The Unwritten Book is Finally Written!
An in-depth analysis of: The sacrifice bunt, batter/pitcher matchups, the intentional base on balls, optimizing a batting lineup, hot and cold streaks, clutch performance, platooning strategies, and much more. Read Excerpts & Customer Reviews
Hey, another way to show how much the Mariners suck right now. Maybe this will help me take my mind off the horror that is Seattle and focus on good baseball.
Kudos for bringing up a subject that needs to be talked about, but is taboo in polite, white society.
Human beings seem to be hard-wired to distinguish between "us" and "them." If "them" is defined by race, you have racism. If it's defined by religion, ethnicity, gender, etc, it gets a different label. The problem is that there's a biological urge to separate from "them." To me, the point is, that it's an urge that can be easily overcome, but you have to acknowledge it first and want to overcome it.
I live in one of the whitest states in the union (Oregon), so racism doesn't come up among whites much. They figure it's all gone and mostly, they don't deal with the 2% African-American population in the state. Of course, they also don't know that we had the one of the strongest KKK influences in the 1920s (mostly directed against Catholics). Or that we're one of the biggest recruiting areas for skinhead, American Nazi, etc. groups.
My Mexican-American in-laws have a completely different outlook on the "tolerance" of Oregonians, however. And the African-American friends I made when I lived in the midwest uniformly hated Oregon. The general tenor of their comments was that there are a lot of truly nonracist, generous, just plain good people here. But they can't be quickly or easily distinguished from the racists who don't get up your face, but undermine you behind your back. It was easier for all of them who'd spent time here to be in a place like Georgia or Mississippi where everybody knows the rules and you know when you're being discounted or can expect some kind of (verbal) attack.
I disagree that I have to be in the minority group to understand the scope of the problem. All I have to be is sensitive enough to know it's a problem, then keep my eyes open for data, for personal experiences of friends, for parallels to my own life.
I believe clubhouse chemistry exists, because I don't know why baseball players would be exempt from group dynamics. I just don't see any evidence it translates into wins.
Looking at the Seattle Mariners last season, there were a number of media stories about how the team thought, from spring training on, that they were going to have a special year. Yeah, that didn't work out so well. I suspect the "team chemistry" in that case just made them that much more resistant to making any changes when problems appeared.
We'll see what the line is if the fabled chemistry doesn't lead to the playoffs.
I don't think steroid use is a victimless crime. Everyone who used made the decision that their criminal self-interest was more important than that of other kids who played by the rules. Who knows how many guys didn't get a chance because of the edge steroids gave to some players. Beyond that, it made every player have to decide whether or not to use, and I'm betting there are a lot who succumbed to the pressure who hated doing so.
That's why to me, the blame and the repercussions have to be focused on management. If it was a few rogues doing it, I'd say off with their heads. But people making a lot of money by setting up a dirty system stink.
I watch mostly AL games because of where I live and I have only one problem with the DH: Headhunters who throw at batters because the pitchers know they won't be the ones retaliated against. That can be fixed with some of the earlier suggestions on this site about giving two bases for a walk, etc., as well as more aggressive umpiring.
In terms of strategy, I think it's ridiculous in this age of baseball where we have one inning specialized closers, as well as a variety of other specialized positions, to make pitchers hit. I prefer the NL's running game over the AL's HRs, but that's a personal preference, not a reason to get rid of the DH (see Angels of wherever in SoCal).
It was late when I read through the comments, and the points against the broadcast stuck in my mind. Never post when you're too tired to have a decent conversation.
I'm going to take a little contrarian viewpoint here. First, having 60 Minutes do something, anything on baseball that wasn't steroid related was fabulous. Mainstream media, top ten show, etc., even if their average viewer is 194 years old.
What the piece did was present this average guy who ended up with one version of the American dream--changing baseball and working for an MLB team without being a stud player. The details and the stats weren't the story.
It was good for baseball, which is good for all of us because it puts money in the coffers. It was good for James and SABR because it showed a regular guy, with a quiet sense of humor, instead of the stereotypical nerd in the basement. Costas may annoy the hell out of us, but he's America's sports guy and his presence lent credibility to the whole numbers thing.
I agree with everyone who said it's incredibly frustrating to watch mass media stories about things you know well. It's pretty typical to not really get details wrong, but kinds miss the point. Having said that, for the audience they have, I think the story they did was dead on.
48 Tango-I get what you're doing. I just have had the unfortunate duty to closely follow teams in the last few years who clutch wouldn't really have helped. When you're wallowing under, or even around, .500, odds are your offensive isn't overly helpful anyway. I do think the Lowell v Yuke example is a good one, because it's two players people care about on a team where they might actually have some memories of each coming through. Be interesting to see how much interest there is from KC, Pittsburgh, et al.
I'm the Mariner fan who didn't pick Ichiro!. I wanted Bloomquist, but you talked me out of it. (Yeah, that is definitely sarcasm.) I love the guy's hitting ability, actually bought shirts with his name on them for the kids, etc. But you gave me an out by letting me rank the team. I absolutely believe Ichiro! is the best bet to get on base whether it's clutch or not.
But in the "close and late and important" definition of clutch, I don't expect power out of him and if he gets on, someone else has to bring him home (or he has to bring home someone else, that in all likelihood being a slow runner), which is the lack of depth issue for the Mariners. So I opted out of giving anyone a great, and chose two or three goods (can't remember exactly) who I thought would give the team the best chance of winning. Ichiro! was certainly one of them.
Which is a long way around of saying that my mind works differently than most people, and can make something simple into something really complicated. I didn't look up any numbers, but this was as close as I could come to a gut instinct. It also probably reflects my disdain for the "one great bat" theory of baseball.
To me, the problem with the study is that by having to reject Ortiz, Vlad, etc., you're actually testing people that fans don't consider the most clutch. I'm assuming even people who believe clutchiness exists can't think it's very common. I don't know how to get around that, though.
I think it's an interesting take on fans' outlook, though, and I'm looking forward to the results through the season.
I think the word is used differently in our experiences. I haven't heard p used exclusively for coward. It's a catchall for denigration, but of a type that implies girliness. Cowardly would be in there, but so would wearing the wrong shirt, and general nerdiness that leaves a man without the right outlook on life.
I don't know much about other women's usage, since in my circle, I'm the only one who swears like a sailor. The occasional hell, damn, and f are about all I hear. But I spend most of my time with men anyway.
Another interesting discussion. Thanks.
I did just a quick visual scan comparing this to THT's (WP+PB)/G.
Both systems had Varitek and Ausmus as the best.
THT's 5 worst were AJP, Molina, Rodriguez, Posada, Olivo.
Block percentage 6 worst were Olivo, Posada, Mauer, AJP, Ross (not qualified for THT), and Rodriguez.
Quite a bit of overlap at the top and bottom. I don't have time right now to look at the middle, but I'm always interested in new ways to tease out catcher contributions.
I originally came to the website because I loved "The Book." I come back (and send other people here) because of the cool baseball entries. But I like these little diversions, well-marked so the focused don't have to read them. Always something interesting back here.
I can definitely get behind a no-coward policy. My big problem with the DH is letting pitchers throw at batters without ever having to face a pitcher for retribution.
I'm just a little sensitive to the whole concept that the worst thing a guy can call another guy is a girl, or some part of a girl. I think there's a difference between calling someone a p***y when they don't have one and calling someone a d**k when they do.
I want to go the rest of my life without knowing about anyone else's sex life. I realize there were crimes committed here, and there's the issue of hypocrisy, but I'm mostly ticked off because once more some idiot has done something so stupid it forces me to hear about his sex life for days on end. And I live more than 3,000 miles from his state.
Though I object to the p word as a backhanded slur on my sex, I agree with the rest of Tango's comments. About both the play at home and Duncan's slide.
There's a difference between hard play and plays that have a high risk of injury, or even a low risk of serious injury, to another player. I think throwing a fastball at someone's head should be criminal, but then I was an impressionable kid when Billy Conigliaro's face was smashed. I don't like big guys deliberately taking out little guys on second (though the size difference has decreased through the years, the positional vulnerability remains), not even trying to hide their intent. Umpires rarely call it. There are a few other things like that, that could be handled, but won't be in my lifetime.
Hey, another way to show how much the Mariners suck right now. Maybe this will help me take my mind off the horror that is Seattle and focus on good baseball.
The Race Card (jlc) —
Kudos for bringing up a subject that needs to be talked about, but is taboo in polite, white society. Human beings seem to be hard-wired to distinguish between "us" and "them." If "them" is defined by race, you have racism. If it's defined by religion, ethnicity, gender, etc, it gets a different label. The problem is that there's a biological urge to separate from "them." To me, the point is, that it's an urge that can be easily overcome, but you have to acknowledge it first and want to overcome it. I live in one of the whitest states in the union (Oregon), so racism doesn't come up among whites much. They figure it's all gone and mostly, they don't deal with the 2% African-American population in the state. Of course, they also don't know that we had the one of the strongest KKK influences in the 1920s (mostly directed against Catholics). Or that we're one of the biggest recruiting areas for skinhead, American Nazi, etc. groups. My Mexican-American in-laws have a completely different outlook on the "tolerance" of Oregonians, however. And the African-American friends I made when I lived in the midwest uniformly hated Oregon. The general tenor of their comments was that there are a lot of truly nonracist, generous, just plain good people here. But they can't be quickly or easily distinguished from the racists who don't get up your face, but undermine you behind your back. It was easier for all of them who'd spent time here to be in a place like Georgia or Mississippi where everybody knows the rules and you know when you're being discounted or can expect some kind of (verbal) attack. I disagree that I have to be in the minority group to understand the scope of the problem. All I have to be is sensitive enough to know it's a problem, then keep my eyes open for data, for personal experiences of friends, for parallels to my own life.
Gregg Easterbrook (jlc) —
Disagreeing with Colbert??? I'm sure he could tie the yapping back to bears, though. (And I've been an Easterbrook fan for a while.)
Small team sample size: Can anyone just write anything they want because they have a "title"? (jlc) —
I believe clubhouse chemistry exists, because I don't know why baseball players would be exempt from group dynamics. I just don't see any evidence it translates into wins. Looking at the Seattle Mariners last season, there were a number of media stories about how the team thought, from spring training on, that they were going to have a special year. Yeah, that didn't work out so well. I suspect the "team chemistry" in that case just made them that much more resistant to making any changes when problems appeared. We'll see what the line is if the fabled chemistry doesn't lead to the playoffs.
Sort of a Review of Canseco's book, Vindicated (jlc) —
I don't think steroid use is a victimless crime. Everyone who used made the decision that their criminal self-interest was more important than that of other kids who played by the rules. Who knows how many guys didn't get a chance because of the edge steroids gave to some players. Beyond that, it made every player have to decide whether or not to use, and I'm betting there are a lot who succumbed to the pressure who hated doing so. That's why to me, the blame and the repercussions have to be focused on management. If it was a few rogues doing it, I'd say off with their heads. But people making a lot of money by setting up a dirty system stink.
The Case for the DH (jlc) —
I watch mostly AL games because of where I live and I have only one problem with the DH: Headhunters who throw at batters because the pitchers know they won't be the ones retaliated against. That can be fixed with some of the earlier suggestions on this site about giving two bases for a walk, etc., as well as more aggressive umpiring. In terms of strategy, I think it's ridiculous in this age of baseball where we have one inning specialized closers, as well as a variety of other specialized positions, to make pitchers hit. I prefer the NL's running game over the AL's HRs, but that's a personal preference, not a reason to get rid of the DH (see Angels of wherever in SoCal).
60 Minutes Piece on Bill James (jlc) —
It was late when I read through the comments, and the points against the broadcast stuck in my mind. Never post when you're too tired to have a decent conversation.
60 Minutes Piece on Bill James (jlc) —
I'm going to take a little contrarian viewpoint here. First, having 60 Minutes do something, anything on baseball that wasn't steroid related was fabulous. Mainstream media, top ten show, etc., even if their average viewer is 194 years old. What the piece did was present this average guy who ended up with one version of the American dream--changing baseball and working for an MLB team without being a stud player. The details and the stats weren't the story. It was good for baseball, which is good for all of us because it puts money in the coffers. It was good for James and SABR because it showed a regular guy, with a quiet sense of humor, instead of the stereotypical nerd in the basement. Costas may annoy the hell out of us, but he's America's sports guy and his presence lent credibility to the whole numbers thing. I agree with everyone who said it's incredibly frustrating to watch mass media stories about things you know well. It's pretty typical to not really get details wrong, but kinds miss the point. Having said that, for the audience they have, I think the story they did was dead on.
The Great Clutch Project (jlc) —
48 Tango-I get what you're doing. I just have had the unfortunate duty to closely follow teams in the last few years who clutch wouldn't really have helped. When you're wallowing under, or even around, .500, odds are your offensive isn't overly helpful anyway. I do think the Lowell v Yuke example is a good one, because it's two players people care about on a team where they might actually have some memories of each coming through. Be interesting to see how much interest there is from KC, Pittsburgh, et al.
The Great Clutch Project (jlc) —
I'm the Mariner fan who didn't pick Ichiro!. I wanted Bloomquist, but you talked me out of it. (Yeah, that is definitely sarcasm.) I love the guy's hitting ability, actually bought shirts with his name on them for the kids, etc. But you gave me an out by letting me rank the team. I absolutely believe Ichiro! is the best bet to get on base whether it's clutch or not. But in the "close and late and important" definition of clutch, I don't expect power out of him and if he gets on, someone else has to bring him home (or he has to bring home someone else, that in all likelihood being a slow runner), which is the lack of depth issue for the Mariners. So I opted out of giving anyone a great, and chose two or three goods (can't remember exactly) who I thought would give the team the best chance of winning. Ichiro! was certainly one of them. Which is a long way around of saying that my mind works differently than most people, and can make something simple into something really complicated. I didn't look up any numbers, but this was as close as I could come to a gut instinct. It also probably reflects my disdain for the "one great bat" theory of baseball. To me, the problem with the study is that by having to reject Ortiz, Vlad, etc., you're actually testing people that fans don't consider the most clutch. I'm assuming even people who believe clutchiness exists can't think it's very common. I don't know how to get around that, though. I think it's an interesting take on fans' outlook, though, and I'm looking forward to the results through the season.
Zimmer v Girardi: Crossing the line (jlc) —
I think the word is used differently in our experiences. I haven't heard p used exclusively for coward. It's a catchall for denigration, but of a type that implies girliness. Cowardly would be in there, but so would wearing the wrong shirt, and general nerdiness that leaves a man without the right outlook on life. I don't know much about other women's usage, since in my circle, I'm the only one who swears like a sailor. The occasional hell, damn, and f are about all I hear. But I spend most of my time with men anyway. Another interesting discussion. Thanks.
Catcher Blocks (jlc) —
I did just a quick visual scan comparing this to THT's (WP+PB)/G. Both systems had Varitek and Ausmus as the best. THT's 5 worst were AJP, Molina, Rodriguez, Posada, Olivo. Block percentage 6 worst were Olivo, Posada, Mauer, AJP, Ross (not qualified for THT), and Rodriguez. Quite a bit of overlap at the top and bottom. I don't have time right now to look at the middle, but I'm always interested in new ways to tease out catcher contributions.
The Traveling Typo Guy (jlc) —
I originally came to the website because I loved "The Book." I come back (and send other people here) because of the cool baseball entries. But I like these little diversions, well-marked so the focused don't have to read them. Always something interesting back here.
Zimmer v Girardi: Crossing the line (jlc) —
I can definitely get behind a no-coward policy. My big problem with the DH is letting pitchers throw at batters without ever having to face a pitcher for retribution. I'm just a little sensitive to the whole concept that the worst thing a guy can call another guy is a girl, or some part of a girl. I think there's a difference between calling someone a p***y when they don't have one and calling someone a d**k when they do.
Governor... (jlc) —
I want to go the rest of my life without knowing about anyone else's sex life. I realize there were crimes committed here, and there's the issue of hypocrisy, but I'm mostly ticked off because once more some idiot has done something so stupid it forces me to hear about his sex life for days on end. And I live more than 3,000 miles from his state.
Zimmer v Girardi: Crossing the line (jlc) —
Though I object to the p word as a backhanded slur on my sex, I agree with the rest of Tango's comments. About both the play at home and Duncan's slide. There's a difference between hard play and plays that have a high risk of injury, or even a low risk of serious injury, to another player. I think throwing a fastball at someone's head should be criminal, but then I was an impressionable kid when Billy Conigliaro's face was smashed. I don't like big guys deliberately taking out little guys on second (though the size difference has decreased through the years, the positional vulnerability remains), not even trying to hide their intent. Umpires rarely call it. There are a few other things like that, that could be handled, but won't be in my lifetime.