Reclaiming Balance in Baseball is a four-part special feature examining the forces pulling America’s pastime off its axis. Part II confronts the dominance of analytics—from the rise of Ivy League front offices to the near-evaporation of instinct in decision-making. Where does data enhance the game, and where does it hollow it out?
Analytics vs. Intuition: A Pendulum Overswung?
Baseball once thrived on gut decisions. Today, analytics dominate, driven by Ivy League GMs—40% of general managers hail from elite schools like Harvard, Yale, and Princeton.
Billy Beane’s Moneyball (2003), inspired and groomed by Dartmouth’s Sandy Alderson, ushered in data-driven success. Advanced analytics like bWAR, exit velocity, and defensive shifts diminish instinct’s role, shaping decisions in ways that might undervalue intuition.
This analytics dogmatism—like the judicial debate between originalist justices & judges (who adhere to statutory intent) and living-document counterparts (who view the Constitution as adaptable to evolving circumstances)—clashes with baseball’s long-standing reliance on intuition. While numbers offer precision, instinct gives the game its soul—both must coexist to preserve its essence.
As in commercial real estate (CRE), where my brethren and I—as part of the task—analyze KPIs (key performance indicators) like NOI and ROI, numbers inform but don’t seal deals. Intuition, trust, and execution do. Baseball’s shift mirrors Wall Street’s algorithm-driven ETFs, obscuring simplicity.
Understanding bWAR: Value or Veil?
Wins Above Replacement (WAR) estimates a player’s contribution compared to a replacement-level player—essentially, the difference between a star and a readily available minor leaguer or bench player.
bWAR, Baseball-Reference’s version, adjusts for league, era, and ballparks, differing from FanGraphs’ fWAR, which utilizes distinct calculations for player value over a full season.
An elite player typically achieves a bWAR of 8.0 or higher, placing them in the upper echelon of baseball history. With that in mind, consider these standout seasons:
Historic bWAR figures:
Babe Ruth (1923): 14.1 bWAR
Brooks Robinson (1964): 8.4 bWAR
Aaron Judge (2024): 11.1 bWAR
Aaron Judge (2025), ~59 games, as of 6/1/2025: ~4.5 bWAR, projecting to ~13.0 bWAR
Mike Trout (2012): 10.5 bWAR
bWAR predicts team wins with ~85% accuracy, like debt yield in CRE underwriting—a key metric used to assess financial stability in commercial real estate.
Still, as Whitey Herzog often reminded us, a hot bat or sharp glove doesn’t always show up in the margins. 📎
The Modern Crisis: Data Over Heart?
Analytics reveal talent, but baseball risks becoming formulaic.
Judge’s ~12.6 bWAR projection dazzles—yet misses his Ruthian aura. Real-time decisions—pitcher matchups, shifts—lean too heavily on data, relying less and less on instinct.
A 2021 SABR study found clutch performance, like Derek Jeter’s 2001 ALDS flip to nab Jeremy Giambi, defies analytics. That moment—guile, positioning, execution—defined Jeter’s Hall of Fame career, not a KPI.
OTD in 2001, Derek Jeter’s iconic ‘flip play.’ pic.twitter.com/XoDignGSig
— YES Network (@YESNetwork) October 13, 2023
Imagine Sparky Anderson, Earl Weaver, or Tommy Lasorda guided by spreadsheets? Analytics dogmatism, like the originalist vs. living document judicial split, threatens baseball’s soul. Balance is needed.
Part III publishes tomorrow, focusing on Curt Flood, Marvin Miller, and the financial realignment of baseball’s labor economy.
If you missed it, read Part I—Whitey Herzog and the Lost Art of Intuition—here.
Catch up on Reginald Armstrong’s Memorial Day column—Restoring the Integrity of America’s Pastime
