Sabermetrics, the search for objective knowledge about baseball through statistical analysis, has taken over the national pastime. The authors argue that this approach began as a useful corrective but has come to harm baseball. The book demonstrates that the so-called moneyball approach, based on sabermetrics, offers only limited guidance for assembling a team, managing games, and evaluating player performance. Equally important, the obsession with statistics and vision of the game as wholly predictable obscure baseball's spectacular improvisational quality. It is the game's unquantifiable and relentless capacity to surprise--the source of wonder so central to its greatest stories and personalities--that informs any real appreciation of baseball.
The Beauty of Short Hops
and over one million other books are available for Amazon Kindle. Learn more
| |||||||||||||||
Book Description
Frequently Bought Together
Editorial Reviews
Review
"Engagingly written...highly recommended." --Library Journal
"Terrific.... Proponents of sabermetrics should do themselves a favor and buy the book to find out if they should have something to think about. Those who have no use for sabermetrics should buy the book to find out why they are on solid footing." --Murray Chass, 2003 J.G. Taylor Spink Award Recipient
"Compelling...authors Sheldon and Alan Hirsch take aim at [the] presumption that baseball is essentially a series of highly predictable results. They call into question the value of many of the advanced statistics that have popped up in recent years...correctly pointing out that it doesn't take more than a handful of short hops (or bad bounces) over the course of a season to yield dramatically different ratings/rankings/statistics." --Kevin Greenstein, Department of Communication and Journalism, Suffolk University
"Thankfully, the Hirsch brothers provide the first sensible rebuttal to the Moneyball approach. After summarizing Moneyball in the opening chapter, the authors…pick apart Michael Lewis's arguments with relish. The authors compare a base-running gaffe in a Mets-Nationals game to the famous 1960 world series, [describe] a game delayed 52 minutes because of a swarm of bees, baseballs hidden in Wrigley Field's famous ivy, and many other anecdotes which remind us why we love baseball and its unpredictable nature." --FrumForum
"Good, fun stuff.... The descriptions of bizarre incidents and freak plays make for a good read and is done in a similar vein as some of Rob Neyer's work on the game's historical oddities." --Joe Tarring, columnist for fullcountpitch.com
"A thoughtful, spunky counterpoint of a book, sure to be panned by true believers." --Spitball
"Good, fun stuff.... The descriptions of bizarre incidents and freak plays make for a good read and is done in a similar vein as some of Rob Neyer's work on the game's historical oddities." --Joe Tarring, columnist for fullcountpitch.com
"Terrific.... Proponents of sabermetrics should do themselves a favor and buy the book to find out if they should have something to think about. Those who have no use for sabermetrics should buy the book to find out why they are on solid footing." --Murray Chass, 2003 J.G. Taylor Spink Award Recipient
"Compelling...authors Sheldon and Alan Hirsch take aim at [the] presumption that baseball is essentially a series of highly predictable results. They call into question the value of many of the advanced statistics that have popped up in recent years...correctly pointing out that it doesn't take more than a handful of short hops (or bad bounces) over the course of a season to yield dramatically different ratings/rankings/statistics." --Kevin Greenstein, Department of Communication and Journalism, Suffolk University
"Thankfully, the Hirsch brothers provide the first sensible rebuttal to the Moneyball approach. After summarizing Moneyball in the opening chapter, the authors…pick apart Michael Lewis's arguments with relish. The authors compare a base-running gaffe in a Mets-Nationals game to the famous 1960 world series, [describe] a game delayed 52 minutes because of a swarm of bees, baseballs hidden in Wrigley Field's famous ivy, and many other anecdotes which remind us why we love baseball and its unpredictable nature." --FrumForum
"Good, fun stuff.... The descriptions of bizarre incidents and freak plays make for a good read and is done in a similar vein as some of Rob Neyer's work on the game's historical oddities." --Joe Tarring, columnist for fullcountpitch.com
"A thoughtful, spunky counterpoint of a book, sure to be panned by true believers." --Spitball
"Good, fun stuff.... The descriptions of bizarre incidents and freak plays make for a good read and is done in a similar vein as some of Rob Neyer's work on the game's historical oddities." --Joe Tarring, columnist for fullcountpitch.com
About the Author
Sheldon Hirsch's dreams of the major leagues died after a mediocre season as a high school junior. He is a nephrologist living outside of Chicago, and has published extensively in medical journals.
Alan Hirsch, a visiting professor at Williams College, is the author of numerous books and articles. His articles on sports and other subjects have been published in the Los Angeles Times, Washington Post, Washington Times, and Newsday, among many other publications. He also contributes a regular sports column to Frumforum.
Product Details
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images? |
More About the Author
Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.
Customer Reviews
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
51 of 66 people found the following review helpful
1.0 out of 5 stars
The authors seem to have never read Moneyball or anything by Bill James
March 13, 2011
Format:Paperback
The whole premise that stats based analysis tries to fully predict all outcomes in baseball is absurd and nobody, especially not Billy Beane or Bill James, holds it.
The funniest thing is that when stats based analysis of baseball first came out, it was ridiculed precisely BECAUSE they liked to say a lot of baseball is pure luck. The old school train of thought was that there was little luck in baseball and that a .300 hitter was almost always better than a .285 hitter.
The writers of this book seem to be mainly writing for a crowd of individuals who don't understand statistics, don't like anything that's not pure "gut instinct" and hate, without ever having read, Moneyball.
Basically this book is the equivalent of the following conversation:
Stat person: well, ERA isn't a good measure, because a lot of it is based on luck. We should use this other stat that takes into account only things that the pitcher can control, so that we can better understand what is skill and what is luck.
Short Hop person: Wait, you're not taking luck into consideration with your statistical analysis!
Stat person: Did you listen to anything I just said?
Short Hop person: what about when a ball hits a pigeon? How do your stats take that into account?
Stat Person: *walks away, shaking head*
The funniest thing is that when stats based analysis of baseball first came out, it was ridiculed precisely BECAUSE they liked to say a lot of baseball is pure luck. The old school train of thought was that there was little luck in baseball and that a .300 hitter was almost always better than a .285 hitter.
The writers of this book seem to be mainly writing for a crowd of individuals who don't understand statistics, don't like anything that's not pure "gut instinct" and hate, without ever having read, Moneyball.
Basically this book is the equivalent of the following conversation:
Stat person: well, ERA isn't a good measure, because a lot of it is based on luck. We should use this other stat that takes into account only things that the pitcher can control, so that we can better understand what is skill and what is luck.
Short Hop person: Wait, you're not taking luck into consideration with your statistical analysis!
Stat person: Did you listen to anything I just said?
Short Hop person: what about when a ball hits a pigeon? How do your stats take that into account?
Stat Person: *walks away, shaking head*
4 of 5 people found the following review helpful
2.0 out of 5 stars
A flawed rebuttal of Sabermetrics...but worth reading with an openmind
January 3, 2012
By Matthew Ng
Format:Paperback
Really, this book is two books. The first is an academic criticism of how the Sabermetric community has gone off the deep end in their use to advanced data to try to predict and simulate baseball outcomes. The second is diary of the 2009 season from the perspective of two Red Sox fans of why the game of baseball is unique and wonderful...but Tim Kurkjian, George Will or Bob Costas, they are not.
Half of this book is written as criticism of using a Social Science approach in studying baseball. Unlike books written by baseball "lifers" like John Scherholtz's Built to Win, which praises tobacco-stained, traditional methods and scouting...This criticism from two academics looked promising. Their attack of the collection and classification methods used to input data in advanced fielding metrics has merit. But those who create and use these methods, don't claim their new tools are infallible, they are just trying to bring more information in a game of uncertainty and incomplete information...Bill James, the Godfather of this movement states as such, to paraphrase "Just because a new metric isn't perfect, doesn't mean we should stop trying to search for more knowledge." The discussion of the LaRussization of the bullpen and how even Sabermetrically inclined GMs have to designate an established closer is also worthwhile.
Yes, we get it...baseball, sports, like the weather is unpredictable. But to close your eyes to new avenues of information, technology and data, the authors instead suggest an approach that would be akin to saying that all meteorologists should just embrace the uncertainty of the weather and not try to find scientific trends, reasoning, technology and analysis and just give limited forecasts.... Read more ›
Half of this book is written as criticism of using a Social Science approach in studying baseball. Unlike books written by baseball "lifers" like John Scherholtz's Built to Win, which praises tobacco-stained, traditional methods and scouting...This criticism from two academics looked promising. Their attack of the collection and classification methods used to input data in advanced fielding metrics has merit. But those who create and use these methods, don't claim their new tools are infallible, they are just trying to bring more information in a game of uncertainty and incomplete information...Bill James, the Godfather of this movement states as such, to paraphrase "Just because a new metric isn't perfect, doesn't mean we should stop trying to search for more knowledge." The discussion of the LaRussization of the bullpen and how even Sabermetrically inclined GMs have to designate an established closer is also worthwhile.
Yes, we get it...baseball, sports, like the weather is unpredictable. But to close your eyes to new avenues of information, technology and data, the authors instead suggest an approach that would be akin to saying that all meteorologists should just embrace the uncertainty of the weather and not try to find scientific trends, reasoning, technology and analysis and just give limited forecasts.... Read more ›
37 of 55 people found the following review helpful
By Jim O'Hara
Format:Paperback
How did this naive, poorly argued and illogical book get published? The basic premise of this book seems completely wrong. It's not that statheads ignore chance, as this guy claims, but that statheads *stress* the role of chance in ERA, batting average and esp pitchers' wins and RBI. The laws of probability still apply even when a large number of random events are included. Old-school guys lament that X or Y didn't drive in enough runs; intelligent baseball fans know that there is a lot of luck involved in any RBI total. Old-school guys say that Bert Blyleven didn't win enough games, and that Jack Morris was a big winner; intelligent baseball fans know that Morris was pretty good, but lucky, and that Blyleven was great. This book reminds me of one of Ronald Reagan's more notorious sayings: "Facts are stupid things." The book argues against things that no one believes: the classic "straw man" approach. Don't waste your money.
16 of 25 people found the following review helpful
By Nox
Format:Paperback
A very narrow viewed walk through of modern sabermetrics, this book misses the mark entirely. The authors make a number of outrageous claims about modern baseball statistics that are completely unsubstantiated. To suggest that sabermetrics aim to take away a fan's enjoyment of the "little things" is ludicrous. This false dichotomy that they try to push on the reader has been rendered completely irrelevant in the days since the release of the book.
Do not waste your time with this irrelevant piece of baseball writing.
Do not waste your time with this irrelevant piece of baseball writing.
1 of 2 people found the following review helpful
Format:Kindle Edition
Starts off slow with all the stats but really enjoyed the second half of the book with all of the inner quirks of baseball in just one season
15 of 25 people found the following review helpful
By Cid arthur
Format:Paperback
I have read this book and followed the polarized debate about it, here and on baseball blogs. The book seems to have touched a raw nerve in the numbers community, uncivil reviews that often lack any evidence that the reviewer read the book.
Curiously, the naysayers seem at odds with each other. One person says that everything in the book is "total nonsense". Yet Mr Rabon (in a comment) writes: "It's not so much that the authors are wrong about anything they say, it's that they're attacking a straw man".
All that's confusing: Are the Short Hops guys completely wrong, or are they right but not saying much that everyone doesn't already know?
I suspect that numbers guys come in "different packages". Short Hops actually lauds the numbers approach, but not what it calls eventual excesses and, I guess, over-reliance and over-confidence. If that's nothing new to Mr Rabon, I'd bet the authors would applaud his agreement. On the other hand, it seems like there are many others out there who have weighed in angrily, claiming that there is zero wrong with sabermetrics, no excesses, no flaws, everything is great. For those folks, the book does not seem a straw man, but a real challenge to their dogmatism.
That's the way I see the back and forth!
I am a good baseball fan, a Moneyball reader, I'm fine with numbers, and there was a lot in this book that was new to me.
Curiously, the naysayers seem at odds with each other. One person says that everything in the book is "total nonsense". Yet Mr Rabon (in a comment) writes: "It's not so much that the authors are wrong about anything they say, it's that they're attacking a straw man".
All that's confusing: Are the Short Hops guys completely wrong, or are they right but not saying much that everyone doesn't already know?
I suspect that numbers guys come in "different packages". Short Hops actually lauds the numbers approach, but not what it calls eventual excesses and, I guess, over-reliance and over-confidence. If that's nothing new to Mr Rabon, I'd bet the authors would applaud his agreement. On the other hand, it seems like there are many others out there who have weighed in angrily, claiming that there is zero wrong with sabermetrics, no excesses, no flaws, everything is great. For those folks, the book does not seem a straw man, but a real challenge to their dogmatism.
That's the way I see the back and forth!
I am a good baseball fan, a Moneyball reader, I'm fine with numbers, and there was a lot in this book that was new to me.
Most Recent Customer Reviews
5.0 out of 5 stars
Back to Basics
In order to set things straight against all these other 1 star reviews that talk about ERA and whatever else, I want to say this book is great. Read more
Published 13 months ago by Spicysenor
5.0 out of 5 stars
Devastating critique of moneyball worshippers and sabermetricians
This is a terrific book (referred to here as BSH); any baseball fan who has read or at least heard of Moneyball should read this ASAP. Read more
Published 19 months ago by J. Davis
5.0 out of 5 stars
What can the numbers tell you?
Can baseball, over the course of a season or a fiscal year, be reduced to a battle of mathematicians and statisticians? Read more
Published on March 31, 2011 by Reader in Matawan
5.0 out of 5 stars
GREAT BOOK- A MUST!
I have read this book and found it to be especially is well written. The authors show a tremendous knowledge of baseball and statistics. Read more
Published on March 19, 2011 by marilyn
5.0 out of 5 stars
Baseball fans unite.
This is a very serious and well thought out analysis of sabermetrics that should appeal to all baseball fans. Read more
Published on March 17, 2011 by Tricia
5.0 out of 5 stars
I read it, it's great!
On the back cover, the ex-commissioner of Baseball, Fay Vincent, wrote: "For those of us who have long questioned the focus on statistics in baseball, this is a welcome book. Read more
Published on March 13, 2011 by Samuel Honsif
What Other Items Do Customers Buy After Viewing This Item?
Listmania!
|
|
