No, that's restating my argument, isn't it? I'm not sure I agree with that, but either way I should at least get partial credit for using begging the question "correctly" in a sentence. You've already dismissed all baseball stat fans as people taking the Chemistry Homework Approach (look up the answer in the back of the book, figure out how to get there)... No, I didn't. What I said was there are enough bad statisticians to force one to take a critical view of the perveyor's motives whenever stats are presented. I totally acknowledge that some stats are good, and some statisticians are responsible (some of them post on this very site). the thing that stands out is the lack of any backing evidence in your post Along with several others who have posted on this thread, I believe David Ortiz is sick in clutch situations. I also believe, from my observation, that Derek Jeter is also quite clutch, and also not the horrendous fielder that the new wave of statheads would like me believe. I have no "proof" to provide that isn't empirical, and you've already pointed out in a previous thread that my empirical evidence isn't worth any more than anybody else's, so there's nothing worthwhile to provide. Baseball Prospectus is telling me that "everything I know about baseball is wrong." I disagree. Why am I being held to a higher standard of proof than any of the others who post their opinions here? If you object, go ahead and mark it down among the number of unsubstantiated opinions on this site. So now we're not even getting the reasoning behind the pronouncements, just the pronouncements. "I believe that the inability to translate a concept into a mathematical equation does not render it pointless or unworthy of discussion." Costner didn't say that part. I did. I do not believe that baseball is just a bunch of theorems waiting for a proof. It's just my opinion, and you can disagree, but again I don't see why I have to prove that this is my opinion. I don't understand why I can parse your arguments and at least pretend to care about them but you walk right by mine. I thought my comment was more evidently tongue-in-cheek than it came across. You are certainly welcome to define "clutch" in any way you see fit. As for arguments, parsing, and caring, I've already pointed out in this post one instance where you didn't read what I wrote very carefully. If none of us cared about the arguments being presented, this whole thread would just be a typing exercise. If nothing else, please believe me that you would notice if I was trying to be insulting. I believe you. Just because you weren't trying to be insulting doesn't mean you didn't insult anybody. My argument is one for the validity of a baseball fandom that likes the statistical side of the sport, not an invalidation of any other approach. Forgive me, but when you say, "Some people have a mighty high opinion of their eyes," it sounds like a slight on the empirical approach. It is the Catholic School Boy in me that sees personal philosophies and religious beliefs writ in these oh-so-small arguments. It must be the Irish in me that sees hope and commonality in what always devolves into a bitter conflict. The "Church of Baseball" indeed was not made up just for the movie -- there is something to it. For my part, the conflict is not "bitter" but "passionate." Nobody likes to be fooled by what they see, nor do they like to be told that their perception is invalid. And I know that goes both ways. I started college as a math major because I was comforted by the concrete nature of numbers, but I eventually became an English major because I eventually felt constricted by that same nature. I don't want an actuary to tell me how many children I'm going to have or when I'm going to get into a car accident. And I don't want a mathematician to tell me how to perceive the game of baseball, or the world in general. Is that so bad? Baseball Prospectus points out (in their comments about ARod in the 2006 book) that most of his home runs came when the team game was scoreless or when it was tied. However, they happened in the earlier innings and not the late innings. Here's my point exactly. If all that was said was, "most of A-Rod's home runs came when the score was tied," it would be true but deceptive, since the score is tied in the first inning. The implication is that A-Rod comes through in the clutch, but "the clutch" is NOT the first inning, in my opinion. Some statisticians who are less thorough in their analysis than Grum make these types of claims. No, I don't have an example at hand, and you don't have to take my word for it. If your team takes the lead as a result of your hit/HR, and ends up winning the game, it shouldn't matter which inning the hit/HR came in. True. But this doesn't examine the countless times A-Rod comes up in a situation in late innings where his team is behind a run and desperately needs a hit. These scenarios provide an argument that the pitching staffs on A-Rod's teams do a pretty good job of preserving leads. Just to pull out one scenario, I'll bet A-Rod's average in the ninth inning, with his team down a run and with a runner in scoring position, is far, far lower than his .307 career average. Just a guess. The problem I have with "intangibles" is that it's PURELY subjective. And the problem I have is, so what? Why is subjectivity so bad? If there was no subjectivity, there would be no point to discussing sports, since the responses to any issue would be self-evident. I think the point being made is that "stats guys" get derided for what they state because they are not "part of the game", but baseball writers get lauded for their comments even though most of them have the same (lack of) baseball background. It's a double standard. Perhaps, but there's a reason for it. Reason: statisticians CAN make their observations using only the numbers without seeing a single game. Baseball writers could NOT make their observations without witnessing the events on the field. Stats guys need to display a higher degree of proof that they have seen a game and understand the way the game operates OUTSIDE a mathematical formula. And some do not display this kind of understanding, in my opinion.
Just to pull out one scenario, I'll bet A-Rod's average in the ninth inning, with his team down a run and with a runner in scoring position, is far, far lower than his .307 career average. Just a guess. According to the stats at espn.com, based on his 2003-2005 stats, you would probably be correct. They don't have that specific statistical breakdown, but using the "Close and Late" stat (which I believe means the score is within a run either way after the 7th inning) or the simple "Scoring Position" stat, they are both below his overall average in the same time period. For the sake of fairness, I checked Ortiz's stats in the same timeframe and categories and discovered that he hits BETTER than his overall average. I also believe, from my observation, that Derek Jeter is also quite clutch And finally, I checked in on Derek Jeter. He is WORSE in those two categories than his overall average over the past 3 seasons. Significantly worse than ARod in the "Close and Late" category.
For the sake of fairness, I checked Ortiz's stats in the same timeframe and categories and discovered that he hits BETTER than his overall average. I would say MUCH BETTER. And finally, I checked in on Derek Jeter. He is WORSE in those two categories than his overall average over the past 3 seasons. Significantly worse than ARod in the "Close and Late" category. Indeed. Much worse. A victory for the "stats over empirical view" argument. I am certain of this -- my sheer envy of Jeter blinds me to any failings he may have. Growing up, I wanted to be shortstop of the Yankees, captain the team and lead them to multiple championships. I live that dream vicariously through Jeter, who, in my mind, embodies everything good in the current game. You can certainly call me on it, but can you blame me for it?
You can certainly call me on it, but can you blame me for it? Yes. ;) Grum enjoys shattering dreams.
The "Church of Baseball" indeed was not made up just for the movie -- there is something to it. I'm not taking a half day today because I want to watch people's batting averages change in real time.
Grum enjoys shattering dreams. Being a fan of the Toronto Maple Leafs and the Buffalo Bills, you can understand why I'd want to share the "dream shattering" moments with everyone else. Misery loves company... You can certainly call me on it, but can you blame me for it? I won't blame you, as long as you won't blame me for worshiping Darryl Sittler in the same fashion. Someone at work once said that Sittler didn't deserve to be in the HOF, and I had a brief fantasy of taking an office chair and beating my co-worker with it. I'm not taking a half day today because I want to watch people's batting averages change in real time. I know I am not right in my head because all during April, whenever I see someone's batting average displayed on the screen, I immediately try to guess how many AB they've had and how many hits they've gotten. For example: after a week of play by a regular player, when I see a .250 AVG, I guesstimate that they've had 30 plate appearances, had a walk and a SF, and figure they have 7 hits.
I immediately try to guess how many AB they've had and how many hits they've gotten. But of course. Multiples of .143 = x/7, etc. The beauty of the early season is a guy hitting 2/8 is either great or awful after his next at bat.
Darryl Sittler? Now, THERE'S a guy who sucked in the clutch. I'm kidding. I actually had to look up who Darryl Sittler was. I love hockey, but know virtually zero about its fine history. For example: after a week of play by a regular player, when I see a .250 AVG, I guesstimate that they've had 30 plate appearances, had a walk and a SF, and figure they have 7 hits. At the risk of severely damaging my anti-stathead reputation, I do exactly the same thing. At least now, when my girlfriend looks at me like I'm Rain Man, I can tell her I'm not the only one who does it... Lately, I've been trying to figure out -- without looking it up -- how Brian Giles can have a .500 OBP when he's 4 for 13 at the plate. Somehow, he must have a plate appearance that doesn't count as an AB, but does count against your OBP... right?
Nevermind. Got it. I didn't realize before that sacrifices count against OBP. Who knew?
I'm not taking a half day today because I want to watch people's batting averages change in real time. Check the times on yerfatma's subequent posts. I want to know if Fenway is a WiFI hotspot...
I didn't realize before that sacrifices count against OBP. Who knew? Not Tony LaRussa wjho once featured a lineup with a leadoff hitter whose OBP was lower than his BA. I want to say it was Craig Counsell, but that sounds wrong. Little white dude that LaRussa brought with him everywhere. Wish I was at Fenway. Fuck, no I don't: Beckett just walked in a run.
Jumpin' Jesus on a pogo stick, Bronson Arroyo IS Babe Ruth.
Yeah, statistical outlier or trend? Why didn't he do this in Interleague (did he do this in Interleague?)?
Coming into this season, Arroyo was 4 for 55 with 2 doubles (both in 2000 with Pitt). He never had a hit in seven at bats for the Sox.
Coming into this season, Arroyo was 4 for 55 with 2 doubles (both in 2000 with Pitt). He never had a hit in seven at bats for the Sox. posted by BullpenPro at 2:37 PM CST on April 11 Well he sucks now. 2 career homeruns - both against the Cubs - both this season! Unbelievable. I am beginning to not like this guy.
Bottom of the eighth, down a run, two outs, two on against Kansas City, Derek Jeter hit a three-run home run to put the Yankees up by two, 9-7. I can't believe I let you guys put a thought of doubt in my head. I blame myself, really. But shame on you. He gets double clutch points for coming through when my faith was so weak. I'm lighting a candle. 2 career homeruns - both against the Cubs I agree, sdm, his timing is horrible. Arroyo's tomfoolery notwithstanding, I like the Cubs' lineup this year a lot. If they can get some pitchers who don't break, they've got a chance to do some damage.
Derek Jeter hit a three-run home run to put the Yankees up by two, 9-7. Thought of your prior comment as soon as I saw the highlight. In other news, Wily Mo Pena subbed in for Trot Nixon, swung at every change-up he saw like he was auditioning for Major League IV and just midwifed a Frank Catalonotto fly ball over the right field wall.
Bottom of the eighth, down a run, two outs, two on against Kansas City, Derek Jeter hit a three-run home run to put the Yankees up by two, 9-7. You'll remember this for the rest of the season, but you've probably already forgotten: - that he grounded out weekly in the 8th inning when the team was trailing by one run (April 8th) - that he flied out in the 8th inning when the game was tied (April 5th) - that he grounded out with a man on 2nd and the score tied in the top of the 9th (April 4th) Each of those games the Yankees lost. I've got no problem celebrating the "clutch" results, but it's not realistic to ignore the "failed" results either.
Not Tony LaRussa wjho once featured a lineup with a leadoff hitter whose OBP was lower than his BA. I want to say it was Craig Counsell, but that sounds wrong. Little white dude that LaRussa brought with him everywhere. I did a search of the Lahman database for anyone in the past 20 years that had a lower OBP than AVG. I could only find pitchers and some obscure cup-of-coffee type players. Mariano Duncan pulled off the feat during his half-season in Philadelphia in 1995. Other than that, I couldn't find anyone that maintained it for longer than 150 AB on one team in the past 30 years that wasn't a pitcher.
we don't all ignore Jeter's failures, grum. in fact they stand out even more because his clutchiness is so celebrated. it was especially noticeable last year when several times he had the chance to win or at least tie the game in the 9th, only the make the last out. if the above statement makes no sense please keep in mind that i got hit in the head today with a bernie williams BP home run. i'm still a little out of it probably due to the blood loss since i stayed to watch the game instead of getting stitches right away.
I've got no problem celebrating the "clutch" results, but it's not realistic to ignore the "failed" results either. C'mon, Grum. I thought it was pretty evident that I was lampooning my own silly idolatry. I'm not forgetting any failures -- just grossly overreacting to one success, the timing of which was pretty uncanny vis a vis this thread. i got hit in the head today with a bernie williams BP home run Yikes. I hope you're okay there, goddam. Did you get stitches eventually? Did it catch you on the dead fly? Too bad it wasn't A-Rod. His homers are a lot softer.
I did a search of the Lahman database for anyone in the past 20 years that had a lower OBP than AVG. Not for the whole year. It was mid-season and the guy was a utility player, so he probably had 100 ABs or less. Tough to spend the whole season with an OBP under your BA unless someone really believes in the power of sacrifice. Besides Jesus.
bullpen, i'm much better today, thanks. i got a couple stitches. it hit my hands first, then head, then tagged my aunt in the neck. somehow i don't think i'd want to get hit in the head with an a-rod homer either.
Little white dude that LaRussa brought with him everywhere. Dummy Hoy is out. How about Mike Gallego? John Cangelosi? Wayne Tolleson? somehow i don't think i'd want to get hit in the head with an a-rod homer either. Just for the record, I'm rooting for ALL future homers to dodge your noggin. I'm glad you're feeling better today, and hope your aunt is as well. To further underscore the ridiculosity of my Jeter-zealotry, my girlfriend was reading this thread while I was watching the "Yankees Encore" replay of yesterday's game, and having seen enough turned to me and said, "Jeez, why don't you just lick him and claim him as your own." Sometimes I think I go a little overboard, but then I say to myself, "Overboard? It's Derek Freakin' Jeter!"
2 career homeruns - both against the Cubs - both this season! Not only that, but both against the same pitcher! i stayed to watch the game instead of getting stitches right away. Chicks who refuse medical attention until after the game = wicked hot! Editor's note: the term "chick" is used with all appropriate respect and reverence.
Everyone be careful because if you point out too many of Jeter's faults a blood vessel in bullpenpro's brain might burst or something. I've said it before but I'll say it again. Alex Rodriguez is a better shortstop than Derek Jeter
Getting back on (read: near) topic, if the Yankees are in a tight spot in the ninth inning, I'd still rather see Jeter coming up than A-Rod.* *And that is with due regard for the numbers that have been presented, and an acknowledgment of all the valid arguments regarding Jeter's overratedness. Of course, I'd rather have Ortiz coming up for my team than either of them. This is not unlike the Red Sox teams of the mid-eighties - I don't think anyone argues that Roger Clemens wasn't a better pitcher than Bruce Hurst, but if I was a Red Sox fan looking at the history I'd a lot rather see Hurst penciled in as my starter in a playoff game. And to YYM: you have to stop with this heckling... I can't afford to keep throwing computers out my window.
Me, I have nothing to contribute, except that I'm disappointed that justgary used "stuff" instead of "shit" in "Billy Beane's s***". P***y.
