No offense taken. I am certainly not perfect and apologize if that’s the impression I gave. I tried to be very thorough so I was legitimately curious as to other metrics you thought I should have included.

I welcome any and all criticism, so please, have at me. Doesn’t mean I can’t respond to it though.

I think it was you saying you’d be “shocked” to learn they weren’t sabermetrically inclined that threw me, as if there were no other explanations.

I think the disparity between what I’m saying and what others seem to interpret what I’ve said is a matter of degree.

What is “Sabermetrically-inclined”? Is it using Sabermetrics at all? Is it mainly using Sabermetrics? Or somewhere in-between?

I certainly don’t think the Phillies are anywhere close to the level of Sabermetric thought that, say, the Boston Red Sox or Tampa Bay Rays are at. However, I also don’t think the Phillies have zero Sabermetric thought.

As for the 1993 Phillies, like you, I haven’t gone over the numbers. It could certainly be true that they were “just as Sabermetric” as the Phillies. And I could certainly be wrong about them being a fluke. A quick perusal of their walk totals reveals that they were in the top-half of the NL (12 teams until 1993) for several years, including tops in 1993. However, they certainly didn’t have the consistency that the current batch of Phillies have displayed.

You are more attuned to the latest metrics than I am, and I defer to you on that front. I also thought your point that the Phillies would rather others not know what they’re up to is valid. However, to modify some of what I said, I can see how these data points support your thesis, but I think it was you saying you’d be “shocked” to learn they weren’t sabermetrically inclined that threw me, as if there were no other explanations.

As for the 1993 Phillies being a fluke, were they not the same team in 1992 (offensively)? I haven’t checked the numbers recently, but I seem to recall them drawing a lot of walks for a few years running.

The discussion isn’t solely about general managers.

If they relied heavily on UZR, I don’t think they would have given Raul Ibanez 3 years at $10.5M per following his -23.3 and -10.4 UZR/150’s in 2007 and 2008, respectively.

Again, to quote myself:

That’s not to say that, secretly, Phillies officials are poring over UZR and plus-minus data. Instead, the Phillies likely use a little of everything to various degrees. They probably do consider the word of scouts highest, then video scouting, and various sets of defensive data whether it’s UZR, +/-, PMR, or their own brand.

Can you think of other Sabermetric principles that I’ve left out?

I think UZR is interesting, but I’m not yet convinced of its accuracy.

If you trust wOBA, you should trust UZR. That’s not to say that one season’s worth of UZR is reliable, but neither is it for wOBA or whatever statistic du jour you select.

Stolen base percentage is likely a function of coach Davey Lopes

I’m actually doing a study on this and Lopes did in fact have an impact on this, but it doesn’t explain all of it.

And the walks stats actually argue against your conclusion, I think. Placing 5th and 7th in the NL in walks is not good evidence in favor.

You say this after accusing me of cherry-picking? The Phillies were top-two in walks six years straight!

if leadoff man Rollins’ OBP weren’t under .300

This is a function of the manager, not the front office. Sure, the GM could’ve sent orders down to have Rollins bat seventh, but that’s a good way to unnecessarily ruffle some feathers of both the manager and Rollins.

Also, sometimes teams *do* just happen to assemble a bunch of players who walk a lot. Does anyone think the 1993 Phillies were sabermetrically inclined?

To quote myself:

It’s one thing to have a fluke season here and there but the Phillies are incredibly consistent.

1993 was a fluke season. The 2002-09 Phillies are not.

A truly good defensive team will probably score well on whatever metrics are currently in vogue. I think UZR is interesting, but I’m not yet convinced of its accuracy. Also, hk makes a good point re: the Ibanez signing (though compared to Burrell, perhaps this is still an upgrade).

Stolen base percentage is likely a function of coach Davey Lopes, plus some existing player-skill, perhaps in Rollins’ case. Lopes was always a good baserunner, and he actually did play “before” sabermetrics (unlike the way offbase timeline implied by Adam S.).

And the walks stats actually argue against your conclusion, I think. Placing 5th and 7th in the NL in walks is not good evidence in favor. If they had maintained their walks edge even after losing Abreu, if leadoff man Rollins’ OBP weren’t under .300, then perhaps… other than that, I don’t see it. Also, sometimes teams *do* just happen to assemble a bunch of players who walk a lot. Does anyone think the 1993 Phillies were sabermetrically inclined?

Actually, sabermetrics existed in the 1990′s; they did not magically flash into existence when Moneyball came out. You are confusing the point at which sabermetrics became popular with the point at which they were created. For one thing, Billy Beane began running the A’s from a quantitative standpoint in the late 1990′s. Hell, OPS has been around since 1984.

Of course we don’t know whether the Phillies use sabermetrics, but if they rank high in certain metrics every year, then either they use them or they’re looking for the same things that stat guys look for. This is not a bad thing.

As for “some high and mighty belief that you can’t be successful without sabermetrics,” it’s not really high and mighty anymore. Teams that use advanced metrics have experienced a great deal of success.