Comments on: 60 Not So Deep Minutes

By: ajnrules

ajnrules — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 21:48:36 +0000

You know, reading this blog reminds me how little I know about Bill James and his work. I still think he is the Henry Chadwick of our era and deserves a spot in the Hall, but it seems like I need to read more of the Abstract.

By: Pat

Pat — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 20:19:02 +0000

Really accurate description of these 60 minutes profiles of people. There always is some truth that they make to be the whole truth. My area of expertise is politics, and as is true with any political news item these days, facts are distorted by editorial bias. They did the same injustice to Bill James that they did to former Chess Champion Gary Kasparov in describing his political activities in Russia. They seemed to put a face to an area of thought that actually encompassed wide-varying opinions, not at all completely represented by the man they credit. All in all, I think your observation puts it best in describing 60 minutes these days.

By: Chuck

Chuck — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 19:55:51 +0000

I know something about classical music and conducting. And yes, the Dudamel piece was everything you guessed it might be, and even worse. As was the Bill James piece. The nature of the medium, I guess, except that Bill James has been doing his thing for a very long time now, whereas at least Dudamel is a relatively recent arrival on the conductor scene. So with the James piece 60 Mins. is being not only obvious, but way-behind-the-curve obvious.

By: Creston

Creston — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 18:10:23 +0000

As for the 60 minutes bit on Bill James, I ignored it. It’s extremely rare for 60 minutes to actually provide some useful information, and the idea of its producers being able to shed some information on Bill James and / or Sabermetrics that :

A) I didn’t already know
B) was actually accurately presented
C) was actually interesting

seemed extremely unlikely. It’s good to see that 60 minutes was up to its usual ‘fine’ standards again.

By: Creston

Creston — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 18:00:59 +0000

“Just like I donâ€™t know if pilots actually watch the guy who is trying to guide them into the gate”

Hehe, that part is funny. But there really IS a purpose for these guys. Pilots can’t see the nose of their plane. Nor the wheels. Nor really much of anything.

While a pilot could conceivably get the plane close enough to the gate by “feel” for the whole scenario to work, it’s a bit easier if they have a guy giving them instructions 60 feet in front of the plane that they can actually SEE.

And don’t forget the safety element. The pilots can’t see if there are any obstructions on the ground underneath their plane either.

By: Chris

Chris — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 13:29:33 +0000

*Roy Williams always had a classic Roy Williams-like answer whenever anyone came up to him with the â€œHave you thought of thisâ€ type suggestion. He would say, â€œNo offense, but believe me, weâ€™ve thought of it. Anything you have thought of, weâ€™ve thought of. Itâ€™s our frickinâ€™ job.â€

Isn’t it kind of condescending to assume that you’ve already thought of everything? Isn’t the point of this Bill James pieces that people hadn’t thought about it? For years people were enamored with the basic stats like batting average, without considering that there may be something more, and without listening to the people who suggested a change…

By: EWS

EWS — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 12:48:25 +0000

monkeyhawk had a great point about the abstracts. not only did bill point out the numbers but he explains what they mean and usually with some humor.

two more glaring gaps imo in the piece…

1) gave no context as to what “competitive” meant for beane’s A’s. all he had to say was “at this time the avg payroll was this and teams won this many games while beane’s payroll was this but he won this many games.” done.

2) it still discredited SABR’s by jabbing at the “geeks” and “wonks” whatever a wonk is. and he ended the piece by trying to convince James that “magic” is still more important.

i did agree that Bill came across as very likeable but probably lost some credibility with so many full body shots. i’d have to think Joe Midwest sitting on his couch took one look and said “wtf does this guy know about baseball? look at him!”

to me it was a big swing and a miss. pun intended.

By: Mauichuck

Mauichuck — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 12:05:28 +0000

I learned one thing from the 60 Minutes piece: Bill James is a big tub of goo. He looks exactly like the kid who got picked last in the school yard ball games. Who woulda guessed?

By: Goosemyer

Goosemyer — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 00:35:55 +0000

OK You snuck a new picture in at the top and I never found out where the lake picture is form.
Is that a ballon, or a cow ,…dog?

By: Mike S

Mike S — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 21:14:37 +0000

I wonder if the “introduce him to David Ortiz” line was more a friendly plink than anything else. Francona seems to have embraced a lot of “Jamesian” reasoning in his on-field decisions.

And if the game were on the line, I’d want David Ortiz up there too — mainly because he’s an amazing hitter, clutch or no clutch.