PDA

View Full Version : KW-Style (Sabermatics/Moneyball) Question


soxtalker
09-01-2003, 12:50 PM
I'm about half-way through Moneyball, and I find the discussion of the use of statistics and estimating value fascinating. Most of the discussion of KW in relation to this book has centered on Beane's discussions with him with regard to the draft (which I've read) and trades (which I haven't gotten to yet). However, I'm curious how much of KW's style involves this type of analysis. Obviously, there are some big differences -- paying Borchard a $5M bonus to avoid college is a perfect example. Any comments / thoughts?

Dadawg_77
09-01-2003, 02:03 PM
Originally posted by soxtalker
I'm about half-way through Moneyball, and I find the discussion of the use of statistics and estimating value fascinating. Most of the discussion of KW in relation to this book has centered on Beane's discussions with him with regard to the draft (which I've read) and trades (which I haven't gotten to yet). However, I'm curious how much of KW's style involves this type of analysis. Obviously, there are some big differences -- paying Borchard a $5M bonus to avoid college is a perfect example. Any comments / thoughts?

Kenny probally has someone who complies the data but then tosses it aside for what his eyes "see". How the Sox handled Konerko is good example of this. Most MLB GMs use sabermetrics in the same way.

Borchard was paid five million for him to skip playing football at Standford. He would have started that fall and was a longshot at making the NFL. A good number of college baseball players are drafted as juniors adn skip their senior years.

soxtalker
09-01-2003, 02:25 PM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
Kenny probally has someone who complies the data but then tosses it aside for what his eyes "see". How the Sox handled Konerko is good example of this. Most MLB GMs use sabermetrics in the same way.

Borchard was paid five million for him to skip playing football at Standford. He would have started that fall and was a longshot at making the NFL. A good number of college baseball players are drafted as juniors adn skip their senior years.

As you point out, I didn't remember the details of the Borchard case correctly. We weren't taking him out of high school, which, according to the book, is something that baseball people like to do but is bad from a statistical point of view.

Dadawg_77
09-01-2003, 03:19 PM
Originally posted by soxtalker
As you point out, I didn't remember the details of the Borchard case correctly. We weren't taking him out of high school, which, according to the book, is something that baseball people like to do but is bad from a statistical point of view.

The statistical point is you can't judge high school players by stats, since High School have no real meaning in comparing High School players from one part of the country to another. With pool of colleges being smaller and other factors, you can reasonably compare players from different conferences. Teams avoid High School players is because you can't judge their performance and only can base decision on whether to draft a kid or not on a mental image of what could be. There are tons of other variables which make drafting high school players a very risky proposition. For every high school draftee that makes it to the majors there are 10 busts. With the cost of signing draftees skyrocketing, it is prudent to avoid this risk esp when you have limited resources to acquire talent since the risk/reward isn't worth it.

BannisterE6
09-01-2003, 07:08 PM
Williams understands a little bit about sabermetrics, but his knowledge is like La Russa's and Jim Lefebvre's: it would have been cutting edge in the mid-80s. He's the kind that puts far too much value on OPS and doesn't understand that OBP is more important than SLG. And as his deal for Koch demonstrated, he's still doesn't understand that the label of "closer" is fool's gold. By no means is he the worst GM out there, but he's not nearly in the top 10 either, and he was wholly unsuited for the talent he inherited.

Daver
09-01-2003, 07:15 PM
Originally posted by BannisterE6
Williams understands a little bit about sabermetrics, but his knowledge is like La Russa's and Jim Lefebvre's: it would have been cutting edge in the mid-80s. He's the kind that puts far too much value on OPS and doesn't understand that OBP is more important than SLG. And as his deal for Koch demonstrated, he's still doesn't understand that the label of "closer" is fool's gold. By no means is he the worst GM out there, but he's not nearly in the top 10 either, and he was wholly unsuited for the talent he inherited.

Hey welcome aboard! :redneck

BannisterE6
09-01-2003, 07:38 PM
I should give Williams his due. While I think the Koch deal was a window to his soul, I liked the deal for Jiminez, and then how he flipped Jiminez for Sullivan. I also thought Loaiza was a smart gamble. I was less impressed with the moves for Alomar and Everett, but that's the kind of movement that fans and journalists equate with caring, so I understand the deals even if I would have rather seen him hold. So he's not worthless.

soxtalker
09-01-2003, 08:24 PM
Originally posted by BannisterE6
I should give Williams his due. While I think the Koch deal was a window to his soul, I liked the deal for Jiminez, and then how he flipped Jiminez for Sullivan. I also thought Loaiza was a smart gamble. I was less impressed with the moves for Alomar and Everett, but that's the kind of movement that fans and journalists equate with caring, so I understand the deals even if I would have rather seen him hold. So he's not worthless.

When I asked the initial question, I didn't mean for this thread to turn into an evaluation of how well KW does as a GM. There have been plenty of those, and, no doubt, there will be many more before KW leaves the Sox. I would like to get some sense as to how he thinks -- "a window to his soul". That's one thing that has been fascinating about the Moneyball book. After you cut through the bravado and egoism, you do really get an idea of how Billy Beane makes his decisions. With KW I almost want to cut through the raw agressiveness (that so many fans love and focus upon) and understand how he makes the basic decision on a ballplayer.

kermittheefrog
09-01-2003, 09:02 PM
Originally posted by soxtalker
When I asked the initial question, I didn't mean for this thread to turn into an evaluation of how well KW does as a GM. There have been plenty of those, and, no doubt, there will be many more before KW leaves the Sox. I would like to get some sense as to how he thinks -- "a window to his soul". That's one thing that has been fascinating about the Moneyball book. After you cut through the bravado and egoism, you do really get an idea of how Billy Beane makes his decisions. With KW I almost want to cut through the raw agressiveness (that so many fans love and focus upon) and understand how he makes the basic decision on a ballplayer.

I've been trying to figure out how Kenny makes desicions on ballplayers as well and one of the things I've picked up is he tends to go after guys who have been successful against the Sox or against the AL Central. And thats a really dumb way to evaluate players. Or even if they haven't played particularly well against us guys he's seen a lot of are good to him.

Most of Kenny's moves have been for AL players. The one major part we got from the NL was Todd Ritchie and this was after he rocked the AL Central in interleague play in 2001. He also favors veterans over young players. He likes pitchers that throw hard. In other words he's very traditional. Although he does seem to recognize the importance of plate discipline to some degree.

gosox41
09-02-2003, 02:56 PM
Originally posted by soxtalker
When I asked the initial question, I didn't mean for this thread to turn into an evaluation of how well KW does as a GM. There have been plenty of those, and, no doubt, there will be many more before KW leaves the Sox. I would like to get some sense as to how he thinks -- "a window to his soul". That's one thing that has been fascinating about the Moneyball book. After you cut through the bravado and egoism, you do really get an idea of how Billy Beane makes his decisions. With KW I almost want to cut through the raw agressiveness (that so many fans love and focus upon) and understand how he makes the basic decision on a ballplayer.

I don't think there is much of a logic to how KW makes a decision. It's hard to quantify emotion, and some of KW's moves are made because he seems to be in love with a big name (koch) or no name player (Ritchie). Also, when he goes after a player he likes, he tends to overpay for him, probably out of a more "emotional" reponse.

Of course he could use stats, but I want to know what he was looking at when he decided Koch was better then Foulke, Ritchie was seen as a good pitcher, and Royce Clayton as a good hitter.

Bob