Will we ever see sabermetrics used in MLB broadcasts?

[Kapono]

For example when players come to bat, in the little window that pops up showing all their stats, will we ever see metrics such as "fWAR" or "wOBA" ?

[Jatt]

Doubt it, as useful as those stats are, I don't see MLB alienating the non stats-geek fans by inundating them with a whole new slate of statistics on screen, they'll keep with the current ones.

[LittleOzzy]

Not any time soon.

Get the casual fan to understand the stats first and big networks will likely think about it. You also need a whole new generation of commentators that believe in them.

[Hendrix]

They already use OPS, but I really can't see them getting too advanced ever.

The problem is you have to teach people what they are first. Some people might like to learn the math behind baseball, but there is, and will always be, a massive chunk of people that don't want to sit down and wrap their head around math functions just so they can understand baseball.

A typical fan is probably something like my granfather. I watch the odd game with him, and literally every single time I have to explain to him what OPS is. He doesn't get it, can't remember it, and doesn't want anything to do with that "baseball math voodo".

[HangTime]

OT: any chance they show the strike zone during live play. I believe ESPN had it last year.

[Graham's Cracker]

I saw on the spring broadcast they displayed GB%. Thought that was an interesting stat to add.

[spykelee]

God I hope not.

[Schad]

I saw on the spring broadcast they displayed GB%. Thought that was an interesting stat to add.

It's those sorts of statistics, more than advanced metrics, that you should start seeing much more of...they're quite accessible for most fans, and they can add quite a bit to the discussion rather than merely saying "so and so gets a lot of ground balls". OPS+ would be another really useful one, because it's a pretty easy explain...even casual fans know what OPS is by this juncture, and OPS+ is just adjusted by park, with 100 set as an average. Above 100 = better than average, below 100 = worse than average is easy enough.

It bothers me when broadcasters make lazy, sweeping conclusions based on junk like pitcher wins and RBI, rather than using measures that their audience would get that would actually add some depth, but I don't expect them to start going into stuff like fWAR and wOBA on-air.

[MGD24]

God I hope not.

+1

[SharoneWright]

God I hope not.

+1

LOL, agreed!

Although... its a sure-fire way to rid us of Tabby. And for that, I say, "Whatever it takes!"

[baulderdash77]

A lot of the older broadcasters don't really believe in the advanced stats. Just getting them to talk about WHIP, gb% and OPS is an accomplishment.. Also other younger broadcasters like Zaun don't like advanced stats because they take away the mysticism of the game.

[Hamyltowne]

I remember viewing games in the late 90s--well before Moneyball--and the graphics would treat the audience as though it were participating in a 5x5 rotisserie league--Avg, HR, RBI, SB, fifth would be hits or walks or 2B or any other statistic in which the player had a notable number.

[Randle McMurphy]

Only a matter of time. It's really already happening already in some places (as it should).

[satyr9]

I don't think there's any question that you'll eventually see both some form of OPS+ or wRC+ or what have you. Something that measures overall offensive adjusted by park and normalized where 100 is average. May take some time yet, but that's coming to a baseball broadcast near you eventually no question. After that I do think you'll see some type of WAR stat, although maybe not in any of its current incarnations. If you use either you'll realize how much they can contribute to a conversation about baseball, so I have no doubt they'll be there eventually. They're a great shorthand, even though they're terrible reductive and flawed for what we use them for in those conversations, which is perfect for a TV broadcast.

What I'll dislike is how they'll become semi-mystical numbers to the general audience, that will drive me batty.

[Hamyltowne]

To my previous post: the fifth category would often be Runs. I bet the ones who worked in graphics were well into rotisserie-league baseball.

[Hamyltowne]

On the original question: absolutely not. Viewers lead busy lives. Most of them watch baseball to see a beautiful game played on beautiful green grass. Mathematics be damned.

Sabermetrics is esoteric stuff. Not everybody has the inclination and the time to invest in a proper understanding of advanced analytics. Many enjoy the game for reasons that don't rely on formulae.

Making heavy use of sabermetrics would turn the broadcasts into narrow-casts.

OPS is about as advanced as you'll see for some time. Perhaps OPS+ will be the next step; viewers might be curious as to park effects and league standards. It would be nice to see BABIP become a standard of some sort. Although, a thorough breakdown of BABIP might lead to DIPS, FIP, and xFIP--all of which will put the audience to sleep. So, I expect a period of stasis.

Why?

The medium, obviously. Baseball, now more than ever, is a television show. (Click on the link.) Math does not make for good television.

(Non-game baseball television is a little different. MLB Network's Clubhouse Confidential puts sabermetrics on prime-time.)

Let's not waste time on this. There is absolutely no level-headed reason to entertain this sort of idealism. It has become an excuse for you all to snub your noses at the hoi-polloi. Look at all the self-congratulatory posts. I don't want to read stories on how much smarter you are than your brethren.

Let's focus on making sense of the sabermetrics that apply to our Blue Jays and flirt with trade scenarios and all that fun stuff.

Utopianism is unattractive.

[Al_Oliver]

not until there are more intelligent broadcasters...

[Hamyltowne]

not until there are more intelligent broadcasters...

'Broadcasters' are not interested in a niche audience because Major League Baseball is not a niche product.

Again: no.

[Parataxis]

It'll be a slow evolution. And probably limited to the type of stuff that would tell you something about 'this at-bat'. So WAR really won't be relevant to viewers watching Bautista face off against Sabathia with 2 out, 1 on.

GB% might, OPS potentially, situational hitting numbers, absolutely.

[Hamyltowne]

situational hitting numbers, absolutely.

That's not sabermetrics. At least not of the sort one associates with DIPS, BABIP, UZR, Runs created, and BsR. Plus they've always had situational hitting numbers up on the screen.

Again, I say no.