HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > By The Numbers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
By The Numbers Hockey Analytics... the Final Frontier. Explore strange new worlds, to seek out new algorithms, to boldly go where no one has gone before.

Brian Burke is a Dinosaur

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-03-2013, 04:01 PM
  #101
Hipster Doofus
Registered User
 
Hipster Doofus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 6,478
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Man Bear Pig View Post
I might be the biggest baseball stat man around and no, Boston never won with moneyball. Moneyball is using metrics to exploit overlooked statistics. The only reason Beane used this strategy was because he didn't have a choice. Boston attempted this strategy after Beane had success in Oakland and abandoned it after a few years and began going on spending sprees.
Biggest stat man around where? Certainly not here.

Moneyball is a tittle of a book used to describe the use of sabremetrics to compete against teams with more spending money. Sabremetrics is the application of statistical thought and analysis to baseball. Billy Beane was teh first to use it becaus ehe had no choice, sure. But he still uses it. Its just now that everyone uses OBP as teh basis of offensive construction, he's begun to look at other measurements.

Red Sox took Beane's work and gave it a payroll. Its still the application of statistics. Just because it isn't termed moneyball doenst mean its not tied into Moneyball as it is colloquially known as.

Hipster Doofus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2013, 04:53 PM
  #102
Master_Of_Districts
Registered User
 
Master_Of_Districts's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Black Ruthenia
Country: Belarus
Posts: 1,745
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bomber0104 View Post
+1

Hockey isn't a sport that can be properly quantified. Hockey is about roles, spontaneity, and teamwork.

The best statistics are the ones you develop cognitively when you are watching a game unfold.
"Develop cognitively when you are watching a game unfold"?

Jesus Christ.

Master_Of_Districts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2013, 05:22 PM
  #103
Boba Fettuccine
Pastafarian
 
Boba Fettuccine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Location,Location
Posts: 29,104
vCash: 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Quincy View Post
Yes it's been pointed out multiple times..... incorrectly:

http://content.usatoday.com/sportsda...ries/team/2004

Boston had the 2nd highest payroll in MLB that year. They spent $44 million more (1.5x as much) as the team they played in the World Series.

I don't doubt at all that the Red Sox used advanced statistics as a strategy that year, but when you spend 20m on Manny, 17m on Pedro, (both of whom were there before Bill James or Theo) 12m on Schilling, 8m on Damon (also there before James and Theo) and so on, it's not really a "moneyball team".

Especially since so many of the key players on that team were assembled BEFORE the "moneyball" front office came aboard AND since one of the most interesting things about that team was that the year before they tried to go with the advanced stats concept (touted by Bill James, and which I agree with) of not really using a "Closer" (as the role has become) and how that strategy failed miserably, and that for the 2004 team they threw away that strategy (despite it being part of the supposed advanced stats philosophy.

Also, it's important to note that several of the 2004 team were acquired because they were too expensive for their former teams: Manny, Damon, Pedro, etc.

So the question is, did this team win the title because they used advanced stats to assemble a collection of players that the "eye" wouldn't have? Or were they a group, largely collected by the previous regime, who were big stars that ANY criteria would have said were good players?
Look at Ortiz, Millar, and the other players that Theo acquired.....

Here is a link to Theo's free agent signings

The Red Sox won their first world series on 10/27/04. Before they won, the most Epstein spent on a free agent was 3 Mil a year

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/...hl=en_US#gid=1

Boba Fettuccine is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2013, 09:10 PM
  #104
Ewan McGregor
Registered User
 
Ewan McGregor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 3,200
vCash: 1053
Moneyball. It helps when you're in a league with no salary cap.

Ewan McGregor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-04-2013, 02:58 AM
  #105
No Team Needed
Registered User
 
No Team Needed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: essex
Posts: 3,887
vCash: 500
Spending money does not mean you're considering sabremetrics. Is this so hard to understand or comprehend?

No Team Needed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-04-2013, 03:29 AM
  #106
Man Bear Pig
Registered User
 
Man Bear Pig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Earth
Posts: 11,026
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hipster Doofus View Post
Biggest stat man around where? Certainly not here.

Moneyball is a tittle of a book used to describe the use of sabremetrics to compete against teams with more spending money. Sabremetrics is the application of statistical thought and analysis to baseball. Billy Beane was teh first to use it becaus ehe had no choice, sure. But he still uses it. Its just now that everyone uses OBP as teh basis of offensive construction, he's begun to look at other measurements.

Red Sox took Beane's work and gave it a payroll. Its still the application of statistics. Just because it isn't termed moneyball doenst mean its not tied into Moneyball as it is colloquially known as.
Certainly not here, okay pal, I'd love to debate baseball with you. Moneyball is the title of the book, it's also the term used to describe the market inefficiencies. If you choose to use another term, that's great. Boston used high OBP guys like Youkilis and Ortiz, while Beane was "buying" runs and wins and using far more advanced statistics that others weren't because of the old school mindset. All GM's are and were aware of advanced statistics but back then chose to ignore them and some still do. It's all about market inefficiency. Boston drafted and picked up high OBP players but without the payroll they had, no title. The payroll was the reason they won before anything. Completely different approach from Bean's.

Man Bear Pig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-04-2013, 03:36 AM
  #107
Man Bear Pig
Registered User
 
Man Bear Pig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Earth
Posts: 11,026
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dingo View Post
Look at Ortiz, Millar, and the other players that Theo acquired.....

Here is a link to Theo's free agent signings

The Red Sox won their first world series on 10/27/04. Before they won, the most Epstein spent on a free agent was 3 Mil a year

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/...hl=en_US#gid=1
Manny Ramirez $20,500,000
Pedro Martinez 17,500,000
Curt Schilling 12,000,000
Nomar Garciaparra 11,500,000
Johnny Damon 8,000,000
Keith Foulke 7,000,000
Jason Varitek 6,700,000
Trot Nixon 6,600,000
Nuff' said

Man Bear Pig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-04-2013, 06:10 AM
  #108
Yossarian54
Registered User
 
Yossarian54's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Perth, WA
Country: Australia
Posts: 1,384
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NobodyBeatsTheWiz View Post
Do people realize that 'moneyball' doesn't mean winning without spending? It means using advanced statistical analysis to find players that excel in traditionally (or currently) undervalued areas.
Judging by the contents of this thread, apparently not. Your point in parenthesis perhaps being most pertinent to the discussion at hand.

Yossarian54 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-04-2013, 07:10 AM
  #109
Joe Canadian
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: St. John's, NL, CAN
Country: Canada
Posts: 162
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Man Bear Pig View Post
Nuff' said
No. There's a lot more to be said about the 2004 Red Sox than that list of high payed players, especially when Nomar only played 38 games for the Red Sox that year before being traded to the Cubs. And that Nixon only played 48 regular season games, meanwhile a player like Bellhorn was a big contributer and getting payed $490,000. You're simplifying their approach that year to just "spending money", which categorically isn't true. You've decided to define Moneyball as just the exploitation of market inefficiencies, that's cool. I tend to think the book and that term describe something bigger than that, but if you want to define it like that cool.

The problem lies with how Burke was using the term. It appears, given the context of the other quotes, that he was using it as a stand-in for Sabremetrics. And even if you personally discount the 2004 Red Sox as merely a big spending team, you can't ignore how Sabremetrics has influenced every MLB franchise since Beane popularized it. That's the point. Teams do win using that approach, and it's used so much now that the market inefficiencies Beane explotited in the early years are gone because everyone else has realized how valuable those players are. Burke wasn't using Moneyball to describe exploiting market inefficiencies, he was using it to describe Sabremetrics... and clearly he is wrong.

Joe Canadian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-04-2013, 07:34 AM
  #110
achtungbaby
Registered User
 
achtungbaby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,543
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OccupySheen View Post
You are proving my point, moneyball was about taking advantage of under-valued skills. the red sox simply had big name players all over their team, very few homegrown. The rays have taken it to the next level, but the difference between baseball and hockey, is the rays can get compensatory picks for letting guys walk. though they also have no problem making trades. If the NHL had a similar pick system things would be alot different
You're confusing Sabremetrics principals with why Billy Beane was using them. Beane loved a guy like Youkillis and tried to acquire him but wasn't able to. When Kevin became a free agent, Oakland couldn't afford him while Boston was able to pay whatever he wanted to keep him. You don't think that if Beane had the money he would still want Youkillis?

Moneyball was just the name of the book guys, Sabremetrics was a new way of using advanced stats to look at players in a different way. Using advanced stats on a rich team just gave them even more of an advantage.

achtungbaby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-04-2013, 08:03 AM
  #111
Bender
TheHockeyProspector
 
Bender's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,865
vCash: 50
Cool, what kind? Stegasaurus? T-Rex?

Bender is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-04-2013, 08:38 AM
  #112
achtungbaby
Registered User
 
achtungbaby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,543
vCash: 500
"Brian Burke’s daughter Katie Burke, who has worked as a conference organizer and introduced her father’s panel, offered a window into the ex-Leaf GM’s post-firing disposition: “If you want some unsolicited advice, don’t sign your dad up for a panel shortly after he gets fired. It doesn’t work in your favour.”"

I guess even Burkes daughter was embarrassed by his performance at the conference and who wouldn't be? He basically went there and spat on advanced stats and didn't attend any of the other workshops except for the one where he was speaking. Hardly the sign of an open mind.

achtungbaby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-04-2013, 09:12 AM
  #113
bleedgreen
Moderator
 
bleedgreen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: colorado
Posts: 11,275
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by achtungbaby View Post
"Brian Burke’s daughter Katie Burke, who has worked as a conference organizer and introduced her father’s panel, offered a window into the ex-Leaf GM’s post-firing disposition: “If you want some unsolicited advice, don’t sign your dad up for a panel shortly after he gets fired. It doesn’t work in your favour.”"

I guess even Burkes daughter was embarrassed by his performance at the conference and who wouldn't be? He basically went there and spat on advanced stats and didn't attend any of the other workshops except for the one where he was speaking. Hardly the sign of an open mind.
Sounds like he's grumpy. That's about it. Who's idea was it to send a non stats guy to a stats conference in the first place? She probably was just trying to get him out of the house, didn't realize how much he's against the basic concepts here. Did she ask how he felt about stats first? Maybe she told him not to attend any more after the first one?

I totally agree with him. He's no dinosaur. He's gotten where he is by believing in himself and how he thinks of hockey. Why would he need to "open" his mind?

bleedgreen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-04-2013, 09:16 AM
  #114
Hipster Doofus
Registered User
 
Hipster Doofus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 6,478
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bleedgreen View Post
I totally agree with him. He's no dinosaur.



Perhaps hes a pterodactyl but his opinions are prehistoric

Hipster Doofus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-04-2013, 09:29 AM
  #115
achtungbaby
Registered User
 
achtungbaby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,543
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bleedgreen View Post
Sounds like he's grumpy. That's about it. Who's idea was it to send a non stats guy to a stats conference in the first place? She probably was just trying to get him out of the house, didn't realize how much he's against the basic concepts here. Did she ask how he felt about stats first? Maybe she told him not to attend any more after the first one?

I totally agree with him. He's no dinosaur. He's gotten where he is by believing in himself and how he thinks of hockey. Why would he need to "open" his mind?
Because we never stop learning? We should be able to entertain a thought even if we don't agree with it unless one assumes they already know everything.

As for your questions about Katie Burke, you'll have to take them up with her. I'm sure you can find an email link somewhere but blaming her doesn't change anything.

achtungbaby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-04-2013, 10:14 AM
  #116
Mathletic
Registered User
 
Mathletic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: St-Augustin, Québec
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,578
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bleedgreen View Post
Sounds like he's grumpy. That's about it. Who's idea was it to send a non stats guy to a stats conference in the first place? She probably was just trying to get him out of the house, didn't realize how much he's against the basic concepts here. Did she ask how he felt about stats first? Maybe she told him not to attend any more after the first one?

I totally agree with him. He's no dinosaur. He's gotten where he is by believing in himself and how he thinks of hockey. Why would he need to "open" his mind?
He's been there for at least the last couple years, so yes they know exactly what he's about. From what I remember, he was announced to be at the conference before he was even fired. That said, he puts on a good show. I may not agree with Burke on a lot of subjects but he's his own character and he put on good shows everytime he's been there.

As for Katie Burke, she once was a moderator for a panel on hockey analytics at the conference. She came up with a delicious quote, it went something like this "In hockey, scouts will always know best, there's so much intangible from height and weight..."

Mathletic is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-04-2013, 06:59 PM
  #117
WarriorOfGandhi
Was saying Boo-urns
 
WarriorOfGandhi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Country: Scotland
Posts: 14,954
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bender View Post
Cool, what kind? Stegasaurus? T-Rex?
Truculenceratops

WarriorOfGandhi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-04-2013, 09:52 PM
  #118
JETZZZ
Registered User
 
JETZZZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Winnipeg Manitoba
Country: Canada
Posts: 277
vCash: 500
Barney is a dinosaur...from our imagination...i forget the rest but boy is Burke terrible

JETZZZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-04-2013, 11:57 PM
  #119
jughead42*
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Windsor
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,971
vCash: 500
It's possible that the Red Sox used some nerd formula to win a championship I guess, but it is far more likely that they won because they had guys who had the heart to get it done when the games were on the line. How do you give any credit to moneyball when the team came back from a 3 nothing deficit to the best team in baseball? No statistic will ever capture accurately a players heart, and it's the most important statistic when it comes to winning. If player A and B both fit the exact same statistical model, there's still nothing taking into account which of the two is more likely to play on a broken leg in an important game, or which one is going to fold like a tent under the pressure. Nerds have always wanted to be a part of sports and feel like they can use math and formulas to understand what these guys do, but at the end of the day statistics and therefor moneyball strategies will only ever provide a small piece of the puzzle.

jughead42* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-05-2013, 04:29 AM
  #120
The Vengabus
Registered User
 
The Vengabus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 2,680
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jughead42 View Post
It's possible that the Red Sox used some nerd formula to win a championship I guess, but it is far more likely that they won because they had guys who had the heart to get it done when the games were on the line. How do you give any credit to moneyball when the team came back from a 3 nothing deficit to the best team in baseball? No statistic will ever capture accurately a players heart, and it's the most important statistic when it comes to winning. If player A and B both fit the exact same statistical model, there's still nothing taking into account which of the two is more likely to play on a broken leg in an important game, or which one is going to fold like a tent under the pressure. Nerds have always wanted to be a part of sports and feel like they can use math and formulas to understand what these guys do, but at the end of the day statistics and therefor moneyball strategies will only ever provide a small piece of the puzzle.

The Vengabus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-05-2013, 10:05 AM
  #121
Mathletic
Registered User
 
Mathletic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: St-Augustin, Québec
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,578
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jughead42 View Post
It's possible that the Red Sox used some nerd formula to win a championship I guess, but it is far more likely that they won because they had guys who had the heart to get it done when the games were on the line. How do you give any credit to moneyball when the team came back from a 3 nothing deficit to the best team in baseball? No statistic will ever capture accurately a players heart, and it's the most important statistic when it comes to winning. If player A and B both fit the exact same statistical model, there's still nothing taking into account which of the two is more likely to play on a broken leg in an important game, or which one is going to fold like a tent under the pressure. Nerds have always wanted to be a part of sports and feel like they can use math and formulas to understand what these guys do, but at the end of the day statistics and therefor moneyball strategies will only ever provide a small piece of the puzzle.
Which is the route the Rockies took. All good christians with heart. No more troublemakers with swag and stats on their side. It's not like it's getting them anywhere.

I still think people put way too much stock in heart and whatnot. Sure it's important, but you have to remember that those guys are pro athletes. Pro sports is extremely competitive. You don't get there just with the "talents" you received at birth. Most of them worked extremely hard to get there.

Just recently they ran a video on Jonathan Drouin on TSN. Kid played hockey 8 hours a day. Same for Crosby. Outside of very few exceptions, like T-Mac and a couple others, most guys have played their butts off all their life. So, the heart thing pretty much cancels off at the pro level. Sure some people will play that thing to get ratings and get on people's back but IMO, it's way overblown.


Last edited by Mathletic: 03-05-2013 at 10:13 AM.
Mathletic is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-05-2013, 10:22 AM
  #122
bleedgreen
Moderator
 
bleedgreen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: colorado
Posts: 11,275
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by achtungbaby View Post
Because we never stop learning? We should be able to entertain a thought even if we don't agree with it unless one assumes they already know everything.

As for your questions about Katie Burke, you'll have to take them up with her. I'm sure you can find an email link somewhere but blaming her doesn't change anything.
Isn't Burke a bit of an innovator himself? He has his own methods for building teams that not everyone agrees with, and while it never worked in TO has done well for him overall, he's the architect behind a great Olympic team as well. Doesn't seem to be the guy to accuse of being a dinosaur, what with his own syste. I don't blame his daughter, the poster I responded too used his daughters quote as "proof" even she is ashamed. I doubt she is ashamed.

A lot of hurt feelings around here. Is it ok to disagree with math? Is it ok to have a divergent opinion? Burke has earned his right to his opinion, and his style of thinking has carried him far in hockey. Obviously that won't get him much from this crowd.

bleedgreen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-05-2013, 10:40 AM
  #123
The Legend
Stamkos in 2016
 
The Legend's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,451
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tml145 View Post
if those are your examples, every team wins with moneyball
Contrary to (completely erroneous) popular belief, "moneyball" is not a synonymous term for "relying on analytics". Scott Cullen (of TSN) does a far better job of explaining why Burke (and many others) are completely off-base:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott Cullen
My Twitter feed was full of people jumping on Burke's stance on Moneyball, but there also seems to be some misinterpretation of Moneyball as a stats-only approach, rather than a way to find under-valued assets. It just so happened that under-valued statistics, most notably on-base percentage, were what the Oakland A's used to gain their edge. The approach, however, doesn't only require stats. If fat players were being undervalued, the new market-inefficiency relative to their overall production (no matter the sport), it would be a "Moneyball" approach to sign fat players to contracts that provided value

The Legend is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-05-2013, 10:54 AM
  #124
The Legend
Stamkos in 2016
 
The Legend's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,451
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reign Nateo View Post
Red Sox are not an example of Moneyball. Yes, Epstein used a similar approach at times, but he had a huge payroll to work with. Neither are the Mavericks. Burke is right a lot here. Stats are pretty useless in hockey.
....

Quote:
Originally Posted by TSN ARTICLE
Cuban has an interesting view because he's so involved as an owner. He talked, at times, about how organizational culture can lead to acceptance of advanced stats, but it certainly helps when, in the Dallas Mavericks' case, it's the team owner that is on board with using analytics to gain an edge. Cuban said that they were using advanced stats to evaluate NBA players when he took over the Mavericks in 2000.

The Legend is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-05-2013, 10:56 AM
  #125
The Legend
Stamkos in 2016
 
The Legend's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,451
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tml145 View Post
if advanced statistics are that be all and end all

then they should win every year
Just to get this straight: Your argument is the right process should yield favourable results 100% of the time?

The Legend is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:40 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2015 All Rights Reserved.