Re: Who is more ready?
Originally Posted by RedsManRick
Steel, I appreciate your post. Few people really understand fully the metrics being tossed around (the assumptions, implications, history, etc.), and I consider myself on the periphery of understanding at best.
We usually know enough to make the case or counterpoint, and often that's not a problem. But we should be careful about just how far we run with our conclusions. I think that generally speaking, we'd all be better off using data to make "observations" than "points".
It's interesting to me that a few tenants of analysis are constantly violated in thread after thread. Things like sample size, variance, etc. are routinely given lip service but not wholly informing the points being made. I know it's not fun to come to the conclusion that "Homer Bailey's 2007 MLB performance tells us very little about what he's likely to do in 2008". "I don't know" is usually a conversation ender. We should be willing to do that more than we seem to be.
How many people are solely using Homer's '07 to predict his '08 though?
"This isnít stats vs scouts - this is stats and scouts working together, building an organization that blends the best of both worlds. This is the blueprint for how a baseball organization should be run. And, whether the baseball men of the 20th century like it or not, this is where baseball is going."---Dave Cameron, U.S.S. Mariner