Brewers betrayed by Baseball Prospectus

by roguejim on Feb 12, 2008 7:47 AM CST Comment 33 comments

In Baseball Prospectus' National League Central spring training preview Monday, Joe Sheehan gave the Brewers a B-plus for offseason moves and wrote: "this is the most entertaining Brewers team in a quarter-century.

However like some other early Central projections, Baseball Prospectus still likes the Cubs to win the division and suggests that the Brewers have too many right-handed hitters despite the fact that the club "could be a 90-win team if it wins more of the bullpen bets than it loses."

Apparently, we're too right-handed. Plus we need to platoon Bill Hall at third. Fools!

0 recs | Comment 33 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Can't really call it stabbing in the back

when Sheehan, the author of the article, has a steady record of Brewers hating. It's been documented here, and it is to be expected at this point. I'd call him a Cubs fan, but he was born and raised in NYC, and went to school at USC. I don't get it really. In fact, in an interview with The Baseball Analysts in 2004, he said:

RWBB: When did you begin to follow baseball?

Joe: My earliest baseball memories are of a nighttime Mets game when I was four or five and of playing Wiffle ball on the sidewalk around that time. The first specific memories I have are of the Bucky Dent game, when I was seven.

RWBB: You must not be a Red Sox fan or you would have given ol' Bucky a certain middle name.

Joe: I'm a huge Yankees fan, have been since I was a little kid. My birthday present for a number of years was tickets to a doubleheader, back when they scheduled them. When I got older, I'd go to 20-25 games a summer. To me, no place in baseball will ever be like Yankee Stadium.

There you go, he's a Yankees fan. That would explain... nothing.

I saw the overcrowded marketplase that is the brewers blogs and said, "Me Too!" The Chubber Lang Report

by hyattff2003 on Feb 12, 2008 8:12 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

I wouldn't call it betrayed

The NL Central is going to have a close race again this season and the Cubs are the defending champs, so that makes it easier to pick them again. It's not the best way to do it (especially if your team gets the short end of the stick) but neither team stands out too much from the other anyway. They're not saying the Cubs will blow the Brewers away or anything -- it's like the Hardball Times preview article that mentioned the Brewers will win the division by one game. So what?

Obscure baseball records and more at my blog, Recondite Baseball.

by TheJay on Feb 12, 2008 8:45 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

I was feeling dramatic. :)

"I will agree that the attitude [at BCB] is ridiculous and they have done so much to instigate animosity and then block us from responding. Real mature!"

by roguejim on Feb 12, 2008 9:38 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

baseball prospectus

that column from sheehan was borderline firejoemorgan fodder. you must remember that these guys at BP are writing for subscriptions, and there are more cubs fans in the country.

the column is unresearched. it's just mainstream style sports journalism speculation.

Sheehan writes:

It will be harder [for the cubs] to hold off the Brewers this season

the cubs will have a harder time holding off the brewers this season? because 'they held off' the brewers last year? did no one at BP tune into the NL central race until the last two weeks? what happened was the brewers failed to hold off the cubs.

he also writes:

Winter grade: A-. [The Cubs] only move of note--signing Fukudome--was a terrific one, giving them the OBP boost they sorely needed, and solidifying a position, right field, that was a problem in 2007.

he has fukudome projected for a .390/.440 line. (i already gave my opinion on that projection).

Well, RF for the cubs last year posted a .375/.419 line in 611 at bats. give those at bats to fukudome's projection and you get 105 simple runs created (up from 96), a 9 run improvement.

And for that 9 run improvement, which could very likely be offset just by the aging everywhere else on the diamond, he gives the cubs the best 'winter' grade in the division. One of the problems with relying on the veterans is you have to make off-season improvements just to offset the aging. The brewers have the opposite problem, without doing anything, they are better this year.

For the cubs, Soto and Pie will prove to be better additions than Fukudome will. And not messing up the younsters shots at positions on the diamond is impressive for hendry, i'd give him a B just for not trading those two away.

But Sheehan goes on to write that the brewers should be improved in the bullpen, might be 4 wins better on defense because of cameron, and might post 90 wins?

And they are not the team to beat? i think sheehan just covered all the bases in a throwaway collection of words cause it was time for some free material.

Bring Back The Old Logo!

by jacob on Feb 12, 2008 9:57 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

The article isn't bad

It looks bad after Tom H. pulls out a couple nuggets. And I hate the idea of turning Billy into a platoon player. But like Hyattf says, you have to use context and look at the author.

Here is his 'wiki'

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Sheehan

The thing that struck me besides his life on the coasts, is that his career started by posting on a usenet group. Heck, it sounds as if BP is kind of a thing that grew out of guys hanging around on usenet. That's probably not entirely fair.

He is a stat guy though, but at least he is a stat guy who observes players. Some stat guys seem as if observing will poison their mathematical truths. He wrote an article calling for a few guys including Rickie Weeks to break out this year. Look at the way his brethren are ready to throw him overboard:

http://www.insidethebook.com/ee/index.php/site/comments/yappin_joe_sheehan/

I know who 'mgl' is but I forget and Tony the tangoing tiger (sarcasm) is a successful entrepeneur selling stats and stats talk. I'm sure it'll break Joe's heart if he won't be exchanging emails with him. Pathetically he touts his crude Marcel the monkey tool which is fine as a starting point for conversation, but not much more. He talks about it as if it is akin to DNA testing and that the very idea of players not matching their marcel or PECOTA is foolishness.

GAK

by ol Pete on Feb 12, 2008 11:04 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

Sheesh

I know you don't like the whole statistics crowd, but I think the main point of the thread you linked to at Tangotiger's site is that picking small lists of guys to break out is dumb. Anyone can blindly pick any number of players (especially if you limit it to younger guys) and probably do as well.

The Marcel system (as I understand it from tangotiger's description) is just a weighted average of each player's numbers from the previous three major league seasons. He even admits it's the most basic projection system you can use and that it won't be perfect. I think the reason he does still use it is because it hasn't been shown to be much less reliable (if any) than the other projections out there. I don't visit there much, though, so I could be wrong on that.

Obscure baseball records and more at my blog, Recondite Baseball.

by TheJay on Feb 12, 2008 12:04 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

my impression is different

I don't get that impression at all and I doubt that picking 8 young players arbitrarily would match results with more educated guesses, such as the author's and probably yours.

Even though you refer to Marcel as basic, they talk about it like its much more and if it matches reliability with other projection systems, that isn't a positive for the others.

And hey, everybody outside of fans like my girlfriend who will watch a game and enjoy it (and that's a recent development), is a stats guy (or gal). But stats in bball are like stats in everything else including politics, they're bits of data. They're great at learning and improving observations and often provide telling insights. But they can also be used to prove anything and are misused frequently.

by ol Pete on Feb 12, 2008 1:05 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

breakouts

the main point in that thread, at least tango's original post, in my opinion, is that here is sheehan giving predictions on breakout candidates with no explanation or research behind it. He has not come up with a method for identifying players that can be examined later.

it's a witch doctor business model.

like you say theJay, unless you've got reasoning behind it, predicting something like a breakout season is dumb.

it's essentially the same criticism i made above about his look at the NL central. just a bunch of guesses. it's like pop sabermetrics. that's fine for a sports illustrated column, but it makes baseball prospectus the boy bands of the advanced baseball metrics crowd.

all style and no substance.

mostly, sheehan simply gets off on the wrong foot:

What do true breakout players look like? Well, a little like this...

now the comment thread moves to something more interesting and ends with a philosophical question, can you project a breakout season without a projection system?

Bring Back The Old Logo!

by jacob on Feb 12, 2008 1:56 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Tony the Tangoing Tiger

I like that.... first time I heard it.

Ol Pete, you are so far offbase with me, I don't even know where to begin, or if it's even worth it. Do you want the record set straight?

Jacob has gotten the right vibe on this issue.

by tangotiger on Feb 12, 2008 2:01 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

OK, here's the setup

Tiger, you get to be Eminem. Ol Pete, you're Super MC, Jasmine "Nina da Pimp" Thompson. It's going to be freestyle rap battle. Freestylin', G!

"I will agree that the attitude [at BCB] is ridiculous and they have done so much to instigate animosity and then block us from responding. Real mature!"

by roguejim on Feb 12, 2008 2:27 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

talk about the wrong foot

From the very beginning, the idea that there has to be a bunch of mathematical formulas before someone can judge players as potential breakout candidates is flat out crazy. You can check his score merely by looking at how he does. Equating judging players by looking at their performances over time to being a witch doctor is... well, the best word I can use is odd. Since observation is the starting point of science, maybe the crowd that deprecates observation is better equated to a witch doctor, although thats a poor choice of ad hominems if you ask me. If you want a paucity of reasoning, the stat-head crowd does it all the time. Its usually impossible to even determine the premises that are used to reach conclusions. If you could get the premises, you almost never hear a discussion of whether the conclusions logically follow from them. The underlying mathemetics of complex formulations is rarely examined and often its top secret since the people making conclusions and forecasts are entrepeneurs. Its all about selling books and consulting contracts.

Breakout candidates have been predicted without the requirement for the existence of a set of mathemetical formulas since they started using coaches I would think. Every team has multiple personel who do it. I wonder if the "advanced" crowd believes that such a thing exists.

by ol Pete on Feb 12, 2008 6:13 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

12 step program

1) accept that there is no "crowd that deprecates observation."

Bring Back The Old Logo!

by jacob on Feb 12, 2008 11:14 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

You're not alone

trust me on that.

by ol Pete on Feb 13, 2008 7:13 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Examples

Is all this based on anything you can point to or is it a result of ill-defined experiences? For someone who seems so concerned with stating cases correctly, you don't delve into many specifics.

Obscure baseball records and more at my blog, Recondite Baseball.

by TheJay on Feb 12, 2008 11:24 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Did you

read his article?

by ol Pete on Feb 13, 2008 7:10 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Whose?

All I hear in your complaints are that stat-heads don't divulge their methods and thus you can't follow their conclusions. I've seen plenty of material explaining how conclusions are drawn based on statistics (just go through archives at The Hardball Times, etc.), so I have absolutely no idea where your crusade is coming from. Sure, all the work isn't stated in every single article, but I don't think assuming readers have prior knowledge about the topics discussed (or can at least look them up if need be) isn't bad writing.

Obscure baseball records and more at my blog, Recondite Baseball.

by TheJay on Feb 13, 2008 8:23 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

the article

by Joe Sheehan that caused such consternation.

Crusade?

I've read plenty of material including THT and a better word than conclusions would be estimations. In their own discussions they go on quite a bit about their failings.

The formulas, if available, are often quite complex. The complex ones, if they were calculating rocket science, would be reviewed and evaluated. The number of people involved in bball, including fans, who know all the notation involved in representing them is tiny. The number willing to review them for accuracy and reasoning in a thorough fashion is probably often zero, and more often low single digits. The jargon used in the discussion is also obscure and understood by few.

But you're referring to the entrepeneurs rather than the followers who populate forums and use them like weapons to defend whoever and whatever or draw conclusions that aren't supported.

Really you're being far too sensitive.

by ol Pete on Feb 13, 2008 11:31 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I agree with you

I like baseball for what it is...baseball. However, I don't mind seeing the statheads and mathematicians use their formulas to come up with predictions. Everybody wants to know the future before it happens.

Just remember this, these math guys rarely get to use their knowledge on anything fun. Baseball, at least from what I can think of, is really the only sport where this type of math is this useful.

by brewfan2 on Feb 13, 2008 11:43 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

i love baseball

i love baseball for what it is... baseball.

However, i don't mind those who've chosen not to explore the game's inner workings enjoying the game on their own terms. i have no problem with that, i'm pretty certain that when you get down to it, nobody has a problem with that.

Just remember this, the people who've chosen not to explore the game's inner workings really have not put themselves in a position to criticize the methods of those who have.

Bring Back The Old Logo!

by jacob on Feb 13, 2008 12:14 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

What are you arguing?

Did you not read what I wrote?

Read it again, then please tell me what I am criticizing?

by brewfan2 on Feb 13, 2008 1:19 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I don't think

he's being critical. Well, maybe a little, but not really.

"I will agree that the attitude [at BCB] is ridiculous and they have done so much to instigate animosity and then block us from responding. Real mature!"

by roguejim on Feb 13, 2008 1:35 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

i'm not arguing with you.

then please tell me what I am criticizing?

where did anyone say you are criticizing anyone?

I don't think you are criticizing anyone, it's clear that this:

these math guys rarely get to use their knowledge on anything fun.

is a joke. i was simply, like you, expressing an opinion. what's the problem with my statement?

Bring Back The Old Logo!

by jacob on Feb 13, 2008 1:40 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Here's what's funny

Im not joking when I say these math guys rarely get to use their knowledge on anything fun.

Ill leave it at that.

by brewfan2 on Feb 13, 2008 3:01 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

oh.

in my opinion, the "did you not read what i wrote" was a much better joke anyway, since the structure of my post was an exact copy of yours.

or was that not a joke either?

i don't know if the fact that you think math cannot be applied to anything that is fun is sad or funny. I'd just offer the advice that something that includes math is not automatically not fun. Imagine if you had to feed 30 unicorns but you only had 10 rainbows, math could help!

Bring Back The Old Logo!

by jacob on Feb 13, 2008 5:08 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Baloney

30-unicorn cage match, winner take all.

Minus my three-rainbow cut, that is, for setting the whole thing up.

"I will agree that the attitude [at BCB] is ridiculous and they have done so much to instigate animosity and then block us from responding. Real mature!"

by roguejim on Feb 13, 2008 5:15 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

All I know is this

When I was learning how to become a teacher, our main goal was always to relate our subject matter to the real world. Studies show that this way of teaching is most effective towards learning and getting the students engaged.

Every class I had had Math teachers in it as well. It was always hardest for them to come up with authentic activities that would be interesting and relate to the real world.

So, Yes. I am saying, along with 85% of the citizens in the U.S., Math is boring.

by brewfan2 on Feb 13, 2008 10:54 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

you can't get to 85% without math.

is that a real statistic?

i respect teachers the most out of all professions. cheers to you and thank you.

Bring Back The Old Logo!

by jacob on Feb 14, 2008 12:39 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

my first thought

was, (after using my own advanced math skills) fifteen percent is a lot of people. The comments about teachers reminded me of my high school physics teacher. Not exactly scintillating, but we could always get him sidetracked if we could sneak billiards into some remark and then off he would go. Actually, I learned more about shooting pool from him than anywhere else.

by ol Pete on Feb 14, 2008 7:23 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Seriously?

This is still going on?

"I will agree that the attitude [at BCB] is ridiculous and they have done so much to instigate animosity and then block us from responding. Real mature!"

by roguejim on Feb 14, 2008 7:45 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

LOL!!!

I've never seen the text have to be so close to the right margin! Too funny! Think we can get it to be 1 word per line?

TED IS TO NED WHAT CHENEY IS TO BUSH.

by CATALYST on Feb 14, 2008 7:40 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

We did that

Last season, or the season before. I think it broke my browser.

"I will agree that the attitude [at BCB] is ridiculous and they have done so much to instigate animosity and then block us from responding. Real mature!"

by roguejim on Feb 14, 2008 10:48 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah

One instance is in this thread, about 2/3 of the way down. I only remember that one because of your "break the internets" comment.

Obscure baseball records and more at my blog, Recondite Baseball.

by TheJay on Feb 15, 2008 9:21 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I have to agree . . a little

The problem I'm seeing is that teams will not want to throw Lefties against the Brewers. Even Cameron is a Lefty killer. Good news for Prince but bad for others!

by Grinder12000 on Feb 12, 2008 11:11 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed

Search

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

NL Central Standings

	W	L	PCT	GB	STRK
St. Louis Viva El Birdos	91	71	.561	0	Lost 6
Chicago Bleed Cubbie Blue	83	78	.515	7.5	Lost 1
Milwaukee Brew Crew Ball	80	82	.493	11	Won 3
Cincinnati Red Reporter	78	84	.481	13	Won 2
Houston The Crawfish Boxes	74	88	.456	17	Lost 3
Pittsburgh Bucs Dugout	62	99	.385	28.5	Lost 2