I found the first article weird: the concept that being really good in baseball, like the difference between ordinary and star, is something you can tinker with strikes me as bordering on the absurd. This entry was posted in Sports by Andrew. The only thing I don’t recommend are the misleading title and subtitle of the second article, which I’ll attribute to busy headline writers under pressure to grab your attention with counterintuitive claims. The article itself makes sense, and the article does not say the big data revolution is over-quite the opposite, the article states that there will be more data revolutions in the future. The title and subtitle of this article (“The data revolution has largely disappointed-and we shouldn’t be surprised”) are ridiculous.

If baseball is any indication, the big data revolution is over: by Christopher Phillips. The New Science of Building Baseball Superstars: review by Jack Hamilton of “The MVP Machine: How Baseball’s New Nonconformists Are Using Data to Build Better Players,” by Ben Lindbergh and Travis Sawchick.Ģ. Mark Brown pointed me to two recent popular articles on sports analytics:ġ.

Mlb statistical tools for data analysis