We’ve talked a lot about data over the years here, but this episode offers a unique take on data-driven decision making. EconTalk host Russ Roberts welcomed Bill James, an American writer whose work includes baseball history and statistics, has been extremely well accepted. His application of Sabermetrics and creation of ‘Moneyball theory’ have been transformative in baseball’s landscape. James also worked as a Senior Advisor of Baseball Operations for the Boston Red Sox for 17 years, earning four World Series rings during his time there.
Roberts and James talk about the shortening of baseball games to save their entertainment value with James concluding there will always be time extending trade-offs with small-scale changes, like the pitch clock. Data and different approaches to winning are always evolving, and James and Roberts provide their take on the intrigue which the universe of baseball provides. Perhaps unlike many other things in life, it may be possible for someone to figure out the closed system of baseball. James stresses the importance of connecting all the dots and favoring science over expertise when making a conclusion, which can be applied well beyond baseball.
We’re glad you’ve joined us in revisiting this episode, and we’d love to hear your thoughts about it today. Share your responses to the prompts below in the Comments, or use them to start your own conversation offline. We’re always happy to continue the conversation.
1- What’s the difference between science and expertise, according to James, and how can science protect against falsehoods brought about and by expertise? Roberts discusses people seeking reassurance and following anything derived from their trust in the credentials of an expert with the example of someone having to agree with F.A. Hayek about the validity of social security. Roberts argues that people have become blinded by the reassurance they seek in treating controversial topics, and that one’s credentials do not necessarily make their words truthful.
What should be the role of expertise? How should ‘followers’ interact with the information they hear from experts in a thoughtful manner?

2- At the time this episode was recorded, Bill James proposed incentives which he believes would more effectively treat the issue of speeding up baseball than the rule changes which are present today. James identifies rule-changes like the pitch-clock as “pulling up the biggest weeds” as opposed to “mowing the lawn,” where the weeds will result in more weeds—more moments of monotony on the diamond.
Is James, right? Would incentives like draft picks, additional television compensation, and home-field advantage be pressing on the team’s self-interest? Do today’s rule changes create more slow-downs, or do they function as agents not only for shorter games, but games with more appealing action?
3-James’ conception of baseball as a mini-universe is particularly striking. He argues that people are drawn to baseball because they can get a sense of figuring it out.
Following James, how does the intrigue for the closed system of baseball and its intricacies relate to issues we all face each day? What other ‘closed systems’ or mini universes spark human interest?
4-James and Roberts discuss the prevalence of narrative building where people connect only the dots which serve their particular point.
What kind of approach should individuals take when spreading information to protect against being ignorant of unlearned knowledge? Why are people so trusting of experts, and how can curiosity help to protect the validity and pursuit of knowledge?
5-James argues that Barry Bonds should be in the Hall of Fame because there were no specific rules against steroids at the time he was using them. Should Barry Bonds get into the baseball Hall of Fame?
Can rules like the current drug policy be retroactive or should Major League Baseball recognize that players had an incentive to use steroids, and that there were no rules against them? When rules are not strictly enforced, and would you agree with Roberts and James that they are not rules, even if later they are enforced?
[Editor’s note: This Extra was originally published on May 22, 2023.]
Brennan Beausir is a student at Wabash College studying Philosophy, Politics, and Economics and is a 2023 Summer Scholar at Liberty Fund.
READER COMMENTS
Grand Rapids Mike
May 23 2023 at 10:32am
Being a baseball fan enjoyed this discussion with Michael Lewis. Since the discussion was in 2017 a number of Major League Baseball regulation changes have occurred. These include requiring a relief to face at least 3 batters, a pitch clock etc. All seem to have reduced game time. Also baseball now has a plethora of stats used to evaluate players. Also technology can measure the number of revolutions the baseball makes, which is used to evaluate a pitcher. Teams that use such data effectively have outperformed others, thinking of Houston Astros and Tampa, a small market team with huge baseball success.
Brennan Beausir
May 23 2023 at 2:27pm
Hi Mike, thanks for your comment!
I am enjoying the rule changes this year in baseball, and I read last night that this past weekend’s attendance across the league was 1,518,016 which was the highest total in April or May since 2017 (linked below). Are you enjoying the rule changes?
I am fascinated by the success of the Tampa Bay Rays so far this season, especially given that, as you said, they are a small market team who pays a lot less for its players. How much do you think the lack of salary cap/team expenditure differences really translate to predictable team outcomes? Do you think we will continue to see small market teams overachieve/beat out big market teams with superior strategy?
https://twitter.com/MLB_PR/status/1660672182069125120?s=20
Grand Rapids Mike
May 23 2023 at 10:45pm
For small market teams like Tampa, the key is to draft well and develop players, along with having staff that have keen insights or ability to develop players. Here is a tidbit, the Tigers last Year traded Isaac Paredes for a decent Rays outfielder. Tigers previously acquired Paredes from Cubs. he moved up A thru AAA. At the MLB level it seemed Paredes could not make it. So what happens when at Rays, he starts to hit, so far this yr he has 7 hrs., and BA of .272. The guy the Tigers received right now has depression issues.
Here are some other tidbits when Verlander was traded to Houston, the Houston data analytics staff went over his complete pitching portfolio, 2 seam fastball, 4 seam fastball etc and recommended changes in his pitch selection. So several teams thought he was over the hill and look what he did for Houston. As a Tiger fan, feel the Tiger GM was clueless in getting so little in return for the trade. Another tidbit Mickey Lolich, 68 Tigers, was ready to quit baseball when by chance he went to the Portland Beavers (real name) where he was taught to control his pitches. Mention these as examples where in baseball there is no automatic way from minors to star, it seems the subtilties resulting in failure or success are not fixed.
Getting to salary, I just can’t get my head around money given to players, especially long term contracts. I think small market teams, will never be able to complete with NY, Dodgers etc. The best marginal cost or maybe opportunity cost option is to spend on player development and be good at it. Also think money cannot by World Series titles, the Mets are trying to do it with mega contracts for Verlander and Scherzer so far they are 5 and 4. No matter the money, baseball is 25 person team with 40 man roster, by the end of season all the players count.
Regarding salary caps. Think is has a 2 fold purpose of keeping mid and small market in the game of competing for free agents, also maybe keep salary in check.
Another point players become free agents after 5 of 6 yrs of playing time. It seems that team will ditch marginal players before they get to that point. Read somewhere with the new salary requirements as players advance in baseball time, the average time a player is in the Majors has decreased from 4 yr range to 3 yr range. So it seems that teams are not going to pay for players who do not advance in skill.
In terms of predictable outcomes money has the edge in terms of coming in 1 or 2 in their division. Teams like Rays look to be an outlier right now for the small market teams. Houston which seems to be a mid market team have combined smart salary contracts with using analytics effectively.
Brennan Beausir
May 25 2023 at 1:56pm
Mike,
Thanks again for another response!
I am also a Tiger fan and caved in to get MLBtv to watch every game out of the market the last couple seasons. So far, the season has been a C in my opinion, but with the AL Central playing so poorly again this year, I guess anything could happen. I am surprised and pleased about the bullpen so far and excited to see young players like Greene, Torkelson, and McKinstry playing well.
Before the new regime, it definitely felt like the Tigers were behind the 8 ball in terms of data analysis and trade return. Rogers is the only player remaining from the Verlander trade which is disappointing. In regards to Meadows, I am obviously hoping for the best for him and his health which comes first. It is also disappointing to see that the Rays were able to get Paredes up to Major League speed so quickly when the Tigers could not. I will also link an article you may be familiar with already, but it talks about the Braves analytics org fixing a mistake in Grossman’s swing just a few days after the Tigers traded him away.
https://www.detroitnews.com/story/sports/mlb/tigers/2022/08/20/braves-fixed-robbie-grossman-matter-days-tigers-couldnt-all-season/7855603001/
You make great points about both the Rays and the Astros, they have great organizations with savvy player development and analytical strategies. I am hoping that the new Tigers regime focused on controlling the strike zone will net better results in the near future. I am looking forward to Justyn-Henry Malloy being called up, and hoping that the Tigers win the Joe Jimenez trade.
The Mets seem to have a much higher average age of players than other teams, and I think that is showing. Players prime years seem to becoming shorter as well as their leash for development time as you said. I agree that the Mets may be top heavy, and holes in the roster may show over time, it is a long season. It will be interesting to see if starters like Lolich and who excel and adapt over long periods of time will continue to exist in the Majors, given that so much value is placed on velocity these days.
Would you prefer a hard salary cap for the league? Or would that threaten the value of an always-evolving race for the ideal management strategy among teams in all markets?