Beasley 1

Zack Beasley
February 2nd, 2017
RC 2001
Dr. Zawilski
Sports Analytics

The two articles being compared come from Deadspin an entertainment/sports website

that posts online articles sometimes by the websites staff, and sometimes by fans who can post

their own articles, and a research article from the International Institute for Analytics. The article

from Deadspin is titled Sports Analytics is Bullshit Now and focuses on the fact that what the

media is calling analytics isnt an accurate representation of what analytics really is. The second

article is titled Analytics in Sports: The New Science of Winning from the International Institute

for Analytics and focuses on educating readers on what sports analytics is, as well as to showcase

successful uses of analytics by multiple sports franchises. This paper analyzes and compares the

different rhetorical approaches of each article and explain why they use such techniques. Both

articles make use of various rhetorical techniques but this paper shall focus mainly on the

audiences, exigences, and appeals to pathos, logos, and ethos that each of the articles make.

Audiences will differ simply because one is an article from a sports/entertainment

website and the other is an independent research study for the International Institute of Analytics.

Deadspin attracts the more casual audience, someone who is interested in sports and maybe

heard the term analytics in a sports broadcast, or someone who wants to read an article that

sounds like they were sitting back and talking to a buddy about what is going on the sports

world. Deadspin is a laid-back style of website that does not care much for prim and properness

as is evident through title Sports Analytics Is Bullshit. Deadspin is loud and tries to grab your

attention. The Analytics in Sports article has a more professional and clean cut appeal to it that
 Beasley 2

attracts the scholars and business types that are likely to read it. It doesnt seek to be flashy or see

how many views or hits it can get. Because its exigence is to inform those who already know

something about the topic it does not have to be bold or exciting to attract more readers. As

discussed in the next paragraph, even more differences can be found between the exigencies of

each paper.

The exigence between these two articles could not be more different. The Deadspin

article seeks to articulate to people that sports analytics is being misrepresented by the media.

Kyle Wagners argument is that there are real analytics being put to work, but the average fan

will never get to see it. Wagners issue, and the exigence he seeks to fill is illustrated in this

quote analytics is posed as a sort of truism engine, a mechanism for coming to the most obvious

possible conclusion. (Wagner, 2015,3). Wagner takes great issue with the fact that all analytics

is currently doing stating facts that can already be discovered through much more conventional

means. He hopes to expose this problem by writing on the topic. He also argues that some sports

franchises are misrepresenting analytics to their own fans as a campaign that essentially says,

we may suck now, but thanks to analytics things will get better. Here is another exigence

Wagner seeks to fill, to stop franchises and media from taking advantage of fan bases with false

advertising of what analytics truly is.

Analytics in Sports: The Science of Winning takes drastically different approach to the

topic of sports analytics. While both articles seek in some ways to explain what sports analytics

is, the Deadspin article does so by explaining what sports analytics is not. Analytics in sports is a

much more straight-forward, by the book approach to explaining what Sports Analytics. In the

article, Thomas Davenport seeks to inform those interested in the field of analytics more about

the topic, as well as convincing those who are doubtful of the subject. There is a common theme
 Beasley 3

in the sports world that intuition, personal experience and gut feeling are better methods of

predicting success than some fancy statistics. Davenport hopes to convince his readers otherwise,

and to explain the potential that lies within all the data. Here we find the main constraint

Davenport meets which is discussed in the paragraph below.

Wagner tries to expose and change some of the constraints that exist within the sports

world about analytics. These constraints being that most people dont truly know what sports

analytics is. That is why he spends so much of the article explaining what analytics is not, rather

than what it is. He must break down the constraints the average fan has regarding the topic.

Constraints that exist within the research article are that not all franchise owners or sports fans

are believe in sports analytics one hundred percent. He argues that for analytics to be successful

there must be trust and commitment from top to bottom for the usage of analytics succeed. A

quote that illustrates the constraints Davenport faces is Even when considerable data and

analytics are available to support key decisions, they may not employ them over their intuition

and experience. (Davenport, 2014). Many of those in the sports world are apt to rely on their

experience or gut feeling as opposed to data. In short, the difference in constraints for the

Deadspin article and the research study is that those reading Deadspin article dont understand

the concept of analytics, and in the research study people know what it is they just dont want to

use it.

Ethos is where the greatest differences in rhetoric exists between these two works. The

Deadspin article makes little to no effort to appeal to the readers ethos. The article lists no

credentials, and the only links on the articles page are to other Deadspin articles, or to reference

the ESPN article Wagner mentions. The website contains numerous ads. It is not even apparent

whether Wagner is a member of the Deadspin staff, or if he is simply an avid fan who wishes to
 Beasley 4

educate and inform the public about a topic. Wagners article contains graphics that dont inform,

and the style of writing he uses does not convey one of professionalism or scholarly work. Take

this sentence for example Analytics say. Holy shit! Analytics say don't sign a legless mummy.

(Wagner, 2015, 3). Using expletives is not exactly a tactic you would expect to find in a scholarly

work to attract readers. This is not to say that the writing is poor, but it is a distinct style that

Deadspin publishes that is akin to talking to a real person rather than reading off what some beat

writer wrote in an article.

Being a research study the Analytics in Sports article makes many appeals to the readers

ethos. The article looks professional and there is no clutter. It was published by the International

Institute for Analytics, lending more towards its credibility. The article itself contains twenty

different citations, and Davenport makes it a point to list his own credentials inside the About

the Author section of the article. Within this section, the reader learns that Davenport is the co-

founder of the International Institute for Analytics, he is the President's Distinguished Professor

of IT and Management at Babson College, and is a research fellow at the MIT Center for Digital

Business. While having the edge in terms of ethos Davenports article falls short in the next

rhetorical device discussed, pathos.

Pathos is where the Deadspin article makes its strongest appeal. Most the article does not

focus on statistics or things of the like, but makes frequent appeals to feelings or opinions of the

readers. Wagner uses imagery such as the conventional wisdom of a bunch of cavemen not

letting that one other caveman on their team because he is old and has no legs (Wagner, 2015, 3)

to create a style of writing that feels like talking to a friend about the latest sports happenings. He

appeals to feeling of comradery. A topic discussed within this article refers to the notion that

some franchises, the Philadelphia 76ers specifically use the term analytics as a campaign that
 Beasley 5

takes advantage of the good will and faith of the fans by saying we suck now, but thanks to

analytics we should be better eventually without providing the real statistics that say such a

thing. In this section of the article Wagner appeals to the sympathy of the readers for 76ers fans

that their general manager is taking advantage of them. Being a non-scholarly article Wagner

must make use of pathos to stir up interest in the article where he lacks ethos and logos.

Being a research article Davenports article tries to keep emotion out of his writing. He

focuses on making fact based claims and cites evidence to get his point across, rather than

appealing to the emotions of his readers. To provide a more personal element to his research

Davenport does make frequent use of personal testimonies and the Leadership Profile sections of

his research. One of the strongest examples is the profile by professional baseball player

Brandon McCarthy who describes his personal experience on how analytics has helped him.

McCarthys testimony details the little ways that analytics has helped him I decided to change

everything and fit a different model, try and kind of change everythingnow that I do it, it's

something that you can focus on different trivial things, percentages here and there that you can

work in your favor. (Davenport, 2014). Research studies try to stay evidence based and use facts

to strengthen their arguments, but the leadership profiles appeal to the pathos of the reader by

giving it a more human element.

Wagner and Davenports writing vary once again when compared in terms of logos.

There is little evidence within Wagners article as it is mainly an opinion piece. Davenports

however makes many appeals and relies heavily upon evidence to convey his point. He cites

statistics constantly throughout the article and makes a point to cite success across various sports

to prove it not a fluke or a product of its environment. Davenport lets the numbers do the talking

as they hold more weight than his words ever could.

 Beasley 6

Through the numerous examples cited it is plain to see the stark contrast between

rhetorical strategies of an academic vs. a non-academic article. The academic article made strong

appeals to the ethos and logos of the reader and this makes sense. There is a saying in sports;

numbers never lie.. This quote explains why an academic article regarding sports analytics

would focus so heavily on ethos and logos. Numbers and credentials add weight to an argument,

more so than any opinion or experience can especially within an academic article. It also makes

sense that in an article discussing analytics, one would use analytics to prove their point. Wagner

appeals more to the pathos of the audience as it is an opinion piece focused on entertaining the

reader. The two articles take drastically different rhetorical approaches to draw the reader in and

explain their point.

Works Cited

Davenport, T. H. (2014). Analytics in Sport: The New Science of Winning. International

Institute for Analytics, 1-28. Retrieved January 30, 2017.

Wagner, K. (2015, February 27). "Sports Analytics" Is Bullshit Now. Retrieved January 30,

2017, from http://deadspin.com/sports-analytics-is-bullshit-now-1688293396