They are absolutely correct in The Book when they seay that people make way too much out of way too little. And that remains true for many other issues in baseball analyses besides hot and cold streaks.

And just like we really shouldn’t evaluate Raul Ibanez’ or Jose Vidro’s talent level any differently today than we did a month ago, nobody should have evaluated them differently in July as they did at the beginning of the season. Anybody that thought Ibanez was good enough to be in the starting lineup in April should have still thought so in July.
Nothing that happens over a period of time as short as a partial season should have much bearing on an opinion of talent level.

“I’ve never said that Ibanez or Vidro shouldn’t get days off or that Jones shouldn’t be given the opportunity to play whenever possible.”

I realize you didn’t – my fault. I said that because that seems to be
McLaren’s M.O. during the streak, and because you seemed to be defending McLaren’s use of the streak as a predictive factor (even if possibly only for reasons of player and clubhouse reaction).

“I used Raul Ibanez’s recent streak as an example . . . because it ties into the argument here. I don’t believe anyone in the clubhouse, including Adam Jones, thinks for a second that it’s a good idea to bench a guy who’s been torching the ball like Raul has lately.

Without necessarily disagreeing with your prediction of player reaction, the inmates don’t run the asylum. All players understand that streaks end, and if you told them “look, we’ve looked at this pretty carefully, and for most players, the fact that they’ve been rolling hot for a while doesn’t really predict going forward that they’ll do better than their usual longer-term averages, so we think we’re better off judging each coming game based on who has the best match-ups and gives us the best chance to win, rather than who’s riding a streak right now. We’ve got a brutal schedule coming up anyway, and everybody will be fresher this way.” For Raul, you would reference the fact that the team (reasonably) expects Jones will provide better defense in LF and that that will be relatively more important when certain pitchers are in the game, and that his numbers against lefties will probably determine which games he’ll sit. With Vidro, it’s a bit trickier, but he needs to understand that a guy who provides more than just singles and some OBP can be replaced by a guy like Raul at DH occasionally against RHP. You don’t really have to explain any of this to Jones, as he’s the beneficiary of all this. And none of them have to like it; it just has to work, and working provides its own justification.

In the end, if it works and you’re winning, you won’t lose anybody. If Jones isn’t hitting or is providing poorer defense that we think he will over a longer sample than the few games he’s getting here and there now, nothing says you can’t adjust. Even within games, this gives you a much better bench….

And fyi, I’ve found stats articles referring to a runs-test and a runs-length test for randomness. Trying to get more info…

Players spend years of sweat and sacrifice, hour after hour in the batting cage, watching video, lifting weights, etc. to be able to get on a roll like Raul has been on over the past two weeks. Most would rather have their teeth pulled out with rusty pliers than be pulled from the lineup when they’re hitting like that and you’ll never, ever convince them this has no value in predicting how they’ll hit today. If you sit a guy hitting like that based on nothing more than a purist adherence to statistical probability then you risk losing not only him but the ballclub.

Willie Bloomquist probably thinks he has a 3 for 4, 3 rbi night in his bat tonight…should he start in center over Ichiro?

Seriously, motivating players is a big part of managing but it doesn’t trump the most important part of the job-fielding a group of players that gives the team it’s best chance of winning on a given night.

I’ve never said that Ibanez or Vidro shouldn’t get days off or that Jones shouldn’t be given the opportunity to play whenever possible. There’s still 40 games left and guys obviously need days off, especially considering the M’s brutal schedule down the stretch.

I used Raul Ibanez’s recent streak as an example of a guy on a hot streak (a pace of nine homeruns in thirteen games is obviously unsustainable for any length of time) because it ties into the argument here. I don’t believe anyone in the clubhouse, including Adam Jones, thinks for a second that it’s a good idea to bench a guy who’s been torching the ball like Raul has lately. If the guy was legitimately tired and needed a day off you MIGHT be able to convince him of that.

Players spend years of sweat and sacrifice, hour after hour in the batting cage, watching video, lifting weights, etc. to be able to get on a roll like Raul has been on over the past two weeks. Most would rather have their teeth pulled out with rusty pliers than be pulled from the lineup when they’re hitting like that and you’ll never, ever convince them this has no value in predicting how they’ll hit today. If you sit a guy hitting like that based on nothing more than a purist adherence to statistical probability then you risk losing not only him but the ballclub.

“. . . I agree that this is an interesting theoretical argument that may be statistically correct but I see very little chance it will ever be applied in the real world to any significant degree. No manager in baseball would sit and watch Raul Ibanez crush nine homeruns over two weeks and then bench him because there’s no proven predictive value in that performance.”

First, nobody is suggesting “benching” Raul Ibanez (and that’s not what this thread is about). There is a suggestion that Jones in LF at least some of the time in place of Raul, and a reasonable platoon of Raul and Vidro at DH (again, at least some of the time) would be a better use of all three players’ skill sets and values.

Second, the reason you might “bench” Ibanez (or Vidro) isn’t because there is no predictive value in their recent past performance, but because the most reasonable/accurate projections suggest the team might benefit if you did. Again, this isn’t a “real world” argument/post, and most reasonabe people you are arguing with would concede that there are many other factors to consider before you would “bench” one of these guys.

But you seem to be accepting as a trusim (in the absence of “proof” to the contrary that could only be gathered if the manager did what you argue he shouldn’t because of the lack of that proof – play Jones more and platoon Vidro and Raul at DH some) that you should not consider these “purist” statistical arguments unless and until these guys come back to earth, which is to essentially buy into the predictive value of the streak. It won’t hurt Ibanez or Vidro to get a day off here and there (especially Raul vs. lefties), and as long as it isn’t taken too far, I don’t think there would be a clubhouse revolt. There just needs to be better balance, and ignoring the statistical argument because of it human impracticality doesn’t make the alternative more reasonable.

No manager in baseball would sit and watch Raul Ibanez crush nine homeruns over two weeks and then bench him because there’s no proven predictive value in that performance. He wouldn’t do it for any number of real world reasons including the fact that he’d probably have a clubhouse revolt on his hands if he did.

The thing is that winning is what matters. Every once in a while, a manager or a GM will change the way baseball is seen. Yes, usually that inspiration comes from a small-market, last-place team that has less risk of failure. But baseball has changed a lot in the last ten years, and apparently crazy ideas can take root once they’re seen to work. You can actually try to use your closer in non-save situations again. You can actually bat Juan Pierre eighth instead of first even though he’s the fastest guy on the team. You get the idea.

If an idea helps teams win more games more of the time, it will eventually become accepted. Sabermetrics is the argument. Listen to the argument. Don’t just say “It’d never work, it’ll make the left fielder cry.” Besides, it’s far more interesting to talk about how to make the team better than it is to simply shout “Go M’s” two hundred and seven times per thread.

Some interesting analysis on the prevailing view that Raul was “finished” before his current hot streak:

Raul’s BA on July 31: .253
Rauuuul’s BA for his career: .283

Probability (based on 1000 simulations) that a .283 hitter bats .253 or worse over his first 400 or so at-bats: 0.086 = approx. 9%

So, quantitatively, this is a fairly strong indication that the data was not generated by a .283 hitter, i.e. that Raul’s true skill had declined. Of course, Raul’s subsequent hot streak might suggest that for the first few months of the year, we were observing one of those 9% of seasons where a .283 hitter hit well below his average (