*Never read the book, but know some of the overarcing themes and history of it.*
*If you have and feel the need to post detailed insight, feel free*
*Nor have I seen the movie*
So the Oakland Athletics (AL West baseball far inferior to the Texas Rangers), for a while, had an "advantage" in a league that has zero salary cap and where winning is reserved for the big spenders, which Oakland was NOT.
They looked for a way to assess players differently using a system called Sabermetric(s). I won't go into the details, but it was judging players in a different manner than the traditional evaluation of RBI, batting average, stolen bases, etc.
It was creative.
It was different.
It was a secret.
It was working.
But when it was just Oakland using this method you had two distinct things going on.
1. You had the way Oakland was looking at free agents and farm leagues.
2. And you had the way the rest of the MLB teams did it.
Maybe the "pack" isn't the best way of accessing things.
Maybe you're choosing the popular decision over the best decision.
Maybe you are feeling pulled to what everyone else is doing because everyone can't be wrong....(Can they?)
Maybe you've figure it out but the masses are calling you crazy, an idiot, or worse.
Oakland had an advantage because they (because of competitive forces) had to have a different perspective. That perspective helped them in winning. Their perspective now is part of how more and more teams evaluate.
The new/different/arguably better perspective changes the old/static perspective.
If you have a view/perspective/idea that isn't supported by the "masses", keep it. explore it. test it.
You may be onto something we all need to hear.
0 comments:
Post a Comment