Nice way to completely innaccurately paraphrase my positions on the matters at hand. I'm shocked! That never happens at Brewerfan.net. I stand by my opinion that Sabermetrics isn't science, that's complex mathematical analysis, and the 2 things are not the same. Plugging numbers into equations (that there is no mathematical proof for, only hypothesis) doesn't constitute science in my opinion. Applied math/statistics wants to create an equation to explain everything. Unfortunately there isn't a good understanding of the number of variables and what orders they interact. We're told that they know the important variables so that it doesn't matter if we only have an equation that accounts for a small fraction of the variables. Of course it's those pesky minor variables that lead to dead patients due to drug side effects or the teams that score more runs than they allow in a year, but have a losing record. I'd rather be a fan of the baseball team with "unlucky" variance than the patient who's coin landed on the wrong side. I said that I utilize Sabermetrics as part of my view of a player, it's just not my entire view. There's a good book you should read by Jonathan Kirsch (inbox me for reference). I said Sabermetrics cannot accurately predict the outcome of a given AB in today's game, nor the outcome of the game itself. Thankfully nothing can predict the outcome of a given AB, nor the outcome of a game. That's why we play them and they're so enjoyable. In fact, I was giving my opinion about the proper time to pull a plug on player, and that we the fan's generally are not armed with all of the information available. As fans we tend to second guess (or billionth guess) the manager/management for every move. Other than a few apologists to the manager/management most people would agree that fans have the right to second guess what goes on. Where we as fans get into trouble is when we minimize the information that we don't have access to as trivial or unimportant in the decision making paradigm. I'm as guilty as anyone for this, but until all of the information is known we don't really know whether that "missing" information was critical. Its like taking in account my mass when determining how hard gravity pulls me down. Sure technically I'm pulling the earth towards me but in practice it can be safely ignored. Can you point me to the data that shows that any hypothesis in sabermetrics equats to the Theory of Gravity. Some of the early theories on gravity didn't take into account mass. So under that situation it was entirely reasonable to ignore weight. This is where sabermetrics gets into trouble - when it's touted as being as accurate as an extensively tested and proven theory. While I understand you are just making an analogy, the implication is clear - those who don't believe in sabermetrics are simple minded individuals who don't understand the difference in mass between the earth and a person. Where this whole issue breaks down is the assertion that any of the sabermetric theories/hypothesis are correct. I'll be a believer when I see the proof.