Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 1 of 17 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 253
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    7,374
    vCash
    3620

    What do you think the current market inefficiency is?

    I've read some articles that suggests it's defense, given that we don't have the "perfect" metric for it yet.

    What do you guys think? Have you read anything interesting lately on the subject?
    PATRIOTS 2014 SUPER BOWL CHAMPIONS


  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    9,209
    vCash
    1500
    Injury avoidance.
    If teams can keep players more healthy or identify players who will stay healthy, they'll gain an advantage.

    Also, front office staff.
    A good front office can add multiple wins over multiple years at a fraction of the cost would take in players. Look what the a Dodgers are doing with their staff.
    Donít argue with idiots because they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience. óGreg King

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,188
    vCash
    1500
    Chemistry

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    41,156
    vCash
    1000
    I also think it's healthy players.

    Teams are also starting to really staff for the behavioral aspects of players, such as the Red Sox with Bob Tewksbury.


    Both of these are things that teams are focusing on, and I can see it being a market inefficiency.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    PNW
    Posts
    16,240
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Victory Faust View Post
    Chemistry
    Explain your reasoning. I think plenty of teams value it, but I don't see much of a correlation between the narratives and success, nor is there any way for a team to seek that out when building a roster, as has been explained to you about 15 times.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,188
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by jej View Post
    Explain your reasoning. I think plenty of teams value it, but I don't see much of a correlation between the narratives and success, nor is there any way for a team to seek that out when building a roster, as has been explained to you about 15 times.
    There are lots of studies that look at how groups of people interact. Attorneys have people pick juries on this basis.

    So, whether you "explained" it to me 15 times or not, that doesn't make it true.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    PNW
    Posts
    16,240
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Victory Faust View Post
    There are lots of studies that look at how groups of people interact. Attorneys have people pick juries on this basis.

    So, whether you "explained" it to me 15 times or not, that doesn't make it true.
    And how do you apply that to the future? How do you know how a player will fit in? Do you the entire 40 man roster what they think of the guy? Do you guess? And how do we know chemistry is even important? How do we isolate it and test its effect on team success? Is there any evidence that players play better when they have a buddy on the team? Not that I am aware of.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,188
    vCash
    1500

    What do you think the current market inefficiency is?

    Quote Originally Posted by jej View Post
    And how do you apply that to the future? How do you know how a player will fit in? Do you the entire 40 man roster what they think of the guy? Do you guess? And how do we know chemistry is even important? How do we isolate it and test its effect on team success? Is there any evidence that players play better when they have a buddy on the team? Not that I am aware of.
    Just because you're ignorant about the subject, it doesn't mean there's no merit to it. You don't think corporations sometimes study how certain groups work together? They do. So apply all your questions to those situations.

    For starters, here's a piece from Psychology Today, to hopefully make you less ignorant about the efforts to quantify group behavior/performance:

    https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog...team-chemistry
    Last edited by Victory Faust; 01-24-2015 at 04:06 PM.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    PNW
    Posts
    16,240
    vCash
    1500
    So provide evidence and enlighten me then. Don't just say things and throw insults around. How does a team predict chemistry and the effect it has?

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,188
    vCash
    1500

    What do you think the current market inefficiency is?

    Quote Originally Posted by jej View Post
    So provide evidence and enlighten me then. Don't just say things and throw insults around. How does a team predict chemistry and the effect it has?
    See my edit with link. And calling you ignorant isn't an insult. You clearly aren't aware that there are efforts to quantify chemistry.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,188
    vCash
    1500
    Another link from the Harvard business school:

    https://hbr.org/2012/04/the-new-scie...ng-great-teams

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    PNW
    Posts
    16,240
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Victory Faust View Post
    Just because you're ignorant about the subject, it doesn't mean there's no merit to it. You don't think corporations sometimes study how certain groups work together? They do. So apply all your questions to those situations.

    For starters, here's a piece from Psychology Today, to hopefully make you less ignorant about the efforts to quantify group behavior/performance:

    https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog...team-chemistry
    I'm intrigued, but that article gives no data, no criteria for what qualities as a "split," how they determined that, etc.. I'm willing to bet if a fangraphs author just said stuff without proving any of it, you would doubt it. I'm doing the same with this. There's just a severe lack of info provided.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    PNW
    Posts
    16,240
    vCash
    1500

    What do you think the current market inefficiency is?

    Quote Originally Posted by Victory Faust View Post
    Another link from the Harvard business school:

    https://hbr.org/2012/04/the-new-scie...ng-great-teams
    Again, a good start, but nothing about baseball, which is just a different animal. There is very little actual team effort in terms of working together. It's pitcher versus hitter, for the most part. It's not communicating on what the goal is, and who should take which tasks, etc..

    I don't doubt that teams in general can perform better, but I'd like you do consider this if you don't agree that baseball is different: there was a study we were assigned in my economics class that found that groups/teams that feature more socially conscious people tended to be more successful. Women tend to fall into this category far more often than men (reading body language, tone, etc) and thus women are better teammates in general.

    Does this mean you think the Yankees would be a better team if they started signing females? They are better at teamwork, after all.

    http://m.theatlantic.com/business/ar...people/384625/

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,188
    vCash
    1500
    Would the Yankees be better if they signed females??? Seriously? What a ridiculous thing to say. It shows me you're more interested in defending a worldview than having an intelligent conversation.

    So...ok. You win. Human beings, and the way they interact, feed off each other, inspire or distract one a other, means nothing in baseball. We can't assign any of that to spreadsheet cells so we should just ignore it. You win. Baseball can be boiled down to a bunch of numbers. How silly of me to attempt to assign human qualities to these Strat-O-Matic pieces.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    PNW
    Posts
    16,240
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Victory Faust View Post
    Would the Yankees be better if they signed females??? Seriously? What a ridiculous thing to say. It shows me you're more interested in defending a worldview than having an intelligent conversation.

    So...ok. You win. Human beings, and the way they interact, feed off each other, inspire or distract one a other, means nothing in baseball. We can't assign any of that to spreadsheet cells so we should just ignore it. You win. Baseball can be boiled down to a bunch of numbers. How silly of me to attempt to assign human qualities to these Strat-O-Matic pieces.
    Wait. So I'm the one who isn't interested in an intelligent conversation, yet you say **** like this?

    How about you reply to the actual important points I made that turning this in to a ******** contest? I used the women example to illustrate that being a good teammate in a business or other environment doesn't guarantee it transfer over to a game like baseball. You haven't demonstrated that it does, and again, the links you did give were very much incomplete.

Page 1 of 17 12311 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •