Friday, December 31, 2004
Christmas came early in 2004
Watched the World Series DVD on Christmas night.
Some memories that came back, making themselves clear in the light of day: the whole sad incident with Mariano Rivera's relatives, and his 2 saves in the face of that. How close Game 1 ended up, despite Schilling being shelled. Tony Clark's miraculous ground-rule double. So many times they stared elimination in the face and laughed. And one thing stood out - how seriously happy Pedro was at the end of the ALCS and at the end of the World Series. In retrospect, a sepia-tinged last Sox hurrah.
It will be sweet when the Sox win again, but this was something magical. How would you script it? The arch-rival Yankees. Plunging into the depths of despair. Then the fightback. Then, seemingly invincible, the relentless force rolling over the best team in the National League, a team that had previously been the conquerors. The stuff of legends.
No matter the ups and downs of the offseason, no one can take 2004 away from us Sox fans.
***
On a personal note, I continue to ask that those of you stopping by, please, please donate to tsunami relief. The Amazon link in my sidebar will let you donate to the American Red Cross. You can also donate through Oxfam, the Red Cross, World Vision, Mercy Relief, or CARE International. Happy New Year.
Watched the World Series DVD on Christmas night.
Some memories that came back, making themselves clear in the light of day: the whole sad incident with Mariano Rivera's relatives, and his 2 saves in the face of that. How close Game 1 ended up, despite Schilling being shelled. Tony Clark's miraculous ground-rule double. So many times they stared elimination in the face and laughed. And one thing stood out - how seriously happy Pedro was at the end of the ALCS and at the end of the World Series. In retrospect, a sepia-tinged last Sox hurrah.
It will be sweet when the Sox win again, but this was something magical. How would you script it? The arch-rival Yankees. Plunging into the depths of despair. Then the fightback. Then, seemingly invincible, the relentless force rolling over the best team in the National League, a team that had previously been the conquerors. The stuff of legends.
No matter the ups and downs of the offseason, no one can take 2004 away from us Sox fans.
***
On a personal note, I continue to ask that those of you stopping by, please, please donate to tsunami relief. The Amazon link in my sidebar will let you donate to the American Red Cross. You can also donate through Oxfam, the Red Cross, World Vision, Mercy Relief, or CARE International. Happy New Year.
Thursday, December 30, 2004
World Series shares
In one of the World Series DVD bonus features, there's an old video of Smokey Joe Wood saying that his World Series share for 1912 was $4024.70. Using historical rates of inflation (plus some modifications for the period Jan 2002 to Oct 2004), I calculated that $4024.70 would be worth $80,461.95 in October 2004 dollars.
By comparison, a full World Series share in 2004 for each of the Sox was worth $223,619.79. So the Sox made 3 times as much as Smokey Joe Wood did, which is actually less than I was expecting. I wonder if that's a testament to the fact that the Sox voted a lot more full shares (58) than normal - by comparison, the Marlins gave out 37 in 2003, and the Yankees gave out 32 full shares in 1999.
(Incidentally, if Smokey Joe Wood had invested his share in the stock market, assuming a 7% historical average rate of return, that $4024.70 would be worth $2,032,549 in 2004.)
In one of the World Series DVD bonus features, there's an old video of Smokey Joe Wood saying that his World Series share for 1912 was $4024.70. Using historical rates of inflation (plus some modifications for the period Jan 2002 to Oct 2004), I calculated that $4024.70 would be worth $80,461.95 in October 2004 dollars.
By comparison, a full World Series share in 2004 for each of the Sox was worth $223,619.79. So the Sox made 3 times as much as Smokey Joe Wood did, which is actually less than I was expecting. I wonder if that's a testament to the fact that the Sox voted a lot more full shares (58) than normal - by comparison, the Marlins gave out 37 in 2003, and the Yankees gave out 32 full shares in 1999.
(Incidentally, if Smokey Joe Wood had invested his share in the stock market, assuming a 7% historical average rate of return, that $4024.70 would be worth $2,032,549 in 2004.)
Tuesday, December 28, 2004
That Theo kid makes good
Theo Epstein, Bostonian of the Year. Two of my favourite bits: first, a good quote from Theo -
Also, Theo as Borat is just a funny idea -
Theo Epstein, Bostonian of the Year. Two of my favourite bits: first, a good quote from Theo -
"Anyone who points to a direct causal relationship between that [Cabrera-and-Mientkiewicz-for-Nomar] trade and our turnaround is missing the boat."I presume he meant "missing the point", but I like how even after it seemed successful Theo was careful not to define his career solely by The Trade.
Also, Theo as Borat is just a funny idea -
Epstein is a good impressionist and can enliven even the dullest contract discussion by assuming the voice of "Borat," the hilarious Kazakh character from HBO's Da Ali G Show.Carrying on both the rich Jewish comedic tradition and the rich familial creative tradition, I see.
Monday, December 27, 2004
Donations for the earthquake
Stepping outside baseball for a short while, I should note that those concerned with the earthquake and tsunamis in South-East Asia can make donations at Oxfam or the Red Cross International Response Fund. Please give what you can, the damage in the region is devastating. Thank you.
Stepping outside baseball for a short while, I should note that those concerned with the earthquake and tsunamis in South-East Asia can make donations at Oxfam or the Red Cross International Response Fund. Please give what you can, the damage in the region is devastating. Thank you.
Risk management and the offseason
Looking at the offseason thus far, risk management, rather than just pure payroll flexibility, seems to be a huge theme for the Sox this offseason - all those incentive-laden contracts, for instance.
While I may think that Pedro is likely to be great next season, I can see the Sox point of view on this. If a key player is "merely" good instead of great, the Sox probably still make the playoffs. But if a key player who could have an MVP season instead has a bad one, that could jeopardise even making the postseason.
I would think of all our FAs this season, Pedro actually has the highest upside, but (as in many other financial investments) that high upside comes with greater risk. (I still think he'll outpitch Schilling next season, as I said long ago, but I can see how Pedro might not be a good fit for a risk-averse organisation.) I don't foresee Tek having stratospheric seasons in his 4 contract years, but neither do I see him completely deteriorating - don't think he'll be a $10 million player in 2008, unless the market that year for catchers is drastically different then, but you won't lose it all.
Looking at the offseason thus far, risk management, rather than just pure payroll flexibility, seems to be a huge theme for the Sox this offseason - all those incentive-laden contracts, for instance.
While I may think that Pedro is likely to be great next season, I can see the Sox point of view on this. If a key player is "merely" good instead of great, the Sox probably still make the playoffs. But if a key player who could have an MVP season instead has a bad one, that could jeopardise even making the postseason.
I would think of all our FAs this season, Pedro actually has the highest upside, but (as in many other financial investments) that high upside comes with greater risk. (I still think he'll outpitch Schilling next season, as I said long ago, but I can see how Pedro might not be a good fit for a risk-averse organisation.) I don't foresee Tek having stratospheric seasons in his 4 contract years, but neither do I see him completely deteriorating - don't think he'll be a $10 million player in 2008, unless the market that year for catchers is drastically different then, but you won't lose it all.
Saturday, December 25, 2004
Tek as Captain
So not only was Varitek re-signed, he was named Captain. I hope the "C" on the jersey was just a nice touch to surprise Tek, rather than a permanent thing - I'm a traditionalist when it comes to the uniforms:
And for the obvious joke (first one that came to my mind when I saw the pic, and also said on SoSH and I'm sure elsewhere): clearly part of the deal was that Tek traded his goatee to Theo.
And now for something completely different:
MERRY CHRISTMAS! Many thanks to all readers, commenters, and everyone who's stumbled on this site and stayed. 2004 was a blast. No need for further gifts.
So not only was Varitek re-signed, he was named Captain. I hope the "C" on the jersey was just a nice touch to surprise Tek, rather than a permanent thing - I'm a traditionalist when it comes to the uniforms:
And for the obvious joke (first one that came to my mind when I saw the pic, and also said on SoSH and I'm sure elsewhere): clearly part of the deal was that Tek traded his goatee to Theo.
And now for something completely different:
MERRY CHRISTMAS! Many thanks to all readers, commenters, and everyone who's stumbled on this site and stayed. 2004 was a blast. No need for further gifts.
Friday, December 24, 2004
Back in Tek
So the Sox have probably resigned Varitek according to reports. I think he was overpaid (4 years / $40 million), and while I wish they had overpaid Pedro over Varitek, it's nice to at least see ONE of the 2004 FAs come back.
As I see it, there are 4 pitchers with incentive-laden contracts: Wells, Miller, Halama, Mantei - which of those 4 will live up to their upside? (I know, Wells' contract incentives are more about him making his starts i.e. making sure he doesn't go to seed.)
Merry Christmas / Happy Hanukkah / Happy Holidays one and all!
So the Sox have probably resigned Varitek according to reports. I think he was overpaid (4 years / $40 million), and while I wish they had overpaid Pedro over Varitek, it's nice to at least see ONE of the 2004 FAs come back.
As I see it, there are 4 pitchers with incentive-laden contracts: Wells, Miller, Halama, Mantei - which of those 4 will live up to their upside? (I know, Wells' contract incentives are more about him making his starts i.e. making sure he doesn't go to seed.)
Merry Christmas / Happy Hanukkah / Happy Holidays one and all!
Pedro in the Dominican
Sigh. Festivus is over. But here's a grievance to air: we all knew Pedro did lots of stuff in the Dominican Republic. Always has, probably always will. Nothing's changed. So how come the former villain is now a hero in the New York Times' eye?
Sigh. Festivus is over. But here's a grievance to air: we all knew Pedro did lots of stuff in the Dominican Republic. Always has, probably always will. Nothing's changed. So how come the former villain is now a hero in the New York Times' eye?
He helped pave the road and build the church, and he paid for homes for his family and friends.Ah, homerism. It's better than bitter hatred, I guess. Must say Pedro's offseason life sounds idyllic. The article, incidentally, was one of the first I've seen to mention his girlfriend Carolina Cruz by name. If he teaches their kids that changeup...On this night, he stops by the school he helped pay for. The new three-story yellow building sits in the corner of a field recently bulldozed for his latest construction project.
(Link)
Thursday, December 23, 2004
Wade Miller in Red Sox
Wade Miller! Woohoo! Well, assuming he doesn't have aftereffects of his injury. I always thought he'd be a strong part of the Houston rotation with Oswalt, didn't expect the Astros to let him go.
So now: Schilling-Wells-Clement-Miller-Arroyo? Whither Wakefield? I always feel bad that Wakefield seems to end up doing long relief just because he's a nice enough team player not to complain about it. But I guess with Schilling out for the first month Wells-Clement-Miller-Arroyo-Wakefield is a very decent rotation, less scary than seeing Kim inserted there...
Wade Miller! Woohoo! Well, assuming he doesn't have aftereffects of his injury. I always thought he'd be a strong part of the Houston rotation with Oswalt, didn't expect the Astros to let him go.
So now: Schilling-Wells-Clement-Miller-Arroyo? Whither Wakefield? I always feel bad that Wakefield seems to end up doing long relief just because he's a nice enough team player not to complain about it. But I guess with Schilling out for the first month Wells-Clement-Miller-Arroyo-Wakefield is a very decent rotation, less scary than seeing Kim inserted there...
Wednesday, December 22, 2004
For fans of New York's shortstop...
ILoveDerekJeter.com. And yes, there was nothing Sox-related in the news, so I'm Yankee-baiting for the day. Actually, I'm wondering what the J.D. Drew signing means for any hopes of resurrecting the Randy Johnson deal - would like to see how the AL East shapes up.
Speaking of the AL East, Baltimore getting Steve Kline for 2 years, $5.5 million is a good deal. I hated seeing the Sox face their bullpen last season, and Kline's good. I can't believe Bruce Chen only gets 1 year / $550,000. He was good last year, if only sparingly.
ILoveDerekJeter.com. And yes, there was nothing Sox-related in the news, so I'm Yankee-baiting for the day. Actually, I'm wondering what the J.D. Drew signing means for any hopes of resurrecting the Randy Johnson deal - would like to see how the AL East shapes up.
Speaking of the AL East, Baltimore getting Steve Kline for 2 years, $5.5 million is a good deal. I hated seeing the Sox face their bullpen last season, and Kline's good. I can't believe Bruce Chen only gets 1 year / $550,000. He was good last year, if only sparingly.
Randy Johnson stays - for now
The Randy Johnson deal is dead. At least for the moment. The fact that it was because of Javy Vazquez (at least according to Newsday) makes me smile:
The Randy Johnson deal is dead. At least for the moment. The fact that it was because of Javy Vazquez (at least according to Newsday) makes me smile:
According to a source involved in the discussions, Vazquez, the Yankees' righthander, was so opposed to joining the Dodgers that he refused to travel to Los Angeles to undergo a physical examination. (Link)
Hmm. Refused to play in a pitchers' park? He either really dislikes the West Coast, or, if you want a conspiracy theory, really didn't want to take the physical - which might make sense given that there's been speculation about his arm slot changing sometimes midseason because he was hiding an injury. (ERA pre-All-Star break: 3.57. Post-All-Star break: 6.92.) Of course, unnamed sources are so iffy it's hard to even know if this whole thing is true.
Tuesday, December 21, 2004
Orlando and Dave go to California
So, a series of Sox moves today heating up the stove.
OC in the OC. Yup, Orlando Cabrera is now with the Angels, for a very decent contract indeed (4 years / $32 million). If Theo moves Mientkiewicz it'll be like we don't keep anyone from the Trade. And yet they all seemed to be perfect Sox for those 3 months - goofy (I'll always remember OC's handshakes - or at least, that he had a million different special handshakes), great smiles (Dave Roberts). The Sox helped the OC in the end by setting the market in getting Renteria for 4/40. Although I didn't quite believe I would see the day that the Angels would come to their senses and get rid of David Eckstein.
Dave Roberts to the Padres for Jay Payton and Ramon Vazquez: good move for both sides. Roberts wanted to start, and would you begrudge that of the man who had the Greatest Stolen Base in Sox History? (Granted, the way the Sox have played station-to-station over those years, it's not like there were really that many great ones, but still...) Vazquez looks like a standard backup infielder in the Ricky Gutierrez mould, while Payton fulfills the backup outfielder / Trot's Right-Handed Platoon Partner role that Gabe Kapler filled last year. Payton's 1-year line against LHPs (can't go back 3 years, that would take his Coors years into account): .283/.369/.401. Nixon's 3-year line (he hardly batted against LHPs this year, with only 15 ABs): .220/.293/.348.
So, a series of Sox moves today heating up the stove.
OC in the OC. Yup, Orlando Cabrera is now with the Angels, for a very decent contract indeed (4 years / $32 million). If Theo moves Mientkiewicz it'll be like we don't keep anyone from the Trade. And yet they all seemed to be perfect Sox for those 3 months - goofy (I'll always remember OC's handshakes - or at least, that he had a million different special handshakes), great smiles (Dave Roberts). The Sox helped the OC in the end by setting the market in getting Renteria for 4/40. Although I didn't quite believe I would see the day that the Angels would come to their senses and get rid of David Eckstein.
Dave Roberts to the Padres for Jay Payton and Ramon Vazquez: good move for both sides. Roberts wanted to start, and would you begrudge that of the man who had the Greatest Stolen Base in Sox History? (Granted, the way the Sox have played station-to-station over those years, it's not like there were really that many great ones, but still...) Vazquez looks like a standard backup infielder in the Ricky Gutierrez mould, while Payton fulfills the backup outfielder / Trot's Right-Handed Platoon Partner role that Gabe Kapler filled last year. Payton's 1-year line against LHPs (can't go back 3 years, that would take his Coors years into account): .283/.369/.401. Nixon's 3-year line (he hardly batted against LHPs this year, with only 15 ABs): .220/.293/.348.
Monday, December 20, 2004
Matt Clement's asthma
Someone wrote to me to ask me to post something in Sons of Sam Horn on Matt Clement's asthma (that article, incidentally, seems in complete agreement with me on the soporific effects of Clement's pitching) and whether being in the American League helps him in that regard. I must admit, I didn't know he was asthmatic, but since I have exercise-induced asthma, I'd hazard a guess that being in the AL helps Clement, not just because the existence of a DH gives a pitcher time to catch his breath, but also because he doesn't have to run the bases - any sort of running tends to aggravate the condition, and short sprints are particularly bad.
Also, Clement is most likely to suffer the effects of asthma in humidity, which makes Boston generally a good choice for him. Looking at his 3-year splits, there's no discernible relation between ERA and monthly humidity (April and July are his best months) so if there are indeed any effects of humidity on his asthma they don't seem to translate into performance, fortunately. Presumably the Sox will be keeping a watchful eye.
Someone wrote to me to ask me to post something in Sons of Sam Horn on Matt Clement's asthma (that article, incidentally, seems in complete agreement with me on the soporific effects of Clement's pitching) and whether being in the American League helps him in that regard. I must admit, I didn't know he was asthmatic, but since I have exercise-induced asthma, I'd hazard a guess that being in the AL helps Clement, not just because the existence of a DH gives a pitcher time to catch his breath, but also because he doesn't have to run the bases - any sort of running tends to aggravate the condition, and short sprints are particularly bad.
Also, Clement is most likely to suffer the effects of asthma in humidity, which makes Boston generally a good choice for him. Looking at his 3-year splits, there's no discernible relation between ERA and monthly humidity (April and July are his best months) so if there are indeed any effects of humidity on his asthma they don't seem to translate into performance, fortunately. Presumably the Sox will be keeping a watchful eye.
Conan O'Brien on the Sox
Conan O'Brien is my favourite late night host, writer of some of my favourite Simpsons episodes, and quite possibly the tallest man in show business (I remember once passing him as he was walking from the Harvard Lampoon building and he was about a good foot taller than me). He's also written this funny piece in the Globe Magazine's special commemorative edition on why the Sox won the World Series. Choice excerpts:
Conan O'Brien is my favourite late night host, writer of some of my favourite Simpsons episodes, and quite possibly the tallest man in show business (I remember once passing him as he was walking from the Harvard Lampoon building and he was about a good foot taller than me). He's also written this funny piece in the Globe Magazine's special commemorative edition on why the Sox won the World Series. Choice excerpts:
Red Sox fans finally embraced Neil Diamond's "Sweet Caroline" as their eighth inning anthem, after years of disappointment with Diamond's "You Don't Bring Me Flowers."
Pedro Martinez's statement that "the Yankees are my Daddy" initially delighted Yankee fans but ultimately distracted and confused them with warm, paternal feelings.The fact that Theo Epstein's grandfather co-wrote Casablanca led all Red Sox fans to believe the season would have a classic and unpredictable ending. By the way, this means that during the off-season, Steinbrenner will be shot by the French police.
Theo, I think this is the beginning of a beautiful friendship.
(Edit: the edition also has pieces by David Halberstam, Doris Kearns Goodwin, and the usual Globe gang.)
Sunday, December 19, 2004
Cooling off
I see Theo Epstein also thinks of Pedro's comments as "heat of the moment" type words. Much better than those sports radio hosts ready to condemn Pedro at the drop of a hot. (Remind me never to listen to the WEEI audio vaults again.)
I see Theo Epstein also thinks of Pedro's comments as "heat of the moment" type words. Much better than those sports radio hosts ready to condemn Pedro at the drop of a hot. (Remind me never to listen to the WEEI audio vaults again.)
"I think Pedro is a brilliant pitcher, a very intelligent guy off the field, and an emotional person as well. I don’t put much stock into what he said. I didn’t put much stock into his ‘Yankees are my daddy’ statements he made in September after a tough loss. I think he did wonderful things for the Red Sox for seven years and I think he’ll go on to do some great things for the Mets."
Epstein called Martinez’s complaints a "heat-of-the-moment type of thing. I choose to look at the man, not one comment."
"When the negotiations failed, that’s similar to a tough outing, like a loss," said the GM. "Things are said after losses that are probably regretted later on. I think we’ll probably look back at this months or years from now and feel the same way. I’m not just saying this to take the high road, I honestly wish Pedro well." (Link)
Mulder on the Cards
Wow, I wasn't expecting Mark Mulder to be traded. The Oakland rotation looks filled with potential for the future, what with the law firm of Blanton, Haren, and Harden, although whether they'll contend in 2005 is another matter. What does this mean if the Sox are slugging it out with the AL West for the wild card again? I think it gives some breathing room, but Haren was St Louis's best pitcher in the World Series, and Mulder did have an alarming second half.
Wow, I wasn't expecting Mark Mulder to be traded. The Oakland rotation looks filled with potential for the future, what with the law firm of Blanton, Haren, and Harden, although whether they'll contend in 2005 is another matter. What does this mean if the Sox are slugging it out with the AL West for the wild card again? I think it gives some breathing room, but Haren was St Louis's best pitcher in the World Series, and Mulder did have an alarming second half.
Pedro: a semi-contrarian view
So Pedro's been criticising the way the Sox organisation negotiated with him. Maybe it's classless behaviour, but I have a fondness for players who speak their minds and wear their hearts on their sleeves rather than those who sound like PR flacks.
It really sounds like Pedro feels that by his definition the Sox didn't respect him. And ultimately, like it or not, if the Sox wanted to re-sign him they needed to go by his, not their own, definition of respect. It still strikes me that in the negotiations there weren't any non-baseball moves that gave the sense that the Sox were dealing with Pedro as a person - sending a huge gift to his sister's wedding, that sort of thing... unlike, say, taking Foulke to watch hockey (note to self: be thankful that the NHL lockout occurred this year, not last!) or breaking bread with the Schillings. They flew to the DR, yes, but they flew there to negotiate with Pedro and bring the trophy to the Academy - all baseball-related events.
Fact is, Pedro is a proud, passionate man, and as someone said, what's happened is kind of like a divorce - people say things in the heat of the moment that they don't mean, except that in this case it's written in the press and magnified forever. Give it a few months, let it cool off, and we'll see how the dust settles.
So Pedro's been criticising the way the Sox organisation negotiated with him. Maybe it's classless behaviour, but I have a fondness for players who speak their minds and wear their hearts on their sleeves rather than those who sound like PR flacks.
It really sounds like Pedro feels that by his definition the Sox didn't respect him. And ultimately, like it or not, if the Sox wanted to re-sign him they needed to go by his, not their own, definition of respect. It still strikes me that in the negotiations there weren't any non-baseball moves that gave the sense that the Sox were dealing with Pedro as a person - sending a huge gift to his sister's wedding, that sort of thing... unlike, say, taking Foulke to watch hockey (note to self: be thankful that the NHL lockout occurred this year, not last!) or breaking bread with the Schillings. They flew to the DR, yes, but they flew there to negotiate with Pedro and bring the trophy to the Academy - all baseball-related events.
Fact is, Pedro is a proud, passionate man, and as someone said, what's happened is kind of like a divorce - people say things in the heat of the moment that they don't mean, except that in this case it's written in the press and magnified forever. Give it a few months, let it cool off, and we'll see how the dust settles.
Saturday, December 18, 2004
Oh my darling Clementine
Matt Clement, eh? Eh. Decent contract, preferable to Pavano's, and preferable in my mind to trading the farm system to get Hudson or Sheets. A solid #2/#3 pitcher, with a sick 9.45 K rate last season, but somehow not someone I get all excited about. Every Clement game I've seen he's lulled me to sleep.
So this is the rotation: Schilling-Wells-Clement-Wakefield-Arroyo. As usual, we'll see how it goes- hopefully it goes well, but this gives the financial flexibility to make trade deadline deals. So the Clement for Lowe swap that was talked about since the trade deadline has gone through, in a way.
Matt Clement, eh? Eh. Decent contract, preferable to Pavano's, and preferable in my mind to trading the farm system to get Hudson or Sheets. A solid #2/#3 pitcher, with a sick 9.45 K rate last season, but somehow not someone I get all excited about. Every Clement game I've seen he's lulled me to sleep.
So this is the rotation: Schilling-Wells-Clement-Wakefield-Arroyo. As usual, we'll see how it goes- hopefully it goes well, but this gives the financial flexibility to make trade deadline deals. So the Clement for Lowe swap that was talked about since the trade deadline has gone through, in a way.
Interleague
So, if all the major signings and trades are summarised: Pedro - Sox to Mets; Wright - Braves to Yankees; Hudson - As to Braves; Beltre - Dodgers to Mariners; Pavano - Marlins to Yankees (tentative); Glaus - Angels to D-Backs; Wells to Sox.
I guess 1) GMs really don't like trading within their own league; and 2) FAs really don't want to stay in their own league.
And yes, I know about Russ Ortiz and Richie Sexson... but the general point seems to hold.
So, if all the major signings and trades are summarised: Pedro - Sox to Mets; Wright - Braves to Yankees; Hudson - As to Braves; Beltre - Dodgers to Mariners; Pavano - Marlins to Yankees (tentative); Glaus - Angels to D-Backs; Wells to Sox.
I guess 1) GMs really don't like trading within their own league; and 2) FAs really don't want to stay in their own league.
And yes, I know about Russ Ortiz and Richie Sexson... but the general point seems to hold.
Hot stove non-analysis
Thoughts on the hot stove? To quote William Goldman from another context, "nobody knows anything". Or at least, us armchair pundits don't. Frankly, I don't like our rotation for 2005, Schilling's out for the start, leaving the idea of Fat Bastard (I mean it in a good way - I like his attitude, actually) David Wells as our starting pitcher on opening day. That said, I think the Yankees might be mortgaging everything of value left in the farm system (Eric Duncan and Dioner Navarro were possibly their last two good prospects) just to get an aging Randy Johnson, the man with the porn star name.
While I believe Theo Epstein and the rest of the Sox brass do have a plan, I'm not going to believe everything this off-season went exactly according to plan either. There are all sorts of conspiracy theories floating around: the Sox never wanted Pedro and offered him a big contract that they knew he would turn down, Cuza didn't convey the right messages to Pedro, that sort of thing. Not sure how much of that is true.
I'll say this: it's possible that the Sox would think saying "look, we're giving you the same money as Schilling" would be a sign of respect, while Pedro could hear those exact same words and find them distasteful. (Not making any claims to knowing their personalities - just postulating a scenario which could explain the tone of bewilderment on both sides.) One of those 'different styles' 'head vs heart' things purveyors of the MBTI and other personality metrics keep reminding us of... hey, even with Schilling, they not only had to cater to the stats geek in him in trying to convince him that right-handed power pitchers can succeed in Fenway, they had to sit down with him at Thanksgiving.
So where does that leave us? Let's see what unfolds in April. Nobody knows anything.
Thoughts on the hot stove? To quote William Goldman from another context, "nobody knows anything". Or at least, us armchair pundits don't. Frankly, I don't like our rotation for 2005, Schilling's out for the start, leaving the idea of Fat Bastard (I mean it in a good way - I like his attitude, actually) David Wells as our starting pitcher on opening day. That said, I think the Yankees might be mortgaging everything of value left in the farm system (Eric Duncan and Dioner Navarro were possibly their last two good prospects) just to get an aging Randy Johnson, the man with the porn star name.
While I believe Theo Epstein and the rest of the Sox brass do have a plan, I'm not going to believe everything this off-season went exactly according to plan either. There are all sorts of conspiracy theories floating around: the Sox never wanted Pedro and offered him a big contract that they knew he would turn down, Cuza didn't convey the right messages to Pedro, that sort of thing. Not sure how much of that is true.
I'll say this: it's possible that the Sox would think saying "look, we're giving you the same money as Schilling" would be a sign of respect, while Pedro could hear those exact same words and find them distasteful. (Not making any claims to knowing their personalities - just postulating a scenario which could explain the tone of bewilderment on both sides.) One of those 'different styles' 'head vs heart' things purveyors of the MBTI and other personality metrics keep reminding us of... hey, even with Schilling, they not only had to cater to the stats geek in him in trying to convince him that right-handed power pitchers can succeed in Fenway, they had to sit down with him at Thanksgiving.
So where does that leave us? Let's see what unfolds in April. Nobody knows anything.
Friday, December 17, 2004
More on DHs and HPBs
I had e-mailed my questions about the Bradbury-Dinen paper to J.C. Bradbury, who responded in a very nice e-mail to me. Firstly, there's an updated version of the paper on the effects of the DH on hit batsmen - I had been looking at an old one. (I blame the fact that the New York Times website doesn't, for some reason, have hyperlinks to appropriate places.) As Bradbury points out:
I had e-mailed my questions about the Bradbury-Dinen paper to J.C. Bradbury, who responded in a very nice e-mail to me. Firstly, there's an updated version of the paper on the effects of the DH on hit batsmen - I had been looking at an old one. (I blame the fact that the New York Times website doesn't, for some reason, have hyperlinks to appropriate places.) As Bradbury points out:
In the new version we address some your concerns. For example, we discuss the role of umpires and the Japanese league experience. Also, in a second paper looking at interleague games, we find the DH affects NL and AL pitchers the same. So, it's not just some difference between leagues. Check out this blog post that summarizes the issue.Really great of him to respond since I was just thinking off the top of my head.
Thursday, December 16, 2004
Hall of Fame
The Sox announce their plans to create a Hall of Fame or museum at Fenway Park. I'm just surprised this hasn't happened already. I remember visiting the museums at various soccer pitches in England and it seemed like a nice way to make money from the grounds when no one was around...
The Sox announce their plans to create a Hall of Fame or museum at Fenway Park. I'm just surprised this hasn't happened already. I remember visiting the museums at various soccer pitches in England and it seemed like a nice way to make money from the grounds when no one was around...
Shameless self-promotion
Incidentally, my personal blog - the more scattershot one featuring my thoughts on everything else other than baseball - has been nominated for the Asia Blog Awards. If you like it, do vote (it's "Daryl Sng", blog #6 under the "Best Singapore Blog" category). And even if you don't, a quick click around the other finalists gives a nice slice-of-life picture of this island I live on...
Incidentally, my personal blog - the more scattershot one featuring my thoughts on everything else other than baseball - has been nominated for the Asia Blog Awards. If you like it, do vote (it's "Daryl Sng", blog #6 under the "Best Singapore Blog" category). And even if you don't, a quick click around the other finalists gives a nice slice-of-life picture of this island I live on...
Request For Foreign Partner
Riffing on a joke by "Marty Nopointe" over at Boston Sports Media Watch...
Dear Mr Pedro -
Riffing on a joke by "Marty Nopointe" over at Boston Sports Media Watch...
Dear Mr Pedro -
I sincerely write to seek your co-operation and trust to enable my colleagues and I carry out an urgent business opportunity in my department.
I work with the Metropolitans of Flushing Corona; currently I am the general manager of bills and exchange at the foreign remittance department of my bank. I am the account officer to one Jim Duquette, who mysteriously disappeared from Fluyshing Corona earlier this year.
After Mr Duquette's disappeearance, I have come into the large sum of $54million Fifty For Million USA Dollars. Since the management got the information of his death none of his relation has come up and claim his money. The banking and financial law of Metropolitan Plc stipulates that if such fund remained unclaimed after it will be transferred as unclaimed bill.
Upon this discovery kind sir, I and two other senior staffs now decided to do business with you and release the money to you for safety and subsequent disbursement. I will soon proceed for my retirement leave this year, and I personally do not want this fund to be transferred into the bank treasury as unclaimed bill. That is why I wanted the fund to be move out of the bank before I proceed on my retirement from the banking services by December 16th 2004. We have agreed that the Fund would be for you as foreign partner; thereafter my colleague and I will visit your country for disbursement according to the percentages indicated.
Upon receipt of your acknowledgement indicating your interest, please indicate your bank account number and location wherein the money will be remitted. Send your reply through my direct and private email address (omarminaya123 at yahoo.com) and indicates your direct Fax and telephone numbers for effective communication that this transaction needs.
Please note that you are not to appear in person, as every thing regarding this project will be strictly on documentations and every banking documents needed for this transaction will be taken care of by my self.
Looking forward to urgently hearing from you.
Yours Faithfully
Omar Minaya
Be careful what you wish for...
... you just might get it. (A parody of those Mastercard ads, with Denis Leary getting his comeuppance. Link courtesy of SoSH)
... you just might get it. (A parody of those Mastercard ads, with Denis Leary getting his comeuppance. Link courtesy of SoSH)
Sox sign Halama
The one-L lama,
He's a priest
The two-L llama,
He's a beast
But I will bet
A silk pajama
They don't throw strikes
Like John Halama*
*The author's attention has been called to the Dalai Lama's 3-inning 6-K no-hit relief appearance for the Lhasa Apsos. Pooh.
(With apologies to Ogden Nash)
The one-L lama,
He's a priest
The two-L llama,
He's a beast
But I will bet
A silk pajama
They don't throw strikes
Like John Halama*
*The author's attention has been called to the Dalai Lama's 3-inning 6-K no-hit relief appearance for the Lhasa Apsos. Pooh.
(With apologies to Ogden Nash)
Another Colombian shortstop
And now that the Sox aren't committing money to Pedro, they're giving it to Edgar Renteria. 4 years/$40 million. Conventional logic seems to be that young pitching commands a premium, more so than young hitters. Or, conversely, people like to pay for old position players. Clearly the Sox position seems as usual to be counterintuitive, by sacrificing age at pitching (Wells over Pavano) for age at positions (Renteria).
And as Renteria said: "It (Boston's offer) was more generous. They were more interested in my playing for them." You can't hate on Pedro for leaving if you like the Edgar deal...
(Incidentally, that article was written by Indira Lakshmanan, the Globe's former Asia bureau chief. I always wonder what reporters like Lakshmanan who was in Colombia writing on more serious topics, feel when they are asked to cover sports.)
And now that the Sox aren't committing money to Pedro, they're giving it to Edgar Renteria. 4 years/$40 million. Conventional logic seems to be that young pitching commands a premium, more so than young hitters. Or, conversely, people like to pay for old position players. Clearly the Sox position seems as usual to be counterintuitive, by sacrificing age at pitching (Wells over Pavano) for age at positions (Renteria).
And as Renteria said: "It (Boston's offer) was more generous. They were more interested in my playing for them." You can't hate on Pedro for leaving if you like the Edgar deal...
(Incidentally, that article was written by Indira Lakshmanan, the Globe's former Asia bureau chief. I always wonder what reporters like Lakshmanan who was in Colombia writing on more serious topics, feel when they are asked to cover sports.)
Wednesday, December 15, 2004
Designated Hitters and HBPs
Was flipping through the New York Times Magazine's annual Year in Ideas issue, which included the idea of the "Designated Hitter as Moral Hazard", which presented John-Charles Bradbury and Doug Drinen's analysis that the introduction of a DH increased the chances of a hit-by-pitch. (Here's their paper: "Moral Hazard on the Mound - the Economics of Plunking". Edit: this is the updated version.) This seems to make intuitive sense - no chances to retaliate when the pitcher doesn't bat - but as far as I recalled the HBP rates of both leagues are actually not that different. From tangotiger's posts in an old Baseball Primer discussion on the topic, the HBP rates are:
1955-1972: AL .0057, NL .0055
1973-2003, AL .0065, NL .0060
Which is to say, the AL does seem to have 10% more HBPs, but .0065 HBPs per plate appearance translates into a very small number of total HBPs. It also indicates that the AL has historically had a higher HBP rate than the NL, so I'm not sure that the DH coefficient in the findings is measuring some other difference in the leagues. It's true that you can do a comparison between pre- and post-DH AL stats to isolate the effects of the DH from other league differences, but the authors only, unfortunately, have access to two non-DH AL years, 1969 which is as they note a problematic year for stats given the post-1968 changes introduced, and 1972.
What I think is quite interesting is Figure 1 of their paper, which shows that generally the AL had more HBPs over the NL starting in the 1970s even pre-DH, an advantage which rose in the 1980s and then fell in the 1990s and 2000s. This seems to suggest that HBP rates might be influenced more strongly by factors other than the introduction of the DH: off the top of my head, for example, the introduction of body armour taking out the "cost" of a HBP to a batter (which would also explain why both leagues showed a marked increase in HBPs from the mid-1980s onwards), and the standardisation of both leagues' umpires and strike zones.
I guess while I think that Bradbury and Drinen's work adds a lot of insight into the economics of baseball, particularly in their use of play-by-play analysis, the fact that the differences in HBP between leagues already existed before the DH rule and only seemed to markedly increased in 1980 makes me a bit skeptical about whether the positive DH coefficient is masking something else. (Thinking out loud, new rules preventing retaliation were introduced by MLB in 1978. Could that have led somehow to an increase in the difference in HBP rates between the AL and the NL in the 1980s?)
Also, if one league's umpires were more likely than the other to toss pitchers for retaliation within a game, this might create differences in the HBP rates. That also brings in the concept of next-game retaliation - sometimes, the game situation doesn't allow for a retaliation, and the 'traditional' thinking is that the next time the two teams face off, a retaliation pitch might take place. Perhaps there needs to be a dummy variable for 'unretaliated pitches'. Incidentally, Gregory Trandel (in "Hit by Pitches: Moral Hazard, Cost-Benefit, Retaliation, or Lack of Evidence?") notes that there's no correlation in total HBPs experienced by any team's batters and its pitchers per season, for what it's worth.
Also, I wonder about brushback pitches. If a pitcher has good control, he doesn't necessarily need a HBP to retaliate - but how does one quantify that fact?
Intuitively, another way to confirm the results would be to look at the effect of DH introduction into other baseball leagues, but I'm not sure how good minor league historical stats (or Japanese stats, which might be interesting given that they also have the 'one league has a DH, one doesn't' situation) are for this kind of analysis. The magazine article did note that the findings from interleague seemed to confirm the idea that NL pitchers were more likely to hit players in DH games and AL pitchers were less likely in games where pitchers had to bat, so there seems to be further evidence of the moral hazard argument - I'm leaning towards accepting that it exists, but I'm not fully convinced yet, so I'd be interested in seeing those findings.
That's my admittedly scattershot musings on the topic. Maybe when I have time to sit down and think about it I might have more coherence to the ideas here...
Incidentally, since we're talking about the Year in Ideas, how about Glenn Stout's research showing that there were anti-Semitic roots to the idea that the Red Sox are cursed? One of the best articles written in ESPN this year.
Was flipping through the New York Times Magazine's annual Year in Ideas issue, which included the idea of the "Designated Hitter as Moral Hazard", which presented John-Charles Bradbury and Doug Drinen's analysis that the introduction of a DH increased the chances of a hit-by-pitch. (Here's their paper: "Moral Hazard on the Mound - the Economics of Plunking". Edit: this is the updated version.) This seems to make intuitive sense - no chances to retaliate when the pitcher doesn't bat - but as far as I recalled the HBP rates of both leagues are actually not that different. From tangotiger's posts in an old Baseball Primer discussion on the topic, the HBP rates are:
1955-1972: AL .0057, NL .0055
1973-2003, AL .0065, NL .0060
Which is to say, the AL does seem to have 10% more HBPs, but .0065 HBPs per plate appearance translates into a very small number of total HBPs. It also indicates that the AL has historically had a higher HBP rate than the NL, so I'm not sure that the DH coefficient in the findings is measuring some other difference in the leagues. It's true that you can do a comparison between pre- and post-DH AL stats to isolate the effects of the DH from other league differences, but the authors only, unfortunately, have access to two non-DH AL years, 1969 which is as they note a problematic year for stats given the post-1968 changes introduced, and 1972.
What I think is quite interesting is Figure 1 of their paper, which shows that generally the AL had more HBPs over the NL starting in the 1970s even pre-DH, an advantage which rose in the 1980s and then fell in the 1990s and 2000s. This seems to suggest that HBP rates might be influenced more strongly by factors other than the introduction of the DH: off the top of my head, for example, the introduction of body armour taking out the "cost" of a HBP to a batter (which would also explain why both leagues showed a marked increase in HBPs from the mid-1980s onwards), and the standardisation of both leagues' umpires and strike zones.
I guess while I think that Bradbury and Drinen's work adds a lot of insight into the economics of baseball, particularly in their use of play-by-play analysis, the fact that the differences in HBP between leagues already existed before the DH rule and only seemed to markedly increased in 1980 makes me a bit skeptical about whether the positive DH coefficient is masking something else. (Thinking out loud, new rules preventing retaliation were introduced by MLB in 1978. Could that have led somehow to an increase in the difference in HBP rates between the AL and the NL in the 1980s?)
Also, if one league's umpires were more likely than the other to toss pitchers for retaliation within a game, this might create differences in the HBP rates. That also brings in the concept of next-game retaliation - sometimes, the game situation doesn't allow for a retaliation, and the 'traditional' thinking is that the next time the two teams face off, a retaliation pitch might take place. Perhaps there needs to be a dummy variable for 'unretaliated pitches'. Incidentally, Gregory Trandel (in "Hit by Pitches: Moral Hazard, Cost-Benefit, Retaliation, or Lack of Evidence?") notes that there's no correlation in total HBPs experienced by any team's batters and its pitchers per season, for what it's worth.
Also, I wonder about brushback pitches. If a pitcher has good control, he doesn't necessarily need a HBP to retaliate - but how does one quantify that fact?
Intuitively, another way to confirm the results would be to look at the effect of DH introduction into other baseball leagues, but I'm not sure how good minor league historical stats (or Japanese stats, which might be interesting given that they also have the 'one league has a DH, one doesn't' situation) are for this kind of analysis. The magazine article did note that the findings from interleague seemed to confirm the idea that NL pitchers were more likely to hit players in DH games and AL pitchers were less likely in games where pitchers had to bat, so there seems to be further evidence of the moral hazard argument - I'm leaning towards accepting that it exists, but I'm not fully convinced yet, so I'd be interested in seeing those findings.
That's my admittedly scattershot musings on the topic. Maybe when I have time to sit down and think about it I might have more coherence to the ideas here...
Incidentally, since we're talking about the Year in Ideas, how about Glenn Stout's research showing that there were anti-Semitic roots to the idea that the Red Sox are cursed? One of the best articles written in ESPN this year.
Cheer up sleepy Jean
By the way, if you're still bummed about Pedro leaving like I am... never let it be forgotten, the man brought a World Series to Boston. And there are pictures to prove it.
By the way, if you're still bummed about Pedro leaving like I am... never let it be forgotten, the man brought a World Series to Boston. And there are pictures to prove it.
Tuesday, December 14, 2004
Pedro and the Metropolitan Opera
So, barring any problems with the physical, Pedro Martinez is a Met. It'll take some time to get used to seeing him bat. Sad to see him go, but that's business. Hey, if I were offered $16 million for one extra year of work I'd take it. Plus I think he'll pitch well enough for the Cy - if the Mets' bullpen can hold on to enough leads to get him wins. I foresee a "Steve Carlton in 1972" situation redux.
There's a nagging sense that a higher initial bid during the exclusive phase might have sealed the deal. Of course, the Sox's initial bid of 2 years / $25 million seemed to put everyone off but the Mets, and you could argue that the Mets were bidding irrationally, or that Pedro's value to the Mets was much, much higher. So whether the Sox could have secured Pedro's services with a different strategy is an open question - given that the Mets were willing to bankroll $54 million, I would say no, Pedro would've sussed that the Mets wanted to blow cash, and this was how everything would have panned out. But that was a gamble Theo took. I'm hoping the Sox's plan B is something sweet, though.
Actually, I'm really hoping the MRI falls through and Pedro's back with the Sox. The eternal optimist am I.
So, barring any problems with the physical, Pedro Martinez is a Met. It'll take some time to get used to seeing him bat. Sad to see him go, but that's business. Hey, if I were offered $16 million for one extra year of work I'd take it. Plus I think he'll pitch well enough for the Cy - if the Mets' bullpen can hold on to enough leads to get him wins. I foresee a "Steve Carlton in 1972" situation redux.
There's a nagging sense that a higher initial bid during the exclusive phase might have sealed the deal. Of course, the Sox's initial bid of 2 years / $25 million seemed to put everyone off but the Mets, and you could argue that the Mets were bidding irrationally, or that Pedro's value to the Mets was much, much higher. So whether the Sox could have secured Pedro's services with a different strategy is an open question - given that the Mets were willing to bankroll $54 million, I would say no, Pedro would've sussed that the Mets wanted to blow cash, and this was how everything would have panned out. But that was a gamble Theo took. I'm hoping the Sox's plan B is something sweet, though.
Actually, I'm really hoping the MRI falls through and Pedro's back with the Sox. The eternal optimist am I.
Jeff Allison, hubris exemplar
Good story on the rise and fall of Jeff Allison in the Globe. If he makes it back into the bigs this will have a Behind the Music feel to it.
Good story on the rise and fall of Jeff Allison in the Globe. If he makes it back into the bigs this will have a Behind the Music feel to it.
Manny for Floyd
I really don't like this Manny for Floyd move rumours. While I respect Theo for making the Nomar trade - which I think will forever be his signature move - at the time Nomar was distinctly not performing. It's another thing to just ship someone off because you think his contract's not worth it when he's had an MVP season or close to one. They put the man on waivers, tried to trade him all winter, and instead of pouting like he could have done he came into 2004 all prepared, worked hard, and even learnt to deal with the media and fans. I respect Manny a lot for that. What more could you have asked from him? I understand the "trade him while his value is high" thinking, and I understand that if they don't trade him now he becomes a 10/5 player, but I don't see why if a trade has to be made it has to be a salary dump. Give me the guaranteed production of Manny over the question marks of Floyd. Of course, if the savings enable a Beltran acquisition I might - just might, heh - come round to it.
I really don't like this Manny for Floyd move rumours. While I respect Theo for making the Nomar trade - which I think will forever be his signature move - at the time Nomar was distinctly not performing. It's another thing to just ship someone off because you think his contract's not worth it when he's had an MVP season or close to one. They put the man on waivers, tried to trade him all winter, and instead of pouting like he could have done he came into 2004 all prepared, worked hard, and even learnt to deal with the media and fans. I respect Manny a lot for that. What more could you have asked from him? I understand the "trade him while his value is high" thinking, and I understand that if they don't trade him now he becomes a 10/5 player, but I don't see why if a trade has to be made it has to be a salary dump. Give me the guaranteed production of Manny over the question marks of Floyd. Of course, if the savings enable a Beltran acquisition I might - just might, heh - come round to it.
Monday, December 13, 2004
Southpaw Grammar
Lefties flourish in violent societies. What does that say about the 2004 Red Sox clubhouse? I always knew that Lenny DiNardo was trouble.
Lefties flourish in violent societies. What does that say about the 2004 Red Sox clubhouse? I always knew that Lenny DiNardo was trouble.
Pedro to sign?
D-day for Pedro to sign. Apparently.
And about the Manny for Cliff Floyd/Kaz Matsui rumours - I like Theo's coldblooded approach as much as anyone, and I know about rooting for the laundry, but that may be a bit too much for me. It's not like trading an underproducing Nomar - Manny may have a huge contract, but he still hit like an MVP. I remain a strong believer that the real wasted money in baseball is in the $5-10 million contracts.
D-day for Pedro to sign. Apparently.
And about the Manny for Cliff Floyd/Kaz Matsui rumours - I like Theo's coldblooded approach as much as anyone, and I know about rooting for the laundry, but that may be a bit too much for me. It's not like trading an underproducing Nomar - Manny may have a huge contract, but he still hit like an MVP. I remain a strong believer that the real wasted money in baseball is in the $5-10 million contracts.
Hot Stove Flurry
Actually, now that I think about it, the amazing thing about the Wells offer is that Theo made it in the morning. I didn't know the Boomer got up that early.
As for the reported Renteria offer - I like Renteria, and I think it's amazing that he's a 28-year-old who's been to two World Series. But 4 years, $40 million sounds like a lot. I guess I'm not pricing the shortstop market right - Miggy Tejada was signed at $12 million per, and I feel the step between Tejada and Renteria is a lot more than $2 million. Market correction's over I guess.
As for the Halama signing - $1 million for the swingman / long reliever - what's not to like? Not the greatest of pitchers, but a good, cheap deal. Rama halama ding dong. And the Yankees get Pavano, who I've already expressed doubts about. It's not that Pavano can't be good. I just don't feel a pitcher with a sub-6 K/9 ratio (especially in the NL) is at the superstar level, as opposed to merely very good - if what you want is sick control, Wells has that. As usual, time will tell.
Actually, now that I think about it, the amazing thing about the Wells offer is that Theo made it in the morning. I didn't know the Boomer got up that early.
As for the reported Renteria offer - I like Renteria, and I think it's amazing that he's a 28-year-old who's been to two World Series. But 4 years, $40 million sounds like a lot. I guess I'm not pricing the shortstop market right - Miggy Tejada was signed at $12 million per, and I feel the step between Tejada and Renteria is a lot more than $2 million. Market correction's over I guess.
As for the Halama signing - $1 million for the swingman / long reliever - what's not to like? Not the greatest of pitchers, but a good, cheap deal. Rama halama ding dong. And the Yankees get Pavano, who I've already expressed doubts about. It's not that Pavano can't be good. I just don't feel a pitcher with a sub-6 K/9 ratio (especially in the NL) is at the superstar level, as opposed to merely very good - if what you want is sick control, Wells has that. As usual, time will tell.
Sunday, December 12, 2004
The doctor is out
Dr Morgan, diagnosis: fired. Should suturing Schilling's smashed shin (okay, ankle, but I was going for the quasi-alliteration) outweigh some questionable in-season diagnoses? I guess this is the same attitude as we see in the Sox's dealings with Lowe: great postseason performances don't negate weak in-season work.
Dr Morgan, diagnosis: fired. Should suturing Schilling's smashed shin (okay, ankle, but I was going for the quasi-alliteration) outweigh some questionable in-season diagnoses? I guess this is the same attitude as we see in the Sox's dealings with Lowe: great postseason performances don't negate weak in-season work.
Wells, Wells, Wells
So the Sox sign David Wells. This is a deal I like for many reasons: one, while Wells is an ex-Yankee, he's an ex-Yankee who would love to stick it to Steinbrenner. Two, Wells walks no one. No one. He's a control freak. Three, he's a character. And I love characters.
And, just looking at him, he clearly hasn't been using performance enhancing drugs. Performance-impairing drugs, yes *cough booze cough*. Performance enhancing drugs? The only thing the man looks like he could have been injecting into his body is lard.
So the Sox sign David Wells. This is a deal I like for many reasons: one, while Wells is an ex-Yankee, he's an ex-Yankee who would love to stick it to Steinbrenner. Two, Wells walks no one. No one. He's a control freak. Three, he's a character. And I love characters.
And, just looking at him, he clearly hasn't been using performance enhancing drugs. Performance-impairing drugs, yes *cough booze cough*. Performance enhancing drugs? The only thing the man looks like he could have been injecting into his body is lard.
Friday, December 10, 2004
Change of Heart
It increasingly looks like Pedro will sign for the Sox, but for those who claim that him signing elsewhere would be betraying what he said about loving Boston, just recall these immortal words of Curt Schilling:
It increasingly looks like Pedro will sign for the Sox, but for those who claim that him signing elsewhere would be betraying what he said about loving Boston, just recall these immortal words of Curt Schilling:
People get to change their minds."As it stands right now, there are only two phone calls that would interest me," he said. "One would be [Phillies general manager] Ed Wade saying, 'We have 72 hours to strike a deal.' The other would be [Yankees GM] Brian Cashman saying the same thing."
What about Boston? Reports have said Schilling would consider accepting a trade to the Red Sox.
"I'm not going to Boston," he said adamantly. "I never said that. I never mentioned Boston. I'm a righthanded fly-ball pitcher. In Fenway Park, that's not a tremendous mix." (Philadelphia Inquirer, Nov 13 2003. Link)
Championship Rings
If you're looking to buy World Championship rings, the Sox have some replicas to sell. Cheap at $2,999. (Why do they even bother doing the "$1 less" trick for something that costs 3 grand? Does it really work?)
Have yourself a merry little Christmas, A-Rod.
If you're looking to buy World Championship rings, the Sox have some replicas to sell. Cheap at $2,999. (Why do they even bother doing the "$1 less" trick for something that costs 3 grand? Does it really work?)
Have yourself a merry little Christmas, A-Rod.
The statistician stares at a family in division
Hey man what is that you're thinkingApparently one of the sticking points in the drug-testing negotiations is whether amphetamines count as performance enhancers.
Maybe you can get away
There must be lots of pressure
And lots of bills to pay
Amphetamines & coffee
It almost makes you gag
Too many big decisions
No more time to play - The Afghan Whigs, "Amphetamines & Coffee" (C, Bm, G if you want to play it)
Thursday, December 09, 2004
Last night I dreamt of San Pedro
The signs on Pedro are starting to look brighter. After Larry Lucchino's belligerent-sounding "it takes two to tango" comment last week, I was getting a bit worried, but the new reports make Pedro sound much happier. As David Ortiz said, "He ain't going to no Mets".
Of the other major FA pitchers, Radke's signed, and I'm still very unsure about Pavano, who did have a good 2004 but up till then was distinctly so-so. Way back in '97, the Sox gave up Pavano to get Pedro: the choice was right then, and I think it's still right now.
The signs on Pedro are starting to look brighter. After Larry Lucchino's belligerent-sounding "it takes two to tango" comment last week, I was getting a bit worried, but the new reports make Pedro sound much happier. As David Ortiz said, "He ain't going to no Mets".
Of the other major FA pitchers, Radke's signed, and I'm still very unsure about Pavano, who did have a good 2004 but up till then was distinctly so-so. Way back in '97, the Sox gave up Pavano to get Pedro: the choice was right then, and I think it's still right now.
Mantei signed
The Sox signed Matt Mantei. Brilliant move. Could fall flat, of course, but the damage would be minimal - $750k for a very tough competitor with a phenomenal 11.4 Ks per 9 innings. The Yankees can have their early-70s soul group of Womack and Wright.
Theo seems to be keeping to his liking for former closers: Kim, Williamson, Timlin, Leskanic, now Mantei...
The Sox signed Matt Mantei. Brilliant move. Could fall flat, of course, but the damage would be minimal - $750k for a very tough competitor with a phenomenal 11.4 Ks per 9 innings. The Yankees can have their early-70s soul group of Womack and Wright.
Theo seems to be keeping to his liking for former closers: Kim, Williamson, Timlin, Leskanic, now Mantei...
Wednesday, December 08, 2004
Arbitration
So the Sox have offered Pedro-Tek-Lowe arbitration, along with a whole gaggle of players. Some were "offered arbitration with the understanding they won't accept arbitration", as per Theo Epstein. Makes sense - gives more time for the dance to continue. Radke's no longer a possibility, as the Twins signed him.
Lots of great players not offered arbitration, paradoxically enough probably because they were so good in the past that teams were scared of being stiffed with too high a contract. A sample lineup of those not offered arb:
C - Sandy Alomar Jr.
1B - Carlos Delgado
2B - Jeff Kent
3B - Troy Glaus
SS - Jose Valentin
LF - Ray Lankford (! - okay, no major left fielders in the bunch)
CF - Steve Finley
RF - Magglio Ordonez
Rotation:
Russ Ortiz, Kevin Millwood, Eric Milton, Al Leiter, Woody Williams
Bullpen:
Antonio Osuna, Chris Hammond, Steve Kline
So the Sox have offered Pedro-Tek-Lowe arbitration, along with a whole gaggle of players. Some were "offered arbitration with the understanding they won't accept arbitration", as per Theo Epstein. Makes sense - gives more time for the dance to continue. Radke's no longer a possibility, as the Twins signed him.
Lots of great players not offered arbitration, paradoxically enough probably because they were so good in the past that teams were scared of being stiffed with too high a contract. A sample lineup of those not offered arb:
C - Sandy Alomar Jr.
1B - Carlos Delgado
2B - Jeff Kent
3B - Troy Glaus
SS - Jose Valentin
LF - Ray Lankford (! - okay, no major left fielders in the bunch)
CF - Steve Finley
RF - Magglio Ordonez
Rotation:
Russ Ortiz, Kevin Millwood, Eric Milton, Al Leiter, Woody Williams
Bullpen:
Antonio Osuna, Chris Hammond, Steve Kline
"Casey's Random Batting Trial"
The win probability was epsilon for the Mudville nine that dayAh, the poetry of modern sabermetrics.
With a minus-two run differential, and just three outs left to play
Monday, December 06, 2004
Boggs for the Hall
Rob Neyer notes that Wade Boggs deserves a Cooperstown spot despite the fact that no one ever gets really excited about Boggs:
Rob Neyer notes that Wade Boggs deserves a Cooperstown spot despite the fact that no one ever gets really excited about Boggs:
If you'd like to knock him down a peg or two because he wasn't always considered the teamest of team players, feel free. But it's still fairly difficult to construct a reasonable argument that Boggs isn't one of the five or six greatest third basemen ever. (link - it's Insider Only, but Neyer's main point can be seen in the few paras they let us outsiders read)Clearly Boggs was great, if unexciting (as Neyer notes). The only danger is that the HoF is particularly treacherous for 2Bs and 3Bs - Ron Santo Ron Santo Ron Santo - and they seem to think that a 3B needs to play like Schmidt or Brett (yeah, only 2 of the 3 best ever, that's easy) even though the standards for other positions are weaker. Still, I think Boggs should get in, easy.
Gammons and steroids
Gammons on juicing. Wonderful stuff, with lots of good points, including the one about Gaylord Perry and his spitballs, and the fact that Giambi and Bonds aren't the only bad guys in this fiasco:
Gammons on juicing. Wonderful stuff, with lots of good points, including the one about Gaylord Perry and his spitballs, and the fact that Giambi and Bonds aren't the only bad guys in this fiasco:
There are anywhere from four to 10 pitchers in the Hall of Fame who cheated in some form or another; Gaylord Perry wrote a book about it.I can understand that players are necessarily wary about testing: it looks like teams will use any excuse to get out of bad contracts, as Jason Giambi or Denny Neagle will testify. But it also looks like that's the only way to regain the public trust. Leave the juicing to the 300-lb hulks slamming into each other on Sundays.
All those civil rights that our government shredded at the expense of Giambi, Bonds, et al., aren't coming back, much less their reputations.
Productive Outs?
I've ranted about the concept of "productive outs" before - any stat in which the best AL and NL teams are the Devil Rays and the Expos respectively can't be good. Indeed, any stat in which your best hitters are Miguel Cairo, Brandon Inge, and Tony Womack sounds dubious to me.
And yet you can't deny that it's better to see a runner advance from first from a ground ball to third than to see a fielder's choice from a ground ball to short that leaves only a runner on first. So on this SoSH thread there's an attempt to make sense of it all, chiefly the fact that teams which make Ks as a higher percentage of all outs score more runs than teams which don't. (If you reduce this to: teams that K more often score more, the first graph on this Baseball Prospectus page should illustrate the principle) The usual explanation is that Ks prevent you from grounding into double plays, but I also think Ks correlate with a patient approach that wears out starters and lets you feast on a bullpen.
Personally, I feel the problem is the way the stat is framed. The whole premise of productive outs starts with the implication that, for any at-bat with runners on, the out was inevitable, when it's not. Another way to look at it may be to say: the goal, when there are runners on base, is to advance the runner. You can advance the runner with a hit or a so-called productive out. Given the choice between those two, which would you take? Clearly the hit. The Ks come as a by-product of an approach that is trying not to make outs.
Still, it seems it's to the Sox's advantage to have as many teams as possible believe in productive outs. And the occasional team like Anaheim that succeeds while making many productive outs helps that cause, because other teams can look to Anaheim and say, hey, that approach might work. It's like watching someone saying "hit me" when he has 18 in blackjack and getting dealt a 3: it can work, but the odds are better the other way around.
I've ranted about the concept of "productive outs" before - any stat in which the best AL and NL teams are the Devil Rays and the Expos respectively can't be good. Indeed, any stat in which your best hitters are Miguel Cairo, Brandon Inge, and Tony Womack sounds dubious to me.
And yet you can't deny that it's better to see a runner advance from first from a ground ball to third than to see a fielder's choice from a ground ball to short that leaves only a runner on first. So on this SoSH thread there's an attempt to make sense of it all, chiefly the fact that teams which make Ks as a higher percentage of all outs score more runs than teams which don't. (If you reduce this to: teams that K more often score more, the first graph on this Baseball Prospectus page should illustrate the principle) The usual explanation is that Ks prevent you from grounding into double plays, but I also think Ks correlate with a patient approach that wears out starters and lets you feast on a bullpen.
Personally, I feel the problem is the way the stat is framed. The whole premise of productive outs starts with the implication that, for any at-bat with runners on, the out was inevitable, when it's not. Another way to look at it may be to say: the goal, when there are runners on base, is to advance the runner. You can advance the runner with a hit or a so-called productive out. Given the choice between those two, which would you take? Clearly the hit. The Ks come as a by-product of an approach that is trying not to make outs.
Still, it seems it's to the Sox's advantage to have as many teams as possible believe in productive outs. And the occasional team like Anaheim that succeeds while making many productive outs helps that cause, because other teams can look to Anaheim and say, hey, that approach might work. It's like watching someone saying "hit me" when he has 18 in blackjack and getting dealt a 3: it can work, but the odds are better the other way around.
Random Sox music trivia
Okay, so I'm a big music fan, as can (hopefully) be seen from my reviews blog, but I don't know why it never occurred to me to write this random bit of trivia down until inspired by some SoSH message-board random questions: Ed Cobb wrote not just the Standells' "Dirty Water", that classic Sox anthem, but also Gloria Jones' / Soft Cell's "Tainted Love" (more info). I always found that a random coincidence, and I'm grateful for both songs.
Okay, so I'm a big music fan, as can (hopefully) be seen from my reviews blog, but I don't know why it never occurred to me to write this random bit of trivia down until inspired by some SoSH message-board random questions: Ed Cobb wrote not just the Standells' "Dirty Water", that classic Sox anthem, but also Gloria Jones' / Soft Cell's "Tainted Love" (more info). I always found that a random coincidence, and I'm grateful for both songs.
Sunday, December 05, 2004
Did they know?
Looks like the Yankees' case for voiding Jason Giambi's contract is quite weak, if the NY Daily News is to be believed:
Looks like the Yankees' case for voiding Jason Giambi's contract is quite weak, if the NY Daily News is to be believed:
Steinbrenner had many conversations with several of his employees about Giambi's steroid addiction (alleged then, a fact now that Giambi's grand jury testimony in the BALCO case has been revealed by the San Francisco Chronicle). Steinbrenner's due diligence investigation confirmed the obvious, according to two MLB sources, but he decreed Giambi nonetheless would be the crown jewel of his mercenary brigade. (Link)Random thing I just thought of: if you rearrange "Giambi", you get "I am big".
The Grapefruit Juice League
A thought experiment I came up with: let's say baseball weren't a monopoly, and rival leagues were allowed to form. Let's say MLB clamps further down on steroids, and a league sprouted up that allowed its players to juice up or whatever they saw fit (leaving aside the question of how the league obtained steroids in the first place). Would that rival league succeed? Or would it go the way of the XFL?
A thought experiment I came up with: let's say baseball weren't a monopoly, and rival leagues were allowed to form. Let's say MLB clamps further down on steroids, and a league sprouted up that allowed its players to juice up or whatever they saw fit (leaving aside the question of how the league obtained steroids in the first place). Would that rival league succeed? Or would it go the way of the XFL?
The Baseball of Business
An interesting blog that I check in with from time to time is Jeff Angus's Management by Baseball, which features really nice long articles on what business managers can take from baseball. (I work in strategic planning, so this is a nice intersection of my work and hobby.) Most recently there's a good piece on Ichiro, making the point that Ichiro learnt how to adapt to his new work environment (i.e. the different strike zone of MLB), as opposed to, say, Maury Wills:
Sometimes I think the whole "what can business learn from other fields" thing is hooey though (that whole Fish! series? colour me skeptical), and you have to properly analyse each claim to see whether it's filled with genuine lessons or just an chance for executives to "escape" the corporate world. Billy Beane I know makes a ton of money going around speaking to executives about how his work involves exploiting market inefficiencies, and it makes me wonder, why don't these executives know about market inefficiencies? Or did they prefer to spend their (or shareholders') money listening to Beane ostensibly on something work-related, rather than a perhaps more relevant, but more dry, corporate speaker?
An interesting blog that I check in with from time to time is Jeff Angus's Management by Baseball, which features really nice long articles on what business managers can take from baseball. (I work in strategic planning, so this is a nice intersection of my work and hobby.) Most recently there's a good piece on Ichiro, making the point that Ichiro learnt how to adapt to his new work environment (i.e. the different strike zone of MLB), as opposed to, say, Maury Wills:
If you're Maury Wills and you can steal bases and the team you bat leadoff for wins precisely because you can steal bases in a low run-scoring environment, it's hard to have the self-awareness that when you manage in a much-higher scoring environment, base stealing doesn't correlate very well with winning. It wasn't that Maury Wills was wrong in thinking his base-stealing success made his team successful, it was that he was wrong to think of "success" as a static goal unaffected by the environment.The blog is, as Angus points out, the opposite of Moneyball: Moneyball was about taking business principles and applying them to baseball, this is the other way around.
Sometimes I think the whole "what can business learn from other fields" thing is hooey though (that whole Fish! series? colour me skeptical), and you have to properly analyse each claim to see whether it's filled with genuine lessons or just an chance for executives to "escape" the corporate world. Billy Beane I know makes a ton of money going around speaking to executives about how his work involves exploiting market inefficiencies, and it makes me wonder, why don't these executives know about market inefficiencies? Or did they prefer to spend their (or shareholders') money listening to Beane ostensibly on something work-related, rather than a perhaps more relevant, but more dry, corporate speaker?
Saturday, December 04, 2004
Soccer stats
I'm also a football (henceforth referred to as "soccer" for all you Americans) fan, incidentally, so I thought this thread on whether it was possible to apply sabermetrics to soccer was quite interesting, particularly with the stuff posted by Voros McCracken, he of the finding that pitchers have very little control over batting averages on balls put in play. Who knew? I'm intrigued by the potential for analysis coming up in soccer...
I'm also a football (henceforth referred to as "soccer" for all you Americans) fan, incidentally, so I thought this thread on whether it was possible to apply sabermetrics to soccer was quite interesting, particularly with the stuff posted by Voros McCracken, he of the finding that pitchers have very little control over batting averages on balls put in play. Who knew? I'm intrigued by the potential for analysis coming up in soccer...
Friday, December 03, 2004