Stop the revolution . . . I want to get off (ESPN article)

[Gobias Industries]

I didn't see this posted yet. We should really have a designated "Hatred of Moneyball" thread. It continues to amaze me that this stuff gets put on major websites. I've never heard of this writer. Maybe the whole thing is a joke by Rob Neyer writing under a made-up name.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=garfamudis/080305

[trwi7]

Now, I look at the stats page and it has more columns than the Parthenon.

It seems that the smart thing to do would be to stop looking at the stats that make you so angry that you have to get on your soapbox to vent about.

[sbrylski]

Its a satire.

[brewers19]

Considering it's Page 2, I strongly recommend that nobody take it at face value. It may not be good satire, but that's what it's supposed to be.

[trwi7]

Doh should've looked where it came from. :|

[ryne100]

http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/art-garfamudis-revealed/

 

It turns out that "Art Garfamudis," the author of a couple hilarious satire pieces over at ESPN Page 2 is none other than BPro/ESPN columnist Jim Baker.

[mothershipconnection]

It'd take quite a tool to write that in a serious manner - dude had about a million holes, starting with the fact that nobody ever thought Brown would be a great player. He was a reach, but one that they thought was a great gamble.

 

As a satire, it's funny, but the sad thing is that there are so many tools out there who actually write this kind of stuff that it was not at all easy to pick up that it was a joke. It's kinda like how it's hard to know Stephen Colbert's show is a satire because he pretty much says the same thing others say when trying to be serious.

[Gobias Industries]

As a satire, it's funny, but the sad thing is that there are so many tools out there who actually write this kind of stuff that it was not at all easy to pick up that it was a joke. It's kinda like how it's hard to know Stephen Colbert's show is a satire because he pretty much says the same thing others say when trying to be serious.

That's why I thought there was a pretty decent chance it was a serious piece. After seeing the MSNBC piece that FJM picked apart, it sure wouldn't have surprised me. Also didn't know that Page 2 is all pretty much comedic writings. The only writer I've ever read from there was Simmons.

[GAME05]

in an article bashing the "Moneyball" revolution, the author points out in the beginning that he never actually read "Moneyball", so that should tell us something right there.

[TheBwaz]

I finally have gotten around to reading "Moneyball" (thank you Tosa Library) and am about 250 pages in. As a BF reader, I already knew the stat revolution, and am onboard for the most part. Well, at least as far as the offensive stats are concerned. The defensive stats seem a tad too subjective to me, especially in a revolution that is based around looking at measureable scientific datum.

 

That said, I will will agree with one thing in the mock article: The book does read like it was written by an either self loving Beane or a worshipful intern.