M's Manager: Sabermetrics made Dustin Ackley suck

[jojo]

Not me.

Some guys can hit with 2 strikes better than others. Ackley appears to be someone who struggles at that point vs major league pitchers. He's not the only guy.

I think the saber community can get a little sensitive when it's impugned in any way (not the only community to do so). Especially when it comes from a manager who apparently has more influence over outcomes than the saber community generally attributes to a manager.

To be fair, Wedge was quoted as saying, ""People who haven't played since they were 9 years old think they have it figured out. It gets in these kids' heads."

Has the response from staheads been all that different that the expected reaction from any group that has just been told "you don't know what you're talking about, in fact you're about as knowledgeable as a 9 year old"?

Frankly Wedge deserves a redszone infraction!

[jojo]

Is it fair to say, in a general sense, he needs to be more aggressive?

It's fair to say he needs to alter his pitch selection if possible. It's not fair to say his current plate discipline is the result of trying to draw walks nor is it necesarily sound advice to generally argue he should be more aggressive if that means he will swing at significantly more pitches out of the strikezone. The dude simply needs to cover more of the plate.

[lollipopcurve]

It's fair to say he needs to alter his pitch selection if possible. It's not fair to say his current plate discipline is the result of trying to draw walks nor is it necesarily sound advice to generally argue he should be more aggressive if that means he will swing at significantly more pitches out of the strikezone. The dude simply needs to cover more of the plate.

I think, then, the answer to my question is yes. He does need to be more aggressive. Of course, he needs to do that in a smart way, but that should be understood.

All in all, Wedge has a point, and folks need to see past the bluster. Because it's just bluster.

[bucksfan2]

Above all else, what the sabermetric community dislikes is being antagonistically misrepresented. He's beating a strawman; that's what bugs people.

No one likes being misrepresented. When a manager goes out and says something people who overreact take what was said as gospel. There is no sarcasm, no tongue and cheek, 100% written in stone truth without any underlying meanings.

Somewhat ironically, the sabermetric community is more willing to engage in open, honest and challenging discourse than any community I know of. What's frustrating is being told that a) you think you know it all (when no sabermetrician would make anything close to that claim) and b) that you don't know much of anything because you stopped playing in little league.

Sure, nobody likes to be put in their place. But it helps when it's an accurate critique.

I disagree that the sabermetric community is an open, honest, and challenging community. Some people are willing and open to a discourse while others are closed and pretty much say that if you disagree with them you are wrong. For ever Eric Wedge there is a Keith Law.

[edabbs44]

If Wedge was truly trying to deflect blame from himself and blame everything on the darn sabermetrics, he probably would've included Montero and Smoak in there as other victims from 2013.

[jojo]

If Wedge was truly trying to deflect blame from himself and blame everything on the darn sabermetrics, he probably would've included Montero and Smoak in there as other victims from 2013.

Montero is a "catcher" so Wedge has a built in excuse with him. Smoak has actually been a useful player over his last 70 games so Wedge doesn't need a excuse for him (yet?).

[edabbs44]

Montero is a "catcher" so Wedge has a built in excuse with him. Smoak has actually been a useful player over his last 70 games so Wedge doesn't need a excuse for him (yet?).

Avg OPS for first basemen are generally near or at .800. Smoak isn't in the same zip code. Ever. And I haven't heard him use the c word with regard to Montero. But, truth be told, I'm not as in tune to Seattle baseball as you so maybe he has.

[RedEye]

Ackley went 4-5 with a HR and two walks last night in AAA. Your move, sabermetrics.

Maybe his problem was major league pitching.

[Brisco]

Ok... let me start by saying I am not about to defend any comment by Wedge... I know little about the context and less about the person. I also know next to nothing about Ackley not contained in this thread. But the topic does bring up an issue I think is interesting.

What is the role of sabrmetrics?

I posit that sabrmetrics is a useful tool for GMs, and to a lesser extent, to managers filling out lineup cards.

I also posit that sabrmetrics has far less value to batters and can be a detractor to hitting.

Let's start with the common game thread complaint that batters need to make the pitcher throw more pitches. Nothing draws more ire and game thread wailing and gnashing of teeth than a first pitch swinging ground out.

You know what is almost always missing from this complaint? An evaluation of whether or not the pitch was a strike.

Question: If the first pitch of an at bat is a strike in the middle of the zone, is it ever right to take it?

Stats will say yes. If the pitcher has walked the bases full, you must not swing at the first pitch, even if it is a strike.

This stance seems so intuitive.. so obvious. Stat analysis tells us to use probabilities to reach conclusions. The pitcher just threw 12 balls... the next pitch is probably gonna be a ball... EVEN if your senses and instincts are telling you its a strike. However. probabilities never dictate a single given action NOR should they trump instincts that have been honed by years of watching pitches.

I would prefer a player to trust their instincts over the probabilities. If your eyes say its a strike in an area of the zone you can handle, then swing.

The batter must make the swing decision in a millisecond. they do not have time to cloud their mind with thoughts of where the runners are, what the score is, and many other of the game time variables that stats folks can analyze to decide if it s a good idea to swing or not.

Hitting a ML pitch is such a difficult skill already. The last thing you need is a timidity based on how you will be statistically evaluated and second guessed after the at bat.

I can get second guessing which base a ball is thrown to, whether to stretch a single or try to steal, what pitch to throw in the count and to what batter and other in game player decisions... because in those decisions they have significantly more time for deliberation than a batter on his swing decision.

I detest the quaint advice: "Swing at strikes, not balls." I do not believe any batter intentionally swings at balls. They are all thinking they are swinging at strikes when they make the swing decision in that millisecond.

Tony Gwynn was once criticized for his lack of home runs. Gwynn responded that HR are most often a product of the hitter guessing the right pitch is coming. Gwynn said he never guessed. He treated every pitch the same way, no matter the game situation (although he mentioned that he would swing at close balls if there were two strikes). If his instinct said swing... he swung. Period.

This may be a chicken/egg argument... but I think that the SABR focus on OBP for GMs (Think the Hatteburg discussion from Moneyball) that says high OBP can be used to identify better hitters was correct. That is because those guys were the best at identifying strikes and balls in the millisecond they made the swing decision.

However, it has improperly morphed into a belief that if one wants to be a better hitter, you need to get more walks. It is not about walks, but rather identifying strikes that you can manage. Its about constantly improving and honing instincts rather than statistical analysis.

Ok... I know I have worded this poorly and there are many lines that can be pulled out individually and attacked... but doesn't the general theme make sense? SABR for GMs = Good... SABR for batters = Not so much.

[jojo]

Avg OPS for first basemen are generally near or at .800. Smoak isn't in the same zip code. Ever. And I haven't heard him use the c word with regard to Montero. But, truth be told, I'm not as in tune to Seattle baseball as you so maybe he has.

Smoak over his last 70 games (he's been a plus defender too):

AVG	OBP	SLG 	wOBA	K%	BB%	ISO
0.239	0.380	0.432	0.362	19.2	13.5	0.192

[RedEye]

but doesn't the general theme make sense? SABR for GMs = Good... SABR for batters = Not so much.

I agree that SABR for GMs = Good. I wouldn't want a GM who was closed off to any tool he could use to do his job better.

For batters, I think it depends. For a hitter like Votto, statistical analysis has obviously helped him to perfect his approach at the plate, along with the wisdom of greats like Pete Rose and Ted Williams. That works for Votto.

For someone like Ackley who is just figuring things out, or someone who is wired differently than Votto (and there are a lot of people who are) it might take a different formula to be successful. I still think all Wedge is trying to say is that Ackley is overthinking his approach. My guess is that this would likely be a problem for him whether or not "sabermetrics" are involved. So Wedge just used some faulty causal logic when he spoke. It happens.

I still think it is ironic and quite funny that Joe Morgan is one of the most strident voices for ignoring new stats. Morgan might be the HOF player who has gained the most esteem due to SABR. We knew he was great before, but thanks to WAR and other metrics, we now know that his accomplishments on the field were beyond mere great -- and that his '75 and '76 seasons were objectively among the greatest individual performances of all time by any player. Anyway, Joe is obviously a case where a player who pretty obviously wasn't aiming for SABR goals still managed to accomplish them despite himself.

[mdccclxix]

Add Domonic Brown to the victims of Sabr-itis?

Brown hit 12 HR and drew 0 walks in May...

Back to the man of the hour. Entering this season his career walk rate in 492 plate appearances was 10.1 percent. In April, it was 9.3 percent. He was drawing walks but not doing much of anything else. His patience was praised by sabermetricians, but his production was denounced by all.

Then he started swinging. Through April, he had swung at 46.2 percent of pitches; in May he swung at 55.9 percent of pitches. And drew no walks.

.....

If Brown keeps hitting home runs, he'll start seeing more pitches out of the strike zone. That in itself could lead to more walks. Sometimes the "sabermetric" approach isn't really about an approach but earning respect from pitchers. Maybe that will happen with Brown; or maybe he just had a Ty Wigginton-like fluke month.

Truth is, we don't know who Domonic Brown IS right now, let alone know who he'll become.

[M2]

Add Domonic Brown to the victims of Sabr-itis?

Brown hit 12 HR and drew 0 walks in May...

Or he's getting pitches he can hit, so he's swinging at them. We'll see if he's swinging for the sake of swinging once pitchers wise up and try to get him to chase balls out of the zone.

[mdccclxix]

Or he's getting pitches he can hit, so he's swinging at them. We'll see if he's swinging for the sake of swinging once pitchers wise up and try to get him to chase balls out of the zone.

True. You see it happen a lot that a batter wakes up from his perception that pitchers are trying to pitch around him, when in reality he's watching some perfect pitches go by. Then the adjustment cycles through again.

[Always Red]

Verducci tells the whole story, and not the twitterific snippets that were reported on what Wedge had to say about Ackley's struggles:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/mlb...1_a6&eref=sihp

Wedge got himself into hot water with the sabermetrics community when he said, in part, "People who haven't played since they were 9 years old think they have it figured out. It gets in these kids' heads."

Uh-oh. Wedge's long discussion with reporters about Ackley quickly was reduced to the shorthand narrative that Wedge was a Neanderthal of a manager who has no use for numbers, nevermind that he has embraced statistical analysis since his days managing the number-crunching Indians.

Where Wedge slipped on a verbal banana peel was using the term "sabermetrics" as a catchall term. Wedge actually was making a very good point about the down side of the modern passive-aggressive approach to hitting, but he distracted from it by using the hot button term of "sabermetrics."