Hawk Harrelson Voices Opinion on Sabermetrics on MLB Now
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 29 ก.ย. 2024
- White Sox announcer Ken "Hawk" Harrelson voices what he thinks about sabermetrics and where the game is today. "LIKE us on Facebook, follow us on Twitter @MLBNetwork and check out MLBNetwork.com for more content.
Watch MLB Now live weekdays at 4pm. Old School vs. New School, see Harold Reynolds and Brian Kenny debate daily news in the MLB.
All about that T-Dub'ya T-Dub'ya
Exactly about the t-Dubya T-Dubya!!! Can I get a t shirt that says that??? I need some extra motivation myself as in addition to being a Baseball fan and a fan of the Chicago White Sox, I go to a MMA class which is more like Grappling and Jiu-Jitsu on Tuesdays and Thursdays from 6:30 to 7:30 not too far from where I live in Streamwood, Illinois as I have just started and have attended only 2 classes so far and at 173 pounds, I am not only the least experienced person in the group, I am the lightest person in weight as there is also a 180 pounder, 2 200 pounders, 1 who weighs 217, another who is 6 foot 4 and 225, and one who is 230!!! I need a TWTW t shirt!!!
bamabum123456789 the will to win baby!
Best clip around. Love you Hawk. Grew up listening to you. Was awesome
"Young whippersnapper, I'm using his vernacular." That's a great quick shot at Hawk. The fact is baseball is getting a little too technical and I think players suffer from it especially hitters. I agree with the sentiment that hitters get too into the computers of their opposing pitchers and that plethora of information can lead to them forgetting how to hit and be a baseball player. For the players they need to simplify their approach as possible. Sabermetrics can benefit the front office guys.
Bryan always has to be right and have the last word
K Gabbard In this case, he is. Hawk is an old fool who is in his right place out to pasture.
I hate the Sox but love Hawk. Old school. Bad ass.
Hawk was right.
Yes he was. I didn’t think so at the time but with how the game has been boiled down to home runs and 100mph pitchers he definitely predicted the future.
Okay Hawk, you did not have a better year in 1969 than you did in 1968.
First of all it was .230, 30 HR, and 92 RBI, it was .222, 27, and 84.
Second your numbers got worse when everyone else got better numbers offensively.
1968: .275/.356/.518 with a league average of .230/.297/.339
1969: .222/.341/.418, league average .246/.321/.369
The mound changed in 1969 so that's why offense went up that year. Saying he had a better year in 69 is dumb.
Finally, no Hawk you did not almost win the triple crown. Being 9 home runs and 26 points in batting average short, does not count as "almost winning the triple crown" in my book.
+jannecechmanek He did come close to winning the triple crown. Hawk got hemorrhoids in the final month and a half of the season. He had hit .297, 31 homers, and 99 rbi through august 15th. after he got the hemorrhoids he hit .219, 4 homers and 10 rbi the rest of the way. So yes, he did come close the the triple crown.
***** Fair enough.
+Pc Retro no.... that doesn't make you close. that puts you farther away from the triple crown. 1 home run and an RBI or two and a couple of points in batting average would be an almost.
+CGonzales033 But he was only a few homers away, and a few BA points away before he got hemorrhoids. He still lead the league in RBI.
***** then that means he led the league in one category. the team dependent one. while his other numbers regressed.
Harrelson should've stuck to calling Putt Putt matches.
all this sambermetrics shit is bullshit , if you can hit YOU CAN HIT , if you can pitch then you can PITCH
@Fries Jack Morris got elected by the Veterans' Committee...though he probably didn't deserve it.
I'm not a White Sox fan, but I love Ken's work.
Just a f--ing badass.
It seems like 50% of baseball fans love him and 50% hate him, which is the sign of an awesome guy.
+Michael G In baseball forums I've seen, he's pretty much loathed.
There are people who love Rex Hudler who says some of the dumbest things you have ever heard a broadcaster say.
I couldn't agree more. I listened to Rex when he did Angels games from time to time on AM radio because I live in L.A. Absolutely god awful-- maybe the worst.
Michael G
He called the moon a planet one time.
He said "Game winning homo."
Talked about taking possession of a little girl into his family because a kid had a "Trade my sister for an autographed baseball" sign, and of course it was super creepy and took it way to far.
I love his work also Michael G and I am a White Sox fan!!! But as you said, in one of my many Facebook groups which I am a part of on Facebook, Chicago White Sox Pride and Passion, more than half of the White Sox fans in that group hate the Hawk!!!I That rerminded me of a poll in the 1970s here in the Chicago area which was conducted by the Chicago Sun-Times!!! The Announcer who was voted the favorite Announcer of all of the Chicago Announcers??? Harry Caray!!! The Announcer who was voted the least favorite Announcer??? Harry Caray!!!
"but will the percentages tell you what is going to happen at that exact moment?"
Is Harold trying to imply that his scout's eye allows him to predict every outcome in a baseball game before it happens?
No, but to make every decision by simply going off a set of the most basic, nuance-less numbers based on a zillion irrelevant circumstances that don't take into account a zillion things going on at that exact moment with all of the individual players involved and the environment around them is absurd.
@@e2go so what would you base your decision on if you don’t use sabermetrics?
@@callanboyle9318 Knowing your players. It's like football. Current metrics say you have a 50% chance of converting a two point conversion. Therefore, the probability card says down by two scores go for two twice. Thought being if you get it the first time you kick the one point the second, win by one point, if you fail the first time you will convert the second, cause 50%, therefore tie. If you know anything about football that is a stupid statement. Two point plays spend months in development and exploit key match ups, there are a lot of times where they are sure things, some 75%, some doomed to fail. It's the coaches job to assess what's going on with the players, past play calls, and the opposition to determine a working metrics. To return to baseball, if you have a guy at the plate who is committed to bunting in practice and talented, plays hard every play all season, and is highly committed and motivated to winning in the current game, you as a manager can determine that you have a higher than average chance of converting the sac bunt, and you estimate that chance to be higher than the batting average of the player against current pitching then you should bunt. That was Harold's point.
@@davidmendenhall4090 got that right
Its not about prediction, it’s about the fact that you need to take into context when making the decisions by looking at what’s literally happening in front of you.
I'm a numbers guy, and have read the MacMillan "Baseball Encyclopedia" & Bill James' "Win Shares" books many times. I believe sabermetrics can assist in evaluating a player's past performance. It can give an indication of future performance, but only an indication. A lot can change from year to year with a player, causing the trend to be wrong (e.g. a pitcher learning/mastering a new pitch). It is a tool, and should be one of several tools in evaluating a player or a strategy. Brian Kenny is letting the tail wag the dog.
YOU CAAAAAAAAAAN PUT IT ON THE BOAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARD...
YEAH!
The performance is dubya
never gets old lol
Hawk being against sabermetrics is best thing to ever happen to sabermetrics
I guarantee you Mickey Mantle would be against it too! I can just see The Mick, and Teddy Ballgame rolling their eyes and saying, "This stuff is bullshit." Just give me a bat and I'll show you! LOL!! If your a real baseball fan do you really need to know some new fangled arithmetic to know what Mantle, Mays, and Koufax would do for you on the field?
Some managers over thing situations too much information can be a waste of time and cause bad outcomes.
Hawk wants you.....for the church of TWTW!! LOL
Sabermetrics does not factor in one very important aspect of baseball. Momentum. Statistics reflect what a player DID, not what a player is about to do. Part of managing baseball has to be done with the eyes and not with numbers, some situations are dictated from momentum and instinct, not form percentages. Statistics say the 2012 San Francisco Giants had no business winning the NLDS & NLCS, yet the momentum they had put so much pressure on their opponents that they won the whole damn thing.
The Hawk. "I boxed in the ring and in the street.". He's so into himself.
+Bill Browne But he's not full of shit, that's why he deserves some respect
+Waynez Gamez he's a disgrace to broadcasting. the pistons announcer isn't even half as biased as this guy and I can't stand blaha. hawk gets so butthurt on live tv, i would be embarrased if I was a CHW fan.
Being biased is literally his job.
El Cuñado that’s his job, why do you think all 30 teams has their own set of commentators
@@elcunado2926 that’s literally his job. i’ve been listening to jerry remmy (he’s not on as much anymore) on the sox games for years now nd i would expect him to be bias for the team he announced for years lol. they lowk apart of the team to us viewers lol
Hawk is a homer but thats what true Sox fans like about him. The Cubs will need Len Casper to be that way by the end of the season because he and Ricketts will be the only fans pulling for them. People are jumping the Cubs ship like it was the Titanic.
Talking to baseball traditionalists is like banging your head against the wall.
talking to you dumb shits that believe all this is like talking to a turd
i get an odd thrill watching harold not be able to get a word in
Long live Hawk Harrelson. Dude is fucking awesome.
The fight between traditional analysis and Sabermetrics is overblown. No one who professionally studies advanced stats would tell you that they have all the answers. They would tell you that what they do is not intended to replace old-school scouting or player evaluation, it is meant as a supplement.
If you are truly 'against sabermetrics', then you are basically against the idea that we can test our claims about reality with facts. But most people aren't against that idea, they are reacting to people who use advanced stats to make absolute claims where there are none. Statistics give probabilities, nothing more. Anyone who tells you that an advanced stat gives you an answer about anything is wrong. The flip-side of that is that anyone who says you can't test a claim with research is also completely wrong. If everybody kept these two things in mind, there wouldn't need to be a fight.
Here's a great article from a SABR-slanted site on why stats are important. It's an easy read.
www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2014/4/24/5635638/chicago-white-sox-ken-harrelson-baseball-statistics-twtw-the-will-to-win
Jeremiah Prescott. Thank you. These new statistical models provide some very interesting information and are way more predictive of future production than traditional stats. BUT you can't use them to change history. A baseball game is played on a particular day in a particular place. And when the results are in, they are in. Hawk hit .275 and had an OBP of .356 in 1968. Period. Saying that this translates into an OBP of over .450 at Coors Field in some season a generation and a half later -- Who cares? That never happened. And even this is an extrapolation from statistical models that anyone with a degree in Statistics would tell you comes with any number of limitations and caveats. The problem with those wedded to sabermetrics is that they declare the validity of their comparisons without regard to those limitations and caveats. And please don't get me started on pitcher's wins. Here you have two ex-players saying that the pitcher's W stat, at least as to starting pitchers, is significant. And you got some non-ball player in the studio telling them they're wrong. In the theoretical realm, sabermetric advocates are correct about the W stat. But, practically speaking, in a baseball world where the reality is that the games are played and the results are thereafter immutable, a starter who has earned a W has earned a W for the team. And that's the only thing that gets counted in the standings.
All of the things hawk mentioned can be measured statistically all you have to do is decide to measure it and then quantify it. Wins above replacement is a wonderful example of this. Hawk should read more and take a stats class and stop talking about golf during games. He is the only baseball announcer who talks more about golf than baseball during games.
d griff lol trust me no I am not the only one that has noticed the crazy made up stats of hawk. But u must be a good 7th 8th and 9th inning hitter also? Haha
N.J. Wæïne You did not strengthen ur point about hawk at all. All u r saying is that he is a has been.
War is a fake stat
There's no doubt that sabermetrics are a valuable addition to baseball. However, sometimes the analysis is taken too far and what you end up with are a bunch of geeks trying to make themselves seem important in the sporting world.
How so?
Imagine getting this upset over "geeks"
"sabermatrix"
Hawk may very well be the Mike Ditka of baseball.
It's hilarious that how poorly these quotes have aged
He's wrong. Both in that Sabermetrics ignores pitching and defense and in that clutch hitting is something that actually exists. Sabermetrics is less about telling teams how to win and more about telling teams how to properly evaluate players so that they can use them more efficiently.
You do realize you're striking down your own argument, right? Yes, there are dozens of factors that play into any given situation...which is precisely why sabermetrics exists. Relying on the numbers is the ONLY thing that can give you your best odds of success; there's no way managers can compile the odds given all those factors. Humans are really bad at probabilities, and having the help of situational metrics has proven over and over to do a better job of predicting success than humans can.
Hawk shreds Brian Kenny.
I love Brian Kenny
Hawk could be a nut at times but he was 100% right at 4:16 when he said every game is different. You can't just copy and paste these metrics from one game to another. Every game has its own unique flow with different ups and downs. The decisions should be made based on what that game dictates the best move is at that exact point in time, not what a computerized chart suggests (not every single time at least).
I agree with hawk
Don't read the comments.... don't read the comments. AHHHHHH I knew I shouldn't have read the comments!!!!
There is a massive age gap between people who think sabermetrics are garbage, and the people who think it's the best way to view the game, from a GM/Manager perspective. The people who think it's trash tend to be about 20 years older than the people who subscribe to it.
That should tell you something about the direction baseball is heading.
And frankly, I couldn't be happier.
CanadaMMA David Cone is the only kind of old guy, that likes them
I'm one of the few middle grounders. I actually agree that there are parts of a team (leadership, clubhouse attitude, coachability, etc) that haven't been made into numbers, which should be taken into accounts. But sabermetrics are better stats than a lot of outdated stats (pitchers wins, RBIs, etc). I think the moral of the story here is that you need to look at everything holistically. Look at both sabermetrics, as well as what colleagues (baseball experts) think of him. Using both is the best way to go, in my opinion.
@@protoman1365 i totally agree.
Go Hawk it's plan & simple pitching defense fundamentals & clutch hitting
#TWTW Hawk is right, paralysis by analysis.
TWTW>Everything
Hawk at times drives everyone me included nuts but he's right old school baseball pitching defense fundamentals & clutch hitting win games this moneyball stuff overrated
I'd say what wins games is scoring more runs than the other team.
@@matthewmorgan4765 I don’t disagree but they’ve gotten out of control sign WAR, Launch Angle & other things.
@@patrickgray5633 wow, did you ever think you'd be called back to this comment 8 years after making it?
Entertainment doesn't win ball games. Getting on base does. Puig swings at everything under the sun and that is going to catch up with him. One player who has been sucessful without walking a lot does not prove that walks are meaningless. You'll find a strong correlation between the best hitters in the game (as measured by wRC+) and the ones with the highest walk rates.
If your argument is that advanced metrics cannot predict the future and should therefore take a back seat to managers "eyeballing" the game, your implied suggestion is that managers can predict the future. Since baseball currently has a dearth of prophets, you're more likely suggesting that managers' sense of the game over a smaller sample space (i.e. SF's playoff run) is more accurate than the metrics and should be more highly valued. In that case, you and Hawk are both just wrong.
2nd viewing of this video over a year. Makes me recall a Casey Stengel comment I read years ago. He was talking about his great Yankee squad at the time, and to emphasize their mindset, he called 2nd baseman, Joe Gordon, over and asked, "What's your batting average?" Response: "Don't know." "What's your fielding average?" Response: "Don't know," and Gordon runs back to practice.
I guess this was the 1940's.
Point is, they were focused on what was happening on the field, on winning - that "TWTW" Harrelson was talking about. I've never liked the Yankees, but I've always admired the success of the organization.
I didn't like Harrelson when he played: he seemed like a cheap version of Roger Maris - like Davey Johnson or Sammy Sosa - a good ballplayer who caught lightning in a bottle and exploded as a performer. I look at Harrelson differently now, partly because of sabermetrics. I respect that he played and contributed what he did, and I respect his continuing contribution as a broadcaster and baseball man.
And I respect his position. My love for Baseball morphed from my experiences in Little League to board games to history and numbers. As much as I love the numbers, I know they cannot drive the game - they must not. Most of us who love the numbers have never faced a 90-mph fastball.
I've rambled. Sabermetrics and advanced analytics are part of the game today and there's no going back. But this conflict between jocks and nerds needs to end. Anyone who watched this video loves the game and to me, that's what we need to remember, and work our way out of this power struggle that exists. The game on the field and the data it generates can co-exist peacefully if we keep things in proportion and perspective.
That's an incredibly small sample size to use to defend such a statement. That's really the problem with all these claims about "clutch hitting". When the samples are large enough everything balances out and clutch doesn't exist. Even Allen Craig is eventually going to regress on his ridiculous numbers with RISP. He doesn't have a special skill, he's just getting lucky.
No. It's not. Moneyball is about more than that. It's about taking advantage of what the market is ignoring and then exploiting it in a favourable way.
TW TW ....period
anyone who is for sabermetrics is not good for baseball and knows little about the sport. simple as that
Interesting looking back on this after the 2020 World Series, and the Rays use of sabermetrics cost them at winning a World Series.
To be fair, it gifted them Arozarena.
They dodgers used sabermetrics too don’t worry
Actually sabermetrics told them to leave Snell in against Betts. Cash just took a blanket sabermetric statement which isn’t how sabermetrics is supposed to be used instead of actually looking at the situation and numbers which told him to leave Snell in
Sabermetrics told rays to *Leave Snell IN*
I love Hawk. You don't get a lot of oldschool baseball in the game today. Stop hating and appreciate the way the game used to be
Leadership is something that guys like Hawk only apply in hindsight anyways. Team goes 62-100 and they say "Theres no leadership!" and if a team goes 100-62 then they say "Look at the veteran leadership!".
Love how opposite their views are though I don’t think that Hawk is so 100% against measuring stuff im sure he gets the point… kenny is such a dork tho hahahah
Harrelson had many languages he could speak and chose to speak facts
Two points about the sacrifice:
1 -it increases your chance to score a single run, but greatly decreases your chance to score more th,an one.
2 - a single base advance (unless it is from third to home) is worth less than the out you give up.
Where the manager comes in is in adapting to the current situation and having that temper his typical strategy.
I own five of Bill James' Abstracts, as well as Total Baseball and their insights helped me win several seasons of tabletop baseball. In addition to being fascinating reading.
A single run late in a game can mean victory. A single run early in a game is huge, also. Especially if a great pitcher has an early one run lead. And how many times do teams not bunt and the hitter hits into a double play. End of inning.
Hawk is a beast.Brian Kenny is annoying.
Wins are the most important statistic.
You still need one run I think Chris Sale can tell you that
Most players have ~75% of their at-bats with the bases empty. If a player was a "pure .300" hitter (his ability is such that he is guaranteed a hit 30% of the time) it's entirely possible for him to have a sub-par average when looking at 25% of his at-bats.
David Wright is a superb hitter. Duh. Upton obviously isn't as good as Wright, but his "not" hitting with men on is an aberration that will even out in time.
I guarantee you Mickey Mantle would be against it too! I can just see The Mick, and Teddy Ballgame rolling their eyes and saying, "This stuff is bullshit." Just give me a bat and I'll show you! LOL!! If your a real baseball fan do you really need to know some new fangled arithmetic to know what Mantle, Mays, and Koufax would do for you on the field?
It's not SABR, they do a lot of cool things. It stands for Society of American Baseball Writers, and they write all the player bios and other cool things. It's Analytics with a capital A, it's ruing the game.
what does RF/9 mean? I see it all the time when I look at how good a player is on d? so I would just like to understand it becuz i look at stats all the time.
it's probably range factor per 9 innings (i.e. putouts+assists per game played)
I dunno. I disagree with literally every thing Hawk says in this clip and by the end I liked him more.
You can tell most of you aren’t athletes and haven’t played in high intensity games. Mfs be beating the odds all the times. Numbers are infinite.
atta boy
sabermatrics is for dfs lol
You have to watch the games before you can talk about numbers. You have to watch the players closely. It still is an eye test to anyone besides GMs.
Tim Xander that is the opposite of the truth
That depends on what aspect of the match-up you're looking at. If you're looking at lefty/righty splits (especially for a player like Ryan Howard) then yes. If you're looking at the history between a hitter and pitcher, it doesn't matter at all. There's far too small a sample size in the latter.
I'd much rather c Hawk vs. Brian not Harald vs. Brian
So this is where the baseboard meme comes from
doug collins and hubie brown best at bball
basketball that is
Evan Smith Smith's
Hubie Brown is BORING. He puts me to me sleep.
Stats do matter for pitching match ups.
"The more numbers and more information you bring into the game the more instincts you take out of the game"...WTF?
No surprise Harrelson hasn't read Moneyball. He complains that managers and GMs have been fired because of not understanding sabremetrics, but that glosses over the fact many more managers and GMs have been fired simply for not winning enough one way or another.
In the end it's the age-old "stats vs. scouts" debate, and there's room for both. The more you can calculate things about the sport, especially the business side of winning, the more beneficial it is.
Hawk played pro played pro baseball for 12 years, I think he knows a lot about the game we just watch.
SABERBASERS
TWTW = LOL!!!!!
I do also.
typical conservative position. The guy is critiquing something he hasn't even researched. He didn't read the book, he just has some vague notion that it involves numbers he doesn't understand and that it got some of his buddies fired. What a tool
Hawk was exactly right
Will to win is built into OBP.
Why does it have to be one or the other? Why not use every tool at your disposal if you're a GM? Do stats tell you everything you need to know about a player? Of course not. They don't have a stat for intangibles. On the other hand, I'm not leading a guy off in my line up who has an OBP of .273. Oh wait, my White Sox are doing that. I can't figure out why we're near last in almost every offensive stat. Arrggg. :(
Harold Reynolds should know how flawed W/L for a pitcher is. When you look at current Tigers pitcher Doug Fister in 2011. Before Fister was traded to Detroit, he had a 3-12 record in Seattle BUT had a 3.33 ERA, 1.17 WHIP (Walks, Hits, Innings pitched) and batters had a average of .252 against him. It was rarely on him when he was pitching for the Mariners. I live in Michigan and I hear idiots like Pat Caputo degrade Fister because of his W/L record.
I'm a Sox fan and a lot of times I find myself muting the tv. I feel so bad for Steve Stone sometimes. I'm not big on all sabermetric stats, but I'm also not big on a lot of traditional stats like RBI or W-L for pitchers. I'm just letting the world know, Hawk does not speak for all Sox fans. Oh well, at least he's only a broadcaster now. He was the worst GM of all time. I guess the teams he built didn't have TWTW.
I'm a firm believer in Brian Kenny and Sabr stats, but I still enjoy a lot that Hawk said. He's a terrific announcer and fun individual. I think he'd be better off just saying that complex new stats aren't his thing. There's nothing wrong with not embracing stats, as long as condemn what you don't understand.
Aged like fine wine.
I remember seeing this at the time and I disagreed with hawk but as time has gone on he was definitely right
Because if a theory or way of thinking cannot fully and perfectly encapsulate 100% truth right out of the gate, we should just ignore it all completely, right?
We'd all still be living in thatched-roof huts and waging war with marauders if that's the way scientists and thinkers felt.
thats true we cant have instant replay every inning
Please TRY to elaborate this? Here is what is funny everyone complains about sabrmetrics BUT if you look at the stats the best players are near the top. So their really is not a flaw in it.
The Hawk is a legend
I couldn't agree with you more
I like how he just randomly starts ranting and raving for 10 minutes about something they didn't even bring up lol.
What song is played at the beginning of the show?
complex brought me here
Age old argument, science or spirit?
How many times do we need to teach you this lesson old man?
Brian Kenny has no place in baseball
Brian Kenny has no place in baseball
He gone ! Best Sox on air personalitie ever 🙌 👌 !
*The Muppets