This is better than anything Ive read in any of the papers websites lately. I would tend to lean more towards to statistical method of evaluating players, but youre right, a happy medium is sometimes necessary, and a lot of the things Theriot/Eckstein and players like them do isnt really quantifiable and in some instances, as you pointed out, can win games.

There is a palpable difference b/t the teams approach last year when compared to this year, so perhaps the team has adopted this hybrid approach of old school/Billy Beane Ball, hopefully the patience of the middle hitters can offset the supposed short comings of Soriano or the not quite everday major league range of Theriot.

But theyve got to find a way to get Ronny in there more, that much is for sure, and DeRosas defense has been less than stellar, so hopefully Jimbo and Lou will get this figured out.

Great post though!

“Scrappy” Usage Percentage(SUP): You used the word scrappy twice in this post. With that kind of SUP how can you really expect to contribute to the Cubs winning?

...is it weird that I am already refering to Cedano as Onedec without even trying?

but do you have any numbers to back it up?

I try to be as pluralistic as possible about things, but most of these sorts of philosophical divides are exacerbated by each side believing and perpetuating the worst, most strawmannish claims about the other. Even my own discipline is fraught with such a divide and the more professionally involved I become, the more distasteful even the mere acknowledgment of this divide becomes to me. of course, when you mount this objection, in a way similar to what Al has done with this post, you are accused of being a naive dilettante. Perhaps more thoughtful considerations of the divide will produce a more pluralistic view of baseball analysis, but that’s going to require each side getting off their respective high-horses.

Maybe TXCub is on to something. We need a stat for the “scrappy/gritty” factor. Then we could see on tv when Theriot comes to bat, .331ba, 1hr, 9rbi, 10sf. Ten being the “scrappy factor”. Soriano might be .188ba 3hr 10rbi -10sf.

...in performance between 2005 and 2006. His strikeout, walks and homers got a bit worse, but not enough to add THAT many runs to his ERA. I think it’s just a simple fact that in only 80 or so innings of work you can pitch well and not have it show up in ERA. His FIP ERA for 2005 was 3.11, and his FIP ERA for 2006 was 3.74. (His current FIP, for those curious, is 4.10.) I’m not going to try to argue that Dempster is a GOOD pitcher, but I think he’s clearly a better pitcher than Marquis at this point.

As far as Bonds – the arguement isn’t that the team needs Bonds, per se. But if it comes down to acquiring Bonds versus, say, Milton Bradley or Junior Griffey (which are the options Gammons presented) then there’s some room to talk about the best use of resources.

He thought it was FLAXSEED OIL.

MUWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Riot really is just a utility infielder, though I do admit he has his uses. He came up as a 2b – I’d rather he ‘split’ time with DeRosa at second base (i.e. play when DeRosa is subbing for someone else) and give ONEDEC a shot at being a full time SS. He’d still probably start several games a week subbing at 2b and SS and get late-inning PH appearances (as a rally starter), so Riot fans would still see him in plenty of games.

you didn’t post this a couple months back, Al. I’d have voted for you in the primaries! Al Yellon, The Uniter!

You need your resume (statistics) to get you in the door, but then there are often other factors, such as personality and work ethic, that keep you in that position.

In Theriot’s situation, his current statistics are very good, and his scrappiness adds to his value to the team because he is always trying as hard as he can in any given situation and that type of effort rubs off on other players. But what kills him are the factors that cannot be easily measured by statistics and must be witnessed, defensive ability and arm strength. As fans, we see his throws get to first much slower than other SS. We see other ss make great plays and realize that there is no way our ss would have made that play and that frustrates us.

Theriot’s effort and desire are traits that are necessary around any contending team, but they should not solidify him a position in the starting infield.

P.S. great post Al, couldn’t agree with you more.

LSA – It takes both.

the displeasure I have with Theriot being the starting SS doesn’t entirely stem from his “statistical performance”. I’m actually just jealous of his Rugged-Manly-MILF-Bait-Sexyness. My wife thinks baseball is boring and my attachment to the Cubs is a little silly, but she’ll sit and watch any AB in which Theiot or DeRosa are involved.

I just wanted to say something. No arguments from me about what Al said. We all have our opinions, but in the end, we all want the same thing… for the Cubs to win it all!

GO CUBS!

...and has personal significance to me. I’ll try to explain without too much boring detail.
I played competitively until my mid-twenties, little league, high school, a little in college, dabbled in American legion, etc. I went on to a successful business career and now, in my 40’s, I’m back in school full time- brushing up my old educational skills in order to pursue the advanced degrees necessary to achieve my life long ambition of becoming a psychologist.

All of my leisure time pursuits, baseball fandom included, were not on my radar for a few years of the transition- until about a year and a half ago. The Internet as a recreational vehicle was new to me and I found a ton of baseball stuff, BCB included.

During the last 18 months I came across sabermetrics for the first time and, at first thought- “who let the slide-rule guys talk about baseball?” As I’ve had time and actually taken a statistics course, while getting back into following baseball again- I see the value.

My background and interests in baseball and psychology have made this debate an internal one. I think scouting and statistics are both vital parts of the analysis of the game. From my personal experience and study in psychology, I know the eyes lie and we selectively take in information to fit our preconceived ideas. We are human and have inherent limitations. Statistics are only one kind of description of what took place and can predict the likelihood of what’s to come when the human element is considered. Players are not robots and a lot of the factors that influence performance aren’t obvious or even available at the time.

Both need context and when both are well informed they do a great job. Put them together and you get- the Red Sox. Bill James, a father of sabrmetrics is a senior consultant for them and they of course use a traditional baseball scouting approach as well.

Taking “sides” is probably a sure way to to be wrong in this argument. What really bugs me is when either “side” rudely dismisses the other- usually with “I do fully understand …” and then vehemently display a lack of understanding. Arrogant ignorance is one of my own defects and I hate seeing it on display.

You don’t have to analyze baseball to love it, though. Just watch it, take it all in and have the experience you want. Be a fan- a Cubs fan. I’m glad there is this debate- it means that there is a lot of new interest in baseball. It also means there is a ton of stuff to divert my attention from studying and worrying that the other kids in class are making fun of me because I’m old.

Looks like I failed at not too long, boring and detailed.

Well said. Not boring at all.

Also, for anyone looking for something on DeRo’s pre-Cub history, Jamey Newberg of the Newberg Report has posted this article at Rangers.com.

I was looking at the site meter and was wondering if these stats are from BCB or all of the SB nation. Seems to be a lot of activity:

Total 110,829,568    
 Average Per Day 129,810    
 Average Visit Length 3:27    
 Last Hour 8,779    
 Today 66,058    
   This Week 908,670

Total 110,829,568
Average Per Day 129,810
Average Visit Length 3:27
Last Hour 8,779
Today 66,058
This Week 908,670

4 runs in the first to the Rox. Panic everyone, he’s gonna be this good all year

Great entry today.

I read Moneyball when it first came out because I’m also an Oakland A’s fan. The book’s premise intrigued me and the arguments in support of it were impressive. In particular I liked the presentation of OBP as “not making outs so frequently” – that made a ton of sense to me as far as being one of the keys to having a great offense. Another thing I liked is the justification that guys “who never played the game” can have as astute a knowledge of lineup construction and personnel evaluation as the Joe Morgans and Tim McCarvers of the world.

But I didn’t like the implication that all talent is innate and if you weren’t good in the past then you will never change and improve. I found that personally insulting, as many of my friends and family members have overcome some horrible personal demons and are now living productive and fulfilling lives. Apples and oranges perhaps, but it still rubbed me the wrong way. I also didn’t care to hear about Billy Beane’s childish displays of temper. I still hold Beane in high regard as I do Billy Martin and Dick Williams, but I won’t deny their personalities leave a lot to be desired.

I’m so glad BCB isn’t full of pretentious, smarter-than-thou idealogues who take themselves far too seriously, unlike certain other Northside Baseball sites out there. Here things are much more enjoyable and friendlier. Put it this way: BCB is like going on Space Mountain, and that other site is like going to a Star Trek convention.

I urge you to go back and watch the play again. Use your MLB-TV account. You really should before you claim that 99% of shortstops would have thrown that ball back. After watching it again, I’d say that 100% of shortstops in any level of the minors or the MLB itself make that play, assuming they catch the ball.

http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/news/wrap.jsp?ymd=20070420&content_id=1920246&vkey=wrapup2005&fext=.jsp&team=home&c_id=chc

The play is at 7:40 if you watch only the bottom half of the 9th.

Anyway, I agree with a lot of what you’re saying. There is a place for statistical analysis and a place for other analysis based on scouting and experience. I personally think that without a doubt, once players are in the bigs for a few years, stats are more important and scouting becomes much less important because unless something major changes with a player, they’re going to be about the same as they have been.

You mentioned the Ryan Dempster situation as a knock against the statistical analysis but that’s almost a meaningless argument, because obviously stats couldn’t predict that he would be distracted by family issues. That would be like saying we have statistics that can measure and predict how quickly a ball is going to roll down a ramp, and then saying that the stats are flawed when someone blows on the ball and it misses the predicted target. I don’t think anyone is claiming that stats are 100% perfect. I think people are claiming that stats are better at predicting what is going to happen than if you only had scouts, which they are. Additionally, stats people think there are better stats to use than batting average for hitters and W/L and ERA for pitchers and the problem is that the old people who cling to the belief that they don’t need to learn anything new about baseball don’t understand the usefulness of VORP, for example, and instead of learning something new that would make them better at their job and how it’s a much much better stat then batting average, they instead bitch and moan about bloggers in their mother’s basements wearing their underwear.

It’s also a shame that Joe Morgan has basically appointed himself the spokesperson for the anti-stat group because he is such an idiot that it’s ridiculous.

In the past, when writing about Theriot, I’ve stated that teams don’t have an all-star player in every position. The economics of baseball won’t allow it. The important factor is what those non-star players bring to the team. Theriot is doing well and brings a determination that the team needs.

Statistics are very good to measure the past and to attempt to predict future performance. But in the end it is only an attempt. A player can improve his play by practicing more, making adjustments to his mechanics and approach, or through an excellent mentor and teacher. Sometimes players exceed expectations because they tried to improve. Cedeño might be a good example of this.

The bottom line on Cedeno v. Theriot is that both have significant limitations in the O part of their game. Cedeno is younger and has more upside but it’s not like he’s HOF bound. I think the Cubs’ issue, i.e., Lou’s issue with Cedeno right now is that he may not trust him in the field at SS starting everyday. I am not trying to criticize Cedeno here, just that Lou probably needs more confidence in him. One way to get that confidence is if the other guy starts to tank, then you have nothing to lose.

I think Cedeno has earned a shot but it’s going to be a shot leash when he gets it. Let’s hope he does well.

Scouting & Stats go hand-in-hand, they are complimentary. Same with fans’ observations and opinions.

Statistical analysis is great and all, but really, would anyone have predicted the outing that Joey Votto had against the Cubs in their last meeting? The intangibles are what makes the games worth watching.

The rest were just academic.

gaining ground on almost the entire division without swinging a bat….