Salon's Kaufman accuses Kindred of 'ignorance'

The same father who wonders why son knows the team's best player was traded before dad sees it on the 6 p.m. news or the next day's paper.
Bottom line - older generations are generally hesitant to change.

 

I don't know why, when or how those who are at least sympathetic to sabermetrics decided that the rest of us believe a walk is without value.

This is wrong-headed and needs to stop.

 

if the younger generation is so smart, why do so many of them live in their parents' basements?

 

Because they know not to buy a house in this shitty economy and mom and dad need the extra rent income so they can afford a mortgage they bought because they couldn't shop around for better interest rates because they didn't understand how to surf the interwebs.

 

yeah, life must be good in rhodyland. enjoy driving your late-model honda and sleeping on mom's futon, chief.

 

This thread got ugly in a hurry.

 

LJB,

If you ever have a chance, read some of the articles collected under this particular FJM heading. There are plenty of others that could also illustrate the point.

http://www.firejoemorgan.com/search/label/adam%20dunn

 

I'll do it for you. You're always a gentleman, even if I happen to agree with you 3.14...... percent of the time.

 

be precise, please: 3.14159 26535 89793 23846 26433 83279 50288 41971 69399 37510 58209 74944
59230 78164 06286 20899 86280 34825 34211 70679 82148 08651 32823 06647 09384

 

True, but do we really need endless ridiculous statistical formulas to try to quantify all of that?

 

I'm going to take the higher road here and not respond.
But there's a reason not a lot of people like you here and your post is a good reason why.

People talk about Hall of Fame numbers and can't figure out what they are; why not let the stat geeks do it so we can figure out who is deserving and who isn't.

 

I don't have a Hall of Fame vote, and I am fairly sure I never will. So, I don't know ... do people vote based entirely on stats? Alluding to something I said earlier, it's still called the Hall of Fame, right? That suggests to me this not simply a ranking of stats. As others have said, that would be easy, and you wouldn't need voters.

Until it's called the Hall of Best Stats or something like that, as long as you have voters, as long as it's still called the Hall of Fame, people should be allowed to invest some subjectivity into the process. If there are others who wish to avail themselves of the most current statistical analysis for help with that, good for them. Neither side of the spectrum needs to piss on the other.