Comments on: What is it Good For? (Absolutely Nuthin’)

By: Shaun P.

Shaun P. — Wed, 08 Sep 2010 15:32:49 +0000

[3] “On the one hand, it’s irritating when writers trumpet their ignorance as if it were some kind of virtue.”

Alas that many besides baseball writers in our society today do so.

By: rbj

rbj — Wed, 08 Sep 2010 15:16:53 +0000

Is that George Steinbrenner and Jerry Garcia?

By: RIYank

RIYank — Wed, 08 Sep 2010 14:58:21 +0000

My favorite is this:

Statistics zealots apparently love to deal with mythical or hypothetical players. The problem for those of us who prefer dealing with reality and actual human beings is we can’t buy into the idea of using mathematical formulas instead of real players.

Uh huh. So, don’t ever tell Murray about an average. The average Major League pitcher doesn’t exist, after all. He’s mythical! He’s hypothetical! He lives in his mother’s basement!

On the one hand, it’s irritating when writers trumpet their ignorance as if it were some kind of virtue. On the other hand, it’s entertaining to make fun of them.

By: Shaun P.

Shaun P. — Wed, 08 Sep 2010 13:45:16 +0000

I also recall a scathing item he wrote in the Times about BP and VORP and “stat mongers”, which Nate Silver answered quite amicably via open letter.

How about a new definition for irony: Murray Chass is no longer employed by the Times, but Nate Silver is.

By: Shaun P.

Shaun P. — Wed, 08 Sep 2010 13:40:03 +0000

Its been sad to see Chass descend into bitter and arrogant irrelevance with his foolhardy repugnance for advanced baseball analysis. As a writer and reporter, he had some truly great stuff on the labor battles in MLB. That’s what he should be remembered for. It won’t be.

Like Clemens, however, he seems incapable of realizing how much damage he does to himself by not keeping his mouth shut. His campaign to be remembered as the loudest and shrillest anti-analysis Don Quixote is just about won. I hope he enjoys his booby prize.