to hate on certain players and like others based upon their styles of play and the types of skill sets they excel in. You like "scrappy" players like Bonifacio because they are defensive and speed centric (that's your personal bias), but you don't acknowledge that his skill set might not amount to a solid major league player. WAR basically tells you why your biased approach to players is flat out wrong.

I thought the joke was funny. When I first read it, I chuckled.

 

 

I mean, it's been told a million times already. Even the college kid who wrote that article about WAR not providing you the "real value" of a player (article that Broncobob cited indirectly from Wikipedia) told it.

 

 

Not entirely. Every article on the definition has words like "perceived" and phrases like "what a replacement minor leaguer should." IOW, making up a standard and then judging players by that made up standard. It's just not reliable on it's own merit. Too many other things need to be taken into consideration, many that can't have a # put on it. If people want to use WAR, then that's fine. But when they use it as the final answer, or the final analysis on any given player, then that's not fine.

 

 

 

 

I don't think you understand what WAR is. I also don't see what the first part of your post has to do with the second. WAR assesses value/talent but does so with respect to the average minor league call up. That's intended to establish a certain baseline, but the baseline applies to all players. What's the problem with that?

 

WAR is useful because it disregards biases. You and your eyes have proven to be incredibly biased. You seem to hate on certain players and like others based upon their styles of play and the types of skill sets they excel in. You like "scrappy" players like Bonifacio because they are defensive and speed centric (that's your personal bias), but you don't acknowledge that his skill set might not amount to a solid major league player. WAR basically tells you why your biased approach to players is flat out wrong.

 

 

 

 

Yeah but you didn't go to that Spring Training game that one afternoon to see what he saw. I think you're wrong.

To me it's kinda weird for a utilty infielder better known for his glove than for his bat to be our batting instructor, mostly since he has not really had that much of experience as batting coach but it is reported he is a good instructor and relates well with young talent ...If he doesn't work out I guess The Marlins can replace him with Alex Arias or Eddie Zosky

 

 

http://www.rantsports.com/mlb/2013/10/11/miami-marlins-brett-butler-frank-menechino-are-good-coaching-add-ons/

Often times, the best coaches weren't all stars. Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach.

 

 

And you can't make chicken salad out of chicken sh*t, which is often what kind of talent level the Marlins have had.

Sentinel is reporting bullpen coach Reid Cornelius has gotten permission to interview with the Phillies about their pitching coach opening

I would think that bullpen coach must be a tedious job. I'm surprised he has stayed around so long.