Awhile back, someone told me a story involving a major-league team’s in-house statistician. The stat guy went to the team’s manager to inform him that the 3-hole hitter had horrible numbers against that night’s opposing pitcher. The stat guy thought the 3-hole hitter should be benched that night. The manager said, “Great, you go tell him.” The stat guy declined the opportunity.
OK, funny story, but why didn’t the manager follow the statistician’s recommendation? To begin with, it’s unlikely the manager was unaware of how his 3-hole hitter had done against that particular pitcher — managers pay attention to matchup numbers. But that still doesn’t answer the question: Why send a hitter to the plate when his odds of succeeding aren’t good?
The human element.
Solving one problem, while causing a bunch of new problems, is not good managing. Say you do bench your 3-hole hitter. That solves one problem: A bad matchup in one game. Now let’s look at the new problems you’ve created:
Your 3-hole hitter is your 3-hole hitter because, overall, he’s the best hitter you have. Let’s say every fifth day he runs into a pitcher he doesn’t handle well, but rakes against the other four pitchers. Now your best hitter is thinking that if he doesn’t do well against those other four guys, he’ll be benched. You’ve shot a hole in the confidence of your best hitter.
If you benched your 3-hole hitter, someone else has to hit in that spot. If you think moving one or two spots in the lineup is no big deal, you’ve never played the game. A hitter who was fine in the 5 hole can become a head case in the 3 hole. No matter what you tell them, some hitters will attempt to change their game to match being in the 3 hole (I need to be the best hitter on the team) or 4 hole (I need to hit with power). So now benching the 3-hole hitter has messed with two players’ heads.
If your 3-hole hitter is sitting down, someone else is playing. That bench player is now thinking if he does really well that night, maybe he’ll get into the lineup on a more regular basis. He’s putting more pressure on himself. You’ve now changed the mental approach of three players.
Your 3-hole hitter is now in the unfamiliar role of being a pinch hitter. Pinch hitters have routines they follow in order to prepare for their one at-bat. You now have a less-than-optimal pinch hitter. So let’s count that 3-hole hitter twice; you’ve now screwed around with the confidence of four players.
Three-hole hitters tend to be team leaders. They’re the guys everyone counts on in the clutch. You’ve now got everybody thinking maybe that 3-hole hitter isn’t as good as they thought. You’ve also hurt his standing in the clubhouse: His absence from the lineup might be interpreted as “ducking” a tough pitcher. So you’ve now messed with the entire team in a way that will have repercussions throughout the season in order to gain an advantage in four at-bats. Is that good managing?
Even though this story did not come from the Royals, we can learn from it. Baseball players try to find a mental approach that allows them to perform at their best, and it doesn’t take much to upset that mental equilibrium.
Now let’s look at an example closer to home.
One of our very smart readers wondered if reliever Greg Holland had a low pitch count in the eighth inning, why not leave him in the game to close out the ninth? I think the answer lies in the first example.
If you change horses in the middle of the stream and leave Holland in for the ninth, you create chaos in the bullpen. Now when Holland pitches, he’s not sure how many outs he’s required to get. That might change his approach. Does he let it all go in the eighth inning or save something in case he pitches the ninth? Does he start worrying about keeping his pitch count low so he can stick around for a save?
You’ve also messed with Joakim Soria’s head. Now when Soria warms up, he doesn’t really know if he’s going to be used to close out the game. You’ve changed the way your best reliever prepares. You’ve also got the entire team wondering how the pen is going to be used to close out games. As in the first example, solving one problem creates new ones. Good managers don’t make short-term moves that have long-term drawbacks.
This doesn’t mean that managers should ignore numbers. They can’t keep running a guy out there who isn’t producing just because it’s good for his confidence. If the 3-hole hitter we’ve been talking about doesn’t put up overall numbers that justify keeping him in the lineup, a good manager has to make a move. But managers should be more patient than the average fan.
As I’ve said repeatedly, numbers are important, but they don’t tell you everything. Handling people, knowing who can be moved in the lineup without problems, who can handle more than one position, who has the right mind-set to pinch hit or close a game, is also a big part of managing.
So next time Ned Yost or any other manager makes a move that you don’t understand, a move that isn’t supported by the numbers, remember: Numbers are important, but they aren’t everything.
There’s also the human element.
A thank you
Earlier this week, the Associated Press Sports Editors named “Judging the Royals” one of the top 10 multimedia projects in the country for 2011. While I’d like to grab all the credit I can, there are some other people who deserve recognition. Let’s start at the top: Star editor Mike Fannin. After listening to me drone on and on about baseball, he came up with the idea for an online project that studied the Royals. Nicole Poell, who edits my copy and makes sure I don’t make an even bigger horse’s ass out of myself than I already have. Tim Baxter and Jason Goldstein, the computer wizards who keep the site up and running. Photographer John Sleezer, who shoots most of the photos and videos that appear on the site. And Tim Bogar, the Boston Red Sox bench coach who gave me invaluable advice on approaching players and the direction the site should take. And while we’re at it, the players and coaches who have spent hours patiently explaining their craft.
And finally, the readers…without you, there’s no point in doing this. Thanks.
Larry Tindle
1 year, 3 months agoLee, way to go on the award. My question is are they going to have to make the door to the press box bigger so your head will fit through. lol Just keep up the good work.
Lee Judge
1 year, 3 months agoLarry: Thanks, but I’ve been married for 27 years; I get taken down a peg or two on a regular basis.
Jeffry L Jack
1 year, 3 months agoLee, I just read the story about DM offering Jason Kendall the special assignment coaching job to work with the catchers. Sounds like a match made in heaven, and I love Kendall’s attitude as reflected in his quotes. Looks like you may have more opportunities to pick his brain after all!
Robert Blakey
1 year, 3 months agoCongratulations on the award, it is deserved.
Can I point to this blog and my posts on it as proof that I am not a bandwagon fan? I have been watching and listening to the Royals since I was kid save a few years after the strike, and I can not remember being this stoked for a season.
Chris Hawkins
1 year, 3 months agoOh man. What is Ned doing? HE’S GOT OUR BEST HITTER IN THE LEADOFF SPOT!! What an idiot! Everyone knows your best hitter hits in the 3-hole!
As for the bullpen… I’m sure glad that bullpen roles have been defined going back to the 1960s. Remember back then how we had set-up men and closers like we do now? Good thing. They would’ve been all messed up. Then you have the 70s and 80s. You never had a guy like a “fire man” that would just come in any time it was needed. And that’s a good thing too. The manager made sure the fire man knew exactly when he would pitch and exactly how long he would pitch. If the fire man didn’t have a specifically defined role, he would have been a head case!
So yeah, this post is ridiculous.
Matthew LaMar
1 year, 3 months agoLee,
This situation would only really occur if the lineup was set in stone every single night. If there was an element of flexibility in the lineup, the impact would be smaller, if not negligible. Also, I would like to add that if a lineup switch severely screws with the head of a professional baseball player, he probably isn’t doing his job very well. I know I’m traversing into the gray area here, but isn’t how a player feels irrelevant if his production stays the same?
And…I’m not sure anything messes with Soria’s head, ever. That being said, congratulations on the award; keep up with the unique insight.
Lee Judge
1 year, 3 months agoJeffry: I’m glad Jason was able to work out an arrangement with the team. The fact that Dayton Moore did not let that much baseball knowledge walk out the door is to Moore’s credit.
As you could tell from Brayan Pena’s comments in the same story, the other cathers realize that Kendall can make them better. His teammates talk about his game preparation with something close to awe.
There are so many things that you can’t count, but are still important. I think that’s where the difference of opinion on Kendall stems from; he tends to excel at phases of the game that are hard to measure.
As a result other players (and at least one baseball writer) have great respect for him. Sabermetricians, not so much.
Lee Judge
1 year, 3 months agoRobert: I think a lot of people feel the same way; they’re very excited about this season. I’m sure long-time fans like you appreciate that even more than most.
I’m also excited about this season, but I know once it starts, it won’t let up until October…let’s hope it’s late October.
Chris Hawkins
1 year, 3 months agoAbout Jason Kendall - perhaps he excels at things that are difficult to measure (for now). But there’s a lot of good work being done to change that - meaning they are getting better at measuring things. For example, an article out today that measures how much a catcher helps his pitchers by being proficient in framing pitches from 2008-2011. Kendall ranks near the very last. http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=16096
Lee Judge
1 year, 3 months agoChris: I don’t think we’re going to agree on this one. The point of the post was to explain why a manager would not do something that seemed logical at first glance.
Whether you agree with it or not, this was a real situation and I described what a real major-league manager decided to do and why he decided to do it. You might find it ridiculous, but this thinking is common in the major leagues.
It has to do with keeping players in their comfort zone, which is why your comment about relievers in the 1960s misses the point.
Dan Quisenberry was comfortable being called on any time late in a game because that’s what he was used to. A utility player is comfortable moving from position to position because that’s what he’s used to. A pinch-hitter is comfortable taking one crucial at-bat late in a game because that’s what he’s used to.
The situations described in the post have to do with taking people out of their usual roles to gain a momentary advantage and the consequences of doing so.
So you might quibble with the current thinking on use of relievers, but that doesn’t change that thinking or the fact that people perform better when they’re in a familiar role.
And are you really arguing that 3-hole hitters aren’t generally a team’s best hitter?
The Royals have been recently been blessed with a couple of people that could fill that role and last year you could’ve made that argument for at least three hitters. Alex Gordon would do a good job anywhere in the line up, but I’m assuming he was in front of Butler and not vice versa because Butler can’t run.
Craig Scholes
1 year, 3 months ago“As a result other players (and at least one baseball writer) have great respect for him. Sabermetricians, not so much.”
I don’t think this is fair in regards to Kendall, I think most “Sabermatricians” will not argue that Kendall was one of the 10 best players in all of baseball for about a 6 year stretch, I don’t think many traditional guys would agree with that.
Aside from that, I think this article is very misguided, and is grossly overrun with unprovable rhetoric that simply isn’t true.
Any Statistician worth his weight in spit would not argue that you should pull your best hitter because of a bad matchup, one of the fundamental principles of statistics is sample size, and rarely does any one hitter have a meaningful sample size in which you would make arguments based on benching him against a pitcher.
Craig Scholes
1 year, 3 months agoOh man… Also
“A pinch-hitter is comfortable taking one crucial at-bat late in a game because that’s what he’s used to.”
This is a very VERY poor argument, a pinch-hitter pinch hits because he isn’t good enough to start, and because he like most professional athletes wants to compete. You can’t get to the pinnacle in any sport with out it.
And then there is this
“You might find it ridiculous, but this thinking is common in the major leagues.”
Just because thats the way its done, doesn’t mean its the best or right way to do something. Humans also used to think that the world was flat, that the sun revolved around the Earth, and that Nicolas Cage is a good actor.
Lee Judge
1 year, 3 months agoMatthew: You make a good point and it goes to the heart of what we’re talking about: people perform better in accustomed roles. If the lineup is changing all the time, I supposed players would get used to that, too.
But I think most players would tell you they’d rather the lineup wasn’t changing all the time.
Although, if there is line-up flexibility, it’s usually not in the 3-hole. Hitting third is a big deal and being taken out of the third spot can be even bigger.
You might think a professional ballplayer wouldn’t let being moved in the lineup or benched for one game affect his play, but reality tells us something different. You bench a 3-hole hitter and suddenly he’s a platoon player and might get platoon-player money in the future.
Theoretically, you’re right; if a player still produces, what difference does his emotional state make? That’s where the managing people comes in: who can handle change and who plays better when left alone?
And I’d argue with you about Soria; when he was scuffling last season he asked to be taken out of the closer role because he felt he was letting the team down. Soria was feeling the pressure of performing poorly as a closer.
Soria still wanted to pitch, still knew he might pitch poorly, but wanted to be put in a position where his failures wouldn’t hurt so badly. He spent a short time in middle relief, made adjustments and then felt good enough to go back to closing. A perfect example of what we’re talking about.
Anyway, thanks for the intelligent comments and questions. And thanks for compliment about unique insight. Feel free to disagree (as some do), but the insight I’m providing comes directly from the players and coaches themselves.
Lee Judge
1 year, 3 months agoChris: From personal observation I’d say the metric that shows Jason Kendall to be bad at framing pitches raises more questions about the metric than Jason Kendall.
I think all too often fans of metrics accept any number without question. Metrics also show Eric Hosmer is bad defender and Billy Butler is a better base runner than Jeff Francoeur.
Whether they like metrics and believe in them without question or not, the bottom line for Royals fans is this: Dayton Moore, Brayan Pena and Salvador Perez think Jason Kendall is valuable resource and will improve the catching staff.
Lee Judge
1 year, 3 months agoCraig: As usual we’re going to disagree. We’re coming at this subject from two very different points of view and that leads us to two very different conlusions.
As I pointed out to Chris, whether you agree or not, what I described is an real situtation that actually happened. Apparently, at least one major-league team is employing a statistician that isn’t worth his weight in spit, because benching a 3-hole hitter against one particular pitcher was exactly what he suggested.
(Although, to be fair, the sample size was an entire career’s worth of at-bats against this pitcher.)
And the point about the pinch hitter didn’t have anything to do with why a pinch hitter is a pinch hitter; it had to do with comfort zones. A player who is used to pinch hitting and the preparation it requires will have an easier time playing that role than a player who hasn’t done it.
The difference in our approaches to the sport has to do with attitude: I believe professional players know more than I do. I think almost anybody who’s devoted his life to the game and played it at every level will know more than someone with a web site. I believe that they have something to teach all of us.
That doesn’t mean they’re right 100% of the time, but I also believe they’re right a lot more often than they’re wrong. They have experience that those of us without the talent to play at that level will never have.
And Nicolas Cage IS a great actor, he must be, he’s in six movies a year.
Chris Hawkins
1 year, 3 months agoYou’re right that our differences have to do with our respective attitudes. But rather than it being as simple as you believing professional players know more than you, I think it’s partly because you don’t attempt to think about things from another point of view.
Many people of the statistical persuasion started out this way also, but the fact is, some of the traditional thought processes aren’t logical.
About 3-hole hitters. I’m not saying that most teams don’t have their best hitter in the 3-hole. They certainly do. What I’m arguing is that one thing Ned Yost does that is truly great (and surprising) is that he is okay leaving his best hitter in the leadoff spot. Obviously, it helps that Alex can run a little. We can only speculate about how Alex will hit in 2012, but I don’t think there can be any doubt that Alex was the best hitter on the team in 2011, by far.
Simple question: Do you believe Alex Gordon was clearly the best hitter last year, or do you think it was close? I believe we’ve been over this before, and I believe you thought it was between 2 or 3 players.
Jim Fetterolf
1 year, 3 months ago“What I’m arguing is that one thing Ned Yost does that is truly great (and surprising) is that he is okay leaving his best hitter in the leadoff spot.”
Some of that is because he lacks a better choice of a classic Willie Wilson type lead off man.
Gordon has several advantages over other choices on the team, one that he drew a lot of walks, even with the switch hitting Melky behind him, another that he has decent speed and can steal a base and is a solid base runner, makes few mistakes. Another yet is that he has power and could drive in some runs when the lineup rolled back around.
“Do you believe Alex Gordon was clearly the best hitter last year, or do you think it was close?”
I think he was: top HR guy, similar average to Melky, similar walk percentage to Billy, same RBIs as Melky and Frenchy. Have seen it suggested that some of it was luck with a BABIP near Savior Perez’ .362 at .358, part of that resulting from an above average LD% of 22, part of it from 1 in 8 fly balls clearing the fence. Another part would be selectivity, a result of being willing to take a K or BB rather than chase a pitch he couldn’t do anything with. He led the regulars in K% and was second in BB%, so almost 30% of the time didn’t put the ball in play. In that regard he was second only to Matt Treanor.
Thanks for all the free publicity:)
Craig Scholes
1 year, 3 months agoWell I have seen (and done the research) on some of your pieces that haven’t been entirely truthful. Perhaps you just had some info crossed, but I will be quite honest. It seems to me that you fabricate some of these stories to get your point across.
But for the sake of argument, Billy Butler has faced Jason Verlander 42 times in his career. That isn’t a big enough sample to make a reasonable decision.
George Brett faced Bert Blyleven 128 times, or roughly 35 games worth of data, Im not even sure thats a big enough sample.
So the point is, I am much more interested (as are most people who are “statisticians”) at the larger set of data, and thats never going to be individual hitter vs pitcher data, not unless that hitter has faced a pitcher 200 times, but then you start getting into much different factors, since pitchers age differently than hitters.
In Engineering there is a saying. If you have been doing something the same way for 5 years, then you have a good process, if you have been doing something the same way for 10 years then you have a great process, but if you have been doing something the same way for 15 years, then I’ve found your problem.
Lee Judge
1 year, 3 months agoChris: Yes, I believe Alex Gordon was the team’s best hitter in 2011 (although I don’t think my opinion makes much difference). Gordon struck out 139 times (45 more than Melky Cabrera) struck out looking 41 times (compared to Cabrera’s 15) and was streakier than Cabrera, but Gordon had a big advantage in walks. Overall, I’d say Gordon had a better year, but the numbers are fairly close in a lot of categories.
Lee Judge
1 year, 3 months agoJim: I’d agree, Gordon is a classic leadoff hitter, but Yost didn’t have one on the roster. If he did, maybe Gordon’s in the 3-hole and Billy’s hitting fourth, but that’s pure speculation on my part.
And you’re welcome to all the publicity you can grab.
Lee Judge
1 year, 3 months agoCraig: You’ve now gone from disagreeing with me to accusing me of lying. Here’s what you said:
“I have seen (and done the research) on some of your pieces that haven’t been entirely truthful. Perhaps you just had some info crossed, but I will be quite honest. It seems to me that you fabricate some of these stories to get your point across.”
Basic debate textbooks say that arguments are made up of evidence and conclusions. You’ve reached a conclusion, please share your evidence.
What stories have I fabricated?
If I’m lying about players, that would get around the clubhouse very fast and nobody would speak to me.
I don’t mind people disagreeing with me: the whole point of this web site is to present a different point of view. I know that every time I run a piece like today’s, someone will disagree and that’s fine, it leads to interesting discussions.
But that isn’t what you’ve done, you’ve accused me of fabricating stories in an attempt to hurt my credibility.
So share your evidence.
Craig Scholes
1 year, 3 months agoIn this article
http://royals.kansascity.com/entries/old-school/
You said this:
“Semi-quick story from awhile back: I was at a Royals game with a friend who wasn’t a huge baseball fan but wanted to learn. The game was tied in the bottom of the fifth, and Matt Stairs led off with a double. Angel Berroa walked to the plate, and I said, “Berroa needs to hit the ball to the right side to move Stairs to third. To prevent that, the pitcher will throw the ball down and in so Berroa will hit the ball to third or short.””
Doing a little digging, Never did John Buck ground into a DP, in a game that Matt Stairs and Angel Berrora played, and if it did happen it wasn’t in a loss.
http://tinyurl.com/6v2tgew
Like I said perhaps you had some info crossed, but the fact that something like that which easily can be looked up, makes me question what other bits of info you gloss over.
Im not accusing you of lying, that implies intent, I do not think that you willfully misleading, but it does make me wonder on what other things aren’t 100% accurate.
Jim Fetterolf
1 year, 3 months ago“So the point is, I am much more interested (as are most people who are “statisticians”) at the larger set of data, and thats never going to be individual hitter vs pitcher data, not unless that hitter has faced a pitcher 200 times”
Unfortunately, in our less than perfect world, significant sample sizes are a luxury that managers and coaches don’t often have, so they do have to work from much smaller samples or take a larger sample, batting average against same handed pitcher for instance, and make a decision. Opposing managers do the same thing, note that a certain batter has bad trends against a RHP with a good slider low and away, so pitch to that weakness, even without 200 PAs of that pitcher throwing that slider to that hitter.
“It seems to me that you fabricate some of these stories to get your point across.”
That’s a fairly serious charge, but “seems” is a qualifier, just as “someone told me a story” is, and this is the internet. The thing I find questionable in the story is that a stat guy would need to tell the manager or batter that, as match ups are a key element in the game and Seitzer has the same stats, plus the video on the subject, that the stat guy would and had probably already been working with the #3 hitter on approach to that particular pitcher, because that’s what the hitting coach does, just as the opposing pitching coach has game planned the pitcher’s approach to that #3 hitter.
The central point that some players need routine and predictability is probably valid if baseball is anything like the real world where lots of people don’t like to have the furniture moved. Other guys will volunteer to catch even if they don’t know what equipment to use. Part of management is knowing your people and who you can move out of their comfort zone and who you can’t. Alex is one who can move, as we saw last year, he thrived wherever he was needed. Holland is another one, “Gimme the ball and get off the mound.” Duffy was asked if he could relieve and said, “I’m pretty microwaveable, 30 minutes and I’m ready.” Brayan Pena would sell peanuts in the stands if Ned asked him to. Others, including many SPs, live within a five day rhythm and don’t handle change that well.
I think part of Lee’s point is that baseball is a tightly interconnected team game and that one move can have a ripple effect throughout the team. The key word is “can”, as managers do rest players in the face of bad match ups, one reason Kouzmanoff was signed, an RH corner infielder to give Moose a day off against a nasty lefty and help the team’s chances to win.
Jim Fetterolf
1 year, 3 months agoSecond part of the post, too many characters…
I would note that Ned Yost mentioned the other day that he could see using Jack Soria for more than just starting the 9th, bring him on in the 8th to put out a fire, then start the 9th for the close. That may be psychology on Yost’s part or may be a case of Soria, having been in Surprise for months working on stuff and conditioning, telling his manager that he not only can but wants to do this. There will be instances where Soria has pitched three straight days and Holland or another set up man does the 5-out close. I do like that idea as the reliever will go back out warmed up and knowing what he has that works, but Lee makes valid points about possible problems. That might be a reason Yost has suggested using a 7-man BP. We’ll just have to see.
Jim Fetterolf
1 year, 3 months ago“Im not accusing you of lying, that implies intent”
Fabrication also implies intent:
“It seems to me that you fabricate some of these stories to get your point across.”
I think best may be to accept that some of us are human and don’t always write a post to the standards of a legal brief, me because I’m not that sharp, Lee because he is busy with other things sometimes, and just let it ride.
I think your other points have been respectfully and in a non-condescending manner addressed and welcome your response to any of them.
John Wilson
1 year, 3 months agoCongratulations Lee on the award! I’ve always thought this column had a unique perspective about reporting on the Royals in a way that standard sports reporting doesn’t. Videotaping taking a 95mph fastball apparently earned you street cred not just with the players but with the AP sport reporters too! LOL
Jim Fetterolf
1 year, 3 months agoJeez, the birth of an urban legend. It was only 91mph:)
Lee Judge
1 year, 3 months agoCraig: That’s it? Well over 300 posts and thousands of comments and I misremembered a lineup from one game? (I’d guess how many years ago, but I’d probably get that wrong, too.) That’s what you’re characterizing as fabricating stories?
I’d ask the guy I was with, Steve Winn, former editorial writer for the Star, to verify my account, but I doubt he’d remember things any better than I did.
And I’ll have to take your word that I got it wrong (if that’s true, my apologies, if we had a correction section I’d make a correction), because I’m not going back to research your version of events. I also wonder about the motivation of someone who would go to that much trouble to make a case against me.
When we started this web site I assumed that people into metrics would enjoy hearing from the players themselves. If they love baseball, wouldn’t they like to hear from the people who play the game?
Instead, some of those people (I don’t want to unfairly paint with too broad a brush, Jim Fetterolf’s into metrics and couldn’t be nicer) seemed to be outraged that I was presenting a different point of view. They didn’t see it as an opportunity to learn, they saw it as a challenge.
I don’t spend a lot of time on other web sites (too busy running this one), but in the short amount of time I have spent on those sites I’ve seen some pretty wild stuff about me.
I’ve been accused of not having an open mind because I don’t take the same point of view as everyone else. (Probably a political cartoon in that.)
My fabulous salary has been discussed (sorry, I wish it were true, but I make so little for running this site it’s possble for me to lose money…depending on what I eat…while covering a game).
I’ve read that I’ve admitted to tailoring my views to please the team. (A. If I was doing that, would I admit it? B. I don’t do that. Twice a season we run “Strengths and Limitations” which contains something negative about every player. I also score “mental mistakes” evey night, most of which weren’t noticed by the public, so if I was really sucking up to the team I could just ignore those mistakes.)
In short, a lot of people have problems with what I do. I’d advise them to ignore this site. Why come here if I’m fabricating stories?
As for those of you who decide to stick around, did I ever tell you about the time me, Paul Bunyan and Pecos Bill watched a ball game together?
Lee Judge
1 year, 3 months agoJim: Sorry about the “too many characters” limitation. That sprung up when the web site had to be adjusted to allow blog entries and not just game posts. We’re trying to get that fixed.
As for what people do and do not know in a baseball organization: I’ve heard more than one story about a stat guy breathlessly rushing in to tell a coach or manager something that coach or manager already knew. (Or maybe I just made that up, I can’t remember.)
Players, on the other hand, are sometime out of the loop on purpose. If you’re going to face a pitcher you hit poorly, knowing just how bad it is might not help. If the coaches have information that would help (“he’ll throw you a slider down and away once you get to two strikes” kind of stuff) they’ll certainly pass that along to the hitter.
But coaches don’t want unhelpful information in the hitter’s mind. I wanted to ask Alex Gordon about his two-strike approach, but it became clear he had no idea he was leading the team in striking out looking. Clearly, Kevin Seitzer did not want that in his mind during the season and they’re addressing that issue now, in the off-season.
So, while coaches and managers generally know a lot more than people give then credit for, that information is not universally shared throughout the organization.
Lee Judge
1 year, 3 months agoJim: (Second part of your post, second part of my response) Once again, you hit the nail on the head: if Soria and everybody else knows he may be used for four or five outs, that changes things.
Players get comfortable in roles. Defining those roles helps players get comfortable.
Lee Judge
1 year, 3 months agoJohn: Thank you. After I got hit by that pitch, first base coach Doug Sisson told me I had more street cred than 50 cent. I told Doug the most impressive thing about that was him knowing who 50 cent was.
And Jim Fetterolf’s right, it wasn’t 95 miles an hour, but he’s wrong about it being 91. It was 92 miles an hour (and I want credit for every mile an hour I took off my left kidney).
I’d accuse you guys of fabricating, but I’m 58 years old. I now have to write myself daily notes about what Im supposed to do that day.
I get it.
Craig Scholes
1 year, 3 months ago“because I’m not going back to research your version of events”
I did the research for you, and linked to it. Its not my version, its the actual history of games played. I did this research at baseball-reference in less than 10 minutes, having never used their play index tool before. So with that instance and this instance it seems to me that you at least fudge facts to mold them around the point you want to make.
My problem is, you will write a story that I truly enjoy such as the Alex Gordon offseason workouts, which might be my favorite things I’ve read this year, but then write a column about not being able to move a hitter in the lineup so as not to hurt his feelings like every hitter on every team is the same. Perhaps you should stick to actual game insight and shy away from psychological evaluations of how a game affects a player.
Lee Judge
1 year, 3 months agoCraig: Those aren’t my insights (as I’ve explained a thousand times). Those come from coaches, players and managers. I’d think they’d be of some interest to a baseball fan.
So far I’ve counted one instance in which you say I “fudged facts” by incorrectly telling a story that happened years ago (and being incorrect naming the lineup really didn’t change the point of the story).
The story the current post is based on was told to me off the record, but my editor knows which team, manager and player it’s based on.
You seem to be going well out of your way to find fault. You only seem to like what I do if it fits your preconceptions of what’s true. If you don’t like what I do, why read it?
Scott McKinney
1 year, 3 months agoLee, I think the point is that since the game you described never happened, it throws your whole anecdote into question. Did the other things in the anecdote actually happen? The whole “when I saw this little thing happen, I knew the Royals were going to lose” seemed pretty facile. It kind of hurts the argument behind your anecdote when the anecdote appears to not have happened at all.
It also makes one skeptical about other anecdotes you post. And the story about the stat guy going to the manager in your column here is apocryphal at best. You don’t have to be an advanced statistical analyst to know that making lineup choices based on pitcher vs. hitter matchup stats is horrendously bad analysis. That’s pretty elementary stuff. And this is true even if you have a career’s worth of matchup data, as that still adds up to too little data from which to draw any reliable conclusion. Could any MLB team employ such an incompetent statistical analyst? If this actually happened, I really hope it wasn’t an analyst for the Royals, because that would mean their two-man SA department (Wong runs it but isn’t an analyst) is worse off than I thought.
Lee, no one is going out of their way to find fault. When you give us the behind the scenes stuff and the flavor of the game, you do very well. I genuinely enjoy those columns. When you get into analysis, things go very wrong very quickly. Yes, you have a particular viewpoint and approach, but it is not unassailable. And when people read what appears to be seriously flawed analysis, many will discuss that in the comments. You see that as being attacked. In reality, it is critique and discussion. If you don’t want criticism, don’t have a comments section. If you want calm, measured, polite criticism only, then you’ve come to the wrong internet.
My biggest problem with your baseball writing and analysis is that you appear to believe everything you hear from “real baseball people.” Any part of traditional baseball orthodoxy is apparently divinely revealed truth to you. You question nothing. With regard to baseball, you appear to be completely unreflective. You’re not really willing to consider that perhaps Russ Morman, Ron Polk and the conventional wisdom about something might be wrong. Blindly parroting conventional wisdom isn’t worth much.
More specifically with regard to this column, what I see is a lot of guesswork with regard to sports psychology. Yes, that may be the impact on the player(s) in question, or the impact may be very different from that, or perhaps there will be no significant impact at all. But as a loyal denizen of traditional baseball conventional wisdom, action X has effect Y, period. So you preach it as gospel. It seems all to easy and simple, especially when we’re dealing with something as complicated and difficult to nail down as sports psychology.
Scott Boden
1 year, 3 months agoThis is my first post about your articles and yes I’ve read just about all of them. I enjoy them and feel they deserve the recognition they have received from the AP.
I also recognize the information you put on this site is based upon what is provided to you by players, coaches, and those within baseball. That information has all the flaws of human opinion, beliefs and such but that is baseball and life. Metrics definitely is a valid tool but people forget human nature and don’t add that into metrics.
When you manage people it is just not about numbers, it is about ego, emotion, and such. Lee gives this side with some numbers thrown in for some of his articles. Lee will also throw in some opinion and emotion as he is human also. I don’t take Lee’s articles as law and the only way but like metrics it is another tool in the bag when I watch baseball.
Lee’s articles do add, as do numbers, to my enjoyment of the game which is all I can ask for and is why I read his articles. Frankly, I can read metric articles and see what everyone should do but the problem is metrics doesn’t take into account human nature on a daily basis. It has a use but is not the end all be all and I get tired of reading that it should. How many who have supervised people believe metrics should be the only way to manage…..
Scott, I’ve never read Lee’s articles as saying it is gospel. It is a view and I can choose to believe it or not.
Keep up the good work Lee.
Lee Judge
1 year, 3 months agoEverybody: I’m leaving momentarily for Columbia, Missouri to watch the MU-KU game with my son. I’ll respond to every posting once I return.
Until then, Jim Fetterolf’s in charge…although he doesn’t know it.
Jim Fetterolf
1 year, 3 months ago“When you manage people it is just not about numbers, it is about ego, emotion, and such.”
Kind of like in the real world. Employees are a funny bunch, they just don’t function like numbers on a page (dating myself).
“Lee, I think the point is that since the game you described never happened, it throws your whole anecdote into question.”
Scott, were this a congressional hearing or campaign debate, that is possible, but a misremembered batter’s name doesn’t change the baseball lessons that might be learned from the story, which is, of course, the point of the exercise and the point of this particular blog, trying to get behind what the big picture beat reporters give us by giving access to the players and coaches that statistics can’t offer.
“Judging the Royals” is a fairly unique niche for this market and most of Lee’s readers find value in it, as shown by the comments from the slowly developing, during the off-season no less, community. Some people may not be interested in whatever insights may be drawn from getting lectured by Kevin Seitzer during Alex Gordon’s off-season hitting workouts or may argue with the reasons given by a 3rd base coach for sending a slow runner or the reasons that Eric Hosmer had for trying to steal 3rd with one out and a dealing Ubaldo on the mound, but others find it of interest, so we keep dropping by.
Scott, you make valid points and they are appreciated. I, personally, laid the foundation for what very little I am learning on metrics at your site and will take this opportunity to thank you for turning me on to fangraphs and br and the ideas behind more finely sliced data, and also your occasionally excellent pieces like the recent projections, which I linked here. Good of you to drop by in person and thanks for the links and publicity.
Kurt Vancil
1 year, 3 months agoLee, hope you had fun at the KU-MU game. I love college basketball!
I do appreciate the different take you have on the game of baseball and you look at many aspects of the game that can get overlooked such a blocking pitches, hitting the cut-off man, etc. Baseball isn’t just home runs and strikeouts. I have more of a basketball mind and when I watch a game I am constantly watching for things that happen besides scoring. Do players set good screens? Do they move without the ball? Do they seal of the opponent when a shot is taken? Do they make the extra pass? Etc… So I appreciate that you look for similar things with baseball.
I also agree that we are dealing with humans not video game characters. When I bench Moose on my fantasy team because he is facing a lefty “Fantasy Moose” (a stellar band name, if you want my opinion) does not get upset or question the move. With real humans that can happen.
With that in mind I do think you paint way too broad a stroke with this piece. Personally it seems like all of the players mentioned above must be named Jose Guillen for taking one lineup change as a personal affront. Do you think that attitude could be curved by management at the beginning of the season by talking about how lineups will be semi-interchangeable in order to win as many games as possible? And focusing on how the last man on the bench can be just as important as the number 3 hitter throughout the season? I think showing that attitude early and having everybody buy in could curb a situation like this. Same goes for the bullpen. If a pitcher is dealing in the 7th but isn’t usually a set-up guy I think it should be fine for him to keep it up and the set-up guy ought to want the best for his team and put his personal feelings on the side.
Lastly, I do like hearing from the coaches, ballplayers and I will say they have way more experience than I do but wouldn’t you agree that a novice can sometimes see problems from a different angle because they aren’t a part of the system?
Also congrats on the award. Can’t wait for the 162 game grind!
Jim Fetterolf
1 year, 3 months ago“I think showing that attitude early and having everybody buy in could curb a situation like this.”
Good point and that is something than can be developed with a young team given some time, and even then some may still resent a change and allow it to perfect performance.
“wouldn’t you agree that a novice can sometimes see problems from a different angle because they aren’t a part of the system?”
Fresh eyes always have possibilities and the way this site handles that is through the comments. You may have noticed that all respectful posts are treated respectfully and the ideas get discussed. Lee’s posts can sometimes be seen as seed stock for a garden of opinion and that is one strength of this board, that we have such a wide variety of perspectives interacting, from the impressive Curtis with his combination of journalism and stat backgrounds to a couple of us old school guys who might not be able to tell you what OBP means.
I appreciate posts that raise questions because that makes me think and look at the world through new eyes, so am comfortable here. Thanks, Kurt, good post. I look forward to you during the season when things get “fer realz”.
Jim Fetterolf
1 year, 3 months agoMake that “…affect performance.” We need an edit button. Yoo hoo, IT dudes…
Scott Boden
1 year, 3 months agoKurt, that is exactly how I watch basketball.
While this one wasn’t my favorite article by Lee because it is so broad, I just took it as an example of what can happen with some instead of what could happen with everyone or many. It is just one more thing a manager/front office deals with when looking at or playing certain players.
Clint Scoles
1 year, 3 months ago“So you might quibble with the current thinking on use of relievers, but that doesn’t change that thinking or the fact that people perform better when they’re in a familiar role.”
Greg Holland pitched in the 5th inning of games in Omaha as well as closing games out just last year for Omaha, sometimes for more than one inning. Not knowing a role in KC he performed in the 6th, 7th and 8th inning. To define a role for him would be creating a problem. Jirschele used him as a fireman and Yost should take that same approach. It may take a few appearances for Soria (Rule of 21 days I believe)but not nearly as long as you are thinking.
People get into routines but routines can be changed. Good Pinch hitters aren’t the best hitters on their team now but they were at sometime in their High School, College or Minor league careers the #3 hitters in their lineups. They learned to change their routines, it is the managers falsely putting creating these routines.
By creating an argument about psychology one at the same time Lee is depleting the idea that Kevin Seitzer did anything for Alex Gordon. Perhaps he just helped him psychologically or Alex was just in a good mental state that season, one never knows.
Loose Seal
1 year, 3 months agoLee, Hypothetically, my office manager just informed me that staff meetings will no longer be held on Mondays at 10am in conference room A, but on Tuesdays at 11am in conference room B. I have been doing my job for 15 years, worked in many cities for many companies, and have attended staff meetings in numerous different locations on different days at different times. I also get paid millions of dollars to do my job. However, after having attended staff meetings in conference room A on Mondays at 10am for almost 6 months now, I don’t think I can effectively work do my job if staff meetings are held any other way. I mean, my job responsibilities are exactly the same, but this minor change has led me to question whether I can do my job at all anymore. I even spoke to my manager about this, and he told me that the change was made because he had statistical evidence that I would be more effective at my job with the change. But it doesn’t FEEL right - now I don’t even know what to think. It seems that you have inside knowledge on this issue, so please advise me on how to deal with this.
Clint Scoles
1 year, 3 months agoHolland for his first two months last year put up a 1.57 ERA and a .180 BAA pitching anywhere from the 4th to 9th inning. KC would be very smart to keep him as a high leverage floater putting him in whatever inning he is most needed.
The 9th may have some psychological value to it being the final 3 outs and since Soria has comfort doing it that is fine. That same value isn’t involved in the other innings and floating around Coleman, Crow, Holland, etc to matchups and leverage would be the more prudent managerial maneuver.
At one point Lee argues that a 3 hole hitter should be left alone so you don’t create a false sense of insecurity. At that same time you can’t tell your best reliever to go get 6 outs because he’s already insecure in how to do it. Which is it?
Jim Fetterolf
1 year, 3 months ago“Not knowing a role in KC he performed in the 6th, 7th and 8th inning. To define a role for him would be creating a problem.”
True, there are players like that, as pointed out above. Some people actually thrive on having the furniture moved.
“It seems that you have inside knowledge on this issue, so please advise me on how to deal with this.”
And it seems that the whole gang is coming to visit. If you equate the change in conference room to a player losing his on-field position or being publicly outed as a failure, you may need more help than a political cartoonist can offer. If your job problem instead is that you have been demoted or replaced by a younger hot-shot or that your territory has been rearranged because of a problem in a sector, that would be a little more analogous to what a baseball manager faces when making decisions and handling the personalities of a situation. And bear in mind that a cubicle cowboy might be much more easily replaced than a productive ball player with high ceiling, so the risk to the manager from an incorrect move is much greater and more costly to the organization.
Thanks for dropping by. Nice to see you guys again.
zack_delmont
1 year, 3 months agoI guess I don’t understand the undercurrent and perceived firestorm caused by Lee’s post. Lee’s the man. The insight is top notch. If you disagree, then disagree. Don’t make it personal. There’s a human element to what Lee does also. This squabbling is simply sabermetric masturbation.
Craig Scholes
1 year, 3 months agoWhat about the Royals game August 25th 2010
http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/DET/DET201008250.shtml
In this game Bloomquist batted third, because Ned had a hunch. This must have crushed the team and ruined everyones confidence.
Clint Scoles
1 year, 3 months agoJim,
Soria worked just fine as a setup man his first year and closed 17 games as well. I think Lee’s ideas on this subject are pretty archaic Soria and all closers are proof of it. Almost no closer becomes a closer without having success in middle relief, setup or whatever role. They are good pitchers, better than most and that is why they succeed not because of the role and routine they are given.
Jim Fetterolf
1 year, 3 months ago“Which is it?”
Depends on the player and also the situation. Last year, for instance, Ned Yost left Moose in to take his lumps and learn through it. This year they signed Kouzmanoff as an RH corner infielder, able to spell both Moose and Hoz as needed.
“Soria worked just fine as a setup man his first year and closed 17 games as well.”
You may have heard that Yost has already floated the idea of Soria as a five-inning closer. I agree with that, if he can handle it. I’ve suggested that the idea may have even come from Jack Soria himself after spending a few months in Surprise working on conditioning and command. Last year, with the troubles Soria had, would have not been a good time to move the furniture, this year it sounds as if Soria is in great shape and confident and having two or more guys, Soria and Holland at the least, add Herarra and Broxton maybe, who can also do the same thing may allow the manager to comfortably go with a seven man ‘pen, even with six inning starters, which should allow Kouz to get a bench spot, which should help the team.
“They are good pitchers, better than most and that is why they succeed not because of the role and routine they are given.”
Possible, but one major difference between the current classic closer and a fireman like Holland is that a Soria can come in and pitch from the windup, without getting situationally “dry-humped earlier in the game, while Holland often comes on out of the stretch after he may already have been up a couple of times. We’ve seen from Luke, as an example, that he can dominate from the windup and the wheels fall off from the stretch. Not saying that is an issue, but it may have something to do with it
Good points, Clint, and that is what makes this site good, that really solid discussions can arise from a blog that is sometimes shorter than my own posts:) Thanks.
Jim Fetterolf
1 year, 3 months ago“Don’t make it personal.”
That is one of the strengths of this site. This particular thread is a bit of an aberration, but I think part of it is just cabin fever, been too long without real games and energy is starting to build up. Thanks, Zack.
Jim Fetterolf
1 year, 3 months ago“You may have heard that Yost has already floated the idea of Soria as a five-inning closer.”
Make that “…five-out closer.”Oh IT guys…”
Phil King
1 year, 3 months agoI got to the first paragraph and thought “I would fire that stat-guy and hire a better one.” Like Craig said, any stat guy, who is worth a damn, throws away individual pitcher v. batter match-ups due to SSS.
Phil King
1 year, 3 months agoAlso anecdotal evidence is the worst evidence.
Jim Fetterolf
1 year, 3 months agoOn the subject of the blog and moving the furniture, this was just posted:
http://www.kansascity.com/2012/02/25/3452015/leaner-billy-butler-also-shows.html
The nut ‘graph: “It was a big adjustment,” Butler said, “and it was hard to accept. It was hard to get the right mind-set. But there was (an inability) to just accept things, too. There was a need to accept the type of talent that Eric is, and realize what’s best for the team.”
“Like Craig said, any stat guy, who is worth a damn, throws away individual pitcher v. batter match-ups due to SSS.”
Doubtless true, unfortunately managers don’t always have the freedom to wait four years for SSS. And, of course, not all guys in all businesses, especially a fairly new one, will be worth a damn. May be an old story where the stat guy was a kid from the local university, may have been a new guy on his first day unsure of how much the managers and coaches actually knew, not really important to the points of the piece, which are reinforced by my above link.
Nice to see you again, thanks for dropping by. Could you send KCDC1 by? One of my favorite posters.
Phil King
1 year, 3 months agoJim, baseball statistics are a hobby of mine that I’ve only been into seriously for around a year. When I got to the first paragraph I said to myself “That stat-guy sounds pretty stupid.” (Not verbatim, just trying to keep it clean)
Jim Fetterolf
1 year, 3 months agoPhil, I’m working on the stat side, trying to integrate some of the ideas into my rather elderly experiences and to at least reach the point that I can discuss things with the more statistically oriented. Believe it or not, a year ago I knew nothing of so-called advanced metrics and now I know just a very little, but for me it’s like trying to learn a new language. But I agree with you, the stat guy was a little clueless. But we all can learn. I appreciate the contributions.
Jim Fetterolf
1 year, 3 months ago“Also anecdotal evidence is the worst evidence.”
But as a literary device it can be useful. We could, of course, question whether the anecdote was even germane to the case, rather than some scenery in the background of a photo. The subject of the photo was “Moving Furniture”, so that is what most of us concentrated on and ended up with a pretty good discussion and a seeming consensus that different people respond differently to changes, so a broad brush in either hand probably isn’t the best tool.
For our readers, thanks a bunch, real good thread, and I appreciate the opportunity for a little self-aggrandizement at you all’s expense:) This is going to cost Lee an autographed Bruce Chen baseball.
Lee Judge
1 year, 3 months agoJim (and everybody else): I just got back from Columbia. I’m bushed and Jim Fetterolf handled the responses better than I would’ve (thanks, Jim, I owe you a cold one). So there’s no fire to put out and I’ll leave things until morning.
Although, I’ll throw one last log on tonight’s conversational fire. What follows is a quote from the book “Knuckler” by Tim Wakefield with Tony Massarotti. It talks about Theo Epstein, Grady Little and the Red Sox’ attempt to use a “closer-by-committee” system.
“Epstein and Little theorized that, since sometimes the most important outs of a game are recorded not in the ninth inning but in the seventh or eighth, it made little sense to have a closer and to earmark him exclusively for the ninth. They believed that their “closer-by-committee” system, as it came to be called, could work. Of course, the experiment failed miserably. With no clear responsibilities on a nightly basis, Red Sox relievers struggled mightily. For as much as the theory made perfect sense—it had been promoted by longtime statistical analyst Bill James, whom the Red Sox had hired—it completely disregarded the human element. Relievers, like most ballplayers, are accustomed to specific job descriptions and responsibilities. Some pitch in the seventh, some pitch in the eighth, some pitch in the sixth. Some face only left-handers, and others face largely right-handers. The uncertainty that came with the closer-by-committee approach required the Red Sox pitchers to be ready at all times. They were left unsettled, uncertain of when or how they would be used on any given night. Performing under those kinds of conditions was extremely difficult.”
This comes directly from Tim Wakefield. I thought the idea that something could be perfectly logical, but fail because of the humans involved was an interesting one. This quote inspired me to write about similar situation.
OK, that’s it for the night. I’ve been driving all day and still haven’t had dinner. Once again, my thanks to Jim Fetterolf for doing such a great job. (Jim, it’s against the rules for sportswriters to ask for autographs, but I can introduce you to Bruce Chen and let nature take its course.)
Clint Scoles
1 year, 3 months ago“Of course, the experiment failed miserably.” Both of Little’s teams won 90+ games and they likely just couldn’t stand the heat of the Boston media. Not to mention the weakness of the bullpen in general.
A team like Atlanta or even Kansas City if they tossed Herrera in the BP could convert to a BP by committee system. A good BP by committee would probably be best with two RH and two LH dominant relievers so that if a team uses one side earlier in the game they can go to them later if matchups are needed. ATL is very close to that with Venters and O’Flaherty from the left side and Kimbrel from the right.
Philly tried the same thing and it failed again due to fan and media pressure. Oakland, KC and most small markets are better for any kind of revolutionary thinking because the media pressure is very weak as is fan pressure. Kansas City has let plenty of great statistical thinkers slip away to other teams which is too bad.
Jim Fetterolf
1 year, 3 months ago“A good BP by committee would probably be best with two RH and two LH dominant relievers so that if a team uses one side earlier in the game they can go to them later if matchups are needed.”
Maybe I’m not getting this, but it looks to me that the committee would arise from having the available people rather than as a top down idea which would be sabotaged by this:
“Not to mention the weakness of the bullpen in general.”
I think we are pretty much on the same page on this, that having and knowing the players allows some creativity. The fact that Ned Yost is suggesting Jack Soria as a five out closer, which also may suggest having more than one such stretched out closer if the team has a few more leads to protect, shows that a renewed confidence of both Yost and Soria in Soria’s abilities, plus having Greg Holland plus the hope of a healthy Broxton plus the potential that Kelvin Hererra has flashed could lead to changing some roles in the ‘pen, “moving the furniture” as it were.
To our long-suffering readers, Clint Scoles is over at the excellent Pine Tar Press, the best one-stop destination for all information Royals, from potential draft picks to DSL to rookie ball and all through the minors, a veritable library on the Royals. Pine Tar Press also has some very good young writers who tolerate me and inform me in equal measure and I highly recommend the site. There are some good commentators there, but always room for more. When the minors’ seasons start, PTP is the place to get brief summaries and box scores on the Royals affiliates the next day so the next wave of prospects can be followed.
Thanks for dropping by, Clint. Always enjoy your thoughts and expertise.
Phil King
1 year, 3 months ago“But I agree with you, the stat guy was a little clueless.”
I don’t think you understand, this is basic stuff. It would be like if there was a guy claiming to be an auto-mechanic, but didn’t know how to change oil.
As for the anecdotal evidence part. I demand proof that something works or it’s true, or it doesn’t work or it isn’t true. I’ve learned by watching Penn and Teller on Showtime that people often use anecdotal evidence to fool people in believing their nonsense works. “This patient used to be sick, but because of my nonsense he’s all better.” Maybe the patient is indeed better or it’s just a placebo effect, but how do we really know the nonsense made the patient better?
I remember an earlier article about Getz being valuable because he hit two sacrifice flies in the same game. Now here’s something interesting, in 32 other opportunities as a Royal to get a sac fly (runner on third and less than two outs) he has NEVER gotten another sac fly. In fact he’s probably the last I would want hitting in that situation. Also Getz career slash in that situation .302/.300/.372 and hits a SF 9.8% of his PA. The Royals as a team last year had a a slash of .330/.344/.546 and hit sac flies 15.4% of the time. Lee’s anecdotal evidence would suggest that Getz does a good job with a runner on third with less than two outs. My statistical evidence shows otherwise.
Now Craig, Getz really did hit two sacrifice flies in the same game. Just he never did it before or since in a Royals uniform.
Lee Judge
1 year, 3 months agoPhil: The following stats come from Kevin Seitzer. Seitzer’s stat sheet has 30 columns, divided into two categories: Quality Plate Appearances and Situational Batting Average.
Quality Plate Appearances include hits, walks, 8+ plate appearances and hard hit outs. Seitzer considers anything less than .350 to be below average, .350 to .400 to be average and anything over .400 to be excellent.
Salvador Perez led the team with a Quality Plate Appearance average of .457, but did it in limited plate appearances. Billy Butler was second with a Quality Plate Appearance average of .452. Chris Getz was seventh among starters with a .394 QPA average.
The second category of Seitzer keeps, Situational Batting Average, includes moving a runner over from second with 0 outs, driving in a runner from third with less than 2 outs (which is broken into two categories; infield in and infield back), sacrifice bunts (broken into three categories; 1st base only, 2nd base only, 1st and 2nd) and hit and runs.
Anything less than .500 success rate in those situations Seitzer considers below average, .600 is average and anything above .700 is considered excellent. Chris Getz led the team with a .767 Situational Batting Average.
Scott McKinney
1 year, 3 months agoI think there’s a cause issue with the failure of Boston’s short-lived closer-by-committee. Did it fail because pitchers were unsettled because they didn’t know when they’d be pitching? Or did it fail because that committee was made up of pitchers who weren’t very good? Call me crazy, but I think the talent level is the important variable there. Just because Wakefield thinks that the uncertain roles was the cause doesn’t mean he’s right. We shouldn’t just assume that because a player says X caused Y (especially with regard to the psychology players other than himself), that X actually caused Y.
And other than the closer, do pitchers really know when they are going to pitch? An 8th inning setup man may well pitch in the 7th. When some pitchers are tired and the bullpen is short, roles necessarily get very fuzzy. Does this throw a bullpen into chaos where pitchers can’t be effective because they don’t know for sure when they are going into a game? Relievers almost never know for sure when they are going into a game.
I have no idea where this silly idea came from. It has become accepted fact that relievers need to know exactly what their role is (even though most don’t have a clear, set role). This is a relatively new idea, since sometime in the 1990’s. In the 80’s and before, there were no clear roles, except for the closer/fireman…and his role was anything but clear. He’d come in when needed, period. Were relievers not so effective back then? Of course they were effective. This is silliness.
Jim Fetterolf
1 year, 3 months ago“I don’t think you understand, this is basic stuff.”
It is now. Five or ten years ago it wasn’t so basic.
“As for the anecdotal evidence part. I demand proof that something works or it’s true, or it doesn’t work or it isn’t true.”
Must make for an interesting life, but again, the anecdote wasn’t the important part of the piece and only a few, fairly specific of the commentators consider it important enough to make it an issue, which suggests it may be less an issue than a “gotcha” opportunity to go after certain bloggers and commentators.
“Lee’s anecdotal evidence would suggest that Getz does a good job with a runner on third with less than two outs.”
Chris’ RISP, per br, last year was .321/.352/.358 in 95 PA and his slash with runner on third and two outs was .364/.391/.364. Runner on 3rd, less than two outs .364/.357/.364. Baseball Reference seems to agree with Lee’s anecdotal evidence. His weakest performance is with the bases empty, .227/.297/.258 in 256 PA.
“Seitzer’s stat sheet has 30 columns, divided into two categories”
Reminding us that coaches are the ultimate nerds and often have much more detailed stats than SABR at the moment, because they chart even more game elements and they have a certain amount of eyeball input.
I’ve had some suggest that a high pitch count at bat is irrelevant, I have suggested that if Justin Verlander is dealing, the only chance with him is to run up his count and get to the bullpen, so a batter running up ten or twelve pitches or even a runner drawing several throws to 1st can use up a pitcher and get him out earlier.
Chris Getz mentioned one time that he considered part of his job when he led off to try to get a long at-bat, drive up pitch count, give the other hitters a chance to see what the pitcher had that day, and, if the at-bat was later in the game give his own pitcher a little extra time to rest. That at least might be a good excuse for hitting .218/.313/.248 leading off an inning. Given that he had an isoOBP of .095 in those situations, he was taking and probably wasting a bunch of pitches in those situations.
“In fact he’s probably the last I would want hitting in that situation. Also Getz career slash”
Career slashes don’t take the field for the game and Getzie, runner on 3rd, less than two outs last year delivered 7 RBIs in 15 PA, runner on 3rd with two outs delivered 9 RBIs in 23 PA. For comparison, Billy, runner on 3rd, less than two outs, had 26 RBIs in 40 PA, quite good, runner on 3rd two outs, 13 RBIs in 40 PA. All of course are small sample sizes, but even so Getz doesn’t look like “the last guy”.
Numbers do have their uses.
Scott McKinney
1 year, 3 months agoJim, what is the number of such situations for Getz in 2011? I’m guessing we’re talking about a tiny sample of data. If so it is not very meaningful and tells us very little about his true talent level (even his situational true talent level, if such a thing existed).
I think a larger, more meaningful sample of data tells us a lot more about Getz and whether you’d want him at the plate. As he’s an awful hitter, you want him at the plate as little as possible. Being able to execute a sac fly is a positive. But for Getz, it is buried under an avalanche of negatives.
Lee Judge
1 year, 3 months agoThis web site is based on the premise that professionals tend to know more than amateurs. If you believe the opposite, there’s no shortage of web sites that take that position.
That doesn’t mean all professional agree or that professionals are perfect. I’ve written about Gregor Blanco missing signs, Yuniesky Betancourt’s poor footwork and limited ability to go to his left, Jeff Francoeur missing cutoff men, Billy Butler and Yamaico Navarro failing to carry out defensive assignments, Scott Podsednik’s problems playing the wall—the list goes on.
But, yes, generally I think the people that have played the game all their lives know more than people with web sites (and that certainly includes me).
And that’s a bothersome belief: if you accept that the people who play the game know it in a way that you can’t or that organizations have information that you don’t, it becomes much harder to second-guess general managers, manager and players. Not impossible, but harder.
If a player’s individual personality and mental approach play a role in the manager’s game decisions, then it’s harder to criticize those game decisions. The manager has information you don’t.
Uncovering that information has been the goal of the web site. If you look at metrics and can’t see Jason Kendall’s value, it it worth knowing what the Royals see in him? It doesn’t mean you have to agree, but they did sign him to play for them and now want him around as a coach. Does it add to your understanding of the game to know why?
To me, the answer’s always been yes.
This web site is here to provide the player and coaches point of view. The main reason they’ve been so open with me is just that: they want people to understand why they’re doing what they do. Agree or disagree (and obviously I mainly agree) that seems worthwhile.
So if Tim Wakefield thinks a “closer-by-committee” system won’t work, it doesn’t mean he’s 100% right or it could never work anywhere, but I find his reasoning interesting, not “silliness.”
If you don’t care what the players and coaches think, this web site doesn’t have much to offer.
With the possible exception of Jim Fetterolf.
Clearly, that dude needs his own web site. I’d read it every day.
Scott McKinney
1 year, 3 months ago“So if Tim Wakefield thinks a “closer-by-committee” system won’t work, it doesn’t mean he’s 100% right or it could never work anywhere, but I find his reasoning interesting, not “silliness.””
But you post it as an authoritative interpretation of what happened with no critical analysis. Do you see the point of your column, comments, etc. to be just to write up whatever you hear from players and coaches? You have no interest in breaking that down to see if it makes sense? The fact that something is the conventional wisdom doesn’t mean it necessarily makes sense. But you appear unwilling to challenge or even question ANY of that conventional wisdom.
Relief pitchers performed well for decades without set clear roles. Many relievers perform well right now without set clear roles. Doesn’t that mean that maybe we should question whether or not relievers need set, clear roles in order to perform well? Why are you choosing to merely regurgitate baseball’s orthodoxy of the moment without questioning or even discussing it?
It’s not like baseball fans don’t know what the conventional wisdom is on closers, reliever usage, lineups, etc. We get it in game reporting, broadcasts and pretty much every element of the mainstream sports media. So your columns are about sharing this same perspective which dominates sports media through yet another voice?
Loose Seal
1 year, 3 months agoLee, You say “If a player’s individual personality and mental approach play a role in the manager’s game decisions, then it’s harder to criticize those game decisions. The manager has information you don’t. Uncovering that information has been the goal of the web site.”
However, this post does nothing to uncover that information. You even admit that this story did not originate from a source at the Royals. Instead, your post relies entirely on your own conjecture about player confidence levels based on hypothetical situations—there is no evidence that any, much less all, players are actually affected in the way that you say they are. You then use this conjecture as hard evidence and categorically attack the reliability of advanced statistics and the wisdom of “stat guys”.
Nobody is forcing you to learn the ins and outs of advanced stats. Most everyone can agree that advanced stats do no paint a complete picture of baseball and that there are many intangible and immeasurable elements that should also be considered. So, there is a very valuable purpose to your stated goal of “uncovering that information [that] the manager has [but] you don’t” and your access to the Royals and to the KC Star provides you the means to do this. However, this post falls far, far short of that stated purpose.
And if you want to attack advanced statistics (and there are many short-comings worthy of discussion), please do your research. Your anecdotes and specific examples simply cannot invalidate any statistics that are based on careful mathematical analysis of every pitch and every play of every game.
Jim Fetterolf
1 year, 3 months ago“Jim, what is the number of such situations for Getz in 2011?
I believe I gave the PAs for both Getz and Billy, didn’t I? I assume that sSS would apply to both players in the situation, but thought it useful to look at actual production.
“I think a larger, more meaningful sample of data tells us a lot more about Getz and whether you’d want him at the plate.”
True, as long as the large sample is relevant or even available. In Chris’ case large has some use, although there would be an injury season that shrank the sample size. With a career of just under 1,100 PAs, not sure if it is possible to call even 102 PAs with a runner on 3rd a significant sample, but he did have lines of .302/.300/.372 with less than two outs in 51 PA, .306/.333/.388 with two outs, and an RBI%of 55 with less than two outs, RBI% of 37 with two outs.
“Many relievers perform well right now without set clear roles.”
“Many” being the operative word. Different players, different comfort levels, different abilities to handle changes. Ned Yost recently suggested Jack Soria as a 5-out closer, so that is hardly a sign of a rigid ideologue. I can only guess, but have suggested there to be a reason for Yost’s suggestion and that it may have come from Soria himself, a result of his conditioning and confidence from an extra couple of months in Surprise working on conditioning and command of his arsenal. Last year Soria was ineffective at times and even voluntarily gave up the closer role, so someone else moving the furniture may not have been helpful. If Jack wants to move the furniture, that’s a bit different.
“Relief pitchers performed well for decades without set clear roles”
I’m old enough to remember when relievers weren’t very good and offenses looked forward to facing them. That was one reason old time pitchers went so deep in games, a gassed starter still being better than a fresh reliever. Elroy Face started the change toward the modern system.
“So your columns are about sharing this same perspective which dominates sports media through yet another voice?”
A statement with a question mark tacked onto the end. Always nice to have you drop by, Scott.
Craig Scholes
1 year, 3 months agoI care about what the players and coaches and think, doesn’t mean that it should be reported as fact, the definitely know more about the game of baseball than me, that doesn’t mean they know everything about baseball.
I might be more prone to believe some of this rhetoric if the Royals were actually winning with this philosophy. Its easy to blame payroll, but Allard Baird had more winning season than Dayton has had, and its possible to win in baseball without a 100 million dollar payroll.
Here’s a thought, perhaps the Royals should start thinking outside of the box, what could it possibly hurt, especially when this team is probably a year away from serious contention anyway… After all their is more than one way to skin a cat.
Jim Fetterolf
1 year, 3 months ago“Here’s a thought, perhaps the Royals should start thinking outside of the box, what could it possibly hurt,”
A valid point and it could be suggested that both Felipe Paulino and Bruce Chen are “outside the box” thoughts, Paulino identified by the stat guys and verified by the scouts in spite of horrible career “old school” numbers, Master Chen disparaged by stats, yet successful because he is the luckiest pitcher alive. Last year GMDM went outside the box also with Melky and Frenchy, two signings that were savagely ripped in some quarters, and was rewarded for his gamble because two desperate ballplayers at the end of their career ropes took it upon themselves to make adjustments in conditioning, swing, and approach to become productive. Alex Gordon also, on the cusp of being considered a bust, made some changes. This year GMDM signed Broxton and Mijares to an already good and deep bullpen, once more taking the risk that they, like Jon Sanchez, would be supremely motivated when facing a chance for a chance to be traded to a playoff contender and a good FA payday after a successful time with the Royals. I’m not sure GMDM the Gambler gets enough attention.
“its possible to win in baseball without a 100 million dollar payroll.”
And Tampa is an example and role model. I looked them up on br and discovered that the year their new GM and owner started they already had several productive players, including an imminent ace on the staff. GMDM came on with an empty system and has built the current team pretty much from the ground up, so it will take a little longer than Tampa did to get to the point of three playoffs in four years. I think the team is making a great deal of progress and have players who can rack up some serious WAR through their control years, so we’re in good shape while hoping a couple of the young pitchers reach a good percentage of their potential this year. On the other hand, I can see the wheels falling off a few starters and a couple of injuries destroying the season, like happened with the Twinkies. That’s why they play the games. Good post, thanks.
Tim Block
1 year, 3 months agoCongrats on the award, Lee. As I’ve said before, this site has been like “Baseball 101” for me as I have not been an avid fan in the past. Thank you to those who arranged for this idea to be possible, and thank you to you, Lee, for your dedication and style of writing that makes it so readable.
About some of the above posts…. before I started typing this response there were two little grayed out words in the text box… BE NICE.
Lee Judge
1 year, 3 months agoThe perception that I’m completely uncritical of anything I hear from a professional ballplayer or coach is inaccurate.
On this web site I’ve disagreed with Kevin Seitzer about a hitter’s two-strike approach (I believe in expanding your zone and getting the ball in play, Kevin thinks a hitter shouldn’t let an umpire change a hitter’s zone). I’ve disagreed with Ned Yost’s throwing a player under the bus (in my opinion), I’ve disagreed with John Gibbons about how aggressive a runner should be to get to third with one out, I’ve disagreed with Mike Aviles on how he was attempting to turn the double play, I’ve disagreed with Jeff Francoeur about hittng the ball the other way in certain situations, etc. etc.—you get the picture, or at least you should.
On the other hand, the perception that I’m less critical than most is completely accurate and there are at least two reasons:
1.Professional ballplayers and coaches are the ones that taught me baseball. I’m very likely to see the game the way they do.
2.(And Jim Fetterolf touched on this) The current Royals are a much better team fundamentally than they were even a few years ago. Not long ago we had an outfielder climb the wall while the ball landed on the warning track, a cutoff man who was hit in the back with a throw, a second baseman who thought the right way to start a double play was to run up and tag the runner headed to second.
If “Judging the Royals” had existed then, it would’ve been a much different web site.
This morning Ned Yost was talking about taking care of “mundane” matters like cutting bases correctly (making the turn before you hit the base and then hitting the inside corner) and getting behind a throw (an outfielder setting up a couple steps behind where the ball’s coming down and moving forward through the throw). This should be encouraging to Royals fans.
The fact that they’re paying attention to this kind of detail means a great deal. Doing this stuff right tranlates into wins.
So bottom line: I’ll crticize the players and the team, but it probably won’t be over the same issues as other critics…AND this is a better team.
OK, I kinda feel like we’re all on our second lap here. We’ve aired our differences more than once and I don’t think we’re going to agree. I’d say that I need to be open to what metrics can teach me and others might want to consider what ballplayers can teach them.
In any case, Jim Fetterolf deserves a giant thank you for trying to bridge the gap between the two schools of thought and being polite and charming while doing so.
Jim, come down to the first base dugout on any night he’s not pitching and I really will try to get you that Bruce Chen introduction. I owe you one.
Lee Judge
1 year, 3 months agoTim: Thank you very much…and you’re right, we should be able to air our difference in a polite way. When that doesn’t happen, I’m as much to blame as anyone.
Jim Fetterolf
1 year, 3 months agoLee and all, on the subject of criticism, another blog hyper-critical of Mr. Glass, GM Dayton Moore, Chris Getz, Jeff Francoeur, Luke Hochevar, and Master Chen isn’t needed, that niche is saturated in this market. The niche that was available and is filled by Judging the Royals was one that looks at the game not as a fan, not as a statistician, not as a hater hiding behind a screen name, not even as PR for the front office, but as a ballplayer and coach or manager, giving a perspective that is new to many fans and to try to answer the question every fan asks at one time or another, “You dummy, why the hell did you do that?”
I admit I’ve wondered about trying to score a guy who runs like me from second on anything less than a triple sometimes and this site gave an answer, as well as showed how the after affects of that decision were handled. That information isn’t important to everyone, just as maybe insight into Alex’ off-season training and the changes he’s working on are a yawner to some. I’m interested in that stuff and that is why I’m here. I’m interested in other aspects of the game and sometimes post links to what I think to be other interesting sites and articles. Is this a great country or what? And that’s a 30. Have a great week everyone.
Larry Tindle
1 year, 3 months agoJim, I couldn’t have said it better. Thank you.
And thank you Lee.
Chuck Smith
1 year, 3 months agoHey Lee, ever think of making a 20ish page compulation that is printable / buyable about the basics about what you’ve been telling us? Something light weight that we could carry to a ballpark? Maybe a position to a page. Example would be: When the the ball is a sure single what route does the OF take to limit the damage? (maybe with a small diagram). I love the website but trying to take that info with me to ball game is tough. (Just AAA here in SLC, but i still try to watch for the things you’ve talked about). Gotta think a bunch of Lee Judge disciples running around with a small compendium would be kinda interesting. (I think something like “Judge for yourself” would be a nice working title.) This thought occured to me when i realized how big a task it’ll be to find some of the articles i’ve read on here on the off chance my work sends me to Phoniex in the next month or so.
Dave Parre
1 year, 3 months agoWell said Jim. Well said indeed. Being a Royal fan since their inception in ‘69 and now living in the Seattle area, I look forward to Lee (and Jim’s as well) insights, perspectives and obvious love for the game and our Royals. I appreciate the time and hard work that goes into making this blog a very interesting and entertaining site as well a refreshing and enjoyable part of my week. Thank you Lee.
Jim, again well said. You are a true diplomat that addressed posts with a far, far better response than I certainly could have(or would). Thank you for your diplomacy, from keeping me from going off like Milton Bradley on his worst day and saving me from being barred from the site forever. (I’m a cowboy who used to ride bulls, what can I say?) Be nice.
Phil King
1 year, 3 months ago“Chris’ RISP, per br, last year was .321/.352/.358 in 95 PA and his slash with runner on third and two outs was .364/.391/.364. Runner on 3rd, less than two outs .364/.357/.364. Baseball Reference seems to agree with Lee’s anecdotal evidence.”
You pointed out your own flaw in the same post.
“Career slashes don’t take the field for the game and Getzie, runner on 3rd, less than two outs last year delivered 7 RBIs in 15 PA”
First of all you’re beating the drum of a very tiny sample size. Second of all that’s an average of .47 RBIs per PA, compared to the Royals, as a team, having an average of .64 RBIs per PA last season.
Lee: I’m curious to see the raw data for the Quality Plate Appearances average. I’m pretty okay with that, except for the “hard hit outs”, but I could live with that. Besides I’m guessing the two starters Getz beat out are Owl CDs and Pena.
“The second category of Seitzer keeps, Situational Batting Average, includes moving a runner over from second with 0 outs, driving in a runner from third with less than 2 outs (which is broken into two categories; infield in and infield back), sacrifice bunts (broken into three categories; 1st base only, 2nd base only, 1st and 2nd) and hit and runs.”
I have a huge problem with this. First of all, based on what I’ve read sac bunts are actually harmful. Second this sounds like more SSS. Based on my calculations the highest possible number of PAs for SBA is 122. Third he is going to benefit from SBA since he hits the ball on the ground more than any other Royal and only shortstop Jesus bunts more.
Larry Tindle
1 year, 3 months agoAnd yet it continues. Get a clue Phil, you are not going to change Lee’s mind on this and he is not going to change yours. This if evident from following this thread. Save the wear and tear on your fingers.
Sean Fischbach
1 year, 3 months agoLee, congrats on the award.
Love the stuff you put up and look forward to it each Monday (and after every game when the season starts).
Ignore the haters. They can’t be reasoned with. They sky will never be blue to them no matter how often they look out the window!
John Schultz
1 year, 3 months agoI really loved your last post Jim and couldn’t agree more. Also congrats Lee for the award. You and the site deserve every accolade you receive. My baseball education continues with each visit. The comments section also provides an interesting learning experience in human motivation. Fans motivated to “really” learn the game easily find that here, while the motives of the others are just as obvious with nearly every post. Thanks for all you do and please stay the course.
Max Rieper
1 year, 3 months agoThis notion that players need to “know their roles” is a ridiculous trend in baseball. Athletes should do whatever it takes to help their team win and should be ready at a moment’s notice to be called on by skipper to contribute. These are not pampered babies, these are professional athletes being paid millions of dollars to win ball games and they should care less about their role and more about what they can do to win ball games whenever called upon.
If a reliever or a #3 hitter gets offended that he’s being asked to do something he’s not comfortable well tough beans.
Also, if any “stat guy” is recommending a move based on a ridiculously small sample size like “hitter v. pitcher matchup”, they’re not really a “stat guy.”
Lee Judge
1 year, 3 months agoAny chance of summing this up and we all get on with our lives? (I’ve gotta draw some cartoons today.) Here’s what I’ve got so far:
1.Sounds like I screwed up a lineup when writing a story from memory, my bad. In light of the fact that I’m often writing at 1 AM after a couple cold ones and have to write at least 162 columns while exhausted, I’m amazed I haven’t made worse mistakes (and fairly sure I have, we just haven’t discovered them yet). If that means everything I’ve ever written is called into question, so be it, but stop reading newspapers because they also run corrections.
2.Some people don’t like the idea that there’s a human element involved in decision-making. Seems logical to me, but if you don’t agree, that’s your right.
3.You can cherry-pick stats to support just about any position you want to take. Want to prove Chris Getz is a horrible situational hitter? There’s a stat for that. Want to prove he’s good? There’s a stat for that, too.
And once again, Jim hits the nail on the head: I wanted to do this web site because I’d hang out with ball players and they’d tell me things about the game that I’d never heard before. Stuff that helped me understand what was happening and made the game more enjoyable.
I wanted to share that with other fans. (And Chuck? That book you want to read is in the works: what to watch for position-by-position when you’re at a ballgame.) I never dreamed that sharing that information would upset so many people.
I do think this site fills a niche: despite the millions of words written about baseball, players will tell me I’m the first to ask them where their feet go when taking a throw from the cather, or how to make a tag correctly or where the third-base coach has to be positioned when sending the runner home.
Doug Sisson would just laugh and ask, “What took so long?” The truth is the beat writers have so much to cover they can’t linger on the correct way to break up a double play. I can.
Larry and Sean are right, I’m never going to change some people’s minds about the worth of what I’m doing, but as long as there are people who want to know what the players think, I’ll keep asking them.
Now I’ve gotta go draw those cartoons.
Loose Seal
1 year, 3 months agoLee - I don’t think you need to change stat guys’ minds. They know that there is a human element to baseball.
The thing is, for stats, there is a ton of valuable & reliable information, and many people know these stats down to the last detail. So, if you’re going to discuss advanced stats here, be forewarned that it’s going to start a debate.
However, regarding the human elements to the game, there are only a handful of writers with both the access and the platform to provide real insider information — you can be one of those people. Get that content and give it to us -tell me how Billy feels about his DH role, tell me what Soria does before games, tell me how Broxton gets along with Dave Eiland. Show me the things that numbers can’t quantify.
Jim Fetterolf
1 year, 3 months ago“the Royals, as a team, having an average of .64 RBIs per PA last season.”
All due respect, Phil, but that seems a bit on the high side. Billy’s percentage was 65 in that situation.
“First of all you’re beating the drum of a very tiny sample size.”
For statisticians, sample size can be allowed to underweight data, but for players and coaches they lack the luxury of waiting for four years to make a judgement. If Getz’ sample size is too small to think that he is adequate in the situations we speak of, then it would also be too small to damn him as inadequate. I think that the numbers we have available, 102 PAs yielding a couple of slash lines and driven-in percentages will have to do because we have nothing better to go on. We can hope that Johnny Giavotella is better, which will help the team. That is just the curse of living in the real world instead of on a spread sheet.
On sacs, I’m not the biggest fan of the idea but recognize a couple of points: that there are situations where a runner needs to be advanced and not all hitters have the ability to go the opposite way like Billy can, and that in the case of Escobar and Getz, both are fast and good bunters so have a chance on any given bunt to beat it out or force an error, which adds some value to the sac. Given that, Billy doing a sac attempt is a low percentage move, Escobar and Getz doing it is higher percentage.
“If a reliever or a #3 hitter gets offended that he’s being asked to do something he’s not comfortable well tough beans.”
Max, Bob Dutton touched on that with a real world example from last year, which I linked above. A quick glance at baseball reference’s first/second half splits from last season within the context of what the player himself said, reveals that in some cases moving the furniture can have a quantifiable effect on performance. The player in question did “man up” and adjust and went on to put a serious hurt on the ball and in the process showed maturity and leadership and, apparently, won quite a bit of respect from his peers, but it wasn’t instantaneous and it wasn’t easy.
Baseball is different from the real world to the extent that if you don’t mow my yard correctly, I can get another guy the next day at the same price. Some baseball players are a little harder to replace, so get cut a little extra slack. Baseball is also different to the extent that almost all ball players are out there every day performing very near to their absolute best possible capabilities. If I had a flat tire or got a speeding ticket and showed up for work in a bad mood with my concentration wandering and only could give 80% of my normal production, it’s not a big deal unless I’m a surgeon or trauma nurse. For a ballplayer that drop can make a win into a loss and waste the efforts of the rest of the team.
Jim Fetterolf
1 year, 3 months agoSecond part of comment:
Since I did mention surgeons, of whom I know several very good ones, they are even more OCD than professional athletes, because more than just a game rides on them being at an absolute performance peak. Special Forces military folks are the same way. That kind of dedication is hard for a cubicle cowboy or carpenter to relate to but exists. I think I would grant that a SEAL Colonel or a Chief Surgeon would likely have a much better idea of how to handle these people than I would.
Thanks for the comments.
Lee Judge
1 year, 3 months agoOK, cartoons are done and I’ve got a moment. I would agree with “Loose Seal” (really?) that the strength of this site isn’t advanced metrics. Others do a much, much better job on that front. (Like Jim…maybe we should add a “Fetterolfing the Royals” feature. )
And I would also agree the strength of this site is inside access.
The problem arises when those two inevitably cross paths. For instance: both Jason Kendall and Chris Getz (two subjects that make everybody crazy) are held in high regard in the clubhouse for playing the game the right way. That’s inside access.
Explain why their teammates feel that way on the web site and someone wants to start an argument about advanced metrics.
The post that started all this was based on a story told to me off the record. It demonstrated why a manager didn’t do something that might seem logical. That’s inside access.
And it started an argument about advanced metrics.
I’ve got no interest in debating whether a bunt is worth one or two points in Ron Polk’s system or whether WAR is an accurate way to value players or the faults of UZR.
On the other hand, I’m extremely interested in the footwork that starts a defensive play, but watch Rick Ankiel start in shallow center and smoothly make a running over the shoulder catch in the gap because he took a good drop step and ran a great route and someone will start an argument about range factor. (Which was the first argument I had here on the site.)
I’ve said from the very beginning that this isn’t the only way to look at baseball, there are other legitimate points of view. I was trying to fill a gap that I saw in reporting on the sport: the details of how the game is actually played as described by the people who play it.
I’ll contine to do that…and I won’t bring up advanced metrics if you won’t.
Sean Fite
1 year, 3 months agoLee, CONGRATS on the award; it’s well-deserved. Keep doing exactly what you’re doing as there are many of us here who have continued to follow this blog even though we haven’t had a game to watch since last October.
This site is great, your insight is great, the human element is great, and if a stat gets utilized along the way, then the picture only deepens. No one thing tells the story, but the inclusion of all is what MLB managers are dealing with on a daily basis.
Thanks, Jim, for providing sane responses to some of the foolishness that has crept into this thread.
Lee Judge
1 year, 3 months agoSean: Thanks a lot. I found out today that contest judges really liked the hit by pitch video. So if I want to win a Pulitzer, I guess I just need to take one in the head.
Brian Courington
1 year, 3 months agoI know you try to stay away from the GM side of things but I was wondering what was your take on the Perez signing today? Even if he is a total bust (seriously doubt that) I think it is a great move and tremendous bargain. Here’s hoping they can get some more young guys to sign deals like that!
Lee Judge
1 year, 3 months agoBrian: You’re right, I shy away from many GM issues because I don’t think I have any special knowledge in that area. There’s just too much inside information that I don’t have access to. As a fan, though, I’m happy to see it.
In the past we’ve been a team that developed talent for others. I wondered whether we’d be able to hang on to the young players everyone is so excited about, so the Perez deal seems like a good sign.
Phil King
1 year, 3 months ago“All due respect, Phil, but that seems a bit on the high side. Billy’s percentage was 65 in that situation.”
Oops, I forgot to post that the Royals had 235 RBIs in 369 PAs. http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/split.cgi?t=b&team=KCR&year=2011#bases
“If Getz’ sample size is too small to think that he is adequate in the situations we speak of, then it would also be too small to damn him as inadequate.”
Actually my whole point was that there’s no evidence that Getz does well with a runner on 3rd and less than 2 outs. With his SSS of only 51 PAs in that situation, the numbers show that, so far, he isn’t good at all in that situation. In my opinion SSS > anecdotal evidence, but not by a whole lot.
Lee: “Any chance of summing this up and we all get on with our lives?”
If you want to “get on with our lives”, be my guest. No one is forcing you to discuss baseball with me or anyone else, but don’t imply I need to get on with my life.
“There are certainly people that don’t like what I do, and that’s my cross to bear.”
…
“I never dreamed that sharing that information would upset so many people.
I do think this site fills a niche: despite the millions of words written about baseball, players will tell me I’m the first to ask them where their feet go when taking a throw from the cather, or how to make a tag correctly or where the third-base coach has to be positioned when sending the runner home.”
I don’t think that’s why some people have a problem. The problem comes from your attempts to bury the importance of advance statistics in baseball and the use of the Ron Polk system. Seriously, that thing is awful.
FYI: The site is broken.
Lee Judge
1 year, 3 months agoPhil: You’re right about the “let’s get on with our lives” comment. I shouldn’t have put it that way, especially since it’s not precisely what I meant. What I meant was, can we move on? Everybody said what they had to say, usually more than once.
“How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?” arguments get old quickly, at least for me. I think some people enjoy those to an absurd degree. I’m not one of them and I suspect a lot of readers feel the same way.
So I agree with you on that point. Poor choice of words on my part.
I disagree with you when you say I’m trying to bury the importance of advanced statistics. I’ve never gone on anybody’s else’s web site and made disparaging comments. Over and over again I’ve said numbers are revealing, but I also say they don’t tell you everything…and that’s where the trouble starts.
The weakness of many in the metric community is their lack of actual playing experience. From many comments posted here it’s clear the person making the comment never played the game at a high level (and by that I mean college and beyond). If I’m wrong in your case, let me know.
What seems to upset so many people is the players themselves adding information that changes the perspective on advanced metrics. (I don’t think it “buries” their importance, but it does mean there are other things to consider.)
The original post is a perfect example. That there is a human element to decision making seems pretty logical. That managers have to take into account things besides numbers seems obvious, but that still upset a lot of people. Add evidence from Tim Wakefield and people get even more upset. If Tim Wakefield can’t teach you anything about a pitcher’s mindset, I don’t know what to say. (Except congratulations on your self-confidence.)
I’ve said that you need both: numbers provide one perspective, players provide another. Hearing from the people who actually play the game doesn’t bury the importance of numbers, it should supply information that puts those numbers into perspective.
P.S. If Ron Polk’s system is so awful, why has it survived for decades and been used by so many high school and college coaches? If the people who play and coach the game find it useful, isn’t there something to be learned there?
If you think they use it because they’re just not as smart as you, we have a different perspective. I’ve spent 20 years around these people and I’ve always felt they had something to teach me. It’s why this web site exists.
Brian Robinson
1 year, 3 months agoBrian Robinson
1 year, 3 months agoNice! Leave it to me to mess things up on the site.
Lee Judge
1 year, 3 months agoBrian: I’ve got no clue how you managed that, but I think I get the idea. I think the Perez contract is a good sign, also. If they do a deal with Hosmer, Moustakas and Gordon (which they’ve talked about), The Royals are really turning a corner.
Two years ago Dayton Moore got ripped by some people for saying “trust the process.” Right now the process looks pretty good.
Phil King
1 year, 3 months ago“I disagree with you when you say I’m trying to bury the importance of advanced statistics. I’ve never gone on anybody’s else’s web site and made disparaging comments.”
You do enough disparaging comments here. Hilariously enough, the first time I’ve heard about this blog was from Rany Jazayerli’s blog which he linked an article where you said, “Tell a sabermetrics guy that Getz is a better all-round ballplayer than Billy Butler and he’ll have an asthma attack and ask his mom to bring him a fresh box of Pop Tarts.” FYI- I don’t have asthma, I don’t live with my mother, and I don’t eat Pop Tarts on a regular basis. And I also have a girlfriend, just in case you were going to go there.
“The weakness of many in the metric community is their lack of actual playing experience.”
Oh man that joker Billy Beane never played a day of pro ball in his life. Granted, you said “many” and not “all”, but still I’ve never liked that argument in any form. e.g. You can’t judge a movie, unless you’re a film-maker. You can’t judge art, unless you’re an artist. You can’t judge music, unless you’re a musician. You can’t judge baseball, unless you’re a player. Saying that my opinion isn’t as valid, only because I’ve never played baseball at a high level is a faulty premise.
“If you think they use it because they’re just not as smart as you, we have a different perspective.”
I don’t believe they’re not as smart as me. Instead, I think it’s hard to give up something you believed in for so long. I didn’t embrace sabermetrics for a while. I thought it was people using obscure stats to push their bias beliefs on me. It took a friend, a blog, and a book to get me where I am today.
“If Ron Polk’s system is so awful, why has it survived for decades and been used by so many high school and college coaches?”
Just because it’s popular, doesn’t mean it’s right. Instead of asking “why has it survived” you should have asked, “Why do I think it’s so awful?” But that’s an answer for another time, right now I need to go to bed.
Ed Johnson
1 year, 3 months agoThe horse is dead, buried, and decomposed Phil. Please go elsewhere for info if unhappy instead of forcing others who enjoy the site for what it is to filter thru your nonsense. If Lee seems a bit defensive, I can’t blame him at this point. It is a fact that some players have a tough time seeing the ball out of certain pitchers hand. It does not take a huge sample size to guage how comfortable that player looks at plate against that pitcher. Body language and quality swings can tell a story. Metrics doesn’t show confidence. Are you going to argue that? Metrics does not measure Francoeur’s (had to check spelling on that one twice!!) ability to help a young player relax before a big at bat with a smart ass comment. That is also a part of the game.
Point is…..the game is not played in a vacuume.
Lee Judge
1 year, 3 months agoPhil: It’s true I’ve joked about people in the metric community. I’ve also joked about the players (I said Jason Kendall looked like the head of security at a meth lab, which made Chris Getz burst out laughing when he read it). And I’ve also joked about myself extensively. But the people in the metric community are the only ones that had an asthma attack. (Hey, another joke!)
Once I saw how badly those in the metric community reacted to that kind of thing, I quit doing it.
I said “many” in the metric community lacked playing experience, for the very reason you point out. Brian Bannister is another example of a guy who played at the highest levels and still made extensive use of metrics. Team use metrics, they also realize there’s more to baseball than numbers.
I doubt Billy Beane or Brian would dispute that there’s a human element to decision-making. If you play ball for any length of time, you’ll see too many examples to dispute the notion.
And to be precise, I never said you can’t judge baseball if you haven’t played at a high level, I said those who have, provide another point of view.
People judge music, movies and art all the time, that’s their right. But the people who produce those things also have an interesting perspective and some expertise and experience that the people who don’t produce those things can never have. Having an opinion about a movie is very different than saying you know more about movie-making than Martin Scorsese.
That’s the point of this site: to provide that perspective. If you find it interesting and helpful great. If not, there are plenty of other sites that are more in line with your point of view.
I hope you got a good night’s sleep, this arguing stuff is exhausting.
Lee Judge
1 year, 3 months agoEd: You got “Francoeur” right and screwed up “vacuum.” I know the feeling—I once did a cartoon which had me checking “Farrakhan” over and over and I screwed up “Louis.”
But to your point: when I said ‘can we all get on with our lives,’ that what I meant. Endless arguments going in circles are boring and serve little purpose. Once everybody’s had their say (and some have had it more than once), why not move on?
There are plenty of people who see things Phil’s way. That’s fine. There are plenty of web sites that provide that point of view. That’s fine, too.
This web site does something different, which is why I was interested in doing it in the first place. It’s here to provide the player’s point of view. Insisting that this web site mirror the conclusions of other sites seems counterproductive.
I’ve got this crazy notion that players know more than all of us about how the game is actually played on the field.
If you want to know what they have to say, I’ll do my best to provide that. If you don’t want to know that they have to say, you’re looking at the wrong web site.
But I’m hoping even people who hate the Polk system and think I’ve got my head up my posterior (and the latter includes some people I’m related to) would like to know what Alex Gordon has to say about throwing out a runner.
Ignore the parts that bug you and enjoy the parts that don’t.
Ed Johnson
1 year, 3 months agoI very much enjoy this site and have referred many to it. It hasn’t changed my perceptions of the game after a life time as a fan but it has enhanced my enjoyment. I continually find morsels of info to share with my teenage ballplaying son.
Lee Judge
1 year, 3 months agoEd: Thanks very much. Sounds like we’ve accomplished what we set out to do in your case.
Ole Boozer
1 year, 3 months agoSpring Training started, write more.
Lee Judge
1 year, 3 months agoOle? Hey, once this roller coaster starts I can’t get off until October. I’ll post something new each weekend and then start writing every day from Surprise starting on the 19th of March.
Lee Judge
1 year, 3 months agoBy the way, I should make everybody mad more often; we set a record for comments this week.
Larry Tindle
1 year, 3 months agoThere you go using words like everybody.hahaha. I can say I know at least one you didn’t make mad. There you have one more comment to add to the record.
Lee Judge
1 year, 3 months agoLarry: You’re right “everybody” was inaccurate. Maybe I’ll get accused of fabricating records.
Chris Murphy
1 year, 3 months agoFrom Rany Jazayerli: “According to this very thorough article at BP, the worst catcher at game-calling the last 4 years is… Jason Kendall.”
http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=16096
Of course, that’s just the opinion of the “metrics community”.
Lee Judge
1 year, 3 months agoChris: The link you provided didn’t take me to the article you’re referring to. I’m not a subscriber to Baseball Prospectus and that may be the problem.
Scott Boden
1 year, 3 months agoIt works but you have to cut off the Kansas City star part of the link.
Scott Boden
1 year, 3 months agoChris, do you think working with a bad pitching staff and injuries also had a part in his number. Here is a bit from the article, ‘Caveats Some caveats apply to the above numbers.
Since the analysis is based on just four years, it’s possible that some catchers had a limited set of comps.’
I guess the problem I’m having with the comments for this article is it seems some of the Metric community are trying to stuff metrics down those who read Lee’s post throats. Metrics is one of several ways to evaluate a player. It is not the bible and while I don’t mind hearing a metric arguement it gets real old seeing it over and over. If I want the metric story, I’m perfectly capable of going to a metric site and reading it. I don’t come to THIS site for metrics, so please those of you that have a problem get over it and don’t come here. Again, if you want to give an opinion great just don’t give it over and over and over and over again. It really gets old. Sorry, I’m not as political as Jim…..
Scott Boden
1 year, 3 months agoChris,
My metric part wasn’t a shot a you as you gave me an option to read a metric option and your post wasn’t a repeat of the ‘metric against this website’ arguement.
Scott Boden
1 year, 3 months agoNow I can make an arguement about not having an edit feature……
Chris Murphy
1 year, 3 months agoLee, The link works fine. You might try it again.
Scott, I don’t know you, but you seem awfully offended. Because I posted link to more information? This is my first post to this particular comment page. I didn’t write the article — I saw it on Rany Jazayerli’s Twitter account and decided to share it.
I added it to this comment thread because the subject matter of the article fit into the argument that has been going on between Sabermatricians and measurable statistics versus those people who believe in the “immeasurables” (heart, guts, bunting, “doing things the right way”, clubhouse chemistry, etc.).
If you have a problem with the article or the data, take it up with Baseball Prospectus.
Lee Judge
1 year, 3 months agoGuys: Wow, I get a chance to play peacemaker…an unusual role. First: Chris, thanks for the link, I’d like to read the article. My position is evolving and I’m currently at “the numbers tell you something, they don’t tell you everything” stage.
If I say Jason Kendall is a good defensive catcher, I think it’s totally fair to refute that with metrics. This thread got pretty negative at times and I think the tone of the comments and my responses had something to do with it. (I’m trying to learn from Jim Fetterolf.)
We ought to be able to disagree in a polite way. But as Scott points out, there are plenty of sites devoted to metrics, this one is based on the players point of view. That’s what most readers want from this site. But some people seem to want this site to reflect their point of view, not the players.
I think Scott is reacting to the 100 comments that came before yours, more than yours. I don’t think you did anything wrong, but at this point, I think people are just a little worn out with the subject.
Chris Murphy
1 year, 3 months agoI just don’t understand why advanced stats and player opinions can’t work together. Players and coaches can think that Jason Kendall is great and underappreciated, and stats can show that he is wildly overrated. So what’s wrong with offering up both points of view?
NO ONE thinks that advanced statistics can tell the complete picture. The stats are just so you can make a more informed decision based on lots of data. (Example: A player can have a .400 batting average, but that doesn’t mean they will always get a base hit every 4 out of 10 plate appearances. It just means the AVERAGES show they are likely to do so)
Conversely, people are often taken by the personality, athletic speed, or “toughness” of ballplayers and it blinds them to their actual value to the team.
I can’t see any reason why “Judging the Royals” can’t be a little of both.
Brian Robinson
1 year, 3 months agoI’m not on one side or the other but do believe both sides have been sufficiently protracted. As most ardent fans would agree both statistics and experience come together for a mangement team. Any smart manager will look at numbers but he’s also got to be the person who knows his players the best. He has to have that feel to know, even when the numbers suggest otherwise, to go in a different direction. Sometimes you just have to go with your gut and knowledge of the game. Stats be damned!
Lee Judge
1 year, 3 months agoChris: I don’t think there’s any problem with offering both point of view and that’s already happening. But right now there are many web sites that offer the metrics point of view and (as far as I know) one that has someone in the clubhouse, talking to the Royals players.
Demanding that the one player-point-of-view web site offer more metrics (we seem to have plenty in the comments) without demanding that the dozens of metric-oriented sites offer more from the players seems a bit unbalanced.
Quite a few readers solve the problem by looking at more than one site.
Lee Judge
1 year, 3 months agoBrian: I think reasonable people would agree that you need both. The numbers are helpful, playing experience puts them in perspective.
Lee Judge
1 year, 3 months agoActually, I probably should of used the word “consistently” when talking about web sites that had someone in the clubhouse talking to players.
I’ve seen people from other sites out at the park on occassion and maybe someone is there all the time and I just don’t know about it.
The point remains: there are a lot of places to read about metrics, people come here for something else.
Scott Boden
1 year, 3 months agoChris,
You missed the second post where I said it wasn’t directed at you. I could get as offended as you but it doesn’t need to on this website.
Sorry Lee. I just get tired of some people constantly coming on here and attacking this site when they don’t even have to read it. If I didn’t like what you wrote, I would go somewhere else. I don’t mind reading their view. It is when they keep going at it that it becomes irritating.
Scott Boden
1 year, 3 months agoChris,
Hopefully you will read this one which you didn’t above, but I completely agree with what you said and completely agreed with how you posted it. As Lee and I said, none of that was pointed at you.
Lee Judge
1 year, 3 months agoScott: Thanks, I get where you’re coming from. This week has been an interesting one, not only for what the metrics fans had to say, but how other people responded.
I think you’re right, people come here for something other than metrics and I’ve got to figure out how to respond to critics from the metric community without letting the web site get off track.
As always, the point of the site is to hear what players and coaches have to say. The trick is presenting what they have to say without getting drawn into a metrics debate.
Ty Lewis
1 year, 3 months agoI watched with great interest as the above debate unfolded. I have come to two conclusions as a result. 1. Lee Judge = Class Act 2. Judging the Royals website = Excellent
Thanks!
Lee Judge
1 year, 3 months agoTy: Thanks, I appreciate that.