FIRE JOE MORGAN: 10.06

FIRE JOE MORGAN

Where Bad Sports Journalism Came To Die

FJM has gone dark for the foreseeable future. Sorry folks. We may post once in a while, but it's pretty much over. You can still e-mail dak, Ken Tremendous, Junior, Matthew Murbles, or Coach.

Main / Archives / Merch / Glossary / Goodbye

Tuesday, October 31, 2006

 

Are you ready for some football?

No? Sorta? Yeah, dark days. Anyway, someone needs to explain whether the Associated Press rounds down or doesn't care.

New England (6-1) more than doubled Minnesota's average of allowing 15.8 points per game, setting the tone for an easy victory with an opening drive on which Brady completed all six of his throws for 94 yards.

New England won 31-7.

So...what's going on over at the Arizona Fall League these days?

Labels:


posted by Coach  # 3:02 PM
Comments:
You knocked my somewhat emotional, Season-Ending Eckstein Round-Up down the page for .6 of a football point?

How do you sleep at night, Coach?
 
Sorry KT, the numbers all pointed conclusively to signs that David Eckstein was due for a little, old-fashioned overlookin'.
 
Post a Comment

<< Home
 

Eckstein Round-Up

It's been several days since America's Favorite Little Scamp singlehandedly beat the Tigers for the World Series title, not only going 23-22 (he tripled twice in a single at-bat in Game Two) with sixteen doubles, but also throwing three consecutive no-hitters in Games 3-5, despite staying at the stadium late every night to help the concessions crew clean up the grandstands and tutoring his little brother in pre-calc.

In case any of you are wondering, we here at FJM do not hate David Eckstein. What we hate is bad sports journalism, and there has been a lot of it recently. Apparently, nothing brings out the cliche machines faster than a small man who plays sports.

David Eckstein started the World Series 0-11. Did anyone hear anything about how bad Eck was in the clutch? No. No one heard that. If Alex Rodriguez had an 0-11 slump in three playoff games, the hand-wringing and typewriter pounding would have been deafening. How do I know this? Because ARod did do that, and that did happen.

The point is, ARod is a large human, who makes a lot of money. Eck is a small human, who makes less money. Their career performances during the regular season and during the playoffs indicate beyond a shadow of a fraction of a smidgeon of a blorgtion of a flernson of a doubt that Alex Rodriguez is the better player by like eleven standard deviations. And yet: no one writes anything good about ARod these days, and everyone writes good things about Eckstein.

Does no one in the world remember the 2000 ALCS, when ARod was 9-22 with 2HR and put up this line: .409/.480/.773? Does anyone realize that in the last 2 series Eck played in before the NLCS he put up a scrappy little 6-35 with 6 singles? Does anyone care?

Well, we do. Because people love to attack big rich guys, and love to praise small little scrappy guys, no matter what the actual facts of their performances tell us. To wit, here's a quote from former Eckstein coach Joe Maddon, from yet another paean to a little man's big heart. Read the last sentence of the quote like seven times in a row, and try to figure out how this is possible.

"I've always said David was the smartest guy on the field every night, and that included both coaching staffs," Maddon said Friday. "And I've never seen the guy have a bad day. Even if he goes 0-for-4 and makes three errors, he helps you."

I don't trust that you all read that seven times in a row, so:

Even if he goes 0-for-4 and makes three errors, he helps you.
Even if he goes 0-for-4 and makes three errors, he helps you.
Even if he goes 0-for-4 and makes three errors, he helps you.
Even if he goes 0-for-4 and makes three errors, he helps you.
Even if he goes 0-for-4 and makes three errors, he helps you.
Even if he goes 0-for-4 and makes three errors, he helps you.
Even if he goes 0-for-4 and makes three errors, he helps you.


No. No he does not. He does not help you. He hurts you. Anyone who does this in a game hurts you, no matter whether he is 5'7" 165, or 6'4" 230.

I'm sure David Eckstein is an awesome dude. I actually do admire his ability to hang in a league where everyone is bigger than he is. I get the human interest angle. I get it. I really do. Nice work, Eck.

But David Eckstein is not great at baseball. He is almost like the definition of average at baseball. And people insist on saying otherwise, even when they admit that he is not that good at baseball.

The baseball season is over, now, and although we have a Hot Stove to look forward to, we here at FJM always lament the final days of October, because it's just not as much fun to post dumb things that Michael Irvin says about the Packers, or make jokes about Barry Melrose's mullet. So, we'll keep posting whenever we can, but as a final WS/Eckstein round-up, and to celebrate the end of a great year, here are my favorite responses to the Eckstein Height and Weight Contest. Thanks to all of you who wrote in -- more than 500 of you -- and thanks for being the snarkiest and most consistently amusing reader base a bunch of nerds could ever ask for.

Again, the questions:

1. How tall is David Eckstein?
2. How much does he weigh?

Joe:

1. How tall is David Eckstein?
Nelson De La Rosa plus two inches.

2. How much does he weigh?
Trick question, David Eckstein does not weight anything. He is composed completely of toughness and grittiness and those have zero weight.

Bob K:

All I *know* for sure is that he plays like he's 7'8" and 425 lbs.

Jeff:

170 cm, 75kg!
metric!
boo-yeah!
i have nothing better to do!

Alex:

Weight: As big as a 15 year old high school chess club president with the arm strength of the president's 9-year-old sister, but the minute you begin to doubt him, you're already out.

Height: Shorter than a pesky annoying toddler, but as soon as you look at Eckstein as an easy out he somehow makes contact with the ball and uses his peskiness to get the centerfielder to trip on wet grass, letting the ball land for a double.

Now, if you'll excuse me I need to get back to my math homework, whereby I calculate everything using only measurements of heart and soul combined with a little hustle. I have an F so far in the class, but that's because the teacher is a geek who thinks numbers are important.

Invisible200:

1. 5.515158362e-17 parsecs
2. 7.484274105e-8 teragrams

RocketRoss:

He was only 3'8'' and weighed 49 lbs when he was drafted by the Red Sox, but through grit, hustle, heart, scrappiness, and white-man blue-collar work ethic, he outhustled and outgrinded his genetic code and grew to the height of 5'7'' and the weight of 165 lbs. Sadly, no amount of grit and hustle could undo his terrible skin condition.

D K:

Height: Why the fuck does it matter? The bastard's got GRIT IN HIS FUCKING DNA.
Weight: Who fucking cares? He's the toughest player I've ever seen in uniform. THAT'S ALL THAT MATTERS.

Jeff:

1. How tall is David Eckstein?
Scraptastic!!!

2. How much does he weigh?
Translucent!

John:

1. 6'5"
2. 270

I may be confusing him with Frank Thomas. But how many World Series MVPs does the Big Hurt have? Exactly.

Anthony:

David Eckstein's height is: Clutch
His weight is: Hustle

Evan:

How tall is Eckstein? As tall as his heart is invaluable to the success of all teams everywhere.
How much does he weigh? He’s too feisty to get onto a scale.

Joe:

His hustle is 11 feet tall, and his heart weighs 2,461 lbs.

Also, this year his GORP (Grit over replacement player) was an astounding 193.8!

Avinash:

1. Doesn't matter
2. Doesn't matter

When you want to know the size of his heart, then we'll talk.

Labels:


posted by Anonymous  # 1:16 PM
Comments: Post a Comment

<< Home
 

Them Gritty Types, They Always Fall For Each Other

Thanks to reader Craig for pointing out that Eckstein's wife, Ashley Drane, won a silver medal on the Nickelodeon game show GUTS in 1994.

That's right. GUTS.

Hosted by Michael Goddam O'Malley.

GUTS.

Silver. Medal.

Labels: ,


posted by dak  # 2:00 AM
Comments:
And, from what I understand, she was in third until the Agrocrag.
 
Here's the thing about Ashley Drane:

6'2", 220, Runs a 4.4 40.
 
Post a Comment

<< Home

Monday, October 30, 2006

 

FJM Quiz

1. How tall is David Eckstein?
2. How much does he weigh?

The first 10,000 correct responses to these impossible-to-find-answers-to questions will receive a congratulatory e-mail from me, Ken Tremendous, winner of the 2006 David Eckstein Award for Excellence in Underappreciation. E-mail me with the link above. And good luck! Again, there's very little chance you'll be able to find the answers.

Labels:


posted by Anonymous  # 3:31 AM
Comments:
Happy Birthday, Mr. Tremendous.
 
Post a Comment

<< Home

Sunday, October 29, 2006

 

Sorry Everybody

We accidentally missed the Eckstein article in one of the most venerable newspapers in human history. Us-a culpa.

Everyfuckingbody finally familiar with the smallness of David Eckstein, and the way he hustles down the line like almost every other major league baseball player? No?

Here are the Cliffs' Notes:

pocket shortstop
rosary beads
ignited
little player who does big things
neither was a flashy play
workmanlike things that help teams win
core player
"He's the toughest guy I've ever seen in a uniform" (proving to be the most irresistable quote of 2006 for sportswriters)
5 feet 7 inches
baby faced
looks like he wandered into the lineup from an American Legion tournament
scrappers
feisty
broke his bat
two-out roller
"our club responds to how hard he plays"
walk-on at the University of Florida
puttering along
Granderson slipped

Labels: ,


posted by dak  # 9:47 PM
Comments: Post a Comment

<< Home

Saturday, October 28, 2006

 

Football (Sorry)

Color man Todd Blackledge during ESPN's South Carolina / Tennessee match-up [word for word] :

"I don't know if the numbers really are that, but it feels like we've had a lot of penalties in this game. I mean, I don't know if we've actually had a lot. . ."

Ah, yes. The old Penalty Chill Factor. "There were only six penalties in the game, but if you were announcing, it would have felt more like fourteen."

Labels: ,


posted by dak  # 10:59 PM
Comments: Post a Comment

<< Home
 

Playtime

I've written a short play based on a ridiculous thing I heard on the radio.

I hope you enjoy it.

Labels: , , , ,


posted by dak  # 9:37 PM
Comments:
Ridiculous thing: A
Play: A-minus
 
KT's comment: C+
 
This "riff": F-plus
 
Post a Comment

<< Home
 

You Didn't Want It -- You Got It!!

Here's a guy from San Diego who's really shaking thing's up a little. How? By writing a story about David Eckstein.

built like the batboy
little league lightweight
throws a baseball as if he were heaving a javelin
certified shrimp
sawed-off leadoff man
pestering presence
nothing fancy
maximum effort
enviable efficiency
gritty little gamer
inspiration
more ambition than aptitude
University of Florida walk-on
"man of iron"
no one would ever mistake Eckstein for a superstar
small ball
continues to crowd the plate despite accumulated bruises
seafood motif

Labels: ,


posted by dak  # 6:58 PM
Comments:
Thanks to FJM reader Randy.
 
Post a Comment

<< Home
 

Protect Ya Eck

I would have thought this point I'm about to make to be self-evident, but judging from the e-mails we're getting, it may not be. Here goes:

We have nothing against David Eckstein. I don't know if he's a good dude or not; people generally seem to think he's a ruling dude. And hey, I hope he is. I hope he and his wife are very happy and have like 30 dogs and children someday.

This is not about David Eckstien. This is about sportswriters across the country who have all chosen to write the exact same story. This is about bad journalism, and laziness, in the news sources that you pay for. The opportunity cost, if you will, of other great stories from the World Series that we're not reading about, is becoming staggering.

This may not be enjoyable for anyone other than ourselves. I guess, sorry?

And now, onto more Eckshit. This time from Ben Walker of the AP. Eck Time!

biggest little man
5-foot-7 and all banged up
true spirit (spirit = "Yankee")
"club responds to how hard he plays"
little things
fairy tale
and 5-7 is being generous
enthusiasm
"guts"
extra inches
odds have been against Eckstein ever since he was in youth ball
"toughest guy I've ever seen in a uniform"
hugging

Labels: ,


posted by dak  # 6:41 PM
Comments:
Thanks to the curiously named F FF for this link. (Whither Alessio??)
 
Post a Comment

<< Home
 

An Examination of the Three Key Senate Races that Could Decide Control of Congress

Just kidding. It's another Eckstein article.

But with an Asian twist: this is from the Taiwanese Taipei Times.

Yes. Our little friend with the big gritty sub-10 VORP has penetrated the hearts of our brothers and sisters half a world away.

Read the article, or read my fun word snipets below. Either way, ni hao, Taipei Times! Huān yíng guāng lín!

Let me tell you about David Eckstein
"He had done everything that a lead-off man should do."
"He had gotten on base."
"He stole second base."
"He slid into third on a passed ball by the Braves catcher."
"He hit a double."
Davy
Little
All 170cm of him (That metric twist is my favorite part.)
Overlook
"What he lacks in height, he makes up for with pure ?"
"I'm not even sure of the word for it. Heart?"
Gumption?
Incredible will?
Sprint for first base
Diving [for a ground ball]
Shortstop who never quits
Very large shoes
Unlikely
Unexpected
Completely underestimated
Faith

Labels:


posted by Anonymous  # 6:28 PM
Comments:
A very large tip of the cap to Tony for the link.
 
Post a Comment

<< Home
 

I'm Going to Keep Doing This Until Someone Tells Me to Stop

Send your "Stop Doing This" requests to:

Stop Doing This
c/o Ken Tremendous
FJM Headquarters/Secret Air Force Nerve Gas Project
Area 54
Utah, USA

It will take weeks for them to get to our underground government bunker. And in that time, I will link to, and snip words from, thousands of identical articles about David Eckstein, like this one.

Either click the link and read Tom Verducci's version of the same exact thoughts and feelings that every other sportswriter in the free world has expressed in the last few days, or just read my list of words that are taken from said article, below. That will save some time, and I swear you can get the whole meaning of the article from just reading the word list.

David
Goliath
Faith
Imagination
Heart
Soul
5-foot-7
165 pounds
Clean-scrubbed
Cub Scout
"barely qualifies for a razor"
"one of the most clutch players I've ever seen"
"Tigers centerfielder Curtis Granderson turned a routine out -- by that pest Eckstein, of course -- into a rally-starting double when he flat out fell in centerfield"
(Isn't it amazing how Eckstein continues to receive credit for that, even when the writer of the article always notes how Granderson just flat-out fell down? How is this because of Eckstein being a "pest?")
Size [does not matter]
Magnitude [of a person's heart]
Little dude
Little man
Role model
Good little player
Good player
Idol
Not...big enough to make it
Idol
Small
Stature
Very big man

Labels: ,


posted by Anonymous  # 2:13 PM
Comments:
Thanks to Matthew for the tip. And continuing thanks to everyone else who keeps sending me links to these things.
 
Post a Comment

<< Home
 

Who Among Us is Interested in Something Other Than David Eckstein?

Not me.

Here are some words from this article:

Spirit
Overachieving
Diminutive
Hero
"The definition of a clutch player"
5-foot-7
165-pound
[He] even contributed to the Tigers' bad luck. (Note: ???)
"You can't watch Eckstein play and not smile."
Enthusiasm
Infectious
"...embodies the word undaunted."
"...he still looks as if he would be better placed at the American Legion World Series than here.
Youthful looks
"He may look like a puppy but he plays like a big dog."
Toughest
"all heart"
"His throwing motion is a little odd"
Rally starter
"the pest"
Tenacious
"Eckstein fought off good pitches and hit a foul-ball "home run" before finally getting on base with a swinging bunt."
Dinker
"... fly ball that went for a double when Granderson fell in the seventh."
"at his best when it matters the most."
Joy

Labels:


posted by Anonymous  # 2:31 AM
Comments:
Thanks to Scott for the tip.
 
Post a Comment

<< Home

Friday, October 27, 2006

 

Hey Everyone! Another Eckstein Article!

I will quote this one in full.

TINY LITTLE ECKSTEIN ACTUALLY BIG AND GRITTY
Small Eck Comes Up Big Vs. Tigers
Diminutive Star Big at Heart

by Ken Tremendous

Picture it: Joel Zumaya, the Detroit Tigers’ flamethrowing righty, stands on the mound. He is capable of throwing a baseball 120 miles per hour with wicked movement.

Sixty feet away, gritty and determined David Eckstein, all 5-foot, 7-inches and 165 pounds of him, stands at the plate. Or, rather, he buzzes around the plate, like a gnat around a pitcher’s head.

“He’s the grittiest player I have ever seen,” says Everyone. “You think he’s too small, you think his arm is too weak, you think he is not that good at baseball, you think he is a small, small boy who is very small, you think he can’t hurt you. And you are right. But god damn, is that small boy gritty and determined.”

And gritty. In college – the same age at which Angels’ first baseman Darin Erstad was busy being a hard-nosed punter -- David Eckstein was told that he was just too small. So instead of riding the roller coaster at the amusement park where someone told him that, he tried out for the baseball team. The 5-foot 5-inch 128 pound Eckstein quickly demonstrated that he belonged.

Also, he is tough. The 5-foot 1-inch, 102 pound Eckstein – this year alone – has broken three fingers, shattered an elbow, slammed his other fingers in a door, dislocated his shoulder, had his eyes gouged when one of the older boys took his lunchbox, stuck a knife into his side on a dare, broke his own neck intentionally, ate his own ankle, and allowed teammate Jeff Suppan to open the top of his head with a corkscrew. That’s a lot of abuse for one 4-foot 2-inch frame to take.

But did he miss even one game in 2006? Yes. He missed 39, actually. But holy fuck, is he tough.

And did these injuries affect his performance? I don’t think so, friend.

He hit like .350 and always came up clutch every single time and tore it up all through the playoffs and basically out-hustled everyone to the tune of 50 doubles and like a thousand runs. I haven’t checked to make sure that stuff is true, but I don’t need to. Because even if Eck didn’t do any of that, he at least was always gritty, which is what counts more than anything in baseball. Also there are home runs.

“The thing that makes David Eckstein so great,” says a person with a computer, “is nothing. His offense is worth 9 more runs over the course of the entire season than the average AAA call-up. So. That’s…something, I guess.”

Something indeed. Something gritty, determined, and detertty – a word I just made up that means determined/gritty.

So when David Eckstein -- 2-foot-1 in bare feet, topping the scales at barely 40 pounds soaking wet, and appearing in the game only thanks to an MLB Outreach Program to give malnourished young mole people a chance to fulfill a dream of playing in the big leagues – stands in against 8-foot-11 Joel Zumaya, who can throw a weighted leather exercise ball 200 MPH with his penis, you might think Zumaya has the advantage.

But he didn’t count on the heart, or the determinittyness, or the sheer heartitude, or the gnatosity, or the dirtheart, or the toughgrit, or the dirtdirtdirt, of an 11-inch tall, 2-pound foetus named Dirtid Gritstein.

Eckstein hit a soft liner to left that Craig Monroe kind of misplayed on a wet track, and it fell in for a double.

So, yeah, he’s kind of the best ever.

Ken Tremendous is about six feet tall, relatively big at heart, and mildly gritty.

Labels:


posted by Anonymous  # 8:24 PM
Comments: Post a Comment

<< Home
 

P.S.

Just in case anyone is wondering whether we are being too harsh on people who praise poor little gritty determined banged-up heart-of-a-champion little-things-doer David ScrapHeart Eckstein, O.B.E., here is some decidedly ungritty data for them to gnaw on:

2006:

EQA: .251 (21st among all SS)
WARP1: 2.5
VORP: 9.2

9.2 VORP. 9.2.

That is 217th in MLB.

He was tied with Tony Graffanino and his own teammate John Rodriguez, who is predominantly a pinch hitter.

Kaz Matsui is only 5'10", and he's terrible, and his VORP was over 12.

Note, too, that in both of the articles linked in the posts sub, the work "overlooked" is used many times. In what possible freaking way is this guy overlooked? He is the most-looked player ever, in terms of how much his talent deserves to be "looked".

Labels:


posted by Anonymous  # 5:55 PM
Comments: Post a Comment

<< Home
 

This is Getting RidEckulous, Part II

Read this.

Now, read this:

Here are some words and phrases that appear in that article:

Small
Frail
Innocent-looking
Gritting [his teeth]
Aches
Pains
Tough
"When Eckstein went 0-for-11 to begin the World Series, you had to wonder."
Biggest hearts
5-foot, 7-inch
165-pound
Big and imposing vs. small and scrappy
"He's not the fastest guy in the world"
"He doesn't have much power"
"You can list all the things he can't do."
"You realize he always gets it done no matter what."
"Eckstein made a statement in his first plate appearance against Jeremy Bonderman, digging out of an 0-2 hole and capping a nine-pitch at-bat with an infield single."
All-Smurf
"Between the both of them, I don't think they get to six feet tall"
Little guys
Little swing
"put our bats [on it]"
Inspirational
Sacrifice his body
Scuffed up
"He's the kind of guy you want when the game is on the line."
"He doesn't get enough praise in this league."
" Tony La Russa...has called Eckstein 'the toughest guy I've ever seen in uniform' more than once in recent weeks."

Labels:


posted by Anonymous  # 5:35 PM
Comments:
Thanks to Sam for the tip.
 
Post a Comment

<< Home
 

This is Getting RidEckulous

Read this.

Now, read this:

Here are some words and phrases that appear in that article:

Gritty
Little
5-feet-7
Grit
165 pounds
Determination
Overlooked
Overlook
Grinding
Clutch
Toughest [I've ever seen in uniform]
Banged up
Knocked around
Beaten down
"...he did fall into a 1-for-20 slump running from Game 5 in the NLCS through Game 3 of the World Series -- but he has come roaring back."
Suicide squeeze artist
"isn't known for his muscle"
Darin Erstad
Grinds out every at-bat
"ain't the biggest guy"
"or the strongest"
Makes things happen
"He fights you tooth and nail"
"People talk about him not having enough arm"
"People talk about him not having enough range"
"People talk about him not having enough size"
"That's what's most impressive."

Labels:


posted by Anonymous  # 5:26 PM
Comments:
Thanks to our buddy Brian for the tip.
 
Post a Comment

<< Home
 

Of All The Things I've Heard About David Eckstein

Last night, ESPN Radio. I wish I knew who it was -- someone doing post-game commentary with Dave Campbell.

"If you scrapped the rosters for these two teams [Cards and Tigers], and started over by holding a draft between two managers, there are a bunch of guys who would be drafted ahead of David Eckstein. But if you ask the same managers: 'which player do you think is most likely to be on the winning team?', then David Eckstein will be the first name on that list."

That makes sense to everybody, right?

Cool.

Labels: ,


posted by dak  # 2:38 PM
Comments: Post a Comment

<< Home

Thursday, October 26, 2006

 

If Only There Were a Way to Tell Who Had the Best Offensive Year Using Statistics. But There Clearly Is Not.

So, let's just go ahead and give the Henry Aaron Award for the American League to Derek Jeter. Cool?

No? It isn't cool? Why not?

Exhibits 1-5 of what is like probably 1000 exhibits:

Runs Created, AL, 2006:

1. Ortiz 141.8
2. Sizemore 134.1
3. Jeter 128.2
4. Hafner 124.4
5. Thome 122.8

Not bad. So far, Jeter's a decent choice.

EqA, AL, 2006

1. Hafner .355
2. Ramirez (Bos.) .342
3. Ortiz .334
4. Thome .328
5. Giambi .326
6. Mauer .321
7. Dye .320
8. Jeter .316

Okay…not the best choice anymore. Hafner seems like the best choice so far, maybe. Or Ortiz. But let’s keep going. Because I love Derek Jeter, and I really want to believe that he was the best offensive player in the league this year.

IsoP, AL, 2006

1. Hafner .350
2. Ortiz .349
3. Thome .310
4. Dye .306
5. Giambi .305
Then there's a really long run of dudes who stink, like Kevin Millar and stuff, and then...
50. Pierzynski .141
51. Iguchi .141
52. Jeter .140

Huh. Now I'm definitely iffy on Derek Jeter being the best offensive player in the AL this year. Let's keep going.

SecA, AL, 2006

(This takes into account Jeter's SB, remember)

1. Hafner .570
2. Ortiz .565
3. Giambi .556
4. Thome, .529
5. Ramirez (Bos.) .519
(Then there's a long list of dudes, including Johnny Damon and Jorge Posada and Alex Rodriguez and, yes, Kevin Millar again, and then we get...)
28. Millar .302
29. Jeter .297

Ugh. This is looking more and more like Derek Jeter didn't deserve this award. Sorry I put in the thing about how Millar was in the long list of dudes who came before Jeter and then also wrote in Millar's place on the list right above Jeter, but I really wanted to hammer home the insane fact that Kevin Millar had a higher SecA than Derek Jeter in 2006.

Well, at least Jeter led the league in OPS. Check that -- he was 15th. Hafner was first.

No matter. I'm sure he was at the very least the best offensive player on his own team. Oops -- hang on. Giambi was way better in every single stat except BA and SB. And ARod was 13th in OPS. (Surprising -- I thought that guy sucked, based on what people who are professional sportswriters have told me.)

Well, okay, fine, whatever -- Jeter was definitely the very very best offensive SS in the AL. Except arguably Carlos Guillen, who had a higher OPS, more HR, more 2B, and more walks, in 80 fewer AB.

But look, everyone -- Jeter was second in VORP in the AL. So he's not a bad choice.

Of course, Hafner was first in VORP in the AL.

Travis Hafner is a better hitter than Derek Jeter. So are lots of other people. Jeter might deserve the MVP, because he put up his very very good stats from the SS position, which makes those stats very very valuable. But the Hank Aaron Award is not the MVP.

So there you have it, folks. Derek Jeter. Winner of the Hank Aaron Award for being the first-or-second-best-hitting SS in the AL, and probably like the third- or fourth-best hitter on his own team.

That's what we give the award out for, correct?

Labels: ,


posted by Anonymous  # 12:14 AM
Comments:
There have been some very angry blog-o-types -- my favorite kind, as I myself am an angry blog-o-type -- who have chastised me for using SecA and IsoP in the same breath as VORP, EqA, etc. Just to clarify: I am not equating these stats. The umbrella stats -- VORP, EqA, etc. -- tell the big picture story, and the smaller, more specific stats -- SecA, OPS, IsoP -- tell the details of the story. And the story is: Travis Hafner -- and probably Ortiz, Thome, and a few other dudes -- all had better offensive years than Derek Jeter.
 
And yes, okay, fine. This:

Winner of the Hank Aaron Award for being the first-or-second-best-hitting SS in the AL, and probably like the third- or fourth-best hitter on his own team.

is an exaggeration. Just having a little fun.

But Giambi had a better year. And ARod (.311 EqA to Jeter's .316) was basically equal.

And Kevin Millar had a higher SecA.
 
Post a Comment

<< Home

Wednesday, October 25, 2006

 

The Morning After

Still reeling from that "Scouting Report" that FOX gave us on Brad Garrett's character in the new sitcom "Til Death."

I need some Advil.

Labels: ,


posted by dak  # 3:23 PM
Comments: Post a Comment

<< Home

Monday, October 23, 2006

 

I'm Sure This Observation Has Been Made Before

Chris Berman's "Fastest Three Minutes," during halftime of MNF on ESPN, feel to me like the longest three consecutive minutes I've ever experienced in my life.

Labels:


posted by dak  # 10:28 PM
Comments:
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
 
Mrs. Tremendous refers to Berman as "that man who yells at me." It always makes me laugh.
 
Post a Comment

<< Home
 

Hate To Interrupt Doodoo-on-handgate For This

Doesn't it seem like even Tim Kurkjian himself has trouble pronouncing the name Tim Kurkjian?

Labels:


posted by dak  # 3:50 AM
Comments: Post a Comment

<< Home

Sunday, October 22, 2006

 

WS Game 1, FOX Pre-Game Observations

1. Were I a member of Eric Byrnes’ immediate family, I might be more than a little worried about the current state of his mental health.

2. Fox has still not granted women the right to predict who will win the World Series. (Kennedy: Tigers in 6; Byrnes: Tigers; Zelasko: toss to commercial)

3. Nothing – and I mean nothing – represents the zeitgeist of the 2006 Detroit Tigers better than Architecture In Helsinki.

(I tried to get this up 4 hours ago but Blogger has been down. Oh well.)

Labels: , ,


posted by dak  # 12:14 AM
Comments: Post a Comment

<< Home

Friday, October 20, 2006

 

Picks!

I'm not a huge fan of making predictions about who's going to win a given series, or the whole postseason, or what have you. I very much enjoy talking about who has a better chance of winning, and for what reasons, et cetera. But I see little reason in saying anything like "I'm picking Twins in 6." I guess maybe it's fun? (Not a big fan of fun things.)

So generally speaking, I don't really care what people's predictions are.

But then...once in a while...19 baseball experts from the nation's leading sports network try to predict which team will win the World Series, and not one of them even picks a team that makes it to the World Series, let alone wins it.

And that, I kind of feel like, is worth pointing out.

I know what you're thinking: what are the chances that this could happen, assuming even that the ESPN analysts have monkey-throwing-raisins-at-a-dartboard level of guessing ability? And by "this," I mean 19 picks for World Series champs not even making the World Series.

Well, the chances that any given ("random") playoff team makes the World Series is 1 out of 4. In this case, 19 people missed what would have been a 1 out of 4 chance, if they had just simply "guessed" (at random). To measure the probability of this, we have to think in these terms: 19 people in a row "hit" a 3 out of 4 chance. What are the chances of that? .75^19 = .00423, or .42%

In other words, the anlaysts could have thrown all of their baseball knowledge out the third floor window of the Bristol megaplex, picked a random team to win the World Series...and there would have been less than a 1 in 200 chance that zero of their picks would get to the World Series. (Which, just to remind everyone, is exactly what happened.)

But wait! It gets better.

Looking further at these picks -- and I'm sure someone pointed this out before -- not one single person picked the Tigers to even get out of the ALDS. And only one person picked the Cards to beat the Padres in the NLDS.

Which means (stay with me) in the combined series of: Yanks / Tigers ALDS, Padres / Cards NLDS, ALCS, NLCS, and WS, the 19 ESPN experts went a total of 1 for 95. ONE FOR NINETY-FUCKING-FIVE.

If you let 10,000 teams of 19 monkeys randomly pick winners in those series, those monkey-picking-teams would average 30.9 out of 95. (.5 for 38 DS picks + .25 for 38 CS picks + .125 for 19 WS picks)

Congratulations to Enrique Rojas, the only person who picked either the World Series bound Tigers or Cardinals to win even one series. He also picked El Duque as the WS MVP in a victory over the Twins.

EDIT: I'd like to take a second to address two categories of e-mails I'm getting from a lot of readers.

Category 1 is best summed up by e-mailer CJ:
"You're giving them too much credit. Each of nineteen guys failed to connect on TWO one in four chances. If everyone picked at random, the probability that any one guy would fail to pick either wold series team is (.75 * .75) = .5625. Raise that to the 19th power and you get 0.0000178, or 1 in 55933."

On its own, this is true. And "more" impressive. As for accusations that I was wrong, however (which were often made), I stand by my original numbers. I was looking at the chances of a different phenomenon. ("And by 'this,' I mean 19 picks for World Series champs not even making the World Series.")

So, dudes who wrote -- excellent point. The chances of going 0-38 in CS Champs picks are even more astronomically difficult than going 0-19 in WS Champs picks not even making the WS. But I was right also. Sweet.

On to Category 2 now, as written by the beautifully named Alessio, who is probably a dude but in my imagination is a gorgeous 23-year-old woman from like Monaco who loves baseball and statistical analysis. I quote him (her? please?) at length because it's easier than writing this all out myself:

I'm no statistician, but I think you made an analytical error in your post on "picks". The chances of what happened are not nearly as distant as you calculate. In fact, you're far more likely to get such results from intelligent decision makers than from random chance.

The fact that human beings are picking will tend to "bunch" the picks a lot more than random chance. For example, let's say the Yankees are better than the Tigers, and everybody recognizes that. Everybody will pick the Yankees, so the picks could rationally be 19-0 even though their actual chances of winning might be something like 55%. When the Tigers beat those odds, all of a sudden you have 19 wrong picks, although there's only one upset in the series.

Now, when you have three or four series upsets (nothing unusual there), all of a sudden you have a whole lot more than 19 wrong picks.

When you have a consensus on the various team strengths, combined with just a few upsets, you get the seemingly anomolous result of a bunch of prognosticators going 1-for-95. A random picking system would almost never be that bad; but on the other hand, it would almost always be around 50%. The humans could just as easily have been around 90% if those series had gone the other way.

Alessio. My sweet, innocent Alessio. Alesssssio, my princess of Monaco... [daydreaming now: playing with Alessio's hair; engaging in conversation about VORP vs. WARP3 over mussels and wine...now realizing instead that Alessio is almost certainly a 45-year-old dude from Canton, Ohio or something, and on top of that, feeling the obligation to publicly apoligize to girlfriend about the whole Alessio-fantasy situation]...sorry, what now?

Oh, the numbers thing.

Yeah. Well, Alessio, you fat fucking ugly monster of a man, you make what I guess is a good point. I guess my response is: yes, of course. Of course humans will, over the long haul, be better than random-team generators at predicting who wins certain games / series / whatever. I realize why, especially in this case, the experts were especially bad at picking winners. Your point is spot on: a rational human being will pick the 55%-likely-to-win team, and, likewise, so will 19 rational humans. I'm just trying to put a scenario together that sort of points out the whole ridiculousness of "predictions" in general.

Listen: It's a cheat. I cheated. And that's the kind of thing you do when you run a blog devoted to making analysts look silly.

You take advantage of a combination of hindsight, upsets, and odd numbers, and use them in a way to make people silly. And you sort of hope, I guess, that people make their own conclusions about just how much these numbers actually mean.

To me, the overall point is not that we should let monkeys throw raisins at a dartboard instead of letting experts make their predictions. But rather, isn't it kind of silly / interesting / amusing that in this particular case, a team of monkeys would have been almost a sure bet against these so-called experts?

That's all. Interpret at your own risk.

Sorry / Thanks to Alessio, whose appearance and gender remain an absolute, delicious mystery to me.

Labels: , ,


posted by dak  # 3:14 AM
Comments:
Turns out Alessio is a 25-year-old dude.

Goodbye, boner!
 
And now for the sake of pure hypocrisy, I am going to predict the Cards as WS winners in 6 games.

I find comfort in knowing that I can't be any more wrong than Karl Ravech.
 
I am sticking with Yanks over Pads in 5.
 
Post a Comment

<< Home

Thursday, October 19, 2006

 

Going Back For A Second

...to that e-mail that Simmons posted (see Junior's post below).

Dude wrote: "In 1996-2000, it wasn't just that they had great chemistry (which they did), they didn't have nearly as much offensive talent so they were forced to play true October baseball."

Hmm. How much less offensive talent did they really have during that 5-year stretch?

In 2006, the Yankees scored 930 runs.

In the World Series Championship year of 1998, they scored 965.

From 1996-200, they averaged 899.6 runs / year. Compared against the 2006 juggernauts, that's a difference of 30.4 runs, or .19 runs / game.

And this difference in offensive talent (am I measuring it wrong?) is meant to be enough to explain the problem with the 2006 Yankees? At this point, I'm even willing to let go of the far more ridiculous assertion: that the problem is that they had too much talent.

Side note: in the 1998 World Series, the only series for which I currently have the energy to make the following calculations, the Yankees also scored 15 out of 26 of their runs on HRs. Or 54%. Or a percent that would have led MLB any of the years for which I've been able to find data. And yes, you should ignore those numbers because the sample size is tiny.

Labels: ,


posted by dak  # 8:17 PM
Comments:
Not to quibble Jr., but it is worth noting how little the Buck-McCarver team extolled Endy Chavez's catch. We might have seen the single greatest postseason defensive play in the Division Series era (particularly if the Mets end up winning). I guess my point is generally that the pro-Cards bias has been unbelievable this series. Did you catch McCarver trying to spin Pujols's quotes about Glavine the other night? If Delgado had said the same about Carpenter, all we would have heard about all night is how Delgado hates America because he won't stand for the anthem 5 years ago (when the U.S. was using his native land as mortar dump.) McCarver-Buck are not good at their jobs.
 
Wow, I'm old. It was 10 years ago.
 
Ok, it was 2 years ago. I got that from an abbreviated Google entry that ellipsied into a bit about Mahmoud Abdul-Rauf in the '95-'96 season. We've all been there, right fellas?
 
I hear you, Jr. For the record, I find it easier to root for the Mets knowing that Willie Randolph's daughter loves to watch Endy Chavez play the game. Ok, I'll stop clogging up the comments board.
 
Hey Junior / Coach:
Get a room.

Am I right?
 
Man, McCarver and Buck seem to be giving an awful lot of credit to LaRussa for that Molina HR.

LaRussa moved him up one slot in the order...and that's why he went yard?

Truth is, if Yadier had been in the same position as he usually was, he "would've" hit the HR in even more dramatic fashion, with 2 out in the 9th.
 
You guys, I think we might be "live-blogging."
 
Isn't it weird when it's raining at baseball games, and it looks from some angles like it's pouring, and then from other shots like it's not even raining at all?

(No, it is not that weird.)
 
Eckstein does it again!!!
 
Post a Comment

<< Home
 

Griffined!

I finally got around to reading the Richard Griffin article that Junior assailed yesterday (see below, 18 Oct.). Here are a few more pieces of evidence Griffin gives that Billy Beane, and not Ken Macha, is at fault for the A's woes:

How could anyone blame Macha for losing to the Tigers? After second baseman Mark Ellis was injured, Beane gave Macha the combo of D'Angelo Jimenez and Mark Kiger. Jimenez may have been the worst starting second baseman in a playoff game this decade, while Kiger was making his MLB debut.

I could be wrong, but wasn't Ellis injured during the playoffs? Apparently, Beane was supposed to fly Robby Cano to Oakland, give him a fake moustache, and have him pretend to be Cobinson Rano: Oakland A's Second Baseman Who Is Totally On the Playoff Roster!

Ellis was also on the DL in early June, but I really believe that Griffin is blaming Beane for the A's not having an awesome backup 2nd baseman instantaneously in October. Now, that's not Macha's fault either. In fact, it's nobody's fault, really -- it's just bad luck. But as Junior's post below shows, there seem to be other things that are, in fact, Macha's fault. Like the fact that everyone on his team hated his guts.

During the regular season, when the A's were in Toronto, catcher Jason Kendall was suspended, so Beane elevated one of his Moneyball legends, overhyped draft choice, roly-poly catcher Jeremy Brown. Macha laughed in the face of a question about how much playing time Brown would get. "None."

Listen to me carefully, Richard Griffin. I have several points to make.

1. The fact that a catcher got suspended means that the GM, in this case Billy Beane, would be doing a huge disservice to his team by not putting another catcher on the team ASAP. So. They had a catcher in the minors, who is on the 40-man roster, who has decent AAA stats (.764 OPS, 13HR in 77 games -- not great, but workable), so he promoted him. What is the problem here?

2. Ken Macha laughing and being snarky about how much playing time a new guy is going to get is a dickish thing to do, and is exactly the kind of thing that got him fired.

3. Jason Kendall was out for four games. Four. So the worst thing that could have happened was that Jeremy Brown would be there for four games. In May.

4. In the last two full seasons, Jason Kendall, who makes $11 million a year, has OPSes of .709 and .666. In the minute sample size of MLB-level experience this year, Jeremy Brown was 3-10 with 2 2Bs. Career, 4-12. That shit ain't bad. Maybe Macha should have played him more. Or maybe he shouldn't've. But he definitely shouldn't have laughed at the question of how much the guy was going to play. What good does that do?

Macha's fault? During the ALCS against the Tigers, Nick Swisher lived up to his name, with five strikeouts in 10 at-bats, while ...another of Beane's prized drafts, Joe Blanton, was relegated to long relief.

In 2005 Joe Blanton made about $327,000 and won 12 games with an ERA of 3.53, giving up 178 hits in 201.1 IP. His OPS-against was .693. In 2006 he regressed terribly, his WHIP soaring to 1.54 (possibly due to some bad luck -- his K/BB stayed roughly the same and he actually gave up fewer HR). But tell me how Billy Beane is at fault for this. Is he the pitching coach too?

And as for Nick Swisher...I guess his .254/.372/.493/.865, 35 HR and 97 BB go right the fuck out the window in the face of three not so good games against the league's best pitching staff. Curse you, Billy Beane!!!!!!

Labels: ,


posted by Anonymous  # 6:30 PM
Comments:
Is "swishing" really a synonym for striking out?

Not buying it.
 
A number of Canadians have thanked us for finally mentioning Richard Griffin.

It seems as though he may be, dare I say, Canada's answer to HatGuy.

So to you, O Canada, I say on behalf of FJM: you're welcome, and go Oilers.
 
Finissez l'emploi de Monsieur Richard Griffin!
 
Post a Comment

<< Home
 

McCarver, Game 6, NLCS

Anyone else hear him, bottom of the 7th, after Yadier Molina made a terrible throw to 2nd following a pitchout, allowing Michael Tucker to steal 2nd safely?

"By guessing right, they may have guessed wrong."

How is making a bad throw in any way "guessing wrong"? It's like the try-to-make-things-sound-clever part of his brain is eating all the other parts of his brain.

Also I have a fun game to pass along: any time you read a gossip headline about "Macca" and the crazy breastmilk / stabbing / bedpan allegations made by his ex-wife, imagine that it's actually about Tim McCarver and not Paul McCartney.

I'll tell you what -- it made my day about .4% more enjoyable!

EDIT: after reading some e-mail verifications (thanks Kevin -- but it was Yadier, not Bengie), it appears that indeed McCarver, and not I, am the crazy one.

Labels: ,


posted by dak  # 3:38 AM
Comments:
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
 
Post a Comment

<< Home

Wednesday, October 18, 2006

 

THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT

Please -- please -- vote Frank Catalanotto for MLB's most-clutch left-fielder. It is very important to me.

Having a vote for "most clutch" baseball player is like having a vote for "most real" monster.

Labels:


posted by Anonymous  # 3:22 PM
Comments:
I for one believe that John Lithgow is a real monster.
 
Post a Comment

<< Home

Saturday, October 14, 2006

 

"So" Awesome

Homer In Ninth By Cards' Taguchi Causes Massive, Voltron-Like Collective Wet Dream From Top U.S. Headline Writers

Labels:


posted by dak  # 12:44 PM
Comments: Post a Comment

<< Home

Friday, October 13, 2006

 

The Numbers Are In

Sorry for the delay, folks. I've finally finished crunching the numbers for the 2006 MLB Team Chemistry Indices. This year's TCI's were especially difficult to calculate, but I think you'll find them especially revealing. (A complete explanation of the formula can be found at the end of the post.)

Anyway, on to the numbers and some explanatory comments!

== 2006 MLB Team Chemistry Index [(c) 2006 FJM] ==

1. STL -- 167.78 (+8)
Not much of a surprise here. Great leadership by gritty veterans like Edmonds and Rolen. Another cohesive ship helmed by LaRussa. And oh -- let's not forget a little thing called Eckstein.

2. PHI -- 156.65 (+7)
Didn't expect to see them quite so high, but clearly the wild card chase brought this team together like magnets. Quiet leadership from Ryan Howard; don't forget, he's almost 27 and knows how to communicate well.

3. FLA -- 153.67 (+7)
Needless to say, "it showed." This team was clearly more than the sum of its parts, especially after the all-star break. Exceptional chemistry for such a young team. Watch out for these guys.

4. MIL -- 123.92 (+5)
Look at this team's roster, and you'll see that they're full of glue guys like Corey Koskie and Jeff Cirillo. Side note: you ever wonder why it seems like National League teams are always at the top of these lists? Here's a theory: pitchers having to bat creates a little less friction between pitchers and position players.

5. NYM -- 80.64 (+3)
What's that old saying? "Working together is chemistry. Winning together is alchemy." You better believe it.

6. BAL -- 76.27 (+2)
Maybe all those things they used to say about Miguel Tejada are still true. First one to the ballpark, sparkplug, etc. Add a few character guys (Millar, Loewen) and suddenly this high ranking isn't so surprising.

7. CLE -- 67.00 (+2)
To be sure, the on-field results were disappointing this year. But ask the local beat writers if these guys ever gave up. Ask them if Pronk and Sizemore and Cliff Lee ever threw in the towel in September. Ask them what Jake Westbrook found in his cleats one morning in Detroit, and you'll find out what kind of clubhouse they had.

8. NYY -- 65.67 (+2)
People wonder why I keep saying Joe Torre should be Manager of the Year every year. Numbers like this one are why. Assist: Derek Jeter. Unsung Chemistry Hero: Ron Villone. TCI Could've Been Over 100 Without: A-Rod.

9. TOR -- 65.20 (+2)
And they said all J.P. Ricciardi cared about were the numbers. Tell that to guys like Greg Zaun and Jeremy Accardo. Laid back Canadian atmosphere can't hurt either.

10. CIN -- 63.67 (+1)
You have to wonder whether this number would have been higher or lower without those midseason trades. Some say despite all those strikeouts from Austin Kearns, he may have been the guy holding that young clubhouse together.

11. PIT -- 63.45 (+1)
Sometimes it's easy to get along when there are zero expectations to begin with. These are a good group of guys to be sure, and one of the newest clubhouses in the bigs fosters lots of communal time among teammates.

12. LAA -- 59.74 (0)
Whether it's Blink 182 or Carlos Santana; Burgers or Enchiladas; Jessica Biel or Jennifer Lopez, it's all welcome in the bilingual Angels clubhouse. Credit owner Arte Moreno for bringing in the heavy Latin flair.

13. SEA -- 57.91 (0)
Word out of Seattle is this young pitching staff does everything together. I mean, almost everything.

14. SND -- 57.39 (0)
What do Cla Meredith, Russell Branyan and Khalil Greene have in common? More than you might think.

15. COL -- 54.21 (0)
You have to wonder how the changes to the longstanding batting order affected the psyche and clubhouse demeanor of Todd Helton. They don't often win more than 80 games, but these guys are usually better than a middle of the pack chemistry team.

16. ARZ -- 53.42 (0)
Credit Darren Nolan of the Phoenix Daily Globe for this perfect description of the Diamondbacks: "Twenty-five players. Twelve to fifteen cabs."

17. BOS -- 52.86 (-2)
You might expect them to come in even lower, but remember, the TCI is a cumulative, full-year statistic. "Manny being Manny" (the bad kind) didn't kick in till about August. Plus, as good as Papi is on the field, he's just as valuable in the clubhouse.

18. CHC -- 51.25 (-2)
It'll be interesting to see how the next Cubs' skipper tries to turn this number around. He might not be able to get guys on base more often, but he can sure do something about that 51.25 TCI. It wasn't all Dusty's fault, though. See also: nagging injuries, Scott Eyre, and, according to one anonymous infielder "dogshit clubhouse catering."

19. LAD -- 51.19 (-2)
Paging Dr. LoDuca.

20. SNF -- 50.50 (-2)
It's hard to build too much chemistry when there's a performance-enhanced elephant in your clubhouse. And I'll tell what isn't the cure for a situation like that: Shea Hillenbrand.

21. CHW -- 49.53 (-2)
Looking for an explanation for the defending champs' failure to even make the playoffs? Look no further. Just as easily as you can picture Ozzie celebrating after a big win, it's just as easy to picture him screaming at his boys behind closed doors after a loss. And that's not the kind of clubhouse you want to walk into the next day.

22. KAN -- 46.59 (-3)
Hard to blame the players when their owner doesn't even seem to care. What's the use of getting along when you know you're just going to get traded as soon as you become too good?

23. MIN -- 46.38 (-3)
All year long we heard the same thing: the Twins will go as far as Santana and Liriano will take them. There was nothing Mauer or Morneau could do to garner attention, and for a team so young, that kind of competition can be seriously disruptive. Give them credit for being able to leave their off the field problems off the field.

24. TEX -- 44.79 (-3)
Hey, it's not like Rod Barajas and John Koronka are exactly known for their people skills.

25. HOU -- 43.98 (-3)
You think maybe everyone other than Roger Clemens was getting a little sick of the Roger Clemens saga?

26. OAK -- 43.85 (-4)
Score another point for those who say there's one thing Billy Beane can't measure with all his fancy numbers: heart.

27. ATL -- 42.72 (-5)
You think these guys ever finished in the bottom four during their 300-year run as division champs?

28. WAS -- 40.05 (-7)
From those on the inside, it sounds like the much-rumored Ryan Church-Luis Ayala brawl may have been the least of their problems. The closest thing these guys had to a veteran leader was Jose Vidro. Due respect, Jose, but that's not gonna get it done.

29. DET -- 39.32 (-8)
There's your giant surprise, folks. But what does this really tell us? My take: Leyland gets a little too much credit for engendering a winning attitude...but not nearly enough for being a great game manager.

30. TAM -- 38.12 (-8)
When you're counting on Dan Miceli as your 'show-the-kids-how-they-do-it-in-the-bigs' guy, you're pretty much asking for as much chemistry as Andersoon Cooper and Portia di Rossi.

====

TCI Forumla:
As always, the TCI for each team is derived from a series of random numbers.

This year, teams were ranked by batters hit by pitches in the month of May. (The number in parentheses for each team is just the total number of HBP relative to the number 12.)

Once teams were ranked, TCI was computed by using the total domestic box office gross (in millions) of the top 30 films from 1987. Cardinals = "Three Men And A Baby"; Brewers = "Good Morning, Vietnam" and so on.

Then it's time for some ridiculous "Power Rankings" like comments, and that's pretty much it. Now that I'm done with this I kind of forgot what the point of this exercise was. Oh well.

Labels:


posted by dak  # 3:06 AM
Comments:
dak:

Kudos for the #1 waste of time this site has ever endorsed. Which is saying something.

You are truly one snarky, over-educated SOB.

God bless.
 
Post a Comment

<< Home

Tuesday, October 10, 2006

 

Has Anyone Heard of this "Eckstein" Fellow?

Apparently he's an absolutely wonderful baseball player. He must be, because the goshdarn Newspaper of Record in the U. States of A. has written a fawning article about his bunting skills. It's called: The New York Times Sports Section Has Its Head Up Its Ass. Or something. I can't remember. But here are some gems:

Tony La Russa, the St. Louis manager, is a longtime advocate of the squeeze play. David Eckstein, the Cardinals’ leadoff hitter, is a master. Whenever La Russa is in the dugout and Eckstein is at bat with a runner on third base, watch for the squeeze.

Although St. Louis is still best known for Albert Pujols’s 450-foot home runs, Eckstein’s 10-foot bunts can be just as productive.


Well, um, er, ah, that is, gee...I...okay. Ahem. Here's the thing. A 450-foot HR produces one-to-four runs, at the cost of zero outs. A squeeze bunt, if executed well, can produce one run, usually at the cost of one out. There is no conceivable way a bunt can be as productive as a HR. If you squeeze with a man on third and do it so well you don't even get thrown out at first, well, it still is not as productive, because a HR in that situation would have been worth two runs. See how that works, Newspaper of Record in the U. States of A.?

His squeeze bunt Sunday night helped finish the San Diego Padres in their National League division series.

That is technically true. But at the time he did that, the Cards were up 5-2. And Chris Carpenter was pitching. The final score was 6-2.

Eckstein has pulled off 13 squeeze plays in his career, according to the Elias Sports Bureau, including one in each of the past two postseasons.

Albert Pujols hits like 50 450-foot HR a year, including many in the postseason.

He no longer benefits from the element of surprise, yet he continues to drive in runs with bunts.

Amazing. 13 RsBI, each of them probably at the cost of an out. What a valuable, valuable thing. Way way way way more valuable than a player who has knocked in 13 runs with ground balls to the right side. Or sac flies. Or -- here's an idea -- hits. Wouldn't that be something? If guys could drive in runs with hits? Wow. Imagine if that were possible, in baseball.

“I have been doing this my whole life,” Eckstein said. “Everyone is looking for it now, so we have to be really careful. The key is not giving it away too soon.”

This makes me sad. I can't explain why. Just the idea that this is all the guy has.

For any right-handed hitter, Eckstein included, a squeeze is a dangerous proposition. If the pitcher recognizes it, the batter can expect a fastball headed toward his face. And if the hitter fails to make contact, he will probably be plowed over by the runner charging home. At 5 feet 7 inches and 165 pounds, Eckstein does not win many collisions.

If he could hit better, he wouldn't be called on to squeeze so often.

But he has managed to keep his features intact, mainly because he is careful to disguise each bunt. Eckstein does not square around to bunt until after the ball has left the pitcher’s hand, and once he squares, he does not seem to miss.

“Tony does it every time he has an opportunity,” said Yadier Molina, the St. Louis catcher. “And David is the best guy you can do it with.”


"The reason we use 9 year-old children as chimney sweeps," said an old Cockney British guy in 19th century England, "is because they're small, so they're great at being crammed into chimneys."

So confident is La Russa in Eckstein’s bunting ability that he called for a squeeze in the sixth inning Sunday night, even though the situation was far from ideal.

The bases were loaded, giving the Padres a force at home plate. The runner at third was Scott Spiezio, no speed burner. The pitcher was Cla Meredith, a right-handed reliever with a sidearm motion, difficult for right-handed hitters to gauge.


And still, La Russa realized, the only way in hell Eckstein was bringing a run home was by bunting. Because he is bad at baseball.

An average bunt scores the run. Eckstein’s latest was right out of a manual. The ball rolled up the first-base line, away from the runner. The bunt was too hard for the pitcher to have a play at the plate, and too soft for the first baseman to have a chance.

The run scored. Excellent. The batter produced a perfect guaranteed out -- the opposite of what is a "good" outcome for a baseball player. So let's call it more good than bad. But let's also call a HR way way way way way better.

As the Cardinals celebrated their third straight trip to the National League Championship Series on Sunday night, Eckstein stood a few feet from George Will, the author and political pundit. Although Will might have seemed out of place in the clubhouse, it was important to remember the title of one of his books: “Bunts.”

Another good title for the book: "Outs."

Here's my favorite part:

If a manager is confident that a squeeze is coming, he will call for a pitchout. But if he does not, and the pitcher sees the squeeze developing at the last moment, he will throw directly at the hitter.

The Mets do not have a lot of experience in this area. They hit 62 batters this season — 18 fewer than the Cardinals — underscoring the possible need for target practice.

Mets fans, still delirious over events of the past week, would probably line up in the batter’s box to accept a bruise from Billy Wagner. At this point, better a bruise than a squeeze.


Does anyone understand this? Mets fans would line up in the batter's box to get hit by Mets' pitcher Billy Wagner...because they are afraid of the squeeze bunt...from the Cardinals? Am I just really tired?

The point is: David Eckstein is good at bunting.

Labels:


posted by Anonymous  # 11:57 AM
Comments: Post a Comment

<< Home

Monday, October 09, 2006

 

A Few Gems From JoeChat, Five Days Later

Hey America. Joe wants to chat. We want to insert ourselves into that chat, five days later. And that's what we're going to do.

Brian Lesley (Pearl River, Louisiana): Joe, what teams do you think will advance past the ALDS?

Joe Morgan: My first thought was the Yankees, but I thought Oakland was going to play Detroit. I picked the Mets, but now all their pitchers are hurt. And I picked the Cards at the beginning of the year. So, now that Oakland's won the first game, they have the edge in that series.

This question was posed on Wednesday, when the playoffs were already underway. Why Joe needs to tell us where his head was at before Wednesday, when the matchups could have been different, I have no idea. What the Mets and Cardinals are doing in an answer to a question about the American League -- again -- your guess is about as terrible as mine.

Joe, here are the acceptable ways to answer the question from Pearl River:

Oakland and New York
Minnesota and New York
Oakland and Detroit
Minnesota and Detroit

sandy, boston: Joe, why do you think Joe Torre took Chien Ming Wang out in the 7th inning last night with two outs and no one on base. His relievers gave up a homer and two singles before the inning ended.

Joe Morgan: I think Joe still wants to know how his bullpen stacks up. Remember Rivera has been injured and he still wants to know who he can count on out of the bullpen. He didn't get a great performance last night other than Rivera. He wanted to bring in Myers to face Granderson and that didn't work out. I think Joe found out they're going to have to score a lot of run to wins and they can do that.

There are two answers in this paragraph. One of them is boring, but right. The other is interesting if not crazy, and is wrong.

BORING BUT RIGHT: Joe Torre brought in Mike Myers to face a lefty, Curtis Granderson.

Here's the situation:
Two outs, seventh inning, playoffs, four run lead, lefty coming up, who you can be pretty sure is not going to be pinch-hit for

If Mike Myers doesn't come out of the bullpen, you have to believe he's heading straight to Torre's office after the game. Not to complain, but to find out what sort of medical condition Torre's suffering from that prevented him from making one of the easiest decisions he'd make all night.

INTERESTING BUT SUPERWRONG: Joe Torre wasn't sure just how many runs he was going to need his team to score in future games to pull this series off. So to gather a little more information, he throws Mike Myers -- almost hoping that he gives up a run or two, just so he can know what kind of a series this is going to be in the future. Helps him plan his offense for future games.

Brandon ( London, KY): Should Frank Thomas win the Comback Player of the Year award? I think his numbers speak for themselves.

Joe Morgan: Of course. He should win that almost unanimously. He'll win that definitely.

He lost.

Dom from Btown: Though A Rod has more godgiven talent, is the major difference between them that Jeter isn't afraid of failure and A Rod seems to dwell on it? Basically it seems Jeter is metally tougher than A Rod and that seems to be why he tends to come up bigger in pressure situations. Your thoughts?

Joe Morgan: My minor was in psychology, but I'm not going to get into that. I don't know either of them well enough to make the statements that you made. On the surface, it would seem that you're correct, though.

"I did a thing that is sort of related to your question. But I don't want to talk about that thing. In fact, I'm not even qualified to comment on this at all...but you're probably right."

(By the way, Joe Morgan graduated from Cal State Heyward in 1990 with a major in Physical Education.)

DAVID (MINNEAPOLIS): How big was that game one loss for the Twins? can they recover?

Joe Morgan: It was big. Very big. But they CAN recover. Today's game is the biggest game, because Loaiza is going today, one of their better pitchers, while Minnesota has Bonser, and you don't know what you're going to get. So today's the biggest game, but the next one will be the biggest after that. That's the way the tension builds.

Color me very confused about the definition of the word "biggest." Today's game is the biggest, except for the one after that which is even bigger (the biggest).

Oh, okay! I figured it out. "Biggest" means the most big, or the second most big.

That makes sense. That's the way the tension builds!

Labels: , , , , ,


posted by dak  # 3:38 AM
Comments: Post a Comment

<< Home

Friday, October 06, 2006

 

Is It Me...

...or did Jim Leyland sound drunk during his 6th inning interview?

Has the dude had a stroke or something?

Labels:


posted by dak  # 10:04 PM
Comments: Post a Comment

<< Home
 

Maybe Someday, Kirk Gibson Will Finally Show Up in the Playoffs

Does the name Mike Celizic mean anything to you guys? He's a typist for MSNBC.com, who sometimes types about sports. I can't remember if we've ever written anything about him before...check the archives. There might be one or two musings on his talents. I honestly can't remember. Anyway, he just wrote an article for MSNBC.com called -- I kid you not --

Glavine Finally Erases His Playoff Demons.

As in: Tom Glavine.

As in, the guy who clinched the 1995 World Series with this line:

8 IP, 0 R, 1 H, 8 Ks.

And the guy who won Game Two of that same WS with this line:

6 IP, 2 R, 3 H, 3Ks.

The guy with a 2.47 World Series ERA. The guy who has given up (pay attention to this) 33 hits in 58.1 WS innings.

That guy. That guy finally erased his playoff demons with a Game Two Division Series win over the Dodgers.

I know he's had some crappy outings in the playoffs. I know that he's like 13-15 lifetime in the postseason. But when you play in the postseason every year for 32 consecutive seasons, you'll have some crappy outings. Whitey Ford was 10-8 in the postseason, and had an ERA over 8.00 in his final World Series. Think he had any playoff demons?

Labels: ,


posted by Anonymous  # 2:58 PM
Comments: Post a Comment

<< Home

Monday, October 02, 2006

 

Lower-Third Graphic of the Week

6:36 PM PST.

Corell Buckhalter just fumbled for the second time in the game, both inside the opponents' 5 yard-line. When ESPN came back from commercial, they showed a lower-third graphic that read thus:

PHILADELPHIA EAGLES
AAAAAAAAAAGGGG


Perhaps it was a mechanical malfunction. I prefer to believe that the graphics computer has a speech-recognition program that recorded an Eagles fan's reaction, and then immediately flashed it on screen before anyone could stop it.

posted by Anonymous  # 9:48 PM
Comments: Post a Comment

<< Home
 

Commence Wrongness

As I have clearly seen, from the barrage of electronic mailings I received after touting Derek Jeter for AL MVP a few days ago -- mailings which ranged from begrudging agreement to violent assailments on my character -- reasonable (and unreasonable) people can disagree on season-ending awards. Partly because the criteria are so vague. Partly because statistics and anecdotalism more often clash than mesh perfectly. And partly because institutionally-designated recognition is a dicey business in any arena. (Remember when "Crash" won Best Picture?)

But even the most unreasonable person would not, in a season-ending round-up of award suggestions, deny that Travis Hafner had a great year, right?

Wrong, suckers.

Thanks to a tip from reader Sean, we can see that SI's Jon Heyman thinks the top 20 for AL MVP are:

Johan Santana, Frank Thomas, Derek Jeter, Joe Mauer, Justin Morneau, David Ortiz, Jermaine Dye, Johnny Damon, Carlos Guillen, Jason Giambi, Chien-Ming Wang, Mariano Rivera, Justin Verlander, Torii Hunter, Michael Cuddyer, Joe Nathan, Jim Thome, Joe Crede, Vladimir Guerrero, Paul Konerko, Nick Swisher.

Granted, Haf only played in 129 games. But in those 129 games he did this:

308/.439/.659. 42 HR, 117 RBI. 111/100 K/BB ratio.

He also had a Pujolsian .363 EqA, and an 8.9 WARP3.

Just...I'll pick one person from his top 20 at random. Torii Hunter is a lovely man, a fantastic defensive CF, a great baseball player. A great baseball player who did this:

.278/.336/.490. .280 EqA, 6.2 WARP3.

All of Heyman's top 20 might deserve top-10 votes. But come on, people.

Labels: , ,


posted by Anonymous  # 2:47 PM
Comments:
Okay, so he only picked dudes from teams that either made the playoffs or came close.

What I don't get is how you separate, say, the Angels from the Indians? What's the arbitrary line you draw in the missing-the-playoff sand? Six games back? Eliminated within the last week of the season?

What sort of "value" is there in missing the playoffs by 4 games that missing the playoffs by 18 games doesn't give you? Ticket sales?

Also -- tangent, sorry -- have you noticed how often people say things like "like it or not, the MVP goes to a team in contention." Or "maybe it shouldn't necessarily go to a team in contention...but it has for the last 60 years! So my vote's for Chump X from Good Team Y!"

I don't get it. I don't get why the MVP isn't the best player award. That makes the most sense to me. I see zero in the criteria listed by the BBBBWWAAA that should lead voters to vote for teams from playoff teams vs. non-playoff teams, ceteris paribus.

It means "Zazzle" in Latin.
 
I meant "goes to a player from a team in contention." Twice.

Can't figure out how to edit comments. Deal with it.
 
Reader Kevin chimes in, with some thoughtful zazzle:

...Did you catch the fact that [Heyman] ranked Morgan Ensberg as his least valuable player in all of the NL? Sure, Ensberg didn't have anything close to his 2005 season, but he did this:

.235/.396/.463/.859 (walked 101 times) with 23 HR, a .295 EQA, and 6.3 WARP3. He was, by my count, 48th in the NL in VORP.

What the hell is Heyman talking about? Seriously. That is a very, very solid year. Like I said, it wasn't his 2005, but it's good. And he's the Least Valuable Player over, say, Clint Barmes and his .220/.264/.335/.598 line (at Coors Field) or his teammate Adam Everett and his .239/.290/.352/.642 or David Eckstein and his .292/.350/.344/.694? Oh, that's right. David Eckstein is scrappy, does all the little things right, knows how to play the game, and has a huge heart. Silly me.

 
I also just noticed that his award for worst pitcher is "Cy Old."

A joke so instantly gettable that he has to add a parenthetical explanation:

"Cy Old (Worst Pitcher)"
 
Wait! More wrongness.

Dude also wrote that Billy Beane traded for Frank Thomas. Which he did not do; he signed him as a free agent for about $500k.
 
Is 'honorable-mention" a verb?

I know "zazzle" is.
 
I've done some more number crunching.

Twenty out of Heyman's twenty AL MVP picks were from teams other than the Royals.

Every time I hear or see the word Zazzle I think of this.
 
Post a Comment

<< Home

Archives

04.05   05.05   06.05   07.05   08.05   09.05   10.05   11.05   12.05   01.06   02.06   03.06   04.06   05.06   06.06   07.06   08.06   09.06   10.06   11.06   12.06   01.07   02.07   03.07   04.07   05.07   06.07   07.07   08.07   09.07   10.07   11.07   12.07   01.08   02.08   03.08   04.08   05.08   06.08   07.08   08.08   09.08   10.08   11.08  

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?