It's been a while since I read it, but the thing I most remember is how sophisticated some of the earliest thought on baseball was. The idea that there were some early stats which were better than the 'traditional stats' but had never caught on, and then later had to be recreated just stunned me.

I think it shows how much clubbishness there really is in baseball. The earliest folks were able to think freely about how to understand the game, because it was so new, but once 'received wisdom' was in place, new thoughts were readily suppressed.

Plus the book makes Branch Rickey out to be even more of a genius than he's generally thought to be, and that's gotta be a good thing.
Sean H | Homepage | 01.04.06 - 10:33 am | #

I'm reading it right now, and having much the same experience. I can't tell if it is redundant or if I'm re-reading it, but it has been a stop-and-start affair.

The book is enlightening, but I can't call it well written. In fact, at times it feels over-written. That said, it is very informative and opens up a world I didn't know existed.
Tod | 01.04.06 - 10:50 am | #