Late on Monday, Greg Johns, the Mariners beat writer for MLB.com, posted a story that quoted skipper Eric Wedge on Dustin Ackley’s demotion to triple-A. We don’t have the full context of the discussion from which the quote came, but here’s what we do have:
"It's the new generation. It's all this sabermetrics stuff, for lack of a better term, you know what I mean?" Wedge said. "People who haven't played since they were 9 years old think they have it figured out. It gets in these kids' heads."
Dropping this quote was like throwing chum in the water for the sabermetric community, and the response was quick and predictable. It was a decidedly non-diplomatic way for Wedge to get his point across and, unfortunately, that point was mostly ignored in the twitter firestorm that followed.
The point is not difficult to parse if you can look past the incendiary language in which it was couched: Dustin Ackley ain’t right at the plate, and the problem is mental. Wedge expressed this in maybe the worst way possible, but that doesn’t make him wrong, necessarily.
Wedge has managed Ackley for the equivalent of nearly two seasons, plus two spring trainings. That’s a lot of time to get to know a guy. Unless you’re related by blood or marriage to Dustin Ackley, Eric Wedge probably knows him better than you do. Ackley is probably a better hitter than his .205 AVG would indicate (although we can argue how much better than that he actually is). And maybe advanced statistics are actually making Ackley worse.
Of course it’s not the stats that are the problem; it’s what you or, in this case, Dustin Ackley, does with them. I’ve talked to a number of ballplayers recently about advanced statistics — or tried to, anyway. A fairly large percentage of players stop me almost as soon as the pitch is out of my mouth: a typical response is “If it’s about stats, I’d rather not talk about it. Thinking about stats takes me out of the moment of competition, and that’s where I need my focus to be.”
That sounds completely crazy to someone like me, who worships at the altar of Bill James and his acolytes. But then again, I’m not an elite athlete competing at the highest level. If I were, I’d want all of the data. My tendencies, the tendencies of the pitchers I’m facing, defensive data, all of it. But I’m not an elite athlete. I didn’t have the physical gifts or the dedication to the sport to play beyond high school. But probably my biggest impediment (in addition to all the other ones) was between the ears. I couldn’t immediately put failure behind me, as I assume one has to do to be a pro. I couldn’t focus solely on baseball to the detriment of all other things, which I assume is also necessary. I got all up in my head at the plate, trying to anticipate this or that pitch or location. And I can only imagine how much worse this would have been in the age of ubiquitous heat maps and PITCHf/x data. God help me.
Data is never bad; data is just data. But what if the data gets in the way of what you’re trying to accomplish? Maybe that’s what’s going on with Ackley. Or maybe he’s just a middling hitter with a .250 BABIP in a sample size of just 171 plate appearances this season. I don’t know. You probably don’t know. But who knows?
If anyone knows, it’s Dustin Ackley. And possibly Eric Wedge. Ultimately it's Wedge's job to manage his players in this environment, because analysts, bloggers, PITCHf/x experts, internet commenters, hostile tweeters, and writers trying in good faith to make sense of the game aren't going anywhere (whereas Wedge might be).
So yes, Eric Wedge expressed himself in just about the worst way possible, but that doesn’t make him wrong. I encourage you to look past the cheap mom’s-basement-level shot he took at us and entertain the possibility that he’s right. Do it because all of us have more to learn about this game and the exceptional people who play it. And also because no one likes a smug jerk.
Thank you for reading
This is a free article. If you enjoyed it, consider subscribing to Baseball Prospectus. Subscriptions support ongoing public baseball research and analysis in an increasingly proprietary environment.
Subscribe now
While I agree with Ian's general premise, this might be just one more example of the survivor of the fittest, cut-throat nature of professional sports. Not everyone can overcome the physical and mental challenges to succeed.
Q to Baseball Ops team
"Do you sit down with coaches to go over Sabermetric stats?"
A:
"We dont' 'sit down' with coaches...we provided stats to them in forms of information to help them make decisions"
Fair to say that there are numbers guys in Mariners org, but not necessary "heavily emphasized". My impression is that they started look at stats side in recent years, but not in the way some orgs (Rays/Padres, even Astros) relied upon.
Either Wedge meant what he said, or he's not a good enough public speaker to handle the duties of a MLB manager. And he chose to insult people while making a fool of himself.
When did we decide that mean, stupid people shouldn't be held accountable? And when did it become BP party line to NOT stick up for itself. Wedge doesn't deserve to be abused, but I see no reason at all why we can't have some fun with it on twitter or why the stats community needs self-reflection on the matter (which, btw, has been trying to figure out why Ackley's struggled for ages)
BTW, Ian, I really like the vast majority of your stuff.
This is something of a false dilemma. Those aren't the only two conclusions we can draw. Wedge could have been having a horrible day and said something flip and immediately regretted it. I bet even Joe Maddon has bad days and says dumb stuff sometimes. But no, one poorly worded comment doesn't mean he's unfit for the job. I really wish we had the full text of the interview, because more context is always helpful.
It's not my job to hold stupid people to account, nor to defend BP. We don't need defending, firstly, and secondly, a lot of the "defending" I see comes off as strident and smug. Which is fine, but it's not how I operate. Individual people will come around to advanced stats or they won't. All I can do is let them know there's water over here; it's up to them whether to drink or not.
I'm not interested in being an Eric Wedge apologist here, although I know it looks like from this exchange. My only goal is to deepen my understanding of the game, which often comes from discussing it with people who know more about it than me. And when I tweet or type or say "Eric Wedge is an idiot," the dialogue stops.
I'm suggesting is that we don't take the nerd-bait and see if there's anything of value in his statement. I thought there was; many (most?) others disagree. Which is totally cool.
Sabermetrics, despite its origins, is just as capable of evolving into the role currently occupied by traditional thinking as it is to remain the community that thinks outside the box. Knee-jerk shout downs just take us closer to that possibility. So, even if we disagree with someone, even if we strongly disagree with someone, it needs to be civil instead of a lynch mob - you have to let people retain their dignity and composure if you want them to listen to you or learn; otherwise they just turn away.
You know who is having the discourse about Ackley's struggles? The Sabermetric community; the thing that Ian is asking to happen is exactly what is happening. For a few hours everybody gets pissed because these same stupid arguments come up again (honestly, can anybody be mad at Neyer for being hyper-defensive at this point? The poor guy is a genius and takes, as Harry Redknapp would say, dog's abuse). Then there is the regroup and the studying. By 4 pm on Tuesday, Brian Kenny was on whatever-the-name-of-that-terrible-show is on MLB Network saying 'if some analyst is messing up Ackley's head, that is unacceptable and the organization needs to change.'
Take a look at Hosmer, tons of number based articles have been done. Perhaps I've missed it, but the two best breakdowns of Hosmer's struggles have come from Sam Miller and ESPN's top scout-side writer, Keith Freakin Law. A few weeks ago on EW, the Dynamic Duo (Gruesome Twosome?) discussed the Reinhart-Rogoff scandal and decided that it probably won't happen bc there is so much cross-checking done by the community on it seem. Statheads are our own ombudsman. Who the hell is fact checking Harold Reynolds?
Also, I think it is your job to defend BP - you write for this brand and this brand means something, it is your job to defend that something. As for not holding stupid people to account - isn't that what this post is? You saying to all the stupid people who abused Wedge that they are being stupid?
I don't why this issue bugs me so much (take a look at my other comments, I'm not a negative guy) but with this following Colin's piece about Heyman-WAR, I just don't get why there is this urgency to dull the blade. Rany, Joe, Bill, Rob, Tango, MGL, Huckaby, Thorn, Palmer and all the other people I forgot - these guys had to scrap every second of the day to help get stats to where they are now - are we so sure that we don't need to go in two-footed anymore? I still have to watch Mitch Williams and Dan Pleasac every night, yet Sheehan got dumped from the Top 10s.
I think it's really just twitter, god that place is a cesspool - like that garbage dump in Star Wars. It has to be the worst place in the history of human existence.
Life is short/
So you choose your battles/
It's sometimes all you can choose/
Don't let them get away with it/
Don't give them satisfaction/
Fall in but don't fall for it
Sorry this is so long...
Thanks for the piece Ian.
Randolph is absolutely right. If Wedge really does blame sabermetrics for Ackley sucking (which is literally what he said) then his ire is just as misguided as Ackley's plan at the plate, and we are right to point that out publicly.
http://blogs.seattletimes.com/mariners/2013/05/29/wedge-amplifies-on-his-sabermetric-remarks/
Also, I love love love that he seems to think that "hitting" and "getting on base" are two different things. Good lord.
But that doesn't mean you watch a first pitch cookie go right down the pipe because 1-0 is a better hitters' count.
Frankly, (IMHO) a batter going into the box looking to take a walk is too passive to be successful. Willing to take a walk if you don't get good pitches, sure.