There was a great national debate being played out locally last night between traditionalists and a growing number of people who favor statistical analysis. It had to do with Nate Silver. But for the first time in weeks, it had nothing to do with party politics. It was about baseball.

I’m not a huge baseball fan — I prefer basketball (MFFL) and soccer (COYS) these days — but the same debate has played out in pro basketball the past decade, just as it did in evaluating this year’s presidential race.

It interests me on the stat-nerd-vs.-old-schooler level. And it involved one of my favorite beat writers, the Dallas Morning News’ Evan Grant, who is also a friend.

The background: This column does a great job explaining the fight between number-crunchers and traditionalists. Bottom line: Advanced stats favored Mike Trout from the Angels being voted American League Most Valuable Player.

But traditionalists love the fact that Detroit Tigers slugger Miguel Cabrera won “the Triple Crown” — had the highest batting average, plus the most home runs and runs batted in — and led his team to the World Series. Narrative favored Cabrera; numbers favored Trout.

Last night, Grant got online after the award was announced and saw vitriol being directed at him and many of the other 27 baseball writers who voted (22 of 28 voted for Cabrera, who won; Trout was second). So he announced via Twitter that he had voted for Cabrera.

He then argued in a sometimes calm, sometimes delightfully bitchy manner with critics (who were themselves throwing around the terms “idiot” and “moron”). By my count, this lasted for about 100 tweets.

Grant does a very good job, of course, making the traditionalists’ case. If you want to read a detailed breakdown of the statistical case for Trout, Nate Silver (who before he was averaging political polls was coming up with statistical models to better predict baseball players’ performances) makes the advanced-stat case.

Again, I really don’t have a dog in this hunt, as I’m a lapsed baseball fan. But three things about it fascinate me:

1. I think that as fans become more comfortable with advanced stats, writers like Grant will have to increasingly defend using the “eyeball test” argument, because the new generation of fans, raised on advanced metrics, know how narrative can overwhelm reason. (This shift is already happening in basketball.)
2. Commenters on blogs and in social media are usually obstinate assholes. Arguing with them is a dangerous, minefield-filled road. I wouldn’t be surprised if the DMN comes up with rules for its writers in this regard someday soon.
3. Really just a melding of Nos. 1 and 2: Grant expressed several times his weariness with this debate, primarily because of its black/white, idiot/genius framing. Welcome to the New Normal, Evan.

Elsewhere

Deep Ellum is coming back? Really? I dunno. Doesn’t feel that way to me, but, hey, don’t bring your real estate stats up in here, Steve Brown! Also: That pic is of a place that used to be called the Sand Bar, where Andy, one of the Egyptian owners/bartenders, once proclaimed: “Sand Bar don't fuck around.”

The DMNsays of the secessionist movement: “There’s something mystifyingly un-American about giving up on America.” I’m sure the response would be this.

Anna Merlan at Unfair Park tells us about a state lawmaker/nutjob who wants to make sure it’s okay to put the 10 Commandments in classrooms.

Retweets

Of course he did, Bud.

Uncle Barky notes a Channel 8 anchor didn’t much care for the poll question I made fun of earlier this week.

Friday movie clip

Holy hell! I said it might happen, but I didn't believe it really would. But, yes, Irving-based Hostess is going out of business. Pay homage, people. Watch the greatest Hostess scene in movie history. And this weekend, work this line into casual conversation: “I could use a Twinkie.”