By Taylor Nigrelli
Sports Editor
Monday, baseball fans experienced the always comforting (unless you’re a Mets fan) opening day.
To prepare for this, SportsCenter ran a segment where anchor Karl Ravech attempted to sum up all the offseason happenings in 162 seconds.
It was a cute enough idea, but it was marred by one mind-numbingly stupid sentence.
When mentioning Detroit Tigers third basemen Miguel Cabrera earning his second consecutive American League MVP award, a caricature of a stereotypical “nerd” appeared. Ravech then dismissed those who supported the MVP candidacy of Los Angeles Angels outfielder Mike Trout as “whiny fan boys.”
The oh-so-clever and original quip reminded me and likely many other baseball fans of a similar mindset of what lies ahead— another year of squabbling with knuckle-draggers and trolling media members about the virtues of advanced-metric analysis (commonly referred to as saber metrics, advanced stats, analytics or Moneyball).
For the uninitiated, advanced metrics are exactly what they sound like – a better version of traditional statistics. Essentially, the concept is to add context to regular stats, which leads to an overall better understanding of whatever game you happen to be studying. Of course, there’s more to it than looking at spreadsheets (thinking logically, ignoring bogus narratives, etc.), but understanding the basics of advanced stats can change the way one views any given sport.
This is nothing new, of course. Michael Lewis’s New York Times best-seller “Moneyball,” which detailed the Oakland Athletics cutting-edge scouting and player evaluation techniques, brought an already established movement to the mainstream more than a decade ago.
Ravech’s quip, however fleeting it may have been, was a stark reminder that even many at the world’s largest sports media entity aren’t ready to take their fingers out of their ears and stop yelling “lalalala” at the top of their lungs.
And I can only assume that’s what those opposed to the use of advanced stats are doing. Otherwise, they would likely have noticed that nearly every North American professional sports team employs at least one analytical type. Many MLB and NBA teams have made advanced metric analysis a major part of their operation.
Perhaps many are intimidated by the concept of advanced metrics because, at first mention, it sounds like something only egghead mathematicians could ever truly grasp. Perhaps some fans and media types don’t see how advanced stats relate to the sport they’re watching.
Both of these are damaging misconceptions. Since the basis of studying advanced metrics is adding context to statistics, it doesn’t take a genius to work with them. I’m certainly no math genius, and I had no issue immersing myself in the subject. It has nothing to do with the calculus class you took in high school; it’s about thinking logically.
Of course, advanced stats are related to sports. I know many writers and analysts like to go by the “eye test,” but statistics are just a log of what happened. Advanced statistics are a better log of what’s happened. Why attempt to remember everything you’ve seen and put it into proper context in your mind when stats can do a much better job of that for you?
I could go on about how no serious advanced-metric-using analyst would ever say statistics are the be-all, end-all of analysis and that watching games and considering statistics are not mutually exclusive. But no one ever seems to understand that point anyway.
But, after a decade of mainstream exposure, I shouldn’t have to make the case for advanced stats. I shouldn’t have to explain them to adults who have covered sports for their entire careers. That’s what made Ravech’s attempt at a joke so infuriating.
Those who make use of advanced metrics when analyzing teams and players shouldn’t be dismissed so easily. ESPN shouldn’t support one of their anchors laughing in the face of serious analysis.
But they’ll continue to do so. And other uncreative writers will continue to beat the “stats nerds never see the sun” and “analytics guys live in their mom’s basements” (Yeah right, the WiFi would be terrible!) jokes into the ground, while steadfastly refusing to look at the world in a reasonable and logical way.
Stupid narratives will continue to gain steam while at least one prominent national sports writer will pen a column about how “stat geeks don’t get it, man.” My money’s on Mitch Albom.
But this has come to be expected. And I can’t speak for the rest of the long-reaching and ever-growing advanced stats community, but I’m not ready for another battle.
I’d rather enjoy the fine work of the dozens of young data-driven analysts that seem to be gaining steam on the internet. I’ll let the trolls and hacks have their fun.
Now if you’ll excuse me, I have Mike Trout stats to salivate over.
Taylor Nigrelli is the sports editor for The Bona Venture. His email is nigreltn11@bonaventure.edu
