Michael Lewis Quotes

In terms of merit, sports has mathematical statistics. That's how you know who the best player is.

What gets measured gets improved.

I am way more accurate than my completion percentage shows.

I don't really look at numbers. I couldn't tell you what my home-road stats are or anything like that.

If you want to know who was better, me or Willie Mays, you have to look at our career stats. And Willie's bottom line was better.

The analysis of statistics is a big part of the modern game, and it's important as a modern manager to embrace areas that can help your team and players improve.

There was but one question he left unasked, and it vibrated between his lines: if gross miscalculations of a person's value could occur on a baseball field, before a live audience of thirty thousand, and a television audience of millions more, what did that say about the measurement of performance in other lines of work? If professional baseball players could be over- or under valued, who couldn't?

Though 'Moneyball' had the talents of screenwriters Steven Zaillian and Aaron Sorkin going for it, they weren't baseball insiders.

You can't control what you can't measure

If he's averaging 25 points and I can contain him to 17, then I've won the battle. If he averages 12 assists and I kept him to seven, I'm winning the game.

I think a player should be evaluated for what he does on the playing field.

I understand what sabermetrics get across, and what they're getting across is to keep it simple. Especially for me, as a pitcher, that's something that helps me - finding ways to keep it simple. Numbers can only tell so much.

One of the most important tasks as a leader in a startup is to pick the right metric to track. This is often referred to as the 'compass metric' because it will be your compass for growth. It's important to note that 'compass metrics' will likely change over the lifetime of a business.

I've played games where I thought I played one of my better games, and statistically, there's nothing there, and vice versa. I've never based how I feel about my performance on stats.

Usually, if I do a good job in the plus/minus category, I know I've had a good game.

Sometimes fans, sometimes even players, they don't know the game sometimes, and they look at numbers, or they use smoke-and-mirrors as far as who's a top 15 player, who's a top 20 player.

I believe you accomplish what you measure.

I'm not worried about good numbers or bad numbers. You worry about the process.

Sacks shouldn't be the only thing that determines if you had a good year.

Data drives success. That is how we began our success with eSpeed. It was always based on the data.

I'm not a numbers type of guy who says I need this many yards, this many touchdowns.

When evaluating the players, too little emphasis is placed on the individual. Reaction times are measured, stress situations are simulated, sleep behaviour is analysed, eating behaviour, how the body reacts - everything is available. The control over the players has got out of hand. They are judged on this data, albeit subjectively. That's madness.

The signal of the importance of something is whether you're actually measuring it and you're holding people accountable to improving those numbers.

Good marketers measure.

Most problems, decisions, and performances are multidimensional, but somehow the results have to be reduced to a few key indicators which are to be institutionally rewarded or penalized... The need to reduce the indicators to a manageable few is based not only on the need to conserve the time (and sanity) of those who assign rewards and penalties, but also to provide those subject to these incentives with some objective indication of what their performance is expected to be and how it will be judged... key indicators can never tell the whole story.