Michael Lewis Quotes

Some coaches believed they could judge a player's performance simply by watching it. In this they were deeply mistaken. The naked eye was an inadequate tool for learning what you needed to know to evaluate baseball players and baseball games. Think about it. One absolutely cannot tell, by watching, the difference between a .300 hitter and a .275 hitter. The difference is one hit every two weeks. The difference between a good hitter and an average hitter is simply not visible-it is a matter of record

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

I won twenty-eight games in thirty-five and I couldn't believe my eyes when the Cards sent me a contract with a cut in salary. Mr Rickey said I deserved a cut because I didn't win thirty games.

In organizations, once you articulate how success will be measured, everybody tries to game the system so that they are measured in the best possible way.

Pop is totally results-oriented and there is a very strong feedback loop.

Eliminate numerical quotas, including Management by Objectives.

It is much more difficult to measure nonperformance than performance.

Data not only measures progress—it inspires it. Once you start measuring problems, people are more inclined to take action to fix them, because nobody wants to end up at the bottom of a list of rankings.

What gets lost is we wouldn't be who we are and as successful as we have been if we didn't have a decent batting average.

At the end of the day, what people will give credit for is how Octobers turn out. That's how it works for Yankees managers.

I am way more accurate than my completion percentage shows.

It's very hard to rank performances. It's very difficult, and it doesn't really matter if you rank performances.

The difference in being a good soldier and actor is that in the Air Force, you see results, and our worth is defined by numbers. As an actor, your results are based on other people's opinions.

If you do not score, it is difficult to win.

I never played for numbers.

If you hit .200 and you win or .300 and you win, it's all the same. Just so you win.

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

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.

It is hard to ignore that is reality. But, at the same time, it still comes down to sound baseball decisions, farm systems and then execution on the field by the players. There are a lot of components to that (other) than just saying it is the highest salary.

When a baseball player makes an error, it goes into the record and is published. How many of us could stand this sort of daily scrutiny?

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.

You're only as smart as your ERA.

I have always cautioned partners that I considered three years a minimum in determining whether we were "performing".

If the metrics you are looking at aren't useful in optimizing your strategy - stop looking at them.

It (a baseball box score) doesn't tell how big you are, what church you attend, what color you are, or how your father voted in the last election. It just tells what kind of baseball player you were on that particular day.