Tony Gwynn. Rod Carew. Willie McGee. Ozzie Smith. Maury Wills. Brett Butler. David Eckstein. Dustin Pedroia. Plácido Polanco. Juan Pierre. Scott Podsednik. Ben Zobrist. Marco Scutaro. A.J. Pierzynski. Eric Hosmer. Yonder Alonso. Different generations.
Different skill sets. Different ways of impacting winning baseball. Let me make something clear: I’m not against analytics. I’m all for information that helps us better understand the game and make smarter decisions. But I do question whether we’ve reached a point where certain numbers carry more weight than actual production and proven baseball skills.
There’s a difference between using information to evaluate talent and allowing information to dictate what talent is supposed to look like. Some guys beat you with power. Others beat you with contact, speed, defense, baseball IQ, execution, and an understanding of how to win. My concern is that we’ve become so focused on what certain players don’t do that we’re overlooking what they consistently bring to the table.
Sometimes organizations fall in love with what the numbers suggest a player could be instead of appreciating what another player has already proven he is. Analytics should help us understand the game, not convince us to ignore what happens on the field. And before somebody brings up the Dodgers and how much money they spend, yes, they spend a lot, but they also go out and get proven ballplayers, guys who can impact the game in multiple ways and know how to win.
They’re not afraid to spend what it takes to get those players, but that’s a different conversation. The point is, they’re investing in proven baseball talent, not just what a projection says a player might become. There’s a reason they’ve been so successful. And perhaps the best modern-day example of what I’m talking about is Luis Arráez. Three-time batting champion. Elite bat-to-ball skills. Consistently puts together quality at-bats year after year.
Yet somehow, we keep having conversations about whether his game fits what winning organizations are looking for. Here’s what I find interesting: teams with postseason aspirations have gone out of their way to acquire him because they recognize what he brings to a lineup. I’m not saying he’s a perfect player. Nobody is. But when did we get to a point where being one of the best pure hitters in baseball isn’t enough for people to appreciate your value? We spend so much time explaining what Luis Arráez can’t do that sometimes I wonder if we’ve forgotten how special what he can do really is. I’m not asking anybody to ignore the numbers.
I’m asking whether we’re giving the right numbers the right amount of importance. So here’s my question: are we using information to build better baseball teams, or are we sometimes allowing that information to make us overlook good baseball players? Because at the end of the day, you can have all the information in the world, but somebody still has to step between those lines and play the game. There’s more than one way to be a great baseball player, and there’s more than one way to win. And if the ultimate goal is winning baseball games, shouldn’t we be appreciating all the different ways a player can help us accomplish that? Make it make sense.