Jim Lang is super smart
:The more I watch the Jays the more I despise the whole concept of Moneyball.
Yes. It's definitely the book Moneyball
that screwed up the Blue Jays. Not B.J. Ryan or A.J. Burnett or Vernon Wells's 2007. It's...a book.What moron ever came up with the idea that it was bad thing to move a guy over with a sacrifice bunt or to steal a base?
A moron named Mathematical Probability
. He's a dick. Never picks up a check. Doesn't help his wife clean up the house. Thinks Daughtry is awesome. Asshole
.Sorry, but I will take Whitey Herzog baseball over Moneyball any time. For example; the Jays are trailing 1-0 in the sixth inning, there's nobody out and men on first and second. However, thanks to the screwed up concept of "Moneyball," the Jays go up there swinging away.
Well, that's close
to a time you might want to bunt. It sometimes makes sense to bunt, depending on whether you need exactly
one run or more than one run, and how late in the game it is, and who's at the plate, and who's on deck. So what was the situation
Oh. You had Stewart, Rios, and Wells up -- your 2-3-4 guys -- against a pitcher
with 77 total innings in the majors (though he's a really good prospect). I say: bunt, bunt again, suicide squeeze with 2 out!Lineout, fly out and Vernon Wells caught looking.
loves lineouts, fly outs, and called third strikes. Moneyball
is all about called third strikes. What's not to love about Moneyball
I like, too, that a lineout isn't seen as bad luck, but the failings of a philosophy that has nothing to do with what he is talking about.Thus endeth the inning and a golden opportunity to manufacture a run. Moneyball freaks will call me an idiot for even suggesting that you would bunt someone over to third base with no one out.
Okay: you're an idiot. Albeit, one with crystal-clear 20-20 hindsight.
Now, at this point, the Jays had not scored a run in the previous 14 innings. What have you got to lose by bunting a guy over and setting up an easy sac fly scenario?
An out. That's what you have to lose. A precious out, made by your #2 hitter, in front of your #3 and #4 hitters. A precious out, that you are just giving away, and the execution of which is in the hands of a dude with 15 sac bunts in 14 seasons
. How do you think that's going to go, really? You think that's going to be a flawless, perfect sac bunt that gets the runners over? Guaranteed? 15 sac bunts in 14 years? You think that'll work out? You think he won't like bunt it right back to the pitcher for an easy toss to third? Or pop it up? Or foul it off and put himself into an 0-1 or 0-2 hole?
The fallacy of the "Why don't you just perfectly execute a difficult play and then everything will be awesome" gambit. Hey -- here's an idea. Why don't we just give everyone free health care? Then everyone will have it, and so then things will improve. Duh.I have had it with Moneyball; give me good old Whitey Herzog baseball any day.
I have had it with people who have "had it" with Moneyball
, who don't understand Moneyball
. Take that.
Labels: jim lang, moneyball