1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Salon's Kaufman accuses Kindred of 'ignorance'

Discussion in 'Journalism topics only' started by Wendy Parker, Jan 13, 2009.

Page 1 of 24
  1. Wendy Parker

    Wendy Parker New Member

    I understand where King is coming on all this but think he's way over the line with his insistence that Baseball Hall of Fame voters go all geeky with stats before casting their ballots. But I've never been an HOF voter either:

    http://www.salon.com/sports/kaufman/?last_story=/sports/kaufman/feature/2009/01/12/ignorance/
     
    Wendy Parker, Jan 13, 2009
    #1
  2. Ace

    Ace Well-Known Member

    Sorry, but if Baseball Prospectus won't even divulge the math behind VORPs and WARPs, I think it's perfectly reasonable to dismiss them.

    Now, if some of these newer statistics were the rage when Dale Murphy or Jim Rice were playing, fine, use them to judge their Hall of Fame worthiness. But I don't think voters should feel compelled to retroactively apply them.
     
    Ace, Jan 13, 2009
    #2
  3. Terence Mann

    Terence Mann Member

    To be fair to all, it seems he's more put out by Chass (and others) and found Kindred mostly guilty of being the last straw. Kindred didn't "boast" about not understanding some of those stats. Kaufman even said "sorry" to Dave and told him he's the last straw. The subject line on the thread made me think this was a huge shot at Kindred, but I think it's more of a shot at Chass, and it just happened to be Kindred who triggered it.
     
    Terence Mann, Jan 13, 2009
    #3
  4. JayFarrar

    JayFarrar Well-Known Member

    I was just about to post this.
    King's take is an interesting one, but not one I agree with.
    Numbers lie, that's why need a human to interpret them.
     
    JayFarrar, Jan 13, 2009
    #4
  5. spnited

    spnited Active Member

    More sabermasturbation bullshit.

    Anybody know Rickey Henderson's VORP? Anybody freaking care?
     
    spnited, Jan 13, 2009
    #5
  6. The Good Doctor

    The Good Doctor Guest

    Here we go ...
     
    The Good Doctor, Jan 13, 2009
    #6
  7. Frank_Ridgeway

    Frank_Ridgeway Well-Known Member

    If the HOF wanted to eliminate subjectivity and turn the selection process into mathematical equation (or series of them), it would do so. It could have done so at the very beginning. Live with it, seamheads.
     
    Frank_Ridgeway, Jan 13, 2009
    #7
  8. playthrough

    playthrough Moderator Staff Member

    From the link:
    Sabermetric analysis is used not just by a wide swath of baseball fans and chroniclers, but also in baseball front offices. It's relied heavily upon by, among others, the Boston Red Sox, who have been one of the most successful franchises in baseball this century, winning two of the last five World Series, and by the Rays, who beat the Sox on the way to the Series last year.

    If your job is to put the best team on the field and all those numbers help, fine. But HOF voting's not the same beast. And I will always believe that if you need that kind of statistical analysis, the candidate isn't worthy anyway.

    And when they start putting VORP on the Jumbotron at the park, I'll believe that this stuff is "used by a wide swath of baseball fans."
     
    playthrough, Jan 13, 2009
    #8
  9. spnited

    spnited Active Member

    Sorry, Doc.

    VORP+WARP+DIPS+Wins Shares = steaming pile of shit
     
    spnited, Jan 13, 2009
    #9
  10. Dave Kindred

    Dave Kindred Member

    As I understand it, I am being accused of ignorance for not studying VORP, WARP, et al., by a man who then says ...

    "It's one thing to criticize the new stats. VORP and WARP, for example, are proprietary statistics of Baseball Prospectus, which doesn't show the math behind them. BP's defensive stats, which are an element of WARP, have been called into particular question by some experts. I don't have the math chops to take Win Shares apart, but I think some of its assumptions are a little off."

    Which seems to say it's mostly impossible to know what any of it means, anyway.
     
    Dave Kindred, Jan 13, 2009
    #10
  11. Ace

    Ace Well-Known Member

    Can't you just take their word numbers for it?
     
    Ace, Jan 13, 2009
    #11
  12. Joe Williams

    Joe Williams Well-Known Member

    What percent of writers who actually cover the sport, vs. covering the spreadsheet equivalent via its stats, stomp their feet over this sort of stuff?
     
    Joe Williams, Jan 13, 2009
    #12
Page 1 of 24
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page