Re: Evolution revisited
Agreed, and I am starting to feel a bit bad for the new guys. They get jumped on from the word go with many of us that have hashed these arguments out many times. We have evolved ourselves, we can argue these points very well, as we have done and seen it done in the past. We need to allow them to evolve as well. None of us were brought up on OPS, RC, etc. ... somebody helped us understand these along the way. It was up to each of us to figure out how much we would rely on these newfangled numbers.
We also get a bit tired of arguing the same point every 3-4 months as new guys come aboard. Its a bit of a problem, but I think it is more incumbent on the crusty old vets here to take it upon themselves to be above the fray a bit.
If you want to teach someone something, show them your point of view, or share your opinion, belittling them is not the way to go.
As a GM I'd do exactly as you say. I'd blend both, use one to validate the other and use one to test the other. I doubt many disagree with this other than the weight you give to either discipline.
As a GM I'd weight the scout higher than I can as a fan. I can get ahold of the numbers, I can't get ahold of the scouting reports and determine which scouts are reliable and which are not. I can't watch more than a 150 games a year. I can't travel to see all the minor leaguers play.
On the same page, its pretty obvious that stats need to be interpreted as well, and some are much better at it than others.
Too much of anything is not a good thing. All things in moderation.
Last edited by gonelong; 01-26-2006 at 08:40 PM.