See copyright notice at the bottom of this page.
List of All Posters
OPS: Begone!
May 21, 2003 - Reality check
I also think that while Beane and company are parsecs ahead of their competition, that there is a large gap between his and Depodesta's knowledge of and efficient and correct use of sabermetric principles and that of many sabers on Primer, BP, and Fanhome (and wherever else they might lurk). IMO, the A's would be far better off hiring someone like James, Voros, Tango, etc., than trying to do sabermetric analysis themselves.
You're an idiot.
DePodesta is a Harvard graduate who did some pretty sophisticated econometric work to receive his degree. He's spent the past five years of his life dedicated, at least in large part, to performing sabermetric analysis on behalf of the A's. There's no reason to think that he's any *more* qualified to do sabermetric work than Voros or Tango etc, but there's also no reason to think that he's any less so, and if you're using "publication" as the standard of measurement, well, DePodesta has some very obvious reasons for keeping his work proprietary.
Most importantly, DePodesta has shown that he can get along with people, and influence the decision making process of a real, viable organization. Once again, I'm not saying that Voros or Tango couldn't, but it's far from a given. There are lots of very bright people - not just statheads - who don't have the interpersonal skills to get very far in business. See also Gimbel, Mike.
OPS: Begone!
May 21, 2003 - Reality check
Finally, as for anyone's ability to deal with people, I'm not sure that you can necessarily say that DePodesta is good or bad, nor could you say that with me, or Voros, or anyone else, unless you deal with these people on different issues in different settings (or you have some second-hand knowledge... definitely not third-hand or worse). I don't think that an executive is a better people-person, or can deal with people, than a non-exec.
Well, working in the corporate sector, I can confirm that. Although it's a minority, there are plenty of a**holes who do plenty well for themselves in business, and plenty of really nice people who fall short.
But I'm not talking about being friendly, and I'm not *exactly* talking about managerial skills. Rather, I'm talking about the ability to be persuasive when dealing with people who have dissenting or at least ambivalent viewpoints, which at the very least involves some combination of:
1. The ability to listen to people (or "read people", if you will), in order to understand what their priorities are and why they believe what they do. 2. Rhetorical ability ... which in a non-virtual setting becomes a subset of charisma. 3. Prioritizing one's research and aligning it with the goals of the organization ... i.e. knowing which battles to fight.
Now, there are a lot of different ways to go about accomplishing those things - Beane has a certain personalitiy, DePodesta's is virtually the opposite, and they're both highly effective. But to really do all of those things well is fairly unusual, and I would guess that among the pool of the 15 or 50 or 500 or whatever leading analysts, there's a lot more differentiation in terms of interpersonal ability than technical ability.
OPS: Begone!
May 21, 2003 - Reality check
How easy Paul D is to get along with, and what his college was and degree was in, has next to nothing to do with anything.
It has to do with the following comment by MGL,
"IMO, the A's would be far better off hiring someone like James, Voros, Tango, etc., than trying to do sabermetric analysis themselves"
which neglects the fact that the technical side of DePodesta's job is just one part of his responsibilities. Understanding the priorities of his organization, being able to pitch his ideas successfully; these things are also very important. The tragic part of the Mike Gimbel experiment, and the experiences that Craig Wright, Eddie Epstein etc. had before him, is that they were lone voices in the dark and had no discernable influence on the direction of their organizations. Yes, DePodesta's in the right place at the right time. But he's also the right man for the job, as attested to by the fact that he's received offers to be a GM, a position in which his responsibilities would extend far beyond being a Stat Boy.
Let me quote the relevant passage from moneyball about the 3 to 1 ratio: "He proceeded to tinker with his own version of Bill James' runs created formula. When he was finished, he had a model for predicting run production that was more accurate than any he knew of. In his model an extra point of OBA was worth 3 times an extra point of SLG."
I happen to believe - and no, I can't offer proof - that Lewis in some way or another didn't convey DePodesta's findings properly. The A's certainly haven't *behaved* like an organization that believes that OBP is three times more important than slugging average.
Copyright notice
Comments on this page were made by person(s) with the same handle, in various comments areas, following Tangotiger © material, on Baseball Primer. All content on this page remain the sole copyright of the author of those comments.
If you are the author, and you wish to have these comments removed from this site, please send me an email (tangotiger@yahoo.com), along with (1) the URL of this page, and (2) a statement that you are in fact the author of all comments on this page, and I will promptly remove them.