Cool. Fun fact: I never said anything like this strawman. Like, even remotely. I know, I went back and reread to be sure. So, yes, I am declining to acknowledge a thing I never said. It's why I declined previously, I didn't want to engage your strawman. However, you appear intent to grasp at that straw (pun intended) because it's being made obvious by a host of other posters that you're delivering false conclusions.
To clarify, cuz I'm nice like that, I said baseball ignored and/or didn't discover analytics until the game was a century old. It was always there to be used had some enterprising team wanted to employ it. Yet they didn't. Maybe that was purely ignorance of the value. But then...even now people brought up in the pre-analytics tradition still rail against it. Meaning there is a history of baseball ignoring things out of traditional thinking. Or out of stubborn, greedy thinking. Which is, you know, what I actually said. Apologies to your strawman, but the third path is pretty obvious and as as baseball as apple pie (Or some other clever turn of phrase): MLB is really good at inexplicably ignoring good ideas because it's cheap, ignorant, or weird.