Take a power-hitting DH who runs like molasses going uphill. Turn over the odometer and expand the BMI. Throw in a wrist injury -- the very kind that puts the brakes on bat speed. Stir in a big contract. What you have is a career that's over, but doesn't know it.
You have David Ortiz.
Ortiz is done like burned meatloaf. It's not just that he hasn't hit a home run in April or that he's batting .217. It's not that his compadre Manny is gone or that last season was his worst with Boston. It's that the careers of big fellas like him fall off the table when their time comes and you can see it when he bats.
Ortiz can't get around on fastballs. He's got to start his swing earlier, making him more vulnerable to breaking pitches. Pitchers are no longer afraid of him, particularly in Boston's densely-packed lineup, and are throwing more pitches in the zone. When a player without speed or defense loses walks, home runs and hits, all he's got is his sunny disposition. As Leo Durocher famously observed, you don't win pennants with those.
Perhaps Ortiz is still recovering from last year's ouchies and will rev it up when the weather warms. We certainly saw Carlos Delgado find another gear in the second half of last year after it appeared that he was ready for his parting gifts. But Delgado is a better athlete than Ortiz. I'm betting that Big Papi is this year's Mo Vaughn.
b
26 April 2009
25 April 2009
Stop the Bailout
Let's hear one for the sensible natures of New Yorkers. (Did I just say that?) As you've no doubt read, Big Apple baseball clubs can't seem to sell out Citi Field and Yankee Stadium, particularly the high end seats, because their prices are -- I believe the word is -- insane. Frankly, the prices would keep me from coming more than once or twice a year if I lived in the metro area, and I'm a rabid fan (of the game, not of the teams).
Call me cheap, but each contest in the two NYC cathedrals counts for .07% of the team's final record, yet the Steinbrenners expect a family of four to purchase tickets three sections up between first base and right field -- in other words, nowhere in particular -- for $600. For one game! (Similar seats at Citi are a mere $276 for the same family.) That's before the outrageous Ticketmaster scam is added on top of it, before the $12 parking charge and before the $50 in hamburgers. And those aren't the deluxe model, cushioned seats: those babies go for $300 and up per ticket at Yankee Stadium.
It is my fervent hope that attendance in these two parks lags badly and that the franchises suffer financially. NYers should not reward their franchises for investments in fan stupidity, gullibility and slavishness. They need to learn that there is a severe limit on what the market will bear, and the same lesson must be made clear to their cousins across the country.
If cities are going to be stupid enough to devote finite resources (and lending authority, which is often pitched disingenuously as no cost to taxpayers) to build these edifices for companies that provide nearly no local employment and few concrete financial benefits, the teams could at least avoid the temptation to price their product as monopolists. I recommend this book to anyone who thinks that sports teams provide an economic contribution to their host cities, or that their abstract benefits somehow convey some financial gain to the metro area.
Or, you could come visit us here in Charleston, SC. Our mid-level single-A team notwithstanding, the Holy City has a thriving tourist economy based on real tourist attractions, not on sports, and we're doing fine. It costs six bucks to go to a RiverDogs game, the hot dogs are two dollars and everyone can see the field. You don't want to miss any of the action when the sumo wrestlers come out between innings in their inflatable suits.
b
Call me cheap, but each contest in the two NYC cathedrals counts for .07% of the team's final record, yet the Steinbrenners expect a family of four to purchase tickets three sections up between first base and right field -- in other words, nowhere in particular -- for $600. For one game! (Similar seats at Citi are a mere $276 for the same family.) That's before the outrageous Ticketmaster scam is added on top of it, before the $12 parking charge and before the $50 in hamburgers. And those aren't the deluxe model, cushioned seats: those babies go for $300 and up per ticket at Yankee Stadium.
It is my fervent hope that attendance in these two parks lags badly and that the franchises suffer financially. NYers should not reward their franchises for investments in fan stupidity, gullibility and slavishness. They need to learn that there is a severe limit on what the market will bear, and the same lesson must be made clear to their cousins across the country.
If cities are going to be stupid enough to devote finite resources (and lending authority, which is often pitched disingenuously as no cost to taxpayers) to build these edifices for companies that provide nearly no local employment and few concrete financial benefits, the teams could at least avoid the temptation to price their product as monopolists. I recommend this book to anyone who thinks that sports teams provide an economic contribution to their host cities, or that their abstract benefits somehow convey some financial gain to the metro area.
Or, you could come visit us here in Charleston, SC. Our mid-level single-A team notwithstanding, the Holy City has a thriving tourist economy based on real tourist attractions, not on sports, and we're doing fine. It costs six bucks to go to a RiverDogs game, the hot dogs are two dollars and everyone can see the field. You don't want to miss any of the action when the sumo wrestlers come out between innings in their inflatable suits.
b
Sanity In An Insane World
As usual, Fox subjected me again this Saturday to the Yankees, without whom apparently baseball would not exist. I live 750 miles from NY, but get the Yankees telecast probably half the time. Add in the Mets and Braves (ostensibly my home team) and you have nearly 100% of the games we digital box users get to see.
In any case, the Yankees once again held their opponent to under four touchdowns, limiting the Red Sox to 16 runs. Of course, being the home team, Boston didn't bat in the 9th and since they failed to get out of the gate against AJ Burnett in the first four innings, they tallied all 16 scores from the 5th through 8th frames. The game exposed the Yankees' two major weaknesses: utterly no bench and worse relief than Srebrenica. Because he's forced to carry 13 pitchers, Joe Girardi is out of options after he pinch hits twice.
**
It was fun to note how fickle this game is. Reigning MVP Dustin Pedroia committed a costly baserunning gaffe with a man on third to extinguish an inning and then Bucknered an inning-ending grounder into a two-run, game tying error. Meanwhile reputed gamer Derek Jeter fanned in a critical situation. (I believe there was second and third with one out in a one-run game.) Even Joe Buck and Tim McCarver, who by their own on-air admission stifle orgasms everytime they mention Jeter's name, were forced to admit that it was the biggest at-bat in the contest up to that point.
Meanwhile, AJ Burnett cruised through the first four innings and then coughed up a hairball in the fifth, serving up a bases-juiced tater to former Major Leaguer Jason Varitek. ( You may be too young to remember when he could hit.) For Mike Lowell, on the other hand, it was a moral victory if he could just make contact against Burnett in the first five innings; he ended up with a homer, a double and six RBIs.
**
Though he was ineffective for the first five innings, Josh Beckett found himself staked to an 8-6 lead heading into the top of the 6th. At that point, McCarver opined that Terry Francona is a moron. Well, he didn't say it quite that way; what he said was that Francona was sending Beckett back into the fray so he could get the win. If Terry Francona is managing so that his players can compile personal statistics -- meaningless ones at that -- he is mentally retarded. I say this with all due respect to people with mental retardation, and I think we can all agree that no such person should be the field manager of a $100 million enterprise. Based on that comment, I guess we can include Mr. McCarver. (Also worth noting: Beckett was already positioned to chalk up the W.)
Fortunately for Saux Nation, Francona did no such thing. He sent out Beckett either because he thought the right-hander had found his way in the scoreless 5th or because his bullpen was worn out from the previous night's 11-inning affair. As it turned out, Beckett surrendered two more runs without recording an out and was long gone by the time Hideki Okajima was "credited" with the win.
Okajima "earned" the win by getting an out to end the seventh inning, watching his team score three runs in the bottom of the frame to provide a two-run cushion, and then sitting on the bench and admiring the work of Ramon Ramirez, who shut down the Yankees in the 8th. This was highly necessary after Okajima allowed half the lead to disappear when he grooved one to Robby Cano, who redirected it some 400 feet in the other direction. Of course, on an afternoon when Beckett and Burnett each pitched five innings, gave up eight runs and avoided being charged with a loss, Okajima's performance appeared win-worthy.
b
In any case, the Yankees once again held their opponent to under four touchdowns, limiting the Red Sox to 16 runs. Of course, being the home team, Boston didn't bat in the 9th and since they failed to get out of the gate against AJ Burnett in the first four innings, they tallied all 16 scores from the 5th through 8th frames. The game exposed the Yankees' two major weaknesses: utterly no bench and worse relief than Srebrenica. Because he's forced to carry 13 pitchers, Joe Girardi is out of options after he pinch hits twice.
**
It was fun to note how fickle this game is. Reigning MVP Dustin Pedroia committed a costly baserunning gaffe with a man on third to extinguish an inning and then Bucknered an inning-ending grounder into a two-run, game tying error. Meanwhile reputed gamer Derek Jeter fanned in a critical situation. (I believe there was second and third with one out in a one-run game.) Even Joe Buck and Tim McCarver, who by their own on-air admission stifle orgasms everytime they mention Jeter's name, were forced to admit that it was the biggest at-bat in the contest up to that point.
Meanwhile, AJ Burnett cruised through the first four innings and then coughed up a hairball in the fifth, serving up a bases-juiced tater to former Major Leaguer Jason Varitek. ( You may be too young to remember when he could hit.) For Mike Lowell, on the other hand, it was a moral victory if he could just make contact against Burnett in the first five innings; he ended up with a homer, a double and six RBIs.
**
Though he was ineffective for the first five innings, Josh Beckett found himself staked to an 8-6 lead heading into the top of the 6th. At that point, McCarver opined that Terry Francona is a moron. Well, he didn't say it quite that way; what he said was that Francona was sending Beckett back into the fray so he could get the win. If Terry Francona is managing so that his players can compile personal statistics -- meaningless ones at that -- he is mentally retarded. I say this with all due respect to people with mental retardation, and I think we can all agree that no such person should be the field manager of a $100 million enterprise. Based on that comment, I guess we can include Mr. McCarver. (Also worth noting: Beckett was already positioned to chalk up the W.)
Fortunately for Saux Nation, Francona did no such thing. He sent out Beckett either because he thought the right-hander had found his way in the scoreless 5th or because his bullpen was worn out from the previous night's 11-inning affair. As it turned out, Beckett surrendered two more runs without recording an out and was long gone by the time Hideki Okajima was "credited" with the win.
Okajima "earned" the win by getting an out to end the seventh inning, watching his team score three runs in the bottom of the frame to provide a two-run cushion, and then sitting on the bench and admiring the work of Ramon Ramirez, who shut down the Yankees in the 8th. This was highly necessary after Okajima allowed half the lead to disappear when he grooved one to Robby Cano, who redirected it some 400 feet in the other direction. Of course, on an afternoon when Beckett and Burnett each pitched five innings, gave up eight runs and avoided being charged with a loss, Okajima's performance appeared win-worthy.
b
23 April 2009
Hold This Stat
Every election, reporters -- particularly broadcast reporters -- dutifully relate how much money has been raised by candidates for everything from city council to president. Is this information relevant? Elections suggest it is not. Both Barak Obama and George Bush raised hundreds of millions of dollars and thumbed their noses at federal campaign limits. Is this information interesting? Do you really want to hear a list of candidates and how much they've raised?
So why is this information reported during each election cycle? Because it's so easy to obtain and understand that even a broadcast reporter can dig it up and spit it out.
And that, my friends, is why the Associated Press is now including the Hold in its baseball box scores, even though there is not a baseball fan this side of the Andromeda galaxy who puts any stock in this statistic.
Of all the many useful new measurements that could actually increase readers' understanding of the game -- VORP, BABIP, EQA, Win Shares -- the AP has decided to identify holds because any innumerate, third-rate intern on the overnight shift can figure it out while monitoring Sports Center and scanning the police blotter. VORP, on the other hand, requires a working knowledge of multiplication's profound complexities and division's subtle nuances.
Any reliever who comes in with a lead of three runs or less and doesn't blow it gets a hold. And I mean any. Thus, a right-handed 29-year-old gentleman named Bobby Korecky, despite a generally unimpressive 5.31 ERA, 11 walks and six strikeouts in 20.7 innings of MLB experience, can brag to his homeys that he was credited by the baseball world for "holding" the Rockies during his brief stint in the Diamondbacks' game on April 22, 2009. What Korecky did in unofficial terms was "stink," though fortunately for him Elias Sports Bureau records no such evaluation.
Here is a snapshot of Korecky's performance: He entered the game in the sixth inning with a 6-3 Arizona lead and managed to retire two batters before being run out of the game on a hit and two walks, two runs scored and the beginning of the rally that led to a 9-6 Colorado win. Way to hold 'em, Bobby!
Maybe I have it wrong. Perhaps publishing the hold is part of a diabolical AP plot to enhance the perceived value of the save. Only in comparison to the utterly worthless hold does the generally useless save vindicate its existence. Bwa-ha-ha-ha. It's a Machiavellian scheme by the evil geniuses at AP, I tell you!
Save us!
b
So why is this information reported during each election cycle? Because it's so easy to obtain and understand that even a broadcast reporter can dig it up and spit it out.
And that, my friends, is why the Associated Press is now including the Hold in its baseball box scores, even though there is not a baseball fan this side of the Andromeda galaxy who puts any stock in this statistic.
Of all the many useful new measurements that could actually increase readers' understanding of the game -- VORP, BABIP, EQA, Win Shares -- the AP has decided to identify holds because any innumerate, third-rate intern on the overnight shift can figure it out while monitoring Sports Center and scanning the police blotter. VORP, on the other hand, requires a working knowledge of multiplication's profound complexities and division's subtle nuances.
Any reliever who comes in with a lead of three runs or less and doesn't blow it gets a hold. And I mean any. Thus, a right-handed 29-year-old gentleman named Bobby Korecky, despite a generally unimpressive 5.31 ERA, 11 walks and six strikeouts in 20.7 innings of MLB experience, can brag to his homeys that he was credited by the baseball world for "holding" the Rockies during his brief stint in the Diamondbacks' game on April 22, 2009. What Korecky did in unofficial terms was "stink," though fortunately for him Elias Sports Bureau records no such evaluation.
Here is a snapshot of Korecky's performance: He entered the game in the sixth inning with a 6-3 Arizona lead and managed to retire two batters before being run out of the game on a hit and two walks, two runs scored and the beginning of the rally that led to a 9-6 Colorado win. Way to hold 'em, Bobby!
Maybe I have it wrong. Perhaps publishing the hold is part of a diabolical AP plot to enhance the perceived value of the save. Only in comparison to the utterly worthless hold does the generally useless save vindicate its existence. Bwa-ha-ha-ha. It's a Machiavellian scheme by the evil geniuses at AP, I tell you!
Save us!
b
22 April 2009
Coupla Quick Hits
How good is Roy Halladay? The box score in my newspaper says the accomplished Texas offense "roughed him up" last night by scoring five times. Okay, but Halladay pitched eight innings, surrendered eight hits, walked nobody and struck out nine. If that's roughing him up, your team is doomed if he has a mediocre start against you.
The same paper celebrates the "surging" Pirates following its win over Florida...its second in a row. If that's a surge, I can leave my computer plugged in during a lightning storm. In case you're wondering, Pittsburgh is 6-4 in its last 10. Look out respectability!
There's a larger point here: there are no trends in the first 15 games of the season, so you can stop looking for them. They haven't even played one-tenth of the season. Today's team looks very different than the one that ends the campaign, whether because of injuries, performance, trades, call-ups or some combination of all of them.
More importantly, it's way too early for conclusions. If a team wins 22 of 30, okay, that's a trend. A couple in a row -- against the same team? C'mon.
b
The same paper celebrates the "surging" Pirates following its win over Florida...its second in a row. If that's a surge, I can leave my computer plugged in during a lightning storm. In case you're wondering, Pittsburgh is 6-4 in its last 10. Look out respectability!
There's a larger point here: there are no trends in the first 15 games of the season, so you can stop looking for them. They haven't even played one-tenth of the season. Today's team looks very different than the one that ends the campaign, whether because of injuries, performance, trades, call-ups or some combination of all of them.
More importantly, it's way too early for conclusions. If a team wins 22 of 30, okay, that's a trend. A couple in a row -- against the same team? C'mon.
b
19 April 2009
Notes From the Bleacher Seats
Mid-April, a time in baseball to ignore your fantasy team so that you don't make any rash decisions. Folks, the Blue Jays will not lead the AL in runs scored, so take a deep breath and just enjoy America's pastime without jumping to any conclusions.
A few observations, on the other hand, are in order:
Just What They're Looking For
This is how the Met brain trust drew it up, at least on one side of the ball. Johan Santana strikes out seven in as many shutout innings, J.J. Putz and KRod fan four in two innings of one-hit ball, and a solid defensive lineup clamps down the Brewers.
Expect To See More of This
Tim Lincecum shakes off a couple of rough starts and blanks Arizona for eight innings without walking a batter for the Giants . He also whiffs 13 Diamondbacks. Great. San Francisco, whose cleanup hitter is Bengie Molina, loses 2-0. Get used to it.
Same script for the Mariners, another team with the hit-making ability of Dexys Midnight Runers. Eric Bedard, still healthy after two full weeks, pitches six solid innings, but Seattle's bats remain quiet against the vaunted Detroit mound corps, which prevails 2-0. With the AL West up for grabs, look for Anaheim, Texas and Oakland to circle every Seattle series on their calendars.
Manny Ramirez smacks two home runs and drops a fly ball, as the Dodgers maintain their hold on first place in the NL West. That's the trade-off you make with Manny and it usually accrues to his team's advantage. But it's got to play havoc with the mellow head Joe Torre's been cultivating in L.A.
Enjoy It While You Can
With a second straight come-from-behind win, this time off a closer who hadn't blown a save in 18 months, the Padres beat the World Champs and improved their record to 9-3. Don't believe the hype. San Diego is a dreadful team. Sixteen runs in two games not withstanding, they have no offense to complement their lack of pitching.
Buyer Beware
The Marlins are an intriguing young team, but let's not throw a playoff party for them just yet. Remember that they've been playing the Nationals, whose management seems to share their host city's good judgment and fiscal discipline. If chronic poor performance is reason for a bailout, this team needs to have a talk with Tim Geithner. Think you can name three members of the Washington pitching staff? You're officially a baseball geek.
There May Actually Be A God
It's fun watching the Yankees self-destruct, if only for one day. It wasn't just Chien-Ming Wang's inability to keep the ball below hitters' navels, but the March of the Penguins behind him that is supposed to be the NY bullpen. The Yanks aren't going to lose a lot of 22-4 games; in fact, they may not lose a lot of games period, but it was nice to see the team's deficiencies showcased on national TV. Their defense-first center fielder dropping a fly ball, their slowing shortstop failing to get to any bouncing ball in his vicinity, their complete lack of a bench -- no wonder they spent the GDP of Botswana for three good players. It's hard to imagine this team beating Boston without some mid-season superstar repurchase program provided by a rebuilding team. Note to Brian Cashman: crappy pitching staffs aren't improved by bringing in more bad pitchers. Carrying 13 pitchers leaves Joe Girardi without options in the field, especially with four DHs in the lineup. For all their stars, this is one of the most poorly constructed teams in baseball.
Twenty-four more glorious weeks of this...and then the playoffs!
b
A few observations, on the other hand, are in order:
Just What They're Looking For
This is how the Met brain trust drew it up, at least on one side of the ball. Johan Santana strikes out seven in as many shutout innings, J.J. Putz and KRod fan four in two innings of one-hit ball, and a solid defensive lineup clamps down the Brewers.
Expect To See More of This
Tim Lincecum shakes off a couple of rough starts and blanks Arizona for eight innings without walking a batter for the Giants . He also whiffs 13 Diamondbacks. Great. San Francisco, whose cleanup hitter is Bengie Molina, loses 2-0. Get used to it.
Same script for the Mariners, another team with the hit-making ability of Dexys Midnight Runers. Eric Bedard, still healthy after two full weeks, pitches six solid innings, but Seattle's bats remain quiet against the vaunted Detroit mound corps, which prevails 2-0. With the AL West up for grabs, look for Anaheim, Texas and Oakland to circle every Seattle series on their calendars.
Manny Ramirez smacks two home runs and drops a fly ball, as the Dodgers maintain their hold on first place in the NL West. That's the trade-off you make with Manny and it usually accrues to his team's advantage. But it's got to play havoc with the mellow head Joe Torre's been cultivating in L.A.
Enjoy It While You Can
With a second straight come-from-behind win, this time off a closer who hadn't blown a save in 18 months, the Padres beat the World Champs and improved their record to 9-3. Don't believe the hype. San Diego is a dreadful team. Sixteen runs in two games not withstanding, they have no offense to complement their lack of pitching.
Buyer Beware
The Marlins are an intriguing young team, but let's not throw a playoff party for them just yet. Remember that they've been playing the Nationals, whose management seems to share their host city's good judgment and fiscal discipline. If chronic poor performance is reason for a bailout, this team needs to have a talk with Tim Geithner. Think you can name three members of the Washington pitching staff? You're officially a baseball geek.
There May Actually Be A God
It's fun watching the Yankees self-destruct, if only for one day. It wasn't just Chien-Ming Wang's inability to keep the ball below hitters' navels, but the March of the Penguins behind him that is supposed to be the NY bullpen. The Yanks aren't going to lose a lot of 22-4 games; in fact, they may not lose a lot of games period, but it was nice to see the team's deficiencies showcased on national TV. Their defense-first center fielder dropping a fly ball, their slowing shortstop failing to get to any bouncing ball in his vicinity, their complete lack of a bench -- no wonder they spent the GDP of Botswana for three good players. It's hard to imagine this team beating Boston without some mid-season superstar repurchase program provided by a rebuilding team. Note to Brian Cashman: crappy pitching staffs aren't improved by bringing in more bad pitchers. Carrying 13 pitchers leaves Joe Girardi without options in the field, especially with four DHs in the lineup. For all their stars, this is one of the most poorly constructed teams in baseball.
Twenty-four more glorious weeks of this...and then the playoffs!
b
10 April 2009
The Lessons of Nick Adenhart & Friends
Words are utterly insufficient when contemplating the avoidable loss of three young lives. Shaking our heads, whispering prayers, stopping for a moment to contemplate the tragedy -- none of that makes the untimely deaths of Angels rookie pitcher Nick Adenhart and two friends any more sensible. Smarter people than I have tried and failed to capture the scope of the tragedy.
Preliminary reports indicate that the driver who caused the accident was drunk, had driven drunk before, was driving with a suspended license and fled the scene. I think there is broad agreement across the nation that such a person has committed murder and deserves severe punishment.
I'm angry at that guy, just as you are. But I also recognize that he is probably an alcoholic. He has a paralyzing disease that makes him drink. And when he's drunk, he doesn't have the good judgment to avoid driving. That's not an excuse, but it's important to keep in mind when devising policy.
We need to stop social drinkers from driving and keep alcoholics away from cars altogether. We've done a pretty good job of the former, although our attitudes towards first-time offenders (see Tony LaRussa, Charles Barkley, Michael Phelps, et. al.) are way too lax and forgiving, particularly compared to our shrill, "reefer madness" response to casual marijuana use.
With respect to the latter, we have more work to do. People who drive drunk should lose their licenses for some period of time -- say a month -- that can demonstrate how inconvenient it would be to lose driving privileges altogether. They should be screened for abuse issues and sent to rehabilitation if they are alcoholic, and their licenses should not be returned until they demonstrate they are in remission.
Any subsequent DUI arrests should end driving careers more or less permanently. Perhaps cars should even be impounded. That way alcoholics don't have opportunities to get other people killed.
One thing is for sure: if you drive drunk on a suspended license, you're a felon and ought to be locked up for a long time. We need to protect our communities from one of the most lethal diseases in America, and prevent as many future Nick Adenharts as possible.
b
Preliminary reports indicate that the driver who caused the accident was drunk, had driven drunk before, was driving with a suspended license and fled the scene. I think there is broad agreement across the nation that such a person has committed murder and deserves severe punishment.
I'm angry at that guy, just as you are. But I also recognize that he is probably an alcoholic. He has a paralyzing disease that makes him drink. And when he's drunk, he doesn't have the good judgment to avoid driving. That's not an excuse, but it's important to keep in mind when devising policy.
We need to stop social drinkers from driving and keep alcoholics away from cars altogether. We've done a pretty good job of the former, although our attitudes towards first-time offenders (see Tony LaRussa, Charles Barkley, Michael Phelps, et. al.) are way too lax and forgiving, particularly compared to our shrill, "reefer madness" response to casual marijuana use.
With respect to the latter, we have more work to do. People who drive drunk should lose their licenses for some period of time -- say a month -- that can demonstrate how inconvenient it would be to lose driving privileges altogether. They should be screened for abuse issues and sent to rehabilitation if they are alcoholic, and their licenses should not be returned until they demonstrate they are in remission.
Any subsequent DUI arrests should end driving careers more or less permanently. Perhaps cars should even be impounded. That way alcoholics don't have opportunities to get other people killed.
One thing is for sure: if you drive drunk on a suspended license, you're a felon and ought to be locked up for a long time. We need to protect our communities from one of the most lethal diseases in America, and prevent as many future Nick Adenharts as possible.
b
MLB Staying True To The Game
The NBA and NHL are turning the ignition on their playoffs, which is always a good time for baseball. These two leagues have taken wonderful sports and diluted them to the point of irrelevance, a vivid contrast to baseball.
It's interesting too how basketball and hockey are so far apart on the playoff loop that they're in the same place. In the NBA, half the teams make the playoffs, but only four or five have any realistic chance of winning the championship. It makes the final weeks of the season and the first few rounds of the playoffs largely meaningless.
Hockey's just the opposite. There's little correlation between regular season performance and Stanley Cup results, meaning any team that makes the tournament has a realistic shot if its goalie gets hot. (The top regular season team in the league has never won the Cup in the expanded playoff format.) Since seeding is insignificant, so is most of the season. The only part of the regular season that matters in the NHL is the last two weeks as middle feeders battle for the final playoff spots. Ironically, the sports media seems to stop paying what little attention they give hockey at just that point.
As we inaugurate the baseball season, who's a playoff lock? The Yankees, Sox and Rays have to contend with each other. The Cubs look like a good bet, but so did Enron. And who's playing for honorable mention? The Pirates, Padres and Nationals to be sure, and I wouldn't want my life to depend on the Mariners, Orioles, Blue Jays or Astros either. Nonetheless, each of them has a better shot than the #8 seeds in the NBA playoffs, who have to beat Cleveland and L.A. respectively.
It's another feather to add to Bud Selig's hat. Most baseball fans think of him as Bozo the Commissioner, but there's a lot to be said for avoiding the temptation to rob Peter's regular season to pay Paul's playoffs. Have fun NBA and NHL, and let me know when you're done.
b
It's interesting too how basketball and hockey are so far apart on the playoff loop that they're in the same place. In the NBA, half the teams make the playoffs, but only four or five have any realistic chance of winning the championship. It makes the final weeks of the season and the first few rounds of the playoffs largely meaningless.
Hockey's just the opposite. There's little correlation between regular season performance and Stanley Cup results, meaning any team that makes the tournament has a realistic shot if its goalie gets hot. (The top regular season team in the league has never won the Cup in the expanded playoff format.) Since seeding is insignificant, so is most of the season. The only part of the regular season that matters in the NHL is the last two weeks as middle feeders battle for the final playoff spots. Ironically, the sports media seems to stop paying what little attention they give hockey at just that point.
As we inaugurate the baseball season, who's a playoff lock? The Yankees, Sox and Rays have to contend with each other. The Cubs look like a good bet, but so did Enron. And who's playing for honorable mention? The Pirates, Padres and Nationals to be sure, and I wouldn't want my life to depend on the Mariners, Orioles, Blue Jays or Astros either. Nonetheless, each of them has a better shot than the #8 seeds in the NBA playoffs, who have to beat Cleveland and L.A. respectively.
It's another feather to add to Bud Selig's hat. Most baseball fans think of him as Bozo the Commissioner, but there's a lot to be said for avoiding the temptation to rob Peter's regular season to pay Paul's playoffs. Have fun NBA and NHL, and let me know when you're done.
b
07 April 2009
Audio Killed The Radio Star
Radio is dead, but MLB Audio is alive and humming through my computer for $14.95 a year. I can get the home and away broadcast of every single Major League game. That's 2,430 choices.
Yesterday I listened to the Rangers call of the Texas-Cleveland game while I worked. The Ranger announcers were balanced and unobtrusive. The spent a lot of time in a 9-1 game contrasting Cliff Lee's 2008 season with his 2009 debut. That's good insights about an opposing player.
At night I had the Astros-Cubs contest on my home computer. The Houston announcers are homers of the worst sort. Not only do they use first person references to the team and openly root for them, but they have almost nothing to say about the opposition. It's quite possible that Houson and Chicago will take up residence on opposite ends of the NL standings. Wouldn't Astro fans like to know something about the best team in the league?
I'm looking forward to getting Vin Scully and Jon Miller's calls and discovering some great announcers elsewhere. I'm hoping to wangle John Sciambi and Gary Cohen broadcasts, even though they do TV. I lack the bandwidth to buy the TV package; otherwise $79.95 to get the video feeds is a steal. (There are blackout rules, so if you're hung up on your local team you're probably out of luck.) Bravo for Major League Baseball for leading the way in alternative media, the proceeds of which are shared equally among the teams. Remember to credit Bud Selig for innovations like this when you denigrate his commissionership for a missed World Series and an All-Star game tie.
Heaven, man; I'm in heaven. It's baseball season. This afternoon, Royals and White Sox. After a beautiful wife, a healthy family and food on the table, what more could a man desire?
Yesterday I listened to the Rangers call of the Texas-Cleveland game while I worked. The Ranger announcers were balanced and unobtrusive. The spent a lot of time in a 9-1 game contrasting Cliff Lee's 2008 season with his 2009 debut. That's good insights about an opposing player.
At night I had the Astros-Cubs contest on my home computer. The Houston announcers are homers of the worst sort. Not only do they use first person references to the team and openly root for them, but they have almost nothing to say about the opposition. It's quite possible that Houson and Chicago will take up residence on opposite ends of the NL standings. Wouldn't Astro fans like to know something about the best team in the league?
I'm looking forward to getting Vin Scully and Jon Miller's calls and discovering some great announcers elsewhere. I'm hoping to wangle John Sciambi and Gary Cohen broadcasts, even though they do TV. I lack the bandwidth to buy the TV package; otherwise $79.95 to get the video feeds is a steal. (There are blackout rules, so if you're hung up on your local team you're probably out of luck.) Bravo for Major League Baseball for leading the way in alternative media, the proceeds of which are shared equally among the teams. Remember to credit Bud Selig for innovations like this when you denigrate his commissionership for a missed World Series and an All-Star game tie.
Heaven, man; I'm in heaven. It's baseball season. This afternoon, Royals and White Sox. After a beautiful wife, a healthy family and food on the table, what more could a man desire?
Running the Numbers
Great NY Times article on the use of computer simulations in baseball.
The main takeaway from it is this: there is no debate in baseball team offices about the value of advanced analytics: teams are spending millions on it to get an edge.
The article also mentions that steals, bunts and intentional walks are not necessarily good strategies. To clarify: all of them are good strategies when used judiciously.
It takes two swiped bases to offset a caught stealing, so you should rarely attempt a steal if there isn't a 70% chance of success. The out sacrificed to move a runner into scoring position reduces the average number of runs you'll subsequently score that inning, but with a pitcher at bat, or when one run is all you need, it may be an effective strategy. Intentional walks make sense in some situations that improve match-ups or where the added baserunner is irrelevant. Likely, all of these strategies are overused. It's no surprise that the two teams that employ them least -- the Saux and the A's -- are the most statistically savvy.
The main takeaway from it is this: there is no debate in baseball team offices about the value of advanced analytics: teams are spending millions on it to get an edge.
The article also mentions that steals, bunts and intentional walks are not necessarily good strategies. To clarify: all of them are good strategies when used judiciously.
It takes two swiped bases to offset a caught stealing, so you should rarely attempt a steal if there isn't a 70% chance of success. The out sacrificed to move a runner into scoring position reduces the average number of runs you'll subsequently score that inning, but with a pitcher at bat, or when one run is all you need, it may be an effective strategy. Intentional walks make sense in some situations that improve match-ups or where the added baserunner is irrelevant. Likely, all of these strategies are overused. It's no surprise that the two teams that employ them least -- the Saux and the A's -- are the most statistically savvy.
06 April 2009
Opening Night
What an Opening Night! Who would have imagined that the World Champs would be on pace to lose all their games?
Or that unheralded Jordan Schafer would run away with both Rookie of the Year and MVP awards, with an OBP of .750 and a SLG of 1.600?
Or that Ryan Howard and Chase Utley would bat .000, while Brian McCann slugged 162 homers and collected 324 RBI?
Or that Derek Lowe would win all 35 of his starts with a perfect ERA and an OBP against of .077, while Brett Myers would lose all of his while surrendering four homers per nine innings, as they're on pace to do?
Or how about the bizarre season that Mike Gonzalez is on pace for: no saves, an ERA of 9.00, a WHIP of 3.00, but 324 strikeouts.
The big question, of course, can they keep it up?
Or that unheralded Jordan Schafer would run away with both Rookie of the Year and MVP awards, with an OBP of .750 and a SLG of 1.600?
Or that Ryan Howard and Chase Utley would bat .000, while Brian McCann slugged 162 homers and collected 324 RBI?
Or that Derek Lowe would win all 35 of his starts with a perfect ERA and an OBP against of .077, while Brett Myers would lose all of his while surrendering four homers per nine innings, as they're on pace to do?
Or how about the bizarre season that Mike Gonzalez is on pace for: no saves, an ERA of 9.00, a WHIP of 3.00, but 324 strikeouts.
The big question, of course, can they keep it up?
03 April 2009
A Random Thought
More on team previews.
What do Albert Pujols, Hanley Ramirez, Nick Markakis, Roy Halladay, Lance Berkman, Jake Peavy, Adam Dunn, Chipper Jones, Josh Hamilton and Ichiro Suzuki have in common?
They're all really good players. And they all play for bad -- in some cases awful -- teams.
Baseball fans tend to count up the stars when evaluating teams' prospects, but it's more often the absence of holes that determines the final standings. Nearly every team has a trio of guys who can pound in the middle of the order and a couple of live arms at the top of the rotation. Most decent relievers can rack up saves. How hard is it to get three outs before the other team scores three runs?
The real measure of your favorite side is in the margins. Check the team's fourth starter, its number seven hitter, its second-best set-up man. How good is the fourth outfielder and the backup catcher? Their level of play tells you about the players in front of them as well as the team depth. That's where I look to determine a team's strength.
What do Albert Pujols, Hanley Ramirez, Nick Markakis, Roy Halladay, Lance Berkman, Jake Peavy, Adam Dunn, Chipper Jones, Josh Hamilton and Ichiro Suzuki have in common?
They're all really good players. And they all play for bad -- in some cases awful -- teams.
Baseball fans tend to count up the stars when evaluating teams' prospects, but it's more often the absence of holes that determines the final standings. Nearly every team has a trio of guys who can pound in the middle of the order and a couple of live arms at the top of the rotation. Most decent relievers can rack up saves. How hard is it to get three outs before the other team scores three runs?
The real measure of your favorite side is in the margins. Check the team's fourth starter, its number seven hitter, its second-best set-up man. How good is the fourth outfielder and the backup catcher? Their level of play tells you about the players in front of them as well as the team depth. That's where I look to determine a team's strength.
Preview Review
It's a beautiful time of year, when every publication this side of The Economist runs its baseball preview. (The editors of that august journal might find it less depressing these days to follow suit.) I've been gobbling them up and watching the needle on the Ignorance Meter pin the red end.
Take this from the Associated Press on the Cincinnati Reds:
"If Aaron Harang can bounce back from a down year, the rotation can be one of the league's best."
Well, I suppose it could, assuming a litany of other unlikely scenarios occurs contemporaneously. Harang would have to bounce back from a down year while at the same time Edinson Volquez would again have to pitch his brains out, Johnny Cueto would have to improve on his 4.81 ERA and someone would have to fill the fourth and fifth slots, and among the current someones is Josh Fogg, whose ERA of 7.58 from last season looks more like a good pitcher's pH.
In other words, if Mt. Everest fell down, K2 could be the world's highest peak. Don't hold your breath.
Here's another about the Phillies: "Raul Ibanez agreed to a $31.5 million, three-year contract to replace Pat Burrel in left field, making Philadelphia's already dangerous lineup even deeper. Ibanez is one of five outfielders to drive in at least 100 runs in each of the past three seasons."
By relying on the wrong metric, the AP has determined that bronze is more valuable than silver. Raul Ibanez has an .845 OPS over the last three years, Pat Burrel, .889. Raul Ibanez is 37, with an expiration date of about 39. Pat Burrel is 33. The Phillies got worse, not better, by signing Ibanez, and they paid a premium to do so. Burrel inked a two-year deal worth $2 million-a-year less.
Finally, there's this bit of chuckle inducement: "Houston got a boost in spring training when 13-time Gold Glove catcher Ivan Rodriguez agreed to a $1.5 million contract." I'm splitting hairs here, because Pudge is undoubtedly better than the black hole that was sucking matter into the backstop position before him. But the 'Stros are so lacking in talent after Berkman, Lee and Oswalt it's hard to see how the wretched refuse of Ivan Rodriguez's career, not to mention his AARP membership, can possibly help this sorry ship sail. More than a catcher, the Astros need an overhaul.
Take this from the Associated Press on the Cincinnati Reds:
"If Aaron Harang can bounce back from a down year, the rotation can be one of the league's best."
Well, I suppose it could, assuming a litany of other unlikely scenarios occurs contemporaneously. Harang would have to bounce back from a down year while at the same time Edinson Volquez would again have to pitch his brains out, Johnny Cueto would have to improve on his 4.81 ERA and someone would have to fill the fourth and fifth slots, and among the current someones is Josh Fogg, whose ERA of 7.58 from last season looks more like a good pitcher's pH.
In other words, if Mt. Everest fell down, K2 could be the world's highest peak. Don't hold your breath.
Here's another about the Phillies: "Raul Ibanez agreed to a $31.5 million, three-year contract to replace Pat Burrel in left field, making Philadelphia's already dangerous lineup even deeper. Ibanez is one of five outfielders to drive in at least 100 runs in each of the past three seasons."
By relying on the wrong metric, the AP has determined that bronze is more valuable than silver. Raul Ibanez has an .845 OPS over the last three years, Pat Burrel, .889. Raul Ibanez is 37, with an expiration date of about 39. Pat Burrel is 33. The Phillies got worse, not better, by signing Ibanez, and they paid a premium to do so. Burrel inked a two-year deal worth $2 million-a-year less.
Finally, there's this bit of chuckle inducement: "Houston got a boost in spring training when 13-time Gold Glove catcher Ivan Rodriguez agreed to a $1.5 million contract." I'm splitting hairs here, because Pudge is undoubtedly better than the black hole that was sucking matter into the backstop position before him. But the 'Stros are so lacking in talent after Berkman, Lee and Oswalt it's hard to see how the wretched refuse of Ivan Rodriguez's career, not to mention his AARP membership, can possibly help this sorry ship sail. More than a catcher, the Astros need an overhaul.
28 March 2009
A Net Loss In the Knowledge Column
At this late moment in spring training, the Atlanta Braves (17-8) lead the Milwaukee Brewers (14-9) by two games in the exhibition season standings. I know this is utterly irrelevant, but bear with me.
Were this the regular season, and the two teams played in the same division, you can count on the Brewers' announcers (not to pick on them; I'm using them as an example) to note that they're only one game behind in the loss column.
That there would remain 135 games in the season aside, the rampant use of this datum reveals yet more ignorance on the part of many baseball observers. The use of "loss column" measurement is a late-season insight. Using it anytime other than the last 20 games is a perversion of this insight, like pondering the effect of a basketball player's weakness in transition on his performance at the foul line.
The reason the loss gap matters late in the season is that the trailing team can't make up defeats. Let's say your nine, the Macon Whoopie (82-70), trail the Buffalo Chips (87-69) by three games. If the Whoopie get hot, they only need Buffalo to lose once more in order to catch them. They can erase the Chips' five win advantage on their own.
Conversely, the Crawford Bushes' (82-74) three-game deficit to the East Wenatchee Apples (83-69) is much more dire because they're five behind in the loss column. The Washington contingent would have to drop five of their last 10 games for the Texas side to have any chance, no matter how hot they get.
With 60 games left in the season, parsing the gap this finely leaves you less -- not more -- informed. It's the reason our two-year election campaign leaves voters less informed about the candidates than if they just had six weeks to gather the few key pieces of information they need to make an intelligent decision. This is the underpinning of Malcolm Gladwell's book Blink, which has many applications to sports.
All this will be good to keep in mind after Opening Day, when a rival team wins before yours plays. You'll be in the middle of the division standings, but tied in the loss column.
Were this the regular season, and the two teams played in the same division, you can count on the Brewers' announcers (not to pick on them; I'm using them as an example) to note that they're only one game behind in the loss column.
That there would remain 135 games in the season aside, the rampant use of this datum reveals yet more ignorance on the part of many baseball observers. The use of "loss column" measurement is a late-season insight. Using it anytime other than the last 20 games is a perversion of this insight, like pondering the effect of a basketball player's weakness in transition on his performance at the foul line.
The reason the loss gap matters late in the season is that the trailing team can't make up defeats. Let's say your nine, the Macon Whoopie (82-70), trail the Buffalo Chips (87-69) by three games. If the Whoopie get hot, they only need Buffalo to lose once more in order to catch them. They can erase the Chips' five win advantage on their own.
Conversely, the Crawford Bushes' (82-74) three-game deficit to the East Wenatchee Apples (83-69) is much more dire because they're five behind in the loss column. The Washington contingent would have to drop five of their last 10 games for the Texas side to have any chance, no matter how hot they get.
With 60 games left in the season, parsing the gap this finely leaves you less -- not more -- informed. It's the reason our two-year election campaign leaves voters less informed about the candidates than if they just had six weeks to gather the few key pieces of information they need to make an intelligent decision. This is the underpinning of Malcolm Gladwell's book Blink, which has many applications to sports.
All this will be good to keep in mind after Opening Day, when a rival team wins before yours plays. You'll be in the middle of the division standings, but tied in the loss column.
Yankee Ingenuity
Word from Yankee spring training camp is that Joe Girardi will flip Derek Jeter and Johnny Damon in the lineup, moving his shortstop up to leadoff. Jeter's response was that he doesn't care, telling the Associated Press, "You hit 60 seconds earlier than you normally do."
One of the things that great players often demonstrate is an intuitive feel for the game that had never been borne out by the numbers, or even by conventional wisdom. I'm reminded of Greg Maddux and Roger Clemens, both correctly attributing statistical declines in their mid-career performance to bad luck and weak defense respectively. Each went on to win subsequent Cy Youngs.
Jeter's flippancy about his place in the batting order demonstrates that he understands how irrelevant it is. Batting order is largely immaterial beyond a few rudimentary concepts. As long as your best hitters bat at the top of the order, and you maximize the effects of handedness, there's little to be gained by sweating the exact order. About the only egregious error that managers regularly commit is to bat a weak-hitting speedster in the leadoff spot. Simply put, that strategy gives a weak hitter 50 extra plate appearances a year.
Being similar kinds of hitters, either Jeter or Damon would be a reasonable choice to lead off. Both get on base and around the bases, but are unlikely to waste a lot of home runs to start the game.
So why bother? My guess is that Girardi exploited Damon's .375 OBP last year and expects him to regress closer to his career average of .354 this year, while recognizing that Jeter's .363 OBP in 2008 was the second lowest of his career and is more like to edge closer to his lifetime .383 pace this year. If so, it demonstrates that Girardi also understands something about baseball.
One of the things that great players often demonstrate is an intuitive feel for the game that had never been borne out by the numbers, or even by conventional wisdom. I'm reminded of Greg Maddux and Roger Clemens, both correctly attributing statistical declines in their mid-career performance to bad luck and weak defense respectively. Each went on to win subsequent Cy Youngs.
Jeter's flippancy about his place in the batting order demonstrates that he understands how irrelevant it is. Batting order is largely immaterial beyond a few rudimentary concepts. As long as your best hitters bat at the top of the order, and you maximize the effects of handedness, there's little to be gained by sweating the exact order. About the only egregious error that managers regularly commit is to bat a weak-hitting speedster in the leadoff spot. Simply put, that strategy gives a weak hitter 50 extra plate appearances a year.
Being similar kinds of hitters, either Jeter or Damon would be a reasonable choice to lead off. Both get on base and around the bases, but are unlikely to waste a lot of home runs to start the game.
So why bother? My guess is that Girardi exploited Damon's .375 OBP last year and expects him to regress closer to his career average of .354 this year, while recognizing that Jeter's .363 OBP in 2008 was the second lowest of his career and is more like to edge closer to his lifetime .383 pace this year. If so, it demonstrates that Girardi also understands something about baseball.
15 March 2009
Good WBC News
I've got good news for Derek Jeter, Kevin Youklis and Jake Peavy. You're not playing for me, my honor or my pride. I don't care if you cough it up in the World Baseball Classic to Puerto Rico, the Netherlands or Guinea Bissau. Take it easy guys: the future of our country is not on the line.
Frankly, I don't care about the WBC in the first place. Coming as it does during Spring Training and missing so many top players gives it the essence of pre-season irrelevance in the first place. The exhibition-style rules that limit play -- e.g., pitching limits and mercy rules -- reinforce that. There's no way that's going to compete with my anticipation about the start of the season.
In a larger sense, these nation vs. nation sports exhibitions like the Ryder Cup, Davis Cup, Olympics, etc. designed to inflame nationalistic passions have always bemused me. Why do I care whether a collection of American professionals defeats a collection of Angolan amateurs in basketball? Athletes who are implored to "represent their country" should tell those urging them to shut the fuck up. They don't owe any of us anything, and nothing they do in those contests accrues to your advantage or mine in any way.
I'd feel a lot more national pride if we could reinvent our health care system so it worked, show some national restraint on energy use, treat the rest of the world a little better, balance our books, educate our children, feed our poor. But even without these things, and regardless of whether we outpitch Venezuela in the WBC, I feel pretty lucky to have been born in the freest, richest country the planet's ever produced.
Frankly, I don't care about the WBC in the first place. Coming as it does during Spring Training and missing so many top players gives it the essence of pre-season irrelevance in the first place. The exhibition-style rules that limit play -- e.g., pitching limits and mercy rules -- reinforce that. There's no way that's going to compete with my anticipation about the start of the season.
In a larger sense, these nation vs. nation sports exhibitions like the Ryder Cup, Davis Cup, Olympics, etc. designed to inflame nationalistic passions have always bemused me. Why do I care whether a collection of American professionals defeats a collection of Angolan amateurs in basketball? Athletes who are implored to "represent their country" should tell those urging them to shut the fuck up. They don't owe any of us anything, and nothing they do in those contests accrues to your advantage or mine in any way.
I'd feel a lot more national pride if we could reinvent our health care system so it worked, show some national restraint on energy use, treat the rest of the world a little better, balance our books, educate our children, feed our poor. But even without these things, and regardless of whether we outpitch Venezuela in the WBC, I feel pretty lucky to have been born in the freest, richest country the planet's ever produced.
11 March 2009
The Stats Fallacy: #5 In A Series
"Stats don't show a guy's guts. They can't tell you the human side, help you recognize fear, or figure out who is having a good day or a bad day. I look at the numbers all the time, but people who play fantasy games don't have to look a guy in the eye or try to help restore his confidence." --Dusty Baker
This is a familiar refrain from managers, who after all, are paid to make personnel decisions about guys they spend a lot of time with. Is it right or wrong?
Neither. It's a false dichotomy.
The question isn't, and never was, stats versus scouts. It's a fantasy of Michael Lewis that drove tradition-bound observers batty. The truth is and always has been that mathematical analysis and the softer human arts complement each other, and any team relying on just one or the other is doomed to failure. Numbers can enlighten us objectively about players' past results, but only a human eye, brain and heart can make observations about their physical, emotional and psychological health going forward.
In fact, the truthful dichotomy is: stats versus stats. Is Dusty making decisions based on batting average and saves and pitching wins and home runs or is he dialing up stats that actually matter, like on-base percentage, batting average on balls in play (BABIP), slugging average, etc?
If Neifi Perez bats .372 in the first half of the season, has he suddenly transformed into a hitting machine? The human brain tends to try to make sense of the unexpected, so it concocts explanations: Perez is squaring his hips or seeing the ball better or swinging through the zone. Perhaps, but if his BABIP has suddenly skyrocketed, particularly in the absence of a change in the types of balls he's hitting, (i.e., grounders, line drives, flies, etc.) it really tells you he's just been lucky and can expect a big ol' bag of return-to-earth in the second half. The same calculation works for pitchers: if a guy's BABIP-against spikes, the seeing-eye grounders have been getting through and he's primed for "improvement" as the year progresses.
Fans who dismiss sabermetrics "because numbers don't tell us everything" make me laugh. If any analytical system told us everything -- or anywhere near it -- the game would be soulless, stultifying and utterly predictable. The beauty of baseball is that it's the opposite, and that while a good mix of human evaluation and advanced analytics can improve a team's decision-making, it will nonetheless have to endure a great deal of failure. The best teams, after all, still lose 60 games.
This is a familiar refrain from managers, who after all, are paid to make personnel decisions about guys they spend a lot of time with. Is it right or wrong?
Neither. It's a false dichotomy.
The question isn't, and never was, stats versus scouts. It's a fantasy of Michael Lewis that drove tradition-bound observers batty. The truth is and always has been that mathematical analysis and the softer human arts complement each other, and any team relying on just one or the other is doomed to failure. Numbers can enlighten us objectively about players' past results, but only a human eye, brain and heart can make observations about their physical, emotional and psychological health going forward.
In fact, the truthful dichotomy is: stats versus stats. Is Dusty making decisions based on batting average and saves and pitching wins and home runs or is he dialing up stats that actually matter, like on-base percentage, batting average on balls in play (BABIP), slugging average, etc?
If Neifi Perez bats .372 in the first half of the season, has he suddenly transformed into a hitting machine? The human brain tends to try to make sense of the unexpected, so it concocts explanations: Perez is squaring his hips or seeing the ball better or swinging through the zone. Perhaps, but if his BABIP has suddenly skyrocketed, particularly in the absence of a change in the types of balls he's hitting, (i.e., grounders, line drives, flies, etc.) it really tells you he's just been lucky and can expect a big ol' bag of return-to-earth in the second half. The same calculation works for pitchers: if a guy's BABIP-against spikes, the seeing-eye grounders have been getting through and he's primed for "improvement" as the year progresses.
Fans who dismiss sabermetrics "because numbers don't tell us everything" make me laugh. If any analytical system told us everything -- or anywhere near it -- the game would be soulless, stultifying and utterly predictable. The beauty of baseball is that it's the opposite, and that while a good mix of human evaluation and advanced analytics can improve a team's decision-making, it will nonetheless have to endure a great deal of failure. The best teams, after all, still lose 60 games.
01 March 2009
For What It's Worth
As I was saying yesterday, it's fun and futile to make pre-season predictions. Here we go again.
This is the work of Baseball Prospectus, which uses a slightly different method than Fangraphs to make its projections. After projecting individual player performances and aggregating them by team, BP runs a million simulated seasons to give us a range of possibilities. So while the averages say the Pirates will win just 65 games, a sufficient number of things break right for them in about two percent of cases that would get them into the playoffs.
Again, this is as of Feb.19 when Manny and others remained unsigned. Should the Dodgers ink him, that would close the gap some with the Diamondbacks, who seem awfully well-regarded for a team lacking a power bat. BP has little faith in the White Sox, who last year vastly outperformed their projections.
This whole thing will be settled with two words: Play ball!
This is the work of Baseball Prospectus, which uses a slightly different method than Fangraphs to make its projections. After projecting individual player performances and aggregating them by team, BP runs a million simulated seasons to give us a range of possibilities. So while the averages say the Pirates will win just 65 games, a sufficient number of things break right for them in about two percent of cases that would get them into the playoffs.
Div. Wild Total
NL East W L Title % Card % Postseason %
Mets 92.2 69.8 39.1 11.8 50.9
Phillies 87.1 74.9 23.9 10.7 34.7
Braves 87.0 75.0 23.7 10.7 34.4
Nationals 78.5 83.5 9.5 5.5 15.0
Marlins 71.6 90.4 3.8 2.5 6.3
Div. Wild Total
NL Central W L Title % Card % Postseason %
Cubs 95.3 66.7 52.0 10.0 62.0
Brewers 86.4 75.6 22.9 10.4 33.3
Cardinals 80.1 81.9 11.6 6.5 18.1
Reds 79.4 82.6 10.4 6.1 16.4
Astros 66.6 95.4 1.9 1.2 3.1
Pirates 64.5 97.5 1.3 0.8 2.1
Div. Wild Total
NL West W L Title % Card % Postseason %
D'backs 91.6 70.4 46.7 6.9 53.6
Dodgers 83.7 78.3 22.5 6.4 28.9
Giants 77.9 84.1 12.1 4.1 16.3
Rockies 77.1 84.9 11.0 3.7 14.7
Padres 74.0 88.0 7.6 2.6 10.3
Div. Wild Total
AL East W L Title % Card % Postseason %
Red Sox 98.0 64.0 38.9 24.0 62.0
Yankees 95.9 66.1 32.1 24.5 56.5
Rays 91.3 70.7 20.3 21.1 41.4
Blue Jays 81.2 80.8 6.4 10.1 16.5
Orioles 73.9 88.1 2.3 4.5 6.8
Div. Wild Total
AL Central W L Title % Card % Postseason %
Indians 83.0 79.0 32.3 2.6 34.8
Twins 79.4 82.6 22.6 2.2 24.8
Tigers 78.3 83.7 20.2 2.1 22.2
Royals 74.7 87.3 13.8 1.5 15.3
White Sox 73.0 89.0 11.2 1.2 12.4
Div. Wild Total
AL West W L Title % Card % Postseason %
Angels 84.3 77.7 42.1 2.2 44.3
Athletics 82.3 79.7 35.4 2.3 37.6
Rangers 71.9 90.1 12.5 1.0 13.5
Mariners 70.0 92.0 10.1 0.8 10.9
Again, this is as of Feb.19 when Manny and others remained unsigned. Should the Dodgers ink him, that would close the gap some with the Diamondbacks, who seem awfully well-regarded for a team lacking a power bat. BP has little faith in the White Sox, who last year vastly outperformed their projections.
This whole thing will be settled with two words: Play ball!
28 February 2009
The Standings
One of the great beauties of baseball is that it's so unpredictable. Every year, a team or two that appear moribund make play0ff runs. The Rays and Cards of '08 come to mind. Conversely, some squad that's stacked, tanks. 2008's Detroit and Cleveland are exemplars.
Paradoxically, that makes pre-season projections so much fun. The one below is from Baseball Projection, which uses a system called CHONE (named facetiously for creator Sean Smith) to project the most likely performance from each player in the league, estimate his playing time, and then aggregate all that for each team. It calculates the resulting runs scored versus runs allowed and then uses the Pythagorean formula to project the team's record.
The shortcomings of this method (or any projection made prior to Opening Day) are so transparent as to belie comment. But the projections do give us a guide as to which teams appear stonger or weaker than you might have thought at first glance. Keep in mind that these projections don't include Manny Ramirez's signing or any trades/signings/injuries after February 24.
Remember that these are "average" projections; i.e., there is an equal chance according to this system that each team will win either more or fewer than the number of games listed. So, for example, the Rays may have more upside than the Yanks and Sox, but more downside as well. 89 wins is the midpoint.
I personally believe that the Mets should be a narrow favorite in the NL East and that the Indians and Mariners are vastly overrated by this system. I think the Royals are improving and would bet real American legal tender that they don't have the worst record in baseball. I'm surprised by the lack of respect for the Cubs in a weak NL Central, but not surprised at all by the tossup nature of the NL West.
Take it for what it's worth.
Paradoxically, that makes pre-season projections so much fun. The one below is from Baseball Projection, which uses a system called CHONE (named facetiously for creator Sean Smith) to project the most likely performance from each player in the league, estimate his playing time, and then aggregate all that for each team. It calculates the resulting runs scored versus runs allowed and then uses the Pythagorean formula to project the team's record.
The shortcomings of this method (or any projection made prior to Opening Day) are so transparent as to belie comment. But the projections do give us a guide as to which teams appear stonger or weaker than you might have thought at first glance. Keep in mind that these projections don't include Manny Ramirez's signing or any trades/signings/injuries after February 24.
| American | |||||||||||
| East | W | L | Central | W | L | West | W | L | |||
| Yankees | 97 | 65 | Indians | 90 | 72 | Angels | 85 | 77 | |||
| Red Sox | 96 | 66 | Tigers | 85 | 77 | A's | 81 | 81 | |||
| Rays | 89 | 73 | Twins | 79 | 83 | Mariners | 78 | 84 | |||
| Blue Jays | 75 | 87 | White Sox | 73 | 89 | Rangers | 72 | 90 | |||
| Orioles | 74 | 88 | Royals | 72 | 90 | ||||||
| National | |||||||||||
| East | W | L | Central | W | L | West | W | L | |||
| Phillies | 87 | 75 | Cubs | 88 | 74 | Dodgers | 82 | 80 | |||
| Braves | 86 | 76 | Cardinals | 83 | 79 | Padres | 80 | 82 | |||
| Mets | 86 | 76 | Reds | 82 | 80 | D-Backs | 79 | 83 | |||
| Marlins | 75 | 87 | Brewers | 81 | 81 | Rockies | 78 | 84 | |||
| Nationals | 74 | 88 | Pirates | 73 | 89 | Giants | 77 | 85 | |||
| Astros | 72 | 90 |
Remember that these are "average" projections; i.e., there is an equal chance according to this system that each team will win either more or fewer than the number of games listed. So, for example, the Rays may have more upside than the Yanks and Sox, but more downside as well. 89 wins is the midpoint.
I personally believe that the Mets should be a narrow favorite in the NL East and that the Indians and Mariners are vastly overrated by this system. I think the Royals are improving and would bet real American legal tender that they don't have the worst record in baseball. I'm surprised by the lack of respect for the Cubs in a weak NL Central, but not surprised at all by the tossup nature of the NL West.
Take it for what it's worth.
Dodging A Headache
A sufficient number of baseball observers have scratched their heads publicly over Manny Ramirez's rejection of the Dodgers' two-year, $45 million offer, that I'll refrain from piling on.
Scott Boras has always been able to find a bigger sucker when it seemed his client had already pushed the market far beyond his value, so far be it for me to criticize him and his client for demuring at an offer that overstates his value, in my view.
Manny, now another year older, is not going to hit this year or next anywhere near as well as he did for half a season in L.A. It's just a fact of human physiology that he's more likely to get hurt, experience a decline in his skills and become a serious albatross on defense.
What really intrigues me is why the Dodgers even continue to discuss it with him. It's clear that no other club wants to adopt this particular can of worm larvae. Manny would make most sense on an AL club with dreams of contention and a DH need -- the Angels jump to mind -- and none of them has been reported ringing Boras' cell.
Manny's lack of enthusiasm for Spring Training is well-known. He may very well be stalling as much for a few extra vacation weeks as for a bigger contract. But Boras had better be careful lest some new competition enter the baseball labor market.
With Barry Bonds' trial now delayed past the end of the '09 season, any team willing to take on a migraine who can rake now has another option. Bonds probably can't play 150 games, as Manny can, and his personality issues affect clubhouse relationships, while Manny's only sho9rt-circuit management sleep patterns. But a team balking at paying $50 million over two years for Manny might be willing to drop $2 million for one year of Bonds.
I'm not proposing that the Dodgers head that way. Adding Manny, even at 90% of his average performance, would make them the favorite in the weak NL West. But I think they'd be crazy to add one thin dime to their offer.
Scott Boras has always been able to find a bigger sucker when it seemed his client had already pushed the market far beyond his value, so far be it for me to criticize him and his client for demuring at an offer that overstates his value, in my view.
Manny, now another year older, is not going to hit this year or next anywhere near as well as he did for half a season in L.A. It's just a fact of human physiology that he's more likely to get hurt, experience a decline in his skills and become a serious albatross on defense.
What really intrigues me is why the Dodgers even continue to discuss it with him. It's clear that no other club wants to adopt this particular can of worm larvae. Manny would make most sense on an AL club with dreams of contention and a DH need -- the Angels jump to mind -- and none of them has been reported ringing Boras' cell.
Manny's lack of enthusiasm for Spring Training is well-known. He may very well be stalling as much for a few extra vacation weeks as for a bigger contract. But Boras had better be careful lest some new competition enter the baseball labor market.
With Barry Bonds' trial now delayed past the end of the '09 season, any team willing to take on a migraine who can rake now has another option. Bonds probably can't play 150 games, as Manny can, and his personality issues affect clubhouse relationships, while Manny's only sho9rt-circuit management sleep patterns. But a team balking at paying $50 million over two years for Manny might be willing to drop $2 million for one year of Bonds.
I'm not proposing that the Dodgers head that way. Adding Manny, even at 90% of his average performance, would make them the favorite in the weak NL West. But I think they'd be crazy to add one thin dime to their offer.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)