- The controversy over the telecommunication industry's helping out the government with eavesdropping on terrorists. I understand why Congress wants to know what was done before giving immunity for past cases, but this is not just or even primarily a terror issue; only about 10% of the instances were requested by the White House (et al). Most had to do with mafia or other crime issues, from what I can tell from the statistics. [I saw them yesterday in an article, but cannot find it now.]
- Imagine if Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity had made an outrageous claim like this - would he not be looking for a new job by now? Making up stories that the "right-wing hate machine" mugged an Air America host to "silence" her - when her own lawyer says she fell while walking her dog?! Gotta love this apology:
Host Jon Elliott issued a written retraction of his remarkable on-air charge, saying: "I shouldn't have speculated based on hearsay that Randi Rhodes had been mugged and that it may have been an attack from a right wing hate machine. [Ez: Ya think?] I apologize for jumping to conclusions based on an emotional reaction."
What does it say about the left that their "emotional reactions" make them jump to such insane conclusions against the right so quickly? Yes, all talk-show hosts jump to extreme interpretations of events - it's what gets them ratings - but this is way beyond the pale. - I'm sure James Taranto will write about this far better than I later on, but I'm not sure what to think about this media shield law. There are a nice amount of common-sense exceptions, which is a good thing, but wouldn't it behoove this country to force reporters and media outlets to use a little more common sense and care in their reporting in the first place?! The largest problems that caused reporters to be jailed stemmed from completely false reports, such as Joe Wilson's infamous and false editorial that the NY Times printed that set off the firestorm about Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame. Moreover, this is an important note, too:
The Justice Department, in questioning the need for the legislation, said it had approved the issuances of subpoenas to reporters seeking confidential source information in only 19 cases between 1992 and 2006.
It sounds like this will shield law will simply encourage people with political agendas to constantly leak information without worry of it coming back to bite them. This will only hurt the country in the long run, because administrations will be incredibly secretive about everything they do to avoid leaks. - Obama & Cheney are distant cousins. It's just funny.
- An Israeli Bedouin Arab who has 67 (!!!) kids from 8 wives is looking for wife #9.
- This was fascinating and very smart:
Two key RBI singles in the inning came from second baseman Asdrubal Cabrera and first baseman Victor Martinez, each switch-hitters, both of whom were notably batting right-handed against the right-handed Wakefield. As Cabrera explained, Wakefield's knuckler more often that not breaks in on right-handed hitters and away from lefties. So the more effective way to attack it, if you have the choice that a switch-hitter does, is to go right-handed.
Nice. Note that the left-handed hitting Travis Hafner struck out three times against Wakefield; Sizemore was 0/2 with a walk to lead off the game; and Lofton grounded out twice, for a combined 0/8 with a walk. Righties were 0/5 with a BB and 4K's the first time around, 3/5 with a 2B, HR, and HBP the second time around, and 2/2 the third time around. - Finally, I don't get why everyone was this down on Westbrook and Byrd. Yes, they're not amazing pitchers, but they are both very consistent - Byrd throws strikes [fewest BB/9 in baseball], Westbrook keeps the ball down and gets ground balls and double plays. That has been their modus operandi for a few years, which is why they pick up 15 wins a year. Westbrook hasn't given up more than 4 runs in his last 15 starts; he only gave up 4 twice. Last year, when he was healthy all year, he led the league in ground-ball DPs.
Wednesday, October 17, 2007
All Over the Place
As can be imagined, I'm a bit all over the place today. Life is both very exciting and very nerve-wracking at the moment. So... here are a few tidbits I found interesting in a wide array of topics, along with some of my own thoughts. (Occasionally, I do post my own thoughts, too, ya know...)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
People aren't really "down" on Westbrook and Byrd, but they do realize that both pitchers are around average and should give up a lot of runs to good offenses. Westbrook was bad against the Yanks but very good against the Sox. Byrd pitched two solid games against two good offenses. Yet Sabathia has been awful this postseason and Carmona laid out a stinker in Game 2 against the Sox.
ReplyDeleteJust shows why the playoffs are mostly dependant on luck.
Agreed to an extent. I do think that pitchers who consistently pitch a certain way (particularly in ways that these guys do - ground balls or no walks) have a better shot at putting a good game in.
ReplyDeleteI don't think it's necessarily luck; I just think that statistics play a much smaller role and it's harder to apply them as we like to the rest of the year.
Agreed to an extent. I do think that pitchers who consistently pitch a certain way (particularly in ways that these guys do - ground balls or no walks) have a better shot at putting a good game in.
ReplyDeleteBetter shot than what?
I don't think it's necessarily luck; I just think that statistics play a much smaller role and it's harder to apply them as we like to the rest of the year.
I think that's basically the same thing as luck but you could call it small sample size if you want.
I still have to respond to your matchup post on Noyam, but haven't had the time.
Better shot than what?
ReplyDeleteThan other pitchers with similar numbers, or even slightly better numbers, but who walk a lot of batters and are "flyball" pitchers.
I think that's basically the same thing as luck but you could call it small sample size if you want.
Heh. I had a feeling you'd say that.
There's simply a difference in how you want your team to play in a playoff game and how you want them to play throughout the season.
Than other pitchers with similar numbers, or even slightly better numbers, but who walk a lot of batters and are "flyball" pitchers.
ReplyDeleteI think it depends on why those other pitchers have equal or similar numbers. If those pitchers are lucky, then probably. However, if those other pitchers strikeout a lot of people, they might be less prone to luck, so they might be more successful.
There's simply a difference in how you want your team to play in a playoff game and how you want them to play throughout the season.
You mean how the team plays or how it is structured?
Dunno about the K pitchers. If they simply throw hard but have terrible control, they'd probably still get nailed in the postseason. Otherwise, agreed.
ReplyDeleteI mean both, sort of. I meant how it plays, but structure is important, too. That's part of the other post on Noyam. Not that it should be built different for each, but that certain structures which work wonders for the regular season won't work for the postseason, while others will work very well in the regular season and stay well in the postseason.
Dunno about the K pitchers. If they simply throw hard but have terrible control, they'd probably still get nailed in the postseason. Otherwise, agreed.
ReplyDeleteI'm still not sure how that works. The only possible argument I can envision is that postseason teams tend to be better hitters and low BB, ground-ball pitchers tend to do relatively equally well against both good and bad lineups, while a flyball pitcher with worse control with similar numbers will dominate weak lineups but do poorly against better lineups.
I don't see why that's true. First, it assumes that better lineups are the teams that walk more. But while better offensive teams will normally get on base more, there is no necessary correlation between getting on-base at a higher clip and walking more; a team might have a higher OBP simply because they hit better.
Groundball pitchers might also be prone to more cheap hits that get through the infield.
I'll hopefully go through this more when I write a post about matchups and the postseason.
The only possible argument I can envision is that postseason teams tend to be better hitters and low BB, ground-ball pitchers tend to do relatively equally well against both good and bad lineups, while a flyball pitcher with worse control with similar numbers will dominate weak lineups but do poorly against better lineups.
ReplyDeleteExactly.
First, it assumes that better lineups are the teams that walk more. But while better offensive teams will normally get on base more, there is no necessary correlation between getting on-base at a higher clip and walking more; a team might have a higher OBP simply because they hit better.
I think that's unlikely. Given that balls put into play are generally evened out, it would have to be walks or a massive HR difference that would get a team that far.
Team OBP leaders (BB Rank):
1 Yankees (4)
2 Red Sox (1)
3 Rockies (5)
4 Philles (3)
5 Angels (21)
6 Tigers (27)
7 Indians (6)
8 Mets (8)
9 Braves (12)
10 A's (2)
Basically, the anomalies are the Angels and Tigers... and I'd venture that the Tigers have far more balls in play that land for hits because of the nature of their ballpark.
Groundball pitchers might also be prone to more cheap hits that get through the infield.
...which would probably be mitigated by the DP balls they force.
Exactly.
ReplyDeleteIt's possible but you would have to prove that. Let's use two hypothetical pitchers: A and B. Both are exactly average with a 100 ERA+. A is a groundball pitcher who doesn't walk people. B is a flyball pitcher with bad control, and I assume a higher strikeout rate.
Based on your reasoning, A should be worse against bad teams (i.e., teams with a high OBP) and better against good teams. The variation between his performances should be small, and should not hinge on the skill of the opposition.
For both pitchers to be average, B would have to be worse against good teams and better against bad teams. Therefore we should reasonably find that B is the less consistent pitcher, because his performance depends on the quality of his opponent, or at least it affects his performance more than it does A's. That's a good starting point, but I wonder if the stats bear it out.
I think that's unlikely. Given that balls put into play are generally evened out, it would have to be walks or a massive HR difference that would get a team that far.
That's not true. BABIP is generally consistent among pitchers, but not hitters. That means pitchers will generally average .290 BABIP for their career, with any deviance chalked up to chance and luck. Hitters, however, are able to be better than league average consistently, usually because faster hitters can beat out infield hits.
Also everything evens out across the league, but not necessarily within each team. Some teams might have a higher BABIP over the course of the season and might have a higher OBP than another team with a similar number of walks.
The list you provided doesn't prove your point. It's only a list of 10 teams from one season; and even within that list there are 3 disparities (the A's were second in walks but only 10th in OBP)!
Btw, our hypothetical pitcher A is certainly not Byrd who had the best BB/9 in the majors but is clearly a flyball pitcher. Westbrook had a very higher GB% (although lower than in past seasons), but also walks a lot more people than Byrd. And Byrd has pitched better in this postseason than any of the other Indian starters. Do you really think his style is better suited for the postseason than Carmona and Sabathia?
A vs. B - That's my hypothesis, anyway. :)
ReplyDeleteHitters, however, are able to be better than league average consistently, usually because faster hitters can beat out infield hits.
I've often wondered about that. Besides speed or hitting it out of the park, are there other factors which control a guy's BA? I've always felt yes, but I was under the impression "no".
The list you provided doesn't prove your point. It's only a list of 10 teams from one season; and even within that list there are 3 disparities (the A's were second in walks but only 10th in OBP)!
That's not really a disparity - the top group is bunched pretty tightly. But that means that 7-8 of 10 fall pretty much right in line. That's pretty darn good, especially if I'm right about the Tigers. (I'd have to see if teams had a higher BABIP in Comerica.)
Btw, our hypothetical pitcher A is certainly not Byrd who had the best BB/9 in the majors but is clearly a flyball pitcher. Westbrook had a very higher GB% (although lower than in past seasons), but also walks a lot more people than Byrd. And Byrd has pitched better in this postseason than any of the other Indian starters. Do you really think his style is better suited for the postseason than Carmona and Sabathia?
No, actually. My argument was the following: Westbrook and Byrd are better for the postseason than a typical average pitcher. Westbrook because of the ground ball ratio (and DP ratio); Byrd because he doesn't walk ANYBODY. In theory, Westbrook should be better off - consistent overall, keeps it down, etc. Byrd only gets to take advantage of patient teams not used to swinging by getting ahead in counts; and when they do swing, it comes back to BABIP, where he simply can be lucky.
Carmona and CC should be great pitchers always, though CC can get in trouble if he's not throwing strikes (see Playoffs 2007). Carmona can get in trouble with really patient teams if he's not getting that low strike.
There are hardly any dominant pitchers anymore like those who used to turn up in World Series (think 1950's, 60', 70's). I wonder what factors other than the lower mound, and steroids, have given today's batters an edge.
ReplyDelete