# MLB Spring Training 2009 **URL:** \ **Category:** The Game Room\ **Created:** [February 11, 2009, 6:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mlb-spring-training-2009/485405 "2009-02-11T18:51:01Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![HoboStew](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/f17d59/32.png) [@HoboStew](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HoboStew)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2009, 10:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mlb-spring-training-2009/485405/101 "2009-03-05T22:10:06Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > **1. A-Rod May Be Out Ten Weeks, Maybe More.** I was very confused by the timing of this. Did he JUST hurt his hip? If not, why wait until now to address it? > [@](#): > > **2. Manny signs With Dodgers** Smart move for LA. I don’t think they overpaid, I think he is a big draw (esp in the latin community which I understand is a big win in LA) and a huge bat for them. I’d say they are the favorites in the west now. > [@](#): > > 1. And I don’t know if it was officially noted in this thread yet, but \*\*Orlando Cabrera’s an A now. \*\* His contract - 1 year, $4 million - seems ludicrously cheap. For the A’s this is a pretty significant upgrade; Cabrera is a very, very good fielding shortstop and he can’t hit any worse than Bobby Crosby was hitting. Oakland’s positioned to maybe pull off an upset division title; they’ve added some awfully good players almost without anyone noticing. > > Cabrera’s signing means Crosby’s either done in Oakland or will have to accept very limited playing time. Crosby hasn’t reacted well in the past to talk of playing other positions or being a backup, but a .237 hitting 4th-year player doesn’t have a lot of bargaining power. He’s two, three years away from career oblivion if he doesn’t step it up with another team. I mentioned this in my first post in the thread actually. I love the signing. Crosby is the new Ben Grieve, and I think cabrera is underrated. I definitely think the A’s have been one of the more improved teams this offseason. And elvis, I insinuated nothing. I openly said you made claims without backing them up. You are imagining this whole business about lying. If thats what you want to believe, well I can’t stop you other than pointing out the facts which I have already done. ---
**Author:** ![Munch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/munch/32/5281_2.png) [@Munch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Munch)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2009, 10:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mlb-spring-training-2009/485405/102 "2009-03-05T22:49:49Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > The problem with trying to show, _by statistics_, how well Varitek handles the Boston staff. You’re assuming away the fact that invalidates a comparative approach. > > Puhleeze. You already know Wakefield’s a freak, both stylistically and statistically, that a catcher doesn’t “handle” a knuckler anyway, and you can’t extrapolate shit from Wake’s performances. Do you agree or not? If not, why not? I absolutely agree. I would hope we would agree that the way a catcher “handles” a pitcher deals, in large part, to pitch selection (among a great many other things). Pitch selection is pretty much factored out of the picture with a knuckleballer. Thus, I find it valid to take Wakefield out of the equation on both sides, since neither Varitek or any other catcher wouldn’t be “handling” him. Correct? > [@](#): > > None that would satisfy you, since by definition you’ll only believe a statistical analysis that in his case cannot be credibly made. PLEASE tell me where I indicated this. I’ve asked you this in other threads, and I suspect I’ll get the same response - silence. > [@](#): > > I have, in passing. Are you interested in discussing intangibles or even unquantifiables in good faith? If not, then you’re no fan of the full game and I have no interest in discussing it with you. Your preconceived notions aside, where would you make this assumption? Take the chip off your shoulder, Elvis - you yourself said you’re open to discussing other viewpoints, why are you so eager to automatically dismiss anything other than your own posts? ---
**Author:** ![fluiddruid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/c2a13f/32.png) [@fluiddruid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fluiddruid)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2009, 12:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mlb-spring-training-2009/485405/103 "2009-03-06T00:08:08Z")
Folks, just a reminder that this is **The Game Room** , not the Pit. Please keep your tempers in check, and if you want to have a row, please do it elsewhere. Thanks - Mgmt. ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2009, 2:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mlb-spring-training-2009/485405/104 "2009-03-06T02:36:34Z")
> [@mhendo](#): > > I already did. Four playoff appearances in six years, including two division titles and two hundred-win seasons, all with a payroll far below league average. Seriously, you’re just embarrassing yourself here; it’s seems clear that you don’t even know what the “Beane approach” actually is. Next time someone asks if we have anyone famous on the Dope, i’m going to suggest Joe Morgan, and point them at your baseball commentary for evidence. Although you probably think that’s a compliment.And again with the misrepresentations and the insults. > > I have never, ever played in a baseball fantasy league.\* My love of baseball is precisely that: a love of baseball. I watch it on TV, and when time and money permit i watch it at the ground. I read books about it, and not just books by stat geeks. I love the baseball writing of Roger Angell, of George Will, of Stephen Jay Gould, and a host of others. I’m much more excited by a bases-clearing triple or a well-executed double-play or a vicious curve-ball than i am by OBP or WHIP. > > For me, stats are interesting and fun and a way to enhance my understanding and love of the game, not a replacement for it, as you so absurdly keep asserting. I’m not sure if Bill James cut you off in traffic one time or something, but i just don’t understand why you have to act like such a complete asshole in these baseball threads when people disagree with you, nor why you have to make snide remarks about stat people whenever you can slip them into the conversation. > > Anyway, i’ve said my piece. I just see no point interacting with you anymore in these discussions. > > - Full disclosure: i’ve been invited to join one this season, and have accepted, so i’ll have my first experience of fantasy baseball very soon. As much as you know baseball ,you will be surprised to see how much you can learn in a league. You will not only be aware of players that you never gave a second thought to, but you will know their batting averages and slugging percentages. Then you will comb through the players nobody owns trying to find a replacement for an injured player. You will know every reliever . It helps if you are in a big league,then you will get to the bottom of the barrel . ---
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2009, 3:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mlb-spring-training-2009/485405/105 "2009-03-06T03:16:55Z")
> [@gonzomax](#): > > As much as you know baseball ,you will be surprised to see how much you can learn in a league. You will not only be aware of players that you never gave a second thought to, but you will know their batting averages and slugging percentages. Then you will comb through the players nobody owns trying to find a replacement for an injured player. You will know every reliever . It helps if you are in a big league,then you will get to the bottom of the barrel . I don’t doubt that at all. I’m actually looking forward to having a go at a fantasy league, even though i’ll probably end up near the bottom. I have even called my team The Mendozas. I was simply making the point, for the benefit of some people who apparently don’t understand it, that plenty of folks are interested in baseball stats because it actually makes following the game baseball more interesting to us, not just as a tool for running a fantasy league. ---
**Author:** ![FoieGrasIsEvil](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foiegrasisevil/32/16638_2.png) [@FoieGrasIsEvil](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FoieGrasIsEvil)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2009, 4:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mlb-spring-training-2009/485405/106 "2009-03-06T04:11:27Z")
The Mods may as well shut down this thread. The Reds have the Series locked up already, and the Bengals are going to win the Superbowl. Since that’s a foregone conclusion, I suppose we should talk about the weather in our respective towns. It’s pretty warm in Cincy, a balmy 61 degrees today. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2009, 5:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mlb-spring-training-2009/485405/107 "2009-03-06T17:05:06Z")
> [@Munch](#): > > Thus, I find it valid to take Wakefield out of the equation on both sides, since neither Varitek or any other catcher wouldn’t be “handling” him. Correct? Sure, as I’ve been trying patiently to explain. But you seem to have a problem with saying that it makes a credible statistical analysis of Varitek’s handling of pitchers, in the context you and others have been so belligerently challenging, simply impossible. Why is that? > [@](#): > > PLEASE tell me where I indicated this. It’s embedded in every single post you’ve made on the subject here. > [@](#): > > why are you so eager to automatically dismiss anything other than your own posts? It isn’t automatic, and not “anything” - when I’ve dismissed what you’ve said it’s because it lacks or even flouts substance, and I’ve explained why too. The problem is not mine, champ. **HoboStew** , perhaps you could explain what you \*did \*mean to imply, then? :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![Munch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/munch/32/5281_2.png) [@Munch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Munch)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2009, 5:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mlb-spring-training-2009/485405/108 "2009-03-06T17:50:17Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > Sure, as I’ve been trying patiently to explain. But you seem to have a problem with saying that it makes a credible statistical analysis of Varitek’s handling of pitchers, in the context you and others have been so belligerently challenging, simply impossible. Honestly, I’m not sure what you’re saying here. I don’t feel you’ve “been trying to patiently explain” anything - so I’ll ask you to do it again. You seem to be disagreeing on a point we’re agreeing on - which just indicates a breakdown in understanding. > [@](#): > > It’s embedded in every single post you’ve made on the subject here. This is just simply a prejudiced assertion. > [@](#): > > The problem is not mine, champ. Quite possibly. But it would be challenging to find a single post in a baseball thread where you agree with a single thing, or engage in anything other than misdirection and mudslinging. ---
**Author:** ![Munch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/munch/32/5281_2.png) [@Munch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Munch)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2009, 6:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mlb-spring-training-2009/485405/109 "2009-03-06T18:03:08Z")
From 1997 to 2008, the Red Sox have played 1944 regular season games. From 1997 to 2008, Jason Varitek has started 1175 regular season games. From 1997 to 2008, Tim Wakefield has started 769 regular season games. From 1997 to 2008, the Red Sox have played 461 games in which neither Tim Wakefield nor Jason Varitek have started. Why is it “simply impossible” to make a “credible statistical analysis” that compares the actions of the rotation between the 1175 games Tek started and the 461 games some other catcher started? It’s the same pitchers, in the same period, in the same ballparks with the same defense (apart from catcher). What makes that “simply impossible”? ---
**Author:** ![Munch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/munch/32/5281_2.png) [@Munch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Munch)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2009, 6:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mlb-spring-training-2009/485405/110 "2009-03-06T18:27:48Z")
Goodness, where did I get those numbers! From 1998\* to 2008, the Red Sox have played 1782 regular season games. From 1998 to 2008, Jason Varitek has started 1175 regular season games. From 1998 to 2008, Tim Wakefield has started 279 regular season games. From 1998 to 2008, the Red Sox have played 328 games in which neither Tim Wakefield nor Jason Varitek have started. \*Tek played in 1 game in '97, so that’s hardly a decent starting point. Now, in 2005, there were only 2 non-Tek, non-Wake games played - that’s impressive. There were 4 seasons where there were 12 or fewer such games - those are also legitimate reasons to discount this approach. But here’s the thing, Elvis - you never made that point. You just handwaved it all away, without making a specific argument against it, saying the actual process is irrelevant. Again - how is it irrelevant? If there was a generic team out there that had 2 catchers each playing 81 games, why wouldn’t you be able to compare the results of the pitching staffs? THAT is what my original question was. ---
**Author:** ![HoboStew](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/f17d59/32.png) [@HoboStew](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HoboStew)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2009, 7:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mlb-spring-training-2009/485405/111 "2009-03-06T19:24:34Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > **HoboStew** , perhaps you could explain what you \*did \*mean to imply, then? :dubious: [QUOTE=HoboStew] And elvis, I insinuated nothing. I openly said you made claims without backing them up. [/QUOTE] I’m not sure what the confusion is here. Can’t we just drop this? You made a claim and I said you did so without backing it up with a cite. Then you backed it up with a cite, and there was much rejoicing. ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2009, 8:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mlb-spring-training-2009/485405/112 "2009-03-06T20:20:06Z")
I think baseball statters are going overboard. There are so many things involved in winning a baseball game. Ump mistakes, dumb luck, chalkline hits ,weather and a myriad of others. To look at games won with a player in the game and reward him with points for it ,seems along stretch. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2009, 8:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mlb-spring-training-2009/485405/113 "2009-03-06T20:47:49Z")
**Munch** , please, your posts are getting more choleric and more pointless every time. You might avoid the problem if you actually followed the game on the field - you might then have noticed exactly what I’ve been trying to tell you about how Francona uses his backup catchers. But, since you apparently don’t, there’s nothing further to discuss, no matter how motivated you might be to show me wrong about Varitek’s value to his team, or at least some trivial side point. biow about this - show me one of those trivial side points you think you’ve “got me” on, in a way that you think proves it, and I’ll concede it to make you happy, okay? This thread is for discussion of _the game._ Please try to remember that in the future. ---
**Author:** ![Munch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/munch/32/5281_2.png) [@Munch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Munch)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2009, 8:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mlb-spring-training-2009/485405/114 "2009-03-06T20:56:12Z")
Yup, that’s about what I expected. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2009, 8:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mlb-spring-training-2009/485405/115 "2009-03-06T20:57:12Z")
> [@HoboStew](#): > > Then you backed it up with a cite, and there was much rejoicing. Don’t make that demand to someone contradicting you unless you’re sure of your own facts. It \*is \*tantamount to accusing the other person of making shit up. In a thread that’s supposed to be a fun talk about a fun pastime, that is highly inappropriate. We’re still waiting for your \*own \*cite from Bill James, btw. :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2009, 8:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mlb-spring-training-2009/485405/116 "2009-03-06T20:59:33Z")
> [@Munch](#): > > Yup, that’s about what I expected. Translation: **Munch** ain’t got game. ---
**Author:** ![fluiddruid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/c2a13f/32.png) [@fluiddruid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fluiddruid)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2009, 9:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mlb-spring-training-2009/485405/117 "2009-03-06T21:11:43Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > Translation: **Munch** ain’t got game. ElvisL1ves, I’ve already asked everyone in this thread to behave themselves. Do not just post to bait others; if you want to call out Munch, please do so in the Pit, not here. ---
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2009, 9:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mlb-spring-training-2009/485405/118 "2009-03-06T21:12:00Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > Handling a pitching staff, in that demanding environment, and providing leadership **don’t matter to stat geeks** , since they’re not quantifiable, just as defense at other positions, or pitching itself, or especially intangibles, doesn’t matter to them either. Sure, Bill James provides an occasional interesting insight here, but he’s kept in his place - he has to be. Fortunately, the Boston ownership knows _on-the-field_ baseball too, not just fantasy-league silliness. Bolding mine. Let me provide you with a perfect example of how Bill James, the doyen of “stat geeks,” thinks characteristics like leadership “don’t matter.” All quotes in this post are from Seth Mnookin, _Feeding the Monster: How Money, Smarts, and Nerve Took a Team to the Top_ (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2006). Mnookin was given unprecedented access to the Red Sox management and players, over an extended period, and his book is an excellent study of the reasons behind their recent success. Anyway, here’s James showing how all he cares about is the numbers: > [@](#): > > At the time of James’s hiring, some observers predicted the Red > Sox would be transformed into a team that relied on the computations > of pasty, number-crunching geeks and completely ignored the > tobacco-chewing wisdom of traditional scouts. James found this > viewpoint comical. “I believe in a universe that is too complex for > any of us to really understand,” he says. “Each of us has an organized > way of thinking about the world—a paradigm, if you will. . . . > But the problem is the real world is vastly more complicated than > the image of it that we carry around in our heads.” Baseball was > roughly divided into the analytical camp and the traditional camp, > or the sabermetricians and the scouts. “I created a good part of the > analytical paradigm,” James says, “but at the same time, the real > world is too complicated to be explained by that paradigm.” \*\*He > would never advocate ignoring characteristics like leadership or > focus, even if those qualities can’t be neatly measured. “It is one > thing to build an analytical paradigm that leaves out leadership, > hustle, focus, intensity, courage, and self-confidence,” he says. “It is > a very, very different thing to say that leadership, hustle, courage, > and self-confidence do not exist or do not play a role on real-world > baseball teams. \*\*The people who think that way, not to be rude, but > they’re children. They may be 40-year-old children, they may be 70- > year-old children, but their thinking is immature.” > > p. 165 Again, bolding mine. Which is pretty much exactly what most stat people believe. > [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > You do realize, I hope, that the Sox brought Ortiz in after his release in MN because of lobbying by _Pedro Martinez_, and then only as a backup for Jeremy Giambi at 1B. Here’s Mnookin’s discussion of Ortiz’s signing, and of James’ role in it. You’ll note that two words not appearing in this story are “Pedro” and “Martinez.” > [@](#): > > Within the Red Sox, Ortiz intrigued virtually everyone involved > in the discussions. One of the scouts loved his swing-it was, he > said, a thing of beauty. After looking over his hit location charts, > Epstein’s crew thought he was likely the type of player who would > be able to take advantage of the left field wall in Fenway. Bill James > liked the fact that, while he only hit .234 in 2001, his secondary av- > erage was almost .400.\* (“That’s my kind of player,” James says.) > Dave Jauss, a scout who was down in the Dominican Republic for > the winter, reported that in the winter-ball leagues on the island, , > Ortiz was a superstar, as big as Manny Ramirez or the Montreal > Expos’ Vladimir Guerrero. Finally, Epstein was consciously trying > to find players who could help make the Red Sox clubhouse a more > positive place to be, and Ortiz, like Millar, had a reputation for > being both outgoing and upbeat, which Epstein felt was crucial at > that moment in the team’s history. > > pp. 182-183 Mnookin then notes that one thing Epstein and the rest of the Red Sox management worried about was Ortiz’s age, especially given the tendency of some foreign players to lowball their ages (e.g., Miguel Tejada). Here’s how Epstein dealt with that issue: > [@](#): > > Instead of simply throwing up his hands, > Epstein asked James to see if he could find a way to determine anything > further about Ortiz’s likely age. “I did a study of his career > progression up to that point, identifying historical players who had > very similar career paths up to that point in time, and concluded > that, on average, they were exactly the age that David claimed to > be,” says James. “That was a fun little study. I had never done anything > like that before.” With that settled, Epstein made his move, > acquiring the player that would change both Epstein’s and the Red > Sox’s futures. On January 22,2003, the Red Sox signed David Ortiz > to a one-year, $1.25 million deal. > > pp. 183-184 Tell us again how James had nothing to do with Ortiz’s move to Boston. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2009, 9:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mlb-spring-training-2009/485405/119 "2009-03-06T21:42:13Z")
So James was just one of many guys, some of whom had actually watched Ortiz play and whose opinions thereby carried some actual weight, who offered an opinion about him. Thanks for the support. Mnookin, btw, isn’t even on the regular Red Sox beat - I can provide other cites for Pedro’s lobbying from reporters who do and who were there if you insist, but frankly you’d have to convince me it’s worth the effort. The problem with James personally (as if that mattered) isn’t, btw, that he doesn’t think unquantifiables or intangibles matter, it’s that he has nothing to offer there to help guide the baseball people. He doesn’t follow the game _on the field_ enough to say anything as useful as the career scouts, development people, or maybe even serious fans do. The problem with too many of his acolytes, some of whom have posted right here, is that they think those things not only don’t matter but don’t even exist. Even many who do are often much less interested in discussing them than in discussing what they \*can \*see and quantify. They miss the heart of what makes fanship so much fun. It’s sad, really. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2009, 9:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mlb-spring-training-2009/485405/120 "2009-03-06T21:43:40Z")
> [@fluiddruid](#): > > Do not just post to bait others;. That was intended as a \*response \*to a series of baiting posts. But you’re right, it was wasted keystrokes in this case. Sorry. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mlb-spring-training-2009/485405.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mlb-spring-training-2009/485405.md?page=7)