Why do scouts go to major league games?

[jerichoholicninja]

We hear so and so team is sending scouts to watch Greinke or Hamels or whoever, why do teams send scouts to major league games when every game is televised? What can you learn from sitting at a game that you can't from watching it on TV? Seems like a waste of money to me.

[TheCrew07]

Well when evaluating pitching it's much tougher to do from TV angles and much easier to do from behind home plate for many reasons... arm slot, pitching motion, pitch type, pitch break, body language (health), pace, etc... They could probably get the pitch charts and such from PITCHf/x, though many times pitches are mislabeled.

 

Personally I'd much rather watch someone than read about them. Stick a good scout out there with his own gun and and let him do his job.

 

That's like saying why is advanced scouting necessary when one could just look at spray charts and hot zones to come up with a pitching strategy for every batter. It's part of the puzzle, but not the entire picture, the spray charts are definitely more valuable for defensive positioning rather than a specific pitching strategy. How is the batter being setup? What kind of swing does he put on the ball as the count changes? How well does his swing cover the plate? Those concerns are just as valuable as the raw statistical data.

[FVBrewerFan]

Actually, it's not the same thing at all. He's asking why watch in person vs TV. That's a much finer line than watching vs reading about him or looking at stats.

[1992casey]

I think that TheCrew07 understood the question and addressed it well. He mentions that TV angles aren't necessarily as good as what can be see live. He also mentions that the scout can collect personally collect his own data rather than needing to rely on someone else's. Adding to what he says, camera work isn't necessarily perfect. The camera could completely miss something that's significant.

 

Of course, this doesn't mean that TV and other sources of data should be excluded.

[rluzinski]

I think scouts attending a major league game to watch a guy with years of major league experience is pretty pointless. I'd be surprised if what they have to say is even 1% of the discussion. I guess it doesn't cost very much in the grand scheme of things, though.

[TheCrew07]

Actually, it's not the same thing at all. He's asking why watch in person vs TV. That's a much finer line than watching vs reading about him or looking at stats.

 

I think you misunderstood what I wrote.

 

Simply put identifying pitches from certain camera angles in certain parks is extremely difficult, especially just going with stadium gun velocities. Then there are the other issues like the delivery (any deception) and so on which I already listed that are more easily viewed from behind the catcher.

 

I really like PITCHf/x, but the data isn't even close to 100% accurate in it's pitch classifications at this juncture and it doesn't give you any of the human elements which can make a difference either. There is certainly a ton of value in the raw data but I think organizations are correct in their approach to send scouts to watch players they are interested in, there's just too much information that you won't get out of the raw data at this point in time.

[nate82]

I think scouts attending a major league game to watch a guy with years of major league experience is pretty pointless. I'd be surprised if what they have to say is even 1% of the discussion. I guess it doesn't cost very much in the grand scheme of things, though.

 

It is basically to see with their eyes what is going on and if the stats match up with what the player is doing. It is mostly just seeing for themselves and taking their "opinion" on the player to the GM.

[Roderick]

Well when evaluating pitching it's much tougher to do from TV angles and much easier to do from behind home plate for many reasons...

What is the protocol for where scouts sit? Reserved spots?

[Invader3K]

I can sort of understand scouting a pitcher to check his arm angle, his current "stuff", etc. I don't really get scouting a hitter. I remember a few years back when Adam Dunn was on the trading block while he was still with the Reds, and scouts were supposedly checking him out...as if he was some unknown quantity at that point. Just seems pretty silly to me.

[Funketown]

I was actually thinking the same thing myself. Maybe to try and get a sense if he's laboring through an undisclosed injury as the team is trying to ship him? Perhaps just to make sure his mechanics still look the same?

 

The cost of sending a scout to a game with the team is probably pretty small, and when you're talking about trades for players that might be worth even $5 million it probably makes sense to cover all of the bases.

[rluzinski]

I really like PITCHf/x, but the data isn't even close to 100% accurate in it's pitch classifications at this juncture and it doesn't give you any of the human elements which can make a difference either. There is certainly a ton of value in the raw data but I think organizations are correct in their approach to send scouts to watch players they are interested in, there's just too much information that you won't get out of the raw data at this point in time.

 

Classifying pitch type really isn't that important anyway, is it? It becomes semantics at some point (e.g. slider/curve/slurve). Different pitchers will call essentially the same pitch something different at times. You want to know velocity, spin RPM and spin orientation. That's going to give you the pitch trajectory.

 

What scouts can help with is seeing how well the particular pitcher is hiding their pitches I suppose. But again, if you are talking about an established player, how relevant is one or two scouts' opinions? The proof is in the pudding. How has that pitcher been performing against major league players? If I have a projection based on a large sample size, I'm probably going to weigh that something like 90% and scouting 10%.

[pebadger]

In this age of video and data, I think we are sometimes in danger of forgetting that sports are physical and that what these guys do isn't just some sort of virtual activity. This is much more applicable to hard-core stats fans than people actually in the business, but even then I sometimes get the impression from reading various items that the game itself has become barely more than the tedious data collection phase of an ambitious QA project. It's easy to lose the wonder in sports if all you do is watch the video. Going out to see PGA tour pros is almost unbelievable if all you've ever done is watch on TV and play a few rounds of golf every summer. It's easy to lose sight of things that matter if you don't actually get out there and see the differences (subtle and otherwise) between guys that are good and those that are really good.

 

I'm very much a huge fan of advanced analytical techniques, but I also think that at some point the whole idea of scouts and scouting became unduly discounted and perhaps even demonized. Too many scouts and the organizations that employed them came to overestimate the importance of their observations, often to the exclusion of other intelligence, and the value of the information provided by scouts was rightly reevaluated throughout the industry as a result when other techniques became available.

 

Nonetheless, there is no substitute for going to watch games if you want to get the fullest possible picture on a player. It's certainly fair to ask whether the cost/benefit analysis works in favor of sending a scout when deciding whether the information added to the analytical picture by scouting can justify the cost of scouting. Of course good scouts will do a better job at this than bad scouts most of the time. That's a big part of the problem with scouting as opposed to using math: both are capable of providing valuable insight, but it's much easier to evaluate and validate the mathematical tools than it is to evaluate your scouts. Given that, and given the massive amount of intel you can glean just from the numbers, relying primarily on analytics is a no-brainer. Nonetheless, at some point you still have to get out and watch to get answers that numbers can't always provide.

[reillymcshane]

I think they just do it because that's the way it's always been done, and even though you have copious amounts of video, there are some teams that are going to want to have an eye on the guy. You're giving away potentially good players for a guy like Greinke, plus take on millions of dollars of cost. It probably makes teams comfortable to see a guy in person if they are going to take on that kind of investment.

 

Another reason that a scout might be at a game is he is NOT just looking at Greinke or Hamels or whatever pitcher on the mound. In the case of the Brewers, they might be checking out other players such as Nyjer Morgan, K-Rod or whomever. With position players, the cameras aren't necessarily always pointed at them.

[TooLiveBrew]

Why bother attending a game in person as a fan, right? There's no difference from just watching on TV.

[reillymcshane]

The scouts love seeing the sausage races, just like the fans.

[dlk9s]

Why bother attending a game in person as a fan, right? There's no difference from just watching on TV.

 

The sights, sounds, crowd, atmosphere, the fun of "being there," etc. Those are all things that aren't factors for a scout.

[TooLiveBrew]

Why bother attending a game in person as a fan, right? There's no difference from just watching on TV.

 

The sights, sounds, crowd, atmosphere, the fun of "being there," etc. Those are all things that aren't factors for a scout.

Of course. But things like pre-pitch defensive positioning, how the wind is or isn't carrying the ball, or any of the other factors TheCrew07 mentioned are the 'scout equivalent' to the fan experience factors you noted.

[RightFieldCoder]

I sit in the right field bleachers and see way more info about how a player is doing than what is shown on TV. There are little things like the reaction off the bat, how they round bases, and other things they do when the camera is worried about what the kid in the 4th deck is eating.

[Baldkin]

I would be amazingly shocked if MLB teams did not have access to the raw feeds of every television broadcast so they could see all those things.

[RockCoCougars]

Why do people go on business trips when almost everything could be accomplished with technology these days? Same reason- there are some intangible benefits about seeing something/somebody in person, but it's also a perk.

[craigharmann]

I've got a buddy who is the IT director for the local Budweiser distributor here in San Antonio, and we've gotten his work seats a few times to go watch the Missions. Our seats were right behind home plate, and amazes me is watching the movement on pitches and seeing it from that angle is really great! Of course, my buddy is sitting there guessing the MPH on the pitches within 1-2 MPH before the stadium gun puts it up. I'm not a scout or anything, just possibly an insight that might shed a little light as to why scouts are physically at games.

[TheCrew07]

Typically as a courtesy all scouts are in the mid teen rows behind home plate. A very good friend of mine has had season tickets in row 9 since Miller Park opened, and the Brewer's scout sits right behind him on the aisle in row 10.

 

One game when Turnbow was still on fire and pitching really well my father and I sat in those seats and it was literally awe inspiring how sick Turnbow's slider was when he was on... 92 MPH hitting the black on the outside edge with a sharp break all the way across the plate, all my dad could say was "Jesus did you see that?" He chatted up the scout (something I never do, not even at MiLB parks like when I watch the T-Rats) after the game, it was pretty interesting.

 

Sometimes watching on TV I catch myself thinking "I could hit that" but when I sit behind home plate I know there's no freaking way. Well, except when I sat there the day when Davis walked the entire world, I was pretty sure I could draw a walk off him, but by the 5th inning I just wanted to hit him with a bat.

[rluzinski]

Why do people go on business trips when almost everything could be accomplished with technology these days? Same reason- there are some intangible benefits about seeing something/somebody in person, but it's also a perk.

Like getting hammered on your company's dime?

[Roderick]

Typically as a courtesy all scouts are in the mid teen rows behind home plate. A very good friend of mine has had season tickets in row 9 since Miller Park opened, and the Brewer's scout sits right behind him on the aisle in row 10.

Thanks, was wondering. I suppose they have more seats reserved than they almost always need, as handing them out late wouldn't be a problem for those seats.

[RockCoCougars]

Why do people go on business trips when almost everything could be accomplished with technology these days? Same reason- there are some intangible benefits about seeing something/somebody in person, but it's also a perk.

Like getting hammered on your company's dime?

 

Pretty much. Don't look at me