Filter posts by...
Media
Tuesday, May 06, 2008
Some sobering thoughts from Buzz Bizzinger following his meltdown on HBO v Deadspin. Sober being the key word, as his HBO appearance sounded exactly what a drunk would sound like in a bar. (I quite enjoyed and appreciated that he at least decided to lay down his arms, as it’s not necessary to continue to use your weapon, especially since it doesn’t have any bullets in it.)
All these are just mediums, be it a bar, the ballpark, a two-way phone call, a sports radio show, a TV show, a newspaper, reader’s letters to editor, a magazine, a book, an online blog, online discussion forum, or online comments area. Someone has an opinion, it’s going to be heard. We’re not going to moderate (with an editor) each of these mediums necessarily, are we? Those that are moderated, certainly they have a better percentage of quality. But, they don’t have the volume of quality. At the same time, they certainly don’t have the volume of crap either.
Certainly the biggest volume of crap is at a bar, but we’re not going to call all bar patrons drunk blowhards that need to be muzzled are we? The next biggest volume of crap is at a ballpark, but we’re not going to forbid fans from going to a game, are we?
The difference is the posterity of the opinion: no one remembers any opinion uttered in a bar. But, for eternity, someone’s ramblings will be forever immortalized on the web. Such is the value and the curse of the web.
As for Deadspin itself, it’s the sports equivalent of TMZ and In Touch. It is what it is. But, Leitch’s recaps in The Hardball Times are quite entertaining.
Thursday, May 01, 2008
By , 11:13 PM
From Rob Neyer, who is lately (maybe for a long while) just as obsessed (and misguided) as almost everyone else about short-term recent performance:
So is Cliff Lee for real? I think all we can say is that he’s really healthy. He’s going to give up a higher batting average on balls in play, and some reasonable percentage of the fly balls he gives up will fly over the fence. So no, he probably doesn’t wind up winning the Cy Young Award. But I’ll bet he’s better than average. And considering how well C.C. Sabathia’s pitched in his last two starts, suddenly the Indians would seem to have the best rotation in the majors.
So Cliff Lee, 31 years old, is better than average, because he has pitched well to 128 batters after having pitched mediocrely, at best, to 3047 batters over the last 4 years? I think not, and I will take up Neyer on that bet (he offered this time, although obviously not literally).
Here are Lee’s last 4 years’ NERC, keeping in mind that a league average pitcher, and full-time starter, within his league, is defined as 4.00:
04 4.87
05 3.84
06 4.45
07 4.93
That is a fairly sucky pitcher who, based on his 128 batters faced so far this year, is a now an ever-so-slightly less sucky pitcher! He is NOT better than a league average pitcher, nor he is a league average pitcher. (Warning: of course, I don’t KNOW what he is for sure, but my estimate, since it is based on science, is a heck of a lot better than Neyer’s, which is based on nothing, but a distorted and misinformed view of what 5 outings of good pitching following 4 years of poor pitching, means.)
Again, I ask, for any of these, “Is he for real?” questions, that someone simply look at all players in history of about the same age and circumstances, who have had X prior stats, followed by Y (presumably really good or really bad) stats for a short period of time (whatever you want) and then see how they all did in ANY future time period you want (the more, the larger the sample of course). Oh, you mean researchers have already done that (see Tango’s, my, and probably others’ “banner years” study)? And the answer is that they performed at around the usual Marcel projection? So why are these writers trying to answer the silly, “Is he for real?” question and coming up with equally silly answers? It is a combination of ignorance, they have to write something, and it has to be something that their audience likes (otherwise they are out of a job). However, it doesn’t matter much if what they write is true or not. They don’t get graded on the truth.
How about we all just say in unison, come on now, everyone together, “They will ALL likely (our best estimate) perform somewhere in between their past weighted performance and the ‘breakout’ (or collapse) period you are citing, MUCH closer to whichever is the largest sample!”
Then we can all get on with our lives.
Anyway, I am not done with Neyer.
So, now Sabathia is part of a great rotation, considering the way he performed in his last TWO starts?”
I guess before those two starts, when everyone was calling for Sabathia’s head, and wondering whether he was hiding an injury, the Indians’ staff was NOT great. But now it is. Considering Sabathia’s last 2 starts. Maybe we better wait until his (or Westbrook’s or Carmona’s) next start or two. Because if they pitch badly, then we are not so sure if the Indians have a great staff, right? I am just following Neyer’s logic and that of every other sports writer in the world.
News flash: The Indians staff is roughly the SAME staff it was before the season started, the same staff it is now, and the same staff it will be (assuming no major injuries) in a month from now, no matter how any of their pitchers pitch between now and then!
The sad part is that Neyer knows this stuff (I think), but he still writes the same crap that everyone else does.
Wednesday, April 30, 2008
There’s usually one or two good articles in BE Press, but this issue has alot of interesting topics, from alot of familiar names. I’m starting with the Turocy paper, but I encourage everyone to pick a different one, and report back with a mini-review.
I have this theory that it takes at least one generation for social progress to be achieved, as it takes at least that long for the ignorant and the biased to die. So, peace in the mideast? Not for at least 20 years (if ever). End of racism in America? Not for at least 20 years (if ever). End of separation talk in Quebec? Not for at least 20 years. The progress of sabermetrics?
Otherwise everything is nonsense, starting with Swisher over Soriano. That’s reminiscent of when some goofs actually blurted that during their primes, Mark Grace was a better first baseman to have on a team than Frank Thomas. What’s next, Pamela Anderson over Meryl Streep? Soriano is more valuable than Swisher, who is a good player. Soriano might not be a chemistry guy, cheerleader or jokester, but he’s a better player.
Marcel has Soriano forecast with a wOBA(*) of .360, and Swisher with .357. Fans think that Soriano and Swisher are both roughly equal as fielders (slight edge to Sori). UZR thinks they are roughly equal as outfielders (slight edge to Swisher). You are talking about two roughly equal players. And even if wOBA is too fancy, Soriano’s Runs Participated In (RPI, or R+RBI-HR) based on Marcel is 133 in 581 PA, while Swisher is 137 in 597. Pro-rated, that’s the exact same thing.
Looks like we’ve got to wait 20 years for this kind of crap to not being written. If ever.
(*) If you don’t understand wOBA, treat it exactly like OBP, with a SLG of about 25% higher than OBP.
Monday, April 28, 2008
A new hero of mine? Gregg looks at the yappers… all of them. Everytime a yapper predicted something, he wrote it down… and then looked to see what happened. Imagine: accountability! If you yap a forecast, it is incumbent on you to look at the results. If you don’t, you’re a yapper. If you do, you are a straight arrow, a straight shooter. So, Gregg looks at literally over a hundred forecasts to see how they did. Here’s one:
Read More
Saturday, April 26, 2008
By , 10:22 PM
ESPN.com’s Jerry Crasnick writes:
Maybe it’s due to maturity. Maybe it’s because they’re being more patient at the plate. But whatever the reason, the D-backs now have one of the most powerful lineups in all of baseball.
The correct quote should be:
Maybe it’s due to maturity. Maybe it’s because they’re being more patient at the plate. But whatever the reason, the D-backs have had, with 13% of the season played, one of the most powerful lineups in all of baseball. But, as we all know, almost anything can happen in 20 games or so. If we look at the career stats for all of their players, we can easily see that they have been hitting over their heads, and will likely have one of the least powerful lineups in all of baseball, for the remainder of the season, although even that will likely be disguised by the fact that they play half their games in the one of the best hitter’s park in the NL.
I have not read the article itself. Irresponsible me.
Read More
Tuesday, April 22, 2008
Who makes your skin crawl more?
Jim Gray is the last guy you want at your bachelor party. There’s a time and place for everything, and on an occasion deemed to celebrate the best players of the century, that’s not the time to pick one guy out, and go and look into someone’s closet looking for a gotcha moment.
Tom Farrey is ESPN’s answer to Lou Dobbs. I’m sure these two guys, put in the exact same conditions and walking in the exact same shoes as Tejada, would have behaved differently, because, gosh-darn it, they are superior human beings to Miguel.
Straighten me out.
Thursday, April 03, 2008
By , 08:04 PM
I vaguely recall hearing the name on BTF or somewhere like that. He has a sports blog. Here is the link to the blog as well as the thread I am writing about. The blog article or entry or whatever you want to call it is the usual BS about bunting or not bunting with player A at bat and the score x and y in inning z. The batter usually does something bad and then someone complains that he should not have been bunting. Of course, the complainer has NO idea whether it was “correct” or not to attempt a sac bunt in that particular situation, but he definitely has an “opinion” on it.
There are a slew of comments after the blog entry discussing (mostly fan speak) the sac bunt in general and that particular attempt. I have a bug about sac bunt discussions. The bug is mostly about the fact that many people think that conventional sabermetric wisdom is that a sac bunt is almost always wrong, especially early in a game, because the RE or WE charts indicate that it is, based on the runners advancing and the batter making out (which only happens around 60 some odd % of the time when a bunt is attempted). Whether that is in fact conventional sabermetric wisdom, I don’t know, but it ain’t wisdom, cause it’s wrong. Anyway, I wrote a lengthy post, basically summarizing the sac bunt chapter in The Book. I honestly thought that I was doing a valuables service to this guy and his blog community. Below I will print Justice’s response to my long post, and my response to that, which I am assuming will not make it onto the blog. You can also read my long post about the sac bunt here if you want to, rather than going to his blog.
Read More
Wednesday, April 02, 2008
A blog dedicated to the MLB Blackout policy.
(Hat tip: Studes)
Friday, March 28, 2008
Great SI issue this week, with the draft class of 2005 on the cover. You guys already know how much we love Tulowitzki’s fielding, as well as his clutch play last year. I really enjoyed the article on him by Verducci. Here’s a few quotes:
A pitch from mild-mannered Rockies lefthander Jeff Francis had hit Upton with the Diamondbacks trailing 5-1, a runner on second and no outs in the seventh inning. Upton was slow to take his base, and his body language made clear he thought he’d been plunked on purpose. Tulowitzki directed Upton to quietly haul a certain body part of his as well as the rest of himself to first.
“Why would we hit you?” Tulowitzki barked. “You’re a .200 hitter! We want you in the box! Shut up and go to the bag!”
During BP before Game 2, Upton approached Tulowitzki behind the cage and asked, “Do you have a problem with me?”
“No,” Tulowitzki recalls saying. “It’s just that if I got hit in that situation, I’m going to be happy getting on first. I understand it might not feel great, but it’s a team game and that’s the way you play.”
...
Tulowitzki awoke on the morning of June 7, 2005, convinced he was headed to Seattle. The Mariners held the third selection. “A couple of minutes before the draft,” he says, “they’d called me and said, ‘You’re our guy.’ “
At home in Sunnyvale, Calif., Tulowitzki was hosting a draft party to which he had invited family, friends, coaches, “anybody in my life who had helped me in the game of baseball,” he says. “Anybody who took me to any games or threw me any balls.”
His phone rang. It was the Mariners, saying that they needed a catcher—during the ‘05 season they would use seven—and were choosing Jeff Clement. A 6’ 1”, 210-pound lefthanded hitter, Clement was second alltime in home runs for USC (46), behind McGwire. Baseball America rated him the 12th-most-talented player in the draft.
...
“Totally my call,” Ricciardi says. “Right now we made the wrong choice. I’ve been in [talent] evaluation my whole life. It happens. When we were in Oakland, we took [Ariel] Prieto over [Todd] Helton. Romero hasn’t come as fast as the other guys, but it’s really only his third year. We still like him.”
Last winter Tulowitzki took a vacation to Las Vegas with his friend Romero. Like Prieto and Helton—or Sam Bowie and Michael Jordan—they will always be connected. “Tulo,” Romero told him, “the fans in the minors are all over me. They say, ‘We should have picked Tulowitzki!’ “
...
“After what happened [in ‘05],” says one American League G.M., “I’m really convinced you should never let positional needs influence you. Just take the best player.”
...
“C’mon, throw it!” the kid in the Rockies jersey says.
“O.K., but just one more,” Tulowitzki replies. “I’ve got to go do my ab work.”
The kid is four years old. It’s Jackson Holliday, son of Rockies leftfielder Matt Holliday. Matt, Jackson and Troy are playing with a rag-style ball and a tiny foam bat on a plush patch of grass underneath an old cottonwood tree. Two things are noteworthy about this bit of playtime. One, Tulowitzki seems to be having even more fun than the ferociously swinging Jackson. Two, Jackson’s Rockies jersey does not say holliday on the back. It says tulowitzki.
If they knew about his UZR and Clutchiness, as well as how he is the most underpaid asset in MLB, they’d erect a statue for him already.
By the way, I heard the exact same Holliday story 20 years ago. Tom Brunansky said something like “Can you believe that I’m in MLB, and I’m not even my own kid’s favorite ballplayer?”. Kirby Puckett was.
I’m with Pinto. Similar to his experience, I’m always asked about the name “TangoTiger” in any professional setting. No one’s going to remember my real name, but everyone remembers “TangoTiger”. And, as David notes, “sabermetrician” is a conversation starter.
Friday, March 14, 2008
‘’I understand with newspapers struggling and hoping to hold on to, or possibly expand their audiences, I understand why they do what they do,’’ Costas said. ‘But it’s one thing if somebody just sets up a blog from their mother’s basement in Albuquerque and they are who they are, and they’re a pathetic get-a-life loser, but now that pathetic get-a-life loser can piggyback onto someone who actually has some level of professional accountability and they can be comment No. 17 on Dan Le Batard’s column or Bernie Miklasz’ column in St. Louis. That, in most cases, grants a forum to somebody who has no particular insight or responsibility. Most of it is a combination of ignorance or invective.’’
What insights exactly does Bob Costas bring to the table that would get someone like Brian Bannister to be as impressed as he was with blogger Mike Fast? And, what would he say if he knew that Brian Bannister was comment #9 on Mike’s blog?
Do these guys, your Costases and Gammonses realize that they are insulting a significant part of their audience, an audience that holds some degree of respect for them (though not for long)? In any case, these message boards are alot like Talk Radio. Can Costas also insult Mad Dog too?
(Hat tip: Shysterball)
Saturday, January 12, 2008
Repoz, the quickest blogger in the east, posted a link to an ESPN interview, including a blurb, which seemed like made up facts to me, and to Clemens’ lawyer. I looked in the article in question, and that exchange is not there. The exchange is very very very long. Probably the longest interview I’ve ever seen online. And that particular passage seemed to have been removed. To confirm that Repoz, a blogger of honor if ever there was one, didn’t just make it up as a goof, I googled it. And the exchange did in fact exist on ESPN, as my screen print shows. Look for that part I circled in the ESPN transcript. However, it’s not there, in the latest version!
And this is not the first time. A Keith Law roundtable was edited because Keith Law was too smart! Here’s the video. Vegaswatch is saying that parts of it was removed, apparently.
UPDATE: I’ve gotten confirmation that the Rice video is accurate, but that the McGwire video was cut. That cut was possibly due to length, and not for the poor showing of Steve Phillips (maybe). However, the first part of this post still stands.
Saturday, January 05, 2008
Gary is genuinely outraged at the phony outrage. When did phony outrage start? Was it with Bill O’Reilly? Can we blame him?
Friday, October 19, 2007
Ahhh… I loved it. I saw Rickey Henderson hit a homerun single last night. Sweet memories. Speaking of Manny, he’s either Manny or he’s diabolical according to Pedroia:
“You guys in the media needed something to write on the off day and he gave it to you,” Pedroia said. “He took the pressure of you guys to come up with some kind of story and he took the pressure off the rest of his teammates before a big game because all the focus was on him instead of our backs being against the wall.” Pedroia then grinned, and said, “He was just Manny being Manny.”
Thursday, September 06, 2007
Or so says co-founder Gary Huckabay. (The article id number happens to be 6666.)
Here’s what he says:
Read More
Wednesday, September 05, 2007
Fans however, see my clean uniform and their boyhood dreams incarnate. When my hand presses a pen to paper, they find it magical. I don’t understand why this works the way it does, but its lack of logic in no way negates the reality of it. “My son,” said the mother as she looked at her boy, “would really like to meet you.” Again, she smiled nervously and again she was met with silence. After a moment I broke and said ...
http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/minors/features/264668.html
(Hat tip: USSM)
Friday, August 24, 2007
Gleeman, not Hank.
Tuesday, March 20, 2007
SOSH is conducting a chat with Pete, tonight at 7pm:
http://sonsofsamhorn.net/index.php?showtopic=16240
Tuesday, February 27, 2007
Murray Chass says:
People play baseball. Numbers don’t.
People play baseball. Writers don’t.
Given the choice between looking at a VORP report or reading a column by Murray Chass, I’ll pick the VORP. But, given the choice between either of those two, or watching the Royals play the D’Rays in spring training, I’ll watch the baseball game.
Chass must believe that he and his followers represent baseball, and if you are not with him, you are against baseball. We all love baseball. The only problem is when one person tells another person why he’s convinced he’s right or wrong, rather than offering a reason as to why he thinks he’s right or wrong. Chass is convinced that VORP is useless, but doesn’t tell us the reason. Others are convinced Chass is useless, but they don’t care enough to lay out their case. VORP is VORP, and Chass is Chass, and never the twain shall meet.
I’m a numbers guy, but first and foremost, I’m a baseball guy. I’m just a guy who loves baseball (and hockey and the CFL) like most other Canadian boys. I just also happen to have an aptitude for numbers. One doesn’t preclude the other. On the contrary, I find one supplements the other. If all electronics were to be destroyed, I’d be perfectly content watching a ball game. The pure numbers guys, those guys who treat baseball as a toy or something to study, they’d go away. Don’t lump me in with those guys. On that, I can meet Chass.
from Amazon
Recent comments
Older comments
Page 17 of 342 pages « First < 15 16 17 18 19 > Last »Complete Archive – By Category
Complete Archive – By Date