This is the first installment of a series of posts inspired by the reading of Michael Lewis’s Moneyball: The Art of Winning an Unfair Game. The book tells the story of how the Oakland A’s and general manager Billy Beane used unconventional wisdom to win. Faced with a very low budget, the Beane and the A’s competed with the richest teams in baseball. The innovative approach was so successful that it changed how teams were put together. Major League Baseball and the United Methodist Church have some things in common. Perhaps, a different kind of sabermetrics can help the UMC move forward.
“The problem,” wrote James, “is that baseball statistics are not pure accomplishments of men against other men, which is what we are in the habit of seeing them as. They are accomplishments of men in combination with the circumstances.” – Moneyball, p. 71
Over the past several months, the United Methodist Church has enjoyed or endured, according to one’s perspective, a conversation regarding statistical analysis of effectiveness. Some have been excited about the prospect of having a way to measure fruitfulness. Others have been concerned that statistical evaluation might be unfairly used to evaluate churches and pastors.
I am fully in the corner of the former. Faith in Jesus has a certain goal orientation (following him, becoming like him, being with him). Our denominational heritage is certainly filled with expectations. Wesley lined out what it means to be more than an “almost Christian” and placed high expectations on leadership. We shouldn’t fear goals or evaluation. They can be means of grace.
In our discussion about statistical measurements and goals, however, we need to be very clear that the statistics we are gathering are meaningfully and explicitly connected to the goal. The Moneyball quote above comes in a discussion about baseball’s defensive statistics. REMEMBER: The ultimate goal in baseball is to score more runs than the opponent. Baseball has, historically, only used a couple of numbers to measure defensive abilities. Fielding percentage, for example, tells us what percentage of the balls hit to a player (called “chances”), which were expected to be outs, were actually converted to outs. Consider the subjective possibilities in that statistic. At the very least, we assume to know what plays a player should make. Also, consider what is left out of this statistic. How do we account for a player’s range (i.e., ability to increase his number of chances)? The fielding range of the quickest shortstops may produce over 30 more chances per season than an average shortstop. The right fielder with the best arm in the game may create 10 more chances because of his willingness to attempt to throw out a runner trying to go from first to third on a single. In other words, fielding percentage tells us very little about a player’s ability to limit the runs scored by the other team. (This is a very abridged, but representative, discussion on baseball’s defensive statistics.)
As we approach General Conference 2012, we need to be very clear about the connection between the our evaluative statistics and our stated goal of making disciples of Jesus Christ for the transformation of the world. Let us be confident that our measurements lead us to faithfulness. If we’re going to draw a bullseye, it needs to be the right target. Many baseball players are aware that fielding percentage has been an important tool to evaluate their defense. Because of this, some have been accused of intentionally not hustling to balls at the edge of their fielding range. By making it to the ball, the scorer may regard it as a chance. If they do not make the play, it will negatively impact their fielding percentage. This obviously does not help the team accomplish the goal of scoring more runs than the opponent, but it protects the player’s evaluation.
As we approach General Conference 2012, may we be clear about our goal and clear about what measurables can help to accomplish that goal.
January 20th, 2012 at 5:53 pm
Interesting thought experiment, baseball and sabremetrics and the church. In my experience, measurements are best at showing you where the gaps are, and providing insight as to where to direct resources to address those gaps. That is, measurements help identify where transformation needs to occur, but statistics in and of themselves do not lead to transformation. Here’s a fun thought: what do you think a 5-tool player (disciple) would look like?