Add new comment

Your original statement was more or less "Because Wedge said SSS, he must be aware of sabermetrics". I will grant you that that's true: Wedge is aware of sabermetrics. So is my 90-year-old grandfather, who thinks it's better for a hitter to ground out than to walk. The topic up for debate wasn't whether or not Wedge knows SABR exists, it was whether or not Z and Wedge are using statistics well in their decision-making. SSS is such an entry-level concept (seriously, I learned it within a week of re-becoming a Mariners fan in 2011) that it doesn't prove he has any sort of familiarity with the actual use of stats in making baseball decisions. I'm not saying Wedge was wrong to answer a question posed to him and then say "but SSS" - it was a good answer! I'm saying that anyone suggesting it means he uses good sabermetric practices to make decisions is taking several leaps too far.
My subsequent comment about not discussing SSS issues in-depth applied more to bloggers like us than to managers who are asked direct questions about SSS phenomena. I stand by it. When I address an issue using statistics - like, say, Justin Smoak's platoon splits - I don't want to spill 500 words being thorough on the topic when there's a >50% chance the answer is "it means nothing because it's a small sample size". If you want to do that, that's your prerogative, but you're going to waste a lot of time and e-ink. Taking note of an SSS phenomenon is one thing. Thorough back-and-forth discussions that ignore SSS the whole time is something else entirely.