January 16, 2005
Gladwell's Challenge To Moneyball?
In a review of Malcolm Gladwell's Blink, David Brooks picks up on something I hinted at a few days ago:
The thick-slicing part of the brain reminds me that not long ago I read Michael Lewis's great book, ''Moneyball,'' about a baseball executive who used rigorous statistical analysis to clobber fuzzy-minded old pros who relied on their gut impressions. Now I'm reading ''Blink'' on how impressions can be as reliable as data. This part of my brain wants to know how I should reconcile Lewis with Gladwell. What is the relationship between self-conscious reason and backstage intuition? Which one is right more often?
A great question, and one I'd like seen answered. Hat tip to Instapundit on the Brooks link.
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.ericmcerlain.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/4243
I'd argue that it's not just the method of picking that matters. The fuzzy-minded baseball pros were going on hunches, sure, but that doesn't automatically make them right. You've got to know who to listen to.
Also, the scourts may not have been as wrong as all that on the hunches -- but they were looking for the wrong thing. Obviously, some scouts were really good at picking hitters who fit into their ideas of what a good hitter should be. An important part of Moneyball is the change in what the As looked for. In other words: "My hunch is that this guy will hit for power and field well." Beane would say "Sure, that's probably true, but I want an on-base machine."
Similarly, statistical analysis isn't always right. I'm looking at Danny Ainge here, who is making picks based on the "science" of brain typing.
Posted by:
at January 17, 2005 09:10 AM
Post a comment
Thanks for signing in,
.
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)
10:06 PM
![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.ericmcerlain.com/offwingopinion/nav-commenters.gif)