Fantasy Baseball

[jake]

Has created a generation of "baseball fans" who couldn't possibly sit down and watch an entire game in it's entirety and actually understand why the OUTCOME of the game actually was what it was. Do these fans realize that there are 8 people who stand out there in the field with the pitcher? Do they understand that after a batter actually reaches base that other things happen after that? And do they realize that in any given game the two most important people in that game stand on a hill in the middle of the infield? It's going to be a long winter at Motownsports.

[tiger337]

Has created a generation of "baseball fans" who couldn't possibly sit down and watch an entire game in it's entirety and actually understand why the OUTCOME of the game actually was what it was. Do these fans realize that there are 8 people who stand out there in the field with the pitcher? Do they understand that after a batter actually reaches base that other things happen after that? And do they realize that in any given game the two most important people in that game stand on a hill in the middle of the infield? It's going to be a long winter at Motownsports.

Was somebody talking about fantasy baseball?

[Tyrus]

I think the fantasy stuff has caused some people to value statistics over everything else.

But I'm on a mission from God to impart to these roto folks an important message: TRUST YOUR OWN EYES. BELIEVE WHAT YOU SEE, NOT WHAT YOU READ.

Don't bother thanking me. It's just a service I provide. :grin: :dead: :grin:

[SweetLou]

I agree completely, but not just for baseball. For all sports. People look at a certain stat and if it dips under what they think it should be they want them traded. They don't take into consideration the persons' intangibles nor their overall talent.

[tiger337]

I think the fantasy stuff has caused some people to value statistics over everything else.



Actually, most fantasy baseball leagues are designed for traditionalists who are not comfortable with all the new stats. That's why most leagues are heavily based on stats like SB and saves which are not very good stats for evaluation of real baseball.




TRUST YOUR OWN EYES. BELIEVE WHAT YOU SEE, NOT WHAT YOU READ.



Should we not read what you write?

[Brent]

I disagree. Fantasy Baseball isn't to blame for this.

1. Fantasy Baseball is not that popular compared to Fantasy Football. Many fans don't want to be bothered with fantasy baseball because they have to keep up with their team on a daily basis for 6 straight months.

2. ESPN and Sports talk radio has a greater influence on the dumbing down of the everyday sports fan. Far greater than any influence fantasy baseball has.

[Corky]

TRUST YOUR OWN EYES. BELIEVE WHAT YOU SEE, NOT WHAT YOU READ.


I wish more of you members of the press held such an opinion!

:silly:

[jadefalcon]

Kobe Bryant is a fantasy basketball MVP, but I'm not sure I'd want him on the Pistons. Fantasy sports take out the human element(i.e. chemistry, etc.) of sports, which is really only a bad thing if you don't keep perspective and realize that this human element still exists. (However, I think that this "human element" pertains to basketball more than baseball because of the greater degree of actual interaction.)

[jadefalcon]

I disagree. Fantasy Baseball isn't to blame for this.

1. Fantasy Baseball is not that popular compared to Fantasy Football. Many fans don't want to be bothered with fantasy baseball because they have to keep up with their team on a daily basis for 6 straight months.

2. ESPN and Sports talk radio has a greater influence on the dumbing down of the everyday sports fan. Far greater than any influence fantasy baseball has.

This is very true. Usually, general changes in the trends of public thought are influenced by many factors.

[DTroppens]

I am in one fantasy baseball league that in the last two years that the teams that made it to the title game, three of the four didn't make changes on their teams. Baseball is the easiest sport to do that without a doubt. Especially if earned runs is a stat for pitchers.

[Tyrus]

Should we not read what you write?


I sure wouldn't!!! :crosseye:

[Biff Mayhem]

OH BOY! A sabres vs. the rest of 'em argument! I'm so glad that one of these finally found their way onto this forum.

[tiger337]

OH BOY! A sabres vs. the rest of 'em argument! I'm so glad that one of these finally found their way onto this forum.

I'd like to see one of those too! I'm still looking for evidence of sabermetrics in this thread though.

[Casimir]

Has created a generation of "baseball fans" who couldn't possibly sit down and watch an entire game in it's entirety and actually understand why the OUTCOME of the game actually was what it was. Do these fans realize that there are 8 people who stand out there in the field with the pitcher? Do they understand that after a batter actually reaches base that other things happen after that? And do they realize that in any given game the two most important people in that game stand on a hill in the middle of the infield? It's going to be a long winter at Motownsports.

:confused: How have you come to this conclusion?

[Johnny Mac]

i love fantasy baseball, but i know the difference between fantasy and reality on a lot of these guys, example(Pierre)

[rhino]

Has created a generation of "baseball fans" who couldn't possibly sit down and watch an entire game in it's entirety and actually understand why the OUTCOME of the game actually was what it was. Do these fans realize that there are 8 people who stand out there in the field with the pitcher? Do they understand that after a batter actually reaches base that other things happen after that? And do they realize that in any given game the two most important people in that game stand on a hill in the middle of the infield? It's going to be a long winter at Motownsports.

Isn't whats really important is that fantasy baseball is helping create fans of the game? The more fans, the better. You don't have to worry about being edged out, there will always be room for snobbery.:happy:

[estrepe1]

I don't like fantasy baseball.

[estrepe1]

i love fantasy baseball, but i know the difference between fantasy and reality on a lot of these guys, example(Pierre)

Yeah in fantasy and reality he was terrible this season.

[Johnny Mac]

Yeah in fantasy and reality he was terrible this season.

his 58 sb and and .292 avg made him a pretty good fantasy guy to have

[tiger337]

I don't like fantasy baseball.

Have you tried scoresheet?

[estrepe1]

Have you tried scoresheet?

No. I have only tried the roto type fantasy baseball.

[tiger337]

No. I have only tried the roto type fantasy baseball.

Roto is garbage....except when I win my money league.

[jessman1128]

1. Fantasy Baseball is not that popular compared to Fantasy Football. Many fans don't want to be bothered with fantasy baseball because they have to keep up with their team on a daily basis for 6 straight months.

How very true. I played in a fantasy baseball league this past year for the first time ever. I started the league, actually. 2 or 3 months into the season I found myself losing interest. I stayed interested until the end of the season, but not *as* interested as I was during the first 2 months. Overall, I'd have to say that I really like fantasy baseball, but it doesn't come close to comparing to the real thing. The best thing I got out of it was learning about players that I otherwise would have never heard of or paid any attention to. Two examples that come to mind: Jered Weaver and Anthony Reyes. Had I not been playing fantasy baseball, I likely would have paid little or no attention to these guys, even if they were mentioned on SportsCenter or elsewhere. But I discovered them for my team during the season and started paying attention to how well they were pitching for their teams. I can't speak for other people, but I know for myself personally, fantasy baseball has not skewed the way that I view baseball players in the world of real baseball.

[djhutch]

Kobe Bryant is a fantasy basketball MVP, but I'm not sure I'd want him on the Pistons.

With all due respect, you're out of your mind.

[berneree]

Has created a generation of "baseball fans" who couldn't possibly sit down and watch an entire game in it's entirety and actually understand why the OUTCOME of the game actually was what it was. Do these fans realize that there are 8 people who stand out there in the field with the pitcher? Do they understand that after a batter actually reaches base that other things happen after that? And do they realize that in any given game the two most important people in that game stand on a hill in the middle of the infield? It's going to be a long winter at Motownsports.
SO......in your opinoin why did the Tigers get beat by the St. Louis Cardinals in the World Series?

Fantasy Baseball would tell me the Tigers lost because they didn't hit.

Watching the games in their entirety would tell me the Tigers lost because they didn't hit, and made a ton of errors/unearned runs.

What's the difference? The Tigers lost.

[Domino]

Anyone want to get a motown sports fantasy baseball league going next year? I'm in.

[RobSk]

But I'm on a mission from God to impart to these roto folks an important message: TRUST YOUR OWN EYES. BELIEVE WHAT YOU SEE, NOT WHAT YOU READ.


So here's my question: You want to TRUST YOUR EYES, right?

So what percentage of performances for batters and pitchers in a given season?

For me, I suspect that I see way less than 1/10th of 1% of all major league performances in a given year. For Tiger players, I probably actually see 75% or less.

Given that I see a very small piece of what goes on in baseball, if I don't trust anything but what I see, then I effectively have no knowledge of most National League players, and indeed, tiny knowledge of most baseball players. If a guy happens to have a bad series against the Tigers, by your standard I would conclude he was terrible, no matter what he did over the rest of the season.

Further, if I only believe performances I see with my eyes, I have absolutely no standard to judge against. I don't know what other players are doing (because of course, I don't see all the games, or most of the games, or even very many games at all), so it's hard to know what is a good performance and what is bad (at the player level. At the team level, of course, if we win it's good).

Finally, BELIEVE MY EYES demands that I have perfect knowledge in the skill of evaluating players by watching them. I need to know how to figure out what a good swing is and a bad swing. Good technique in the field and bad. Good pitching motion and bad.

Given that I often see scouting reports from experts that turn out to be completely wrong, it appears that gaining this perfect knowledge is pretty darn hard.

So somehow, we need to have a way to gain knowledge of performances without only "BELIEVING OUR EYES". One way is stats. Until you can figure out a way for me to see all the games and have perfect knowledge in evaluating baseball skills, I'll do the following:

1. Enjoy the heck out of watching baseball played.
2. Evaluate players based on the common information that I have for all of them, namely stats.

If that means that you're going to conclude that I think that "OPS is everything", that's ok by me.

Rob

[jake]

:confused: How have you come to this conclusion?

By the trade and free agent talk I see on this board. This isn't about sabre's as much as it is about people who just think the answer is offense, offense, offense. It's not about that. For crying out loud, we were beaten in the World Series because of bunting. It's about getting guys who are great competitors, good defenders, good athletes, and who have good AB's around that pitching staff. Hasn't this Tiger team taught anybody anything??

[pyrotigers]

We were beaten in the world series because we didn't field well, didn't pitch well, and hit around .200 for the series.

Bunting probably would have just ended it sooner.

[estrepe1]

By the trade and free agent talk I see on this board. This isn't about sabre's as much as it is about people who just think the answer is offense, offense, offense. It's not about that. For crying out loud, we were beaten in the World Series because of bunting. It's about getting guys who are great competitors, good defenders, good athletes, and who have good AB's around that pitching staff. Hasn't this Tiger team taught anybody anything??

We were not beaten in the World Series because of bunting. Yes the pitchers were not able field the ball correctly and throw it. But they were beaten in the World Series and in the division race because they were unable to score at an adequate level over the second half of the season. The offense came back to life a bit in the ALDS and the ALCS. I know its tough to admit but you can't win without offense either. They averaged 2.2 runs scored a game in the WS. They hit .199/.237/.335 over the series, if anything the series would have lasted longer if they could have fielded a bunt. But it would likely have had the same result.

[tiger337]

So here's my question: You want to TRUST YOUR EYES, right?

So what percentage of performances for batters and pitchers in a given season?

For me, I suspect that I see way less than 1/10th of 1% of all major league performances in a given year. For Tiger players, I probably actually see 75% or less.

Given that I see a very small piece of what goes on in baseball, if I don't trust anything but what I see, then I effectively have no knowledge of most National League players, and indeed, tiny knowledge of most baseball players. If a guy happens to have a bad series against the Tigers, by your standard I would conclude he was terrible, no matter what he did over the rest of the season.

Further, if I only believe performances I see with my eyes, I have absolutely no standard to judge against. I don't know what other players are doing (because of course, I don't see all the games, or most of the games, or even very many games at all), so it's hard to know what is a good performance and what is bad (at the player level. At the team level, of course, if we win it's good).

Finally, BELIEVE MY EYES demands that I have perfect knowledge in the skill of evaluating players by watching them. I need to know how to figure out what a good swing is and a bad swing. Good technique in the field and bad. Good pitching motion and bad.

Given that I often see scouting reports from experts that turn out to be completely wrong, it appears that gaining this perfect knowledge is pretty darn hard.

So somehow, we need to have a way to gain knowledge of performances without only "BELIEVING OUR EYES". One way is stats. Until you can figure out a way for me to see all the games and have perfect knowledge in evaluating baseball skills, I'll do the following:

1. Enjoy the heck out of watching baseball played.
2. Evaluate players based on the common information that I have for all of them, namely stats.

If that means that you're going to conclude that I think that "OPS is everything", that's ok by me.

Rob

Rob, that was beautiful. It sounded like something out a Bill James Baseball Abstract. Great stuff.

[Charles Liston]

Actually, most fantasy baseball leagues are designed for traditionalists who are not comfortable with all the new stats. That's why most leagues are heavily based on stats like SB and saves which are not very good stats for evaluation of real baseball.

Good call. Also, it needs to be pointed out that stats have ruled baseball conversations since before all of us were born. It's how fans follow the sport when they don't live near a city that has a major league team - the vast majority of baseball fans, in other words.

Stats have been an integral part of a fan's enjoyment of baseball for over 100 years. Some of the stats are different today...we don't spend a lot of time praising a ".300 hitter" or a "20 game winner". But there have been stat geeks for as long as there has been baseball. Not convinced? Read this post over again, but do it in James Earl Jones' voice. See?

[Oblong]

Do scouts just visually take everything in and not gather up stats?

What's the old saying, the difference between a bad hitter and a good hitter is one hit per week? You are going to trust a guy's eyes to make that evaluation?

Two players that are interesting to examine in this whole saber vs. scouting stuff are Gabe Kapler and Chris Shelton. Not saying they sway the argument in either direction, they are just good examples to get the thing going.

[tiger337]

Do scouts just visually take everything in and not gather up stats?

What's the old saying, the difference between a bad hitter and a good hitter is one hit per week? You are going to trust a guy's eyes to make that evaluation?

Two players that are interesting to examine in this whole saber vs. scouting stuff are Gabe Kapler and Chris Shelton. Not saying they sway the argument in either direction, they are just good examples to get the thing going.

When we argue about stuff that has already happened, statistics usually answer the questions. It doesn't matter whether a player has certain skills when we talk about performance. Either he did well or he didn't and stats will generally tell us that. Those kinds of debates are not very interesting to me.

It gets a lot fuzzier when we try to predict the future. That's when the stats versus scouting debate gets interesting. This is especially true with young players. You need to consider performance and scouting. I usually fall on the side of the sabers but one area where I think some sabers tend to be too stubborn is the idea that minor league stats can be translated into major league stats. There is definitely a correlation but I don't think it's as strong as a lot of people claim.

[tiger337]

Good call. Also, it needs to be pointed out that stats have ruled baseball conversations since before all of us were born. It's how fans follow the sport when they don't live near a city that has a major league team - the vast majority of baseball fans, in other words.

Stats have been an integral part of a fan's enjoyment of baseball for over 100 years. Some of the stats are different today...we don't spend a lot of time praising a ".300 hitter" or a "20 game winner". But there have been stat geeks for as long as there has been baseball.

One of the best books I've ever read is: "The Numbers Game" by Alan Schwarz. It gives a history of stat analysis in baseball. Anybody who thinks that statistical analysis is a new thing should read this book. The book is very accessible to non-sabers too.

By the way Charles, you've been mentioned on Tiger Tales today. Now the 3 people who read it tomorrow will think you are important.

[estrepe1]

It gets a lot fuzzier when we try to predict the future. That's when the stats versus scouting debate gets interesting. This is especially true with young players. You need to consider performance and scouting. I usually fall on the side of the sabers but one area where I think some sabers tend to be too stubborn is the idea that minor league stats can be translated into major league stats. There is definitely a correlation but I don't think it's as strong as a lot of people claim.

I agree with you. I think the scouts can tell us a lot more about minor leaguers and College/HS players. With the minor leagues typically I will look at stats to at least see that the highly touted player is doing well.

With College/HS I think you can throw the stats out the window for the most part. Listen to the scouts.

[cruzer1]

By the way Charles, you've been mentioned on Tiger Tales today. Now the 3 people who read it tomorrow will think you are important.
How much does it pay to get mentioned?

[Charles Liston]

How much does it pay to get mentioned?

It's not what it pays really, but rather how much it costs. I was surprised that he would take Canadian money (a cheque of course).

[tiger337]

Charles is just being humble. He will be receiving 1% of Tiger Tales profits for the month of November. I will mail him a check in American money. All he has to do is pay the postage.