PDA

View Full Version : Redszone Poster by Type



gonelong
03-08-2007, 03:20 PM
If Redszone posters voted on which label to slap on you, they would the vote you as ...

- Primarily a "Numbers" guy/gal
- Primarily "Old School" guy/gal

EDIT: - Just taking a roll call of sorts.

If you are unsure of what I mean here, please reference the Breakfast Club (http://imdb.com/title/tt0088847/).


The Breakfast Club: Dear Mr. Vernon, we accept the fact that we had to sacrifice a whole saturday in detention for whatever it is we did wrong, but we think you're crazy for making us write an essay telling you who we think we are. You see us as you want to see us, in the simplest terms, in the most convenient definitions. But what we found out, is that each one of us is a brain, and an athlete, and a basketcase, a princess, and a criminal. Does that answer your question? Sincerely yours, The Breakfast Club.


GL

KittyDuran
03-08-2007, 03:21 PM
Definately "Old School"...:thumbup:

HumnHilghtFreel
03-08-2007, 03:21 PM
Old School guy that's learning to embrace the numbers. Mostly an old school guy though.

Red Leader
03-08-2007, 03:27 PM
Old School guy that's learning to embrace the numbers. Mostly an old school guy though.

Same here.

BTW, RFS62, the term "Old School," in this instance is based on a school of thought, not the fact that you taught Laura Ingalls. :evil: :laugh:

Highlifeman21
03-08-2007, 03:49 PM
Numb3rs

bucksfan2
03-08-2007, 03:49 PM
I dislike numbers. I like performance. I believe in intangiables.

kbrake
03-08-2007, 03:51 PM
I would say more and more numbers

Caveman Techie
03-08-2007, 03:56 PM
I voted old-school, but I'm slowly coming around to the numbers side of things. I just need to do a little more research into it.

Redsland
03-08-2007, 04:01 PM
I like to think of myself as numero uno.

redsfan30
03-08-2007, 04:02 PM
Old-school. I enjoy looking at stats because they are valuable. I don't base my opinions though on stats alone.

redsmetz
03-08-2007, 04:30 PM
What about old numbers school? Roman numerals?

http://www.prodesign-uk.com/block-roman.JPG

rotnoid
03-08-2007, 04:30 PM
Most decidedly old school. Numbers are great and all, but too many make my head hurt.

dabvu2498
03-08-2007, 04:34 PM
Kickin it Old Skool:


I'm takin it back to the old school
'Cause I'm an old fool who's so cool
If you want to get down
I'm gonna show you the way
Whoomp there it is
Let me hear you say

Whoomp chak a laka chack a laka chak a laka chak a (repeat 4 times)

Triples
03-08-2007, 04:55 PM
Old school. I'm just results oriented but I can appreciate the usefulness of stats as a tool.:beerme:

pedro
03-08-2007, 04:57 PM
I'd prefer not to fall into this dichotomy.

westofyou
03-08-2007, 05:29 PM
Know thy history, know thy numbers.

I like both oysters and snails.

edabbs44
03-08-2007, 05:32 PM
http://www.nighttimes.com/images/OldSchool.jpg

shredda2000
03-08-2007, 05:33 PM
Old school...numbers scare me!!! ;)

However, I am learning the values of the numbers more everyday.

Falls City Beer
03-08-2007, 05:34 PM
I'd prefer not to fall into this dichotomy.

Agreed. I know what I read. And I know what I see, if I see it often enough.

If you don't know a ton of both, you're screwed as a student of the game.

Red Leader
03-08-2007, 05:39 PM
I'd prefer not to fall into this dichotomy.

I was going to say that, too, but I didn't know how to spell dichotomy. :D

RANDY IN INDY
03-08-2007, 05:45 PM
Old School.:beerme:

KronoRed
03-08-2007, 05:46 PM
Spell check ;)

Numbers, results are what's important.

919191
03-08-2007, 06:12 PM
Old school with a growing appreciation for the numbers.

BoydsOfSummer
03-08-2007, 06:29 PM
I know a crappy statline when I see it and what that means.

I also know a crappy player when I watch him and what that means.

I say if you aren't doing both, you are missing a great game.

membengal
03-08-2007, 06:38 PM
Where's the option for "in-between"?

Stupid Mr. Vernon.

RFS62
03-08-2007, 08:47 PM
I'd prefer not to fall into this dichotomy.



Wow. You talk purty.


"Old School" has taken on a derogatory connotation lately. To me it means respect for tradition and history and a good work ethic.

Since the onset of the Great Moneyball Divide though, it's been used as an insult by stat devotees towards their neanderthal brethren.

I wish "Old School" would go back to a term of respect and not derision, personally.

But there needs to be a name for fans who refuse to consider the new science of baseball statistics, I guess. I just wish it didn't have to be "Old School". Maybe "Great Big Dumbass" would work.

I'm "Old School". To steal a phrase from Redsland, I'm "Ye Olde School". But I've done my best for 45 years to learn every stinkin' thing I can about baseball. History, tradition, statistical analysis, the players backgrounds, the type of people they are, everything. I love all these aspects of the greatest game ever imagined.

Old School, dammit, and willing to respectfully consider any new idea as long as you're smart enough to express it.

jojo
03-08-2007, 09:16 PM
Wow. You talk purty.


"Old School" has taken on a derogatory connotation lately. To me it means respect for tradition and history and a good work ethic.

Since the onset of the Great Moneyball Divide though, it's been used as an insult by stat devotees towards their neanderthal brethren.

I wish "Old School" would go back to a term of respect and not derision, personally.

But there needs to be a name for fans who refuse to consider the new science of baseball statistics, I guess. I just wish it didn't have to be "Old School". Maybe "Great Big Dumbass" would work.

I'm "Old School". To steal a phrase from Redsland, I'm "Ye Olde School". But I've done my best for 45 years to learn every stinkin' thing I can about baseball. History, tradition, statistical analysis, the players backgrounds, the type of people they are, everything. I love all these aspects of the greatest game ever imagined.

Old School, dammit, and willing to respectfully consider any new idea as long as you're smart enough to express it.

I don't think old school is a derogatory term.... to me old-school primarily trusts the eyes and new school suggests the eyes often lie. Both search for a deeper understanding of the game but each takes a different approach. In reality most fans are some mixture of both views.

I think it's a complete misrepresentation of stats-inclined people to suggest they don't respect tradition and history and a good work ethic. A huge part of SABR involves preserving the history of the game. I'd actually suggest it takes a deep love for the game to motivate a lot of people to wade through the science of sabermetrics in search of a deeper understanding when relying on the eyes is probably much more titillating on average.

I also think both sides could do a better job of expressing their views when confronting a fellow devotee of the game who approaches it from the polar opposite perspective.

Tom Servo
03-08-2007, 09:17 PM
I know a crappy statline when I see it and what that means.

I also know a crappy player when I watch him and what that means.

I say if you aren't doing both, you are missing a great game.
My thoughts exactly, perfectly stated.

Keystone12
03-08-2007, 09:23 PM
Old school. I'm just results oriented but I can appreciate the usefulness of stats as a tool.:beerme:

I don't understand this.

Think of it this way:
When a Dunn hits a bomb, you see the result. He rounds the sacks, the team scores, the fans go wild.

And then, in this crazy statworld that is totally independent of the game on the field, Dunn's home run total increases by one. Stats - from home runs to OBP to ERA - measure exactly the results a batter produces at the plate, or a pitcher produces on the mound. Dunn strikes out: his K total increases by one, and the stats measure the number of results he produces.

Stats don't determine anything - they reflect past performance. If you want to be "results oriented", you have to look at what results the player produced.

When you walk up to Josh Hamilton or Adam Dunn, you might not be able to tell which one has the better "baseball tools". How do you decide who is going to be the starting left fielder this spring? You look at results, past performance, and realize that Dunn's career .380 OBP and .513 SLG over five-and-a-half years ...

and you realize that stats tell you everything you need to know: Dunn deserves to start in left over Hamilton.

I realize this is oversimplifying the issue but I find it ridiculous not to see the connection between "results" and "performance" with specific indicators: stats.

Natty Redlocks
03-08-2007, 11:47 PM
Elvis man

vaticanplum
03-08-2007, 11:50 PM
New Slang.

marcshoe
03-08-2007, 11:54 PM
I'm just a fan, whatever that encompasses.

pedro
03-08-2007, 11:55 PM
Wow. You talk purty.




Thanks. Wanna take a canoe trip?

Gallen5862
03-09-2007, 12:00 AM
I am "Old School". Numbers has its place but I value the intangibles.

paintmered
03-09-2007, 12:05 AM
When viewed in proper context, both approaches can be useful in explaining the intricacies of the game. When used together, a nearly-complete picture is painted.

I say nearly, because like all endeavors academic, I don't think it is possible to reach the absolute limit of understanding.

Razor Shines
03-09-2007, 02:43 AM
I'd also be in the absent in-between section.

Ron Madden
03-09-2007, 06:03 AM
I'm a life long Reds Fan and I'm old.

Stats have been around this game a lot longer than I have been.

I'm just begining to learn how to better understand the game I've always loved through a better understanding of the numbers.

Call me a mix between the two choices given if I must be labeled with some sort of tag. ;)

mth123
03-09-2007, 06:07 AM
I know a crappy statline when I see it and what that means.

I also know a crappy player when I watch him and what that means.

I say if you aren't doing both, you are missing a great game.

This is me too. For the record, I don't think they are much different. Numbers are just putting stats to support most of the things the old school people think anyway. For example, numbers folks talk about "plate discipline" where old school people say "pick a good one."

Most of the time numbers and old school make exactly the same point using the same underlying logic. Most people are too busy arguing about it to notice.

MississippiRed
03-09-2007, 12:42 PM
I like the numbers, I'm a stat guy, both at work and play. However, when Brandon Phillips singles up the middle to drive in two against Billy Wagner, then I'm definitely old school.

Team Clark
03-09-2007, 05:12 PM
Old School open to anything.

BRM
03-09-2007, 05:37 PM
Old School open to anything.

I don't think the intent was to be quite that personal TC. ;)

:p:

gonelong
03-14-2007, 04:32 PM
Interesting results, pretty much a split with 85 participants. The reason I posted this poll was that I occasionally see a post about how someone is not allowed to have a certain opinion and that the board is decidedly slanted towards one "side" or another. I think this thread shows we have a pretty good balance here.

GL

bounty37h
03-14-2007, 04:37 PM
Im old school, I like to watch a player/team, and can say afterwards, they are good, or they are bad, etc.....
Too many peeps here seem too focused on stats, missing out on the game itself.....

guttle11
03-14-2007, 04:47 PM
I base my opinions on what I see. For what I don't see, I refer to the numbers.

westofyou
03-14-2007, 04:51 PM
Too many peeps here seem too focused on stats, missing out on the game itself.....
Too many people trot out that line of doody all too often as well.

M2
03-14-2007, 04:57 PM
I prefer "new school" to "numbers." Sure, I like validating an assumption and there's lots of numbers to help you do that, but I'm more interested in shaking loose from some of the cookie cutter precepts around the game.

In other words, I don't subscribe to the notion that everything I need to know about baseball I learned in Little League.

pedro
03-14-2007, 05:01 PM
I base my opinions on what I see. For what I don't see, I refer to the numbers.


I'd further that by using numbers to validate what I *think* I see.

Roy Tucker
03-14-2007, 05:02 PM
There are a lot of old school precepts that I hold true, but numbers have helped me unlearn others that don't hold quite as tightly.

Like other lessons I have learned (sometimes painfully), change or die.

nmculbreth
03-14-2007, 05:06 PM
Old School open to anything.

I'm in the same boat. Does anyone have any suggested reading to pick up on some of the SABR type evaluation methods?

Puffy
03-14-2007, 05:08 PM
I think this should be the Redszone poster of choice

http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2005-8/1070272/f1_jpg.jpg

tripleaaaron
03-15-2007, 04:36 PM
I am like most, on the fence. I think that numbers are a very important tool at evaluating a player, but often times numbers dont tell the whole picture. I am a big picture kinda guy, I watch/ listen to any and every game I can and really like the "hustle" players whose effort and inspirations can't be assessed by numbers. That being said I value them almost equally but always seem to barely lie on the edge of what I see, not what shows up on paper.

Redlegs
03-15-2007, 10:50 PM
Inflated statistics are impressive, but I'll take a guy who can run, hit, and play defense. In other words, give me a "baseball player" any day.

Old school for me.

sonny
03-16-2007, 01:25 AM
old school. even when it comes to athletic athstetics. the cool flow helmet irks me as do the pajama pants. oh well, at least its not as riduculous as the revolution facemasks.

TeamCasey
03-17-2007, 07:05 AM
I'm just a fan, whatever that encompasses.

Me too! :beerme: