Filter posts by...
MLB_Management
Thursday, August 28, 2008
I’ve always found it weird the way MLB deals with potential draft picks. There is supposed to be no contact regarding contract negotiations between team and player until the player is actually drafted. Yet reading Moneyball, it seems that this rule is blatantly ignored. The slotting by the commissioner’s office seems inappropriate. So, now they extend the deadline by a couple of hours, and finally the union steps in? Here’s their statement.
Isn’t it really weird as well that MLB.com hosts MLBPA press releases? It’s great that MLB.com can act at arm’s length from MLB, when it deals with MLBPA. Still, kind of strange that MLBPA’s entire site is hosted by MLB.com.
Wednesday, August 27, 2008
Easy. If you always had this rule in place, would you ever go back to the original rule?
Ask NHL fans if they would like to abolish reviews on goals. Of course the review rule on HR is needed. Once it’s in place, twenty years from now, the clear majority will not say “get rid of the review rule”.
The DH is another matter. Clearly, it’s not working. Has there been any change in rules in baseball that after 35+ years, it still has not been accepted by the clear majority, or at least reviled by the vocal minority? That’s why I support the “home manager” discretion of whether to have DH or not. You will always have that vocal minority, but at least this way, you are reducing them to a tiny minority, like the tiny minority that prefers things simple in the good ole days (that never were other than in selective memory).
Would you go back to a time where you have 4 teams make the playoffs, or 2 teams? The wild card is a good rule for a 30-team league, if you are going to have playoffs.
If you limited mid-inning relief changes in some form (say by making it a 1-0 count count when the 2nd mid-inning reliever comes into the game at any point not just the same inning, 2-0 the third time, and 3-0 the fourth and subsequent times) say in 1972, would we today say “man, I wish they would remove the disincentive, so we can have more mid-inning relievers come into the game”? No, certainly not. No one would say that. So, this makes this a great rule.
What about stopping a regular season game after 12 innings (tie), or going to Olympic-style OT in 1976? Would the fan complain, and want the game to be prolonged? Of course not, since most fans actually leave the ballpark already. They have already voted with their feet that they do NOT want to see games that go on too long (in the regular season). So, some sort of accelerated end to a ball game would be a good rule.
But, MLB is unique in that they think they need to bend over to the vocal minority that has seen Field of Dreams once too often. The common man will break a lifetime contract of love with his spouse and turn over 50% of his assets before agreeing to prevent runners from bowling over a catcher.
Before you complain about proposed rule changes, or what I’ve said here, think first and ask yourself the question: “If we always had this rule in place, would I ever go back to the original rule?”
Friday, August 08, 2008
What is it about the male mindset that obligates power over cunning? There are literally thousands of minor league, college and high school pitchers who think they can make it to MLB. Of all pitchers born between 1968 and 1977 (that’s 10 years), there have been a little over one thousand guys to pitch in MLB. That’s about 100 pitchers born every year. And yet, millions of parents and thousands of kids think they are part of the elite 100.
If you want to distinguish yourself, why not throw a knuckler or throw sidearm. Really. And why don’t MLB teams actively create a “sidearm” training program, selecting 10 low-prospect pitchers every year for their sidearm program. That must have a better ROI shouldn’t it?
Thursday, August 07, 2008
A while ago, someone wrote me with what he thought was a good alternative to the current DH rule: make it the home manager’s discretion. I love it!
We already have two variations of this rule currently in practice in MLB settings:
1. World Series alternate the DH based on the home park
2. Spring Training games have both managers come to an agreement as to DH/noDH
The one being proposed would be somewhat similar in that we expect half the games to have the DH rule in effect. Plus, it adds great strategy (should we force Ortiz to play the field? do we want a DH if Owings is pitching?). It has story potential ("We should have forced them to have a DH and put a better fielder at 1B!"). As I see it, no downside.
Furthermore, this should appeal to both sides. The “yes DH” crowd can easily accept this. They don’t like the pitcher batting, naturally, but giving it to the home manager’s discretion has great strategy appeal. The “no DH” crowd should be able to accept this, at least a good portion of them, since they will still see no DH around half the time (which is what they are used to).
If we accept that in the next 20 years we will never get an “all or nothing” solution, this seems more than ideal.
In the end, it sorts of maintains the status quo, but instead of the demarcation based on something as arbitrary as the league, it becomes a tool for all managers to use.
So.... let’s have at it. What pros/cons do you see here?
Note: don’t talk about why you think an all or nothing DH is better and forget all other solutions. I can point you to a thousand other discussion forums for you to make your opinion known. In this thread, I’m soliciting opinions on this particular proposal.
Monday, August 04, 2008
Love this article:
Read More
Thursday, July 24, 2008
Are MLB teams respectful of a fan’s time, or are they such uncaring scumbags who will not announce a rainout of a game until at least half the stadium is already full?
I have no opinion, and am asking the question. Tell me the team you follow, and how they treat the fan.
Wednesday, July 23, 2008
By , 01:07 AM
Houston picked up Randy Wolf (a bad pitcher) for a minor league prospect in a bid to “try and save their season.”
Colorado’s skipper, with his team 6 games out of first place, stated, “We’re not out of it yet.” Or something like that. And that is why they are not “sellers” at this point in time.
The problem with both of those teams, of course, is not so much that they are pretty far (actually one is VERY far) behind in the standings, but they are both bad teams that are pretty far behind in the standings. There is a HUGE difference between the Yankees or the Tigers being a few games back, as compared to teams like Houston, Baltimore, Colorado or Texas.
Heck, SF is only 8.5 games back, but they have exactly ZERO chance of making the post because they are a terrible team who are 8.5 games back. In fact, if they were 1 game in front, they would still have only a tiny chance of making the post.
Anyway, according to my daily “playoff tracker,” the Stros have a 1 in a thousand chance of making the post-season. Yes, that is one in a thousand, not one in a hundred or one in ten. IOW, they have NO chance of making the post.
Now, there is nothing wrong with acquiring a pitcher who makes around 2 mil for the rest of the season (I guess) and maybe adding a half win or so to your expected win percentage. But, if you seriously made that trade in an attempt to try and make the post-season, you are a stupid GM in many ways. One, you have ZERO chance of making the post with or without Wolf. Two, regardless of your chances, acquiring Wolf, a bad but not terrible pitcher, makes almost no difference whatsoever.
COL, who is presently 7 games behind, has a 1.3 in a hundred chance of making the post, practically a lock compared to Houston. I’ll give them a pass though, as Hurdle may just be “talking up” his team, which he is supposed to do in all fairness to them, their fans, and their opponents.
Houston is in last place, 12 games out, and has a really bad team. I would love to have heard the conversation in the front office that initiated that trade.
Friday, July 18, 2008
Skydome. Requiring someone to ask for ID of someone who “looks” under 30 seems to me like a pornography law: you know it when you see it. Aramark insists that their mystery shoppers “definitely” look under 30. But, this is an art, not a science. To that end, does it make sense to fire someone over art? I’d also like to know what would have happened had a policeman seen this transaction take place?
Great comments in the link. These are my two favorites:
Read More
Thursday, July 17, 2008
I’m watching Bob Costas NOW. I think it’s all uppercase, though I don’t know why. Is it an acronym? Here’s his site. Anyway, there were a couple of interesting things on that show:
Read More
Tuesday, July 15, 2008
While I offered one terrible and one legitimate choice when I asked about Depodesta last week, I will offer two terrible choice about Papelbon: is he delusional, or is he simply an idiot? Even now, as he concedes to Mariano for the right to close the All-Star game at Yankee stadium, it was more a sign of respect to what Mariano has accomplished, rather than what Mariano is doing right now. Papelbon has 51K and 7BB. But Mariano is 50 and 4! Papelbon has allowed 16 runs in 40 innings, and Mo is 5 in 42! Are you kidding me? Papelbon has also given up more HR (3 to 2) than Mo. On BIP, Mo’s batting average is .232, while Papelbon is .313. While Papelbon is ready to put Mariano out to pasture, Mariano is actually the grim reaper, ready to cut down any closer who thinks he’s already better than Mo.
Papelbon is either delusional in thinking that he’s already a clearly better pitcher than Mariano (he might be a bit better at this point, if only because we automatically expect a guy that is 11 years younger than the other to be physically better), or he is an idiot for speaking as if he wants to step aside to give grandpa Mo one last hurrah.
When I was a kid, I was a huge Redsox fan. I suffered in 1986. At some point soon after that, my two favorite athletes growing up, Tim Raines and Kelly Hrudey, were traded. I also was in college. It was time to move on and grow up from having a favorite team, when the players are so callously treated. No need to excuse a big mouth just because he wears your team’s colors.
If we’re going to accept to ignore everything a GM or manager says about a player as being insincere, perhaps we need to also ignore everything a player says about a peer as being completely ignorant.
Monday, July 14, 2008
The Montreal Canadiens are currently in the “Northeast” division, along with Boston, Buffalo, Toronto, and Ottawa. Ten years earlier, Pittsbugh and Carolina were in their division and Toronto was not. Twenty years ago, they were in the “Adams” division, with Boston, Buffalo, Quebec, and Hartford (who later moved to Carolina). Thirty years ago, they were in the “Norris” division with Detroit, LA, Pittsburgh, and Washington. Forty years ago, they were in the original 6 ("East") division, with Detroit, Boston, NYR, Chicago, Toronto.
Who the heck cares what division a team is in? Why must the Jays and Orioles be married together, forever? If it was me, every 4 years, I’d have division realignment. You can keep “natural” rivals together, but even that is not a hard-and-fast rule. Rivals are more natural and meaningful in hockey than baseball, and Montreal was not always in the same division as Boston and Toronto.
The World Cup of Soccer, clearly the pinnacle of all sports competitions, has 6 “groups”, where the top 5 seeded teams, plus the host country, lead each division, and then there is a drawing of the “second class” teams, and “third class” teams, and “fourth class” teams. This way, you get a basically random selection of teams in each division, and you make sure that each division is fairly well-balanced. And every 4 years, you start over.
How about, every 4 years, the 6 best teams get to select who they want in their division? So, coming into 2008, the six divisions would be headed by: Yankees, Redsox, Cardinals, Angels, Twins, Braves. We can follow the World Cup lead of having a lottery for the next 6 best teams (Braves, Phillies, A’s, Indians, Padres, Cubs) for random selection in each group. Or assign based on geographical proximity. Or, you can have the Yanks (with the best record) decide who they want in their division, either among these 6, or from any of the other 24 teams. They might insist, for example, on selecting the Royals, or Pirates first. Let the Yankees decide whether they prefer to save money on travel in selecting their competition, or whether they prefer to select their division foes based on beatability, or marketability.
Imagine the kind of media fanfare MLB can generate on this. Not that we care, but they might.
Yes, yes, I know. It’s not charming, and therefore it’s not baseball, and therefore, the idea is stupid. Consider it said if this is what you are thinking.
For some reason, other leagues are successful in not having to be married to your opponents forever.
Saturday, July 12, 2008
Don’t bother saying my name. In this case, it will have no influence whatsoever.
Friday, July 11, 2008
Darren Everson takes a look. He says:
This season, the average AL opening-day payroll was $97 million, $14 million more than the NL average.
I’ve already talked about this, but let’s do it again. The minimum payroll is around 400K per player times 28 players, or 11MM. Let’s take that out of each team. The average AL team is spending 86MM above minimum, while the average NL team is spending 72MM above minimum.
If they played each other all the time (i.e., as many intra and inter league games), the win% of the AL team would be .525 and the NL team would be .475. Presuming that a replacement level team is .300, that means the AL is +.225 wins per game above minimum, while the NL is +.175 wins above minimum. Over 162 games, that makes the average AL team as 36 wins above replacement (WAR) and the NL team is 28.
AL teams spend 86MM for those 36 wins, or 2.4MM per win. NL teams spend 72MM for those 28 wins, or 2.6MM per win.
So, that’s your answer. AL teams: a) spend alot more, and b) to a smaller degree, are a bit more efficient in how they spend it
If I had used a .250 replacement level they both be spending right around 1.95MM per win.
Because of this, I don’t see this as “cyclical”. As long as teams continue to spend as they do, the AL will continue to be the dominant league (or at least the one that spends the most money, which one would hope would bring in better players).
Thursday, July 10, 2008
By , 08:32 PM
Then open it up at the end of the season, and look at the Rangers record starting on July 10. What am I talking about? After Hamilton’s walk off homer against K-Rod on Wednesday, The Rangers’ manager said this:
You want to talk about a team, that’s a team. You want to talk about a team with character, a team that never gives up, about guys with heart? They showed what they are made of. And there wasn’t anybody in our dugout that doubted at any moment that we could win it. “It’s a group of guys believing in themselves and believing that once they take the field they’re capable of playing with anybody. At some point this year, somebody is going to believe. I know I do.
So we finally have Tango’s long awaited character assessment before the fact.
I am being somewhat facetious (although I do think the whole thing is nonsense), since obviously anything can happen in 75 games by chance alone.
Wednesday, July 09, 2008
He said:
As I’ve written before, this year has been frustrating on two fronts: 1) we’ve played well below our expectations, and 2) we were a timely hit away yesterday from being just seven games out of an underachieving division. Given the state of our current team, our organization as a whole, and the entire division, what would you do?
According to Cool Standings, their chances of making the playoffs first dipped below 5% on Apr 25. It first dipped below 1% on May 19. They are currently sitting at 0.7%. In-between, they reached as high as 6.3% on June 14.
According to Baseball Prospectus, the below 5% happened on May 4, below 1% on June 29, and they are currently sitting at 0.2%.
Baseball Prospectus has 6 teams with a worse chance of making the playoffs as of today, and Cool Standings has 5 teams with a worse chance.
He asked his readers what the Padres should do, and 87% said to sell while 7% are delusional enough to want to buy.
He framed his question with the timely hit thing, and the 7 games out thing… but they still have to climb over all the teams in his division. Those teams will have to play each other, and therefore, that makes it much much harder for the Padres to climb out of it. That’s why BP and CS show the odds they do. You are behind the 8-ball, and you’ve got four teams to climb over. That’s a tough tough situation to overcome.
Obviously “you never know”, as recent Astros and Twins teams have shown. But, if you’ve got 100$ in your pocket, do you spend that on a rollercoaster ride that may work only 1% of the time, or do you buy some high-flying stocks that may pan out 25%+ of the time?
Since Paul framed the issue as a question, without stating his position as to what they should do, I will do the same here and simply ask the question whether Paul is delusional, or if he is simply being a good soldier in asking the question to guage the landscape to see how delusional his readers may be?
Tuesday, July 08, 2008
By , 12:28 AM
It ain’t necessarily that easy. I am hoping to analyze managers’ skills at these things for an article in next year’s THT. Any input would be welcomed.
Read More
Sunday, July 06, 2008
By , 09:43 PM
Just as there are in any other business. In the 15th inning of the DET/SEA game tonight, and the score tied 1-1, the M’s interim (and veteran) manager, Riggleman, sent in their backup catcher, Jamie Burke, to pitch. This (sending in a position player to pitch) is usually reserved for major blowouts, and rightfully so. I have never seen it done in a close (high leverage) situation.
The explanation, according to ESPN, was:
Riggleman was forced to use Burke because his bullpen was spread thin. Reliever Arthur Rhodes woke up with a sore arm and couldn’t get loose. Brandon Morrow had pitched four of the previous five days and Riggleman wanted to give him a day off. Tuesday’s scheduled starter, Carlos Silva, had thrown on the side earlier Sunday. Saturday’s starter, R.A. Dickey, volunteered to throw, but had tossed more than 100 pitches in his start.
Someone on BTF said this, which sums up my sentiments exactly:
IMO, that’s pretty weaksauce - send up Silva Dickey or Morrow. Mariners may suck but this is the major leagues you’ve got to try to win. Instead Riggleman makes the situation into a joke, the players are laughing and it’s a novelty act.
And that’s got to be pretty dispiriting from a player’s point of view, to have pitchers left on the bench and the game lost by a position player being sent to the mound. If the manager doesn’t care, it must make it hard for the players to care. Seems to me like Riggleman may be feeling like Dave Miley.
Even though the team is obviously going nowhere this year, you owe it to the fans, the players, and the integrity of the game (not to mention, your opponent’s rivals), to NOT do something like that. In the AL (where you don’t have to worry about having to pinch hit for your pitcher), there is NEVER a reason to do something odd to preserve your bullpen. You can always use a middle reliever in any subsequent game to pitch the remainder of the game after you take your starter out. Having 7 relievers in the bullpen in the AL is a joke to begin with. Worrying about taxing your bullpen is a bigger joke.
Saturday, June 28, 2008
By , 11:55 PM
In tonight’s LAD/ALA game, Weaver was throwing a no-hitter through 6. He was due up in the top of the 7th with 2 outs and a runner on second. Scioscia pinch hit for him, much to Weaver’s chagrin (he left for the clubhouse, pouting - of course he always looks like he is pouting, or at least like he is disinterested).
He’ll probably get criticized by some people, but it was the right thing to do. He had thrown 97 pitches and the Angels were losing 1-0. And the chances of him throwing the no-no were around 1 in 50, and that’s if the Dodgers took the lead! You don’t get credited for a no-no unless you pitch at least 9 innings.
For what it is worth, I think that Scioscia is one of the, if not THE, best manager in baseball. Every year, I project the Angels to win around 80-something games and they win 90-something.
Thursday, June 19, 2008
Bill James
Are you interested in writing for Bill James Online? Here’s the deal. At this point, we can’t afford to pay you. We have xxxx subscribers as of now and expenses averaging about $y,yyy a month, so. . .do the math; we’re losing money.
(He posts the numbers, but it’s behind the wall. I don’t know if I should post it or not.)
***
Fangraphs.com
I am seeking writers to write for the FanGraphs blog. These are paid, part-time positions. Before you apply, ask yourself the following questions:
-Are you knowledgeable about the stats on FanGraphs?
-Are you an independent worker and can you edit your own posts?
-Are you available to post at least 1 post a day, especially on weekdays?
Please send any past work you have written on baseball and any links to your own blog or blogs you have contributed to.
There may be a three week trial period to show that you are “right for the job” before you get paid, depending on your current experience and track record.
It’s a little odd, isn’t it? Fangraphs has to buy data from BIS, and I presume BJ is getting a freebie there. Fangraphs only has Google Ads, which, if they are as successful as mine, means he has not even earned 100$ from them yet, while BJ has subscribers. Fangraphs invests alot more in technology than does BJ’s site. Or at least, the output of their investment is greater.
It seems to me that Fangraphs, Hardball Times, and Bill James ought to merge. They are all using the same data source. They have two sources of revenue (ads for THT and subscribers for BJ). They have two outlets for paying their writers (Fangraphs on their blog, and THT in their annual).
I might even be assimilated by this collective. And all together, we’ll be half as successful as Sean Forman.
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
After I ran the Fans’ Scouting Report, and saw the UZR results, it was painfully obvious what the Brewers needed to do last year with their fielding (Note: Mike Cameron had yet to sign):
1. Get Ryan Braun out of the infield, pronto.(*) I thought RF would be ideal, which would move Corey Hart to CF, and move Bill Hall to 3B. Out of the available options in the OF, Hart was the best-fit for CF.
2. Get Richie Weekes out of the infield, already. Enough was enough, and LF would be a good fit for him.
(*)Every year, we get one of these projects and fans who say “you never know, maybe just give him a bit of time”. Same thing happened with Wily Mo Pena when the Redsox got him. It’s like those girls who think they’re the ones who can change you, but you will always be a jerk regardless. Hope is not a plan. A plan leads to hope, not the other way around.
I’m obviously not the only one who wanted to realign them. And, they signed Mike Cameron, so CF was locked up. They moved Braun out of the IF (but they left Weekes there). Overall, good job.
The Mariners on the other hand, are undoing what they should be doing. DMZ lays it all out for you, but what a disarray of fielding talent. If you want to understand the additional value the CF has over a corner OF, or that a decent-fielding catcher has over 1B or DH, then try to make sense of the Mariners roster. It was a bit unfair for them to take this long to move Ichiro from RF to CF, but if anyone could make the transition at this late age, it’s him. I know UZR wasn’t crazy about his play (and at some point this year, I’ll investigate the PBP data of Safeco).
Anyway, what a mess. The most undervalued talent is probably fielding (and positional scarcity), and it doesn’t look like the Mariners have leveraged that in the least.
from Amazon
Recent comments
Older comments
Page 1 of 65 pages 1 2 3 > Last »Complete Archive – By Category
Complete Archive – By Date