Woody wrote:That doesn't even make any sense

CalvinBall wrote:he said preeminent slugger about 15 times and in doing so sounded like a dope.

Wheels Tupay wrote:Isn't part of Amaro's job to be a "stat head"? No?

TenuredVulture wrote:Statistical analysis is a reliable method for making generalizations. But they aren't automatic. Whether you agree with MattS or not, there are different statistical analyses that lead to different conclusions. Furthmore, like any generalization, there are going to be outliers. Sometimes, by looking at a particular case, the outlier is easily identified. I think Floppy's analysis some pages back presents a case for Howard not based on dumb stuff, but in the way he suggests that Howard is more than simply a collection of statistics but presents some unique characteristics that make him a better bet with this contract than he would be otherwise.

I don't think even sophisticated fans fully appreciate the business reasons behind the deal as well--these are difficult to value from the outside, but the Phillies clearly care a lot about cost stability and the marketability that Howard brings to the table. That is, we care about Howard's value in terms of wins. The Phillies care about Howard's value in terms of revenue.

jeff2sf wrote:

TenuredVulture wrote:Statistical analysis is a reliable method for making generalizations. But they aren't automatic. Whether you agree with MattS or not, there are different statistical analyses that lead to different conclusions. Furthmore, like any generalization, there are going to be outliers. Sometimes, by looking at a particular case, the outlier is easily identified. I think Floppy's analysis some pages back presents a case for Howard not based on dumb stuff, but in the way he suggests that Howard is more than simply a collection of statistics but presents some unique characteristics that make him a better bet with this contract than he would be otherwise.

I don't think even sophisticated fans fully appreciate the business reasons behind the deal as well--these are difficult to value from the outside, but the Phillies clearly care a lot about cost stability and the marketability that Howard brings to the table. That is, we care about Howard's value in terms of wins. The Phillies care about Howard's value in terms of revenue.

The problem with that, similar to what Squire said, is that there isn't much proof that players, beyond what they contribute to wins, have an impact on attendance/marketability (Ichiro might be a true difference maker)

phatj wrote:WheelsFellOff quoting Wheels Tupay may make my brain melt

phatj wrote:WheelsFellOff quoting Wheels Tupay may make my brain melt

Didn't I? wrote:

phatj wrote:WheelsFellOff quoting Wheels Tupay may make my brain melt

Wait till I change my screen name to WheelsOfFortune.

Buzhardt wrote:

Didn't I? wrote:

phatj wrote:WheelsFellOff quoting Wheels Tupay may make my brain melt

Wait till I change my screen name to WheelsOfFortune.

For that matter how about WheelsTupayFellOff?

Jake (NYC)

Your take on BP's take on the Howard contract? It seemed contrarian, at best. At worst, it seemed like the writer came to a conclusion first, then built a case around that conclusion.

Klaw (1:31 PM)

My main objection - the piece was by Matt Swartz, and it's worth your time to read it - was the implication that all inflationary scenarios were equally likely. We have just come out of a high-inflation (salary inflation, that is) period that corresponded with a long economic expansion, one that is unlikely to recur in the near future. Unless you think that 1) players are going to see their share of industry revenues expand or 2) the industry's revenue model will change in a way to allow continued 10% year-over-year revenue growth, that high-inflation scenario seems a lot less likely than 2-5% salary inflation.