No it isn’t, it remains to date the most plausible explanation it is not however accepted as fact, I refer you to any competent scientist to explain why the scientific method cannot be applied to Darwin’s theory of evolution, there is no fossil record extant that is complete for any species. Consequently it is not fact. As for moneyball, yes I have read it, and I have read and understood everything Bill James has written and released commercially, my point about sabermetrics isn’t that divergent from yours, it represents an attempt to describe baseball performance. My argument rests on those who consider it monolithic and disregard or disdain any other method of evaluating talent or performance. I have never accused you of such. But again in fairness you might recall slobbermetrics was intended as an answer to a similiarly tongue in cheek blog you wrote lampooning anyone who eschewed sabermetric analysis. I remain as always a big fan of your scribble, analysis and opinion in all matters pertaining to America’s pastime…

I’m not saying anything about it except asking for your evidence for the claim, “I think Charlie Lau’s contact hitting sytem has had a far greater impact than Sabermetrics.”

While sabermetrics remains this shifting miasma of formulae that hasn’t gotten the A’s a World Serious, cause last I checked that is the proof in the pudding so to speak.

Remember, Moneyball is not a Sabermetric bible. The A’s are Sabermetric-friendly, but it’s not like they’re ideologues and that’s all they pay attention to; it’s like saying Canada is socialist because they have universal healthcare.

Moneyball is about capitalising on market deficiencies. With regard to Beane’s A’s, the market inefficiency was OBP-heavy, AVG-light, power-hitters like Jack Cust.

Have you read Moneyball?

11 years, no rings, I rest my case, while contact hitters on WS teams have them, advantage Lau contact hitting.

This is a very dishonest argument. It’s not Lau vs. Sabermetrics; the two can coexist. I’m simply asking for your evidence to the claim that it’s had a “greater impact that Sabermetrics.”

Furthermore, Lau’s philosophy has been around a lot longer; Sabermetrics are fairly new. As far as I can tell, Major League teams only recently began implementing Sabermetric analysis into their decision-making processes. Bill James was one of the very few doing anything different with baseball statistics back in the ’80′s and it didn’t really blow up until the mid-’90′s.

The dodge of course is comparing a mental exercise to a physical exercise, which is like trying to win an argument over which is the best apple by introducing an orange…

Well, yeah. But I wasn’t arguing Lau vs. Sabermetrics — you were.

My blog lists the pre-season predictions of every major sports media and publication, courtesy of MLB.com, ESPN blew chunks, so if they’re using those vaunted systems to make predictions they ought to scrap them.

Don’t use ESPN as a whole, as their writers are not all of one ism. Law and Neyer are Sabermetricians; Phillips and Olney are not.

As the Vegas Watch blog points out, Sabermetric-influenced predictions fared much, much better than those of the writers who use traditional statistics or “actually watch the games without burying their nose in a spreadsheet in their mom’s basement.”

Finally the fortune teller remark was meant to illustrate that fortune tellers like to say well I predicted an earthquake for 2008 and it came true

This is true of either side, which is why I linked to the Vegas Watch blog. It didn’t cherry-pick the selections; it took everyone’s predictions as a whole and came up with a score.

To the argument of predictions, Sabermetrics, while useful for them, should not be the only tool used. It’s impossible to account for the unknowable, like injuries or weather.

It’s poor form to rely on one method and one method only for any kind of analysis. That’s why in a lot of Sabermetric blogs, you don’t see the writers citing WARP ad nauseam, and that’s why there are many different variations of the same statistic.

Darwin’s theory requires as many leaps of faith as any belief system that would embrace creationism.

This is untrue as well. The theory of evolution is a scientific fact, and it must be understood that “theory” in “theory of evolution” isn’t synonymous with conjecture. Read this:

A theory is more like a scientific law than a hypothesis. A theory is an explanation of a set of related observations or events based upon proven hypotheses and verified multiple times by detached groups of researchers. One scientist cannot create a theory; he can only create a hypothesis.

In general, both a scientific theory and a scientific law are accepted to be true by the scientific community as a whole. Both are used to make predictions of events. Both are used to advance technology.

There is a ton of evidence in favor of evolution.

But regardless, proving the concept of God is up to those that believe in Him. If you make a positive claim, the burden of proof is on you.

Show me irrefutable evidence that sabermetrics has attained that kind of accuracy over any period of time.

Here’s one example:

A summary for the 2003 through 2007 seasons shows that PECOTA’s average error between the predicted and actual team wins has declined: 2003 5.91 wins; 2004 7.71 wins; 2005 5.14 wins; 2006 4.94 wins; 2007 4.31 wins. Silver conjectures that the improvement has come in part from taking defense into account in the forecasts beginning in 2005.

The standard deviation for wins in 2008 was 11.1, and it’s presumably right around there for other seasons as well. So, PECOTA’s margin of error was within one-third of a standard deviation. That’s very, very accurate.

Anybody can predict the past with unerring accuracy. Tell me what Burrell will hit next year.

The Bill James projection puts him at a .377 OBP and .490 SLG.
Marcel puts him at .371/.483.

I think they assume Burrell will be in Philadelphia, so it may be slightly adjusted depending on where he ends up.

“* By contacting me, you agree that I have the right to publicly disclose our correspondence.”

Now see, I think this is the correct way to handle it, so if somebody starts an email pissing match with you and you asshat them, well played, no complaints from me, had to comment on that Bill…

Re: Contact hitting versus sabermetrics, are you saying the Lau contact hitting isn’t the predominate hitting system taught in the USA and used by the majority of baseball players at every level?

Is there a better way to drive a ball further or more consistently?

While sabermetrics remains this shifting miasma of formulae that hasn’t gotten the A’s a World Serious, cause last I checked that is the proof in the pudding so to speak.

11 years, no rings, I rest my case, while contact hitters on WS teams have them, advantage Lau contact hitting.

The dodge of course is comparing a mental exercise to a physical exercise, which is like trying to win an argument over which is the best apple by introducing an orange…

RE: ESPN

ESPN? ESPN?

http://community.foxsports.com/blogs/edhardiman/2008/09/28/Phillies_Win_2nd_Straight_NL_East_Despite_Experts_SABR_and_Mets

My blog lists the pre-season predictions of every major sports media and publication, courtesy of MLB.com, ESPN blew chunks, so if they’re using those vaunted systems to make predictions they ought to scrap them.

If I might quote myself, which trumps referring to myself in the 3rd person I believe for pomposity…

“Let’s start by wiping the egg off of ESPN’s bucket of useful idiots…let’s see, Eric Karabell & Sean McAdam got it right but they must feel awful lonely at the top of this puddle of mugwumps…89.5% of ESPN can’t tell the NL East from a pork chop it seems…only 21% of them squeezed a team that has 2 consecutive MVP’s into the playoffs as a wild card and a mind boggling 0% gave the Phightins’ a chance to make the World Series.”

Finally the fortune teller remark was meant to illustrate that fortune tellers like to say well I predicted an earthquake for 2008 and it came true, fair enough, they also predicted UFO’s would land and impregnate Priscilla Presley and that didn’t happen, nor did a goat get elected to the White House, selective data is faulty data.

Take creationism, which I believe is cuckoo for coco puffs, people try to use Darwin’s theory of evolution to refute it. Terrible logic since Darwin’s theory requires as many leaps of faith as any belief system that would embrace creationism.

Show me irrefutable evidence that sabermetrics has attained that kind of accuracy over any period of time. Anybody can predict the past with unerring accuracy. Tell me what Burrell will hit next year.

Again, I appreciate the attention Bill, thanks for the analysis, well done as always.

I should start a catalog…

How about a handshake for coming up with Lord Scrapford von Gritstein? At least he’s not a punter from Nebraska.

Keep in mind that you can actually go into CA point debt, as is the case with Shooter…