Comments on: Layups: Seidman Live-Blogs Moneyball

By: Kate Gallor

Kate Gallor — Sat, 19 Jun 2010 02:44:11 +0000

Very good written article -, but cant see many comments. Any how great stuff. Ill pass this on to a friend or two, thanks for this.

By: Neil Paine

Neil Paine — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 16:54:06 +0000

And regarding the sort of arrogant way Lewis wrote about the "stats vs. scouts" argument (which shouldn't have existed and likely would not have had Moneyball not been written), I agree that it was probably too off-putting to some people -- but at the same time, would a kinder, gentler version of the book had the same cultural impact? Part of the reason the book resonated so much with readers was that the themes of challenging the establishment, re-thinking long-held views, and tearing down baseball's culture of insiderism appealed to our desire to break down barriers to free thought and knowledge -- Lewis even compared the sabermetric revolution to The Enlightenment, for goodness' sake. So while I think a lot of the book was hyperbole for the sake of a great story and was written in an especially "assholish" tone, a different approach from a different author may not have achieved the same far-reaching impact.

By: Basketball goals

Basketball goals — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 11:21:26 +0000

I simply loved the concept.

By: Neil Paine

Neil Paine — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 02:05:16 +0000

If I’m not mistaken, that blog was done last year, not yesterday. Yeah, I'm an idiot... Thank you for catching that. :)

By: Ian

Ian — Thu, 19 Mar 2009 22:08:44 +0000

If I'm not mistaken, that blog was done last year, not yesterday.

Personally, I think Moneyball is an interesting concept, and one certainly worthy of having been discussed, but as a baseball book I found it extremely disappointing. It presents a very, very biased perspective on the subject of talent evaluation. It's borderline insulting in its generalization of traditionalist scouting mentality and of its characterization of scouts individually(some of whom do not deserve such ridicule).

Even though I agree with many of the ideas it explores, its holier-than-thou manner of expression is off-putting and I think it does a great disservice to the general public's view of sabremetrics. I do not think the place of statistical analysis in sports would be as polarizing a topic if not for Moneyball.

Almost all of this, of course, falls at the feet of Michael Lewis(who, incidentally, I don't think is a very good writer), and not Billy Beane. I wish the book had been written by someone who better understood the concept of tact, and who was able to communicate what is a very good message without coming off sounding like an asshole.