Now I've Got Some Time for Baseball

A Visit to the Mound

Baseball fans over-analyzing an over-analyzed game

So um... Listen. My wife is friggin' pissed about the last road trip. I'm in no hurry to get home.

A Visit to the Mound is regularly updated series of emails touching on a wide range of baseball subjects. 

Josh

It appears as if pace of play rules are working: http://deadspin.com/mlbs-attempts-to-speed-up-the-game-appear-to-be-working-1697688811

Taking off an average of 8 minutes and getting under the 3 hour mark is huge.  I have no problem watching a 5 hour slog with multiple pitching changes in an inning, but things like that will always keep baseball a somewhat nichey, regional sport.  As a lifelong hockey fan I've grown weary of not being able to discuss my favorite sport when I travel to certain parts of the US.  I am all for growing the game.  I never got why people become "sports hipsters" about stuff.  Hockey fans love to be insular and act like they've been hiding something from the world, some secret sport.  I'd much rather the NHL be in the public consciousness for more than just fights or extreme injuries, which is about the only time the NHL gets the truly national stage.  Same with baseball. Red Sox v Yankees and similar big market games will always drive ratings, but is Joe Six pack gonna watch a late september game with wild card implications between the Pirates and the Rockies?  Unless said Mr Six pack lives in Colorado or Pittsburgh, probably not.  Meanwhile, people watch the NFL scouting combine just to see 20 year olds do shuttle runs.  

Uncle Bones

There's a couple of things to unpack as they pertain the new, shorter baseball games. One that you definitely hit right on the head was the comparison between the NFL and MLB. The NFL really occupies a strange space right now in American sports landscape. There's a war going on for the sport's soul and one side is winning. 2 years ago you heard an awful lot about how discouraging the vicious hits on defenseless receivers would take "toughness" out of the game. Well, now that veterans football players are turning up dead at a rate only seen in Pro Wrestling and Fantasy Football numbers going through the roof, no one is complaining any more. Despite protests, it made the game a better viewing experience.

You'll some similar protests to baseball's pace of play changes. These arguments that emerge from the idea that "baseball shouldn't have time limit" usually come from grumpy old men and the "sports hipsters". These opinions don't matter much as grumpy old men (always knowledgeable & entertaining) are not the future and "hipsters" of any ilk are fairly transient in their interests and will move on to something newer soon anyway.

Getting games under 3 hours is very important to the long term health of the game. Especially when you consider the amount of TV money currently bolstering incomes. We are more or less conditioned around the idea of a 3 hour sporting events. NFL, NBA, NHL all wrap their games up under 3 hours. Its really all we can spend on a single sporting event. I mean really, how many other things do we 3 solid hours to in our day or even week? Other than work? 3 uninterrupted hours? I can't think of anything, yet we expect fans to tune in night after night after night to a 4 hour baseball game featuring multiple mound conferences, throws over, pitching changes, and batters adjusting their gloves? Not when I've got my tablet here and I can check Twitter for some game commenta... Oh look, 13 ways to lose weig... Wait, the Bills just traded for Phil... Huh, whats that? A shiny new penny?

A short, crisp 3 hour baseball game with a solid rhythm will grow the game nationally. It might not happen right away, but I'll be curious to see how the playoff numbers look. I hear a lot from people about how they only get into playoff hockey, but don't care much for the regular season. Well, what if people started getting into playoff baseball? As it stands now just about every playoff baseball game is a 4 hour commitment that doesn't end until 11:00 or 12:00 at night. That's no way to attract new fans even if that midnight drama is as thick as a hipster's mustache wax.

Its Time to Overreact About the Cubs

A Visit to the Mound

Baseball fans over-analyzing an over-analyzed game

A Visit to the Mound is regularly updated series of emails touching on a wide range of baseball subjects. 

We made the right decision Jon. We did. 

Josh

Going back to early season overreacting, are the Cubs sounding the alarms already?

http://espn.go.com/blog/chicago/cubs/post/_/id/29745/cubs-offense-in-need-of-help

This is just feeding the crowd who wanted Bryant to start with the team. However, the article specifically seems to be highlighting that they have trouble scoring with guys in scoring position. Hitting with RISP tends to even out over a bigger sample size. Remember how the cardinals basically rode a high BA with RISP (specifically by Allen Craig) to a World Series then couldn't recreate it? RISP means guys hit to get on. As Rizzo says in the article keep getting on base and the RBIs will come. 

That's not to say putting a guy who hit over .300 in the minors in your lineup wouldn't help your offense. It would. And he will be there soon enough as has been discussed at length. Doesn't guarantee he'd hit with RISP though or solve that problem. To me, It's not really worth pushing the panic button on April 11th.  However, panic sells, especially in bigger markets with fragile fan bases. Gotta get those early season clicks somehow, he says while winking at the camera.

Uncle Bones

Its important here to note the difference between the Cubs sounding the panic bell and the Cubs/baseball media creating the panic narrative out of thin air. I know that you know the difference and basically pointed it out above, but I think us baseball types (yes, we're baseball types now. It needed to be said) may have assumed something about the Cubs that wasn't necessarily true. So without going into the unreasonable nature of hand wringing over .0185% of the season lets talk about the offense that the Cubs actually hit the ground with to start 2015.

1 Dexter Fowler CF - Career OPB .365 - Serviceable, but not stand-out for a lead off hitter and at age 29 not likely to get much better.

2 Jorge Soler RF - Only 23 years old. I can put his number here, but they don't mean anything. He might be really good, but he's just as likely to need some time to be really good.

3 Anthony Rizzo 1B - In 2014 as a 24 year old posted a 151 OPS+ in 616 PA's. Kid's a stud. We should be annoyed that the Red Sox traded him, but him for... Wade Miley... but eh... I still like the team they have now.

4 Miguel Montero C - Has not posted an OPS+ above 100 since 2012. He's 31 now and still a catcher. He is not who you want in the clean-up spot.

5 Starlin Castro SS - 25 yo, career OPS+ of 99, and if the Cubs were really that high on him they wouldn't have traded for Addison Russel and we wouldn't be hearing rumors about him going to the Padres

6 Chris Coghlan LF - Has a career OPS+ of 100 despite only having 2 season about 100: 2008 & 2014. And he's 30 this season. If the Cubs are lucky he's an average player. If they're lucky...

7 Mike Olt 3B - Other than just keeping 3B warm for Bryant, Olt's other claim to fame is having never hit about .200 in any season in his career. I'm sorry, but he has shown nothing to demonstrate that he is a major league hitter.

8 Pitcher Spot - The numbers say hitting the pitcher 8th is the best way to go. I'm glad Joe Maddon will actually do it day in day out and not just pay lip service to the idea, but for our purposes lets be generous: whoever hits here has a .200 average.

9 Arismendy Alcantara 2B - A fantasy darling this spring, but at 23 has done nothing to prove that he's an everyday hitter. You want more evidence? He hits 9th for the Cubs. I rest my case.

My take away from all this? The Cubs line-up is just plain not that good. Their top 3 is pretty good, but the Cubs could do better than Fowler in the lead-off spot and Soler is no sure thing this season. Miguel Montero is not the 4 hitter on a winning team. From there they go from average to abysmal quick. So it shouldn't be a huge surprise that the Cubs are struggling to score runs. They have one stud, some more or less average veterans and a bunch of youngsters who haven't carried their weight as of yet.

Bryant slotting into the 4th spot and sending Montero, Castro, Coghlan down and Olt to anywhere else will definitely help, but looking at that line-up for what it is, I understand why Theo and crew are OK waiting out those 2 weeks or so. Unless 2 or 3 of those youngsters take a huge step forward, the Cubs are still a "wait till next year" team. 

BTW if you Google "Cubs lineup" this is what you get. Look at Manny's mugshot. WTF???

Josh

Very interesting points.  So clearly the Cubs were so hyped they were actually overvalued.  Seems to happen every year.  What is the cause of this?  Do writers just appreciate a good story?  People WANT to believe in the Cubs, but it seems it was beyond statistical reasoning.

Uncle Bones

Baseball is the American sport of where narratives find their home. From its inception it has come alive in the minds of millions through the written word. When baseball first started the only way to keep abreast of the results was from the daily paper, a then thriving form of media. Next came the radio, which allowed for fans to follow a game without being in attendance, but if you missed a game the write up and the box score were still in featured prominently in the next day's paper. Then TV, internet, podcasts and so forth, but reading and writing about baseball is still a major part of how the sport is understood. It was "America's Pastime", because at a time it was something that you could discuss with any one from your community because it was regularly presented in the media of the time and it was relatively easy to keep on top of whether you were interested or not.

So for fans and media types to latch on to the story of the 2015 Cubs is not all that surprising. The years of failure, plus the organizational stewardship of Theo Epstein, plus the eccentric yet media friendly Joe Madden, plus the promise of youth, plus the addition of an "Ace" had everyone all amped up on the North Sides "Lovable Losers". The angle that fascinates me the most about the Cubs obsession is that how much the White Sox are an all but forgotten Chicago team. Its not like the Yankees & Mets where one team has been around for way longer and has won way more in its history. Its not even really like the situations in Los Angeles or the Bay Area. For whatever reason, the Cubs are the Chicago team that really generates the narrative. Both the Cubs and the White Sox were founded in the 19th century. Both teams won early on in the history and not much sense then. And while the White Sox took home the WS hardware in 2005 you never heard anything about them being cursed even though they managed to go 88 years between titles. 

So the Cubs clearly have a special place in America's consciousness and this always lend itself to a runaway narrative. 

Why Do We Think We Know Better Than Yankees?

Ooo... That looks painful

By all accounts the New York Yankees are the model franchise of all North American professional sports. They have won 27 World Series Championships. Next closest in all of the major North American franchises is the Montreal Canadians of the NHL with 24. Followed by the NBA's own Lakers and Celtics with 17 a piece. The next MLB team down the list? The St. Louis Cardinals with 10. That's right, the New York Yankees have 17 more championships than the next closest team in their league. They know how to win baseball games and they've been doing it for a very long time.

So why do we, and by we I mean the fantasy baseball community, baseball chattering class, baseball bloggers, casual fans, people on the street and the random J-Pop stars that I follow in Twitter seem to think that we all know better than the Yankees? Why are we all so convinced the Masahiro Tanaka will not last the entire 2015 season? The Yankees have actually talked to Tanaka. They have seen his medical records, his x-rays, and the size shirts he wears. They know everything there is to know about him and the 27 time World Series Champion New York Yankees believe that letting Tanaka pitch this season is A-O-K. Why?

Before we try and answer that question, lets try to figure out why we think we're so right. Back in July of 2014 after lighting the league on fire, Masahiro Tanaka went down with a partially torn ligament in his throwing elbow. The kind of injury that usually results in Tommy John surgery for the majority of players, pitchers or otherwise. If you've gotten this far into the article and can point an instance of a pitcher who avoided TJ after a partially torn UCL please chime in. I will fix this post and cite you as a source. I know its happened once or twice, but for the most part after teams get that 2nd opinion on the damaged UCL, its surgery. Teams usually figure that its easier to bite that 12-18 months recovery time than to have a 2 month recovery followed a questionable return and then probably a visit from TJ anyway. So please, once again, if you have a case where a pitcher with a torn or partially torn UCL has come back and pitched effectively hit me up. I'd love to hear it.  

The Yankees knew all that. They're not dumb. They have won 27 World Series titles after all. But instead they opted for rest and rehab. Maybe it was because they wanted to get the most use out of their brand new $155 million investment. Maybe it was because they were trying keep the Derek Jeter retirement tour chugging along as if it wasn't a lost season. Or maybe they really just thought that Tanaka could heal his ligament without changing how he threw a baseball.

To be clear, I understand why the Yankees would want as much Masahiro Tanaka as they can get. The first 3 months of the 2014 season he posted a 2.10 ERA with a 0.95 WHIP and 127 K's in 115.2 innings (ESPN). He made hitters look silly and he won 13 games which for only throwing just a hair over 130 innings in pretty good. There's a lot to like there, but once the elbow injury surfaced Tanaka nose-dived in a big way to the point where the Yankees shut him down all together just a 7 innings in to his September return.

So what do the Yankees know that the rest of the baseball world doesn't? I'm afraid nothing. These are not your father's Reggie Jackson, Thurman Munson, work hard, come through in the clutch Yankees. Nor are these your grandfather's outclass, out-talent, just a million times better than anyone Yankees. Hell, these are not even your older brother's Core4, Mike Mussina, Paul O'Neill and Bernie Williams belong in the Hall of Fame Yankees. This is the mostly 30+/$20 mil a year, mediocre at best farm system, grasping at straws, 27 time World Series Champion Yankees. And while those 27 World Series Championship are a nice thing to hang your hat on (or in most cases throw in every one else's face), they don't do diddly-squat for them this year, next year or any year in the future. 

I think the bottom line reason that Masahiro Tanaka is still pitching for the Yankees and not recovering from a mid-July TJ surgery is because the Yankees have no other options. Its probably true that a slightly above replacement level Tanaka is better than no Tanaka. And he's probably better than anybody else the Yankees could trot out there right now. I don't blame them for not getting deep with Lester or Scherzer this off-season. Especially considering the FA class hitting the market in 2016 and the money they have coming off the books in the next 3 years. Unfortunately, a reduced Tanaka gets them no closer to the playoffs this season than no Tanaka will get them. But then again, these are your grasping at straws, let's see what sticks to the wall, we'll still cash in on merch sales, 27 time World Series Champion Yankees.

Click-Bait Worthy MLB Predictions pt.2

A Visit to the Mound

Baseball fans over-analyzing an over-analyzed game

But Coach, I only sent that pic to one girl.

A Visit to the Mound is regularly updated series of emails touching on a wide range of baseball subjects. 

Uncle Bones

To me, saying that baseball should have LESS playoff teams because you want to see the 2 teams with the best record in the World Series is kinda like arguing that gay marriage should be illegal because being attracted to a person of the same sex might be contagious and that the science is still out on that one because no one has done the research yet. In other words, its absurd. Its also like saying that there are too many billboards at the stadiums as if teams shouldn't be trying to maximize their returns at every opportunity.

Let me remind you and anyone who might read this that the MLB season is 162 games long with each team playing 81 home games. Its not easy work getting butts in those seats and eyes on those games day in day out. Going to a baseball game is not an inexpensive proposition and sitting through 162 3 1/2-4 hour baseball games on TV is no treat either, ESPECIALLY when you are watching a team that is either not competitive or not competitive enough so for a shot at the post season.

This is compounded when you think about how regional of a sport baseball is. Yes, the Yankees, Red Sox, and to an extent the Braves have done a great job at expanding their national appeal, but very few people outside of Houston are Astros fans. Same goes for the Royals, Rays, Rockies, Marlins, etc. The longer into the season fans of these teams are able to stay engaged in their team the better. Not only is it the best thing for business, but its the best things for the fans relationships with those teams.

Our defending American League Champion Kansas City Royals are a prime example of this. Before our time the Royals were often considered the AAAA team for the New York Yankees as so much of their talent wound up in NY before it had a chance to win in Kansas City. Then they held on to players in the '80's (when baseball put in ALCS & NLCS) and won, but then in our lifetime we say the same thing happen again. Carlos Betran, Johnny Damon, Zack Grienke, the list goes on, shipped out of town because the Royals didn't want to spend the money on players when they weren't going to compete. Then what happened in 2014? Bolstered by a trade that brought in Major League talent, the Royals hung in it all the way to end, got hot in the playoffs and the rest his history. If there was not 2 Wild Card spots and maybe only 2 teams from each league made the team then Shields would have been dealt and the Royals would have been rebuilding again.

More playoff spots means more teams in contention, more eyes on the product and more fans maintaining an interest year after year. Seems like a smart strategy for a sport that has an average fan base the sits right around the mid 50's. But here's a question for you. Right now MLB has 5-ish playoff spot per league. Too many to some, but still much less than the NBA or NHL and only 1 less that the NFL. How many playoff teams is too man? Sure long term fan engagement is great, but how excited are most fans when their team locks down the 8-seed in the NBA? I tend to follow a lot of Boston media and some folks are wondering whats up with the Celtics approaching the 8-seed in the East. I know the Celts are rebuilding, but is it that bad that the team might be ahead of its time frame? And does sending half of the conferences' team to the playoffs cheapen the whole experience?

Josh

As a lifelong hockey fan, I can say throwing 16 teams in the playoff mix is nothing short of awesome. It differs from the NBA in the sense that low seeds regularly have a chance. Bottom seeds have made it to the cup, and won it. But hockey is different, they've had multiple teams come back from a 3-0 series deficit in the playoffs.  Remember when the Red Sox did that it was a huge story, but it actually has happened in hockey enough to the point where it's a fun story, not a monumental one.  

That said, the length of baseball games doesn't lend itself to more playoff games.  I love a good 5 hour late october slog as much as any baseball stalwart, but that doesnt play to the casual fan. Plus when your team is in the playoffs, it's a different vibe sport to sport.  Overtime hockey is, in my opinion, the only thing that matches the anxiety, dread, and excitement  of late inning playoff baseball. Baseball's "slowness" just lends itself to heightened wonder and anxious pacing in the playoffs.  The "slow" moments are building up to one moment where everything can change (Cue Don Henley's "in a new york munute...oohh we wooo...) If the Red Sox had to play MORE games in October, do you really think you could stomach that?  Probably, but you might have some explaining to do when you walk into work the next day wearing one shoe and 3 day scruff going.  

In regards to your Shields comment, did the pundits who bashed the Royals for that trade ever double back on their words?  Or did they just slink away like the guy who starts a fight and lets his friends finish it?  The whole argument against it was the years of control of Wil Myers.....who the Rays recently traded. That trade proved to me that snap judgments on organizational moves are good for sound bites and tweet headlines in the 24 news cycle, but they take years to play out and truly evaluate.  

Uncle Bones

The fact that baseball has only had 1 team to come back from a 3-0 deficit in a playoff series says two things. One of which being that there just haven't been nearly the same number of playoff series that hockey and basketball have seen. And two, the difference between good teams and good enough teams is probably pretty wide.

Now imagine if 8 teams from BOTH the National League and the American League made the playoffs in 2014. How excited are you right now thinking about a 5 game series between the Angels and the Yankees and the Nationals and the Mets. That's right, both NY teams would have made the playoffs as 8 cedes and both teams would have gotten snuffed out like a spider in a day care. And if that's not bad enough consider that the 7 & 8 cedes in the NL both would have had a 79-83 record. All that to add another week and a half to a season that already ends in early November. Eck...

I do think its funny that you brought up having a rooting interest in October baseball. I remember in September of 2013 as the Red Sox marched towards the playoffs thinking about how my life was about to change in ways I wasn't prepared for in the next month. Sure enough, there I was arguing with strangers about the proper application of runner interference & texting you to discuss the Sox bullpen situation while at my wife's birthday dinner. October baseball does things to me and not all of them are good.

As far as grading trades go, talking heads gotta make noise (its why they're there), but its impossible to grade a trade when it happens, 24 hours after it happens, a whole year after it happens. Baseball is the ultimate long game. Its one of the reasons why advance stats took hold here first. There are a lot of games and players can spend a lot of time in an organization. So while its tempting, and some times necessary (if its your job) to pass judgement on a single transaction moments after it happens everyone knows you're just talking to be heard.

Now for fun, almost 3 years later tell me who won this trade:

Red Sox acquire Allen Webster, Ruby De La Rosa, Ivan DeJesus Jr., Jerry Sands & James Loney

Dodgers acquire Adrian Gonzales, Carl Crawford, Josh Beckett & Nick Punto

Red Sox also sent $12 million. 

Who won? 

Part 3 

ICYM pt.1