But if you don’t believe me, Player X (the anonymous NFL player writing a column for ESPN the Mag) had a recent piece in which he says pretty much the same thing (chemistry is overrated if not mostly imaginary), and it’s something all of us who work for a living intuitively know: if everyone is doing their job and the company is going well, then, hey, going to work’s not so bad. If everyone’s pulling their weight and the company’s circling the drain anyway, not so much fun.

What difference to you does it make if Wag keeps coming back? Or if I keep coming back? Or anybody else?

Because it adds one more name to the mental list I keep of folks whose posts I skip over because they’ve demonstrated they add nothing to the discussion, and I value my free time. I like coming to USSM to read about new things; I don’t appreciate seeing the same well-refuted arguments resurrected over and over again.

If you can’t measure something, you can’t say that it has a “great effect”. Stop it.

You’ve long since passed the point of potential educatability and have moved solidly into pointless conflict-seeking.

And since this site is mostly a trade rumors/speculation site the two go hand in hand.

You have here — as in other topics — absolutely no idea what you’re talking about.

Some things in sports defy accurate measurement.

This is true. If it could be measured, it would be. But since it cannot be measured, how do you quantify it’s value. Simple answer; you can’t.

That’s what most folks don’t understand. When the folks here and other places blow off chemistry, it’s not because it doesn’t exist. It’s because nobody can prove (with numbers) that is has an effect on the game.

What difference to you does it make if Wag keeps coming back? Or if I keep coming back? Or anybody else?

I simply asked why he keeps coming back if our ideas bother him so much. It’s not that I really give a rip that he’s here. I’m just curious why he continues to beat his head against the wall.

Wak and Z certainly seem to think so, but that effect is beyond below actual measure.

Fixed that for you.

What difference to you does it make if Wag keeps coming back? Or if I keep coming back? Or anybody else?

Just wondering.

Wag is right when he insists some things in sport are unquantifiable.

Griffey may or may not have had an effect on last year’s M’s well beyond his crappy numbers at the plate. Wak and Z certainly seem to think so, but that effect is beyond actual measure.

For example…Check out Mike Jacobs ’09 #’s for the Royals, they are very similar to Griffey’s. (His WAR is a bit lower). About the same number of PA’s, both hit 19 hr’s, both played almost all of their games at DH. Jacobs BA was a bit better…and if he had a few more singles fall in and another walk or two their OPB would be nearly identical, too. So give Jacobs those singles and another tater or two…Would the M’s have gone out of their way to sign him? Absolutely not. The M’s are convinced that there is an unmeasurable quality to Jr. that makes them a better team.

I thought Jr. was a stupid signing lasst year….but something changed with the M’s. I’l willing to give him a bit of the credit…and certainly not for being a crappy DH.

Some things in sports defy accurate measurement.

However, I think Wag is way wrong when he discounts WAR which I think is of great value and make great sense.

But that doesn’t mean that Wag is wrong across the board nor does it mean that I should challenge his reasons for hanging around here.

Just thinking,

Keith

I’m not a big believer in the WAR statistic. Not to mention the “players worth evaluator” or whatever its called. They don’t encompass everything. There just another random stat. They mean about as much to me as, “in the bottom of the 4th, with a runner on 2nd, he has a .259 AVG against lefties, but with a runner on 1st he hits .301.” They don’t take in every factor, there ARE some aspects of sports that can’t be measured and do have a great affect on performance.

So Wag, by your own admission, you don’t believe in what we look at on this blog. Why do you keep coming back?