Cup of Coffee: February 28, 2007
Posted by SBG on Wednesday, February 28th, 2007 at 4:29 am
A little birdie told me that they're gonna play baseball tonight in Florida.
This entry was posted by SBG on Wednesday, February 28th, 2007 at 4:29 am and is filed under Cup of Coffee. It is one of 2331 entries by the author. We are no longer accepting Letters to the Editor on this post. Why?
36 LTEs
Sorry, The WGOM is no longer accepting Letters to the Editor on this article.
Loading ...
ok... about Morgan and Chass:
1) Up until 2 years ago, my statistical reference for baseball was limited to the basics like RBI, HR, SLG, AVG, OPS etc. This site and others have opened my eyes to much deeper statistical measures. That is cool. However, I don't think my opinion on most players has changed much. I have always valued a decent hitting catcher or shortstop over a better hitting first baseman or DH. I don't know it was a... geez, what was it... oh... common sense.
I do understand that you can't quantify common sense, so there is a value to being able to quote a stat to support you case in an argument over someone who does not posses common sense.
2) I do sense from many stat heads, as I call them, the inability to accept the concept of "intangibles". As a result, I do sometimes feel like I can't join the club. I personally believe in the words "clutch" and "leadership", but admittedly not to the laughable degree of the mainstream press or Gardy. But having played baseball, and mens fast-pitch softball for 25 years, I have seen first hand that the guy with the best hitting stats is not always the guy you want up to bat when the game is on the line. It just seems like most bloggers and commenters are on one side of the fence or the other. Maybe it is because both sides feel the lack of respect from the other, so when an argument is put forth, a defense mechanism kicks in and an attack is launched without trying to understand the other side of the argument first.
3) Anyway... I am pumped for baseball to start. I look forward to reading the articles, comments and arguments on the WGOM. I may jump in the fray a bit more. I pick the local boys to go 94-68 this year to sneak into the playoffs again. I am hoping a couple of pitchers emerge and become seasoned by playoff time. (I predict Bonser, Garza will be 2 and 3 by the end of the season.) Our position players will be less "awestruck" and we will win a series this time around.
And just to set SBG off a bit, I predict Torii will play 145 games, will hit 35 home runs, 98 RBI, and will bat .280. He will win another gold glove and will be voted MVP of the Twins by his teammates. I also predict that TRyan will stay smart and let Hunter sign elsewhere for 2008.
And just to set SBG off a bit, I predict Torii will play 145 games, will hit 35 home runs, 98 RBI, and will bat .280.
Let's just hope that he does exactly that.
I also predict that TRyan will stay smart and let Hunter sign elsewhere for 2008.
Let's just hope that he, too, does exactly that.
Coincidentally, an insightful take on "intangibles" appeared over at True Blue LA yesterday.
I personally believe in the words “clutch” and “leadership”, but admittedly not to the laughable degree of the mainstream press or Gardy.
I think the degree of belief is generally what most "statheads" have problems with. That it exists at all? Sure, fine, there are leaders, there are players who don't give their all with every at-bat. It's just not a very big effect. (I would actually also posit that many people who like stats get more irritated at the way that the media uses some stats to represent whether or not a player is clutch. Many of the splits that they use are pretty silly and don't really mean anything. It's kind of a matter of: if you are going to use numbers, you should at least be using the right ones.) I also don't think there is quite as much groupthink going on with "statheads" as is the common belief. Different folks disagree on certain issues despite the fact that they're all using numbers to help lead them to the right conclusion.
But having played baseball, and mens fast-pitch softball for 25 years, I have seen first hand that the guy with the best hitting stats is not always the guy you want up to bat when the game is on the line.
There's a big difference between townball and major league baseball. It goes to the question of degree. All of those guys that you want up to bat when the game is on the line? Those are the guys that get promoted through the minors (because the promotions surely aren't made on stats alone.) When you're talking about the best of the best, they've all showed an ability to be clutch (to some degree) at lower levels. So as a result, the difference in clutchiness between players is so small that it becomes very difficult to measure it.
Maybe it is because both sides feel the lack of respect from the other, so when an argument is put forth, a defense mechanism kicks in and an attack is launched without trying to understand the other side of the argument first.
I went a little overboard against Chass, but his argument was patently silly. VORP isn't going to ruin fans' love of the game any more than saves are going to ruin fans' love of the game. What reminded me of Joe Morgan in Chass' article was that he was completely unwilling to be educated before he dismissed VORP. He wasn't willing to spend some time (hell, if he sent an email to BP, he'd probably get a personal explanation--and probably a whole column out of it--as many of them respond to my emails, and I sure don't have a column in the NYT) to find out what VORP is, but he's willing to dismiss it out of hand. Frankly, that strikes me as a rather ignorant position. Similarly, Joe Morgan refuses to rail against Moneyball despite the fact that he's never read it. (Plus, he's just a pompus prick. You should check out that article I linked to about Joe Morgan. "I see everything." Morgan sounds like he thinks he's some sort of omniscient being. He's the best second baseman ever, but boy does he have issues.)
I think there are many within the stats community who are willing to agree that scouts have valuable information to add in player analysis. BP even has a scout (Kevin Goldstein) on staff. Derek Zumsteg's "Beer and Tacos" article seems like it was written eons ago. And clearly many in the game feel that there is room for advanced statistical analysis, as most teams have a stats guy (or more) on staff now. There's really not such a great divide between the two groups as many would have you believe.
ubelmann, I have to disagree with one point. You say that saves aren't going to ruin fans' love of the game. I agree that saves don't ruin my love of the game, but saves do lessen my enjoyment since they cause managers to make stupid bullpen moves (leaving a top 3 closer out of a tie game, etc.) that drive me crazy.
Right, but Chass' point isn't that if managers have access to advanced stats then the fans will suffer--his point is that if fans are being told about advanced stats that they won't enjoy the game as much, that the "human element" will be taken away from them.
So the way that saves dictate managers' strategy might drive you crazy, but I would argue that if you didn't know about the save, but the managers did, it would drive you just as crazy, if not more. (Why are we using Nathan with a 3-run lead in the 9th inning tonight when we could have used him yesterday in that bases loaded jam with 2 outs in the 8th last night?) At least this way, I know why managers are making the decisions that they do. I think it's silly, but there's an explanation.
(Also, on a more basic level, I would say that stupid managers are lessening your enjoyment of the game, and that there were plenty of stupid managers before the save rule was instituted.)
Just to clarify. The label "stat-heads" was not intended to offend or demean. I used it for lack of a better term. I would hate to see Ubelmann wear out his "quotation" keys referring to this term. He He. "Sabermetrician" reminds be of Bret Saberhagen, and for some reason I hated that guy.
As for Mr. Morgan, you are right on... he was the best or one of the best second baseman ever, but no one was good enough to have that big of an ego. I do like listening to him, just as I loved listening to Howard Cosell back in the day. I go in expecting to be amused at the ego and the lack of a filter between his brain and mouth. If you brace yourself for this versus taking his commentary seriously, it is actually enjoyable.
Ubelmann wear out his “quotation” keys referring to this term. He He.
Don't worry, I've got spares.
(I do get to be a little overbearing with my quote keys from time-to-time.)
If you brace yourself for this versus taking his commentary seriously, it is actually enjoyable.
I thought he did a reasonably good job with the Twins-A's playoff games this time around. If he just pretended that Moneyball was never written, he could really be a great announcer. Even though he doesn't see everything that happens on the field, he sees a lot of stuff that goes on, and he definitely knows a lot about the mechanics of how the game is played. I feel like I can learn from him. His voice (to me at least) is pleasant enough to listen to, and I haven't found him to rely too heavily on cliches or gimmicks. And he clearly loves the game of baseball, something which I think is an underrated quality in an announcer. (For instance, listening to Joe Buck announce, I don't get the impression that he cares about the game and it really strikes me the wrong way.) It's just that he has this tendancy to go on and on and on arguing against his Moneyball strawman. Maybe they should put his games on a 5-minute delay so that the producers can edit out all of the strawman crap.
There’s a big difference between townball and major league baseball. It goes to the question of degree. All of those guys that you want up to bat when the game is on the line? Those are the guys that get promoted through the minors (because the promotions surely aren’t made on stats alone.) When you’re talking about the best of the best, they’ve all showed an ability to be clutch (to some degree) at lower levels. So as a result, the difference in clutchiness between players is so small that it becomes very difficult to measure it.
I think I disagree with this.
There is no doubt in my mind that people differ in their responses to stress. Some rise to the occasion (are "clutchy") whereas others wilt. Clutchiness is the degree to which you perform at/"above" your (mean-level) abilities in high-leverage situations. Can you give the same quality presentation in front of the CEO that you give to members of your work group? Can you answer Jeopardy questions as well when you are a contestant as you can drinking beer at a bar? Can you hit the free throws down by two with no time on the clock as you can in the middle of the second quarter? Can you keep your hands as steady as a surgeon in the emergency room as you could while doing minor elective surgery? etc.
I think ubelmann's point isn't really about selection on "clutchiness" as much as it is selection on average performance.
Many levels of weeding out guys who can't perform at a high level on average should leave one with a relative small range of expected performance capabilities.
But (since this is a competitive sport), what does this mean for the importance of "clutchiness"? The variances of pitchers and batters are much smaller at the elite level than at the entry level, by the selection-bias argument. Talent differences should tend to drown "clutch" differences at the lower levels. But you aren't primarily selecting on clutch as you climb to the elite level. Differences in clutchiness should become more prominent not less -- assuming that clutchiness is only weakly correlated with talent.
Can you answer Jeopardy questions as well when you are a contestant as you can drinking beer at a bar?
As long as they let me drink on the set.
I agree that you aren't primarily selecting on clutchiness as you climb the ladder, but this is clearly something that scouts look for. Whether they're calling it the bull-dog mentality, or make-up, or whatever, they care about it. If they think you're really soft, you have to have some kind of extraordinary average performance to outweigh that.
But you aren’t primarily selecting on clutch as you climb to the elite level. Differences in clutchiness should become more prominent not less — assuming that clutchiness is only weakly correlated with talent.
I think that would only be the case if clutchiness was totally ignored as players are evaluated, but that's clearly not the case. Also, as you advance levels, and the competition gets tougher and tougher, there's not much room for you to improve above and beyond what your average performance is. Say we put Vlad in a townball league. He could be the greatest clutch player ever in that league, because he could hit essentially whenever he felt like it, and he could hit just about any pitch that was thrown towards home plate, even if it was out of the strike zone. But in the majors, if he is a clutch player, it's tough for him to show it, because no matter how hard you are trying, it's pretty darned tough to get a hit off Johan Santana or Roger Clemens (who, on the flip side of the coin, might be clutch pitchers). So even if there is a larger variance in the quality of clutchiness amongst major league hitters, I disagree that the difference should be more prominent. It might be there, but it's going to be tough to find it. (Indeed, if it was easy to find it, we would have found it by now.)
This dispute would be rather easy to settle empirically if we had enough minor league play-by-play data.
I conclude that clutchiness is something you feel in your gut. Sorta like truthiness.
Hey, anyone out there think it was apropos that Matthew Lecroy was a sandwich pick in the '97 draft?
I've re-upped by mlb.com Gameday Audio -- looking forward to getting back into it today; go Twins!
+double meat and a bag of chips, Rhu_Ru!
Twins vs. Red Sox. 6:05 p.m. CST start. MLB.TV ($14.95/month, $89.95/year; KSTP-AM and XM radio. Forget American Idol and Lost...Twins baseball is on the air!
Ever since I started watching House my deep-seated hatred of American Idol has increased by several orders of magnitude. No House for the last two weeks (at a critical point in the season) because of Idol cranking up again. I wish it was on during football season, which is when I largely ignore the existence of TV anyway.
Hmmm, shouldn't "order(s) of magnitude" be added to the lexicon?
God, yes. Please let this fetish with stupid, Brit-inspired "reality" shows and game shows end. And never, ever, ever, ever f&*(^(&^ with House.
of course, part of the problem here is the truncation of modern TV seasons. What's with only 22 episodes? The year, at last count, had fifty-two weeks in it.
I'm blaming this on the consolidation of ownership in modern media
After all, back in the 1950s, series typically had 31 episodes (with 50 minutes of content per hour of broadcast. YOU WERE RIGHT, SBG!!!! Effing oligopoly!
If it weren't for AI giving House good lead-in numbers, you may not be watching House at all.
I have recently gotten sucked into House. I've been gong back and watching all the old episodes. Really, it's just what I needed - more TV in my life.
Tonight's starting lineups.
Twins:/Sox:
2B Luis Castillo/SS Julio Lugo
RF Jason Tyner/1B Kevin Youkilis
C Joe Mauer/DH David Ortiz
LF Rondell White/C Jason Varitek
CF Torii Hunter/3B Mike Lowell
DH Matthew LeCroy/RF Wily Mo Pena
1B Ken Harvey/2B Dustin Pedroia
3B Luis Rodriguez/LF David Murphy
SS Jason Bartlett/CF Jacoby Ellsbury
[SP Matt Garza]/[SP Curt Schilling]
I have to figure out how I'm going to see that game. I've got mlb.tv for spring training, but I need to get home to use it. Hmmm...
ubelmann,
This might help.
I always needed one of those!
I prefer this.
+10 black lektroids
occilation overthruster is much more superior to a flux capacitor
Why build it when you can buy it? Go here, and in the "Parts Search" box type: 18851985 As you can see, they're quite affordable. I'm getting three.
Cuddy gets his first game off in about 10 months...
Moss, does the WGOM look better now vis-a-vis our conversation yesterday?
dunno...not at the office today.
Awesome new in my inbox just now! According to Amazon, BP '07 is being shipped! I've also got The Fielding Bible, Baseball Hacks, and THT '07 grouped in with that order, so I'll have plenty of baseball reading soon. (The downside is that I'm too cheap to go with the fast shipping, so the estimated delivery date is 3-5, but with the extra money saved on shipping, I have more money to spend on other baseball-related things.) I swear I've been waiting on this order for about three months now (though I knew what I was getting myself into.)
I got the same Amazon note today. I grouped BP'07 with the BA Prospect Guide. And the Twins-Red Sox game is on XM tonight. This might be the best day of the year.
Oooh, BA Prospect Guide. I should probably get myself a copy of that, too. Have you gotten their book in previous years?
Headline seen on STRIB website, immediately below the game story on last night's Twolf embarrassment: "Team Doctors Have System to Prevent Sudden Death"
It's actually about Dennis Johnson. But it sure looks like a response to the Wolves' performance last night.
here's a shocker -- Vikings release Brad Johnson.
You know, it never woulda happened if they'd given him the starter money he deserved before last season.
That's been my contention all along!
Stick - We got us a syntax err-rah in th' game log...