We're Talking Baseball: 2014 Sabermetrics, Scouting, and the Science of Baseball - SOLD OUT AGAIN!!!
- Thread starter Reverend
- Start date
The best part of that answer was how the organization had no concept of "top 10" prospect lists.ehaz said:
It was a snarky response, but it was clear that they don't keep track of prospects like the nerds do.E5 Yaz said:
I loved his answer on pitch framing -Reverend said:
"How important do you guys think this is and do you emphasize it in player development? "
"No, so don't talk about it"
I'm there - first time - fabulous doesn't do it justice, but it's the best I have right now. Wish I'd caught the visual of 400 people crossing Comm Ave. at once -awesome.
I think the most interesting thing Ben said was about the new approach to building the team. 10 years ago, they could easily go out and get all the best talent, but now it's much more evenly distributed. The new goal is to find ways to get the players they can get hit the high end of their projection ranges (something that definitely isn't happening for the team this year). It goes far beyond player acquisition and traditional coaching.
Kevin Jewkilis said:
For those of us who aren't there -- was this comment set in the context of revenue sharing allowing teams to lock up more players for longer, of the overall increasing valuation within front offices of truly valuable skill-sets, or of some other criteria that defines team-building?
He didn't give any context, but I understood it as relating to the two theories you propose. The new draft bonus rules also probably are in there as well.
I talked to Jeff Lunhow after he spoke about the new international amateur bonus regulations and penalties in light of the crazy spending sprees we saw the Sox and Yankees undergo.
He seemed to agree that barring any changes, we're going to see a lot more of the low bonus pool teams employ that strategy.
I also overheard him talking to Farrell about "that kid" Webster. "He's gonna need a good amount of coaching". But the sox are still high on him.
He seemed to agree that barring any changes, we're going to see a lot more of the low bonus pool teams employ that strategy.
I also overheard him talking to Farrell about "that kid" Webster. "He's gonna need a good amount of coaching". But the sox are still high on him.
Buzzkill Pauley said:
Like was said, not a ton of context, but what could be taken from his statements had that idea coming from a few different places. One was how, at least when it comes to specialized hitters, how defenses/pitchers are getting more tools to work around those values. He blamed declining offense, in part, on the ability of defenses to shift and pitchers to find weaknesses quicker than in the past, which subsequently increases the value of those guys who can either do a lot of different things well or those who have enough power to make those changes useless. He mentioned drafting for skillset rather than type, since most of the easily projectable power is gone by the time Boston picks, and I think you can put that on the FA market as well.
I think he also sees that, at least in the upcoming FA market, offense is going to be pretty scarce and that getting it may be pricy.
Something that caught my attention:
Vince Gennaro and Jeff Luhnow both spoke at length about the rapid changing of the nature of the game due to data analysis, and the difficulties in using data to make changes in a game with 100+ years of tradition. Coaching staffs and even players have years of experience in doing things a certain way. Luhnow's example was getting buy-in on defensive shifts, which he wasn't fully able to implement until his 3rd season in Houston.
A lot of it was straight out of Org. Behavior class in B-School, but what was new to me was the idea of applying that stuff to baseball teams. I spoke with Gennaro afterward, he mentioned that this is an entirely new skill set required by front offices now, there was no place for it until very recently.
Vince Gennaro and Jeff Luhnow both spoke at length about the rapid changing of the nature of the game due to data analysis, and the difficulties in using data to make changes in a game with 100+ years of tradition. Coaching staffs and even players have years of experience in doing things a certain way. Luhnow's example was getting buy-in on defensive shifts, which he wasn't fully able to implement until his 3rd season in Houston.
A lot of it was straight out of Org. Behavior class in B-School, but what was new to me was the idea of applying that stuff to baseball teams. I spoke with Gennaro afterward, he mentioned that this is an entirely new skill set required by front offices now, there was no place for it until very recently.
I'm sorry I missed today, but I'm looking forward to dropping some serious McCheese on everyone tomorrow
OttoC said:
That is a separate problem that is distinct from the issue JGRay is describing that Gennaro was addressing and, for that matter, Farrell addressed last year. That is to say, even in cases where they believe they have enough data such that they know something, they have to work the psychology of the players and develop a culture and an approach to the other personnel, be it players or coaches or whatever, to get buy in. Last year, Farrell mentioned introducing subjects in a gradual way in a dialogue with players that allowed the players to contribute and sometimes think that they had come up with the idea on their own (which they may have, albeit in guided fashion). This is pretty sophisticated pedagogical stuff and a skillset certainly not generally associated with baseball guys and MBA/lawyers.
Gennaro frame it in terms of back in the day people would just listen to the authority and do what they were told whereas now people want to know "Why?", a phenomenon he attributed to a stubborness of a culture that was different from what things were like after WWII--this frame drew some raised eyebrows, from the cheap seats at least.
Thanks Rev. Yeah, that's what I meant. Luhnow mentioned trying to get St Louis to overhaul defensive positioning when he was there, but it was never going to fly with LaRussa. So he had data in hand for 5 years before he could implement anything that could stick, simply because it took that long to figure out how to get buy in from enough players and coaches to make it work.
This is the challenge of the data driven front office. How do you implement a new process based on data when players and coaches don't always believe? This gets out of sports and into the business realm. I find that stuff interesting.
This is the challenge of the data driven front office. How do you implement a new process based on data when players and coaches don't always believe? This gets out of sports and into the business realm. I find that stuff interesting.
Day one was a great success, can't say enough good things about the work everyone has put into this conference and the generosity of everyone involved.
I've been taking photos, trying to get all of the speakers. I still have a few more to work on, but what I have so far, and what I'll post going forward, will be in this album.
I've been taking photos, trying to get all of the speakers. I still have a few more to work on, but what I have so far, and what I'll post going forward, will be in this album.
"We really do encourage people to ask questions, but we would appreciate it if you could try not to be a jerk when asking them," (approximation) may well have been THE line of the day that included many a solid contender.Jnai said:
So kudos to jnai--who also got a shout out from Gennaro for his work in bringing Pitchf/x data to the masses which he credit with changing the whole environment of and pushing us forward in how how we think about the sport.
All you SoSH guys attending - please make sure you say hello today.
And buy a shirt and/or poster
And buy a shirt and/or poster
The Costner thing was like a callback to the Markov "sexy math eyes" from the original one of these.
Reverend said:
Not having been able to attend the presentation makes it difficult to understand the proper context but I still think that if the data and metrics were available for a longer period of time, it would be easier to "get the players to buy in." (And as a matter of full disclosure, I am not a Gennaro fan, being acquainted with him in his role as SABR President and seeing some of his presentations at SABR National Conventions. I feel like I'm dealing with a salesman...but maybe I'm just like those players who have trouble with pedagogical skillsets.)
I see what you are saying, but Moneyball is over 10 years old. This stuff isn't that new. But players learn from coaches who are older and set in their ways, and what goes on on the field is dictated by those older coaches, too. Maybe the next generation of players will see this differently. Until then, it's a challenge.
I thought JF's response to the drop in offense this year was interesting. He notes the strike zone has increased and attributes it in part to more AAA umpires in the mix this year due to replay. A secondary reason might be the desire to speed up play by shortening at bats.
Increasing the strike zone is going to disproportionally affect a team with the plate discipline of the Sox. It'll be interesting to see what the response will be.
Increasing the strike zone is going to disproportionally affect a team with the plate discipline of the Sox. It'll be interesting to see what the response will be.
I had a great time at this event. It was my first year attending and I definitely plan on returning next year. The speakers do such a great job breaking down the information into digestible chunks, so if you aren't saber inclined you will still understand and learn a lot. Plus, the access to the top minds in baseball is outstanding. How many environments are you in where you can pull Tom Tippett aside and ask him a random question? Or one where you can talk Koji with Alan Nathan and when he doesn't know the answer, he calls Brian Bannister over to provide more insight? This is just a great time all around.
Excellent job jnai and Fris and everyone else involved for such an enjoyable weekend.
Excellent job jnai and Fris and everyone else involved for such an enjoyable weekend.
It was a fantastic event. If anything, I thought the second day was even better than the first.
Really great work from Fris and Jnai to organize the event, and Jnai's presentation on catcher defense was a highlight.
Really great work from Fris and Jnai to organize the event, and Jnai's presentation on catcher defense was a highlight.
Day two was excellent. Nice to see so many of you. DRS, I forgot to ask you what form of payment you accept for your $10.
Photos from both days are here. Did my best to get all the speakers, lighting was a challenge in some cases.
Photos from both days are here. Did my best to get all the speakers, lighting was a challenge in some cases.
On defensive shifts. I recently sat with a front office guy from the Astros in Houston -- he is a friend of a friend, he got us the seats, and he came down to say hello. The Astros are a major shift team. The issue he talked about, which might be what Luhnow meant, is that the pitchers get pissed when they give up a hit in a place where a (non-shift) fielder is traditionally positioned. On the other hand, their brain does not as easily see the hits the shift is saving them.
While he was sitting with us, Jake Buchanan (I think) allowed a line smash to Juan Francisco in the (traditional) second base hole that was fielded cleanly and easily by Jose Altuve for a 4-3. The Astros guy immediately said, "someone will be talking to him about that play" as a way of teaching him how he is benefiting.
While he was sitting with us, Jake Buchanan (I think) allowed a line smash to Juan Francisco in the (traditional) second base hole that was fielded cleanly and easily by Jose Altuve for a 4-3. The Astros guy immediately said, "someone will be talking to him about that play" as a way of teaching him how he is benefiting.
LahoudOrBillyC said:
That's pretty much exactly what Luhnow said. The pitchers are quick to heap blame on it when it goes wrong, but fail to give it credit when it does work.
Jnai said:
Thanks. It was definitely a "dome opened/dome closed" park effect on how easy it was to get pictures when the lights were up or down. Speakers with slides and low light were a more challenging environment. Luckily I got some good shots of you on Saturday, or you may be irked with me again as you're a very kinetic speaker and I got a lot of "blurry Dan".
I'm curious what you thought about the presentation on differences in called strikes in day games vs night and/or dome games and how that might interplay with the catchers "strikes added" value. Molina and Lucroy both playing with a roof is an interesting correlation for sure.