Stats Are Great, But The Fetish For Them is Ruining Sports
Stats February 4th. 2010, 3:25pmStatistics are useful. You should buttress your sports arguments with the most indicative ones available. As statistics become increasingly intricate, however, they are overtaking the sports themselves in public consciousness. Those that fetishize stats cast down proclamations from concocted ivory towers impervious to human ingenuity and interaction. They are making sports unenjoyable for others.
I debated with one commenter on this site about “the greatness” of Red Sox outfielder J.D. Drew. We disagreed. The disagreement was over what was great, Drew or his numbers.
Had we gone to specifics, he would have mentioned Drew’s better than .900 OPS and 130 OPS+ numbers the past two years, before continuing with VORP and a myriad of acronyms and projections.
I would have countered with the numerous times, as a Red Sox fan, I’ve seen him watch strike three to end an inning with runners on base, with the same impassive expression. No pitcher quivers on the mound, facing J.D. Drew. I would be scoffed at like some Chassian Neanderthal.
Pedro Martinez had one of his greatest seasons in 1999 (243 OPS+, 0.923 WHIP, 13.2 SO/9). Those numbers are great. So was watching him. The anticipation. The look of defeat in batters’ eyes. The gratification from him absolutely eviscerating another team. It was the closest thing my shy 15-year-old self experienced to sex with another person. There is more than one way to perceive greatness.
I saw a production of Shakespeare’s As You Like It last night. You can enjoy the play from a technical angle, marveling at the word usage and the wit. You can view the play intellectually, liking the meditation on the human experience. You can also revel in the emotive quality of the play, the most profound love, sadness and laughter in the same scene. All are equally valid ways to appreciate it.
Statistics are great. Love them. Bet based on them. Write treatises about them. It’s productive discourse. But, remember it’s only one view. If everything could be determined by statistics, there would be no reason to watch sports.
You can point out that JaMarcus Russell and Mark Sanchez have similar stats. But, it’s equally valid to say that humans are not automatons, he’s winning the effing games, so there must be something Sanchez does differently your numbers are missing.
Ridiculing someone for thinking differently than you edifies no one. It just makes you insufferable.
111 Responses to “Stats Are Great, But The Fetish For Them is Ruining Sports”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.

February 4th, 2010 at 3:27 PM
Bill Simmons writes here now?
February 4th, 2010 at 3:29 PM
i’m an eye test type of guy. then again you can’t watch everything so you have to base some analysis or thought on stats.
February 4th, 2010 at 3:29 PM
did you write that headline duffy or are you trying to trick us?
February 4th, 2010 at 3:29 PM
Am I suddenly on Slate?
February 4th, 2010 at 3:30 PM
February 4th, 2010 at 3:31 PM
you lost me.
February 4th, 2010 at 3:31 PM
This is Duffy, parodying himself.
February 4th, 2010 at 3:31 PM
As statistics become increasingly intricate, however, they are overtaking the sports themselves in public consciousness. Those that fetishize stats cast down proclamations from concocted ivory towers impervious to human ingenuity and interaction. They are making sports unenjoyable for others.
You can turn the channel when the Tebow commercial comes on.
The disagreement was over what was great, Drew or his numbers.
JD Drew is his numbers. His facial expression doesn’t change the value he brings to his team. Thats why we have statistics, to determine if what we’re seeing with our eyes (JD Drew looks like a mime, I subconciously remember all the times he is a piece of shit and ignore all the times he does well because in my head I do not like him).
February 4th, 2010 at 3:32 PM
simply put, i like sports i.e. athletics. if i wanted to fornicate over hairbrained mathmatical formulas concocted by bored accountants, i’d go to the nearest neighborhood corner watering hole and debate the merits of pi.
February 4th, 2010 at 3:33 PM
That wasn’t a sentence.
February 4th, 2010 at 3:33 PM
One thread makes me miss college. This one makes me miss Fire Joe Morgan.
February 4th, 2010 at 3:33 PM
Couldn’t resist, could you Taguchi.
February 4th, 2010 at 3:34 PM
And the afternoon comes to a screeching halt.
February 4th, 2010 at 3:34 PM
well, now this post makes sense.
February 4th, 2010 at 3:34 PM
Dammit Mike. You beat me to it. I was going to end it with:
“You’ve just been Duffy’d.”
February 4th, 2010 at 3:35 PM
So we should decide who wins games based on crowd reaction?
February 4th, 2010 at 3:36 PM
Statistics are great. Love them. Bet based on them. Write treatises about them. It’s productive discourse. But, remember it’s only one view. If everything could be determined by statistics, there would be no reason to watch sports.
This is a straw man argument. No one is saying that everything can be determined by statistics. Statistics can only tell an imperfect story of what has happened and be predictive of what will happen, to a point. The fact you don’t like the story that statistics tell about JD doesn’t make that story any less valid, though it is only as valid as the statistics you’re using.
February 4th, 2010 at 3:36 PM
so to summarize:
Duffy hates stats
And JD Drew
Loves himself some Shakespere
Takes a veiled shot at folks
Got it
February 4th, 2010 at 3:37 PM
duffy waxes poetic about some play like i do “three little beers.”
February 4th, 2010 at 3:38 PM
Idk, I’m nervous as fuck whenever he’s facing my Yanks.
Also, I would venture to guess who the argument was with. So out of nowhere…
FIGHT THE GOOD FIGHT, FETCH!!
February 4th, 2010 at 3:38 PM
Has the best defense and #1 running game in football?
February 4th, 2010 at 3:39 PM
Where does the headline come into play in the article. And why does Duffy feel the need to tell us about going to a play two days in a row?
February 4th, 2010 at 3:39 PM
Humina, humina, humina, humina, humina, humina, humina, humina, humina, humina, humina… WHHHAAAAAAAA?
/brain-fucking-splosion
February 4th, 2010 at 3:39 PM
Do you think scores and wins should be eliminated?
I know adding up numbers of times someone scores in a game gets tough.
And serious, what hairbrain came up with the points system in football, some type of nuclear scientist, you kick and its worth 1 sometimes, 3 other times, who has time for that?
February 4th, 2010 at 3:40 PM
Jim Rice was the most feared hitter in the league!
/what the fuck do either of those sentences even mean?
//who gives a shit if the pitcher is scared if Drew’s getting on base 90% of the time
February 4th, 2010 at 3:40 PM
I can call one hell of a game though.
February 4th, 2010 at 3:40 PM
I don’t think “statistics are ruining sports”. People who don’t understand them and their context are.
They were crappy people to talk about sports with 5 years ago, too.
February 4th, 2010 at 3:40 PM
Also, I’m almost certain that no one is saying “Stats are the be all, end all for sports.” They are just a measure of evaluating a player, and a very good measuring tool at that.
February 4th, 2010 at 3:40 PM
If it wasn’t for my horse, I wouldn’t have spent that year in college.
February 4th, 2010 at 3:41 PM
But, it’s equally valid to say that humans are not automatons, he’s winning the effing games, so there must be something Sanchez does differently your numbers are missing.
Football isn’t baseball, and no one is saying that they are automatons. Of course, “clutch” has never been shown to exist statistically over a large enough sample size, sorry.
February 4th, 2010 at 3:41 PM
Should have finished that sentence differently.
People who don’t understand them and their context are just making discussions more difficult.
They are definitely not ruining sports.
February 4th, 2010 at 3:41 PM
sports were the best when you were a kid and all you knew was that Mattingly could turn on an inside pitch better than anyone….
February 4th, 2010 at 3:42 PM
If it wasn’t for my horse, I wouldn’t have spent that year in college.
Did she ride the horse to school Duffy?
February 4th, 2010 at 3:44 PM
When I was 15 I spoke to everyone in Todd Wilkonson voice. Some say it was the beginning of the end. I just say it was the beginning.
February 4th, 2010 at 3:45 PM
Yes but lack of clutch has!
/Mcnabb & Reid’d!
February 4th, 2010 at 3:48 PM
Ridiculing someone for thinking differently than you edifies no one. It just makes you insufferable.
Does someone who thinks the world is flat just “think differently” than someone who thinks its round, or are they objectively less correct? You wishy washy libs and your inability to make value judgements.
February 4th, 2010 at 3:49 PM
Based on the comments so far I’d say this article has a negative VORP.
February 4th, 2010 at 3:49 PM
Hey now.
/hammerin’ hank’d
February 4th, 2010 at 3:49 PM
sports were the best when you were a kid and all you knew was that Mattingly could turn on an inside pitch better than anyone….
And hot dogs were better before I knew they are made of lips and assholes.
February 4th, 2010 at 3:51 PM
How many times did you see this?
How many times did it actually happen?
How many times did he get a hit in the situation?
How about a walk?
Sac fly?
Instead of wildly speculating, why not know the truth?
February 4th, 2010 at 3:51 PM
ignorance is bliss…
but still love an an all american hot dog.
February 4th, 2010 at 3:51 PM
It’s been a couple of years since I’ve felt the urge to comment here but, man…Ty duffy sucks. That felt like a grade 11 position paper.
February 4th, 2010 at 3:53 PM
And as to your Pedro example its not like every stat doesn’t say Pedro was an unstoppable monster of death, just like they say about Pujols or any other player that is clearly, well, an unstoppable monster of death. Its only when they say nice things about people that your brain says suck that people get all angry. I realized this while preparing to discuss “Wuthering Heights” this evening. I’ll tell you what parts I marveled at tomorrow.
February 4th, 2010 at 3:53 PM
Who are the ad wizards that came up with one?
February 4th, 2010 at 3:54 PM
I will catch shit for this but…
Hot dog, at times, > hamburger
February 4th, 2010 at 3:54 PM
A dog, malted beverage and a game are one of the simple pleasures in life. I can’t wait to take it in at an outdoor stadium.
February 4th, 2010 at 3:54 PM
ok now i get. duffy is venting because the lakers didnt cover last night.
February 4th, 2010 at 3:54 PM
How many times did you see this?
How many times did it actually happen?
How many times did he get a hit in the situation?
How about a walk?
Sac fly?
Instead of wildly speculating, why not know the truth?
EXACTLY
February 4th, 2010 at 3:55 PM
Eh, I like his role here. But not easy to always have something interesting to write about.
A good one-liner for the front page might have been better:
“People who’s hard-on for new age statistics rages 24 hours a day are getting annoying.”
February 4th, 2010 at 3:55 PM
Ladies and gentlemen, we have a new champeen.
February 4th, 2010 at 3:55 PM
will catch shit for this but…
Hot dog, at times, > hamburger
right there with you.
February 4th, 2010 at 3:56 PM
in sub freezing temperatures
February 4th, 2010 at 3:56 PM
No comment.
February 4th, 2010 at 3:56 PM
you might want to wait until memorial day weekend. don’t forget a hot pretzel. that kinda food just tastes so much better at a ballgame. but only baseball games.
February 4th, 2010 at 3:56 PM
I will catch shit for this but…
Hot dog, at times, > hamburger
At tailgate I agree. Hot dogs are much easier and cleaner to eat.
February 4th, 2010 at 3:57 PM
you disgust me
February 4th, 2010 at 3:58 PM
hmmmm…depends greatly on the hot dog and hamburger itself.
if you’re talking frozen patty tossed onto the grill vs a sabrett hot dog you’re right.
February 4th, 2010 at 3:58 PM
i’ll third that.
February 4th, 2010 at 3:58 PM
80% of the time it works every time.
February 4th, 2010 at 3:58 PM
Should have stopped there.
The “numerous times” you watched JD Drew watch strike 3 with runners on is what’s called “anecdotal evidence”, which is a fancy way of saying it’s horse shit.
February 4th, 2010 at 3:58 PM
anyone know what time it is?
February 4th, 2010 at 3:59 PM
Pffft…I’m born and raised up here. Cold is when it hits 0°F
February 4th, 2010 at 3:59 PM
Gotta give it to him. Cassino doesn’t sneak in the door and slide along the wall hoping to go unnoticed. He kicks that motherfucker in and announces his presence with authority.
February 4th, 2010 at 3:59 PM
Hot Link then yes.
February 4th, 2010 at 4:00 PM
It’s dodgeball time!
February 4th, 2010 at 4:00 PM
thats called death here
February 4th, 2010 at 4:01 PM
no I want a PM Roundup
February 4th, 2010 at 4:01 PM
cassino does roll in throwing hay makers
February 4th, 2010 at 4:02 PM
connect 4
February 4th, 2010 at 4:02 PM
anyone know what time it is?
almost 4:20!!!1
February 4th, 2010 at 4:02 PM
The “numerous times” you watched JD Drew watch strike 3 with runners on is what’s called “anecdotal evidence”, which is a fancy way of saying it’s horse shit.
Thats why this man fucks unimaginable pieces of ass and you watch Shakespeare.
February 4th, 2010 at 4:03 PM
I’m talking Nathans hotdog.
Nothing beats a Nathan’s.
February 4th, 2010 at 4:04 PM
Ballz?
February 4th, 2010 at 4:04 PM
Duffy’s right, actually. Drew strikes out 18.3% of the time in his career. That number SHOOTS way up to 18.9% when there are runners in scoring position and two outs.
/doesn’t understand margin of error
//duffy’d (i.e. moron’d)
February 4th, 2010 at 4:05 PM
I said it’s dodgeball time, bitch
February 4th, 2010 at 4:06 PM
Bunch of fatties in here.
February 4th, 2010 at 4:07 PM
My commenting opportunities have been limited lately, so I have to make the most of them.
February 4th, 2010 at 4:07 PM
Now you’re just trying to show off.
February 4th, 2010 at 4:09 PM
I’m talking Nathans hotdog.
Nothing beats a Nathan’s.
Hebrew National is pretty good. And I’ll never turn down a Ballpark.
February 4th, 2010 at 4:10 PM
Nothing beats a Nathan’s.
my girlfriend is from buffalo and she swears by this brand called salens. must be a b-lo thing. they are nothing special.
February 4th, 2010 at 4:10 PM
Stats only ruin the game for people that don’t understand what they mean.
Especially in baseball, where there are 162 games, stats mean a whole hell of a lot. The players are their stats.
Oh, and the part about Sanchez doing something right cuz he wins games was pretty funny…
February 4th, 2010 at 4:11 PM
Part of this article stems from the schism between duffy’s two loves: soccer and baseball. One sport (baseball) can almost completely be quantified by statistics if you don’t stick your head in the ground and ignore advances in the game. Every player’s value is easy to ascertain, and teams usually perform within a standard deviation of the sum of their parts.
Soccer, on the other hand, can not be quantified by stats. It’s impossible with the current methods. There isn’t a stat that can tell someone that player X is a better holding midfielder than player Y without direct observation. It’s just not possible.
Unfortunately, this leads duffy to make some erroneous points. First off, people that like stats like to watch baseball. The mere fact that they cite advanced statistics when arguing about a player’s “greatness” should tell you right off the bat that that person truly loves the game; it’s an odd duck that willingly studies something that they don’t like. Second off, statistics, especially in baseball, make the game what it is. They’re the reason for the game, otherwise it’s just the special olympics. Finally, someone that willfully ignores stats in favor of what they “saw” is a moron. As pointed out already, our memory is flawed and full of bias; relying on an experience over a large sample of statistics is just stupid.
February 4th, 2010 at 4:12 PM
I like my dog chicago style when i can get it.
February 4th, 2010 at 4:14 PM
/tbl
/fixed
February 4th, 2010 at 4:16 PM
Duffy sounds like my dad who went to 3 Brewer games with me last year and every game Jason Kendall had a hit or two to which my dad proclaims “Kendall is having a pretty good year.” My poor dad….
February 4th, 2010 at 4:18 PM
reminds me of telling my dad that granderson should play left and gardner should be in center. he was convinced garnderson was a better CF. then he was watching a show that used stats and video evidence to prove otherwise. he called me to tell me that gardner should play center.
February 4th, 2010 at 4:18 PM
So good, until about three hours later….
February 4th, 2010 at 4:24 PM
Nathans beats all. Have a taste test side by side with ballpark and you’ll throw the rest of the ballpark away.
February 4th, 2010 at 4:25 PM
Smart man.
February 4th, 2010 at 4:28 PM
I think fantasy sports has skewed our perception of stats and a player’s worth. I agree with Duffy that focusing solely on stats sometimes causes us to lose sight of the big picture. However, I think that point was lost somewhere along the way.
February 4th, 2010 at 4:30 PM
I think fantasy sports has skewed our perception of stats and a player’s worth. I agree with Duffy that focusing solely on stats sometimes causes us to lose sight of the big picture. However, I think that point was lost somewhere along the way.
Except fantasy sports (in baseball especially) skew to the “dumb” statistics.
February 4th, 2010 at 4:32 PM
And how exaclty are stats RUINING sports again??? I missed that part.
February 4th, 2010 at 4:35 PM
e.g. batting average, RBI, saves, wins, ERA
February 4th, 2010 at 4:41 PM
Tallguy with the BODY BLOW.
Baseball=statistics. I’m always baffled by the guys who act like statistical evaluation is some sort of newfangled hinky nerdspiracy. OH, THERE YOU ARE WITH YOUR TRUSTY CALCULATOR AGAIN POINDEXTER.
February 4th, 2010 at 4:41 PM
Good Question. Rumor is that Stern is threating the nba lockout talk with this
February 4th, 2010 at 4:42 PM
Oh, and Chicago dogs own all other dogs. Sport peppers ftw.
February 4th, 2010 at 5:07 PM
This thread proves my point.
February 4th, 2010 at 5:26 PM
Scope out the wreckage of your efforts, declare victory and leave. The Vietnam method.
February 4th, 2010 at 5:27 PM
Is this your attempt use evidence to prove a point? I am not sure how these comments had any effect on sports at all (positive or negative).
February 4th, 2010 at 5:31 PM
That’s awesome.
February 4th, 2010 at 5:43 PM
My point was that the emphasis on statistics is devolving sports discussion into spiteful one-upsmanship by people feverishly consulting baseball reference and similar stats sites rather than watching the sport. That’s what this thread was.
It ruins sports by making them unenjoyable. They are supposed to be entertaining. Otherwise, what’s the point?
Baseball is no longer enjoyable. The games have become progressively longer and more boring. The discussion is just jerks checking baseball reference. Maybe stats are everything and what I see during a baseball game doesn’t matter and what I think doesn’t matter because the definitive answer is there on baseball reference. In which case why am I watching or talking about it?
February 4th, 2010 at 6:02 PM
last thing i am thinking about while watching a game are stats…just hoping that a-rod jacks one out of the park, and cc mows them down.
February 4th, 2010 at 6:10 PM
Don’t watch, talk about or write about it then. It’s that simple.
February 4th, 2010 at 6:12 PM
in your headline you says sports, not the word discussion. If your beef is that people use facts (this is the main reason why people use statistics, but many butcher the process) to support arguments, while I think that is wrongheaded I can at least understand it. I love it when people rank movies. or music. and I don’t always think the highest grossing acts are the best (statistics!).
But I think when you are talking about certain factual questions, evidence (statistics) adds to the conversation and often shows the Ignorance of others (usually old media), which it turn leads people to over generalize and complain abstractly about statistics.
Also, watching sports and forming opinions on them, by using statistics or opining in any other manner, are NOT mutually exclusive.
Though, you would have a point if the MLB said it was going stop televising but everyone could go play diamond-mind
February 4th, 2010 at 6:17 PM
i shed a tear over this.
*standing ovation*
February 4th, 2010 at 6:19 PM
i have to agree with all of this. i’d say the worst sports for stats, in order, are baseball, then nba, then NFL.
February 4th, 2010 at 6:23 PM
honestly, i don’t think people are discussing the same topic here.
February 4th, 2010 at 6:28 PM
i have to agree with all of this. i’d say the worst sports for stats, in order, are baseball, then nba, then NFL.
That’s because baseball lends itself (because of the relative lack of moving parts) most to being analyzed this way.
My point was that the emphasis on statistics is devolving sports discussion into spiteful one-upsmanship by people feverishly consulting baseball reference and similar stats sites rather than watching the sport. That’s what this thread was.
I watch four or five hours of baseball a day from April to October. I just prefer the best understanding of what I’m watching possible. I’ve read this article before and I just found where.
FireJoeMorgan responding to this dumb argument:
There have always been statistics in baseball. Always. Statistics like WHIP and VORP and OPS are better than the old statistics, because they give you more actual pertinent information. This is not up for debate. If you don’t like these stats, don’t use them. But don’t tell me that they aren’t interesting or good.
I just don’t get it, man. No one ever said: “When I was a kid, if we were going to cut off your leg we’d give you a shot of whiskey and a rope to bite down on, and we’d just take a dirty hacksaw and just hack away, outside, on the ground. Why do all these nerds keep talking about ‘anaesthesia’ and ’sterilization?!’”
Just Shut up. Seriously, man, shut the fuck up. This is like saying,”I don’t like action movies, so no one can ever enjoy action movies because action movies are terrible.” If you don’t want to use stats, don’t use them. I don’t care. But for the love of goddamned God, don’t tell me that statistical analysis “doesn’t add up to enjoyment of the game.” You are telling me that my friends and I are incapable of enjoying baseball. I promise you — I PROMISE you — I enjoy baseball. I love baseball. This is not a situation where only one kind of person can love baseball. Lots of different people can love baseball for lots of different reasons. In my case, I love baseball every bit as much as you, but — and here’s the difference between you and me — I also understand it. If you are interested in learning how to understand it, just ask. I can teach you in like 10 minutes. (And I don’t even know that much about sabermetrics.)
February 4th, 2010 at 6:40 PM
I think Duffy completely understands the importance of statistics. he has used them to backup claims on baseball posts that he has wrote in the past. However, I think i understand wear Duffy is coming from on this topic.
/still need to look def. of buttress
February 4th, 2010 at 6:46 PM
People say that Mike Hart is too small and doesn’t get many yards or play on most plays, but he’s winning the effin’ games! Your stupid stats don’t tell the whole story!
February 4th, 2010 at 9:03 PM
Bringing this one back from the dead: In this case, does statistics = sabremetics? Or does duffy really hate using RBIS, slugging %, et. al. in arguments?