Filter posts by...
Playing_Approach
Friday, December 16, 2011
These are my favorites. My second favorite is the best-fielding plays. Give me those two, and I’ll be sitting in front of channel 790 all day.
The one shocking one that I saw, was a game with Pascual Perez, where he was standing on the very edge (or even outside) of the batter’s box, and the Padres pitchers were throwing at him… all 4 times he was at bat. It was rather revolting, not to mention cowardly on the pitchers’ part. It’s one thing for players to self-police, but it’s another when it’s a tit-for-tat kind of situation, where one side gets to throw a punch (via throwing a baseball), while the other guy’s defense is to run away (via trying to avoid getting hit by a moving pitch). And then, his response is to do the same, or, have everyone get into a brawl.
What is a better way to avoid beanball wars? And please, don’t dismiss others’ ideas as being unworkable. This is a brainstorming session. All voices will be heard.
Friday, October 28, 2011
By , 02:29 PM
In this article, Tom Verducci, not an intellectual giant when it comes to sabermetrics, said this:
There is a universal rule in baseball about playing the outfield with a lead, especially a two-run lead, and three outs or fewer from victory. Under no circumstance can the ball be hit over an outfielder’s head—not unless it’s flying all the way out of the ballpark. It’s called no-doubles defense. The outfielders have to station themselves deep enough to make sure the ball cannot get over their head.
This is how center fielder Josh Hamilton and left fielder David Murphy played the ninth inning. I saw Cruz early in the ninth inning playing too far in and said aloud, “He’s not back far enough. A ball can get over his head.”
There are so many things wrong with that segment, I don’t know where to begin. I won’t actually. Except to say that the article thoroughly evinces the “either/or”, “black/white,” digital rather than analog approach that managers and even journalists apply to baseball decision-making.
Oh, and the ridculous title of Verducci’s article is:
Cruz’s unforgiveable defensive gaffe proves costly to Rangers
In this case, according to Verducci, you simply play so deep that no ball can ever be over your head and stay in the park. As if a single in front of you is tantamount to an out. And as if by playing deep you are not forgoing some catches on short fly balls.
BTW, if you simply watch the replay of that non-catch, it is obvious that Cruz WAS playing rather deep, and of course it was an eminently catchable ball, not that is HAS to be catchable in order for his positioning to have been correct…
Thursday, October 27, 2011
So says Tony Larussa.
“You watch your productive hitters in the big leagues, and they get a chance to drive in a run, they look for the first good strike, and the better the pitching, especially this time of the year, you get that first strike, that may be the last one that you get to see. So you’d better be ready to swing early. It’s not sitting up there and taking strike one, strike two so that you can work the count.’’
How come MLB managers don’t manage their bullpen that way? They get a high-leverage situation in the 8th inning, and that may be the last one they see: how come they don’t bring in the ace reliever?
***
Anyway, Chipper Jones agrees with Larussa. Chipper has said that he can’t try to give up a decent pitch waiting for an even better one, because he may not get one any longer. The pitcher is ahead 0-1, he works the edges, he gets to 0-2, and now Chipper is at their mercy.
I totally agree with these guys.
At the same time, guys who CAN’T drive the ball simply are better off waiting, because we know that pitchers aren’t that good at locating their pitches.
The only thing I know is that every hitter is different, and he should hit in his own optimal manner. Never would I think to change the batting approach of Vlad or Pujols or Chipper because I think they should be able to get more walks, or think that Rickey Henderson and Barry Bonds and Adam Dunn walked too much. Everyone has his own individual approach, and if they are highly successful, it would be presumptive of me (or us) to think we can make them even more successful.
I remember Larry Walker saying that Felipe Alou had his hitting philosophy, and would keep insisting to Walker (and the rest) to hit a certain way. Walker of course was highly successful because he followed the Larry Walker hitting philosophy.
Wednesday, October 26, 2011
By , 02:56 AM
The overwhelming consensus on BP, FG, this blog, and lots of other sites I have visited is, “No!” How did all these people come to that conclusion? Because it failed and it “cost” the Cardinals a good chance to tie or win the game. Does that make any sense? Of course not. Not in a rational sense. Can the outcome of a play that swings the percentages one way or the other maybe 1 or 2% inform us of the “correctness” of the play? Not in one single instance and not enough that a human being could possibly discern even after dozens or even hundreds of such plays. But people are irrational beings. When it comes to sports, they are out of their minds irrational.
So, can one determine whether running was correct in that instance without “running the numbers?” Not a chance. One can take a guess and be right 50% of the time, I guess. If you are a good sabermetrician, you might be able to do some quick mental calculations and maybe come up with the right answer with some degree of certainty, as long as the actual answer is not particularly close (i.e., the WE from each alternative is not a dead heat).
So what are all those people doing with their, “opinions?” I have no idea. To me, opinions should be reserved for ice cream flavors, what color car you like, and whom you would choose for your dream date. To me, there is no such thing as an “opinion” on which of two strategies yields the highest win expectancy. That is a matter of fact. That seems to be lost on 99.7% of the population.
So what is the right answer? I’m not going to tell you because I don’t know. I could know if I “ran the numbers” but I don’t want to deprive some aspiring sabermetrician of doing the work and making a name for himself.
OK, in all honesty, I can’t “know for sure” because I can only estimate the value of the requisite variables. Some more than others. But when the smoke clears, I could tell you one of three things with almost exactitude:
1) It is clearly a “run.”
2) It is clearly a “no run.”
3) It is close, depending on the exact values of all the variables, so we’ll just call it a draw.
Nowhere does my opinion matter…
Saturday, October 22, 2011
By , 06:44 PM
Here we go again, in Texas!
Wednesday, September 28, 2011
When I was a kid, there was mutual respect on the field. Tussles were actually fun.
When I got older, there was a shift. In a friendly game, guys would spike slide into 2B, keep their hockey sticks high, drape themselves over the guy with the basketball. One of my closest friends even instinctually stuck out his knee as I ran past him. I was shocked. He quickly apologized, obviously embarrassed that he would take his killer instinct out on me in such a friendly game. It was a kill-or-be-killed attitude. It works fine when you are being paid, but if you are playing on the weekend, that weekend warrior bullsh!t is just bullsh!t. I like a good scrap when it’s all in fun, but not when the other guy is serious about it. Hence, guys like me gravitated toward golf.
Brendan Shanahan, one of those warrior-type players in the NHL, who is now part of management and in a position to do something about sportsmanship:
While the play develops quickly, Colborne makes no sudden movements just prior to, or simultaneous with, the hit; placing the onus on Boyes not to hit him in the head. While I believe Boyes’ assertion that he did not intentionally target the head, this is a reckless hit and is now illegal.
I just love this. There’s no better way to send a message than a only-Nixon-can-go-to-China approach (or Kirk-makes-peace-with-the-Klingons for some of you). Players respect former players.
You don’t get that attitude shift in MLB (yet). You still don’t get that separation between intentional and reckless. Basically, as long as it’s not intentional, then being somewhat reckless is ok, just part of the game. That’s bullsh!t.
Monday, September 12, 2011
I loved the Federer/Djokovic match. The idea of enforcing a shot clock seems ridiculous to me. What I care about is the pace. So, Djokovic kept bouncing the balls more than Federer. He threw it in the air and let it drop at least once. I don’t care. There’s nothing about that game I would want to change. Djokovic playing to the crowd at 3-5 in the 5th was beautiful. If there’s a shot clock, that goes away. (I’m not a big tennis fan… I just watch the big tournaments, semis and/or finals.)
This is not baseball, where the batter steps out of the box and adjusts himself after every pitch. The mound meetings by the manager. The in-inning pitching change. The useless pickoffs to 1B. The stepping off the mound. The calling of timeout for something other than dirt in the eye.
The difference between tennis and baseball with the stoppage time is that tennis has it as part of the foreplay, while baseball is more of a tease about it.
Thursday, August 18, 2011
Pitchers protecting batters courtesy of the prince of Poz:
The Indians were playing the Twins, and at some point Rod Carew slashed Kuiper in a double play scenario at some point during the series. Duane was furious. He told Carew, “I’m going to come down the line and slash your achilles.” Jim Bibby calmed him down.
“Don’t worry,” Bibby said. “I’ll get him for you.”
Kuiper said, “OK, fine, you get him.” Only, Bibby did not get him. He got pulled before he had a chance to get him. If it’s the game I’m thinking, in 1977, Bibby lasted just five innings and Carew actually homered of him. Anyway, the point is Bibby didn’t get Carew that day for whatever reason, and unexpectedly that was the last time he ever faced Carew in a big league game. Bibby left Cleveland for Pittsburgh at the end of the season. So the story should be over. Kuiper basically forgot about it.
Only … one day, the Indians are facing Carew’s team, probably the Angels by then, and Carew comes over to Kuiper and says, “You little $&#$@$ …”
“What did I do?” Kuiper said.
And Carew said that he was playing an exhibition game in Japan. He stepped in against, yep, Jim Bibby. And suddenly he felt the jolt of a fastball pounding his side … this in an EXHIBITION GAME IN JAPAN.
And he said Jim Bibby flexed and said: “That was for Duane Kuiper.”
If you don’t institute some sort of penalty, then the participants will exact their own brand of justice. If you throw out a pitcher for every HBP, then you may affect the balance between batter-pitcher. If you leave it to the umpire to determine intent, there’s going to be gaps. You have a similar situation in hockey where if there are infractions that are missed by the referee, then anarchy may reign (escalation of stick fouls). That’s why you often get fights, as a payback to get a brand of justice (which may indeed be the lesser of two evils, that is a fight to defuse the situation, rather than an escalation of stick fouls).
Anyway, I like what soccer does with yellow and red cards. A HBP would be an automatic yellow card, regardless of intent. A certain number of yellow cards will lead to suspension. This is like your driving record. So after every game, you review the various plays, and a runner slashing the fielder would get a post-game yellow card, etc.
So, I’ll put it out there: we all don’t like the vigilante brand of justice. Therefore, what EQUAL OR BETTER system can you create that doesn’t require the players to police its opponents? And what may be the unintended consequences?
Monday, August 01, 2011
Jim Leyland and Mike Scioscia had the perfect response to bunting in a 3-0 (no-hit) game. Justin Verlander should have said one of those two things. And he did say one of those two things, but he preceded it with something unsportsmanlike:
“There’s arguments both ways, but obviously from a pitching standpoint, we like to call it bush league,” Verlander said. “It’s a three-run game, so if you get a guy on base, you never know what can happen.”
His second sentence precludes that there is an argument going the other way. There is no argument.
He also noted that Aybar elbowed him on a rundown. Some pitchers make a huge deal if they are touched at all when they are in a fielding play. I only saw the play once in regular time (not slo-mo, or with multiple angles, and of course, being at the office, I’m blocked). I don’t know if Aybar did a dirty play. I’d like to know if any nonpitcher would have said what Verlander said, had it happened to a nonpitcher. Seems to me in a rundown, with everyone in motion, some “basketball elbow in the key” contact will happen. Especially if the Tigers are not setup well for that rundown.
Monday, July 11, 2011
"Two strikes, you’re out.” That seems like baseball-blasphemy.
You never (as in ever) get an NFL game where a 3rd down is mistaken for a 4th down. Or not knowing how many yards for a 1st down. Even 12-men on the field gets called for a penalty. Or too many men on the ice in hockey. Even the clock is corrected to the second. Counting, it seems, is easy. Basically, it’s important to the referees, and the players, that the things that can be counted are counted perfectly. Not mostly perfectly, like Intel did once. But perfectly perfect.
But, what if it’s not easy? What if you get 3-ball walks and 5-ball walks? Some players forget about 2 or 3 outs, but at least that gets corrected immediately. But to not correct the ball or strike count, where all the umpires and an entire team did not catch the mistake? This happens a few times every year.
Doesn’t that imply some problem? Is it possible that the 4-3 system is… outdated? The take rate on first pitches is huge: 70% of all first pitches are takes. On every other count, other than 3-0, the take rate is 25% to 60%. Seeing that 0-0 is neutral, we’d expect that take rate to be in-between. Instead, the first pitch is a “feeler” pitch, on both sides. Is this really needed?
Basically, you are starting both sides at 1-1. The problem here is that this benefits the pitcher much more than the hitter. Run scoring will drop by 10%. So, that’s a huge impact.
So, we have a situation here where that first pitch is treated differently, and probably because you can go deep in the count, and because you can have so many pitches, rarely (but it happens), people forget how many pitches were thrown.
But, what would happen if you start everyone at a 1-1 count? Does that all of a sudden make it “not baseball”?
Friday, June 17, 2011
Is ”the code” good or not good?
I think this is another example of where “yellow cards” would be useful. The problem in baseball and hockey is they don’t have a small enough penalty for various plays. Basketball has a technical foul, which is great. Football issues unsportsmanlike conduct, and 5 (is it 5?) yards is not that big a deal. 2-minute penalties in hockey is a big deal (not to mention a disruption to the flow of the game). Ejection for baseball? Pretty harsh.
Thursday, June 09, 2011
Why not?
If tall guys in basketball are around for their rebounding, then short guys in baseball for their ability to take a walk is fine by me.
As noted in the article, only in September. And of course, pinch run for them immediately.
And in this day-and-age, it would be impossible for Selig to discriminate based on their player’s height.
Dinklage would probably be still too tall to be effective though. Since the height of the strike zone is roughly 2 feet for a 6-foot tall hitter, Dinklage would get probably about 1 to 1.25 feet of height for his strike zone. A 2 foot wide by 1 foot tall strike zone is not enough to guarantee at least a 50% walk rate. We’d need someone likely shorter than 4 feet tall.
Wednesday, June 08, 2011
I sent this to Bill James, but I’ll post it generally here for the insights of the Straight Arrows:
Why does the culture of basketball accept trash-talking, even from those who don’t need to do it (Jordan), tolerate the tantrums of John McEnroe in tennis, but require different comportment on a (USA) baseball field? Is it because the pitcher has a weapon in his hand that acts as a deterrant? Is it that baseball is not so andrenaline-based? And, if you readers know: what is the attitude in DR, Japan, and Korea?
Friday, June 03, 2011
This David Laurila is going gangbusters here, really stepped it up to the next level. Just a great interview.
I just get the sign from the catcher and try to make the best pitch I can, to the best location. I’ve never been a guy who studies film or goes over scouting reports. I go with my catcher, and Coop [pitching coach Don Cooper] usually sits down with us and goes over the game plan beforehand. For the most part, I figure that the less that’s on my mind when I’m out there — if I’m not thinking about, and worrying about, what to throw to guys — the better off I’m going to be.
I have four pitches that I have confidence in, and I’ll throw almost all of them in any count, in any situation. I feel that if I make a quality pitch, sometimes it’s going to be a hit, but a lot of times I’m going to get an out. Who’s to say…if I’m thinking of throwing a fastball to a certain guy, and A.J. [Pierzynski] calls for a changeup, why am I right over him? I just take it as, “Hey, whichever pitch you throw down, I’ll try to throw it to the best location, the best spot, and see what happens.”
DL: You’ve worked with A.J. for a long time. What if it’s a catcher you don’t know very well?
MB: Well, the first time I ever threw to [Ramon] Castro, we threw a perfect game together.
It’s just like Dykstra v Beane in Moneyball. With Beane, it was paralysis by analysis. With Dykstra and Buehrle, it’s “don’t think, just do”.
Thursday, June 02, 2011
Not every pitcher can pitch in the 9th innings of close games and still be effective. And, as Steve quotes Andy from The Book, not everyone is cut out to be DH:
Players also lose effectiveness when being used as a designated hitter; the DH penalty is about half that of the PH penalty. This does vary significantly from player to player – some players hit as well as a DH as they do otherwise, while other perform as badly as they would as pinch hitters.
Can you only be an effective DH if you accept that DH is your best role for the team and/or that you will only be doing it on occasion? If you believe that you can still play a role as a fielder, does this then mean that your chance of being an effective DH will be greatly diminished? Basically, do you have to walk through that DH pearly gate yourself, rather than being pushed down the DH well into hell?
Wednesday, June 01, 2011
Poz hates it even more than I do. He has a Pozcast with Bill James, where James talks about it (presumably it’s what we’ve already heard from him, but Poz doesn’t go into it, because he’s pushing the Pozcast… and I’d gladly oblige to listen to it, but I, like most people, am at the office, and I, like many, don’t have a speaker, and if I did, I, like several, would be told to not play that at the office; and I’d read his reader comments, but blogspot is also blocked at the office!).
I agree with Poz. It’s like completely removing Wayne Gretzky and Michael Jordan from the ice/court, by giving a lesser shooter an extra two feet around him to make the play. At least in football and soccer, when you double-team, the player is still on the field, and that player is still sometimes involved in the play. To emasculate Gretzky and Jordan is extremely anti-sport.
Anyway, I’ve talked about this in the past:
Vladimir Guerrero is up at bat. He is prepared to swing at anything close to the plate. Anything! And still, teams will intentionally walk him. Was there a more tension-reducing sight than when Barry Bonds was coming to the plate with 1B open? This is the complete opposite of what should have happened, and was not what the fans paid to see.
The rule is simple: Any 4-0 walk, intentional or not, results in a two-base penalty. If you have a runner on 2B, the 4-0 walk gets you runners on 1B and 3B. If you have a runner on 3B, then it’s guys on 2B and 3B. And, with runners on 2B and 3B, the batter goes to 1B, the runner on 2B stays put, and the runner on 3B scores.
Under this scenario, how often would a pitcher not give the batter at least one strike? Again, fans win, and the players go back to giving us action and tension.
***
Poz also asks how many walks would a batter need to get if all he did was walk and strikeout (and is a terrible fielder). This is why we have wOBA. It answers the question pretty clearly. Since you need to be a league average hitter to be a DH, that would mean that you need a wOBA of around 0.333 (or whatever the league average OBP is). And with the coefficient of a walk being 0.72 (and the strikeout would be around -.02), then you solve for this:
OBP * 0.72 + (1-OBP) * -.02 = .333
That gives you OBP = .477
So, it’s pretty close to .500. At .500 OBP (that is, one walk for every strikeout), your wOBA is .350. So, you can get about 1.10 strikeouts per walk, and still be breakeven.
Now, even easier than wOBA is Linear Weights, where the run value of a walk is around .32 and a strikeout is around .29 (it depends on the run environment). And .32/.29 = 1.10. This is why I love Linear Weights.
And, if you remember, I talked about K-BB per PA for a pitcher as a great way to measure a pitcher. And a pitcher who strikes out as many as he walks is a replacement level pitcher.
Therefore, to tie it all in, a batter needs to walk more than he strikes out and a pitcher needs to strike out more than he walks. In order to not follow that, they need to bring more to the table. A batter can bring power or a glove or his legs. A pitcher? Well, it’s extremely difficult for a pitcher to bring ANYTHING else to the table. He’s going to have to be an extreme GB hitter to limit “power” (i.e., few HR), or be an extreme pickoff pitcher to limit “legs”, or be able to control balls in play to an extreme extent to leverage his fielders “gloves”.
Tuesday, May 31, 2011
Another sliding story.
Monday, May 30, 2011
This is a catcher interfering.
Feel free to post other example of plays where the catcher was actually between the runner and the plate (or right on the plate).
And note the runner ran straight throw, and did not contort his body to maximize the tackle potential.
Friday, May 27, 2011
Hawerchuk:
Could you imagine modern football players wearing only punter facemasks - or no facemasks at all - and then pulling their helmets off and fighting on the field? The same thing is defended as part of the game of hockey.
Could you imagine hockey players constantly diving whenever an opposing player even touches them in the offensive zone and having sportscasters describe “selling” a dive as an important skill? But this “is” soccer.
How about getting in your opponent’s face, yelling and screaming and beating your chest after you score? You’d get a penalty in football, and start a fight in hockey or baseball. In basketball, we see it all the time.
I’d quote his whole article…
Thursday, May 26, 2011
More data from J-Doug.
I presume perfect games are the fastest of them all. Well, at least half of the game is very fast.
from Amazon
Recent comments
Older comments
Page 1 of 320 pages 1 2 3 > Last »Complete Archive – By Category
Complete Archive – By Date