Pawnking's Phillies Sportsbeat

Busy, busy, busy

2006-07-22T11:03:00.000-07:00

Incredibly busy. Sorry for the long hiatus, people. When I got back home, my den was flooded, and between that and the new job, no time at all for blogging! I mean, none!

I see the Phils have been treading water while I was away. There's been some rumors about Abreu being traded, but "Stand" Pat has done nothing. He'll soon have to decide to fish or cut bait. Half of me is rooting for the Phils to clean house and trade away the high-priced talent, hopefully for good prospects, but the other half remembers we're not far out of the Wild Card, and Houston wasn't given much of a chance last year, either.

Go Phils! Blogging will still be spotty for a while as I fix the den and adjust to my new schedule.

Gone Fishin'

2006-06-30T05:16:00.000-07:00

I'll be gone for about a week, then light blogging due to a job change. I'm leaving public accounting for the private sector. Wish me luck!

UPDATE:
Remember, you can believe in the Phils! Here, have some Kool-Aid.

This is interesting

2006-06-28T11:13:00.000-07:00

Over at BP, they've taken the chess concept of ELO rating and applied it to baseball. Read all about it (sub req'd) here.

Basically, ELO rates the average MLB club at 1500. The system adjusts for the most recent play most heavily, so theoretically the current ELO will give you a good idea about how well the team is playing now, as opposed to over the whole season. The harder your schedule (against higher ELO teams) the fewer points you lose with a loss, and the more you gain with a win.

I didn't examine the math behind it, but I trust the boys at BP. We'll see if it's a good predictor of future abilities. A few interesting tidbits regarding the Phillies:

The Phillies ELO is currently 1499, just a hair below average for MLB.

Unfortunately, the Mets are the best team in the NL and the 3rd best overall, with an ELO of 1549.

Very interestingly, the Mets, Cardinals, and the Marlins (yes, the Marlins) are the only NL teams with a better ELO than the Phils right now, with the Fish having an ELO of 1500, and the birds 1531.

Since the systems slants heavily toward recent play, the fact that the Phils have lost so many in the past two weeks is offset by how brutally hard their schedule has been, with the Red Sox, Mets, and Yankees being three of the top five teams in baseball.

Given all that, am I crazy to think the Phils aren't out of this? True, we're 5 games under .500 right now, but the teams ahead of us are not beating the world right now. Myers' "time out" makes things more difficult, and the poor play of so many makes things a little unlikely, but overall, this seems to be saying we're not quite as bad as it may seem we are.

Over the final two weeks before the All Star Break, we're playing some pretty bad teams. It's not unlikely we might enter the ASB with a .500 (or near .500) record.

Could it be the Phillies are not out of this? Is it possible we can still be buyers, and not sellers?

Non-apology not accepted

2006-06-28T06:58:00.000-07:00

Here's the text of Myers' non-apology:

"On the day of my arrest, I consulted with my attorney by phone, who advised me to make no comments about this matter. While I followed his advice at the time, I have felt the need to make some comments about this situation and I do so now.

"First, while I dispute that the facts are as alleged, I recognize that my behavior was inappropriate and for that I apologize.

"Second, I recognize that the incident created an embarrassing situation for many people, including my wife and family, my teammates, the Phillies organization, and fans, and I am very sorry for that.

"Third, my wife and children are very important to me and I am willing to do whatever is necessary to address any problems that might harm our marriage. I have asked the Phillies for some time off so that I can concentrate on this matter and make plans for whatever assistance is appropriate.

"At this time, I do not intend to make any further public comments about this matter."

Forgive me if I'm a little slow, but where in this did Myers accept any responsibility at all for his actions? Anywhere at all?

He starts off with a flat denial of any wrongdoing. Others have pointed out that he only did this to protect himself legally. OK, that may be so, but the fact remains he flatly denied any wrongdoing. So, why is he apologizing? Because his "behavior was inappropriate?" In what way? He doesn't answer. Raising your voice in a movie theater is "inappropriate." Hitting your wife is criminal. So, what, exactly, is he sorry for?

He answers that in the next line. Note that he does not apologize for his actions in any way! Rather, he apologizes that "the incident" created "an embarrassing situation" for many. Was he even involved in "the incident?" Not according to him. He isn't even apologizing for embarrassment, but merely a situation where some may be embarrassed! In other words, he implicitly states that you may be embarrassed, or you may not. Therefore if you are embarrassed, it's almost as much your fault as his. Disgusting.

Furthermore, getting caught in a bar fight at 2am in an "embarrassing situation." Hitting your wife is a shameful one. Does anyone else see the difference?

In order to apologize, one must first accept responsibility for one's actions. Myers has not. His carefully crafted statement is a non-apology, and cannot be accepted as an apology.

This is Mobile ESPN!!!

2006-06-27T13:05:00.000-07:00

And it is failing so fast only a former propaganda officer of the USSR under one of Stalin's "Five Year Plans" could justify keeping it in business.

Why do I hate Mobile ESPN so much? Basically because the commercials have been so incredibly insulting and contemptuous of people who watch ESPN.

Look, I sometimes still watch Sportscenter. Why am I so offended by the odious commercials? Because look at the "everyman" ESPN has chosen to represent you, the viewer of their sainted channel. This guy is a total loser in every possible sense of the word. He sucks up to the anchors, asking if they've seen his tape. He seems to be stalking the network in general, with the security guards reminding him that he has to keep a distance from the entrance. Is a restraining order involved?

Am I supposed to identify with this guy so much that I, too, will rush out and get Mobile ESPN? I, too, worship the ground upon which Stuart Scott walks? Am I supposed to believe that Kenny Mayne reading off a teleprompter gives me some unique insight into the world of sports? Am I, too, a pathetic loser with no life outside of the shrine in Bristol, CT? Apparently, if I am, I should rush out and subscribe to Mobile ESPN!!! It's as if the network is flaunting their contempt for us in this commercial.

Look, if they wanted to really sell their target demographic, they would show bored employees in a meeting with the boss droning on and on about synergy. One employee is struggling to keep awake, while the other (cooler) one covertly checks out the scores and stats on this ESPN Mobile network. Or two buddies are fishing, and one displays his awesome knowledge of current events in the world of sports which he just called up on his ESPN Mobile. Or best of all, the wife insists on watching the latest "Lifetime" movie about a woman who repressed the memory of her father scolding the family dog or something. He agrees, to her obvious delight, but he slyly keeps up with the Eagles game on ESPN Mobile. Would that be so hard?

Joe Sheehan sums up what I've been trying to say...

2006-06-26T12:55:00.000-07:00

In Baseball Prospectus (subscription required). Here's the pertinent quote:

The assembly of a baseball team and that team’s approach to the game have no moral element. All that matters are runs, scoring them and preventing them in sufficient quantities to win, and the paths to doing so are well-trod: get guys on base and hit for power, and prevent the other team from doing so.

In my blog earlier, I tried to make a similar point.

Baseball had to at last acknowledge some of the sheer randomness of the game. The fact that, if player X has a one in three chance of getting a hit in inning one with the score tied, he will have a one in three chance of getting a hit in inning nine down by one with two outs and men on second and third. There is nothing that player can do to improve his ninth inning abilities over his first inning abilities. No moral reason why he may get a hit in one situation and not in another.

Hopefully, the reporting community will realize they are writing to and for a shrinking population and begin writing for people who can understand the subtleties of baseball without having to be told there is a moral reason one team wins and the other loses. Basically, one team wins and another loses because one team is the better team. The Yankees didn't win all those world series because they made the most sacrifice bunts. They won because they hit, pitched, and played defense better than the other teams. That's all.

An announcement

2006-06-26T06:08:00.000-07:00

I'll be on vacation next week, in preparation for changing jobs. I expect that my postings will be somewhat sparse for a while, but I hope to substitute quality for quantity.

Also, I've given the bulk of my wealth to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Whoops! I guess I just gave away my secret identity! (Ok, I can dream, can't I?)

Thoughts on the unpleasantness

2006-06-23T13:26:00.000-07:00

Brett Myers seems to have done something which is still considered a taboo in this country. It looks pretty bad for him, and although I'll reserve final judgement until all the facts are out, the facts that are out are pretty damning.

Prediction: The man doesn't throw another pitch in Philadelphia. While the team is taking the safe "Innocent until proven guilty" line, I can't imagine a circumstance where anyone in the Philadelphia area wants to see him pitch another inning in a Philly uniform. Brett has already given his wife a black eye. No need for him to do the same for the city.

As for me, I am inclined to say no matter what they have invested in Brett Myers, dollar wise, the Phillies management would be wise to release him unconditionally only after suspending him for the season. Surely the morals clause applies here, doesn't it?

As for Mr. Myers personally, get help for yourself. Not for your career, but for your soul. There is no excuse for battering a woman. None.

A random thought on how to measure defensive contribution

2006-06-22T12:09:00.000-07:00

As everyone knows, defense is the hardest thing to measure in baseball. I've been thinking about it, and I think the problem boils down to this: When the majority of major re-thinking was done on how to measure baseball performance (Bill James in the 80s, everyone else in the 90s), the tools at their disposal were not sufficient to properly analyze defensive performance. I believe that may be changing.

In the book Moneyball, there is a passage on a consulting team (I'm gong by memory here, so I don't remember the chapter or the consultants) who described a particular way they had in measuring every offensive player's offensive ability. Rather than look at the hits, singles, etc., they broke down every at bat and measured what an average ball hit with the trajectory, speed, location, etc., would have done in a typical at bat. They then assigned a value of this kind of result independent of the actual result of the play. This is critical, because it removed the random effects of superior or inferior defenders, wind, park factors, etc., etc. which can affect any individual at bat. By breaking down hitting into the simplest components possible, they were better able to quantify ability, and therefore identify bargains.

I believe that a similar thing can be done with regards to defense. The only problem lies in a lack of a database with the proper information. Great strides have been made in the area of defense with the development of Zone Rating. However, ZR does not, in my opinion, take sufficient variables into effect to be as good as it could be. ZR does look at where a ball is hit, but not how hard it is hit.

If a ball is hit in Zone J 250 feet and results in a single, what does that say about the defender? Not enough to draw any conclusions. Was it a hard liner which the defender cut off, preventing a possible double? Was it a lazy fly ball the defender couldn't get to because he's too slow? ZR seems to consider that these things will even out over the course of a season. Basically, it ignores the question.

I believe that the simple act of timing the flight of the ball from the bat to the point of contact (either the glove or the ground) would give an easy way of measuring how hard it was hit. I'm no physicist, but the speed of the ball can easily be computed from this information. With a sufficient database for comparison, similar hits in similar areas at similar speeds can be measured for expected result. You can then compare the expected result against the actual results for a given player in that, or indeed, any situation.

For example, Aaron Rowand's play on the triple in last night's game. If we had a database on all balls which hit that zone in the amount of time it did, we could easily tell how often, expressed as a percentage, such a ball results in an out, single, double, triple or home run. The compare that result expressed in terms of how it affects win percentage versus the actual result. The difference in win share can be cumulative, and fielding win shares can then be used to evaluate defensive performance.

After the basic question of catching, baserunning is easy. How often does a fielder hold a runner at first to one base on a ball hit to Zone B 220 feet which takes 1.2 seconds to hit the ground? How did this particular fielder do? What is the expected win share of the play versus the actual win share of the play?

In a similar way, infielders can be judged. Because everything happens so fast in the infield, I don't think that timing the "bat to contact" would work, so the groupings would have to be more general, with the location of the first contact with glove and ground measured, then the infield contact would have to be classified as hard or soft, liner, grounder, roller, or pop-up. Measure the difference between the expected win share of an average infielder on a similar play, and compare to the actual results.

First basemen can also be given a special separate win share for their abilities. If a ball is thrown in the dirt, what is the average result? How often does an average first baseman successfully turn that play into an out? Into a one-base error? A two-base error? The difference in the win share for those results can be measured and compared, too.

The reason no one has compiled a database with this analysis is no one has fully realized the value of it. In a similar way, in the past no one fully realized the value of tracking numbers like caught stealing, batting average in various pitch counts, and the value of a walk vs. a hit. But today all such things are measured and quite commonly accepted as valuable tools to understanding the game and the contributions of individual players. The data can be measured and compiled, and would bring fruitful insights to our understanding and enjoyment of the game.

If the statistical community were to make the effort to track all defensive plays in a way similar to the one I've outlined above, I believe it would revolutionize the way we see defense. At last there would be a way to compare the true value a player brings to the defensive table against his offensive contributions. It would be tangible, testable, and repeatable. In short, scientific.

Disingenuous Wheels

2006-06-22T11:48:00.000-07:00

While watching a little bit of the game last night, I heard the following from that baseball sage, Chris Wheeler:

"He hit the ball really good" on a weak groundout by Fasano for an easy double play.

"Aaron Rowand doesn't usually misjudge fly balls like that" as we watch Rowand once again get lost gong back on a line drive 99% of all major league outfielder would have turned into an routine out, turning twice after playing too shallow, then leaping for a ball that went for a triple.

Yes, I know this is nothing new. It just still irks me. Here, visit this site.

Abreu the 10th smartest player in baseball today?

2006-06-21T05:29:00.000-07:00

He is, according to this.

Take THAT, Mr. Eskin!

This report doesn't sound encouraging

2006-06-20T10:57:00.000-07:00

From Baseball Prospectus, which doesn't see a lot to get excited about in our minor league system. Excerpt:

High Class A Clearwater (5-5; 30-36)

Another bad offense, as nearly 25-year-old minor league veteran Brian Burgamy (.276/.387/.443) is the only starter with an OPS over .756 as 2005 top pick Mike Costanzo (.257/.340/.378) and Australian shortstop Brad Harman (.232/.320/.307) represent major slides. The good news is that Costanzo is hitting .340 in June--the bad news is that he hasn't homered since May 28 and has struck out once every 3.23 at-bats. Lefty J.A. Happ struck out a season-high 10 on June 6 and seems ready for Double-A, which is a test he'll need to see him pass before we can trust his fringy stuff.

I don't know how I feel about his article

2006-06-16T08:08:00.000-07:00

By Bill Simmons. I like Bill, I like his writing style, I like his irreverent take on sports icons, and his hyperbolic ravings about whatever he's excited about. He's a very ironic writer, and certainly will be remembered as the best and likely the most influential sportswriter of his generation. I do not say these things lightly.

However, I don't know how I feel about article like this:

Yes, the most cutthroat athlete of his generation loves to gamble, and even more than that, he loves to win. Should you be surprised? The qualities that once made MJ transcendent on the court -- his legendary hypercompetitiveness,
superhuman stamina, larger-than-life swagger and unwavering confidence -- make the gambling crossover an obvious choice.

And if your franchise guy didn't gamble, didn't need that feeling -- wouldn't you be worried?

Bill's point is that the very thing that makes players great also make them gamblers. In fact, he goes so far as to say he doesn't trust a player (other than Larry Byrd, whom he refers to as a "cheapskate" for not gambling) who doesn't gamble.

In a way, I see his point. One wants to be excellent, and one wants to win, and gambling certainly plays on the competitive fires that burn in athletes. But please, let's take a close look at this.

For every Michael Jordon (who probably could never gamble away his enormous fortune), there's a Boston College. While Barkely will likely never lose more than he can make, what about Darren McCarty?

Maybe at the very pinnacle of the sport, athletes can consider themselves immune from the effects of their behavior, but what about the marginal athletes? What about the college athletes? Didn't the 1919 White Socks throw a world series because of gambling? Are we so foolish to think such a thing couldn't happen in today's world? Is it so inconceivable that a pro athlete making $600,000 a year, but with 1.2 million in gambling debts, might not throw a critical game to payoff a large portion of that debt?

While it may be true that gambling is a part of athletics, it is not reasonable to believe that athletes will not take money to throw games in order to get out of gambling debts. Or at the very lease, use their influence to affect games they are or are not gambling on. Rather than "embrace" a problem which seems intractable, we rather should continue to educate the 20-something players who think that good times will last forever.

We need to remember that the vast majority of athletes are, in fact, very young, and that accepting their lavish lifestyles and gambling as part of who they need to be is placing unfair burdens on them. All athletes, even those who are not Michael Jordan, believe they can be, or will be. And if Simmons' ideals are accepted, they will all therefore gamble big in an attempt to prove it. If the Bill Simmons' ideal continues, scandals of athletes throwing games will inevitably follow.

Pat Gillick signs Roy Hobbs

2006-06-16T05:56:00.000-07:00

In a surprise move, Pat Gillick today signed Roy Hobbs, the unknown sand-lot star who hasn't been seen since striking out "The Whammer" fifteen years ago.

Hobbs is thought to be a five-tool player, with a good batting eye and a strong throwing arm. Although a modest individual, the thirty-four year old rookie clearly has the confidence to play in the big leagues. His bat, rumored to have been carved of a tree felled by lightning, supposedly contains mystic powers to help him slam the ball.

While rumors circulate that the real motive of Bill Giles, the shadowy owner of the team who never has lights on in his office if he can help it, is to have the team lose so he can make good some gambling debts, the team has responded well to the announcement of Hobbs' signing.

"As long as he can help the team win, I'm for it," said Chase Utley. "Let's face it, we can always use another bat."

Charlie Manuel said he "Didn't give a *#$@ about the World series, but I want that pennant more than anything I've ever wanted before in my life." While he has no plans for letting Hobbs bat in a game right away, he acknowledged the man can "literally hit the cover off the ball."

The only concern was the fact that Hobbs hits left-handed, which will not improve the teams' weakness against left-handed pitching.

An article on the 1942 Phillies

2006-06-16T05:30:00.000-07:00

Quite fun. Here's a little of it...

But Things Would Get Worse - The Phillies were a bad team overall, but they improved a bit in 1937 (to 61-92, seventh place)...

But Things Would Get Worse - In May of 1939, Passeau was dealt, though this time not for cash...

But Things Would Get Worse - In November of 1940, Higbe was sent to the Dodgers, for three mediocrities and $100,000 cash...

But Things Would Get Worse - In 1942, the Phillies fielded the very worst of the terrible teams they’d been featuring over the previous several years...

How Bad Were Things? - Oh, things were very bad indeed...
That Is Bad - The 1942 Phillies lost their first four games of the season, by scores of 2-1, 6-2, 2-1, and 7-1. With the third of those losses, they were alone in last place, and would remain so for the rest of the season.

Update: Whoops! Here's the link.

Why the Phillies will win the World Series

2006-06-14T08:36:00.000-07:00

Currently the month is June, and the Phillies are in second place in the NL East, and reeling like a cheap fishing rod. So why can I posit that the Phillies will win the World Series? Easy.

1) We have only one team to beat in the NL East. The Braves are not going to make the playoffs this year. The Nats and Marlins also have virtually no shot That leaves only the Mets to battle the Phillies for the NL Eastern crown.

2) Though the Mets have a great 1-2 punch, the rest of their rotation is weak (See Jose Lima, who actually started 3 games for them this year). Furthermore, I question the ability of Tom Glavin and Pedro Martinez to remain effective over the entire season.

3) The Mets have played about as well as can be imagined, and the Phils have played as poorly as can be imagined. Things will even out.

4) The Phils weakest areas have been starting pitching and defense. With the worst starters banished, and the defense cannot help but get better, the Phils should improve simply due to regression..

5) Even if, for some reason, the Phils don't win the NL East, the Phils will likely win the WC. They came close last year, and the contenders for the WC all have their weaknesses

6) Once the Phils get to the postseason, their 1-2 punch with Myers and Hamels can compete with anybody. If there's anything the Astros demonstrated last year, it's the fact that if you have 2 dominant starters, you can go deep in the playoffs.

7) Most important, the Philly faithful seem to have officially written off this team for dead. As we recall from last year, it was only when officially given no chance that the Phils started playing with resolve and ability. Since this has happened in June and not September, we have plenty of time to make up any lost ground in the NL East and the WC.

Important medical news for all baseball fans...

2006-06-13T13:39:00.000-07:00

Beer, pizza are the newfound wonderdrugs to prevent cancer!

You only think I'm kidding. Apparantly John Kruck is ahead of the curve on this one.

An ingredient in beer seems to help prevent prostate cancer, at least in lab experiments.

...lycopene, an ingredient in tomatoes, and thus also in tomato sauce, has previously been linked to prostate cancer prevention.

Appreciating Bobby Abreu

2006-06-13T05:50:00.000-07:00

Inspired by this post, I have a few things to say about Bobby Abreu.

In Italy there are many museums. One day in the museum a visitor strolled along the halls, inspecting the old art. When he was leaving, the curator asked him what he thought of the paintings.

"To tell you the truth, I didn't like them at all," the man answered.

"Oh, I'm so sorry to hear that, sir," the curator replied.

"Why?"

"You don't understand. The painting are no longer being judged. The viewers are."

And so it is with Bob Kelly Abreu.

Time after time, I hear on the radio, read in the paper, see on tv, the same tired refrain. He can't hit in the clutch. He doesn't hustle on defense. He doesn't understand the game. He's too selfish a player. And on and on and on. The reason I draw the above analogy is because Bobby's game speaks so eloquently for itself. In every measurable way, he's one of the best outfielders in the game today.

Lifetime numbers:

OBP: .413
SLG: .511
OPS: .924
GPA: .313

Take a look at HOF right fielders. There are only two names with a higher lifetime OBP than Abreu. One is Mel Ott. There are only 6 with a higher SLG. There are only 3 players with a higher lifetime GPA.

I will grant that we are living in an era of high offense (although there have been other high offense eras, as well), but that is pretty impressive.

But what about being judged against his contemporaries?

In 2005, Bobby was 4th in VORP among all right fielders in baseball. In 2004, 2nd. In 2003, 5th. In 2002, 2nd. Are you noticing a trend?

Mike Berquist wrote "consistency, thy name is Bobby Abreu." And he didn't mean consistently bad. He discusses Bobby's win shares production, which is at an elite level year after year.

In this article, mention is made to how many win shares are required to get into the HOF. Specifically, Bill James said that 300+ WS means a likely HOF-er, while 400+ means a certain one. Bobby's career WS is 244, and showing no signs of slowing down. Over the next 3 or 4 years, it's likely, almost certain, he'll pass the 300 WS mark. Incidentally, Bobby is the youngest player with at least 244 WS, and there are only 18 active players with more.

Do I need to go on? Let's examine some likely marks Abreu will make before he retires. According to Bill James' favorite toy, Abreu has a 50% chance of ending up with 2,300+ hits, 400+ steals, 320+ HRs, 1,300+ RBI, and 1,400+ Runs. All of those numbers hold up quite well against the HOF standards.

I am not quite trying to make a case for Abreu to be in the HOF, but I think beyond a shadow of a doubt that he will have a very powerful case when his name comes up.

Now let's discuss his lack of "clutchiness." Again in no measurable way is this provable. Inspect Bobby's inning per inning performance, and given the predictable fluctuations every ballplayer might have, he is a winner. His 9th inning GPA is .305, which I think I'd take any day.

In the current year, he's one of the clutchiest hitters in baseball, if you believe in that sort of thing.

Regarding defense, whether he deserved it or not, he did win a gold glove last year. While I don't think he's a great defensive outfielder, he's not an embarrassment, and his strong arm does indeed limit opponent's baserunning. It's not as if anyone in the majors is playing in right field because of their defense, anyway.

I've said before that a team of Bobby Abreu's would probably score over 1,000 runs during the course of a season, and be derided for not scoring 1,200. Bobby Abreu is not hard to appreciate. What is hard is to understand why he's not appreciated more.

Lieberthal out for the season? What to do?

2006-06-12T12:15:00.000-07:00

Have we lost our catcher for the year? Considering how much better Lieby is than the alternates, this is very bad news. The only position we're more shallow is second base.

While Sal has been an adequate replacement so far this year, it's hard to believe that a Fasano/Ruiz platoon is going to take us to postseason.

UPDATE:
Tom G pointed out that not everyone has a subscription to BP. I've stated before why I generally don't post the entire article to a subscription site, but anyway the pertinent quote is this:

A hip problem for a catcher is about as bad as it gets. The Phillies are getting to see what next year looks like, when they’ll almost assuredly begin life without Mike
Lieberthal. The team is without a de facto #1, mixing and matching a series of backup catchers in and getting some production. Lieberthal is headed for an MRI to see exactly what’s going on inside his damaged left hip. The injury is more severe than the strain that the team has acknowledged, leading some to question if it could be career-threatening. This injury is clearly related to the leg and knee problems that have plagued Lieberthal this season (and hindered him over most of his career). Like the Phillies, fantasy teams relying on Lieberthal need to be looking at other options.

BP's analysis of our draft.

2006-06-12T07:33:00.000-07:00

Basically, they're impressed with the first two picks, and with the upside of the draftees in general.

Excerpt:

Best pick after these five: Eighth-round pick T.J. Warren is built like a right-handed Darryl Strawberry, and he nearly has the tools to boot, but he's as raw as tonight's special nigri at your favorite sushi bar.

PrOPS to Abreu

2006-06-06T13:49:00.000-07:00

PrOPS is a tool used by The Hardball Times for "predicting what a player's OPS is likely to be in the future based on his batted balls, strikeouts, home runs and walks."

Based on this formula, Bobby Abreu should have the 4th best OPS in the NL for the rest of the season, leading the Phils.

Other notable Phillies PrOPS facts:

Rollins should improve, but considering how terrible his OPS has been, that's not saying much.

As good as Howard has been, he should get even better.

Pat Burrell's slump shouldn't last.

Chase Utley might be headed for a "market correction."

Correspondence with Dan Fox

2006-06-06T12:32:00.000-07:00

Reprinted with his permission:

In response this his article on comebacks, I wrote and referred him to my postmodernism post. My main point was Buzz Bissinger was a modernist looking for a story arc and could not appreciate the sport in a postmodern sense (as I understand the term) as many of us do.

His response:

Thanks for your comments. I really enjoyed the post (and the blog) as well although definitions of postmodernism that I've read(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postmodernism) don't seem to really capture the differences you mention. It seems to me it is more a scientific mindset ala Richard Dawkins in his book "Unweaving the Rainbow" (brought to my attention by another reader) where he quotes physicist Richard Feynman, responding to a claim that scientists miss the beauty of a flower by studying it:'

The beauty that is there for you is also available for me, too. But I see a deeper beauty that isn't so readily available to others. I can seethe complicated interactions of the flower. The color of the flower is red. Does the fact that the plant has color mean that it evolved to attract insects? This adds a further question. Can insects see color? Do they have an aesthetic sense? And so on. I don't see how studying a flower ever detracts from its beauty. It only adds.'

Anyway, you're probably right that it is indeed a different and perhaps incompatible way of looking at things. Take care.

I'm not a philosopher and don't completely understand postmodernism. I do believe that postmodernism has a skepticism of story arcs and morals, and I do think that people who are constantly looking for only a story and moral in a baseball game are inherently limited in their understanding of the game, but his analogy might be more appropriate.

At any rate, I thank him for his kind words about my essay.

Who is "The Voice of Reason"

2006-06-06T10:44:00.000-07:00

And why doesn't he have a blog already?

Phillies take Kyle Drabek in the first round

2006-06-06T10:25:00.000-07:00

Profile:

One player who has been living up to expectations is Woodlands (Texas) HS righty Kyle Drabek, the son of 1990 Cy Young Award winner Doug. Drabek, an excellent athlete who would go in the first three rounds of the draft as a shortstop, has added a tick of velocity this year, sitting at 92-94 mph with his fastball while touching 96-97; he also features not one, but two breaking balls--a big spike curve and darting slider--which both have been graded as plus. "His stuff has just been absolutely outstanding," said a scouting director. Most see him as the top high school player out there, but some questions about his makeup are starting to crop up, a surprising development for a player with Drabek's pedigree.

Thoughts?

Offense, Starting Pitching, or relief corps?

2006-06-05T06:07:00.000-07:00

which has had the most value this season for the Phils? If you said "The Relief Corps" you obviously are either very astute, read Phlogs regularly, or don't get any of your information from the Philly news media. Maybe all three.

Fangraphs tells us that of all the WPA, both the starting pitching and the defense get negatives in terms of how much they contributed to winning games. It isn't really even very close, with only 3 out of 10 relievers having a negative WPA.

By contrast, only 2 out of 7 starters have a positive WPA, and 9 out of 27 hitters have a positive WPA.

So, now that we know that, what do we do?

William Shatner

2006-06-02T13:11:00.000-07:00

(HT Sportsguy)

In a scene which literally must be seen to be believed, William Shatner gives his unique rendition of "Rocketman." It's one of those things which starts out painful, then becomes embarrassing, then comically tragic, then just plain comic, then unbelievable, and ends with the audience clapping uncertainly, Shatner smiling, and a sense of unreality.

Phillies of the Month: May 2006

2006-06-02T12:26:00.000-07:00

Welcome back to the Phillies of the Month! Also, we'll check in on last month's winners.

Hitters:

Pat Burrell, after a scorching April, has had a much tougher May, with an OBP of .396 but a SLG of only .488. Funny, for all the talk of Bobby Abreu being in a slump in May, his OPS was a very good .919, while Pat had an OPS of .884. Go figure.

For May, the competition wasn't very close. While Utley had a great month, and Bobby had a good one, it's just not everyday when a sophomore belts 13 HRs in a month to lead the majors in that category. Ryan Howard slugged his way to a .696 percentage, and though his OBP was .321 and he drew only one walk (it was intentional), his power more than made up for it.

Congratulations, Ryan Howard, Pawnking's Hitter of the month!

Pitchers:

Flash Gordon showed he wasn't, in fact, Superman in May, although I'll take an ERA of 2.19 and 9 saves. Basically, he didn't pitch enough in May to deserve serious consideration for pitcher of the month.

The ERA leader of the month was surprisingly Geoff Geary, with 1.20 ERA in 15 innings, striking out 6.6 per 9 innings while walking a minuscule 0.6 per 9 innings. Cormier also had a good month, with an ERA under 2 in 10.1 innings. Cole Hamels made his Major League Debut in May, and did well (though with a lot of walks) until "the pop heard round the world" sidelined him. It was actually not a bad month for all Phils without the initials "CL" "RF," or "GF."

But towering over all other pitchers was the undoubted ace of the staff, Brett Myers. Brett lead the Phils in Innings, Strikeouts, and No-Decisions. In 6 starts, all of them quality, he garnered only 2 wins. Despite this, he battled for a sparkling 2.49 ERA striking out 6.4 and walking 1.9 per 9 innings. He should get serious consideration for being an all-star at this rate.

Congratulations, Brett Myers, Pawnking's Pitcher of the Month!

Disclaimer: No discussion of who the winner will be ever influences this judge. Any wagering on the outcome of "Pawnking's Phillies of the Month" is strictly prohibited. Unless I get a cut, in which case I might be convinced to rig the count.

A response to RickShuBlues RE: clutch

2006-06-02T05:33:00.000-07:00

I was going to post this under my previous entry, but it ran a little long, so it became an entry itself. Rick made several good points in responding to the idea that "clutch" might not exist. Excerpt:

To deny it [clutch] exists is to deny that psychology itself exists, and that there are differences in the psyches of individual players. Some players absolutely have
an ability to concentrate, to maintain clarity and confidence in big situations, and some either get too anxious or simply go up there hoping not to fail. Some are affected negatively by pressure and some can respond to it favorably.

My response is I do not believe the James has ever said that clutch hitting does not exist. Rather, he has said that even if it does, it's such a slight part of what makes a good baseball player that it wouldn't matter.

Let me put it this way: If there was a player who always choked under pressure, what are the odds that player would even make it to the big leagues? Such a gaping hole in a player's game would prevent all but the most talented from getting to the bigs, much less becoming high performing regulars. To put it another way, all major leaguers are clutch players, to a greater or lesser extent, and the difference between their levels of clutchiness is much less than their difference in ability.

As far as your point about psychology, it is also well taken. In fact, denying psychology is exactly what I mean, at least at the major league level.

While psychology is a useful tool for many things, it is not an infallible predictor of future behavior. Furthermore, baseball players receive a lifetime of training to perform quite naturally everyday feats under a lot more baseball pressure than we will ever see. While I would almost certainly choke under the pressure of having to hit a baseball in the ninth, I wouldn't have any problem crunching a spreadsheet with a one hour deadline, or conducting an audit with an IRS agent, because that is what I am trained to do. Similarly, a soldier is trained to keep his head with bombs and bullets flying around it, which I think is a little more stressful than swinging a 30 ounce bat.

I believe that most people think that clutch makes a difference in the majors because most of us have experiences in little league, high school ball, softball, etc., in which we either choked to came through in the clutch. We experienced it, so, we assume, surely professionals do, too. However a) professionals are a lot better than we ever were, and b) professionals have faced high pressure situations thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of times in their careers. They are trained to put distractions out of their heads, and perform. While I agree that some do this better than others, the difference at that level is so slight as to be unmeasurable, therefore essentially the same as not existing.

A quick anecdote might help illustrate better what I mean. I saw a special on tv where some psychology students were testing the effect of stress on athletic performance. They got volunteers to see how many puts out of 10 they could make, with nothing riding on the outcome. Then they told the participants they would get another chance to sink 10 puts, and if they at least matched the number of puts made, they would win $100. They tested both ordinary students and members of the golf team.

The ordinary students responded poorly to the pressure, almost never matching the score in the first round. They choked, in fact. The members of the golf team all performed in the second round basically the same as they did in the first. They had been trained to ignore the stress and pressure of the situation and perform regardless of any outside distractions.

So it is with professional baseball players. They are doing what they are trained to do, and all statistical evidence indicates that they all respond to pressure equally well.

Postmodern Baseball

2006-06-01T05:36:00.000-07:00

Or, why Joe Morgan hates Bill James.

Postmodernism is many things, far more than I can understand or can easily relate in a simple blog posting. But one thing that is considered postmodern is a relative antipathy towards narratives. A modernist will see a chain of events and look for cause and effect, how one thing influences another, arching meaning behind the sequence. A postmodernist rejects the universality of the narrative, and will contend that events are not as connected as we might think, and looking for cause and effect is pointless, or at least not always very fruitful.

This brings us to baseball. Baseball is a very interesting sport which has been related by writers almost since its inception. The marriage between the sport and the writer is so close as to be almost inseparable. To name a few examples: baseball rose as a national sport as newspapers rose as the major medium of national communication, the Yankees became the most popular team in part because New York newspapers were the first national newspapers, baseball writers are almost solely responsible for electing members of the Hall of Fame.

As a result of this marriage, the vast majority of baseball fans see games, seasons, players and entire teams as writers do; as part of a narrative story. In other words, most people who cover and follow baseball are modernists. One of the fundamental aspects of a story is they generally have a moral. To them, baseball is an inherently moral game.

I do not refer to morality as good vs. evil in a Christian sense. I refer to morality in the sense that virtues which the writer discerns and judges are, he believes, the causes of the success or failure on the field. There is always a reason a player, team, or season succeeds or fails. A moral to the story of the game.

Some familiar reasons given for the success or failure are: work ethic, chemistry, enthusiasm, self-sacrifice, intelligence, destiny, character, clutchiness and grittiness. The fact that most of these terms are vague only servs to enhance their value in the modernist's eyes. If I, as a modernist, deem player X to be a "clutch" player, who can really tell me I'm wrong? The very ambiguity of the word allows me to use it however I wish.

From the century long hold that modernists writers have held on baseball came the first great postmodernist, Bill James. Although he may not have been the first to break free from the narrative constraints of understanding baseball, he was the first to achieve a national recognition and following. In the 80s, his Baseball Abstract not only applied statistical analysis to the game, it completely changed the way a game (or player, season, or team) can be watched, enjoyed, and appreciated. Statements of cause and effect could be, for the first time, reasonably measured for accuracy. Theories upon which a modernist narrative can hinge were disputed, and sometimes either disproved or shown to lack any credibility.

Baseball had to at last acknowledge some of the sheer randomness of the game. The fact that, if player X has a one in three chance of getting a hit in inning one with the score tied, he will have a one in three chance of getting a hit in inning nine down by one with two outs and men on second and third. There is nothing that player can do to improve his ninth inning abilities over his first inning abilities. No moral reason why he may get a hit in one situation and not in another.

This is all extremely disturbing to the modernist. To the modernist, there is a moral reason for everything. Joe Morgan claims that clutch hitting exists. Bill James counters that if there is such a thing, the sheer randomness of baseball sufficiency obscures the ability so it might as well not exist. These two theories cannot both be held at the same time. Therefore, the intellectual conflict between the two sides.

Some would contend that a postmodernist cannot appreciate baseball as a modernist can. A modernist cares greatly about the outcome of a game, who wins, who loses, and why. While it is true that the postmodernist recognizes that who wins a game may not be indicative of which team is better, I believe that a postmodernist actually enjoys the game more, not less, than the modernist.

The postmodernist can appreciate the fascinating structured chaos that is an organized baseball game. In any one given at bat, there are only a few possible outcomes. Therefore there is structure. But the factors which determine that outcome are so many, and so interrelated, that simply understanding and appreciating why the at bat resulted as it did can be endlessly fascinating. For example: Pitching matchup, if there is a basestealer on base, if there is a power hitter on deck, the score, the inning, the pitch count, how hot the hitter is, how many times he has seen this particular pitcher, the temperature, the defensive alignment, the wind, the angle of the sun, how loud the crowd is yelling, and on and on. And that is just one at bat. Therefore, there is chaos.

A postmodernist could probably write a book full of analysis on every game played. A postmodernist can not only appreciate the outcome, but the journey to get to that outcome, and be intrigued by, say, the question of how a butterfly's beating wings in Australia might have affected the game's result.

Casey at the Bat

2006-05-31T05:27:00.000-07:00

I am posting this because it's my blog and I can do what I like. :-)

Casey At The Bat
by Ernest L. Thayer

The outlook wasn't brilliant for the Mudville nine that day,
The score stood four to two, with but one inning more to play.

And then when Cooney died at first, and Barrows did the same,
A pall-like silence fell upon the patrons of the game.

A straggling few got up to go in deep despair.
The rest clung to that hope which springs eternal in the human breast.
They thought, "if only Casey could but get a whack at that.
We'd put up even money now, with Casey at the bat."

But Flynn preceded Casey, as did also Jimmy Blake;
and the former was a hoodoo, while the latter was a cake.

So upon that stricken multitude, grim melancholy sat;
for there seemed but little chance of Casey getting to the bat.

But Flynn let drive a single, to the wonderment of all.
And Blake, the much despised, tore the cover off the ball.

And when the dust had lifted, and men saw what had occurred,
there was Jimmy safe at second and Flynn a-hugging third.

Then from five thousand throats and more there rose a lusty yell;
it rumbled through the valley, it rattled in the dell;

it pounded through on the mountain and recoiled upon the flat;
for Casey, mighty Casey, was advancing to the bat.

There was ease in Casey's manner as he stepped into his place,
there was pride in Casey's bearing and a smile lit Casey's face.

And when, responding to the cheers, he lightly doffed his hat,
no stranger in the crowd could doubt t'was Casey at the bat.

Ten thousand eyes were on him as he rubbed his hands with dirt.
Five thousand tongues applauded when he wiped them on his shirt.

Then, while the writhing pitcher ground the ball into his hip,
defiance flashed in Casey's eye, a sneer curled Casey's lip.

And now the leather-covered sphere came hurtling through the air,
and Casey stood a-watching it in haughty grandeur there.

Close by the sturdy batsman the ball unheeded sped --
"That ain't my style," said Casey. "Strike one!" the umpire said.

From the benches, black with people, there went up a muffled roar,
like the beating of the storm waves on a stern and distant shore.

"Kill him! Kill the umpire!" shouted someone on the stand,
and it's likely they'd have killed him had not Casey raised his hand.

With a smile of Christian charity, great Casey's visage shone,
he stilled the rising tumult, he bade the game go on.

He signaled to the pitcher, and once more the dun sphere flew,
but Casey still ignored it, and the umpire said, "Strike two!"

"Fraud!" cried the maddened thousands, and echo answered "Fraud!"
But one scornful look from Casey and the audience was awed.

They saw his face grow stern and cold, they saw his muscles strain,
and they knew that Casey wouldn't let that ball go by again.

The sneer has fled from Casey's lip, the teeth are clenched in hate.
He pounds, with cruel violence, his bat upon the plate.

And now the pitcher holds the ball, and now he lets it go,
and now the air is shattered by the force of Casey's blow.

Oh, somewhere in this favored land the sun is shining bright.
The band is playing somewhere, and somewhere hearts are light.

And, somewhere men are laughing, and little children shout,
but there is no joy in Mudville -- mighty Casey has struck out.

- Simply a fabulous poem. I've always had a few thoughts about it:

- Mudville is obviously a hick town (it's isn't called "Metropolis" or anything like that, and only 5,000 fans?), so if Casey is so "mighty," what's he doing playing there?

- Furthermore, if he was such a great hitter, why did they pitch to him at all? Why not intentionally walk him? And they didn't even pitch around him, but went right after him aggressively.

- Also, if he was such a great hitter, why did two hacks precede him?

- Casey, despite his haughty manner, took the first two pitches, maybe in an attempt to work the count. Working the count, trying to draw a walk, etc., are generally considered "an old player's skills." In other words, when a formerly great hitter can't do anything else, he can still draw walks at a good clip because of a good eye and a reputation, at least, for power.

- I can only conclude that Casey was a former major leaguer, a one-time star of the game, reduced to playing in the bus league. His name was what the fans responded to, not his ability. The opposing pitcher obviously knew that Casey was not any threat with the bat. The joke was on the crowd for believing in Casey in the first place.

- Lastly, if the above conclusion was true, I'd like to share a quick anecdote. Last year I was sitting at a Camden Riversharks game when who did I see coming up to bat, but Dante Bichette! A man next to me excitedly called a friend on his cell phone to report "I just wanted to tell you that Dante Bichette has officially hit rock bottom!" True to the poem, Bichette struck out.

Important announcement in my own minor leagues

2006-05-30T10:07:00.000-07:00

Mrs. Pawnking (Pawnqueen) and I would like to announce that we are making roster room for a new callup, expected early next year. We're both hoping that if a boy, he'll be left-handed so his future as a reliever will be assured.

Poll: What should be the batting order and why?

2006-05-26T08:52:00.000-07:00

With all the chatter lately about Abreu hitting first and where to put Rowand/JRoll, etc, what should be the batting order if you were manager? Why?

Here's my 2 cents:

1) Abreu - Basically a hitter who gets on base almost every other time he comes up to bat needs to hit leadoff. His basestealing and power helps too, of course.

2) Utley - Quite simply the best all-around hitter we have right now, he can both drive in Abreu and get on base himself for the following hitters.

3) Rowand - Good pop in the third spot would equal a lot of RBI for Rowand. His lack of OBP would be less damaging here, and you want to avoid having all your low OBP guys hitting in a row even at the bottom of the order.

4) Burrell - Strong power, good OBP, excellent hitter all around.

5) Howard - Enormous power would keep the pitchers honest for the top 4 hitters. No one would want to face Howard with the bases loaded.

6) Bell - Having a good year, has hit lefties well in the past and can offer some protection for Howard.

7) JRoll - With some decent power for cleanup RIBs, he also has speed which would help with the light hitters coming up behind him.

8) Lieberthal - Some power, and if JRoll is on ahead of him should have some good RBI opportunities.

9) Pitcher

My basic idea is to put OBP guys on first, followed by power guys, followed by speed guys. Of course, Victriano can spell any of the three outfielders, and should be able to hit first, second, sixth or seventh without problem.

By putting JRoll at 7th, when he gets on he will have the ability to steal in front of Lieby and the pitcher. Stealing lower in the order is more valuable than high in the order, as the #8 and 9 hitters aren't as likely to hit for power and therefore the extra bases mean more.

Thoughts? Reactions?

Via "The Hardball Times" comes the newsflash:

2006-05-25T10:06:00.000-07:00

Ryan Howard can hit the ball really hard. Now, we have a new website to waste our bosses' time: Hit tracker.

According to Hit Tracker, the longest ball adjusted for atmospheric conditions, ballpark, how far the ball would have travelled if it hadn't hit the bleachers, etc., was smashed by Ryan Howard, with a "true distance" of 491 feet. Fun facts about that homer:

The actual distance was 461 feet.

The ball left his bat at 125.7 mph.

Nine of Howard's HRs this year went for a true distance of over 400 feet. Nine went for an actual distance of at least 400 feet.

Here's the link to watch the HR.

Why our current losing streak isn't worrying me

2006-05-25T07:41:00.000-07:00

yet, anyway. While we've gone 1-7 over the last 8 games, we've only been outscored by 6 runs. In pythag terms, we should have won about 3 1/2 games over the past 8. This while playing Milwalkee, Boston, and NY Mets, three teams which, according to BP's Adjusted Standings, rank as the best, second best, and best in their divisions, respectively.

No, the current losing streak doesn't overly concern me. Manuel's handling of the bullpen, that concerns me. Jimmy Rollin's lack of OBA, that concerns me. Cole Hamels arm, that concerns me. The Phillies' defense, that concerns me. These four things will determine the outcome of the season far more than the past eight games.

Searing criticism of Manuel from the boys of BP

2006-05-24T11:55:00.000-07:00

I have been extremely reserved about overly criticising Manuel, mostly because it's hard to judge the job a manager is doing because a) it's never all that clear exactly what a manager does, and b) the manager has access to inside information we the public may never have.

Nevertheless, BP has seen fit to use the most public responsibility of a manager, namely bullpen management, to point out something rather obvious. Money quote:

Arthur Rhodes and Tom Gordon combined to throw seven pitches last night, while Ryan Franklin (the eighth-best pitcher on the team) threw 21, including the most important ones of the ballgame. That’s simply a failure by the man in the dugout.

I roundly criticised Larry Bowa in his day (pre-blogging) mostly due to his bullpen management. Whatever benefits Mr. Manuel brings to the table, his failures in understanding the concepts of bullpen leverage make me yearn for the days when we might have a manager who can actually make in-game decisions wisely. Last night's loss can be squarely laid at Charlie's feet.

We Should Be GMs also have very direct criticism of the manager:

Continuing to stick with Ryan Franklin in game deciding situations is destroying the Phils. Two outs in the 8th, tying run at the plate...not Cormi-air and his 0.64 ERA or Closer Gordon and his 1.45 ERA....no, stick with Franklin and watch the lead evaporate. This type of managerial idiocy cannot continue much longer.

The Onion is funny

2006-05-24T07:56:00.000-07:00

"Mad Sabermatrician Creates the Perfect Baseball Player's Statistics"

Excerpt:

"The VORP of Ty Cobb, the win shares of Barry Bonds, the equivalent average of Ted Williams—I have created the mathematical representation of the ultimate run-producing machine!" said Neeman, holding the sacred Bill James Historical Baseball Abstract above his head and invoking the isolated power of Babe Ruth.

The greatness of Ruth

2006-05-22T13:16:00.000-07:00

As Bonds passes the Babe, let's take a moment to reflect just how great a ballplayer Babe Ruth really was.

Career OBA: .474
Career SLG: .690
Total HR: 714
Total Hits: 2,873
Total Walks: 2,056

All this in a total of 8,399 ABs

To compare: Hank Aaron hit 755 HRs, but took 12,364 ABS, while walking only 1,402 times. His lifetime OBA was .374. and lifetime SLG was .555

Barry Bonds now has matched Ruth's HR mark, and has more walks at 2,354. Of course, he's had longer seasons in which to play, so his lifetime OBA is "only" .443 (He'll never catch the Babe on that one) and his SLG is a "mere" .610. In short, he's had a lot more games (2,767 vs. 2,503) and ABs (9,239 to 8,399) in which to work his trade.

Using GPA (no park adjustments) we see that Bonds has a lifetime GPA of .351, while Ruth has a lifetime GPA of a, well, a Ruthian .386.

For perspective, last year the best GPA over the entire season was Derrek Lee, at .355. Pujols' lifetime GPA so far is .342. Great, but unlikely to ever top Ruth's. An average Ruth year would win the MVP 4 times out of 5.

The more we understand and appreciate greatness with sabernomics, the more we appreciate just how awesome Ruth really was. It wasn't just the homers. He was simply put the greatest hitter who ever lived, and likely the greatest there ever will be.

This is of course not even considering the way Ruth changed the game in a way that has never been matched. It is not considering his pitching career. It is not considering other things, as well, such as dilution of the rosters, nor the unfortunate segregation of Ruth's day, nor the understanding of nutrition and exercise in today's game, nor any supplements, both legal and otherwise, which aid the modern ballplayer.

But such things are not clear, and their impact on the numbers are not clear. But what is clear is this: No one has in the entire history of baseball come close to Ruth's career numbers. In 70 years, he still towers over all other players, not as a standard, for no one has ever matched him, but rather as the ideal, the mountaintop no one has ever truly climbed, the apotheosis of what it is to be a hitter.

A-Gone

2006-05-22T07:45:00.000-07:00

Thoughts on the retirement of Alex S. Gonzalez.

Best line:

What's amazing to me is that he had a 13 year career from which to retire.

Here's the ever-classy Tom's thoughts:

To Gonzalez, we wish him well.

My thoughts:

While we cheer or boo the great players, we should, I think, stop and remember those whose talent did not match their desire. While we can make fun of a player with an OBP of .302 lifetime, and a career slugging percentage of .391, remember that he got to play in the big leagues for over a dozen years, and you didn't.

So hats off to a man who lived the dream for as long as he could. Alex, we salute you with a cold one tonight! You never made all-star, but you did make the show, and stuck for longer than anyone would ever have thought. Well done.

The consequenses of "The Catch"

2006-05-17T09:16:00.000-07:00

I am not now nor ever will say that Rowand shouldn't have caught that ball. It's the kind of play that you remember years later, the kind of moment which will be enshrined forever in Phillies' lore.

However.

There are consequences to the catch.

Before the catch, Rowand had an OPS of .871, including an OPS in May of 1.067. His replacement, the "Hawaiian Punch" Shane Victorino, has a nifty OPS of 1.104, and is tearing the cover off the ball since he took over in center.

So, is this good?

Well, consider Bobby Anreu's May slump. In spite of a fantastic OBA of .432, Bobby isn't hitting, with an overall OPS of .884, .626 in May. Plus, he missed two games to a bad back (which might explain his slump).

What if Bobby had gone on the DL and not Rowand?

The Phillies aren't exactly scoring a lot of runs right now. If Abreu was sitting, and Victorino was in right, would that be worth 2.84 runs over this stretch? That's what Baseball Prospectus puts as the value of Rowand's catch. Excerpt:

So I'd say that catch turned a .308 chance for the Phillies to win into a .592 chance, a gain of +.284 wins.
At 10 runs/win, that's 2.84 runs, which is the rough equivalent in linear weights terms of hitting two (randomly placed) home runs.

As I said, I am not criticising Rowand's spectacular catch, nor the importance it has in the eyes of Phillies' fans and teammates. However, there are consequences. If the current power outage continues, how much can we lay at the feet of Rowand's nose?

Howard starting to heat up

2006-05-15T06:07:00.000-07:00

Back in Spring Training, I posted about how important one Ryan Howard could be the the Phillies' 2006 success. Last night, King Kong showed why he may contend for the NL MVP this year.

After a slow start, Howard has pulled his slugging percentage up to .597. In April, his SLG was an anemic .494. So far in May, .795.

To remind you, Howard's 90% BP projection has him going for a season SLG of .750.

Now, the bad news is that Howard isn't walking at all, with only 1 walk so far in May, and that was intentional. You cannot continue that kind of thing all year. However, I feel certain that Howard will bring his walks total up again as the year progresses, and currently his power is so great he can get away with it for now.

Questions to consider:

1) Will the fact that the Phillies' have a great linup prevent Howard from being pitched around too much?

2) Given that, after a slow start, the Phillies have been getting on base at a fantastic pace, and lead the league in OBP last year, how many RBI should Howard end up with in '06? Is 150 out of reach?

Read all about the 104-sack 1986 Eagles team

2006-05-12T14:34:00.000-07:00

If you can bear it. Excerpt:

The NFL record for sacks allowed at that time was 70, set by the 1968 Falcons. The Eagles had allowed 64 sacks with five games left to play. And the situation was deteriorating: right tackle Leonard Mitchell was hurt against Detroit.
As the record approached, the Eagles linemen got touchy. “Record? You want a bleeping record? Give me a Van Halen record,” reserve guard Nick Haden told the Philadelphia Daily News. Left tackle Ken Reeves tried to put the high sack total in perspective. “I think out of the 64 sacks we have, that the offensive line has given up 26,” he said in the same article.

"The Catch" Video

2006-05-12T11:31:00.000-07:00

Making the rounds via 700 Level and Balls, Sticks and Stuff.

To be known forevermore as "The Catch"

2006-05-12T05:20:00.000-07:00

No more need be said.

Inspired by the "Streak" I watched "Bull Durham" last night...

2006-05-11T11:34:00.000-07:00

After at least 10 years. Naturally, it wasn't quite what I remembered. Here are the two biggest problems I had:

1) Crash said he'd been in the minors 12 years, and we find out he's been at least in AAA for part of that time, and he's hit 247 Homers for his minor league career by the end of the movie. That's an average of over 20 HRs a year for 12 years, and all he's ever had was a cup of coffee for 21 days? You don't think he could have outhit, say, Ryan Doumit last year? I mean, isn't a backup catcher with some pop worth more than a cup of coffee? Especially when you consider that it's a short season, and while he averaged 20 a year, he must have had a few years when he hit over 30, maybe even 40! I found it impossible to buy that one.

2) Nuke's first start is being discussed by the Skip and bench coach. In his outing, he struck out 18, walked 18, and had innumerable wild pitches, hit batsmen, etc. I believe if it had been a no-hitter, they would have mentioned it. Now just do the math. 18x4 = 72. 18x3= 54. We're up to 126 pitches at a minimum before hit batsmen, hits, errors, etc are considered!! Nuke had to have thrown over 200 pitches in his professional debut!!! This was the 80s, before pitch counts were considered as important as they are today, but can you even conceive of this happening even 50 years ago??? The manager would have been fired by the organization before the night was through.

Please tell me I'm not alone when I notice stuff like this.

Via "The Onion Sports"

2006-05-11T10:55:00.000-07:00

Great but lesser know Home Runs: Excerpt:

1975: Although known for his famous Game 6 Home Run in the World Series, few remember Carlton Fisk's home run earlier in the season that was ruled a foul after he mistakenly waived the wrong way.

Welcome Cole Hamels, but first...

2006-05-11T05:50:00.000-07:00

Thank you to Ryan Madson. Ryan, from what I've seen of how you're handling this, you have class, which isn't something that any amount of wins or losses can bring. It seems obvious that you're disappointed in moving to the 'pen, but you're taking it for the team, and we appreciate it. Keep it up, your day will come.

As far as Hamels, I think that we should allow him at least a start or two before anointing him "King?" Remember how jazzed we all were when Floyd and Madson were announced as starters after incredible springs? Major League hitters have a way of being better than triple A hitters. Let's not get so excited that we are setting "Young King Cole" up to be booed if he strikes out less than 15 every game.

Lastly, well done to the Phillies for a challenging and enjoyable win streak. Come from behind wins, strong pitching, hitting, and luck all played their parts. Wonderful baseball.

Thoughts on Ryan Madson

2006-05-09T12:23:00.000-07:00

Quality start
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Quality Start is a relatively new baseball statistic developed by John Lowe. It attempts to gauge the number of "good" starts that a pitcher has. A start is defined to be a quality start if the pitcher pitches at least six innings and allows no more than three earned runs.

See also Diamond Mind's "The Quality Start is a Useful Statistic"

First, let's address the initial question: what is the ERA of pitchers in their quality starts? Table 1 is a summary of the results from all games from 1984-1991, 16831 games total, of which about 52% were quality starts. The information in this table is divided two ways. First, each league is presented individually, and second, the games are separated by quality starts and non-quality starts. (Emphasis added)

I am a Ryan Madson fan, and I've been somewhat disconcerted by the chatter about moving him back to the bullpen. So far this year, Ryan has made six starts. Three have been "quality" starts, yielding 1, 3, and 1 Earned Runs in 6, 7, and 6 innings, respectively, for a nifty ERA of 2.36.

During his poor starts, his ERA has been an incredibly bad 14.72.

Given that over the past 100 years (up to 1991) the percentage of quality starts has been the same as the percentage of quality starts Madson has given us in 2006, I think it is a little premature to consign him to the bullpen just yet.

Now I am aware that you cannot throw out bad starts, and I'm not suggesting Madson is in reality Roger Clemens in disguise. However, he has shown enough competence to keep his place in the rotation right now. He's still a groudball pitcher, which is what we need in the Cit. The big difference for 2006? He's not striking anyone out, which no pitcher other than Jamie Moyer can continue to do indefinitely and succeed. However in the past two years, Madson has struck out .81 batters per inning, and while I'm not sure why he hasn't done similarly this year, I believe he will. When that happens, he will be the inning-eating machine he's teased us with these past few years.

Another thing to consider. Imagine a 2007 rotation consisting of:

Lieber
Myers
Madson
Floyd
Hamels

The highest paid pitcher on that rotation would be Lieber, with the rest costing the Phils peanuts in '07. If the young pitchers all develop into above average starters or even stars (Hamels!), the Phils can spend the money saved on pitching for some high quality free agent next year.

Some quotes about the win streak:

2006-05-09T06:12:00.000-07:00

From Annie:

But it didn't happen like that... and for one extraordinary June and July, the Durham Bulls, for whatever perverse reason, began playing baseball with joy and verve and poetry--

From Nuke:

It feels "out there". A major rush. I mean it doesn't just feel "out there" but it feels out there.

From Crash:

You outta your mind? If you give in now you might start losing. (beat) Never **** with a winning streak.

The sad, sad saga of John Daly

2006-05-02T12:20:00.000-07:00

This guy was the most popular player in the game before Tiger. In fact, he would have been Tiger Woods if it weren't for his personal problems. He's currently earning enough to support his train-wreck life, but that will end. I predict IRS woes will follow this book, ending in bankruptcy within the next five years or so. Who knows? Maybe it will be the best thing to happen to him.

Anyway, here's the article. Excerpt:

But the gambling continued.

Daly three-putted from 15 feet on the second playoff hole against Woods at Harding Park. He headed to Las Vegas and lost $600,000 within 30 minutes. He said he took out another $600,000 line of credit and lost that in two hours.

"And here's how my sick mind analyzed the situation," Daly wrote. "My sponsorship payments would be coming through in January, so I'd be able to pay everything off and get back to even by the beginning of the new year. Everything's fine. Everything's OK. No problema. Hell, yes, there's a problema."

Baseball Prospectus reviews our minor leaguers:

2006-05-02T10:20:00.000-07:00

Excerpt:

Righty Scott Mathieson had a 4.14 ERA in Clearwater last year, but was outstanding in the Arizona Fall League and scouts have always loved his big frame and power repertoire. The numbers are catching up to the reviews, as the 22-year-old Canadian has a 37/7 K/BB ratio in 32.1 innings. That's three big time starting prospects in the upper levels for the Phillies, a situation most teams can only dream about.

I forgot one: Phillie mascot of the month...

2006-05-02T05:46:00.000-07:00

As always, the Fanatic!!!

Phillies of the Month: April

2006-05-01T06:50:00.000-07:00

Phillies' Hitter of the Month:

This is a pretty tough choice, because Bobby Abreu and Pat Burrell both had outstanding Aprils.

Pat the Bat: OBA .400, SLG .613, 7HRs, 21 RBI - An excellent slugging % has lifted the Phils to many of their April Wins.

Bobby: OBA .444, SLG .550, 24 hits and 24 walks leading to 19 runs scored.

So, which hitter was more valuable? As much as I agree with "OBA is life" and as big a fan as I am of Bobby, I have to pick Pat Burrell as the offensive player of the month for April. Congratulations, Pat. You're the first ever Pawnking's Phillies' Hitter of the Month!

Phillies' Pitcher of the month:

This also came down to two contestants: Myers and Gordon

Myers: IP 30.2, ERA 3.23, 2-1 record with 26 K and 13 BB. Pitched a 1-0 gem in Coors field, a feat rarer than a no-hitter or a perfect game.

Flash: IP 11.2, 6 Saves, ERA of 0.84, 17K and 5 BB. The most consistent reliever, an absolute lock for the win when he shows up.

Generally, the innings the starter gives you is worth more than anything a reliever can do. However, in this case Flash's ERA, Ks and sheer intimidating presense in the bullpen has been invaluable. Despite an April as good as can be hoped for by Myers, Gordon gets the nod.

Congratulations, Flash Gordon, Pawnking's Phillies' Pitcher of the Month!

Swallow your pride and admit Floyd isn't ready for the Bigs...

2006-04-26T06:58:00.000-07:00

As a comparison, Floyd has an ERA of 8.50. Franklin an ERA of 3.18.

Even if Franklin pitches the rest of the season as poorly as last year (ERA of 5.10) rather than his career ERA (4.32), that's such an obvious difference in what Floyd's giving us right now as to really close the argument.

Floyd = not ready for prime time.

Causes for concern, causes for optimism

2006-04-25T06:30:00.000-07:00

Considering the Phillies' season to date, I consider the following as causes for concern:

1) We've been outscored by 24 runs so far this year, second worst only to the Pirates in the NL. If that continues, there is no way we finish with a winning record.

2) OBP, which was the great strength of 2005, has crashed in 2006 to a below league average .326.

3) The team ERA of 5.42 is almost a full run over the league average.

Causes for optimism:

1) The majority of the drop in offensive production can be traced to an absurdly low BABIP (Batting Average on Balls In Play) of .274 (Second worst in the NL). If you are of the school that such things even out over the course of the year, the Phillies will certainly see an increase in BA and OBP over the remainder of the season.

2) Another factor in the low run production is a similarly absurdly low BARISP (Batting Average with Runners In Scoring Position) of .203! This is not only the worst in the league, but 60 points below the average and 30 points below the next lowest team!!! If you are of the school that BARISP will even out over the season, well, the production can't help but improve. It certainly can't be much worse.

3) Although the pitching has been poor so far this year, FIP (Fielding Independent Pitching) is a better than league average of 4.29. The difference between the Phils' ERA and FIP is over 1.1 runs per game (worst in the league, again!). Whether you believe in FIP or not as an exact measure of pitching and fielding, this is a huge indication that the problems of the pitching staff can be laid more at the feet of the defense than the pitchers. The Phils also have the worst DER (Defense Efficiency Ratio) in the league by far. If you are of the opinion that the Phils are actually a superior defensive team (as was the general consensus before the season started) and that this is a result of a fluky small sample size, then the Phils ERA should greatly improve over the remainder of the season.

Looking behind the numbers, it seems obvious that the Phils' shaky start is largely the result of bad luck (BABIP and BARISP) and poor defense. We should be extremely happy to be only 2 games below .500 at this time, considering how relatively poorly the team has played in these areas. Although the debate on the ability to get hits with runners in scoring positions, getting hits on balls in play, and defense vs. pitching hasn't been resolved, such extremely large discrepancies the Phils are currently showing simply are not going to continue all season long.

Regression even to league averages in these three areas should see a great increase in offense and a great improvement in the team's ERA. The season has not been lost in April, fortunately. Improvement in improvable areas over the summer should lead to the Phils rising to challenge the Mets over the entire season for the NL East.

Depressed about the season? Here's somthing to think about.

2006-04-21T08:11:00.000-07:00

News Flash! Jimmy Rollins Extends....

2006-04-19T09:49:00.000-07:00

Non-Sequential-Game Hit Streak!

An oldie but a goodie in honor of the just past tax day...

2006-04-19T07:12:00.000-07:00

How Taxes Work . . . This is a VERY simple way to understand the tax laws. Read on -- it does make you think!!

Let's put tax cuts in terms everyone can understand. Suppose that every day, ten men go out for dinner. The bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:

The first four men — the poorest — would pay nothing; the fifth would pay $1, the sixth would pay $3, the seventh $7, the eighth $12, the ninth $18, and the tenth man — the richest — would pay $59. That's what they decided to do.

The ten men ate dinner in the restaurant every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement — until one day, the owner threw them a curve (in tax language a tax cut). "Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily meal by $20." So now dinner for the ten only cost $80.00.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes. So the first four men were unaffected. They would still eat for free.

But what about the other six — the paying customers? How could they divvy up the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his "fair share?" The six men realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, Then the fifth man and the sixth man would end up being PAID to eat their meal.

So the restaurant owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay. And so the fifth man paid nothing, the sixth pitched in $2, the seventh paid $5, the eighth paid $9, the ninth paid $12, leaving the tenth man with a bill of $52 instead of his earlier $59.

Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to eat for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings. "I only got a dollar out of the $20," declared the sixth man who pointed to the tenth. "But he got $7!" "Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man, "I only saved a dollar, too . . . It's unfair that he got seven times more than me!". "That's true!" shouted the seventh man, "why should he get $7 back when I got only $2? The wealthy get all the breaks!" "Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison, "We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!" The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

The next night he didn't show up for dinner, so the nine sat down and ate without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered, a little late what was very important. They were FIFTY-TWO DOLLARS short of paying the bill! Imagine that!

And that, boys and girls, journalists and college instructors, is how the tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up at the table anymore. Where would that leave the rest? Unfortunately, most taxing authorities anywhere cannot seem to grasp this rather straightforward logic!

T. Davies Professor of Accounting & Chair,
Division of Accounting and Business Law
The University of South Dakota
School of Business

Season's grades so far

2006-04-18T07:29:00.000-07:00

Top Scores:

Abreu - the divisive slugger has an OPS of over 1.000.

Myers - May be developing into the ace we all hoped for.

Burrell - Cannot be asked to do more than he has so far.

Madson - With the staff's lowest ERA, turning into the innings-eating, groundball-producing machine he's hinted at in the bullpen over the past 2 years. Plus he can hit!

Gordon - Billy who?

Rollins - If JRoll keeps up his .380 OBA, he'll set the Philly mark for runs in a season.

Pretty Darn Good:

Rowand - poor defense to date keeps him out of the top spot.

Lieberthal - Probably won't continue at this level, but so far, so good.

Cormier - Will Frenchie revert to his 2005 ways?

Rhodes - What a luxury it will be if we have 2 good lefties in the pen.

Fair to Middlin':

Howard - He's not going to be an all-star by legging out infield singles.

Utley - Despite a good slugging percentage, an OBA of .280 isn't going to cut it.

Lidle - A solid #3 starter.

Floyd - A promising start in Atlanta keeps him out of the doghouse.

Back of the Class:

The entire third base position - Uggh. Will the pitchers outhit the third basemen this year?

Lieber - Did he really start game 1? He's been a train wreck so far this season.

The bench - Have they even got one hit so far?

Santana and Geary - We'll need one of these two to step up with at least adequate right handed help. Flash can't do it all by himself.

Why winning 1-0 in Coors Field is a big deal.

2006-04-17T08:17:00.000-07:00

and Myers should get a lot of attention for it:

Since Coors Field opened in 1995, there have been exactly 2 1-0 games pitched there, including Sunday.

In that same period of time, there have been 25 No Hitters, including 3 perfect games.

Which is the bigger accomplishment?

Poll: Thome and Padilla?

2006-04-13T13:13:00.000-07:00

Quick poll: How do you feel about two ex-Phillies, Jim Thome and Padilla, playing as well as they have?

1) Great to see ex-Phils do well, I root for them.
2) Don't care either way.
3) Why are we paying Thome $11 million to hit so many HRs for another team?
4) How in the name of everything on earth can Padilla have as many wins as the Phils entire team (and twice as many as the Phillies starting rotation)??? The confusion leads me to question the very fabric of the space-time continuum.
5) Gillick should be fired. Bring back Ed Wade.
6) Other?

A quick post...

2006-04-12T05:34:00.000-07:00

15 hour days leave little time for blogging :-) Hopefully after the 15th, I'll be a little more regular.

While Tom mentioned that Charlie should go, and I tend to agree with him, I doubt that a new manager will make a lot of difference. I don't mean that in a pessimistic way, but the Phils simply are not as bad as they've looked. Remember last year when the Yankees were 11-22? Also, the last time the Phils started out 0-4 they rolled out to the NL East.

So while there are a few areas of concern (starting pitching, lack of timely hitting), there are some areas to be cheered, too (Madson looks to be for real, so too Howard, etc.) It's a long season, and whether Charlie is replaced or not the Phils will get back on track and be in the thick of things before too long.

Very timely advice from Baseball Prospectus...

2006-04-10T10:58:00.000-07:00

Excerpt:

...everyone, calm the hell down. We’ve watched about 4% of the season, and if the events of the last week had happened in the middle of June, no one would be wasting electrons on the greatness of the Brewers and Tigers just because they’d put together five-game winning streaks against weak competition. We’d have perspective, and in the first week of the season, no matter how many times we go through this exercise, perspective is perpetually lost.

Wise words. Let us heed them. Read the whole thing (subscription req'd).

((By the way, the reason I don't post the entire article is because I don't believe in stealing from other writers. If they want to charge for their content, well, that's all right with me. I don't feel upset in quoting them, as that might send some business their way. But I won't just paste an entire article. Nobody's been asking, but just in case you're wondering.))

Thoughts for the day:

2006-04-07T07:11:00.000-07:00

Starting the season 0-3 is bad.

Starting the season against what may be the best team in the NL is difficult.

Starting the season 0-3 against what may be the best team in the NL is not ideal, but not the end of the world.

The remaining 159 games will determine the season more than the past 3 did.

If ever there was a "must win" game four games into the season, it's tonight.

Well, one down.

2006-04-04T05:38:00.000-07:00

That's not exactly how we drew it up.

The good:
King Kong blasted a no doubter today, showing that his spring was no fluke.

JRoll extended his hitting streak, lacing a double in the eighth on a 3-0 count. He also hit the ball hard each time up.

We touched up the reigning Cy Young winner for nine hits and four runs.

Rowand looked good at the plate, including a long AB against Carpenter which lasted around 10 pitches and ended with a double. That's the kind of AB we need.

The Bad:
Lieber fell apart in the fourth.

The Bullpen didn't help, either. Fultz indicated that last year was, indeed, a fluky year, giving up 4 hits (including a HR) and 3 Runs (1 earned) in only 2 innings.

The Ugly:
The Wall claimed it's first victim, and it was Phillie Utley. I got so sick last year every time I heard "The Phils can't win with this field" when the Phils had a much better record at home than away. It wasn't the fields' fault we came up short. And now the changes have hurt the Phils. Wonder if the talking heads will mention this?

JRoll and Utley failed to turn a DP in the fourth, and only got the lead runner. Then the bleeding started, ending in massive shock and the code was called that half-inning.

Rowand dove for a ball in the fourth, missed, and it became a triple. I know it was just one game, but that's not how it was supposed to go, either. Shaky defense hurt the Phils a lot more than the scoreboard indicated.

I enjoyed this article on glove technology

2006-04-01T04:26:00.000-08:00

and it's development. Excerpt:

One of the most curious aspects of the evolution of baseball gloves is how slo-o-o-wly they developed. This is largely because of what I call vestigial technology. A lot of time was wasted in the conquest of the air by men trying to make their machines look like birds. It took automakers a while to realize that the motor car was not a wagon or a carriage but a new and unique form of ground transportation. By the same token, it was not until the late 1950s and early 1960s that baseball glove makers finally realized that what they were making was not a glove but a special instrument for catching or trapping a very fast-moving small sphere.

The things you learn...

2006-03-31T04:49:00.000-08:00

I was not aware of this, but apparently I am partners, presumably with gr. I also apparently am living in Arlington, VA.

Furthermore, a comment I had made referring to Rob's erroneous understand of baseball history has been deleted.

Not that it's a big deal, but my deleted post directed Rob's attention to something he claimed was a fact, but wasn't. Rather than answer my criticism, he has chosen to ignore it, deleting any reference to my disputing his understanding of history. Well, that's all right. It's his blog, after all. Maybe I was too hard on him in the manner in which I called him out?

The last thing I have to say on the matter is this: Any observations made by someone who:

1) does not bother to check to see if the things he says are actually true,

2) assumes knowledge that he cannot possibly have,

3) attempts to poison the well by stating "Sabermetrics precision and attention to detail may not be your calling," rather than actually address any points I make or attempt to correct any errors I illustrate (I remind you that I am a CPA, and passingly familiar with attention to detail), and

4) deletes comments which challenge his understanding of history,

well, as I tried to explain to Rob, such a person is undermining his own credibility, and his observations cannot be taken seriously.

....and there was much rejoicing.

2006-03-30T11:38:00.000-08:00

"yeeeeaaaa!!!"

The Phoggosphere is very very happy today. I don't believe I have seen this much excitement by Phillies bloggers since... well, I guess the realization that Ryan Howard was for real was the last time.

Floyd, Madson are both in the rotation!

Keys to the season: Ryan Madson

2006-03-29T08:27:00.000-08:00

Continuing with my keys to the season series, let us consider one Ryan Madson.

Madson has been cursed over the past two years with being an effective reliever, thus limiting his overall effectiveness. Although I have been reading arguments about how much the bullpen needs him, here's the final word on the matter: Starters are more valuable than relievers. Madson has pitched about 75 or so innings a year for the past 2 years, and should easily double that in 2006. More high quality innings means a lower overall team ERA. Unless the bullpen totally implodes, Madson will be best served there.

But it goes beyond that. The very best bullpen guys have one big out pitch. Think Mariano Rivera with his cut fastball he throws over and over. Rivera doesn't have a great #2 pitch, but he doesn't need one. Hitters only see him once a game, and generally not more than a few times a year. They can't adjust to that movement and speed with so few repetitions. If Rivera was a starter, he would only be average, because starters need 3 or 4 good pitches to be effective.

Madson does not have on overwhelming great pitch. His best pitch is probably his changeup, which isn't a pitch you can throw over and over and be effective. Instead, Madson has several high quality pitches, which build on each other. His sinking fastball has the same arm motion as his changeup. Thus, he can be a very deceptive pitcher.

Furthermore, he's a groundball pitcher. Can you think of any ballpark where it's more important to be a groundball pitcher? He also has a fairly good strikeout rate. Although both characteristics by themselves are good, combined they have a chance to become very very special. Do you understand how high Madson's potential is?

One more thought: the past two years languishing in the bullpen might prove to be a blessing for our young pitcher. Consider another young star who pitched a few too many innings in his early years. Or this guy. Maybe starting promising young pitchers in the bullpen might end up being a new trend?

NCAA Bracket ruined? You're in good company

2006-03-27T04:27:00.000-08:00

Friday's Wall Street Journal explains the odds of correctly choosing all 63 games, summarized in this post. Excerpt:

Put it this way, it ain't gonna happen. There's even a company that provides insurance to companies that sponsor events for picking all 63 games correctly. Talk about a safe business! Fifty contests and zero winners. Papa John's contest had 90,000 entrants and no one got past the first round.

Baseball America article on Phillies' Minors...

2006-03-25T13:18:00.000-08:00

Well, this is encouraging, Phils win the Division in simulation!!!

2006-03-21T10:56:00.000-08:00

According to this, the Phillies win the Division about 1/2 the time, and make the playoffs 60% of the time. This guy took three different simulations of the 2006 season and played the season out.

A few facts I found to be particularly interesting: Although the Phils drop a few runs from their actual scored in '06, they are still projected to pace the NL, along with Colorado. Also, they are projected to give up a scant 710 runs, which would be third in the NL behind St. Louis and LA.

I guess our pitching staff might be all right after all.

Key to the Season: Leo Mazzone

2006-03-21T05:30:00.000-08:00

Continuing with my keys to the season series, let us turn to a man who doesn't even play for the Phillies. In fact, he's not even a player, but rather a coach: Leo Mazzone.

As most who follow the Braves and baseball in general know, Mazzone is the most highly regarded pitching coach in baseball. As most statheads know, J.C. Bradbury did a study measuring "The Mazzone Effect." If the study is accurate (and I've never seen any real questioning of it's accuracy), Mazzone alone accounts for 100 runs a year.

If Mazzone had not coached for the Braves in '05, they would have allowed 100 runs more during the season, which translates into 10 wins. They would have finished with 80 wins. If even one of those wins had been against the Phils, then we would have finished with 89 wins. If the Mazzone Effect is real, he was the one most responsible for keeping us out of the playoffs last year.

Mazzone has now moved to Baltimore. I cannot think of any single change by the Braves more devastating to their chances of continuing their incredible divisional championships run. Given the unbalanced schedule, we should pick up a game or two against the Braves just because of his departure. They should also fall a little bit, hopefully eliminating them from serious contention this year.

Here's what BP says about our young-uns....

2006-03-09T08:48:00.000-08:00

in this article (subscription req'd).

Excerpt:

2006 Rookies: Really none to speak of. Two-time Rule 5 pick Shane Victorino was the International League MVP and has the inside track to earn the fourth outfielder’s job, where he should be a valuable bench player. If Hamels can stay healthy, he could be a factor in the second-half of the season. If BP would let me use a font size of 200 for the “If” in front of Hamels’ name in the previous sentence, I would.

Deal Or No Deal?

2006-03-07T06:24:00.000-08:00

In honor of the moronic yet oddly addictive NBC hit, "Deal or No Deal" to the following propositions for 2006 (i.e. would you take these proposed season stats now, or take your chances with the actual season's results?):

1)Phillies total wins: 88 - Deal Or No Deal?

2)Ryan Howard's total HRs - 40 - DOND?

3)Jimmy Rollins total runs - 110 - DOND?

4)Flash Gordan's saves - 25 - DOND?

5)Brett Myers' ERA 3.75 - DOND?

6)Ryan Madson's win total 13 - DOND?

7)Chase Utley's slugging % - .525 - DOND?

8)Bobby Abreu's OBP - .410 - DOND?

Abreu to be traded???

2006-03-06T06:05:00.000-08:00

Mike Berquist and "A Citizen's Blog" returns (welcome back!) with a fleeting mention about Abreu "certainly" going to be traded.

Well, Bobby's one of my favorite players, but no one is above being traded. So I'm looking forward to Mike's thinking about this.

My thoughts:

1) Abreu is the best we have at getting on base, and is one of the best in the league at that.

2) Abreu is also one of the best we have in slugging.

3) Abreu is an above average baserunner, with an excellent successful percentage.

4) Abreu has a gun in right field, which helps make up for his below average fielding.

5) Although not a clubhouse leader, Abreu does not detract in any meaningful way from the club, such as calling his manager out, demanding prima-Donna treatment, dissing the media, etc.

6) Abreu does not have the "name buzz" kind of recognition that might generate a monster trade. In fact I believe he's a little undervalued in the average fans' eyes (certainly in the Phillies' fans eyes), and that would probably hurt his trade value.

7) It's unlikely that the Phillies would trade for another outfielder, which would be akin to shuffling deck chairs. So the only other two reasons to trade Abreu would be

a) for prospects, or
b) for a top flight pitcher

any other trade would be pointless.

a) So, it by the trading deadline, the Phils are out of the playoffs (highly unlikely, I think, but possible), I could certainly see trading Abreu for some big time prospects to a contending team.

b) however if the Phils have serious problems with their pitching, I could see them trading for a top ace to stabilize the rotation if they're still close in the division.

8) All of the above aside, Abreu is almost certainly the most tradeable of the Phils' players, and isn't especially popular in Philadelphia, so from that perspective, a trade could happen.

Just my 2 cents worth.

Shout out to Oisin!

2006-03-02T15:12:00.000-08:00

Congrats on your nuptials.

I always knew it was you, man.

Rethinking the 2005 campaign...

2006-03-02T05:24:00.000-08:00

I think the healing time has been sufficient to look back at the 2005 season in a rational manner, avoiding the defeatism which sometimes accompanies talking about the Phils in general.

The very best of 2005:

1) the 12-1 homestand. The best blog entry about this belonged to Jason Weitzel:

There's no formula to predict that a team that totally stunk for a month and a
half would drop a 12-win megaton bomb squarely on the head of Howard Eskin.
Historically, it was their best home stay in 123 years, before the invention of
baseball

I think everyone remembers how exciting a time that was. Anything seemed possible. It all came together that stretch, pitching, hitting, fielding, everything that makes baseball great.

2) The emergence of Ryan Howard as a true power player. Today, many in the bloggosphere (including yours truly) are excited about the upper potential that Howard may show this year. Let's remember that as late as last July, the Phils were considering shipping Howard for a middling starting pitcher. Could you imagine such a trade today? What happens if Howard really takes off like he might? Keeping Howard is certainly the best move Ed Wade made.

Certainly after Thome went down, Howard stepped up, tearing away the ROTY trophy from Jeff Francoeur, the mid season shoo-in for the award. And he deserved it, too!

3) JRoll's hitting streak. While those who had stopped paying attention didn't notice, and those who were paying attention were more interested in the pennant chase, Jimmy Rollins put together a nifty 36 game hitting streak. More important to the statheads, he got on base at a .442 clip. In short, for a magical month and a half, Jimmy was the leadoff hitter we always wanted him to be, providing the spark the offense lacked for most of the season. It was exciting to see him come up to plate. The fact that it was all in the middle of a pennant chase made it even more fun.

4) Finishing one game out of the playoffs, and two games out of first place. The Phillies had by most measures a very successful season on the field.

The very worst of 2005

1) Finishing one game out of the playoffs, and two games out of first place. When you're that close, recriminations last all off season long. What if we had beaten Houston just ONE STINKING TIME????? What if we hadn't blown that game by giving up one in the eighth and one in the ninth in Philly on July 3rd? What if? What if? What if?

2) Trading away Placido Polanco for Ugueth Urbina. If we can look at the Howard non-trade as a good move, we can look at this one trade as probably the single biggest contributor of the Phillies falling short in 2005. Although his ERA for 2005 ended up being 3.62, Oogy blew a 6 saves for the Phils, including the game mentioned on July 3rd. Take away those 6 blown saves and replace them with 3 and the Phils win the NL East.

The other half of the trade sent the eventual ML batting champ away, when he was perfectly capable of playing third. After the trade, Polanco accumulated an additional 30 VORP for Detroit. Bell contributed a negative 3 VORP. Urbina contributed 7.3 VORP.

Do the math. That trade cost the Phillies 26.7 VORP after it was made, or approximately 2 1/2 wins over the remainder of the season.

3) Losing Thome and Wolf to the DL. - Again, one wonders if Thome had been healthy (and productive), if Wolf, who had his best game just before he went down, had been healthy, what if? what if? what if?

___________________________________________________________

It's so very hard to come so close only to fall short. I'll always remember the 2005 season. The coulda' woulda' shoulda' season. The What If? season.

Any Philly-bloggers interested in an NL-Fantasy league this year?

2006-03-01T08:06:00.000-08:00

If so, I'll be willing to be the commish. But I don't have to be if someone else wants it. Just post below and let me know if you're interested. Also, if you have a favorite venue for fantasy baseball, let me know. I have used the Yahoo thing before, but I'm not very happy with that one.

The Onion has completely run out of ideas...

2006-02-28T07:05:00.000-08:00

A complete change of topics, The Onion is now officially out of new ideas.

Read this.

Now, read this (from 1988!)

It's a real shame that the website which brought us items like "Shirtless, Shoeless March on Washington for Equal Service Rights," which still cracks me up, is mining old Phil Hartman skits for new material.

UPDATE:

Okay, I admit I find this pretty funny. But then again, I'm a numbers' crunching man, too.

Player Highlight: Ryan Howard

2006-02-25T10:41:00.000-08:00

Continuing my series where I focus on the keys to the 2006 season, I turn my attention to one Ryan Howard.

In my prior post, I focused on David Bell. Bell was the worst regular in the lineup last season, and the reason I focused on his first was because although he has limited upside, a small improvement at that position would result in meaningful improvement to the Phills. Low lying fruit, you might say.

The opposite is true for Ryan Howard. His fruit is as high as one can conceive. His 2005 OBP was .356 and SLG was .567. Very very good. However, if you've got a subscription to BP, check out his 2006 projection. His 50% projection shows an improvement to .363 OBP and .582 SLG. Then, look at his 90% projection. Look again. And again. It takes a few times to believe your eyes. Ryan Howards' 90% projection is an amazing .429 OBP and .750 SLG!!!!

As a comparison, I examined other luminaries' projected 90% SLG. The only player I could find with a higher upside is the inhuman Barry Bonds. Ryan projects a better 90% SLG upside than Pujols, A-Rod, Derrick Lee, Manny Rameriz, David Ortiz, anyone but Bonds. His 90% HR number is 61. His 90% RBI Number is 153. His 90% Stolen Base number is 0. Well, he's not playing because of his speed, folks. In fact, if he even attempts a stolen base all year, Charlie Manuel should be immediately fired.

When I plugged Howard's numbers into the nifty run scoring projection program from Baseball Musings, using all other players' 2005 numbers, I got a projected increase in runs of almost .5 per game, which would translate into an extra 8 wins over the season!!!

Wow. That's all I can say. Wow!!!

I like this webpage...

2006-02-25T08:08:00.000-08:00

In it, you plug in the players in your lineup to discover the optimal lineup card. Before you ask, according to this Baseball Musings program, the optimal lineup would be:

1) Abreu
2) Utley
3) Lieberthal (Yes, Mike Lieberthal)
4) Howard
5) Burrell
6) Rollins
7) Rowand
8) Pitcher
9) Bell

According to last years' stats, such a lineup would score 4.774 runs per game. In 2005, the Phils scored 807 runs, which comeS to 4.98 runs per game. So based on this optimal projection, the Phils could see some dropoff, mostly due to losing Lofton and Michaels, I suppose. Or maybe due to Pinch Hitters. The difference is about 33 runs for the season, which might translate to 3 games difference. Not an immaterial dropoff.

Some interesting items in the lineups. In every single optimal lineup (the program shows the top and bottom 20) Abreu was listed as the best choice for leadoff. Lieberthal was listed as high as second and as low as ninth. Bell was listed as the last hitter about 50% of the time. Howard was listed as the #4 hitter 100% of the time in the optimal lineups. Utley was far and away the top #2 hitter listed, followed by Burrell.

In the worst lineups, the pitcher was always listed as the #1 hitter. David Bell was the second worst choice. Number three? Jimmy Rollins! When you consider that every time the pitcher leads off the inning we're going Pitcher Rollins to lead off the inning, Having JRoll as the leadoff man might prove to be very costly to the Phils, according to this.

Please note that I did absolutely zero research into the methods this program uses to calculate the optimal lineup, and I know for a fact it does not consider left/right matchups when considering lineups. Also the difference between the absolute best lineup and the absolute worst is less than a run a game, and if you were to always bat the pitcher last, it's far less than that.

Play around with this and post your most interesting discoveries.

Good News!!!!! A Citizens' Blog is Back!!!

2006-02-24T13:16:00.000-08:00

Probably the premier stathead Phillies Blog will be returning March 6.

This really distresses me...

2006-02-24T06:10:00.000-08:00

One of my favorite baseball web sites ranked the Phils as having had the fifth worst offseason in baseball.

Then again, maybe that's about right. We lost one of the most valuable parts of the team, and added effectively nobody.

On the other hand, consider the fact that BP ranked the 2006 free agent crop as "The least accomplished, most overpaid in recent history." (Membership req'd. What? You aren't a member of BP? You really, really should look into it. It's like, $35.00 a year. Best baseball money you can possibly spend.) Maybe, just maybe, not giving mediocre free agents five year multi-million dollar contracts was a good idea.

Well, I can't say I'm happy about 2006 from an acquisition department. We'll see if it's part of an overall plan.

A quick post on park factors

2006-02-23T13:13:00.000-08:00

What with the fences being moved out and all, I just wanted to point out that last year, the Phils played in a park which inflated runs by only (cumulatively) 3% in 2005, and 1% in 2004.

UPDATE: I just checked and realized those links don't work. Try going here and scrolling to the bottom to access the park data worksheets.

Also note that in 2005, the Phils NL East opponents played in neutral to extreme pitchers parks, with the Braves in a neutral park, Fla and Wash suppressing runs at a 4% rate, and the Mets at a 3% rate. Most park factors (ESPN) simply calculate park factors by dividing runs at home against runs on the road. This is wrong. Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong.

The moving out of the fences might suppress runs a teeny, tiny bit in '06 (although I expect the additional doubles to left will mitigate this effect), but the park factor "experts" will still point to the fact that the Phils will (likely) score more runs at home than on the road. Of course, if you play half of your road games in pitchers parks, this is expected.

Just a little reminder as we head into the new season and all the yahoos on WIP start to bellyache about this subject, as you know they will.

To answer a great post by Tom G

2006-02-23T06:45:00.000-08:00

Here's Tom's post. I originally wanted to post a response in his comments section, but this ran kind of long.

All this may true about underachieving. But (and since I'm such a contrarian you knew there would be a but) I think we really have to lighten up on ourselves and even on these Phils.

As human beings, we always look for patterns. It's what makes us who we are, and even defines us as either "statheads" or as "seamheads" (a great term, by the way). Statheads have our little techniques on measuring performance, with our regressive analysis and prediction of future performance. Seamheads have been weaned on newspaper writers and more recently talk show hosts (who generally have come from newspaper writers). These newspapermen are not statheads, but writers. As writers, they look for a story, a theme, a theme, and an interesting anecdote. When they look for patterns, these writers use terms such as “Clutch” “Choker” “Underachiever” and “Overachiever” to describe what he sees. In all of these terms, we see a story, or a theme, or a character point.

Thus, a writer will translate the action on the field as a human drama, and thus assign, perhaps, more to the outcome of a game than it warrants.

Maybe the best example I can think of which illustrates the absurdity of this is from a very early “Simpson’s” episode. In it, Mr. Burns organizes a Power Plant softball team made up of the out of shape workers (to illustrate, the star of the team was Homer). After a while, Mr. Burns decides to substitute the entire team with major league ringers such as Ken Griffy Jr., Daryl Strawberry, Roger Clemens, and the like. He then holds a mini-tryout for the new team. Naturally, the pros all make the team and the power plant workers all wash out.

The great scene comes when Mr. Burns addresses the washouts, saying, “I just want to tell you how disappointed I am with you. You all lack a certain something. An indefinable character flaw, which caused your failure.” At the risk of over-explaining the joke, Mr. Burns is considering the players poor athletic skills as indicators of poor character. Of course the thought that they were beer-logged middle-aged desk jockeys competing against professional athletes doesn’t occur to him. It’s all part of a greater story line in his mind, one where internal character always defines performance.

So it is with newspaper writers in general. When a team wins, it is proof of their greater character than the team which lost. The closer the outcome, the more proof it is that it wasn’t a lack of skill, but rather a lack of character which caused the loss. Over the course of a season, the Phils came one game shy of the Wild Card, and almost that close to winning the NL East. But they fell short. And so, as human beings, we look to answer the questions why?

Back to the original point, as statheads, we look and look for some measurable reason why the Phils failed. Maybe, if we can find it, we can fix it. Maybe if we’re smart enough, we can be winners. Likewise, writers look in their crystal balls, and usually find goats to blame for the teams’ overall failure (such as Ed Wade or Mike Lieberthal or Bobby Abreu). Maybe if we replace those people with winners (which are generally hazily defined as “I know one when I see one”), then we can be winners.

But what if the truth is that baseball is not a perfectly predictable game? What if the difference between an 88 game winning team and a 95 game winning team is less than people think? What if it often comes down to a few breaks no one could have predicted? What if the Phils played as well as they could have and just came up short? Is that so unacceptable?

The Phils scored over 800 runs last year. When it comes to the point where we are chasing ill-defined terms for a lousy 15 (less than 2%) runs a season, can’t we just say “Well, maybe it’s a rounding error.” Isn’t it possible that the hazy fog of luck is greater than the baserunning errors we sometimes see our Phils make?

An interesting question...

2006-02-22T07:53:00.000-08:00

Bonds' chances of catching Aaron are iffy right now.

If you were able to decide, would you want Bonds to set the new HR record, or not?

If you have nothing to do, read this article

2006-02-22T07:28:00.000-08:00

It's much ado about nothing. Speculation built on speculation about Abreu.

You might find this article interesting...

2006-02-22T06:21:00.000-08:00

Talking about the teams which are best at various positions throughout all time. The Phills are mentioned as having the second best third base position in history, and the worst second base of all time, with a shout out to Utley, saying he'll probably end up being the best second baseman in Phills history before he's done. That is not saying a whole lot.

I admit this blog is pretty funny...

2006-02-20T14:31:00.000-08:00

Check it out. PhilliesSucks.com has a count down to 10,000 losses by the Phillies, which looks like it will occur sometime in late 2007. I think the city should have a parade or something.

Imagine the thrill of lining up with literally tens of people, looking at all time terrible players and managers from the past who contributed to so much futility. My only question would be who would be the grand marshall of the 10,000 loser parade? I suspect this guy has his opinions.

What do you think? What one man or woman contributed the most to your continuing Phillies misery? Who would you stay up for all night to throw tomatoes at at the 10,000 loser parade? Vote in the Comments section.

Well, this is discouraging...

2006-02-20T08:29:00.000-08:00

According to Baseball Prospectus, the Phils don't have a single prospect in the top 50.

Player Highlight: David Bell

2006-02-17T07:16:00.000-08:00

For the next several weeks, I am going to highlight players who will be critical to the Phillies success this year. While every player counts, some may have a bigger impact on the playoff hunt this year than is generally thought. First player: David Bell.

I know, I know. How can David Bell possibly be considered a big part of anything? He's error prone, and was a complete black hole in the lineup. Bear with me.

First of all, David Bell is highly underrated in the Philadelphia Market as a defensive third baseman, considered to be the 8th best in baseball by some measures. That will likely be consistent in '06. Don't discount the importance of saved runs. And no one in baseball starts the 5-4-3 DP faster than Bell, IMHO. This defensive measure probably reflects that.

Second, it is true that Bell was a black hole in '05 in the lineup. And due to his age, he's not likely to be a whole lot better in '06. But not likely isn't a certainty. His Baseball Prospetus Forecast shows his 50% projection to be an anemic .311 .361 OBP and SLG. That's below replacement level, and is about what he did in '05.

However, his 90% level is .353 .427 OBP and SLG. While this isn't great, it beats the heck out of '05, and would be worth some 3 wins more than his '05 level.

The point I'm trying to make is Abreu will probably not outperform his '05 level. Nor is it likely that Utley, or Burrell, or Rollins. Nor will Rowand outdo the '05 platoon of Lofton and Michaels. Where can the Phillies improve offensively? If the worst '05 performers raise their level to even slightly above replacement level, the offense will be significantly better.

Another point is made by Jason Weitzel. David Bell is one of the best hitters we have against lefties. Given the fact that most of the rest of the team hits from the south side, his continued production will be absolutely necessary in 2006.

Considering the Phillies really don't have any better options for third, Bell's 2006 performance will be critical to our win total. If Bell can outperform expectations, the Phillies will be picking up some real production from a spot we're not really anticipating it. His 90% projection is certainly attainable. If he manages it, it will go a long way towards a playoff berth.

Shaking off the dust around here. I think some cleaning is required...

2006-02-16T12:39:00.000-08:00

Because I'm finally gonna start blogging again! Woo-hoo!!!

Naturally, I have lots to say. Given the total lack of interest in my previous blogging incarnations, I doubt there will be a whole lotta feedback, but I care not! I cannot remain silent any longer. It's Spring Training again!

It's the most wonderful time of the year!

Thought for the day:

2005-09-12T07:36:00.000-07:00

Tonight, Philadelphia plays Atlanta. And Atlanta plays Philadelphia.

If you could choose, which would you rather have, a series sweep of the Braves, or winning the one game tonight?

While we're at it, which would you rather have, a Superbowl win or a World Series win?

Well, this isn't what I had in mind...

2005-09-08T05:27:00.000-07:00

When I posted that the next 6 games would be critical.

Sorry about all the optimism, folks. It was really unwarranted.

How bout them Eagles?

- sigh.

Next 6 games make (but not break) for Phillies

2005-09-02T06:42:00.000-07:00

Over the next six games, the Phillies are playing the Nats and the Astros. Having severely hurt the Met's chances of making the playoffs, the next six games could possibly end a lot of the doubt about what we'll be doing next month.

Florida has an incredibly tough schedule with a lot of games on the road. While they're not out of it, we have a much better chance than they do. Let's not forget the Marlins and Mets get to beat up on each other while we play the 'Stros.

Houston is now our closest competition for the W/C. They have a relatively easy schedule for September, but aren't really playing that well since their huge run in late July. We get to play them at home, where we play really well, and they play us on the road, where they are terrible.

The Nats have little chance of winning anything now, and a winning series against them will effectively end their season.

So basically, it comes down to the next six games. If we go 6-0, we waltz into the postseason. Houston will be dealt a devastating blow, and I don't see the Mets and Marlins keeping pace with that. 5-1 would also be great, especially if 3 of the wins come against Houston. 4-2, winning both series will greatly improve our chances, and 3-3 will leave us where we are right now, maybe marginally better because we'll still likely be in first in the WC with fewer games to go. 2-4 means we've fallen back into the pack but still have good chances, while 1-5 or 0-6 would be very, very difficult, although not impossible, to recover from.

So it's time for the Phillies to make some hay. A short hot run right now, and we're targeting the Braves for the division!

Go Phils!

Katrina

2005-08-31T05:58:00.000-07:00

Everyone, please take a moment and donate to some disaster relief fund for the Katrina. Here's a site keeping track of all the links of where you can donate. A few moments, a few dollars, and a tax deduction.

As I have alluded to in the past, I'm from the south and all my family is down there. My Uncle and his family live in New Orleans, so this hits pretty close to home for me. They had to evacuate and haven't been able to return yet to see if there is any home to return to. And they're the lucky ones, unlike those poor souls trapped in the Superdome or those even unable to get that far.

New Orleans is basically a big lake right now. Mississippi might be worse off, but with a more spread out population it might be harder to deliver aid. This is America's Tsunami. Please help.

What a difference a couple of days make...

2005-08-25T06:35:00.000-07:00

two wins, and the Phillies have doubled their chances of getting to the playoffs! And who is our biggest competition? Not the Marlins or the Astros, but the Mets! We are only 1 game ahead of them in the loss column, remember, and they have a much better run differential than we do.

Over at Tradesports, we have a 24% chance of winning the WC, and a 12% chance of winning the division. The Mets don't get as much love in the free market, you notice.

Lately I've been working, moving into my house, and prepping for my fantasy draft. I have a lot of thoughts on draft strategy, which I plan to share in a future post. I guess you can say that my blog is becoming self-indulgent :-)

Requiem to a great blog. Come back!

Check out this new website called fangraphs. I'm impressed. Very high on the coolness factor. See visually Abreau's history of GB/LD/FB %.

Blogging vacation soon to end

2005-08-22T13:25:00.000-07:00

To all my readers anxiously awaiting my next post!

Here's a tidbit I learned earlier today: tradesports has the Phillies at 20% for the WC and 9% as the division winner. So, about a one in three chance of getting to the playoffs.

Those predictions are amazingly close to the ones at Baseball Prospectus.

Just something to think about.

Reason for the blogging hiatus

2005-08-05T05:19:00.000-07:00

One of the features of being a public accountant is that it is not a 9-5 job. This does give me flexibility when it comes to taking breaks when things are slower, but when the work needs to get done, it needs to get done. August 15 is a tax deadline, and also I'm taking off all next week for a much needed vacation. Combine those things, and you have an accountant who just hasn't had time to blog :-(

When I return, I assume I will be blogging about how close the Phils are to first place in the NL East. Other than that unfortunate train wreck in Houston, the Phils have been playing great for quite a while now. I expect it to continue, and I can't imagine that Houston's surge can continue all season.

IMHO, the wild card (and possibly the NL East as well) will come down to which team gets hot last. The Phils are still in an excellent position, and are certainly capable of winning the WC.

Go Phils!

Bad news on the Galaxy Series hopeful...

2005-07-21T12:15:00.000-07:00

Life on Mars has been impossible for at least the last four billion years, according to evidence recently discovered.

This is bad news for those scientists who had calculated the effects of a curveball on Mars. All that research wasted.

Also, this has a depressing effect on certain sci-fi writers. Oh, well. There's always Jupiter...