Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine
Now is the place where the crossroads meet.
Will you look into the future?


Jays 5 - Yankees 4

Boxscore

  1. Recaps:
    • Spencer Fordin:

        The goal started small. The Blue Jays just wanted to score off Orlando Hernandez, who had stifled them for 17 straight innings before Wednesday night's game.

        Seven outs in, they did exactly that. The stakes grew higher as the game wore on, and Vernon Wells found a way to cash in all of Toronto's chips. The center fielder lined a two-run triple in the seventh inning, chasing Hernandez and pushing the Jays to a 5-4 win. That was El Duque's first loss of the season, spoiling one of the league's best stories of the second half.

    • Mark Feinsand:

        The Yankees missed out on an opportunity to clinch a playoff berth on Wednesday, as Orlando Hernandez suffered his first loss of the season, a 5-4 defeat at the hands of the Toronto Blue Jays.

        Hernandez allowed five runs in 6 1/3 innings, as former Yankee Ted Lilly won for the first time in four meetings this season against El Duque.

    • Mike Rutsey:

        As for the bullpen, League wriggled out of a bases-loaded jam in the seventh by striking out Gary Sheffield and then induced Bernie Williams to ground out. Justin Speier gave up a solo homer in the eighth and was followed by Batista, who had a 1-2-3 ninth for his third save.

        Offensively, the Jays were sparked by rookie Russ Adams who had three hits, including a solo homer in the third and Vernon Wells, who stroked a two-run triple off Orlando Hernandez, who lost for the first time this season.

    • Ronald Blum:

        Trying to become the first Yankees starter to win his first nine decisions since Tommy John in 1979, Hernandez (8-1) let Toronto close to 3-2 on Russ Adams' solo homer in the third and an RBI single to Gregg Zaun in the sixth.

        He allowed a double to No. 9 hitter Chris Gomez leading off the seventh, and Adams followed with a pop fly to centre. Williams appeared to get a late start and the ball dropped for a single.

        After Orlando Hudson flied out, Wells lined a high pitch into the gap in right centre for a 4-3 lead.

    • Larry Millson:

        The Blue Jays won two of three games from the Yankees, who lead the American League East.

        Regardless of last night, the Yankees hate to think of where they might be without Hernandez in the second half of the season, considering the inconsistency of their rotation. He is 8-1 and the Yankees are 11-3 in 14 starts after his return to the majors in July. Not bad considering he missed all of 2003 because of arm surgery and was signed in March to a minor-league deal as a free agent.

    • Geoff Baker:

        A pumped-up Brandon League couldn't stop smiling after he'd helped secure a 12th win for a Blue Jays teammate who often falls short of the finish.

        It was Double-A call-up League on the mound in relief of Ted Lilly in the seventh inning last night with the bases loaded, one out and a most valuable player candidate due up for the New York Yankees. The home crowd was on its feet, which had only made the 21-year-old League smile even more.

        Those teeth were downright blinding after League struck out the dangerous Gary Sheffield on a slider, then got Bernie Williams to ground out to end the biggest threat to victory No. 12 by Lilly this season.



  2. Fordin Notes on Gustavo Chacin's windup, Justin Miller's demotion to the pen, and the O-Dog:

      A long-term contract extension for Orlando Hudson will likely be high on the team's list of offseason priorities. The second baseman has become a solid contender for the Gold Glove at his position, and he's one of the only plus defenders Toronto trots out on a daily basis.

      J.P. Ricciardi, the general manager of the Blue Jays, said he expects to work something out with Hudson's agent. He also said negotiations haven't started yet and that he plans on picking them up shortly after the offseason starts.

      The Jays already have three players -- Roy Halladay, Eric Hinske and Vernon Wells -- locked up to extensions. Most of the team's homegrown prospects fit into two categories. They're either too young to command major money or Toronto isn't willing to commit just yet.

    That'd be great news for Jays fans. Other than possibly Reed Johnson, Hudson is the most exciting player on this team. Any guesses on how much Hudson will get?

    Has Fordin once again scooped the other writers? You'd think this would be big news.

  3. Rutsey Notes on a ticket price reduction and Brandon League:

      League, who throws consistently in the high 90s, came on with one on and one out and immediately got in a jam as he walked Derek Jeter on four pitches and had Alex Rodriguez reach on an infield single.

      League, impressively, didn't start to hyper-ventilate or panic as he came back to strike out Gary Sheffield before retiring Bernie Williams on a grounder to first.

      "He's a loose kid with a great arm," interim manager John Gibbons enthused. "He shut them down and that was the game right there."


  4. No Game Tonight

Jays Roundup - I'll Be Sitting in Your Mirror. | 117 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
Coach - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 10:12 AM EDT (#31566) #
Lots of fun stuff to talk about today, but I'll begin with a Help Wanted notice from ESPN.com -- it's a volunteer position, but it's how I got my start as a baseball writer. If you are a fantasy baseball "expert" who knows something about the Jays and can write two interesting columns per week from the start of spring training until the end of the season, you might want to check this out.

About 20% of the Batter's Box Roster is comprised of current or former correspondents. I had a lot of fun with the gig in 2002, but didn't enjoy it as much last year because I had this new outlet. If you are interested, create an ESPN ID if you don't already have one, submit a sample column, and wait. It might take a few weeks before they make a decision.
_Moffatt - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 10:14 AM EDT (#31567) #
I told you that you were supposed to kick me if I forgot. Sorry Coach and Mr. Lucas. :(
_DGriebeling - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 10:17 AM EDT (#31568) #
(If only I wasn't so musically illeterate, maybe I could win since I'm posting first. Oh well)

Question re: Ticket prices for Oct 1-3... someone mentioned that if you had already bought 9 dollar tix, they would give you a discount to tix for 2005 season, or something similar? Does anyone know if this is true before I phone 'em up later today?

Thanks for the help

(P.S. I no longer think Ichiro is human...he's definitely a machine)
Mike Green - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 10:19 AM EDT (#31569) #
No song guess. That is a very fine column by Spencer Fordin. I've noticed a leap forward in his writing this year over last. Is he 27 perhaps?

The signing of Hudson would be a real boon to Russ Adams' defensive development. Working with a fine defensive second baseman on a consistent basis should make play around the bag a lot easier for Russ, so he can focus on improving his throwing.

The Jays' outfield with Gross/Johnson, Wells and Rios looks great defensively. It's easy to see the team being above average defensively certainly by mid-season next year.
Coach - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 10:20 AM EDT (#31570) #
Does anyone know if this is true

Yes, it is. I have a release from PR Director Will Hill confirming it, and the "Thrill" has never steered me wrong.
Coach - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 10:23 AM EDT (#31571) #
you were supposed to kick me if I forgot.

First the Johnny Horton song, now this. Thin ice indeed, Moffatt.
_Moffatt - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 10:27 AM EDT (#31572) #
Man, I just know I'm going to get non-tendered by the Box next year and I'll have to do Roundups for some lousy Pirates blog.
Craig B - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 10:27 AM EDT (#31573) #
Transactions This Week

TEXAS RANGERS - Purchased the contract of RHP Travis Hughes from Triple-A Oklahoma. LHP Ryan Snare designated for assignment.

BOSTON RED SOX - Recalled RHP Byung-Hyun Kim from Triple-A Pawtucket.

CLEVELAND INDIANS - Recalled RHP Francisco Cruceta from Triple-A Buffalo.

BATTER'S BOX - Designated DH Mike Moffatt for assignment.
Craig B - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 10:27 AM EDT (#31574) #
Incidentally, don't feel too bad, Mike - if this were the NFL, we could have placed you on the "Physically Unable To Perform List". No greater damnation exists in the world of sport.
_Jobu - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 10:33 AM EDT (#31575) #
No greater damnation exists in the world of sport

What about playing on the Golden State Warriors?
Coach - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 10:45 AM EDT (#31576) #
At the bottom of Fordin's notes, there's an interesting quote from Gibbons: "When they show up to Spring Training, they have to have a good idea of what they're doing."

Gibby would never say anything critical about Carlos Tosca, and probably didn't even mean to imply anything, but this is an important distinction between the current and former managers. As most Bauxites know, I think Tosca is a terrific baseball man and an admirable person. I defended him often as a strategist, and against a lot of knee-jerk calls for his head in a situation that wasn’t his fault. If I agreed with the anti-Tosca faction on one thing, it was his handling of the bullpen -- not the in-game moves, but the lack of clarity and consistency in players’ roles.

This was never a second-guess. From long before training camp began, I campaigned for Justin Speier to be anointed the closer. Adams was coming off surgery, even a healthy Ligtenberg has trouble with lefty batters, and Lopez (whose collapse nobody anticipated) was relatively inexperienced. The pecking order seemed obvious. Tosca went overboard on fairness, saying he wouldn’t decide in Dunedin because there were so many talented new guys. That meant all of March was an audition for everyone, and even in April, nobody "knew" exactly where they stood.

It sounds like that will change from Day One next spring and makes me even more convinced that "Johnny," as J.P. calls his old A-ball roomie, is the right man for the job. Last night Mike Wilner gave him a 95% chance, and speculated that Ernie Whitt would be the new first base coach, with Bob Geren possibly coming from the A's as bench coach. If the rest of the staff gets new deals, there will be rejoicing on my part.
_Four Seamer - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 10:49 AM EDT (#31577) #
Last night Mike Wilner gave him a 95% chance, and speculated that Ernie Whitt would be the new first base coach, with Bob Geren possibly coming from the A's as bench coach. If the rest of the staff gets new deals, there will be rejoicing on my part.

Coach, does this make Breeden the odd man out in your view? Or would they offer him a reassignment within the organization?
_Moffatt - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 10:51 AM EDT (#31578) #
I'm going to try and steer the conversation a little:

What do the Bauxites think of a long-term deal for Hudson? What would an appropriate length / dollar range be?
_Mick - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 10:53 AM EDT (#31579) #
First, list Moffatt not as a "DH" but as a "RP" -- "Roundup Poster."

Next, on this:
That is a very fine column by Spencer Fordin. I've noticed a leap forward in his writing this year over last. Is he 27 perhaps?

That's funny, but it's true. Honestly, it's not just baseball players who have "peak" seasons, or quarterbacks for whom the defences "slow down." I can now write something in an hour that blows away in quality and readabilitya anything I could write when I was 22, which may be a reason I didn't last in newspapers. But unlike jobs where physical skills are paramount, I plan to keep getting better, even though I'm 38. I shall be the Phil Niekro of Da Box.

Since nobody else wants to bite on the song lyrics, I wonder, last night did David Bush do a jig after the victory?
Coach - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 10:55 AM EDT (#31580) #
Breeden is Tosca's best friend. He showed a lot of class sticking it out this season and accepting a new assignment, but he'll almost certainly be job hunting. Joe is a terrific catching instructor, and Gibby had that responsibility in 2003, so the new first base coach would ideally be someone who has experience teaching young catchers. It would only be a bonus if he's a popular ex-Jay.
_DGriebeling - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 11:06 AM EDT (#31581) #
What do the Bauxites think of a long-term deal for Hudson? What would an appropriate length / dollar range be?


Ok, first off... I think the Jays should sign Orlando long term... and the reason I say that is by simply looking at our 2nd basemen between Alomar and Orlando:
- Tomas Perez, Domingo Cedeno, Carlos Garcia, Mariano Duncan, Craig Grebeck, Tony Fernandez (he's the exception), Homer Bush, Pat Kelly, Mickey Morandini, Jeff Frye, Joe Lawrence, and Dave Berg...

Need I say more? 2nd base has been a very weak position for us since Robbie left, and I think having a (potential) gold glover there will certainly help with defence, and training the new kids, but he's also good with the stick, and shows pop every now and then. I think right now he's the best value 2nd baseman money can buy. (Marcus Giles comes close, IMHO)

As for figures... we sort of look like we're getting burned a bit by Hinske's long-term deal if he doesn't wisen up with his bat soon, so I doubt I would go as long term as him... maybe only a 3-year deal, with a somewhat heavy back-end.
Year 1: 0.6 mill
Year 2: 1.4 mill
Year 3: 2.5 mill

Does that seem reasonable at all?

_SF - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 11:11 AM EDT (#31582) #
What Mick said. I'm actually 28, but I don't think I'm anywhere near my peak. I still have decades to improve at using the written word -- not to mention alter my behavior to fit a somewhat acceptable social norm. If I never get any better, I'd consider myself a failure.

Anyway, this took a little longer to get to the substance of why I'm posting: Thanks for the kind words, folks. It's easier to pour the energy into writing when you know there's a stable and voracious audience waiting to read your words.
robertdudek - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 11:13 AM EDT (#31583) #
I think Orlando will make significantly more than that in 2006 and 2007 in arbitration.

2005: 0.6 million; 2006: 2.0 million; 2007: 4.1 million; 2008: 4.8 million

I don't know if Orlando would accept that, but that seesm like a reasonable discount in exchange for financial security.
_Daryn - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 11:16 AM EDT (#31584) #
No more beating around the BUSH...
The Jig is up. and Life goes on...

Ummm... too obvious?
_Ryan Day - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 11:20 AM EDT (#31585) #
Isn't it possible Hudson will be eligible for arbitration this offseason? I'd imagine that will play a pretty big part in any deal.
_Ducey - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 11:20 AM EDT (#31586) #
http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/minors/04league20s/nyp.html
The BA top 20 from the NY Penn league is up COMN

The Jays only had Thigpen make it. I was surprised Hall, Cannon or Lind didn't make it.
Named For Hank - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 11:21 AM EDT (#31587) #
I'm older than Spencer Fordin. I don't know how to feel about that.
_Sister - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 11:21 AM EDT (#31588) #
I think O-Dawg should receive a contract of similar lenght, but of slightly lower value, to the one signed by Vernon Wells. But is this a wise move? Based on our limited evidence, Russ Adams appears to be the real deal; what happens if/when Mr. Hill arrives?

An affordably priced O-Dawg, signed to a 3 year contract, might be quite a nice trading chip if need (either player-wise or financial) arises, and Adams-Hill emerge as a solid middle infield.
robertdudek - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 11:22 AM EDT (#31589) #
I don't think so - he's got about 2.5 years of service time, which makes it highly unlikely he'll get Super-2 status.
Craig B - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 11:23 AM EDT (#31590) #
Mick wins this cuttlefish on the quotation I supplied for today's thread...



And Daryn, for his apparently independent discovery, wins this letter posted from the U.S.S. Cuttlefish.



Enjoy!
robertdudek - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 11:24 AM EDT (#31591) #
May I suggest that Hill should be moved to third base for 2006? Is that sacrilege?
Craig B - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 11:26 AM EDT (#31592) #
Incidentally, that little envelope picture was from a lovely site called thesaltysailor.com. I'm trying to resist making a crack about Mikey, salty sailors, and the Physically Unable To Perform list.

Also, the Jewish Rick Mahorn said It's easier to pour the energy into writing when you know there's a stable and voracious audience waiting to read your words. I don't know how to feel about this... no one's ever called me "stable" before.
Craig B - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 11:28 AM EDT (#31593) #
May I suggest that Hill should be moved to third base for 2006? Is that sacrilege?

Lèse-majesté, perhaps. :) But let's make sure both these guys can hit first...
_Jim - TBG - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 11:30 AM EDT (#31594) #
http://www.torontobaseballguys.com
As I was going through the roundup, the Hudson note got me to thinking about Gold Gloves. O-Dog has a good shot at one, and after Wells' robbery of ARod the other night, he'll have to get some consideration, too, especially with Mike Cameron now a National Leaguer.

But there was also a queasy feeling I had, and so I went to scan some of the fielding stats. I came away with this very unsettling conclusion: Derek Jeter has a good chance of winning the Gold Glove this year.

I have to apologize at this point for any coffee on monitors or keyboards, and for any of you who may have fallen out of your chairs, but this may actually come to pass.

Consider:

Item 1: Last year's winner, Alex Rodrigues, now plays third base.
Item 2: Nomar Garciaparra, traditionally a member of the shortstop trinity, is now a Cub, and also ineligible.
Item 3: "Yeah, but there's still Tejada right? RIGHT??" True, and he's having a bang-up year with the bat, but he's also committed 23 errors at short, most in the league
Item 4: Jeter is tied for second in the league with fewest errors at short with 11, and has the second best fielding percentage at the position. He trails David Eckstein in both categories, and since it's something of a miracle that Lil' Dave can play the position at all, I can't picture him winning the GG.
Item 5: The Faceplant. Derek Jeter threw himself into the stands to make heroic catch, sacrificing his body for the good of the team, Mr. Clutch, yada, yada, yada. The clip was played endlessly, and the voters all saw it.
Item 6: The Gold Watch factor. It is a baseball truth that Jeter is a GREAT shortstop, and with no one else really running away with the award, the voters may decide he should have a GG - sort of a Lifetime achievement award.
Item 7: "Voters can't be that stupid!" See: Election - Presidential, United States. Also: Oscar - Gooding Jr, Cuba.
Item 8: "But a slow roller to his left is a clean single up the middle!" Hey, I know that and you know that, but Jeter has that clutch sheen about him, his lack of range doesn't prevent the Yankees from winning.
Item 9: "Can't they just give it to Vizquel?" Maybe, but he's 73 years old, and has lost a step. He trails Jeter in several categories, including ones the voters may actually look at, like fielding percentage and total chances.
Item 10: "Can you imagine Yankees fans if he wins?! I don't want to live in a world like that!" You and me both.

There's a chance that Carlos Guillen might win this with his bat and overall breakout season, but something tells me that, in this, the Season from Hell ©, that come winter, we'll be able to preface Derek Jeter with "Gold Glover" for the rest of time.

*shudder*
_Moffatt - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 11:32 AM EDT (#31595) #
Thanks for pitching in for me, Craig. Once again I was out purchasing Tim Horton's products.

If there's a song you'd like quoted in the roundup, you can always e-mail me at economics.guide@about.com . You can also e-mail me to accuse me of having some sort of political agenda. Lord knows I don't get enough of those. :)

I'm just glad I'm younger than Spencer Fordin. I'm also glad that Burley resists his urges for tasteless humour.
Craig B - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 11:32 AM EDT (#31596) #
SF also had good stuff on Chacin's windup. Considering we talked about this extensively here on Da Box just last month, I cadged a password and went to mlb.tv to check out the video from his start. Sure enough, he does seem to balk in the windup as he comes to a complete stop - so it should be called a ball (though many, many players get away with it consistently).

Hopefully it can be sorted out.
Craig B - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 11:39 AM EDT (#31597) #
Derek Jeter has a good chance of winning the Gold Glove this year.

After years of slagging off Jeter for his lack of range, I must admit his defensive statistics are much, much better this year. I still think the real Gold Glover is Valentin, but he'll never win it.

Of the guys who remain after Valentin is taken out, Jeter would actually be a good choice; as good as Tejada, Guillen, Crosby or Lugo, and better than anyone else.

If he won this year, I would not think it undeserved.

There's an even tighter and more difficult race in the NL, where Izturis and Jack Wilson are having terrific years with the glove. Renteria will probably win again.
Mike Green - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 11:40 AM EDT (#31598) #
May I suggest that Hill should be moved to third base for 2006? Is that sacrilege?

Hardly sacrilege. It'll be interesting if Hill sees any time at 3rd in Syracuse in the first half of next year.

I understand your point to be as follows. Having Hudson, Adams, Hill and Hinske as the team's probable 2B-SS-3B options over the next 2-3 years does not constitute an oversupply. If I've understood it correctly, I'm in total agreement.
Coach - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 11:42 AM EDT (#31599) #
May I suggest that Hill should be moved to third base for 2006? Is that sacrilege?

Not at all. It's indicative of the next phase in this team's maturity. Eric Hinske's just one of many incumbents who is going to be challenged. If he raises his offensive game, he might end up at 1B and we could see a Hill-Adams-Hudson-Hinske infield.

The bullpen is also going to get very competitive. Batista and Miller may be added to a mix that already includes Speier, Frasor, Chulk, Ligtenberg, Douglass and Glynn, with League and other prospects like Rosario knocking at the door. Very soon, minor-league starters won't have the same "easy" path to the Jays rotation as Bush did this year. Chacin may have nudged into the #5 mix, though I think he'd also be a very capable swing man.

The point is, there will be more competition, among more talented players, next spring in Dunedin than there has been for a very long time. The recipe is fine, and it's only begun to cook.
robertdudek - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 11:44 AM EDT (#31600) #
Having O-Dog, Adams and Hill will only become a potential problem in 2006 - at which point trades/injuries/development may change the picture.

No need to rush anything now - let's see how things shake out.
_Ryan C - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 11:50 AM EDT (#31601) #
Having O-Dog, Adams and Hill will only become a potential problem in 2006 - at which point trades/injuries/development may change the picture. No need to rush anything now - let's see how things shake out.


I was going to say the much same thing but you said it better and first.
Pistol - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 11:59 AM EDT (#31602) #
What do the Bauxites think of a long-term deal for Hudson? What would an appropriate length / dollar range be?

I'll go 4 years / $11MM

2005 - $0.5
2006 - $2.5
2007 - $3.5
2008 - $4.5

It's about 80% of the Hinkse and Wells deals for comparible years of service time (which is about 4 for $13.6).
_Jonny German - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 12:06 PM EDT (#31603) #
he's got about 2.5 years of service time, which makes it highly unlikely he'll get Super-2 status.

To be precise: Hudson will have 2 years 68 days of service time at the end of this year. A year is 172 or 180 days, depending on who you ask. Either way, no Super-2.

After years of slagging off Jeter for his lack of range, I must admit his defensive statistics are much, much better this year.

I don't dispute this, but as one of the few fortunates to see Monday's game (on business in Michigan, watched it on MLB TV) I quite enjoyed watching Adams fight off a pitch for a 2-run single up the middle that some shortstops would have flagged down, then watching Jeter end the game with a ground ball to Adams that Himself most assuredly would not have gotten to.
_Prisoner of Ham - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 12:09 PM EDT (#31604) #
I don't think Hudson gets four years. My guess is three years topping out at $3 million. Maybe $3.5
Craig B - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 12:10 PM EDT (#31605) #
Right, but if those were hit into the hole, Jeter makes the play and Adams probably doesn't. Is it a wash? Maybe, I don't know.
_Mick - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 12:23 PM EDT (#31606) #
Jeter the gold glove? Even as the Box's token Yankee fan, I can't see it. I haven't checked the stats, but given his previous middle infield glove-man reputation, his selfless move to help the club getting all kinds of pub, his 210 or so hits and especially if his team pulls off the upset division comeback dating back to 1978, I'd think the gold glove has good chance of ending up in the Michael Young residence this off-season.
_Jobu - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 12:25 PM EDT (#31607) #
Ohhhhh man, I don't want to picture a world where Jeter has a gold glove just because he plays for the Yankees. How much bribe money would we have to pool together to get Thrillhouse to win the award? I got 5.07 and a bag of carrot sticks to start things off.
Thomas - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 12:59 PM EDT (#31608) #
With this discussion of a potential contract extension for O-Dog it got me thinking, and maybe this is a dumb question, but why do teams never frontload contracts?

I understand that often times it makes sense to backload contract and pay a player more in later years, when some big contracts the team has now are coming off the books. However, I've never heard of a contract being backloaded in the MLB, and you'd think that sometimes it would make sense.

I know the Jays are counting on relatively cheap prospects like Rios, Bush, McGowan, Hill, Adams and League and so on being able to contribute while making relatively small salaries, so they figure at that point they can afford to pay Halladay, Wells, Hudson and whomever else more money. But wouldn't it sometimes make sense to frontload a contract so you are paying the player $4 million in the first years and $2 million in subsequent years? For example, the Jays could hold off on negotiating O-Dog's extension and then due to how free agency plays out they only have spent $49 million of the $53 million budget, so they could pay O-Dog $4 next year and less in subsequent years. That would allow them to have more financial freedom at the point where they figure to be the most competitive, so you'd think that would be a point in favour of sometimes frontloading.

I would think the player would accept it as he gets the same amount of money in the end and he gets cash sooner, so he can invest it or build his giant dreamhouse or do whatever he wants.

I'm sure there's some reason teams don't, but I can't really figure out what it is.
_Willy - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 01:00 PM EDT (#31609) #
About 20% of the Batter's Box Roster is comprised of current or former correspondents.

How many Bauxites are professional writers, and who exactly are they?

A stable and voracious reader.
_Chuck Van Den C - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 01:02 PM EDT (#31610) #
What do the Bauxites think of a long-term deal for Hudson? What would an appropriate length / dollar range be?

I say the Jays legally change Eric Hinske's name to Orlando Hudson and Orlando Hudson's name to Eric Hinske. They then release "Hudson" and enjoy "Hinske" over the final three years of his contract.
_Jacko - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 01:03 PM EDT (#31611) #

Item 4: Jeter is tied for second in the league with fewest errors at short with 11, and has the second best fielding percentage at the position. He trails David Eckstein in both categories, and since it's something of a miracle that Lil' Dave can play the position at all, I can't picture him winning the GG.

Have rookies ever won the gold glove? Based both and stats and what my eyes tell me, Bobby Crosby is the best defensive SS in the league. Tremendous range, reactions, and arm.

Miggy Tejada has also put up pretty good defensive numbers (in addition to his gaudy offensive stats). However, like with Jose Valentin, his high error totals may be a little too high for voters.

jc
robertdudek - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 01:08 PM EDT (#31612) #
I agree - Crosby has had the best defensive season among shortstops in the AL based on my observations. Tejada is normally as good or better, but has had defensive slumps this year.
Thomas - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 01:15 PM EDT (#31613) #
Crosby was phenomenal when the A's came to the Dome. He made 3 fantastic plays, and although he erred on a wild throw home following one of them, he still showed outstanding defensive prowess. I've seen a couple of A's games on TV and also been very impressed with what I've seen.
Gerry - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 01:18 PM EDT (#31614) #
Spencer - what stable audience? You must be referring to readers of MLB.com, there are not many stable readers in these parts. Coach used to be a stable reader but he got out of the ponies a long time ago.

I think it was JP who said this week on the radio that you earn a gold glove one year and win it the next. I think he was suggesting that voters are a traditional lot and that it takes a while to break through and get enough votes.

I think the only surprise with the BA list for Auburn was Adam Lind not making it. Purcey and Jackson had too little time while Hall and Cannon had good years but in the "tools" evaluation probably came up a little short.
_StephenT - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 01:25 PM EDT (#31615) #
I'm against multi-year deals before free agency. With those, teams just save money if the player becomes better than expected. Imagine how "awful" that would be -- all the young players becoming too good. I think the bigger risk is that the player goes bad and then you have a liability.
_Magpie - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 01:34 PM EDT (#31616) #
Derek Jeter has a good chance of winning the Gold Glove this year.

The leaders in Zone Rating (Hey, I work for STATS!) are:

Valentin
Crosby
Eckstein
Tejada
Jeter

The leaders in Range Factor:

Tejada
Guillen
Valentin
Crosby
Lugo

Jeter is 8th, Vizquel, Young, Eckstein bring up the rear.

Eckstein is well ahead in fielding pct.; Jeter is 2nd in a knot with Guzman and Vizquel.

I think the winner should be Valentin or Crosby, but one of them has a bad defensive reputation and one of them is a rookie. I think Tejada is the most likely to actually win it.

All that said, this looks like a good defensive season for Jeter, compared to his previously established level. Why would that be?

Changes in the pitching staff seems the most likely cause.

The Yankees added three pitchers - Kevin Brown, Jon Lieber, and Paul Quantrill - who throw tons of ground balls.

That's why Jeter is making more plays.
_Magpie - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 01:45 PM EDT (#31617) #
"Voters can't be that stupid!"

I believe it is the managers and coaches who vote for the Gold Gloves.

You know, the same people who gave it to Rafael Palmeiro the season he played 25 games at 1B.

SF is so young. I could be his dad.
_SF - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 01:47 PM EDT (#31618) #
All sarcasm aside, I feel compelled to provide the first two definitions for the adjective "stable", as presented by Webster's:

1 a : firmly established : FIXED, STEADFAST b : not changing or fluctuating : UNVARYING c : PERMANENT, ENDURING
2 a : steady in purpose : firm in resolution b : not subject to insecurity or emotional illness : SANE, RATIONAL
_SF - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 01:48 PM EDT (#31619) #
Not you too, Magpie! Rutsey keeps telling me that he wants to "take a run" at my mom, and he often follows that comment up with: "Please, call me Pop."
_Skills - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 01:51 PM EDT (#31620) #
Hope I'm not swinging the conversation too much, but the talk of gold gloves has got me thinking about the rookie of the year. Of course, I'm still hoping, albeit unrealistically, that Rios will bash a bunch of home runs and appear more of contender despite his short season. However, right now the AL ROY looks like a race between Ford and Crosby. Statistically, Ford looks like the favorite, what with a great OBP, plenty of steals, and the rookie lead in rbi's and average. On the other hand, Crosby seems to have more name recognition since Ford pretty much came out of nowhere. In addition, his defensive contribution is probably more significant. Anyway, I'd like to hear thoughts on this, especially if someone wants to make an argument for Rios.
_Magpie - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 01:55 PM EDT (#31621) #
There's an article up on Hardball Times called "Of Spikes, and Flukes, and Grabrkewitz."

It begins with a series of stats lines for four players. Guess who the players are. You can grade yourself at the end.

If you got three or four points: significant geekiness is among your primary character traits.

Yeah, I get that a lot...
_dp - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 01:57 PM EDT (#31622) #
Aren't the "signing bonus" portions of contracts essentially a frontloading technique? Or am I getting that wrong?
_Magpie - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 01:58 PM EDT (#31623) #
I dunno, SF, I just don't know. It was the 1970s, there was a lot of stuff going on.
_Magpie - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 01:59 PM EDT (#31624) #
AL ROY looks like a race between Ford and Crosby.

Ford's not eligible for the ROY - he should be, but he gets bitten by a technicality. He was on a ML disabled list and has too much service time.
_Jacko - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 02:00 PM EDT (#31625) #

The Yankees added three pitchers - Kevin Brown, Jon Lieber, and Paul Quantrill - who throw tons of ground balls.

That's why Jeter is making more plays.

I think you just identified one of the reasons that Robert Dudek hates Range Factor. Jeter is no different as a player this year, but his RF stats are way up.

BTW, the other theory about Jeter's improved performance is that Arod's extra lateral range at 3B has allowed Jeter to position himself further up the middle and get to some balls which would have rolled by him in previous years.
_MatO - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 02:01 PM EDT (#31626) #
The NY-P live chat is underway at BA.
_Jacko - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 02:12 PM EDT (#31627) #

Hope I'm not swinging the conversation too much, but the talk of gold gloves has got me thinking about the rookie of the year. Of course, I'm still hoping, albeit unrealistically, that Rios will bash a bunch of home runs and appear more of contender despite his short season. However, right now the AL ROY looks like a race between Ford and Crosby. Statistically, Ford looks like the favorite, what with a great OBP, plenty of steals, and the rookie lead in rbi's and average. On the other hand, Crosby seems to have more name recognition since Ford pretty much came out of nowhere. In addition, his defensive contribution is probably more significant. Anyway, I'd like to hear thoughts on this, especially if someone wants to make an argument for Rios.

1. I think Crosby gets the ROY hands down. 20 HR and stellar defense should be enough to win him the award.

2. I think Rios will need to add some muscle before he'll be able to drive the ball against major league pitching. Have you seen how skinny his arms are? He also needs to get the ball in the air more often, which I think will also come with experience. His current G/F ratio of 2.39 would rank him 3rd in the majors (behind Ichiro and Luis Castillo) if he had enough AB to qualify.
Pistol - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 02:12 PM EDT (#31628) #
With this discussion of a potential contract extension for O-Dog it got me thinking, and maybe this is a dumb question, but why do teams never frontload contracts?

I believe it'd be because it'd screw up arbitration. That is, if Hudson got $5, $4, $3, and $2 over the next 4 years a similar 3rd year player could say he deserves $5 even though the system is set up for him to make less than $1 (with some exceptions).

I'm against multi-year deals before free agency. With those, teams just save money if the player becomes better than expected.

If a player maintains his performanance from the time he signs his contract the team will save money. If the player improves the team saves a lot of money.

For example, the Royals went year to year with Carlos Beltran. His last 3 years of arbitration he made roughly $20 million. Vernon Wells is a similar player and will make $12.8 million his final 3 arbitration years.
_Magpie - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 02:18 PM EDT (#31629) #
Robert Dudek hates Range Factor.

Well, its like most numbers. It gives you part of the picture. If you rely on just one number, sooner or later you will go badly astray.

I think Range Factor tells us more about a defender's ability than fielding percentage, and for a long time what else was there? I think Zone Rating tells us more than Range Factor...

I think my ROY ballot would read: Crosby, Morneau, Rios. I know Ford isn't eligible, and I don't think Duchscherer and Scutaro are either. Scutaro and Ford would both be top five.

Jeter is no different as a player

Wouldn't Jeter have been a great centre fielder? The one thing he does do very well as an infielder is play pop flies, and tracking a ball in the air is a talent that not everybody has. He has a good arm. He has very good foot speed, but he does not have a quick first step. This is a liability in the centre of the infield, and would be a huge liability at a corner infield spot.

Players like John Olerud and Brooks Robinson were very slow runners, but had a good first step (and in Olerud's case, an NBA player's reach) which along with a good hitter's reflexes made them outstanding defenders at the corners.
_Ron - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 02:19 PM EDT (#31630) #
Damm baseball contracts are way too confusing.

Super 2 Status? That sounds like some kind of super power.
_R Billie - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 02:19 PM EDT (#31631) #
Hudson won't be signed beyond 2007 as JP has already said he won't be inking any contracts past the last year of his deal in order to leave the organization in the best financial shape possible should he not continue as GM.

If Hudson isn't arbitration eligible for this coming year then I would suggest a raise to about $700K for 2005, $1.5 million for 2006, $2.5 million for 2007. Three years, $4.7 million. Maybe round up to $5 million. That should be a big deal for a player who wasn't earning much more than the minimum for the first 2.5 years. Much more than that and you might risk overpaying. Though you know it won't be for lack of effort from the player.

I think that's about what Orlando could expect to earn in arbitration but it's hard to say as I don't know of many comparables to Hudson in service years and ability. And you want to keep his salary attractive just in case you do have to make a move down the road.
Mike Green - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 02:34 PM EDT (#31632) #
Just using 2005-2007 figures, RBillie, Pistol and Robert Dudek have suggested total contract value in the $5-$6.7 million range on a 3 year contract. The closest comparable I can think off in 10 seconds is Adam Kennedy, who with 4 years service, earns 2.5 million this year. The figures look pretty reasonable to me.
_Magpie - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 02:37 PM EDT (#31633) #
Super 2 Status? That sounds like some kind of super power.

LOL
robertdudek - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 02:39 PM EDT (#31634) #
I think Range Factor tells us more about a defender's ability than fielding percentage, and for a long time what else was there? I think Zone Rating tells us more than Range Factor...

I have to disagree with that. RF tells us less than FPCT because is is subject to so many biases that render it almost meaningless. FPCT at least does a relatively good job of measuring a player's ability to make the routine play.

Bill James, the "inventor" of RF roasted his own creation in the NHBA. It's a must read for any one who still uses RF for anything.

ZR is better but there are huge problems with it, such that I wouldn't draw any firm conclusions using that measure.

As to what else there was in the past - a good pair of eyes and a questioning mind.
_Magpie - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 02:58 PM EDT (#31635) #
As to what else there was in the past - a good pair of eyes and a questioning mind.

But you wouldn't dream of relying on that to assess hitting, would you? We need all the help we can get.

Range Factor is a counting stat - like singles hit in a season - and of course its subject to enormous biases. We have to do our best to account for them and learn what we can.

Zone Rating tries to take into account one of the largest of thoses biases - opportunities. Its subject to the biases of : a) people like me who are the ones watching and recording where and how hard the ball was hit and whether it constitutes an opportunity; b) the basic assumption that a certain are of the diamond is the responsibility of a certain player. All kinds of problems with that, too.

FPCT at least does a relatively good job of measuring a player's ability to make the routine play.

You think? The differences betwen players are extremely small, it lumps all types plays into one pool, and its subject to the huge and unpredicatble bias of whoever the Official Scorer happens to be.

Don't get me started on the Official Scorers!

I just think we need all the help we can get, and we shouldn't turn down any bit of information, whatever its problems.

Derek Jeter looks like a good shortstop. All kinds of experts tell us he's a good shortstop. But his Range Factors suggest that there may be less here than meets the eye.

We need a good pair of eyes, a questioning mind, and any other help we can get as well. :-)
Pistol - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 03:02 PM EDT (#31636) #
Hudson won't be signed beyond 2007 as JP has already said he won't be inking any contracts past the last year of his deal

I don't buy that. Whenever I've seen that quote I've taken it as tongue in cheek. It's worked out that way so far because 2007 has been so far away and it didn't make a lot of sense to give anyone a contract beyond that point regardless of JP's contract.

Also, by the time 2007 rolls around JP's either going to have something to stick around for or will be fired. I can't picture any GM leaving his job because he's not interested in doing it anymore (unless they were retiring). It's certainly be a rare move that I'd only believe if I saw.
Craig B - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 03:19 PM EDT (#31637) #
One thing that range factor can tell me, though, is that David Eckstein (for example) just can't be the most valuable glove in the league... there aren't enough plays that me made. I'd take a guy slightly less good who handled the extra 150 chances...
_Ryan Lind - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 03:20 PM EDT (#31638) #
The Jays only had Thigpen make [BA's top 20 prospects list.] I was surprised Hall, Cannon or Lind didn't make it.

Didn't you hear? Brian Hall is 39 years old and has a deformed femur.

;-)
_Ducey - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 03:35 PM EDT (#31639) #
Yeah, I put in a question to BA about Lind, Chipper, and Hall but they have not used it. They did answer one about Lind from some bigshot named "Gerry" from Toronto though. :-)
robertdudek - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 03:36 PM EDT (#31640) #
I maintain that a bad stat does more harm than good. RF is one of the worst ever devised.
Pistol - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 03:38 PM EDT (#31641) #
Greg Maddux got his 15th win today keeping his streak of consectutive 15 win seasons going (16? 17? I forget).
_Keith Talent - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 03:39 PM EDT (#31642) #
Anybody here an ESPN Insider who can tell me what Crasnick's Delgado article says?
_sweat - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 03:40 PM EDT (#31643) #
Jerry crasnik has an INSIDER article about delgado at ESPN, if someone wants to paraphrase, i would be happy. I'm off to a playoff baseball game myself, so I'm out.
On a side note, my cooperstown game at doubleday field was rained out, so I am going back on the 8 of oct.
Mike Green - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 03:42 PM EDT (#31644) #
Jeter's defensive performance this year presents a puzzle for the statistical community.

He performed consistently poorly on all measures of range from 2000-2003. Range factor, ZR, UZR, Pinto, Defensive Win Shares, DRA. You name it, he was bad. How bad was a matter of serious debate, but there was no real issue that he was a poor defender. Mike Emeigh did the most thorough study of the issue on primer using play-by-play data, and found him to be below average, but not disastrously so.

At his point, the defensive measures that we have available, RF, ZR and defensive win share show him to be an above-average defensive shortstop this year.

So, what's going on? I offer three possibilities:

1. Jetes has simply had a better year defensively. Perhaps the presence of Rodriguez at third has allowed him to position himself so that he can address his defensive shortcomings better. Perhaps he is healthier.
2. He is getting more easy plays and fewer hard ones, as a result of the the addition of Brown, Quantrill and Lieber to the pitching staff, and the subtraction of Clemens, Pettitte, Wells and Weaver. The rating systems as currently constituted probably are unable to adequately address "difficulty of opportunity".
3. The rating sytems are, and were, not an adequate indicator of defensive performance.

I am inclined to the view that it is a combination of 1. and 2, but I'm definitely interested in what UZR has to say at the end of the year.
_Ryan Lind - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 03:47 PM EDT (#31645) #
It doesn't really say anything special. Just that Delgado is a good player, has been a Jay his entire career, has no control ove the situation...etc. A little speculation on where he might go (Seattle, Baltimore, Tampa...maybe Detroit.)

Really nothing terribly newsworthy.
Craig B - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 03:51 PM EDT (#31646) #
1. Jetes has simply had a better year defensively. Perhaps the presence of Rodriguez at third has allowed him to position himself so that he can address his defensive shortcomings better. Perhaps he is healthier.

I think this is a considerable factor. I've always hated Jeter's positioning; he stands WAY too far into the hole and doesn't have the raw foot speed to cover grounders up the middle, like a Carlos Guillen, who (to my eyes) gobbles up *everything* hit up the middle hit slower than an ICBM. Or like Orlando Hudson (or the old Roberto Alomar) who gets absolutely everything hit to his left.

Jeter's positioning appears to me to be better this year, but it's based on only a couple of observations as I generally refuse to watch the Yankees.

Also, he may just be getting better. With Jeter, it was never the physical tools that were in doubt... he can clearly play a mean shortstop *if* he plays it properly.

I think much of the rest has to do with point #3, though given the particular shortcomings of ZR/UZR it could be #2 and we'd never know it until Robert gets $100,000 in seed capital to start his own version of STATS, Inc.
_Magpie - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 04:06 PM EDT (#31647) #
RF is one of the worst ever devised.

That bad?

Its not really devised - its basically a counting stat. It doesn't do anything really dumb, like multiply sac flies by outfield assists and divide by times reached on error...

Gosh, at the very least it tells us what raw At Bats tells us - someone thinks the guy is good enough to play. For whatever reason. And I do think it tells us a little more than that.

Anyway, if at some point you've explained why its so godawful, I would truly be interested in reading it. If you have the link handy....
robertdudek - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 04:17 PM EDT (#31648) #
Technically it's a rate stat, Magpie. But instead of balls in zone as the opportunity, simple games or defensive innings are used.

1) The basic problem is there are three powerful factors that make the range factor (PO+A)/Games (or defensive innings)) statistic meaningless.

2) Each and every team gets the same number of outs, whether they are good or bad fielding teams. So, if you happen to be on a team with other good fielders, they will take opportunities away from you. E.G. if a ball sneaks by the second baseman for a hit, the shortstop has another chance to pad his range factor; if the 2B makes the out, he's taken away a future opportunity for all the other fielders.

This is the famous problem of "false normalization" that Bill James alluded to.

3) Number of ground balls and the direction of same is largely dependent on the type of pitching staff you have.

4) Teams that strikeout lots of guys will have fewer opportunties left for their fielders. Weaker teams, who tend to have fewer strikeout pitchers, will provide more opportunities to the fielders.
robertdudek - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 04:20 PM EDT (#31649) #
Defensive innings tell you someone thinks the guy is good enough to play. RF purports to assess range, and for that purpose it creates a less accurate picture than judging a fielder by sight alone.
_Magpie - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 04:32 PM EDT (#31650) #
Greg Maddux got his 15th win today keeping his streak of consectutive 15 win seasons going

Its 17 years in a row. He even chipped in a 2 run single. He's 38 years old and he's got a 3.70 ERA in Wrigley Field.

He has 295 wins in 569 starts over those 17 years; so he's averaged 17 wins in 33 starts for 17 years.

Cy Young's 15 year run began in 1891 when the pitcher stood just 50 feet from the hitter. It didn't move to 60 feet until 1893. (Cy's ERA went from 1.93 in 1892 up to 3.36 in 1893).

At the modern distance, Cy ran off 13 years in a row - he then had an off year in 1906 at age 39 (13-21, 3.19) but bouced back for three more typical Cy seasons (winning 19-21 games with ERAs below 2.26) before he finally lost effectiveness.

Anyway, Young made 577 starts in his 15 year run (over 38 per year). He completed 543 of those starts.

Duh.

He also made 66 relief appearances (finishing 64 of those games).

The game was different, wasn't it. Young averaged just 3.4 Ks per 9 innigs (I think his highest single season mark was 5.9 per 9 IPT), but he led the league twice and was second two other times. He finished up with 2803 strikeouts, which was good for 15th all time, until this year.

When Greg Maddux went by him... Maddux has since passed a couple old Tigers (Lolich and Bunning) and stands 13th overall. Bob Gibson is next, but he's two years away.
_Magpie - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 04:49 PM EDT (#31651) #
Technically it's a rate stat

OK. A true counting stat would be raw Assists + Putouts. RF puts that raw number into an opportunity context (Defensive Innings)

Each and every team gets the same number of outs

Yes, and I understand the problem. Twenty-seven outs are going to be made, one way or another, before we get out of here tonight. A very rough offensive equivalent is every spot in the order has to hit before you go back to the top of the order. So raw At Bats aren't all that meaningful.

Number of ground balls and the direction of same is largely dependent on the type of pitching staff you have.

Absolutely.

Teams that strikeout lots of guys will have fewer opportunties left for their fielders.

Also true. These last two are in some ways the same issue - opportunities for fielders are to a large degree dependent on the kind of pitching staff you have. The degree to which your staff is left-handed or right-handed would also factor as well.

I was going to add that whether a team plays on grass or turf would also be important - but the game is still changing isn't it? There's hardly any turf left.

Back in the day, when STATS first started doing Zone Ratings, the infielders who played on grass always, always, always had much better numbers than the guys who played on turf. (Except Chuck Knoblauch, for some reason.) Which is what you would intuitively expect to happen, isn't it?

I still think RF is like just about every other number associated with the game. By itself, out of context, it is at best meaningless and at worst downright misleading. But if you give it a context, and you're aware of its limitations, its useful to know about. Its more information.
_Mick - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 04:51 PM EDT (#31652) #
Just so the question isn't completely ignored:

How many Bauxites are professional writers, and who exactly are they?

Interesting distinction here, Willy, which you may not be making, and that is how we use the terms "Bauxites," which refers to everyone who posts here, as opposed to the "Roster," or people who start the threads and more or less manage the site, and the "Cabal," (tm) of which there isn't one, made up of Coach, Craig and Jordan.

So to take your question at face value, I don't think anyone has any idea, though you'd probably start your list with Spencer Fordin, while other local media, including Geoff Baker, have take occastion to post here.

As for the Roster, on the Roster page, Jordan identifies himself as an "Editor in Chief," our long lost pal John Gizzi uses the term "Writer," and Dave Till "Technical Writer," and Mike Moffatt admits his online economics editorial dominance at About.com. I myself dabble in the profession. We are otherwise replete mostly with students, lawyers, IT guys and financial analysts.

More to the point, though, the great thing about Da Box is it really doesn't matter.
_Magpie - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 04:54 PM EDT (#31653) #
RF purports to assess range

Which is the real problem, isn't it? The name of the stat is misleading - it suggests more than it can actually deliver. Its not at all unlike declaring "the batting champion" is the guy with the highest batting average...

Oh, wait. They do that, don't they?

Let's try not think of it as a way of assessing range. Let's think of it as a counting stat in an opportunity context.
Named For Hank - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 04:55 PM EDT (#31654) #
Personally, I became a photographer on the strength of my writing.
_Keith Talent - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 04:57 PM EDT (#31655) #
What do you think about this?

Paul DePodesta calls up Shawn Green and tells him he's NOT ALLOWED to play during Yom Kippur - take the decision away from him. That's what I might have done, weeks ago. This thing is eating at him, and will eat at him after those two days.
robertdudek - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 05:01 PM EDT (#31656) #
If it doesn't assess range, then what good is it? Didn't you list RF along with other stats to shed light on the question of who deserves the GG at short?
_Keith Talent - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 05:03 PM EDT (#31657) #
Anybody else using Safari who has trouble clicking on ESPN.com?
Craig B - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 05:13 PM EDT (#31658) #
Paul DePodesta calls up Shawn Green and tells him he's NOT ALLOWED to play during Yom Kippur - take the decision away from him.

I think that would be tough for the union to swallow, frankly. I think if Jim Tracy were to do it, that would make more sense (it's the manager's role to fill out the lineup card).

I think the principle of what you are saying is exactly right - if I were Jim Tracy I'd say to Green,

"I know you still might want to play that day, but I'm telling you right now you won't be in the lineup and you won't be called upon as a replacement or PH, so you can stay home if you want to. This whole thing is too much of a distraction for the team and for the club's sake I'm going to nip it in the bud right now. Next year, if you want to play on that day you make it clear to me early on, before it has the opportunity to be a distraction. It's your responsibility to this ballclub not to play 'will I or won't I' with the press. I'm prefectly happy with you playing, I'm perfectly happy with you not playing. But you need to make that choice and keep this team focused on winning, not holidays."
_Magpie - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 05:19 PM EDT (#31659) #
If it doesn't assess range, then what good is it?

Its one of the bits of information available. Like ERA is one of the bits of information available if you want to argue about the Cy Young. Its not the only piece of information, it may not be the best piece of information (and I don't have as much confidence in RF for fielders as I do in ERA - despite all its biases and limitations - for pitchers). But its a piece of information.

I can tell you one time RF helped reveal something to me that I did not understand. My eyes - and everyone else in the universe - were telling me that Roberto Alomar was a great a defensive player as you could possibly hope to see. And his Range Factors - no, make that his Assists + Putouts per nine innings - were not at all impressive.

STATS started publishing Zone Ratings about the same time. Alomar still looked bad, while the guy playing beside him (John Olerud) had terrific zone ratings.

I would have put this down to turf vs grass, except a) Chuck Knoblauch was playing on turf, and putting up the best numbers in the AL; b) it didn't seem to bother Olerud. The fact that it didn't seem to bother Olerud to my mind also spoke against the pitching staff having a huge impact.

What it made me look at was defensive positioning. So much of what we describe as "range" is really positioning, anyway. Its much easier to "be" five steps to your left than to move five steps...

And I swear to God, Alomar played at least fifteen feet closer to the infield than any other 2B in the league. Even on the turf at SkyDome.

And that's why he didn't make many plays, relatively speaking, when he was in Toronto. But when he went to Baltimore and then to Cleveland, he made a lot more plays. As he had done in San Diego, before he came here...
Mike D - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 05:19 PM EDT (#31660) #
David Dellucci just hit a two-run double to win the game. Texas rallied for three off Dotel.

The Rangers AND Angels are now each just two games back!
Named For Hank - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 05:19 PM EDT (#31661) #
It seems to be working okay for me, KT.
_R Billie - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 05:21 PM EDT (#31662) #
The Yankees are beating on Tampa Bay to the tune of 7-2 through 7 innings. If they hold on then the Jays will be just half a game out of not being in last place going into tomorrow.
Mike D - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 05:29 PM EDT (#31663) #
Oh, and just to weigh in...I agree with Robert about as completely as I can on RF. He's persuaded me before on this point.
_Willy - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 05:32 PM EDT (#31664) #
Just so the question isn't completely ignored:

How many Bauxites are professional writers, and who exactly are they?

... the "Roster," or people who start the threads and more or less manage the site, and the "Cabal," (tm) of which there isn't one, made up of Coach, Craig and Jordan....

As for the Roster, on the Roster page, Jordan identifies himself as an "Editor in Chief," our long lost pal John Gizzi uses the term "Writer," and Dave Till "Technical Writer," and Mike Moffatt admits his online economics editorial dominance at About.com. I myself dabble in the profession. ...

More to the point, though, the great thing about Da Box is it really doesn't matter.


Thanks for responding, Mick. (I was wondering if I'd have to adjust my paranoia meter.) I take your point that "it really doesn't matter"--except anything you're curious about does matter somewhat. I've been lurking and occasionally speaking up for about a year now, and I'm still sorting out who's who. (Thanks for relating who the Cabal is/isn't--I didn't know.) One of the reasons I've stayed with the site is because many of the posts are well-written or well-argued or amusing. And I was curious to know how many people actually made some part of their living from 'writing'. I've often thought that baseball and writing have certain affinities.
_G.T. - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 05:36 PM EDT (#31665) #
Re. Jeter's stats this year. Jeter had an "established" level before this year, they're better this year. I guess it's just a lack of faith in the stats that has us questioning why his stats are better?

"EL" had better pitching stats last year than in any previous season. Did we try to look behind the stats to find out why they were better? Or did we just accept the idea that they reflected the fact that he had a good year.

Is there a general belief that players don't have good and bad years in the field, as they might at the plate or on the mound?

Is he getting to so many more balls, percentage-wise that it couldn't just be a combination of sample size and, say, him maybe being in better shape?
_Rob - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 06:15 PM EDT (#31666) #
http://newyork.yankees.mlb.com/images/2004/09/23/gqba9F6Z.jpg
Just to fill the void with no baseball tonight...come up with the funniest caption for the following picture:


And it has to be funnier than "Yankees clinch postseason berth", the headline at the MFY Official Site.
_Magpie - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 06:55 PM EDT (#31667) #
Is there a general belief that players don't have good and bad years in the field, as they might at the plate or on the mound?

I think such a belief exists - I have no idea whether it makes any sense or not.

I thought George Bell was a pretty good outfielder from 1984-87. Made a lot of errors for the position, but he ran well, threw pretty well.

In 1988, he was pretty bad.

For the rest of his time in Toronto, he was certainly below average, but better than he was in 1988. Reviews from his one year in Wrigley suggested at the time that he did an adequate job.

Some of this was aging and injuries - he had knee and shoulder problems. (Ever notice that the Jays OF of the 80s all played 150 games a season, year after year, half of them on the old Ex turf, and they all burned out very early). But not so much in 1988. I think team management got into his head and had him thinking about his defense. And he had a lousy year in the field.

Part of it is that we have so much information about hitters and pitchers - the results of their performance in the field is pretty easy to document.

I think there's also a sense that the difference between a good year and a bad year for a hitter can be to some extent just random luck - a dozen or so line drives that went right at fielders instead of in between them.

Whereas fielding seems to be less luck-related. Or at least, we think it is.
Named For Hank - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 07:14 PM EDT (#31668) #
No, not happy birthday! Not happy birthday!
_Moffatt - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 07:17 PM EDT (#31669) #
I am not a writer. I'm an economics talking guy who is forced to write because there's no way on the Internet to express economic concepts using sock puppets. Though there should be. I'm not in the same league as a guy like Fordin; I'm not even playing the same sport.

/commas are hard
_Jim - TBG - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 07:24 PM EDT (#31670) #
http://www.torontobaseballguys.com
Caption: Yankee Hurler Finds Diabolical New Place to Hide Emery Board
_Fozzy - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 09:44 PM EDT (#31671) #
Rob, how about:

"Lieber clinches bowels as Yankees clinch playoff berth"

I'm sick, I know; I'll be taking me brain medicines now...
Craig B - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 10:06 PM EDT (#31672) #
GRETZ-KEE!

(Those who can't remember back twenty years will not get this one at all)
_6-4-3 - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 10:37 PM EDT (#31673) #
Caption :

"I ate fiberglass insulation. It wasn't cotton candy like the guy said . . . my tummy itches."

or

"It's so hot... milk was a bad choice!"
_Anders - Thursday, September 23 2004 @ 10:47 PM EDT (#31674) #
http://www.qwantz.com/20040419.html
on a side note, comn for statistics humour that applies to baseball
_Mick - Friday, September 24 2004 @ 12:00 AM EDT (#31675) #
Caption: "I"m a groundball pitcher. Can I please vote on the Gold Glove? Because I think the one Jeter wears is Titanium."
_Daryn - Friday, September 24 2004 @ 08:45 AM EDT (#31676) #
sorry, I haven't been able to find time to read ALL the post, (notice my answer to the song question several posts after it had already been won) but I have to say two things.

1) that postcard is much cooler than "just another cuttlefish".. thanks.

and
2) Yes, I think Hill at 3rd is a real possibility.
_Daryn - Friday, September 24 2004 @ 08:54 AM EDT (#31677) #
And it has to be funnier than "Yankees clinch postseason berth", the headline at the MFY Official Site.

How about:

"After entering the game disguised as a Starting Pitcher for the Gotham City Yankees, The JOKER, dashed to his green helicopter and evaded Batman once again"
Mike Green - Friday, September 24 2004 @ 09:04 AM EDT (#31678) #
GT, when Loaiza had his great season last year, analysts did wonder why. Some commented that he had faced easier opposition than in prior years; others noticed a change in his stuff.

Pitching is anyways completely different. The skill is so fine that it is common for pitchers to be much better in their 30s then in their 20s. It's very unusual for hitters (Barry Bonds and Jose Cruz Sr. being obvious exceptions).

Intuitively, I would expect deterioration in fielding skills, as players age. Perhaps positioning is so important that, for infielders at least, it is common for players to improve significantly into their early to mid 30s. We could call it the Bordick effect.
_G.T. - Friday, September 24 2004 @ 10:29 AM EDT (#31679) #
GT, when Loaiza had his great season last year, analysts did wonder why

I guess I didn't phrase that correctly. What I meant to ask is why, if a pitcher or hitter's stats suddenly get better or worse one year, one just assumes that the stats are reflecting the fact that he's performed better or worse, and wonder why. The analysis starts with the question -- Loaiza's been better this year... why?

The questions surrounding Jeter's defensive spike seem to start with the question -- Jeter's stats are better... why? People don't immediately acknowledge that he's been better and wonder why, instead we first question if the statistical improvement reflects an actual improvement.

What's the difference, in ZR, between Jeter this year, and in previous years? Is he getting to, 5% more balls? 10%? 20%? (What's the difference, percentage-wise, between the best and worst fielders, for that matter?) If a hitter's BA rises 10%, don't we normally write that off as noise?
Mike Green - Friday, September 24 2004 @ 11:01 AM EDT (#31680) #
In a typical year, the range of ZR for a typical starting shortstop is .790-.900. In other words, the difference between top and bottom is less than 15%. It's nothing like batting average, where the range is between .220 and .350, say.

Jeter's ZR went up from .780-.800 (each year 2000-2003) to .850 this year. It's roughly equivalent to a rise from hitting .220 4 seasons in a row to hitting .290. It's actually not a bad analogy, because batting average as a stat has some of the same problems that ZR does.
robertdudek - Friday, September 24 2004 @ 11:08 AM EDT (#31681) #
In Jeter's case, I'd be surprised if it wasn't almost entirely the result of new pitchers coming in and being able to set up in a different position because of A-Rod. The new Yankees pitchers might give up more routine groundballs than the outgoing ones (I'm thinking of Jeff Weaver).

Also, I have a technical question for Magpie: How are balls that roll through the SS-3B hole counted - in the 3B zone, SS zone, or do they share? Is it possible that A-Rod getting to some of those balls that previous Yankees 3Bs didn't helps boost Jeter's ZR?
Mike Green - Friday, September 24 2004 @ 11:26 AM EDT (#31682) #
The other change this year that potentially might affect Jeter's ZR, and other defensive metrics, is the presence of Cairo rather than Soriano at second. Intuitively, I wouldn't think that it would make too much of a difference, but frankly I don't really trust my intuition on something like this.
Jays Roundup - I'll Be Sitting in Your Mirror. | 117 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.