IntenseDebate - The Baseball Idiot

12 years ago @ It's About The Money - Tough day to be a Sox fan · 1 reply · +1 points

I'm in the middle of '1949' by David Halberstam. He does a good job of taking apart the Boston media of that time, and how it was nothing tabloid sensationalism, and they were more against the players than for them. I guess some things never change.

12 years ago @ It's About The Money - On Jeter and his 3,000... · 0 replies · +1 points

I'm not sure how the phrase 'too many' became 'all'?

I could say 'too many' people don't like ice cream, but that's a far cry from 'all'.

12 years ago @ It's About The Money - On Jeter and his 3,000... · 2 replies · 0 points

I think you're doing a dis-service to all non-Yankee fans by lumping us together. There are non-Yankee fans who hate the Yankees just becasue they think they are supposed to, and there are non-Yankee fans because we actually know something about the game, but are fans of other teams.

I'm a Yankee-hater because I watched them beat my beloved Royals three years in a row in the playoffs.

That being said, I don't have a problem with Jeter. He's a great player and a Hall of Famer, and I admire the way he plays the game.

My only issue is that too many Yankee fans continue to push the idea that Jeter is an elite fielding shortstop when everyone knows he isn't. He never has been, but I think 75% of the teams in baseball would take over their current starter simply for the intangibles Jason was talking about. He's not a good fielder, but his knowledge of the game makes up for a lot of that.

13 years ago @ It's About The Money - Should SLG Be the Next... · 0 replies · +1 points

The stolen bases are just my thing. I realize most people don't agree with it. I just feel that bases gained by stealing bases are under represented, in the grand scheme of things. It shouldn't really matter how you get to third, as long as you get there.

As far the probability issue, I don't disagree. It's just my thing.

13 years ago @ It's About The Money - Should SLG Be the Next... · 1 reply · +1 points

It's okay if you don't understand what I'm talking about. Some people are caught up in numbers and don't really know anything about the game as it's played on the field.

If you want me to clarify something, just ask. No need to be rude and insulting about it.

13 years ago @ It's About The Money - Should SLG Be the Next... · 5 replies · +1 points

Sorry, but that doesn't mean anything to me. I'm not against sabremetrics. I think they're are a good thing for the game.

But I don't deal with probabilities. I deal with reality and what actually happens, not what might happen

Probability says any batter might hit a home run or strike out.

Reality is Adam Dunn will do a lot of both, while Ichiro won't do much of either.

Reality is that Adam Dunn hits the ball a lot farther than Ichiro, but reality is Ichiro was on base more times, and had more total bases (if you count stolen bases, which you should).

Power, for the sake of power, is over rated. It's good to hit the ball hard and far, but what are you doing with it? That's the reality.

13 years ago @ It's About The Money - Should SLG Be the Next... · 7 replies · +1 points

I don't understand the preoccupation with 'power'? It doesn't really matter how far a guy hits the ball. A 302' home run counts the same as a 500' home run. Frank Taveras, he of the two career home runs, once hit a grand-slam that was a bouncing ball down the third base line that got into the corner and rolled around. Counted for 4 runs, just the same as any ball that crossed the fence.

The infatuation with power is just a leftover of the steroid era, when guys like Adam Kennedy were hitting three home runs in one playoff game. Power, for power's sake, is overrated. Some guys hit the ball 400 feet on a regular basis, and it's a fly out to center field. Others hit 60 feet on a regular basis and end up on 1st. I'll take the single over the out any day.

It doesn't matter how hard or how far you hit the ball, it matters how many bases you get out of it.

13 years ago @ It's About The Money - Should SLG Be the Next... · 0 replies · +1 points

I don't think the idea of slugging percentage was to ever identify power. It was created to identify the number of bases a batter got per at bat, and does exactly what it was designed for. It was probably mis-named as slugging percentage, and would have better described as a base percentage instead.

The only way it was ever really used to describe 'power' was due to the deadball era, in which a 'slugger' would hit more doubles, triples and homeruns (mostly inside the park) than the Punch and Judy hitters who only hit singles. The closer you got to home in your own at bat, the closer you were to scoring on any type of hit.

I think the only flaw in it is that it doesn't count stolen bases, as they are earned as surely as any hit or walk earns a base.

13 years ago @ It's About The Money - Prospect Fatigue Spectrum · 1 reply · +1 points

Not all minor leagues are "prospects", and as a Royals fan, I gave up on the whole prospect thing a long time ago. Brett and White were never prospects, just guys drafted out of high school.

Saberhagen, Gubicza and Jackson were never prospects either. They just pitched well and progressed onto a bad team.

I remember them all, from Clint Hurdle to Bob Hamelin to Alex Gordon. I know there are exceptions, but I believe that guys labeled as prospects don't succeed nearly as much as some guy called up at mid-season as an injury replacement or just hit well in spring training.

I'm sure someone has the numbers and will prove me wrong, but I cite Albert as my rebuttal.

Good post.

13 years ago @ It's About The Money - Socialism 101 · 0 replies · +2 points

Now that would be outstanding.

IntenseDebate Comment System

Connect with The Baseball Idiot

My blogs/sites

People I'm following

The Baseball Idiot