Megalophobia

Want to hear something weird? I have it. Megalophobia. Fear of large things. Isn't that bizarre? Now there's not a whole lot of info online, but the few people who suffer from it are affected in different ways. Some are afraid of things that can move, such as airplanes and ships and Godzilla. But I think I'm scared of some stationary things. I probably won't be able to explain it very well, but I'll give it a try. I think the best way for me to go about this is to provide examples.

Anybody every been to the Hayden Planetarium (Rose Center)? You know when they show the moon and then they zoom in so you can see the terrain detail, etc.? Well that enormous, monstrous, terrifying circle on the ceiling of the planetarium scares the bejeezus out of me. Isn't that strange? The moon itself is not scary (although I used to be scared of it; I think I mentioned that elsewhere once), but if the moon was all of a sudden a few times larger in the sky, I would be horrified.

I was on Google Maps earlier today, and I was zooming out from some place in Japan. And when I zoomed out far enough that it became apparent that it was the islands of Japan, I got this nervous butterflies feeling in my stomach and chest.

Buildings. Buildings are scary. But not when I'm at the bottom looking up at a really tall one; I mean when there's just one big one towering over a bunch of smaller ones. And only certain views of such buildings; views where it's clear that this monster just dwarfs everything around. Like a picture of the skyline of Manhattan isn't the least bit scary, but an angled view of the Empire State building from above, like from a helicopter, would be terrifying.

Now this phobia doesn't affect my life in any meaningful way. At all. In fact, I think it makes me interesting, and maybe even sorta cute in a nerdy, me-like way. Maybe I should include some pictures. I'll give it a try.

Time to Chime In

Az we finally know who will be playing in the 2009 World Series. Phillies and Yankees, blah blah blah, sucks for Mets fans, who cares? I'm over it. It's not a big deal. Really, it's not. And anyone who says it is, is a bitter human being who hates baseball. I'm NOT here to talk about that; this is not some kind of shockumentary about a Phillies/Yankees World Series from the eyes of a melancholy metropolitan fan. Again, who cares?

Really, the point of this post, as you might have guessed, is that I hate Derek Jeter. And I think I might have pinpointed the reason. I mean I sorta knew subconsciously, but I never actually articulated it as I will right now. I've tried to explain this to a few people over the last week or two, but I don't think it went over very well, az I'm gonna give it another try here.

Before I begin, I just want to say that I still think that Derek Jeter is an outstanding baseball player, and will most likely be a first-ballot hall of famer. That being said, Derek Jeter is NOT an Olympian god. He is a man, a man who is excellent at playing baseball. He is NOT the greatest, clutch-iest, defense-iest player in the history of greatness or clutch-iness or defense-yness. The only thing he is the greatest ever at is Jeterianism.

According to urbandictionary.com:

jeterian
	1. making a play like derek jeter 2. a way of playing baseball; with class and determination and unbelievable plays and swings

He is definitely classy. He definitely plays with determination. And he has definitely been involved in some unbelievable plays and has had some unbelievable swings of the bat.

He is also way worse at baseball than Alex Rodriguez. I don't want to go through their career stats; that would be misleading and unfair, because they are different types of hitters. They basically have the same batting average and basically walk the same amount, but suffice it to say that A-Rod hits with a lot more power. But here's the thing. Everybody knows this; everyone will agree that Alex Rodriguez is a better player than Derek Jeter. And, almost to a man, everyone would rather have Derek Jeter up in a big spot than A-Rod. If you had to choose between Jeter and A-Rod for your post-season roster, 99.9% of human beings would choose Derek Jeter (I'm probably not too far off with that estimate. Maybe closer to 90%, but either way, it's up there).

The main reason for this is that people want to believe in supernatural powers. The average fan wants to believe that some professional athletes who make millions of dollars have some innate ability to perform better in big spots. This ability is what separates the stars from the bums, the Jeters from the A-Rods. In short, this ability turns normal human beings into heroes. And that's what the average fan wants to believe: that their favorite players are heroes.

The ugly little secret that most analysts don't want the average fan to know is that there's no such thing as "clutch-iness." I'm sorry to be the one to spill the beans, but there is no Santa Claus, and there are no clutch players. "But wait, Professor Schmutter! What about that home run in the world series against Kim in 2001?" Umm, Derek Jeter has 224 career home runs, not a negligible amount. He just happened to hit that one in a big spot. "But Professor, what about diving into the stands for that foul pop against the Red Sox and that play at the plate on Jeremy Giambi?" Not clutch. Good baseball instincts. Everyone will agree with that. "But all those Gold Gloves!" Undeserving. Go read some stuff on teh interweb and prepare to be pwned! Test next week.

"Ok, Professor, there's no way you have an answer for this one: what about how well Jeter has performed in the playoffs as compared to the regular season? And what about how poorly A-Rod has performed in the playoffs?" said little Mikey in the 4th row, a smug, buck-toothed grin on his pimply face. His fellow 4th row-ers sniggered and pointed at me, likely making fun of my newly purchased pocket protector protector. Little do they know that I only use mechanical pencils and the protector protector is just a fashion statement.

Well, let's just take a little look-see at some stats:

Jeter: Regular Season: .317 Batting Average, .388 On-Base Percentage, .459 Slugging Percentage

Post-Season: .308 Batting Average, .381 On-Base Percentage, .477 Slugging Percentage.

Hey, how about that! Those numbers are basically exactly the same! Nothing particularly clutch-y about that.

A-Rod: Regular Season: .305 Batting Average, .390 On-Base Percentage, .576 Slugging Percentage

Post-Season: .307 Batting Average, .408 On-Base Percentage, .570 Slugging Percentage

Well fancy that! Those numbers are basically exactly the same, dadgummit!

Sure, any idiot can have a good game or a good series, or even a good entire post-season. But eventually, when you play enough games, your post-season numbers will look exactly like your regular season numbers. Why? Because there's no such thing as clutch.

"Hold on Professor. Most of your students still look at RBI and stuff, but I'm too smart for that. Go check out fangraphs.com and check their Win Probability Added. That should show you how much more valuable Jeter is than A-Rod. He's so f-ing clutch!" Ah, Curtis in the front row. Such a cool customer. He's on the right track. Kissing up and crew-cuts are such babe-magnets.

Jeter's Post-Season WPA from 2002-2009 (sorry, no data before 2002): 0.16, 0.08, -0.25, 0.06, 0.01, -0.41, 0.00. Total = -0.35.

A-Rod's Post-Season WPA since 2004 (never made the playoffs before then): 1.27, -0.12, -0.28, -0.19, 1.34. Total = 2.02. those numbers basically mean that in 2004 and 2009 A-Rod won the equivalent of one game all by his lonesome.

You see? This is my problem. There is no disputing that Jeter is a fantastic player. I just can't stand that most fans think he's the greatest thing since sliced bread. I really really hope that A-Rod continues to clobber the ball in the World Series and Jeter does his usual thing. I want everyone to realize that A-Rod is an all-time great. I guess I kinda, sorta hope the Yankees win the series; I don't see what makes the Phillies so good, and Jayson Werth is really starting to bother me. But more importantly, I want the fans to discover A-Rod as a legendary player. I think he deserves some love.

Justified!

Yes, Joe Posnanski, my hero, has given one of my old arguments justification. Remember my Derek Jeter post from like three years ago? Here's what I said:

"The Yankees won last night largely because of Jeter's play. Not, I repeat, NOT because he's Captain Intangibles. Joe Morgan, Tim McCarver, Michael Kay, and all their smelly brethren do nothing but insult their hero Jeter when they refer to him as such. As a math guy, the only thing I look for to determine a player's value is his play on the field. Jeter's numbers speak for themselves. For him to be called Captain Intangibles means that there is something lacking in his baseball skills. I want to call your attention to two plays, which fans/commentators always enjoy mentioning; the flip to Posada that Jeter made on Jeremy Giambi against the Oakland A's in the playoffs, and the play last year against the Red Sox when he fell into the stands. These were terrific plays, plain and simple. But to say that the reason the Yankees win is because Derek Jeter does things like that is just silly talk. I'm not saying that every player would be able to make those plays; I just think that he was in the right place at the right time. You cheer him because his face came away bloody. That doesn't make the play any greater than it would have been if he had come away unscathed. My point is that the Yankees win because Derek Jeter is a very good baseball player."

And today, Joe wrote in his blog:

"To me, Derek Jeter isn’t a great player because he can rise to the occasion, because he has this sixth sense out there, and because he plays brilliant defense that is so subtle it does not show up in the statistics. No, he’s a great player because he gets on base, and he hits for some power, and he steals bases at a high percentage of success, and because he is extremely durable at a tough defensive position, and, if you want to get away from stats, because his teammates seem to like and admire him enough that they credit him for much of their own success. The power of the best baseball bloggers is that they try to pierce through vagueness and wave away myth and get at the heart of things. Sometimes, they do. Sometimes, they don’t. But, to a new generation of sports fans, it makes a lot more sense than saying: “This guy’s just a winner.”"

So, I'm right. I win. Good for me.

Anyway, my real purpose in writing today is to discuss Citi Field. I finally went for the first time last night, and I am literally in awe. I couldn't be happier with the way the new ballpark looks. It's like a cross between Citizens Bank Park and Camden Yards. Wow, there are just so many things I like about it. Pictures just don't do it justice; you have to see it for yourself. I'll go through a couple of highlights:

1. Clean bathrooms. This might be the best improvement of all of them. I mean it's like going to the bathroom at an airport instead of a public park.

2. Wide hallways. It was unbelievable. I literally walked from my seat to the garbage can and bathrooms without having to navigate through a thousand people (think Camden Yards).

3. Bars. Our seats were on the Excelsior Club level, which is pretty cool. Thanks BB. And there were actually nice bars with nice stools, and well-dressed bartenders, and a decent selection of drinks.

4. Modern appearance. I love the exposed scaffolding, piping, and rafters. Reminds me of my current office. And the bridge near center field is just outstanding.

5. HD TVs in the stands. I guess the biggest drawback to seeing a game in person has always been the lack of instant replays. Now they have TVs near the seats so you get to see replays of every play! Fantastic!

6. Outdoor activities. There's this whole area in center field that has carnival type booths, and fun things to do for fans (think Citizens Bank Park or a larger scale minor league park).

7. Fancy! We popped into the Caesar's Club just to check it out. Honestly, I couldn't even tell we were at a ballpark. We watched a couple of batters on an HDTV in the club while sitting on some couches. It really felt like we were at an airport or a casino. Amazing!

I'm so thrilled that I get to go watch Mets games at this stunning new park for the next 50 years. If only I were so thrilled about the actual team... Oh well; can't have everything all the time.

A Coupla New Ones

No need for any bells and/or whistles, az I'll just jump right into it.

My wife and I were driving back from Baltimore last night, and, as is usually the case, I went to the local lanes on the Jersey Turnpike when they split up. I go to the local lanes because all the moronic drivers out there (you know who you are) go to the express lanes, which leaves the local lanes nearly empty. The only drawbacks are the trucks, of which there are very few at certain hours, and the few miles of two-line driving. Az what happened during said miles of two-lane driving? Well, there was one car in each lane in front of me, each cruising at around 66 mph (speed limit is 65). And that was it; the car in the left lane was about six feet ahead of the car in the right lane, az there was no room to split the uprights. I must have followed them for about 5 miles getting more and more worked up. They both completely ignored my flashing lights and my horn; they probably had a good laugh over a few PBRs when they got back to their trailor homes and their trashy lumberjacking husbands. Now, I wasn't complaining terribly much, considering that I had set the over/under on our arrival at the GWB tolls at 11:07, and my wife, foolishly trusting in my driving skills, took the under, but it was the principal of the issue (we arrived at 11:13 in case you're keeping score)! It's just not cool to drive the speed limit in the left lane and then completely ignore the other drivers.

Now this one was just a funny thing I saw when I was getting a drink today. I noticed a new water product in the fridge at Duane Reade; it was called Water Street, and it had subway-line circles with the letters VH2O below the name. It's Vapor-distilled water, hence the "V." Okay, that's a pretty cool idea. It's New York, the subways, I get it. But there were SO many problems with the VH2O, that it was almost laughable. In fact, it WAS laughable. Here were the issues:

1. There are no H and O lines in the New York City subway system (in fact, only H, I, K, O, P, U, X, and Y are not in use (or in the works, like T)).

2. The 2 was correctly red, and the H and O were green and yellow, respectively, which is fine because they don't exist. But the V was blue! The V train exists! Why not make it orange like the actual V train?!

3. There IS no Water Street stop on any of the New York City subways.

The point is that it's a cute idea, but it was put into effect so poorly that I wouldn't be surprised if only tourists bought it. Hey, you never know; tourists might be their target market. No self-respecting New Yorker should ever be caught dead drinking one of those.

OMG No!

Before I forget this absolute insanity, it needs to be written down. I'm listening to Colin Cowherd on ESPN radio. Why? Because of stuff like this. He's talking about Derek Jeter getting caught stealing 3rd base last night with nobody out, and he says something like "Derek Jeter is the ____-iest player of the last 20 years, and nobody says that it's so bad to make the first out of the inning at 3rd base; only the last out."

Firstly, no, everyone says that making the first or last out of an inning at 3rd base is a cardinal sin of baseball. Anyway, then he gets corrected, that it is indeed conventional wisdom that you shouldn't make the first out at 3rd base, to which Cowherd responds "Oh, come on. Who says you shouldn't make the first out at 3rd base? There was nothing wrong with what Derek Jeter did last night. Who cares what anyone says? You're Derek Jeter; you do whatever you want." And furthermore, he continues to dig himself into a deeper hole, "...not only is it okay to steal 3rd with no outs, it's the BEST time to steal! Because nobody expects it!"

Fine. I guess it's human nature to not want to admit one's mistakes, especially in front of an audience of potentially hundreds of thousands. But the fact that he's saying it's okay because it was Derek Jeter just blows my mind. And then he continues to make even more ridiculous assertions! It's just insanity. Chaos even!

Colin, you are a pillar, nay, a bastion of wrongness. Derek Jeter, you are a fine baseball player. I don't care if you were tagged out or not. If you want to steal 3rd base with nobody out, you better be safe.

Just Throw Strikes

Okay, here's the situation. Mets are down to the Yankees 3-2 in the top of the 9th inning. The Yankees have the bases loaded thanks in part to another dropped pop-up, and there are two outs. The Yankees brought in Mariano Rivera with two outs in the 8th inning with two men on, and after fouling off several tough pitches in a row, Omir Santos watched a ball go right down the middle. Obviously. Anyway, because the Yankees want Rivera to pitch the 9th inning, they allow him to bat. Again, to recap, bases are loaded, Mets are down by one run, two outs in the top of the 9th inning. The Mets closer Francisco Rodriguez is facing Mariano Rivera, a man who has appeared in a batters box six times in his entire career. Now the obvious play is to throw three straight fastballs right down the middle. Odds are that Rivera, with all of his batting experience, will strike out or hit the ball weakly somewhere. But no, Frankie decides he's going to be cute and starts off throwing two balls. Now Rivera's not swinging because he's probably afraid he's going to hurt himself. I'm sure the Yankees would have been content to just have him watch three strikes go by and then go pitch. Then Frankie "fights" his way back to 2-2 and then throws two more balls. He walked the opposing pitcher with the bases loaded. He forced a run in. He actually allowed a pitcher with six career plate appearances to walk. Why on earth would you ever throw any balls to a relief pitcher in the American League? It's actually unconscionable. It's the most absurdly horrible thing I've ever seen a pitcher do. Now it probably won't matter in the least because Rivera will probably shut the Mets down in the 9th inning anyway, but that's not the point! Just threw three straight strikes down the middle and have done! That's it. I'm done. Enough. I'm disgusted.

Oh, and thanks for a correction in one of the comments. Rivera actually had just two plate appearances before today.

You Need to Let Me Know!

The late, great Mitchell Lee Hedberg zt"l once intoned: "I was gonna get a candy bar; the button I was supposed to push was "HH", so I went to the side, I found the "H" button, I pushed it twice. Fuckin' potato chips came out, man! Turns out they had a "HH" button. You need to let me know. I'm not familiar with the concept of "HH". I did not learn my AA-BB-CC's. God god, dammit dammit."

Now this, as many of you would agree, is not an incredibly funny joke, nor is it particularly well delivered. But, the esteemed Mr. Hedberg's quotation is not without its merits.

Before I continue, let me just say that I have returned to a position where I will have significantly more downtime with which I can continue writing. Az for those of you who have been breathlessly waiting for my inevitable return, I bid you welcome.

Anyway, the point is that people are allowed to do whatever they want, but they should at least let us know what they're planning. There's totally allowed to be an HH button on the candy machine, just put a big ol' sign on there telling us NOT to hit the H button twice. You follow me? I'll give you a coupla examples:

One day two weeks ago I decided to drive down to work. On an average morning at about 8:15, it should take about 35-40 minutes to get from the RJC at 237th Street and Independence Avenue to West 14th Street and 9th Avenue. Az at about 8:31 I'm listening to the traffic report to see if there are any surprises on the Henry Hudson Parkway. Sounds like all's clear, az I stick with it. And then traffic starts to slow down. Traffic report still mentions nothing, az when I finally, 45 minutes later, get to around 50th Street, I see a three-car accident being cleared up. Now listen. It's fine if there's an accident; it happens, there's nothing you can do about it, right? But is it so difficult to just spend five seconds of the traffic report to tell us? It's SO easy. I mean what's the point of listening to the traffic report if they're going to ignore the ONE thing you need to hear about? So - incredibly - frustrating.

Here's another. Last night I was watching So You Think You Can Dance at my apartment, and we were about an hour behind because of working out and preparing for dinner. Az the DVR helped us catch up, az we finished the show only 10-15 minutes after the show actually ended. Meanwhile, I missed the Mets' 11-0 win over the Cardinals, az I wanted to see highlights on SportsCenter or Baseball Tonight on ESPN, but the College World Series was on, az I checked out the channel listings and saw that SportsCenter was on at 11. Fine. 11:00 rolls around, and it had a few extra minutes of College World Series. No biggie; it happens all the time with these live events. Az now I'm breathlessly awaiting SportsCenter and what comes on? Freakin' NBA Draft Preview! WTF?! Az now I'm thinking, "ok, it's just for the first few minutes of SportsCenter, and then they'll get back to all the baseball highlights," but NO, it went the full freakin' hour. And then, to turn insult to injury, they spent the first half hour of SportsCenter showing MORE NBA Draft coverage (didn't they just have an hour devoted to it??? WTF?!?!?!?!), MORE College World Series, and then a long segment on the US soccer team beating the Spanish. Seriously, WHO THE F**K CARES about the College World Series and international soccer? I mean yes, some people do care, but those segments should be relegated to later on in the hour. Put the real, professional American sports first. Fine. I get it. The point is that the channel listings showed that SportsCenter was on from 11-12, and yet they broadcasted the NBA Draft preview. It's fine if you want to have such a preview, but you have to let us know that you're doing it! And it's not like it was breaking news and they didn't have time to inform the cable company to change their listing. The NBA Draft has been on the schedule for a year! It's so easy. All you have to do is tell us what you're planning.

Sorry if I'm a bit rusty; it's been a while. At least I have the semi-colon stuff still rollin'.

Fluke

I'm not actually back, I just heard some good stuff on the radio a couple of days ago. There's all this jazz going on about Citigroup owning the naming rights to the new Mets ballpark, and how they have no right to spend $400,000,000 in sponsorship money if they got bailed out by the government. Anyway, that was just the backdrop for the fun discussion. Michael Kay was saying that Citi Field is the perfect name for the stadium. He's had enough of these corporate sounding names like "Minute Maid Park" or "US Cellular Field." He said that when the San Francisco Giants (who used to be the New York Giants and played at the Polo Grounds) were building a new park, the owner called up Ralph Lauren to ask him to sponsor the stadium so that they could call it the Polo Grounds (get it? Ralph Lauren? Polo?). Anyway, the deal fell through, but it was a great idea. Then he was saying that the Jets and Giants were trying to get Jet Blue to sponsor their new stadium an the Meadowlands. Wouldn't that be awesome? Jet Blue Stadium? I was in shock at how amazing an idea that was. Whatever, just thought I'd share.

The Windy City

Az I just got back from my first business trip in my life (by "just got back" I mean about a month ago. Sorry guys, I was lazy and I had a free trial of Rail Baron on my office computer. Now that it expired I'll have to find other ways to occupy myself during my minimal down-time). The Company sent me out to the Chicago office for a couple of days of training, so I left New York early on Monday morning and stayed in Chicago through Wednesday evening. I want to devote this space to my reflections on that city.

Now, I've never actually stayed at a hotel in New York because... well... I live here, so I couldn't really compare my hotel experience in Chicago to anything here. I did rather enjoy the king-size bed and wide-screen TV, however. I was a bit curious why they went through the trouble of putting those TVs in the rooms but didn't go all the way and get HD service. And the shower left a bit to be desired, but what can you do; you can't have it all.

Anyway, since I was at the office all day I didn't really have a chance to do much sight-seeing; I basically stayed around downtown Chicago the entire time. One thing I noticed was that compared to New York the streets are very clean. This is something I noticed the first time I was in Chicago four years ago for a wedding, but that experience was a bit different because it was a Saturday night; downtown is essentially EMPTY on Saturday night. I was like "where are all the people? I thought this was a big city..." There was no lack of people this time, which is what made the clean streets all the more impressive.

Another thing I found impressive was the fact that every street downtown is a big street. Midtown Manhattan has a few big streets: every avenue, 34th street, 42nd street, etc. Otherwise, every street is a side street. Downtown Chicago has no side streets; every street is a major thoroughfare.

Now here's where things start to make less sense. There are places in New York that have subway tracks above ground. Those places tend to be not-so-good neighborhoods, e.g. 125th street, south Bronx, etc. But downtown Chicago has the elevated train running right through it. It was very strange to see fancy stores and nice restaurants and bars right next to elevated subway tracks.

Three words: Cops on Segways!

Now, as everyone knows, my favorite movie is The Matrix. The movie was actually filmed in Sydney, Australia, but the city is supposed to be Chicago. Az after work on the second day, I walked around downtown to see a couple of sights. I was very excited to find that my hotel was very close to the intersection of Wabash and Lake Streets. In the movie, Tank tells Neo that there is an exit from the Matrix at Wabash and Lake, so that was pretty cool. I almost walked to the Adams Street bridge, which is where Neo first gets picked up by Trinity and the others, but it was a bit far. Anyway, you bet your Segway I took a picture of the Wabash and Lake street signs.

Now for something completely unrelated to Chicago. It was so long ago that I read this, but it was probably in either The Hardball Times, or Baseball Prospectus, or Joe Posnanski. I read in one of those places that because of how Andy Marte is working out, teams should be wary when they trade for prospects from the Atlanta Braves. Marte, who was once a highly touted prospect in the Braves' system, was traded to the Cleveland Indians, and he has been bounced between the Major and Minor Leagues for the past couple of seasons. Anyway, that innocent statement got me thinking: wouldn't it be possible for a team to create a fake prospect? Think about it. I'm John Schuerholz, fromer Braves general manager, and I want to create some fake value. So I take one of my young players in the low Minor Leagues and I make a deal with him. I tell him "listen, you and I both know that your career is going nowhere, but I have an idea that's going to make you a rich man." I tell him that I'm going to pay a few of our opponents' pitchers to tip their pitches, i.e. make it known to our batter what he's going to throw. That will artificially inflate our man's stats and make him a better prospect. Other franchises will start to look at him and perhaps make us an attractive offer to trade for him. That team might decide to pay him much more than he's worth based on his now inflated Minor League numbers. So he gets rich, we get an actual good player or two, and all that's left is just another failed prospect. Seriously, take a look at Marte's Minor League stats:

In four full Minor League seasons from rookie ball through AAA, Marte OPSed .828, .844, .910, and .878. In those four seasons he walked 41, 67, 60, and 64 times. In his two Minor League seasons with Cleveland, he OPSed .773, and .766, and walked just 34 and 21 times. Wha happen?

Mmmmm, I can just smell my first baseball mystery novel. That thing would sell like hot Segways.

Back in the Swing

Today is my fifth day at my new job, and things are pretty busy, which is why I have had little chance to post. I mentioned in a recent post that things would slow down for a while, but they'll pick up eventually.

Anyway, I have a bunch of things to discuss. I'll start off with the non-baseball-related jazz so as to not alienate the vast majority of you. I'll begin with the story of my first day of vacation two Mondays ago. Some of you have heard this story before, but it needs to be available in print, at least for posterity. So I was driving to the East Side on Sunday morning so I could pick up my mom. I was playing softball against my brother, and his wife and my eight month old nephew were gonna come too, az my mom wanted to join the party. On the way home my brother called to tell me that the baby was sick so he and his mother were going to stay home. Fine. Anyway, while I was driving down the Harlem River Drive, I noticed that something just didn't feel right with the car. I exited and pulled over and inspected my tires. Yep, my front passenger's side tire was definitely not going to make it through the day. Az I drove home very slowly and convinced my mother that she needn't go to the game because the baby wasn't going anyway. And then I even learned that my brother had to stay home with the sick baby too, and Mom definitely didn't need to come watch just me. But now I had to carry all the softball equipment, including the bats, balls, catcher's mask, and my glove, by myself. Combining that with the threat of imminent rain made for a very unpleasant 45 minute walk. Anyway, the weather held up and we won our game, so that was nice. I had the others take the equipment back up to the Heights for me and I went back home. I figured I could run errands and spend the night at home and then bring the car in for service early in the morning. Az I traveled around the city like a normal human being for a day; I walked over to my brother's apartment to borrow a book and then grabbed the 6 at 77th and Lex. I went down to the village for a bit of shopping and then back up to 96th street to rent some DVDs. Then I walked down to 86th to buy some shorts at Modell's and then went home. Now we get to the annoying part. I got up at 7:00 to bring my car to Paragon Acura in Queens. I got there and they asked me if I had an appointment. I told them I never needed an appointment before, so the surly gentleman told me they changed their policy recently. Fine. After a bit of needling I convinced them to take my car. Then the same surly gentleman tried to sell me four new tires. I agreed with him that I needed three new ones, but the fourth had just been replaced about eight months ago. He sheepishly consented and he said my car would be ready by 2:00. Then I took the subway back home and napped for an hour and a half or so. We had a family bris at 11:30, so I went with my grandmother and met my brother there. We stayed for about an hour and then I went to the West Side to meet a friend for lunch. I got a call at 1:30 from Paragon, and they told me that they couldn't find the wheel-lock key for my tires (when I first got the car I splurged a bit. Wheel locks are special bolts that you put on each wheel that prevent them from being stolen. You need a special key to attach to your wrench to be able to remove the bolts). I told them it was either in my trunk with the spare tire or in the pocket between the two front seats. The service guy insisted that he could not find it; he was even looking for it while he was on the phone with me. So I told him I could get there in half an hour; az I headed over and followed the service guy to the back. Needless to say, I found the key in no more than ten seconds; it was right where I said it would be, in the pocket between the front seats. By this time they had taken my car off the rack because they couldn't do anything with it, so they said I had to wait until they put it back up; I should expect to wait until at least 5:30. It was 2:30 and I was stuck on Northern Boulevard. There's NOTHING there except for car dealerships, az I gave them a piece of my mind and took the subway back home again. When I finally came back at half past five they actually expected me to pay full price for the service. I told them in no uncertain terms that I pay top dollar for their respect and competence, and if they want to keep my business they'll treat me like a human being and waive the service fee. So I ended up with three brand new tires for the low low price of $747.46. Anyway, that was quite a poor start to my vacation.

Moving right along, last Wednesday I stayed at work for the first time until 7:00 pm. And you know what? The concept of staying at work late is something I find abhorrent, but in practice it's really quite pleasant. Seriously, the instant the clock strikes five and I no longer have to be there it's as if a load has been lifted from my shoulders and I can work more freely. There are fewer people around, nobody calls me, and I can work at my own pace with no distractions. Now if only I could avoid getting to work at 8:45...
On the fourth of July I went shopping at an outlet mall in Long Island. I had a coupon for Lids, a hat store, so I went in to check out their inventory. The first thing I noticed was that the store was divided up; along the right wall were the white hats and along the opposite wall were the black hats. And I don't mean the color of the hats; I mean the hats along the right wall were for white customers and the others were for the black customers. The white hats are the ones with curvy brims, just one price tag, and they are usually fairly empty with small logos. The black hats start off a size larger, have flat brims, and have very large logos and patterns. I didn't have a problem with it; I just found it noteworthy.
Okay, that's all the non-baseball content for today. Those of you who appreciate my sport or even those of you who think David Wright and Grady Sizemore are cute are invited to read on (all stats are through Sunday, July 6th).

I had read last week that Grady Sizemore, the center fielder for the Cleveland Indians, was leading the American League in home runs. This surprised me because one doesn't really think of Mr. Sizemore as a home run hitter. Indeed, PECOTA projected Sizemore to hit .277/.367/.490, with 25 HR, 90 RBI, and 20 SB. PECOTA nailed the batting average and on-base percentage (Sizemore is actually hitting .269/.372), but were way off on the slugging percentage. Sizemore, to this point, is slugging .541 and is on pace to hit 36 HR and steal 33 bases. When I first saw those stats, I was astonished at how similar they looked to Carlos Beltran's stats from two years ago. In 2006, Beltran hit .276/.353/.525, with 33 HR, 112 RBI, and 23 SB. I always thought he'd be more of a prototypical leadoff hitter with a bit of extra pop, but he's actually turning into Carlos Beltran. Another words, if Cleveland wants to make better use of Sizemore's skill set, they better move him to the middle of the lineup.

Az it looks like the Mets are starting to hit a little bit better, and we're a drop over the halfway point of the season, around where you'd expect the All-Star break to be. So I went ahead and looked at some stats, and what really stuck out for me was David Wright. I know I wrote about him recently, but I couldn't shake the nagging feeling that his numbers look similar to his first half from last year. A quick scan of the stats confirmed my suspicions. Through 86 games last year, Wright hit .292/.373/.506, with 16 HR, 51 RBI, and 18 SB. This year, through 87 games Wright has hit .286/.382/.501, with 16 HR, 66 RBI, and 9 SB. He has exactly the same amount of hits as he did in first half last year (97), one less single (58 to 59), and the same amount of doubles (21). If he can duplicate his second half from last year, then he'll be a top MVP candidate again, and then we'll see who should have been an all-star.

A Really Good Day

And no, this has nothing to do with women.

So the early part of the day went pretty much as expected. The subway was the subway, work was work, etc. But then my co-workers took me out for lunch as sort of a congratulations-you-got-a-new-job/good-riddance-to-bad-rubbish "celebration." That really was very nice. We (3 Jews (one observant (me)), a Greek, an Asian, and an Italian) went to Taam Tov for some good, old-fashioned Bukharian food. Perfect. Then we walked off our meal with a pleasant stroll over to Bryant Park and a quick trip to the new Bank of America headquarters on 6th Avenue between 42nd and 43rd streets (somehow they scored the address "One Bryant Park." I guess it's all about who you know).

Anyway, I finished up work after lunch and then walked to the Apple Store on 5th Avenue and 58th Street. I didn't know exactly where it was az I looked it up online. I thought "hmm, that looks like FAO Schwartz... Did FAO Schwartz become the Apple Store?" So I walk over there and then I realized that the Apple Store is UNDER the plaza in front of FAO Schwartz. I have never been to such a store in my life. I dunno if any of you have been there, but it's very difficult to explain it; you have to see it for yourself. It's one gigantic room of Apple products (iphones, ipods, macbook airs, etc.), and it's full of people trying them out. Seriously, I think if you got rid of all the people the place would look empty. I mean almost none of the space was taken up by the product displays; it was mostly just people. And there were A LOT of people. Here's how I could tell it was a high-class place. There were two people standing at the entrance (under the enormous Apple logo) whose sole purpose was to drop customers' umbrellas into a device that made them come out in bags so they wouldn't get everything wet. What a place! Anyway, I didn't buy anything, but I did order a refurbished 4 GB Nano online for $99. I figure either I'll switch back to AT&T after another year and just buy an iphone, or my new company will supply me with a blackberry rendering an iphone redundant, so I think the refurb Nano is a good stop-gap.

I left the Apple Store and walked to Columbus Circle to catch the A-train uptown. I had to hurry because my student's math final is today (Thursday), and we had a lot to cover. I got back to my apartment, changed my clothes, wolfed down a cinnamon bun (dinner of champions), ordered the refurb Nano online, checked my DVR to make sure So You Think You Can Dance was being recorded, and high-tailed it up to Riverdale. Six hours later and we were done with Trigonometry, Limits, and introductory Calculus. Gotta give the kid props for sticking with me for that long; I hope he does well. Seriously, can you believe that I sat down and did math for six hours? I didn't even notice; the time just flew by. A lot of you will assert that I could do it because I was getting paid an obscene amount of money, but I can safely say that I would have done it for a quarter the price (not gonna do it for free; my time is still valuable). Math is just that fun for me.

When I finally arrived back at my apartment at almost 1:00 am, a Cap'n Munch sandwich from Chickie's was waiting for me. It was a bit soggy and essentially at room temperature, but it was still delicious. Meanwhile, the Mets were down 4-3 to the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim in the ninth inning, and no one can hit Francisco Rodriguez these days. But a hit by Jose Reyes, a wild pitch from K-Rod, and another hit by David Wright, and the Mets had tied it up. Damion Easley's home run in the 10th won it, and a perfect tenth inning from Billy Wagner shut the door. I couldn't be happier with how the day went.

Side note completely unrelated to yesterday's events: ESPN has recently hired a couple of castoffs from other sports ventures: Warner Wolf ("Let's go to the videoTAPE!") and Rick Reilly. Now I never really had any strong feelings about Rick Reilly; I never really read Sports Illustrated. I wasn't too impressed with his work, but whatever, who cares? I still don't read his stuff on ESPN. But I actually do get to hear from Warner Wolf every day because he has a few 30-second spots on Mike and Mike in the Morning between 9 and 10 am. And my conclusion: he is dumb. I fully respect ESPN for getting these guys because they are big names and appeal to sports fans of all ages, but some things I won't tolerate. I have zero doubt that Warner Wolf knows a million times more about sports than I do, but that doesn't mean he's allowed to tell us what athletes are thinking. Here's the basic gist of what he said this morning:

"A recent poll was taken of a bunch of Major League Baseball players, and they were asked who they think is the most over-rated player in the game. The top-five vote-getters were Derek Jeter, Barry Zito, J.D. Drew, Alex Rodriguez, and Kevin Youkilis. It comes as no surprise that four of those guys play for the Yankees or Red Sox. Maybe the voters were just JEALOUS. Four of those guys are also some of the highest paid players in the game! Warner Wolf, 1050, ESPN New York..."

No no no no no no no no no no no no and no. Does he really think that players are calling those guys over-rated because they're jealous of how much money they're making?! Now I'm certainly not arrogant enough to say what those guys are thinking, but I think it makes a lot more sense to say that those voters think those five players are over-rated precisely BECAUSE they're making so much money. As far as I'm concerned, getting paid too much money for what you're worth is exactly what it means to be over-rated. Come on Warner; you're not senile yet. Think a little bit.

Another side note completely unrelated to anything previously said with the exception of a Mike-and-Mike shoutout: On the radio they have various hosts do commercials for different products. Mike and Mike do commercials for Olevia HD-TVs and Colin Cowherd (another one of those guys ESPN employs to appeal to a certain kind of sports fan), who I hate, does commercials for Vizio HD-TVs. Now I know absolutely nothing about the relative quality of Olevia TVs compared to Vizio TVs, but what I DO know is that I would never ever buy a Vizio instead of an Olevia, because I love Mike and Mike and I hate Colin Cowherd. There's gotta be some kind of marketing analysis behind all this.

Just Play

Okay, seriously. Can we just get over it already? Willie Randolph was fired as manager of the Mets. Honestly, who cares? I'm not upset that the Mets fired the manager, but I AM upset that we're gonna be hearing about it on the radio and on TV and reading about it in the newspaper and online. I'd rather just hear/read/watch actual baseball. People are going absolutely bonkers about this, "oh, Willie Randolph is such a nice man... how can the bad old Mets do this to a New York legend?" And even the people who are in favor of the firing are taking it way too seriously. Is Willie putting on his second baseman's glove and taking the field every day? Is he picking up a bat and stepping into the batter's box to face the opposing pitcher? No and no. The identity of the manager has a negligible effect on the performance of his team. A manager can't make bad players into good players no matter how good a manager he is. I'm so fed up with this. I want the players, the fans, and especially the media to wash their hands of this whole situation so we can get back to actual real baseball. Mets are playing the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim tonight, and I might even mute the sound so I won't have to hear all the commentators and announcers talk about "Willie this" and "Willie that." Just let them play.

What's Wrong with Wright?

Wow, that title had all four words starting with "W." That's some serious alliteration right there.

Anyway, we're now 68 games into the 2008 baseball season and the Mets are pretty much stuck in neutral. Two posts ago I looked at each player to try to determine what was going on, and I mentioned that David Wright was getting a bit unlucky:

"Am I concerned? Nope. David's really been hitting the ball hard all year. As I expected, his batting average on balls in play (BABIP) is around 40 points below what it should be. His Line-Drive percentage is a robust 23.5%, which should translate to a .355 BABIP, but his is sitting at .310 currently. It's only a matter of time until those line drives start falling in for hits and his stats rise accordingly."

But now I want to look at David Wright more in depth. Let's examine his secondary stats and compare them to his numbers from last season:

Let's start with his slash stats: Batting Average/On-Base Percentage/Slugging Percentage/OPS
2007: .325/.416/.546/.963
2008: .276/.373/.485/.858
Those stats are way down this year.

And now his counting stats:
2007: 30 HR, 107 RBI, 113 Runs, 34 SB, 42 Doubles, 94 Walks, 115 Ks
2008 (pace): 29 HR, 119 RBI, 100 Runs, 19 SB, 43 Doubles, 100 Walks, 114 Ks.
Now those look almost identical! Looks like he's just hitting fewer singles.

Let's go deeper: Walk Percentage/Strikeout Percentage/Walk-to-Strikeout Ratio
2007: 13.5% / 19.0% / 0.82
2008: 13.5% / 17.9% / 0.88
So this is starting to look fishy. He's walking just as often and he's striking out less. Looks like the progression of a player who is getting better at judging the strike zone. So why are his stats down?

Let's keep going: Ground Ball Percentage/Fly Ball Percentage/Ground Ball-to-Fly Ball Ratio/Home Runs per Fly Ball Percentage/Line Drive Percentage/Batting Average on Balls in Play
2007: 39.3% / 37.5% / 1.05 / 16.1% / 23.2% / .362
2008: 38.4% / 40.6% / 0.95 / 13.2% / 21.0% / .298
Okay, so ground balls are down and fly balls are up; that's usually a good sign. But line drive percentage is down, and home run percentage is WAY down. And as I said last time, his actual batting average on balls in play is .32 points below what it should be, which accounts for his low overall batting average.

One step further: Swing percentage at pitches outside the strike zone/swing percentage at pitches in the strike zone/overall percentage of pitches swung at/contact percentage on pitches outside the strike zone/contact percentage on pitches in the strike zone/overall contact percentage
2007: 21.66% / 64.83% / 42.54% / 66.24% / 88.76% / 82.84%
2008: 20.79% / 68.69% / 44.40% / 62.20% / 90.44% / 83.74%
So he's swinging at more balls overall, which is fine because he's swinging at fewer pitches outside the strike zone and more pitches in. And he's making more overall contact, which is also fine because he's making contact more often on pitches in the strike zone.

Conclusion: I have no freakin' clue why his numbers aren't up to par. All signs are pointing to Wright's continued development in terms of reading the strike zone. He's walking more than last year; he's striking out less often, he's hitting more fly balls, and he's swinging at better pitches. The only thing that looks wrong is his line drive percentage. Considering that he's swinging at better pitches I expect that number to change. Besides, he usually picks it up in the second half. I'm prepared to submit that David Wright is just getting unlucky. His luck is bound to turn around sooner or later.

Special thanks to fangraphs.com for advanced statistics.

Note: According to the fantastic website hittrackeronline.com, of David Wright's 31 home runs last year, twelve of them were "just enough," tied for third most in the NL. "Just enough" means that it cleared the fence by less than ten feet. Also, he led the NL in "lucky" home runs with ten, two more than the next most. A "lucky" home run would not have been a home run without help from the weather or other conditions (Colorado, for example). Az 22 of his 31 home runs could easily have been outs were it not for a bit of outside help. Some might say that it's a skill to use the conditions to your advantage. Others will posit that there were probably a bunch of fly balls that fell just short of the wall and that the "lucky" and "just enough" home runs have evened out with the ones that didn't make it over the fence. Either way, Wright might not be quite the impressive slugger that he appears. Maybe those lucky ones have just not been quite enough this year. Hopefully everything will even out as the year goes on and some of those outs will turn into home runs.

Uptown A Experience?

That subject came up over the weekend. I was at a Shavuot lunch on Tuesday and for some reason the ice breaker was to tell a commuting story. The story I told can be read in my post "Ridiculous," from August 8th, 2007. Anyway, we were talking about the subways, and someone who gets up like three hours earlier than I said that he likes the Downtown-A-Experience-Guy too. Az we were musing about what he says on his way back to Manhattan; does he say "this is the uptown A experience...?"

But that's not the point of this post. I'm going on another rant about the public transportation system. Many of you take the B or D train a couple of stops every day; I take it two stops between Rockefeller Center and Columbus Circle. My rant is not regarding the frequency (or infrequency, to be more precise) with which those trains come, but rather the timing. As everyone knows, the A and D trains run on the same track at 59th street, az many times you'll be on the D train going uptown and it will stop just before the Columbus Circle station. It's a bit frustrating when you want to get on an A train and that train is the very reason you're own train has stopped, but there's nothing to be done about that. My problem is actually more of a psychological one. Now, I assume that there is some absurdly complex algorithm for determining when which trains should go where and how often they should come, but this just doesn't make any sense. Probably at least once a week I'll be on a D train that is waiting at the 7th avenue stop (one stop before Columbus Circle). It might wait for a few minutes, not really a big deal. But then it will stop again as it's approaching 59th street because of an A train in front of it! Now I want to ask a couple of questions:

1. If there's an A train in front of the train now, what was it waiting for at the 7th avenue station?
2. If the D train was going to have to wait for an A train to move anyway, why didn't it just continue waiting until the A train would have been gone?

See that's just screwing with you, you know? You're waiting for the subway doors to close and you're relieved when they finally do. But then you end up waiting again in between stations! Just have us wait only once.

Anyway, it will be a moot point pretty soon because I won't be taking the B or D train any longer come June 20th. It's quite probable that my ability to post will be curtailed for at least a little while as well. Hameivin yavin.

Projection Update

We're now one-third of the way through the baseball season (well, a tad more, but let's pretend). By now we should have enough data to compare to the pre-season projections. Az let's jump right in. All stats are through the first 54 games of the season extrapolated out to 162:

Johan Santana: 220 IP, 18-9, 216 Hits, 3.41 ERA, 36 HR, 195 Ks, 51 BBs, 1.203 WHIP, 3.824 K/BB, 7.905 K/9, 2.068 BB/9, 1.459 HR/9.
The projections were all pretty far off. The best was the ZiPS projection: 234 IP, 18-8, 192 Hits, 3.04 ERA, 28 HR, 244 Ks, 46 BBs, 1.017 WHIP, 5.304 K/BB, 9.385 K/9, 1.769 BB/9, 1.077 HR/9.
His actual stats are much closer to his 10th percentile PECOTA projection: 187.7 IP, 13-8, 173 Hits, 3.84 ERA, 25 HR, 188 Ks, 56 BBs, 1.22 WHIP, 8.0 K/9, 2.4 BB/9, 1.2 HR/9.
Am I concerned? Not very. His 1st/2nd half splits are absurd. He really cranks it up after the All-Star break.

Pedro Martinez: No sample size to work with since he just got back from his injury. We'll check back with him at the 81 game mark.

John Maine: 192 IP, 15-12, 162 Hits, 3.66 ERA, 18 HR, 162 Ks, 90 BBs, 1.313 WHIP, 1.80 K/BB, 7.594 K/9, 4.219 BB/9, 0.844 HR/9.
The projections were all around the same, around a 4.00 ERA, around 7.5 K/9. The ERAs were off, and the HRs were off, but all in all, not bad work.
His actual stats are closer to his 75th percentile PECOTA projections, although his strikeouts and walks are off: 161.2 IP, 11-6, 144 Hits, 3.49 ERA, 17 HR, 142 Ks, 61 BBs, 1.27 WHIP, 3.0 BB/9, 7.1 K/9, 0.9 HR/9.
Am I concerned? A little bit. He has been better in the first half than in the second over the course of his career.

Oliver Perez: 179 IP, 12-9, 150 Hits, 4.83 ERA, 27 HR, 150 Ks, 123 BBs, 1.525 WHIP, 1.22 K/BB, 7.542 K/9, 6.184 BB/9, 1.358 HR/9.
Marcel and Bill James were excellent. Both have him at around a .500 record, a 4.50+ ERA, and a 1.43+ WHIP. Well done.
His actual stats are virtually identical to his 40th percentile PECOTA projection with a few more walks: 133.2 IP, 8-8, 128 Hits, 4.83 ERA, 18 HR, 127 Ks, 66 BB, 1.45 WHIP, 4.0 BB/9, 7.6 K/9, 1.2 HR/9.
Am I concerned? Yes. These stats don't include his start on Monday against the Giants (who can't hit a lick), in which he gave up 6 ER in 0.1 innings.

Mike Pelfrey: 168 IP, 6-18, 210 Hits, 4.98 ERA, 12 HR, 87 Ks, 75 BBs, 1.696 WHIP, 1.16 K/BB, 4.661 K/9, 4.018 BB/9, 0.643 HR/9.
Marcel and PECOTA were spot on. Both had him below .500, an ERA over 4.50, and a WHIP around 1.50. They also projected few strikeouts and home runs, although not quite as few as he's actually had.
His actual stats are close to his 25th percentile PECOTA projection: 123 IP, 7-8, 137 Hits, 5.25 ERA, 13 HR, 77 Ks, 61 BBs, 1.60 WHIP, 4.0 BB/9, 5.0 K/9, 0.9 HR/9.
Am I concerned? Yeah! But it's not his fault. The Mets need to play better defense. Castillo's knees need to be healthy, Reyes needs to routinely make routine plays, and Wright just needs to get a bit sharper. Then all of those Pelfrey grounders will get gobbled up instead of going for hits.

The sample size is still too small for the relievers and bench players. Maybe I'll do them at the 81 game mark. Onto the hitters:

Brian Schneider: 408 PA, 27 Runs, 6 HR, 45 RBI, 0 SB, 39 BBs, 60 Ks, .258 BA, .328 OBP, .317 SLG, .645 OPS.
All the projections are close. They all have him at around .250 with a .640 to .690 OPS with 5-7 HR and 40-60 RBI.
His actual stats are pretty close to his 75th percentile PECOTA projection, minus a few extra base hits: 34 Runs, 5 HR, 33 RBI, .260/.339/.376/.715.
Am I concerned? A little bit. I think with a healthy Ramon Castro backing him up and even pressuring him to perform, Schneider will pick up the pace somewhat.

Carlos Delgado: 654 PA, 75 Runs, 24 HR, 75 RBI, 0 SB, 66 BBs, 132 Ks, .228 BA, .307 OBP, .389 SLG, .696 OPS.
Everybody was off on this one. Nobody realized that last season's decline was real. It's really sad to see.
His actual power numbers are in line with his 75th percentile PECOTA projection: 22 HR, 77 RBI, 64 Runs, 48 BBs. But his rate stats are more in line with his 10th percentile: .229/.302/.397/.699.
Am I concerned? Who wouldn't be? He has sparks of brilliance, and he can get hot, but he's just not hitting with any consistency. This might be the end.

Luis Castillo: 567 PA, 81 Runs, 9 HR, 54 RBI, 27 SB, 81 BBs, 42 Ks, .274 BA, .384 OBP, .376 SLG, .760 OPS.
Everybody was off, but not as badly as for Delgado. Nobody expected Castillo to hit more than a homer or two. Everyone overshot his batting average, projecting around .290, but also no one expected him to walk so much.
His actual stats are very close to his 90th percentile PECOTA projection, believe it or not: 100 Runs, 0 HR, 40 RBI, 19 SB, 63 BBs, 43 Ks, .317/.391/.377/.768.
Am I concerned? I don't see much that is concerning. His batting average is down because he is really not swinging early in the count at hittable pitches. He is being extremely patient at the plate and trying extra hard to draw that walk. I would say that's not a bad strategy with Wright, Beltran, and Church hitting behind him.

Jose Reyes: 747 PA, 102 Runs, 21 HR, 75 RBI, 51 SB, 69 BBs, 99 Ks, .282 BA, .346 OBP, .477 SLG, .823 OPS.
Basically everyone had pretty similar projections and were also off, a la Luis Castillo. They pretty much nailed his batting average (all around .290), but they underestimated his power. They all had his SLG around .440.
His actual stats are right in line with his 75th percentile PECOTA projection minus a few hits: 113 Runs, 17 HR, 73 RBI, 61 SB, 57 BBs, 69 Ks, .308/.369/.483/.852.
Am I concerned? No. His early season struggles seem to have corrected themselves and he has begun driving the ball with authority to all parts of the yard. He's no longer getting fooled and popping the ball up to the opposite field. He needs to just keep it going and not wear down.

David Wright: 747 PA, 108 Runs, 33 HR, 120 RBI, 21 SB, 108 BBs, 117 Ks, .284 BA, .390 OBP, .531 SLG, .921 OPS.
Marcel and PECOTA really hit the bulls-eye here. They all have his batting average climbing over .300, and I fully expect that to occur. His second half last year was far better than his first.
His actual stats are very close to his 40th percentile PECOTA projection: 103 Runs, 28 HR, 96 RBI, 20 SB, 78 BBs, 104 Ks, .299/.388/.526/.914.
Am I concerned? Nope. David's really been hitting the ball hard all year. As I expected, his batting average on balls in play (BABIP) is around 40 points below what it should be. His Line-Drive percentage is a robust 23.5%, which should translate to a .355 BABIP, but his is sitting at .310 currently. It's only a matter of time until those line drives start falling in for hits and his stats rise accordingly.

Carlos Beltran: 705 PA, 114 Runs, 15 HR, 96 RBI, 21 SB, 105 BBs, 108 Ks, .263 BA, .370 OBP, .444 SLG, .814 OPS.
Blah blah blah, the projections are all the same again. Everyone's basically exactly right except on the home runs and walks. In fact, it seems like Beltran's missing home runs all turned into walks.
His actual stats are unlike any of the PECOTA projections. Man, he really is having a bizarre season. His power has just disappeared. He's turned into Luis Castillo on steroids. He's walking like crazy, but is on pace to have fewer home runs than his 10th percentile PECOTA. WTF is going on??
Am I concerned? I don't even know! Those extra walks are pretty freakin' valuable though, if you ask me.

Ryan Church: 561 PA, 102 Runs, 27 HR, 96 RBI, 3 SB, 51 BBs, 120 Ks, .309 BA, .376 OBP, .527 SLG, .903 OPS.
Man, Churchie is just destroying the projections, isn't he? Nobody had him batting higher than .274, OBPing more than .353, or slugging higher than .472.
His actual stats are right around his 90th percentile PECOTA projection: 83 Runs, 23 HR, 78 RBI, 7 SB, 57 BBs, 109 Ks, .295/.383/.540/.923.
Am I concerned? A little bit, because of the concussion he sustained a couple of weeks ago. In his first game back he hit a home run, so that's encouraging, but we'll have to see how he does over the next couple of weeks. Either way, I don't think I've ever seen anyone consistently hit the ball as hard as Church does. The man is a living line-drive.

Final thoughts: As a whole, I think things are largely going the way they should, considering injuries to a few important pieces (Alou, El Duque, Pedro, Castro). Some more hitting should come from Beltran and a healthy Alou, and perhaps even a rejuvenated Fernando Tatis. The defense should tighten up a little bit, and with Pedro back, the pitching should be in better shape. We'll check back at the half.

The Best Driver of All Time

Yep, I'm talking about me. A bunch of us were at the Mets game last night, but only three of us stayed until the last out. I was driving, and the remaining two were my passengers. So after the game we walked over to my car, which was parked outside the stadium on Roosevelt Avenue. After a couple of right turns and a left, and we found ourselves going eastbound on the Grand Central Parkway. Two exits and a drop of traffic later, we got onto the Van Wyck Expressway northbound towards the Whitestone Bridge, my route of choice on the way back to the Heights from Shea. Az we crossed the bridge ($5 toll these days) and made our way towards the Cross Bronx Expressway southbound towards the George Washington Bridge. There should be very minimal traffic along that route at 11:00 pm. Lo and behold, as we were merging onto the Cross Bronx we noticed that the cars were mamash not moving. At all. Luckily it was 10:57, az I quickly turned my radio to News Radio 880 and heard the traffic report.

Remember my fourth post? On August 17th, 2006, I wrote a post listing a couple of things that shouldn't be allowed:
"1. Closing the lower level on the George Washington Bridge and only having two lanes open on the upper roadway. Closing west 178th street between Broadway and Ft. Washington is bad too.
2. When ESPN has little league baseball and ESPN2 has women's basketball at the same time."

Well, believe it or not, last night had both of those things on steroids. On the traffic report, we were told that the entire outbound lower level of the George was closed because of a tractor-trailor accident, and one lane of the upper level was closed because of another truck accident. I politely asked my passengers to buckle their safety belts if they had not already, and proceeded to reverse the car for 100 feet or so on the shoulder and got onto the Bruckner Expressway towards the Triboro Bridge. Okay, so it wasn't the best idea in the whole world, but there were only a couple of cars behind me. The awesome thing was that a bunch of cars in front of me started following my lead. It was drive-tastic! Anyway, we took the Bruckner entry road until it merged with the main part of the highway, and we hit traffic again! The right lane of the entry road was closed too, if you can believe that. Now one thing I absolutely refused to do was pay another toll for the Triboro Bridge; it's against my religion to do that. Az I exited the Bruckner towards the Major Deegan Expressway, where I would get off one exit later and get on the Third Avenue Bridge into Manhattan. Guess what. More lane closures on the Deegan! I'm sorry. You cannot have two-thirds of the GWB closed, the entry lane onto the Bruckner closed, and one lane on the Deegan closed all at the same time. It was absolute chaos. Anyway, another ten minutes on the Deegan before I got off. Once we were off the highway it was smooth sailing; we took the Third Avenue Bridge and exited onto 129th street and Lexington Avenue, and we took the city streets up to the Heights. In total, the drive took a drop over an hour, really excellent all things considered. We heard from someone in another car on the way back, and they had left about 20 minutes before we did. We were two minutes away from my apartment when they called, and they were still on the Cross Bronx. I felt terrible for them, but I was enormously pleased with myself.

Oh yeah, and when I finally got home I really wanted to watch SportsCenter so I could see highlights of the game; I wanted to see David Wright's two home runs. Would you believe that ESPN was broadcasting the Women's College Softball World Series and ESPN2 was broadcasting NASCAR Now? It was absurd. I guess it was the Big Guy telling me it was time for bed.

The List

On July 20, 2007, I wrote a post in which I described things that should not happen while walking on the street. These include stopping in the middle of the sidewalk all of a sudden, and re-entering pedestrian traffic from the side of the street. I'd like to add one more in there: walking backwards. It's ridiculous that I even need to say it, but seriously, if you're in Times Square and you're not putting on an act, don't walk backwards! I mean, are you kidding me?

Hey, ever notice that "Are you kidding me?" and "Are you serious?" mean exactly the same thing?

Az I read a post by Joe Posnanski yesterday, in which he struggles to answer the following question: who is the best everyday player in Mets history? This question is particularly relevant in the wake of Mike Piazza's retirement. He says that for now this is a very tough question, but it will become a moot point in a few years, at which time David Wright will own every single offensive team record. Meanwhile, I decided to come up with my own list of greatest everyday Mets players ever, counting down backwards from ten (stats current as of May 22, 2008. Stats are ranked among players with at least 1000 plate appearences):

10. Mookie Wilson: 4th in ABs, 4th in Runs, 4th in Hits, 4th in Singles, 7th in Doubles, 1st in Triples, 1st in Stolen Bases.

Granted the Mook wasn't a very valuable player, but he holds every Mets speed record to date (until broken by #9 in a year or two). And when you're involved in the most memorable play in Mets history, you need to be on this kind of list.

9. Jose Reyes: 2nd in Triples, 2nd in Stolen Bases.

Reyes is short of the all time Mets record in Triples (by 5) and Stolen Bases (by 33). He should reach both of those milestones this season, and will probably end up doubling both records by the time his career as a Met is over. As such, he will likely move up (or down) this list over the next few years. I'm looking forward to seeing him involved in many memorable plays in the near future.

8. Carlos Beltran: 4th in SLG, 5th in OPS.

He's only played in 479 games as a Met, but he has established himself as one of the most productive Mets on a game-to-game basis. He is also probably the very best defensive center fielder the Mets have ever had, and he is an outstanding base runner (63 SB and 17 CS).

7. Edgardo Alfonzo: 3rd in Runs, 3rd in Hits, 3rd in Doubles, 7th in HR, 5th in RBI, 6th in Walks, 7th in BA, 8th in OBP.

While Fonzie had a far-from-memorable career, his star shone extremely brightly during his years in New York. He brought a consistency on offense and defense, which helped the Mets win every day. He also remains the only Met to date to record a six-hit game. On August 30th, 1999, Alfonzo connected for three home runs and a double in a six-for-six day against the Houston Astros.

6. John Olerud: 2nd in BA, 1st in OBP, 5th in SLG, 1st in OPS.

The only reason Olerud's numbers don't propel him higher on this list is that he only played as a Met for three years. But in those three years he proved to be the best everyday hitter the Mets have ever had (at least according to OPS). He sported a juicy .425 OBP and brought gold-glove caliber play to first base. For more information on Olerud, see my post "A Walk Down the Memory Baseline," from January 8th, 2008.

5. Howard Johnson: 2nd in Runs, 8th in Hits, 2nd in Doubles, 3rd in HR, 3rd in RBI, 3rd in SB, 3rd in Walks.

Hojo's greatness can mostly be attributed to his longevity in a Mets uniform, however his production during the low-offense 1980s was well above league average. Among the five 30 HR / 30 SB seasons in Mets history, Hojo has three of them. In two of those seasons he won the Silver Slugger award for third basemen. His contributions to the Mets continue today as their hitting coach.

4. Keith Hernandez: 8th in Doubles, 7th in RBI, 5th in Walks, 4th in BA, 4th in OBP.

During his tenure in New York, Hernandez solidified his claim as perhaps the best defensive first baseman of all time. But he sure could swing the bat well too. He finished in the top five in MVP voting twice, and eighth another time. I'm surprised he didn't garner more than his minimal Hall of Fame votes, but he will always have a special place in the hearts of Mets fans. He continues to enchant fans with his intelligent (and oftentimes inappropriate) comments as an analyst during Mets broadcasts.

3. Mike Piazza: 7th in Runs, 6th in Hits, 4th in Doubles, 2nd in HR, 2nd in RBI, 9th in Walks, 6th in BA, 5th in OBP, 1st in SLG, 3rd in OPS.

Numbers three and two on this list are largely interchangeable, considering that they are the former and current faces of the franchise. Not much needs to be said about Mike Piazza, but those who are curious can read my previous post, "The Grimace," from May 20, 2008.

2. David Wright: 9th in Doubles, 9th in HR, 3rd in BA, 3rd in OBP, 2nd in SLG, 2nd in OPS.

The current face of the franchise will likely hold every single offensive record in Mets history within a few short seasons. He's 14th in Runs, but should be 2nd in three seasons. He's 9th in doubles, but should crack the top five this season. He'll also crack the top five in home runs sometime in July. The list goes on and on. We should watch David Wright play baseball as often as possible, because he is truly a unique talent, and he will hopefully man the hot corner at CitiField for the next 15 years.

1. Darryl Strawberry: 1st in Runs, 7th in Hits, 5th in Doubles, 6th in Triples, 1st in HR, 1st in RBI, 4th in SB, 1st in Walks, 3rd in SLG, 4th in OPS.

Man, Darryl could have been one of the all-time greats. Back in the mid- to late 1980s he was right up there with McGwire and Canseco as the up-and-coming young sluggers. His 1987 and1988 seasons are probably the best individual seasons in Mets history, yet he inexplicably lost the MVP award to a clearly inferior Kirk Gibson in '88. He was my favorite player growing up, and even though my bed time was early when I was six, I always used to ask my parents if I could stay up to see Strawberry's first at-bat.

Honorable mentions: Bobby Bonilla, Robin Ventura, Benny Agbayani (yeah, really. .834 OPS ranked 7th in Mets history), Lance Johnson, Lenny Dykstra, Ed Kranepool, Rey Ordonez (no, not really).

The Grimace

I promise I'll get to Mike Piazza in a minute, but first a little more driving. Some of you might be interested in that, while none of you are interested in baseball.

So I came up with a couple of new driving pet-peeves, which I'm sure everyone is just dying to know. You know how there are "turn only" and "exit only" lanes all over the place? Well they're there for a bloody reason! If you are in one of those lanes you better freakin' do what the signs tell you to do. If you're headed southbound on the Harlem River Drive and you're driving in the right lane near 125th street that is "exit only" onto the Triboro Bridge, then you sure as hell better be getting onto that bridge. If you decide to be cool and use that lane to get ahead of the traffic in the other two non-"exit only" lanes, then all you're doing is creating a problem. You're going to cut off someone in the middle lane, and while you're waiting to cut in you're preventing the people behind you from actually getting on the bridge; a privelege they have earned by being in the correct lane and by shelling out the six dollars for the toll. Honestly, I couldn't care less if getting on the Triboro Bridge costs you six dollars you don't have and takes you an hour out of your way; wait in traffic in the left two lanes like everybody else. The only way you are allowed to break this rule is if you're not going to screw anybody else. If there are few cars on the road (at maybe 4:00 am) then be my guest. Otherwise, make sure you're in the correct lane. You know the intersection on 96th street and 1st avenue? I've mentioned it before because it's a horrible traffic light situation what with all the traffic getting on and off the FDR Drive. Anyway if you're driving east on 96th street, the right lane is "right turn only" going towards York Avenue. I once saw a guy try to cut into the traffic going onto the FDR from that lane, but a traffic cop wouldn't let him and forced him to make the turn. It was outstanding.

Now this one really pisses me off. U-turns are illegal in most places, and I admit that I have made many U-turns in my day. However, as with most things, I have no problem with people making U-turns as long as you're not screwing anybody else. Make a U-turn when no one is around. However, inasumch as they are illegal, don't start your U-turn when there are cars coming at you from the other direction. You see, this is the opposite of "not screwing anybody else." Never has this bothered me more than yesterday evening. I had to go to the cleaners on Ft. Washington Avenue to drop off my tuxedo before driving home to the East Side, az I drove up Overlook Terrace towards Ft. Wash. Now Overlook Terrace is one lane in each direction, i.e. an inopportune place to make a U-turn. Believe it or not, a car coming down the hill started to make a U-turn just as I got there; I literally had to slam on the breaks. Okay fine, I wasn't in a terrible hurry, whatever. Now a plain old K-turn should get the job done, but this driver was so incompetent that it was more like a pentagram-turn. Hey, just as a little tip, don't be afraid to get up close and personal with the parked cars. You don't need to start reversing when you're 10 feet away from the next car; keep on going until you're a foot away. That way you won't have to change directions 84 times to turn around (a la Austin Powers). At that point I started honking the guy. And then you know what he did? He actually decided better of things and began undoing his K-turn. Az after switching from Drive to Reverse countless times, he ended up going in the same direction as when he started. Needless to say, I was displeased.

Now onto baseball. I was reading baseballmusings.com yesterday, and Pinto wrote a post about Ryan Ludwick, the St. Louis Cardinals outfielder who hit his twelfth home run. He noted that "his .767 slugging percentage is more than twice his .342 batting average, meaning his average hit is more than a double." So that's pretty cool. Since I'm obsessed with slugging percentage these days I decided to check last year's stats to see if anyone accomplished that feat last season. It turns out that among players who qualified for the batting title (bizarrely 3.1 plate appearances per team game, or 502 plate appearances over 162 games), six did it in 2007 (in reverse order):

Jim Thome: .275 AVG, .563 SLG, 119 Hits, 65 1B, 19 2B, 35 HR, totaling 2.042 bases-per-hit (BPH).

Alex Rodriguez: .314 AVG, .645 SLG, 183 Hits, 98 1B, 31 2B, 54 HR, totaling 2.055 BPH.

Adam Dunn: .264 AVG, .554 SLG, 138 Hits, 69 1B, 27 2B, 2 3B, 40 HR, totaling 2.094 BPH.

Prince Fielder: .288 AVG, .618 SLG, 165 Hits, 78 1B, 35 2B, 2 3B, 50 HR, totaling 2.145 BPH.

Ryan Howard: .268 AVG, .584 SLG, 142 Hits, 69 1B, 26 2B, 47 HR, totaling 2.176 BPH.

Carlos Pena: .282 AVG, .627 SLG, 138 Hits, 62 1B, 29 2B, 1 3B, 46 HR, totaling 2.225 BPH.

I would say A-Rod's feat is the most impressive because he's the only one who accomplished it with a batting average above .300. Let's see how these guys are doing this season (all stats through May 20th):

Jim Thome: .206 AVG, .418 SLG, 29 Hits, 15 1B, 6 2B, 8 HR, totaling 2.029 BPH.

A-Rod: Nope.

Adam Dunn: .234 AVG, .508 SLG, 32 Hits, 17 1B, 4 2B, 11 HR, totaling 2.171 BPH.

Prince Fielder: Nope.

Ryan Howard: .183 AVG, .396 SLG, 31 Hits, 16 1B, 4 2B, 1 3B, 10 HR, totaling 2.164 BPH.

Carlos Pena: Nope.

Just for fun, let's look at Jason Giambi: .204 AVG, .469 SLG, 23 Hits, 9 1B, 6 2B, 8 HR, 2.299 BPH. Wow!

And now, Lance Berkman, who is absolutely ripping it up so far: .388 AVG, .776 SLG, 66 Hits, 33 1B, 16 2B, 1 3B, 16 Hr, 2.000 BPH. Ridiculous.

Anyway, that was a fun exercise. Let's move on to the reason for this post, the retirement of Mike Piazza.

I don't think I need to go through the stats; he's clearly the greatest hitting catcher of all time, and he's a first ballot Hall-of-Famer. Everyone knows this. I want to share a couple of my own memories of him. A few posts ago I regaled you with the story of the eighth inning of a Mets game against the Braves on June 30th, 2000: "I remember watching the highlights and seeing the fans by the first base line going absolutely berserk. Piazza is running towards first base and when his batted ball clears the fence he pumps his right fist in boyish glee. Here's a guy who's making $90 million and he's going ballistic because he hit a ball over a fence during a game in June." Another one I remember vividly was a game on April 28th, 1999. I was watching it at my cousins' house in Connecticut. The Padres were the defending National League champions; they had lost the World Series to the Yankees in 1998. Trevor Hoffman, the Padres closer, had saved 23 consecutive games and was coming off a season in which he had saved 53 games with a 1.48 ERA. The Mets were down 3-2 in the ninth inning, and Piazza hit a monstrous home run to right field with John Olerud on first. Mets win 4-3. It was such an unbelievable home run; the pitch was probably six inches outside and eight inches high, but nobody I ever watched could hit a ball the other way like Mike Piazza. Nobody got around on pitches with such incredible bat speed like Piazza (except Gary Sheffield). And when he hit a home run, he would scrunch up his face in a classic grimace. It was as though he was so excited to hit a home run but he didn't want to show it, so it turned into a snarl. I remember Roger Clemens beaning him in the head. I remember Clemens throwing the bat-head at him in the World Series. I remember his first hit as a met, an opposite field double into the gap. I remember being at my buddy's house in Great Neck on a Saturday night, when they announced the trade on Sports Center. I remember watching games at home and my grandma saying "that Mike Piazza... oooh is he good looking!" Mike, thanks for all the memories. I'll end with a quote from Mike as reported by the Associated Press: "But I have to say that my time with the Mets wouldn't have been the same without the greatest fans in the world," he said. "One of the hardest moments of my career was walking off the field at Shea Stadium and saying goodbye. My relationship with you made my time in New York the happiest of my career and for that, I will always be grateful."

Foolishness

I'm gonna mix it up this time and do a little football. This is not because I have nothing to say about baseball (don't get me started), rather it's because I just heard something absolutely maddening on the radio. I'm listening to the Michael Kay show, as I do every day, and I have grown to enjoy this show very much over the past ten months. I don't always agree with what Mr. Kay says, but at least he gives a viable argument and usually doesn't sound like a complete moron. But just now, Michael said something along the lines of (and I paraphrase): "The Jets lost a lot by winning that last game against the Chiefs. If they lost they would have gotten the third pick in the draft and been able to draft a top flight quarterback or running back. Instead, they settled for the 6th pick."

The two players about whom Mr. Kay is speaking are Matt Ryan, quarterback out of Boston College, who was the third pick in the draft by the Atlanta Falcons, and Darren McFadden, running back out of Arkansas, who was the fourth pick in the draft by the Oakland Raiders. I have no doubt that these two players are immensely talented, however, recent history has shown us that quarterbacks and running backs who were drafted early have had records of success which are highly suspect. Those well versed in football will know what I mean when I mention Ryan Leaf, Akili Smith, Andre Ware, Kijana Carter, Curtis Enis, Tim Couch, David Carr, and Joey Harrington, to name a few. These were all highly touted, and highly drafted college quarterbacks and running backs who never were or have yet to be successful in the NFL. Granted, there are always highly drafted players who do succeed, including Peyton Manning, LaDainian Tomlinson, Drew Brees, Carson Palmer, etc. but there is much evidence to show that these players have succeeded in large part because of the offensive linemen behind whom they play. Anyway, it certainly seems like drafting a quarterback or a running back with a high pick is risky business indeed. It seems that it is much safer to draft an offensive lineman or a defensive lineman/linebacker, since their skill sets seem to be more easily transferable to the pros.

I'd like to point to the two (arguably) most successful teams in the NFL last year. The New York Giants and the New England Patriots were ranked first and second, respectively, in team sacks (53 and 47). The Patriots were ranked fifth in fewest sacks allowed. Brandon Jacobs, Derrick Ward, and Laurence Maroney, were all among the league leaders in yards per carry. All of these point to superb play from the offensive and defensive lines and linebackers from these teams. The Patriots' offensive line allowed Tom Brady to set the record for touchdowns in a season. Granted, you do need an excellent quarterback to accomplish such a task, but even Brady wasn't a high draft pick (199th in 2000). With the outstanding play of the offensive line and the quarterback, the Patriots were able to win every single one of their games in the regular season. The only game they lost was the Super Bowl, in which their offensive line was outplayed by the Giants' defensive line and their linebackers. One would be hard-pressed to show that the Giants won because of their quarterback (19/34, 255 Yds, 2 TDs, 1 Int).

What I'm trying to show is that the Jets did well this off-season. They filled the holes they had and strengthened themselves on their offensive and defensive lines. The signed left guard Alan Faneca, a perennial pro-bowler, to a five-year contract. This will only help their young left tackle, D'Brickashaw Ferguson, to achieve the lofty goals the Jets expected him to reach when they drafted him two seasons ago. Nick Mangold, the Jet center, has proven himself to be an outstanding player, and with the three of them anchoring the offensive line, Kellen Clemens should be given plenty of time to throw the football. He ran into a lot of trouble by having to scramble all the time last season.

The defensive line and linebacking corps received significant upgrades this off-season as well. They obtained nose tackle Kris Jenkins from Carolina, and signed right outside linebacker Calvin Pace. With those two in place, including the newly drafted Vernon Gholston at defensive end, the Jets have an excellent blend of youth and experience on defense. With Jenkins and Pace joining Eric Barton, David Harris, Shaun Ellis, and Bryan Thomas, the Jets should be far better in preventing the run and in attacking the quarterback. In the secondary, Darelle Revis, last year's first round pick, will only get better, and he is joined by Dwight Lowery, whom the Jets drafted in the fourth round. I would venture to say that this team is better now than it would be had it drafted McFadden or Ryan. Remember when everyone laughed at the Houston Texans for drafting Mario Williams ahead of Reggie Bush? Meanwhile, Williams made mincemeat of offensive linemen and quarterbacks alike last season while Bush struggled in his second season.

I would love to hear Michael Kay change his tune this season. But that's still several months away. Meanwhile, it's back to baseball.

Hamavdil Bein Kodesh L'Kodesh

After the post I'll let you all decide if there's some deeper meaning behind the title. It'll be like how people think J.R.R. Tolkien wrote the Lord of the Rings as an allegory of World War II even though he strenuously denies that claim. This is an entirely uninteresting line of discussion; let's just move on.

On Sunday night, for the first time, my family had a Passover seder at my brother's apartment. He makes one every year and invites all of his friends who are around. Now, I mentioned in my anti-Passover rant last year (More Road Rage, April 11th, 2007) that one of the reasons I dislike the holiday is that everyone always spends it with their families so there's very little variety from year to year. Az this year was a little different. My brother started at around 7:00, az I started off over there, went across the street to synagogue, came back for half an hour, went back to synagogue, and then came back to my brother's and caught up to them. Now some of you are probably wondering about a few aspects of the story. For those of you who aren't, I'll supply the questions:

a) Why would my brother have friends who are around? Why wouldn't they be having the seder with their families?
b) Why did they start so early?

Well, most of my brother's friends are not of the Mosaic faith. However, many of them have been going to my brother's seder for several years. He asks that they each bring a bottle of wine (Kosher for Passover of course), and a "dvar torah." By that I mean that they each bring some kind of reading from a newspaper or a book, or something they found online that is somehow related to Passover or freedom. When they reach the point at the seder when each person's reading is appropriate, they read. And six hours later they're done. This absolutely blew my mind. I don't even think I could get my JEWISH friends to have a holiday meal with me for that long, especially if they each had to bring wine and a dvar torah. I find that troublesome. I guess that being observant these past eleven years can maybe desensitize me from the beauty and wonder of Judaism. I have to remember that there's a reason we do all of these rituals and follow all of these rules. Hopefully next year I'll be looking forward to Passover instead of having my usual sense of foreboding. Props all around to my big bro, his wife, and his friends. Best Passover I've had in a long time.

Here's a slightly amusing anecdote from yesterday. I had to e-mail someone at work to get some data from him, so I looked him up in the directory. Let's call him Bloggy McSchmuttface. So I see a Bloggy C. McSchmuttface in there, az I sent him my request. He e-mails me back and says he's the wrong person. I apologized to him, and then about a minute later a get another e-mail from Bloggy McSchmuttface with an attachment, asking me if these are the data I need. Meanwhile, I went to ask my boss how I can contact the real Bloggy McSchmuttface. She finds his e-mail address, and it turns out that his actual name is Curtis B. (Bloggy) McSchmuttface. Great, az I go ahead and send my original request to Curtis. A minute later I get a phone call from Bloggy McSchmuttface telling me that he sent me an e-mail with an attachment, so why am I calling him now? I'm not gonna go through the entire embarrassing discussion where I ask him which Bloggy he is, but to make a long story short, the first Bloggy that I e-mailed ended up forwarding my request to the real Curtis Bloggy, so he's the one who sent me the attachment in the first place. I understand that was a confusing story, but imagine how confusing it must have been for me while it was happening!

I was doing my usual baseball blog reading yesterday when I came across an article that listed all sorts of different statistics that random writers/bloggers/statisticians presented over the years. They all involved some kind of measurement of bases as compared to at-bats, plate appearances, or outs. It turns out that a man named Bill Gilbert came up with a stat called "Bases per Plate Appearance" several years ago. He calculates it differently than I do, but it would still be unkind of me to use his title without showing the proper credit. Now since the purpose of my statistic was to determine if it's worthwhile to always walk any batter in a certain situation, I did not include double plays, stolen bases, and caught stealing in the formula. I will continue to use the same name in any future research, but I just thought I should mention that the name is not exactly original.

Many of you have read in this space about my (mis)adventures in driving. I contantly complain that drivers are too wrapped up in their own selfishness to be courteous to other drivers. A lot of people have told me things like "well if it bothers you so much when people do that stuff, why don't you just do it yourself?" You know, like when everyone is exiting from the right lane, so it's all backed up, and then someone speeds in from the center lane and tries to cut in front of all the cars that waited patiently in the right lane. I've definitely mentioned that before. Another thing I hate is when you're driving southbound on the Harlem River Drive the right lane becomes "exit only" at 135th street, but some people will drive on the shoulder to avoid the inevitable congestion that results from three lanes merging into two. Somehow those people never get caught, but I know that if I ever do it I'll get caught. You know what I mean. Here's one more. When you get off the George Washington Bridge's upper level and exit onto 178th street you can either make a left onto Ft. Washington Avenue or continue straight towards Broadway. You cannot make a right onto Ft. Wash because there is traffic coming off the Henry Hudson Parkway. Similarly, if you are coming off the Henry Hudson Parkway, you can either make a right onto Ft. Wash or continue straight towards Broadway, but you are not allowed to make a left onto Ft. Wash because of the aforementioned traffic coming off the bridge. So last night I was getting off the bridge and an SUV that had come from the highway cut me off and made the illegal left onto Ft. Wash, something I've wanted to do many times. And a cop TOTALLY nailed him! It was awesome! Booyah! He was DONE! He was SO DONE! Now don't think I'm reveling in that person's pain, far from it! What I really gained from that experience was the knowledge that not everyone will get away with screwing other drivers. If you drive selfishly you will inevitably pay for it. I can now sleep soundly knowing that the system, while not perfect, works.

More Odds and Ends (Even Odder, Still No End)

So someone suggested that I put labels on my posts so that my readers would be able to read (read: ignore) posts at their leisure. For example, this post would be labeled "baseball," az most of you would choose to ignore it. Go ahead; see if I care.

Yesterday, Alex Rodriguez hit the 521st home run of his career. He is now tied for 15th on the all time list with Willie McCovey and Ted Williams. The next two players he's set to pass are Jimmie Foxx (534 HR) and Mickey Mantle (536 HR). Meanwhile, Greg Maddux of the San Diego Padres has 349 victories on the mound. Among the people he should pass over the next year or two are Roger Clemens (354 Wins), and Hall of Famers Kid Nichols and Pud Galvin (364 Wins), Warren Spahn (363 Wins), and Grover Cleveland Alexander and Christy Mathewson (373 Wins). The A-Rod stuff seems closer to home because we've watched a lot of the players near him play. Ken Griffey Jr. and Frank Thomas (and technically Sammy Sosa and Barry Bonds) are still active, and we all got to watch Mark McGwire and Rafael Palmeiro. Even Mike Schmidt and Reggie Jackson are still recent enough that many of us watched them play or at least saw a lot of their highlights. But still, when we're talking about a guy who's passing some of the all time greats like Jimmie Foxx and Mickey Mantle, you know we're dealing with something special. I mean those guys don't even seem real to me; Williams, Mantle, and Foxx are just legends, stories grandparents tell the kids before bedtime about how things were in the old days. And in this day and age, with pitchers getting far fewer opportunities to win games, it's especially jarring to see the names that Maddux is going to pass. Pud Galvin and Kid Nichols are not real people; Warren Spahn is not a real person; Grover Cleveland Alexander and Christy Mathewson are about as far from real as you can get. Some of these guys were alive around the time of the Civil War. They pitched over 100 years ago. We might as well be talking about people like Robin Hood and King Arthur. The fact that a pitcher today has a chance to pass Christy Mathewson on the all time victory list boggles my mind to no end. I implore you, all you non-baseball fans out there, try to find time to watch Greg Maddux pitch. Even at his advanced age, he's one of the most efficient pitchers in baseball. Watch the way his four-seam fastball tails away from lefties. I know that some day I'm going to tell my children that I watched Greg Maddux pitch live, and if I have my way they will be suitably impressed.

Okay, now it's time to get started on my new statistical fetish. I discussed baseball with my brother over the weekend, and we talked a lot about Slugging Percentage and On-Base Percentage, so I was in the mood go back to my bases per plate appearance research, even though I don't have platoon split data. Anyway, here's how I figure Bases per Plate Appearance (BPA): I take a players total bases (Singles + 2x Doubles + 3x Triples + 4x Home Runs), and add walks. Then I divide all that by Plate Appearances (At-bats + Walks + Hit by Pitch + Sacrifice bunts + Sacrifice Flies). The reason I use Plate Appearances instead of At-bats is that I'm trying to determine how much a player is worth each time he comes to the plate. It's for the same reason that I add Walks to Total Bases. Finally, the reason I included Sacrifice Bunts into Plate Appearances is that most sluggers don't ever bunt, so it wouldn't hurt their stats, and most players who would be high on the BPA list who would have a number of sacrifices are often "credited" with sacrifices even when they're bunting for hits, az this penalizes them. I calculated the BPA for all players with 100 or more plate appearances in 2007, and here are some notable findings:

- Barry Bonds had the highest BPA overall at .679. He accrued that over just 477 plate appearances, but still. He should definitely get signed pretty soon.
- The player with the highest BPA among those who qualified for the batting title (502 PA) was David Ortiz at .678 over 667 plate appearances. And a lot of analysts said he had a down year last year because he "only" had 35 homers and 117 RBI. Hey, remember how he also had 52 doubles?!
- Would you believe that Carlos Pena (.670) had a higher BPA than Alex Rodriguez (.665)? A-Rod had more total bases because he had 96 more plate appearances, but man! At-bat for At-bat, Pena was as productive a player as there was in all of baseball last year.
- Jimmy Rollins, the NL MVP comes in at 46th with a .551 BPA. He was beaten out by Chase Utley (.571), Pat Burrell (.587), and Ryan Howard (.642), three players on his own team (!).
- Jason Kendall had the lowest BPA of those who qualified for the batting title, .340 over 514 plate appearances (Nick Punto was right above him at .341).

Another thing my brother and I discussed regarding Slugging Percentage was triples (and inside-the-park home runs). He asserted that triples shouldn't count for SLG, because generally it's not the "sluggers" who are hitting them. Guys like Curtis Granderson, Jimmy Rollins, Jose Reyes, and Carl Crawford can really run, and it's for that reason that they compile a bunch of triples. Otherwise, the only times that players get triples or inside-the-park homers are when fielders screw up but don't get errors, or the ball takes a weird bounce. Here's an idea I had that might reconcile this problem: John Dewan has a plus/minus system for evaluating fielding. For every play that fielder makes/does not make, he assigns a number. If he makes a play that the average fielder would make then he gets zero points. If he botches a play that the average fielder makes then he loses a point. If he makes a play that the average fielder would not make then he gets a point. Simple. The best fielders at each position generally finish the season at around +20; think Adam Everett, Pedro Feliz, Grady Sizemore, Albert Pujols. The worst generally finish around -15; think Hanley Ramirez, Derek Jeter, Adam Dunn, Miguel Cabrera. So I think we can apply this system to extra-base hits. If a player hits a ball that would normall go for a double, then he loses a point if he only gets a single, gets zero points if he gets to second base, and gains a point if he makes it a triple. So if we could keep track of this plus/minus number for each player, we could see how many extra-bases a player takes over the average player.

I was reading an article on the subway this morning, and the writer submitted that it would be advantageous if the Cincinnati Reds could combine the offense of Javier Valentin and the defense of their backup catchers. That got me thinking; may the Designated Hitter in the American League only replace the pitcher in the batting order? Wouldn't it be terrific if a team had a tremendous hitting pitcher (think Micah Owings, Mike Hampton, Carlos Zambrano, Dontrelle Willis), and a fielder who has no bat but plays maniacally good defense? That way you could have the pitcher bat for himself and have the DH replace one of the fielders. Az I went ahead and looked up the DH rules on mlb.com, and here are a few interesting things I found:

- Any league may elect to use the DH rule. So the NL could adopt the DH without having to change league rules.
- It's mandatory for a team to designate a hitter for the pitcher. If the team does not do so, they cannot use a DH for the remainder of the game.
- The DH spot in the lineup cannot move during the game. If the starting DH is batting 4th, then no matter how many times the DH has a pinch-hitter (or pinch-runner), his spot in the order stays at 4th.
- If a player enters the game as a pinch-hitter and then takes the mound, the DH spot is terminated for the remainder of the game. If the pitcher bats at any time, the DH spot is terminated for the remainder of the game. Furthermore, if the pitcher bats he can ONLY replace the DH in the order.
- If the DH goes out to play the field, the DH spot is terminated for the remainder of the game.

So it appears that my idea of DHing a fielder is not allowed. I should tell that to Mr. Dulny so he can retroactively give me the at-bats he owes me from 11th grade. Hameivin yavin.

Couple of Odds and Ends (Mostly Odd, Never End)

I went to my first ball game of the year last night and I had a few observations. Firstly, Citi Field is GORGEOUS! They did a ton of work on it during the off-season, and from the outside it looks ready to go. My friend and I briefly flirted with the hilarity that would ensue if Ryan Howard hit Citi Field with a home run and the entire thing came crashing down. Anyway, we've got 78 (plus playoffs) more chances to experience Shea Stadium in all its blueness, az take advantage while you can.

Another thing I noticed as the game plowed its way into extra innings is that the Mets did not exploit their platoon advantage during the game at all. There were so many times when the Mets best hitters had the advantage over the Phillie pitcher: Reyes, Beltran, Delgado, and Church against Adam Eaton (?), Beltran and Delgado in big spots against 90 year old Rudy Seanez (?), etc. That got me thinking today about which type of batter had the most extreme platoon splits. I always thought it was left-handed hitters, which is why I was so surprised when Seanez got the better of Delgado and Beltran. So I hit the stats. I found three league average hitters (100 OPS+) for their careers, and checked their platoon splits to get an idea of the average hitter splits. I list the percent difference between their platoon splits in Batting Average / On Base Percentage / Slugging Percentage, assuming that they hit better against pitchers of opposite handedness. Here's what I found:

Righties:
Rich Aurilia: 1.818 / 3.364 / 16.986
Hubie Brooks: 11.923 / 14.618 / 18.586
Eric Byrnes: 13.672 / 10.345 / 20.991

Lefties:
Doug Mientkiewicz: 1.873 / 0 / -2.415
B.J. Surhoff: -2.439 / -.300 / .730
Mark Kotsay: .356 / 3.030 / 2.200

Now, granted this isn't the most thorough research I've ever done, but until I can get the historical splits in spreadsheet format, I won't be able to do much. Anyway, it appears that I was incorrect. Righties tend to have a larger disparity in their success against pitchers of different handedness while lefties tend to be around the same or even have reverse splits. This is likely due to small sample size, because lefties (which are rare to begin with) have relatively few plate appearances against other lefties (still rare). In that case, the Mets righties should have handled the left-handed J.C. Romero last night and prevented the game from going to extras. Silly Mets.

I was watching highlights of the first game of the NHL playoffs, pairing the New York Rangers and the New Jersey Devils. In the third period, Sean Avery of the Rangers scored on Martin Brodeur, the Devils' goalkeeper, to give the Rangers a 3-1 lead. Few times have I ever seen an athlete so excited as Avery was at that moment; I mean he was going absolutely bonkers. I love it when the players go nuts. Here they are, making millions of dollars, and at that split-second in time they couldn't care less. These moments remind us of what sports are really about. The moment I remember most was from a Mets game on June 30th, 2000. I remember reading about the game in the morning because it was on a Friday night, and I didn't end up seeing highlights until after Shabbos. The Mets were losing to the Atlanta Braves (gosh I hated them in those days) 8-1 entering the bottom of the eighth inning. Here's how the inning played out:

Don Wengert on the mound.
Derek Bell singles to center (man on 1st).
Edgardo Alfonzo flies out to center (1 out, man on 1st).
Mike Piazza reaches on an infield single to 3rd, error on the 3rd baseman, runners advance (1 out, men on 2nd and 3rd).
Robin Ventura grounds out to second, Bell scores, Piazza advances to 3rd (2 out, man on 3rd, 8-2).
Todd Zeile singles to left-center, Piazza scores (2 out, man on 1st, 8-3).
Jay Payton singles to right (2 out, men on 1st and 2nd, 8-3).
Kerry Ligtenberg on the mound.
Benny Agbayani walks (2 out, bases loaded, 8-3).
Mark Johnson walks, Zeile scores (2 out, bases loaded, 8-4).
Melvin Mora walks, Payton scores (2 out, bases loaded, 8-5).
Terry Mulholland on the mound. Joe McEwing pinch-runs for Mark Johnson
Derek Bell walks, Benny Agbayani scores (2 out, bases loaded, 8-6).
Edgardo Alfonzo singles to left, McEwing scores, Mora scores (2 out, men on 1st and 2nd, 8-8).
Mike Piazza homers, Bell scores, Alfonzo scores, Piazza scores (2 out, 11-8).
Robin Ventura grounds out to 2nd (3 out, 11-8).

Armando Benitez sneaks his way through a nail-biting 9th inning, but for all intents and purposes the game was over with Piazza's home run. I remember watching the highlights and seeing the fans by the first base line going absolutely berserk. Piazza is running towards first base and when his batted ball clears the fence he pumps his right fist in boyish glee. Here's a guy who's making $90 million and he's going ballistic because he hit a ball over a fence during a game in June. These are the moments that we wait for as fans; when the players and we who support them are joined k'ish echad b'lev echad, as one person with one heart. Yeah, sure, stats and spreadsheets are a ton of fun, but there sure is some exciting stuff happening on the field of play.

The Way It Should Be Done

I was surprised not once, but twice yesterday. Now, it's a problem to begin with that I was surprised, because the things that surprised me should not be surprising; they should be expected.

I called Time Warner on Friday (this is the point where everyone thinks "I know where this is going." I mean, is there any other company that is so universally hated than Time Warner? Two friends, who happen to work for Time, were in my new apartment last night, and they totally agreed. One of them said something like "whenever they come to do service I always ask them if I can get free cable, and the guy always responds by asking if he can get free magazines." Anyway, I don't know ANYONE who has good things to say about their service. Which, incidentally is why I was so surprised) to schedule a service appointment so they could install cable in my new apartment. Az they came on Tuesday, but since my enormous television was still in my old apartment I had to ask a friend to bring his small TV over just to make sure the cable worked. So when we finally moved the TV in yesterday, we should have been all set. But lo and behold, the picture was black and white. I called them up, and the service guy was polite, courteous, and extremely helpful (his English wasn't too bad either). He solved the problem in no time and we were good to go. Again, this is the kind of thing one should expect from a company like Time Warner. At least for one day I was pleased with them.

The other surprise requires a bit of backstory. Some time over the summer I was on the john, and I was reading a newspaper article about a baseball equipment company that uses interesting technology in their products. Most baseball gloves look the same, but Akadema explores different ways of shaping them. For full details, check out their website: http://www.akademapro.com/. Anyway, since the average life of a Schmutter softball glove is around 13 years, the time came to get a new one. Just as an aside, there are few things more precious to a guy than his glove; no guy wants to get a new one. A guy knows every nook and cranny of his glove, almost as if it's been attached to his hand for his whole life. A guy would rather repair his glove every inning than have to buy a new one, but there comes a point when you just have to bite the bullet.

Az I went to the website and wrote down which gloves I was interested in seeing, and on the website they have links to sporting goods stores that carry their products. I'm about to make fun of every girl I know, so just beware: a baseball glove is like a pair of shoes; you don't want to buy one until you've tried it on and made sure it's comfortable. So I went to Sports Authority to try on some of the Akadema gloves, but they didn't have any. I asked one of the salesmen if they had, and they said that some things they only have for sale on the website. Bummer. Az yesterday, I went back to the Akadema website, got their phone number, and called them up. I told them I wanted to try on some gloves but couldn't find any in the stores, so the gentlemen told me I could come to their showroom at their headquarters in Hawthorne, NJ (just as a frame of reference, it's basically the next town over from Fair Lawn). So after work I drove out to Hawthorne, and I must have passed by their place three times before I found it. I was expecting some kind of fancy sporting goods store, but it looked just like an office. There were signs that said "For Academy, go around back," so I assumed the front of the office was owned by another company who didn't know how to spell "Akadema," so I went around back. I heard some people hitting softballs in a batting cage, az I knew I was in the right place. I walked through the batting cage area, presumably to where the showroom was, and a gentleman stopped me and asked me where I was going. I told him, and he said "there is no showroom. Wait, you're here for Akadema right?" I nodded. "Go back around to the front." I did. I walked into the front door, and it looked almost like a doctor's waiting room. There were a couple of chairs and a small window, behind which a man was sitting. Now I was feeling pretty foolish for driving all the way out there to some office in some no-name town in Jersey. I was all prepared to be upset at them for feeding my wrong information over the phone, etc. Az I sheepishly told the man why I was there, and he said that they're still building the showroom, but he'd be happy to have one of the workers show me some of their products. Excellent. I went inside and a young man named Kevin brought me a catalogue and asked me to show him which gloves I wanted to see. I told him I'm an infielder, I like a closed back, and I wanted a slightly longer glove. He gave me one and said that was the one I wanted. Az I wrote down the model and told him that I would buy it on the website (I noticed the gloves were $5 cheaper on the Sports Authority website), but he said he would give me a discount. Outstanding. Then I asked him if I could have a discount on batting gloves too, and he said "of course." Basically, I walked out of there with a catalogue ($3 value), a free cap (probably no more than a $3 value; the thing looks like a trucker hat made for a sever year old), a new softball glove ($105 value), and a pair of sheepskin batting gloves ($35 value), for a sum total of $100. It was a thoroughly pleasant shopping experience. I told Kevin he was a terrific salesman and he just acquired a customer for life. I was so pleased that I didn't even care about sitting in GWB traffic on the way home.

Just a couple of other noteworthy occurences at the Akadema headquarters. Kevin showed me the custom mitt they made for Manny Ramirez, the Red Sox Left Fielder, az that was pretty cool. Also, while I was there, they received a call from Jose Offerman, a former player, who wanted to know when his glove would be ready.

Anyway, when I got back home, I ended off the day by lounging on my couch (which was successfully moved into our new place. Thanks guys) in front of the TV (which was also successfully moved into our new place. Thanks a ton guys) and watching the Mets slaughter the Marlins 13-0. It was really a lovely day.

My Favorite Things

Man, it's been a while. The reason I haven't posted anything recently is that I've got two big posts in the works. One of them is a product of a brainstorm I had with my brother regarding my previous post about Ryan Braun. After transforming Braun into a superhero, it was determined that his slugging percentage against lefties in Coors Field ca. 2000 CE (Okay, here we go. So you know how people of the Christian faith count the years starting from roughly the year of Jesus's birth (give or take 3 or 4)? Well, those peoples who do not believe in Jesus as the Lord are loathe to append the acronym "AD" to these years, "AD" standing for "Anno Domini," The Year of Our Lord (Jesus). However, we of the Mosaic faith struggle daily to be part of the modern world, and going around saying that it's 5768 would make us look like raving zealots. So instead we append "BCE" and "CE" to the Christian year to stand for "(Before the) Common Era." Now, I don't think this has quite the same ring as "Anno Domini," so I suggest using the latin translation of "Common Era." Presenting my next idiotic contribution to the world, "Communis Aetas." ) exceeded 1.000. Another words, the average at-bat for Braun under those circumstances produced a little more than a single. My assertion is that it would make more sense to intentionally walk Braun every single time he comes to the plate under those circumstances, thereby assuring that Braun only gets one base (and can't advance any other base runners more than one base). Now, in an effort to expand this analysis, I attempted to download a spreadsheet with player platoon splits from 2007 (a platoon split is a player's statistics against pitchers of different handedness). Sadly, this data was not available to me online, so I had to send an e-mail out to my good friend Joe Sheehan at baseballprospectus.com. He hasn't gotten back to me yet, but I'm still hopeful. Anyway, once I get the data you can expect a big post. Who's excited?

The second post is the reason for the title of this one. Many of you might know of the handful of items that make it onto my list of favorite things. The list is currently populated by 4 things:

1. Binoculars: Is there anything they can't do? They are so versatile. For an astronomy enthusiast such as myself, they can be used for a bit of amateur star-gazing. Needless to say, binoculars appeal to the pervert in all of us. Honestly, how many times have you been walking around or sitting somewhere and you wished you had a pair of binoculars with you? I rest my case.

2. Juice Boxes: Come on, what reminds you of your childhood more than juice boxes? This is the real reason why I give blood; they always have juice boxes on the table o' food afterwards. Is there a more quality item than the plastic bendy straw that comes attached to the juice box? And remember those Richard Lewis commercials for BoKu, the "adult" juice box? If that's not a ringing endorsement of a product then I don't know what is.

3. Trampolines: Can you envision a scenario in which you are not smiling or laughing on a trampoline? I mean you might as well rename the trampoline "the happy machine," because it's impossible to not have fun on one. It's like the parfait discussion that Donkey has with himself in the first Shrek movie; just replace every instance of the word "parfait" with trampoline (and add in an article or two and change some verbs): "You know what else everybody likes? Trampolines. Have you ever met a person, you say, 'Let's try that trampoline,' they say, 'No, I don't like trampolines?' "

4. Crayons: Writing implements made out of wax. Brilliant. Clean. Colorful. Perfect. If I could write in crayon while maintaining my unblemished record of moral and professional integrity, sign me up. If I had to draw a picture of my childood, I would take a bunch of crayons and draw a juice box happily sitting next to a box of 64 Crayola crayons. You know, the one with the crayon sharpener in the back.

Now, I recently got into a discussion with a friend about the relative merits of crayons over markers or vice versa. The pressure to co-author a post detailing this comparison proved to be too much for her, but she has agreed to offer her input, so for that I thank her.

Stay tuned for these exciting posts and more.

New Line of Work

Since I'm bored at work today, and since I'm somewhat on the prowl for a new job, I thought I'd explore my talents in other areas. Today I'm going to try my hand at wizardry. For my first trick, I'm going to take your average, everyday Rookie of the Year, and transform him into Babe Ruth before your very eyes. Now the reason I chose to use Ryan Braun for my magic trick is because Baseball Prospectus looked at his splits from last season. I didn't even realize until I read the article how much he destroyed left-handed pitchers. So one thing led to another, and before I knew it, I had filled a spreadsheet with data. Now, the calculations I did would have looked even more insane had I done my Ruthian transformation on Babe Ruth himself... okay, I'll get to that in a minute. Meanwhile, check out how I changed the Hebrew Hammer (or as BP calls him, the Scourge of Southpaws) into the Sultan of Swat:

First I looked at his splits from last season:
Against RHP: 364 PA, .282 BA, .319 OBP, .526 SLG, .845 OPS, 19 HR, 18 2B, 4 3B, 62 RBI
Against LHP: 128 PA, .450 BA, .516 OBP, .964 SLG, 1.480 OPS, 15 HR, 8 2B, 2 3B, 35 RBI

Those numbers against lefties raised a few eyebrows. Then I decided to have some fun. I did the same thing with Ryan Church in a previous post ("Church v. Hunter," from November 30, 2007); I expanded his numbers against lefties to the full season. Last year, Ryan Braun had 492 plate appearances. Here's how they would have looked if they were all against lefties:

492 PA, .450 BA, .516 OBP, .964 SLG, 1.480 OPS, 192 Hits, 58 HR, 31 2B, 8 3B, 135 RBI

That would probably be the greatest offensive season of all time. Now, let's have some real fun. Baseball-Reference has a tool that allows you to see how a player would perform under different circumstances. The two free options are to see the stats were the player to play in an extreme pitcher-friendly environment, Dodger Stadium in 1968, or in an extreme hitter-friendly environment, Coors Field in 2000. Here's how Braun's 2007 would have looked had he played all 113 of his games at Coors in 2000:

481 AB, .366 BA, .414 OBP, .715 SLG, 1.129 OPS, 176 Hits, 31 2B, 7 3B, 41 HR, 128 RBI.

That looks like an MVP season to me. But wait, there's a lot more. What would happen if those stats were expanded to a full 162 game season:

689 AB, .366/.414/.715/1.129, 252 Hits, 59 HR, 44 2B, 10 3B, 184 RBI.

Again, that would be one of the best seasons of all time, among the top three seasons of hits, extra-base hits, total bases, and RBI.

Finally, let's complete the transformation and look at Braun's stats in 2000 at Coors Field were he to have every one of those at-bats against lefties:

689 AB, .509 BA, .577 OBP, 1.087 SLG, 1.665 OPS, 351 Hits, 107 HR, 54 2B, 13 3B, 272 RBI.

Tada!!! Wow. That's actually double what a fairly normal MVP season would be. That was a lot of fun.

I would LOVE to do the same thing for Babe Ruth, but unfortunately baseball-reference.com doesn't have splits that go back that far. But in case you were curious, I'll put his stats from his best seasons and for his career were they all to take place at Coors in 2000:

1921: 601 AB, .408 BA, .544 OBP, .913 SLG, 1.457 OPS, 245 Hits, 71 HR, 53 2B, 19 3B, 217 RBI
1927: 605 AB, .398 BA, .532 OBP, .863 SLG, 1.395 OPS, 241 Hits, 75 HR, 36 2B, 10 3B, 225 RBI
Career: 9608 AB, .386 BA, .521 OBP, .776 SLG, 1.297 OPS, 3712 Hits, 908 HR, 662 2B, 181 3B, 3133 RBI.

Terrifying.

The More Things Change... (aka That Guy Redux)

Remember one of my very first posts entitled "That Guy?" Well, it's very short az I'll just paste it here for your reading pleasure:

Tuesday, August 22, 2006

That Guy
So, you know how sometimes people say things like, "Don't be that guy!" Well, I was just "that guy." I was paying to go over the George Washington Bridge, and I gave the nice lady $6. I then sat there for about 30 seconds waiting for change. "Schmutter, don't be that guy." I've spent a good portion of my life trying to NOT be that guy, but I was tonight. I feel like I've failed some of you out there. Next time you see me, flick my ear.
end

Anyway, I was That Guy again last night. Let's start at the beginning. I went to a book signing at the Barnes & Noble on 18th Street and 5th Avenue last night. Four of the Baseball Prospectus guys came to sign and speak about their new annual Baseball Prospectus 2008. I especially excited to meet Joe Sheehan because I like his work on baseballanalysts.com in addition to his regular work on Baseball Prospectus. Anyway, they were pretty much just normal guys. Joe was the balding funny guy; Jay Jaffe and Steven Goldman reminded me of the Jeff Goldblum and Wayne Knight characters from Jurassic Park; and Derek Jacques was like a slightly flamboyant, Indian college professor. They were terrific. Az the 40 or 50 of us are hanging out, talking baseball for almost two hours, and then we went up to get our books signed. So while Joe is signing my book I tell him that I like his work on baseballanalysts.com a lot. So he says "that's a different Joe Sheehan. I've read some of his stuff and he's way smarter than I am." Now I feel like an idiot, so I try to salvage my dignity by trying to be funny. "Oh man! I can't believe I was just That Guy! I guess it's alright; you probably get it all the time," I said. His reply: "nope, this was the first time." Now I'm horrified: "I'm the ORIGINAL That Guy?! Ohmygod!" It wasn't very pretty. As I said in my old post, I've spent most of my life trying to avoid being that guy. The tolls on the bridge might have changed, but clearly I haven't very much. Anyway, there's still some small part of me that's hoping that Joe really is the same guy and he just has an alter-ego. Aside from that it was a very pleasant experience.

I started reading Baseball Prospectus 2008, and this morning on the subway I had a bit of a brainstorm. In the book, they make a big deal out of platoon splits, the disparity in how players perform against lefties and righties. For those who don't know, right handed hitters generally do better against left handed pitchers and vice versa. The disparity is very pronounced for left-handed batters. It's for this reason that switch-hitters are highly valuable in baseball today. Now, there have been only a handful of pitchers who pitched with both hands; baseball-reference.com lists only six, and only one in the last 99 years. But what if aspiring hurlers trained themselves to be able to pitch from both sides? That would potentially eliminate the hitters' platoon advantage. Then I started thinking what would happen if a switch-pitcher faced a switch-hitter? Would they both keep switching their positions in the batter's box/pitching rubber until the umpire forced the pitcher to throw? Can you imagine how comical it would be to watch the pitcher and the hitter dance around trying to get the advantage? I envision a lot of balks (illegal activity by the pitcher. See the Wikipedia entry for all examples). Anyway, it probably won't happen, but I thought it was a fun brainstorm.

Recap

Well, it's been quite an interesting journey these last few days. There were many highlights:

I went to dinner on Sunday night with my parents, my brother, and his wife and baby. Aside from the fact that I had the biggest steak of my life (I'm still digesting it 38 hours later), there was one moment that went largely unnoticed. We were sitting around the table and my brother said something like "Noah, of course I love you unconditionally because you're my brother, but aside from that I really do like you; you're a good person." It was entirely unnecessary, didn't need to take place, but it was not unappreciated. Thank you. You are a big part of what I am today.

I saw many of you last night at dinner. I'm sure it was difficult for some of you to make it out on a weeknight at that hour, so thank you all for coming. I was overwhelmed, even humbled, and that is a rare thing. Sometimes I'll walk out of a packed synagogue on Friday night and someone will say "big crowd this shabbos; it's a little overwhelming," and usually I'll say something like "I thought it was underwhelming." Mobs of people hanging out at Post-Davening-Mt. Sinai-Sponsored-Schmoozing-Time doesn't really impress me that much. In fact, I tend to thrive on those situations. But last night was a different animal altogether. After most of the people had left I was pacing around the back of the restaurant feeling exhausted but wired. I couldn't sit down because I was so fidgety. One of my friends commented that she had never seen me like that before. I don't know what that feeling was, or what it continues to be, but I imagine it can't be bad. So for all of you who participated in my birthday, thank you for making it my best one ever.

For those of you who read my post yesterday and expressed their concern, I think the events of the last few days should put those worries to rest. I don't even know why anyone was concerned in the first place; that story took place EIGHT YEARS ago! I think the reason why I reacted so strongly that night was that it was a time of transition for me. Until that summer I was an awkward, nerdy, goody two-shoes (still am). After that summer I was more self-confident, sophisticated, funny, etc. I guess I expected for people to have a newfound respect for me, but apparently you can't earn that sort of thing in only a few months. Either way, most of the people from high school, as I realized later on, weren't really the kind of people whose respect I needed, at least at that point. I should have realized that the 10-15 close friends I had were more than enough. I would take their friendship over the respect of my 85 other classmates every day of the week and twice on Sunday. Needless to say, anyone who knows me now will agree that I can confidently assert that I'm quite well adjusted, so don't worry. Anyway, I was told that I should put a warning on top if I'm ever going to write something sad, so I'll be sure to do that in the future.

My brother called me up yesterday, presumably to tell me where my car was (he had to borrow it for work). But he also informed me that today is National Grammar Day. I was SO excited. In honor of National Grammar Day, I leave you with some grammatically complex sentences. Enjoy:

1. The problem is, is he can't do it.
2. I don't know what you're talking about.
3. Someone forgot their shoes.
4. ...to boldly go where no man has gone before.
5. Who is it? It is I.

Birthday Blog

Okay, let's just get it over with. It's my birthday. Yay. I guess I couldn't really call it a coincidence, but today is merely the time when the Earth happens to be in the exact same location in its journey around the sun as it was on the day I was born. Otherwise it's just an ordinary day. Don't take that to mean that I don't appreciate all the birthday wishes I've received. Keep them coming! Just to let you know how much I appreciate them and I guess to let some of you inside my head, I want to share a very personal story:

In 11th grade, Ramaz took all of us on "Junior Retreat," a weekend getaway, which was designed to strengthen the bonds of our friendship before we began to seek our own fortunes out in the real world. They had a ropes course, various sporting events, and a beautiful Shabbat planned. I remember an awesome game of tackle football that we played in the snow. I remember my friend breaking his knee on a tackle and then intercepting the very next pass and returning it for a touchdown. There were some great times.
After Shabbos, some students prepared a slide-show, which had pictures of us from school. You know, there were pictures of us talking, and hanging out, maybe doing funny things, etc. And as we were all watching the show, we would applaud for the people in each picture to varying degrees. Out of the 100 or so pictures, there might have been one or two of me, and to my chagrin, I received very little applause. Now don't get me wrong, I have great friends from high school, and we're all still close, but I was really sad that I hadn't had enough of an effect on the rest of my class throughout the years to garner more than a few claps.
After the event, before we went to bed, I laid out on the grass outside of our bunk. It was cold and beautiful outside; the sky was cloudless and I could see a million stars. And on that night I cried. I wept uncontrollably for what seemed like forever. I cried to G-d, and I cried to my mother, and I'm crying now just remembering it. Here I am, sitting at my desk, and I'm crying. For every birthday wish I received last night and so far today, I shed a tear to erase the ones from that moment on that empty field. I know that no matter what I might have felt on that cold December night, I have friends today who care about me. So again, from the bottom of my heart, I thank you for your wishes.

Just as an aside, no fewer than three people told me this weekend that they missed me over Shabbos. They said it felt strange when they looked over to my seat in synagogue and didn't see me there. That meant a lot to me too. Look how far I've come.

Okay, so you ever hear that math problem that asks how many people you need in a room to have a reasonable chance of two of them having the same birthday? Well, most people seem shocked that the answer is only 23. In case anyone is interested, here's how it's done:

First, understand that the easiest way to determine the probability of two people having the same birthday in a room of N people, is to figure out the probability of everyone having a different birthday and then subtracting that probability from 100%, okay? It should make sense that there are two options: a) everyone has a different birthday, or b) some people have the same birthday. The probability of one plus the probability of the other equals 100%. Great.

The probability of the only two people in the room having different birthdays is (1-(1/365)). Very high. The probability of all three people in the room having the different birthdays is (1-(1/365)) x (1-(2/365)). You might see a pattern developing. The general formula for the probability of all N people in the room having a different birthday (assuming there are fewer than 365 people in the room) is: 365! / ((365^N)(365-N))!

The exclamation point is the symbol for the "factorial" function, which means you multiply the number by each integer below it until you get to one (ex: 5! = 5 x 4 x 3 x 2 x 1 = 120)

Great, so the probability of any of N people in a room having the SAME birthday comes out to 1 - (365! / ((365^N)(365-N))!). Now all you have to do is plug in your number for N, the amount of people in the room. For N = 23, the probability is about 50.7%. Just for argument's sake, if you have 100 people in a room, the probability that two people have the same birthday is around 99.99996%.

Excellent! Now, in case you were curious, if you wanted to figure out the probability of someone having the same birthday as you, that's a different problem. That's the same thing as asking what's the probability of two people having a specific birthday, whereas the previous problem doesn't care about which date the people share. The formula for the probability of someone in a room of N people having the same birthday as you is: 1 - ((365-1)/365)^N. In order for there to be a greater than 50% chance of someone having the same birthday as you, there needs to be 253 other people in the room.

Okay, that's the end of today's math lesson (thanks to wikipedia for all the info).

I went on facebook last night to check out the myriad wall posts I received, and I noticed that on the top of the page it has a little birthday box. It says something like "Happy Birthday, Noah! From all of us on The Facebook Team, have a great day!" You know what? That's really nice. It's unnecessary and quite meaningless, but still.

Since I absolutely could not fall asleep last night, I found myself watching last year's World Series of Poker on ESPN2 at about 1:30 am. At that hour you see the most random commercials. One of them was for a TimeLife series of CDs called "I Can Only Imagine." It's a collection of 22 Christian faith songs. The first thing I thought was that was the most ridiculous thing I had ever seen (one of the songs was actually called "Kel Shakkai," except with the real words, without the "K" and "dd" instead of "kk"), except then I realized that I basically listen to the exact same kind of music only in Hebrew. I can only imagine what people think of my taste in music.

I went to KJ for Seudah Shlishit, and they had a presentation of several Ramaz students who had gone to York, Pennsylvania for a few days to volunteer for a project called Habitat for Humanity, in which they helped other volunteers build houses for people who lost theirs for varying reasons. It was really quite nice. But the part I found noteworthy was that the students had become friends with the local Chabad Rabbi on facebook. It's ridiculous how far facebook has extended its grasp. Facebook is insane as it is right now, but can you imagine what it will be like for those high school students by the time they're our age?

Okay, I'm done. Wait, you know how when you go to a wedding or an engagement party you wish everyone there a Mazal Tov? I don't mean just to the bride and groom, but to everyone you see. What do you do at a birthday party? I think I'm gonna go ahead and wish everyone a Happy Birthday today, and I will continue to do so at other birthday parties. Az Happy Birthday everyone.

Random Baseball Jazz

I'm listening to the Max Kellerman show on 1050 ESPN Radio, and one thing he likes to do is these live commercials. He does live commercials for Dr. Modell's laser eye surgery, and for Car-cash, and a few other things. Recently he started doing one for this baseball drills video for kids. And each time he says something like "this product is so effective because it turns those boring old drills into a game, and it's the game that kids love, not the drills." Normally, Max, I agree with you, but not in this case. I think baseball drills are TONS of fun. What could possibly be boring about batting practice, or shagging fly balls? Even practicing turning a run-down or a double play is fun. I dunno, maybe I just love baseball that much.

My brother sent me an interesting tidbit this morning. He directed me to a game pitched by Rick Wise on June 23rd, 1971, in which he threw a no-hitter and hit two home runs. That got me thinking about the greatest individual performances by a baseball player in a single game. I could only come up with two other examples, so I'll show them here. I want you all to vote on what you think is the best of the three performances. Enjoy:

Rick Wise: 6/23/1971: 2 for 4, 2 R, 3 RBI, 2 HR (1 solo, 1 2-run), 8 TB, 9 IP, 0 H, 0 ER, 1 BB, 3 Ks, 0 HR, 0.11 WHIP, 89 Game Score, 0.00 ERA, Win.

Tony Cloninger: 7/3/1966: 3 for 5, 2 R, 9 RBI, 2 HR (2 grand slams), 9 TB, 9 IP, 7 H, 3 ER, 2 BB, 5 Ks, 2 HR, 1.00 WHIP, 64 Game Score, 3.00 ERA, Win.

Micah Owings: 8/18/2007: 4 for 5, 4 R, 6 RBI, 2 HR (1 solo, 1 2-run), 11 TB, 7 IP, 3 H, 3 ER, 0 BB, 7 Ks, 3 HR, 0.43 WHIP, 66 Game Score, 3.86 ERA, Win.

I like Tony, but pitchers were better hitters back then.

I Can't Say It Any Better

I guess I've done some of this before, but never on such a magnitude. I'm actually going to paste an entire article from firejoemorgan.com. They say everything that needs to be said. I would be oveir on bal tosif were I to add anything to it. I'm gonna try to get away with this being my own post only because it seems like I will have access to the baseballprospectus.com PECOTA projections, which I will use to add into my Mets preview, so I'm gonna be working on that. Enjoy the article (bold is quoted from the New York Post, and regular is firejoemorgan. Beware a few swear words. Apologies in advance to you REAL Yankee fans):

This Is What We're Up Against

Sure, sometimes it seems like we've said everything there is to be said about EqA and VORP and why batting average and wins are for stupids. We're repetitive, redundant, reiterative, repetitious, redundant, redundant and redundant. We get it.
Then we take a step back and remember that 99.999992% of baseball fans think like the people in this article:

YOU'VE GOT TO BE KIDDING! STUDY SAYS DEREK JETER'S THE WORST

No, nobody is kidding. This is old news, of course, to the other 0.000008% of us.

February 17, 2008 -- How's this for junk science - even with three Gold Gloves, Yankees captain Derek Jeter has been labeled the worst fielding shortstop in baseball.

I'm so happy the New York Post is out there doing its thing -- being angrily, outrageously, passionately wrong about everything. Rare is the institution you can rely on day in and day out, but you can set your watch by the Post. Whatever time the Post says, you're guaranteed to know: it's wrong. Gold Gloves are a m.-fucking joke. Although I've learned nothing yet about this junky "science" study and of course I will learn nothing further by reading the rest of the article (thank you, Post!), I already trust it infinitely more than Gold Gloves, because Gold Gloves are liars. They are no-good cheating liars, and I would not let my fictional daughter marry a Gold Glove.

But the numbers prove it, researchers at the University of Pennsylvania said yesterday at a meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, in (of course) Boston.

Yes, these researchers from the University of Pennsylvania meticulously altered their data, fudged everything they'd worked on for months, slandered Jeter and praised A-Rod, all because they had a meeting once in Boston. Never trust a scientist! All scientists are Sox fans! Post! Post BREAKING NEWS: SCIENCE PLAYS FOR BOSTON!

Using a complex statistical method,

for nerds with calculators and pocket protectors and Daily News subscriptions,

researchers concluded that Alex Rodriguez was one of the best shortstops in the game when he played for the Texas Rangers.

This is an interesting finding. I wish I knew more about how the study worked. Just kidding: give me what Mike Birch has to say on the matter. Mike Birch works at Lids, the hat store.

"I don't know what they're smoking down at Penn," said Yankees fan Mike Birch, 32.

Take that, complex statistical study. Birch is insightful and funny. One time he sold me a sweet lid with the Under Armor logo on it. "I don't know what they're smoking"! Classic. Classic Birch."

That's preposterous. I completely disagree. Jeter's a clutch player."

In one corner: "The method involved looking at every ball put in play in major league baseball from 2002 through 2005 and recorded where the shots went. Researchers then developed a probability model for the average fielder in each position and compared that with the performance of individual players to see who was better or worse than average."

In the other corner: Mike Birch. Watches three innings a week, occasionally while sober. Listens to Mike and the Mad Dog "except when they talk too smart and shit." Watches "Rome Is Burning" with the sound off. I.Q. of 175. Graduated from Cambridge University. Fields Medal winner. I know who I'm taking."

It's ridiculous," said fan Jay Ricker, 22. "Jeter is all-around awesome."

I agree," said Science, 424. "Fuck me, that is a good argument. I might as well not exist. That's it. I'm taking 500 Darvocets. Humans, welcome your new overlord, Jay Ricker, 22. He is all-around awesome.

"He's better than A-Rod any day. Character has a lot to do with it. He's out there for his teammates, not just himself. He does it for the good of the team. That's the kind of guy you want on the field."

Yes. You would never, ever want a guy scientifically proven to be dramatically better at fielding. That is not the kind of guy you want on a field. No fielders. Just team guys.

Ricker added that "A-Rod's only out for the money. For him it's not about baseball, it's just about banking."

Studies have shown that A-Rod is, incidentally, the league's best banker. A lot of people don't know this, but he was heavily recruited by Blackstone and Goldman coming out of high school. Jeter is genetically incapable of using an ATM; he in fact only understands those letters to be the acronym for ass to mouth.

Fans said Jeter's greatness goes beyond the numbers he produces on the field."He has intangible qualities that can't be measured with statistics," said East Village bar owner Kevin Hooshangi, 28.

Fans repeated a thing they had heard innumerable times on the TV and radio. "I can't change my mind about this," despaired Kevin Hooshangi. "My whole worldview depends on it being true. Jeter has intangibles. Jeter has intangibles. He does. He does!" Hooshangi continued to chant about Jeter, tears streaming down his face. "I know he does. He has them. Intangi...(unintelligible sobbing)..."

"He's the ultimate teammate. It doesn't matter what his percentages are when he's making big plays in big games. He's the one with four World Series rings."

Theory: Jeter wears rings on fielding hand, rendering fielding borderline impossible.

However, Frank Angelo, 50, gave A-Rod his due. "He's the best shortstop in the American League playing third base," Angelo said.

Then Angelo realized what city he lived in, and what newspaper he was talking to.

But Jeter as one of the worst?

"That's not true," Angelo said. "He's a good fielding shortstop." He even said he would keep Jeter at short. "Jeter's the captain, he was there before A-Rod," said Angelo.

By this logic, Jeter never should have taken over for Tony Fernandez. Fernandez was there before Jeter. Jeter should've had to slide over to third. But wait, Wade Boggs was at third. No go. Already there. But hey, should Boggs have even been there? No! He took over for Charlie Hayes. That never should have happened. NO ONE SHOULD HAVE CHANGED POSITIONS EVER. After the original roster of the 1903 New York Highlanders died, all baseball should have stopped being played forever. Thanks, Frank Angelo.

But as Yankee fan Brittnay Thompson, 32, said, it's about who's good in May, and who's good in October."In big situations A-Rod drops the ball, no pun intended," said Thompson.

Thompson added, "Are you awake, FJM guys? We're still out here. Morons, I mean. We totally outnumber you. We're loud, we're close-minded, and we dominate the media. We'll never stop being dumb about baseball. Never. We'll always keep the idiot ball rolling. Is that a pun? If it is, I didn't intend it."

posted by Junior # 8:09 PM

Mighty

The time between the double-whistle signifying the end of the Super Bowl and when pitchers and catchers report to spring training is one of those dead periods of the year. The only "sports" going on are "basketball" and "hockey." The other time (which admittedly is not as bad as this one) is after the NBA and NHL finals end, when the only sport being played is baseball. Those of you who watch Sportscenter on ESPN will remember this sad period from last year by these three words "Who's more now?" Hameivin yavin. Anyway, this dead time on the sports schedule provides us with an opportunity to predict and project the upcoming baseball season. Sooo... that's what I did! What did I do? Here's what I did:
As of now, there are four widely recognized, freely available lists of player projections on the internet: the CHONE projections (http://home.comcast.net/~briankaat/statsite.html), the Marcel projections (http://www.tangotiger.net/marcel/), the ZiPS projections (http://www.baseballthinkfactory.org/), and the Bill James projections (available on http://www.fangraphs.com/). As far as I know, these are the only projections out there that are based on statistical analysis and not just general estimation. I'm still unwilling to shell out the cash for a subscription to Baseball Prospectus, mostly because there's so much information available out there for free that it's just not worth it. Also, I read Joe Sheehan on Baseball Analysts anyway. The point is, I think I have enough trustworthy projections that I can survive without Baseball Prospectus's PECOTA projections.
Okay, so I downloaded the spreadsheets for each of those projections (Bill James is not available in spreadsheet format, so I won't be using his numbers much in my analysis. I'll mostly use him to provide credibility to the other projections), and had an awesome time fiddling around with them. I summed and averaged a bunch of the columns so that I could get league averages to which I could compare the Mets' numbers. I went to http://www.mlb.com/ and copied down the 40-man active New York Mets roster and found their relevant projected stats. Then, for each of the projections, I compared their stats to the league averages. In order to determine how good (or bad) each player was compared to the league averages, I only used rate stats. For pitchers I used ERA, WHIP, K/BB, K/9, BB/9, and HR/9 (CHONE projections also included Runs over Replacement, so I used that too), and for batters I used SB%, BA, OBP, SLG, and OPS (ZiPS included Runs Created projections, so I used that too).
If you've gotten this far, it means that you care a lot about baseball, or about my feelings on the Mets. Or you just like me a lot. Anyway, if you've gotten this far because you care a lot about baseball, I'm going to explain how to calculate all of those stats. This is important because I had to calculate the league averages on my own. What I mean is that I didn't need to calculate David Wright's Slugging Percentage because it was given to me in the projection, but I needed to sum the necessary components of the mathematical formula so that I could calculate the league average Slugging Percentage. Anyway, I will use Marcel's Johan Santana as my example for pitchers and David Wright as my example for batters:
ERA: (Earned Runs divided by Innings Pitched) times nine. Santana: (71 / 193) * 9 = 3.31
WHIP: (Walks + Runs) divided by Innings Pitched. Santana: (48 + 164) / 193 = 1.098
K/BB: Strikeouts divided by Walks. Santana: (198 / 48) = 4.125
K/9: (Strikeouts divided by Innings Pitched) times nine. Santana: (198 / 193) * 9 = 9.233
BB/9: (Walks divided by Innings Pitched) times nine. Santana: (48 / 193) * 9 = 2.238
HR/9: (Home Runs divided by Innings Pitched) times nine. Santana: (23 / 193) * 9 = 1.073
SB%: Stolen Bases divided by (Stolen Bases + Caught Stealing). Wright: 23 / (23 + 4) = .852
BA: Hits divided by At-Bats. Wright: 170 / 539 = .315
OBP: (Hits + Walks + Hit By Pitch) divided by (At-Bats + Walks + Hit By Pitch + Sacrifice Flies). Wright: (170 + 72 + 5) / (539 + 72 + 5 + 6) = .397
SLG: ((1 times Singles) + (2 times Doubles) + (3 times Triples) + (4 times Home Runs)) divided by At-Bats. Wright: ((1 * 106) + (2 * 38) + (3 * 2) + (4 * 24)) / 539 = .527
OPS: OBP + SLG. Wright: .397 + .527 = .924
Great! Now I'll use those numbers and compare them to the league average and come out with some new stats. I called these new stats "Plus" stats. What I did was I took David Wright's projected BA of .315 and divided it by the league projected BA of .270. Then I multiplied this by 100. (.315 / .270) * 100 = 117. I called this 117 David Wright's BA+. I did the same thing for each of the other stats (keep in mind that the OPS+ and ERA+ numbers I calculated are not the actual OPS+ and ERA+, which are real sabermetric stats that involve more complex calculations. These "Plus" stats are my own). I'll give one more example, because for some of the pitching stats it's better to be below the league average. I took Johan Santana's projected ERA of 3.31 and divided it by the league average ERA of 4.49, and subtracted the result from one. Then I multiplied that by 100 and added 100. ((1 - (3.31 / 4.49)) * 100) + 100 = 126, Santana's ERA+.
Okay, now I'm done explaining. Now I'll provide some notes on each player on the 40-man roster who I belive will get significant playing time, and then I'll give a little analysis on the team as a whole. This might be my longest post ever. Who's excited?: (Players I will not be mentioning: Adam Bostick, Willie Collazo, Ruddy Lugo, Carlos Muniz, Steven Register, Brian Stokes, Jason Vargas, Anderson Hernandez, and Angel Pagan)
Johan Santana:
Marcel: 193 IP, 3.31 ERA, 198 Ks, 1.098 WHIP, 126 ERA+, 122 WHIP+, 206 K/BB+, 139 K/9+, 133 BB/9+, 96 HR/9+.
CHONE: 212 IP, 2.50 ERA, 232 Ks, 0.948 WHIP, 60 RoR, 143 ERA+, 134 WHIP+, 298 K/BB+, 152 K/9+, 149 BB/9+, 113 HR/9+, 653 RoR+.
ZiPS: 234 IP, 3.04 ERA, 244 Ks, 1.017 WHIP, 134 ERA+, 131 WHIP+, 306 K/BB+, 156 K/9+, 145 BB/9+, 114 HR/9+.
Bill James: 216 IP, 3.00 ERA, 228 Ks, 1.069 WHIP.
Clearly Santana is an elite pitcher. Marcel is known for its conservative pitching projections, which were quite accurate last year. But even if Santana puts up those numbers, he would likely still be one of the top three pitchers in the NL. But if he manages to put up numbers like the other projections would suggest, then it will be one of the best pitching seasons we've seen in the NL in a long time. Jesus, his CHONE projections of 2.50 ERA, 0.948 WHIP and RoR+ of 653 would be absolutely absurd. I can't wait to watch him in person. As stated on The Hardball times website, "Oh, and if his price tag is really bothering any of you, think of it this way: in 2007 the Mets paid $23.25 million to Tom Glavine, Paul Lo Duca, and Shawn Green. In 2008, they'll be paying roughly the same amount to Santana, Brian Schneider, and Ryan Church."
Pedro Martinez:
Marcel: 87 IP, 3.93 ERA, 80 Ks, 1.23 WHIP, 112 ERA+, 113 WHIP+, 154 K/BB+, 125 K/9+, 119 BB/9+, 110 HR/9+.
CHONE: 63 IP, 3.14 ERA, 62 Ks, 1.095 WHIP, 11 RoR, 128 ERA+, 123 WHIP+, 197 K/BB+, 137 K/9+, 130 BB/9+, 111 HR/9+, 120 RoR+.
ZiPS: 150 IP, 3.24 ERA, 145 Ks, 1.100 WHIP, 129 ERA+, 126 WHIP+, 233 K/BB+, 145 K/9+, 132 BB/9+, 123 HR/9+.
Bill James: 125 IP, 2.88 ERA, 135 Ks, 1.024 WHIP.
Pedro is an interesting variable this season. He is clearly an effective pitcher when he's healthy, but he has been anything but healthy for most of the past two seasons. The Marcel and CHONE projections are very conservative with only 87 and 63 expected Innings Pitched. I was prepared to disregard the ZiPS projection because it varied so differently from the other two, but Bill James is also optimistic about Pedro remaining healthy enough to log 100+ innings. If the Mets can get 300+ innings between Pedro and Johan this season, this will be a scary rotation.
John Maine:
Marcel: 163 IP, 4.03 ERA, 141 Ks, 1.282 WHIP, 110 ERA+, 109 WHIP+, 112 K/BB+, 117 K/9+, 95 BB/9+, 88 HR/9+.
CHONE: 155 IP, 3.89 ERA, 124 Ks, 1.348 WHIP, 19 RoR, 111 ERA+, 106 WHIP+, 105 K/BB+, 111 K/9+, 93 BB/9+, 107 HR/9+, 207 RoR+.
ZiPS: 178 IP, 4.15 ERA, 148 Ks, 1.315 WHIP, 110 ERA+, 111 WHIP+, 130 K/BB+, 124 K/9+, 95 BB/9+, 107 HR/9+.
Bill James: 200 IP, 4.05 ERA, 169 Ks, 1.355 WHIP
All of these projections seem to think that the John Maine of the second half of last year is the real John Maine. His first half was outstanding, but he came back to Earth in the second half, allowing many more homers and walking more batters. Each projection has him walking more batters than average. He will still be an above-average pitcher, but we shouldn't expect anything spectacular out of him.
Oliver Perez:
Marcel: 160 IP, 4.50 ERA, 147 Ks, 1.438 WHIP, 100 ERA+, 98 WHIP+, 97 K/BB+, 124 K/9+, 71 BB/9+, 80 HR/9+.
CHONE: 148 IP, 4.14 ERA, 152 Ks, 1.196 WHIP, 14 RoR, 105 ERA+, 116 WHIP+, 174 K/BB+, 143 K/9+, 118 BB/9+, 81 HR/9+, 152 RoR+.
ZiPS: 176 IP, 4.04 ERA, 170 Ks, 1.324 WHIP, 112 ERA+, 110 WHIP+, 136 K/BB+, 144 K/9+, 85 BB/9+, 98 HR/9+.
Bill James: 190 IP, 4.69 ERA, 196 Ks, 1.453 WHIP
Wow, I am surprised. Here I thought that in his third season with the Mets under pitching coach Rick Peterson that Perez was primed for a breakout season. None of the projections agree with me, however. They all think he'll walk too many guys, give up too many home runs, and allow too many baserunners. I'm going to go against the grain a bit, and say that he will have an ERA below 4.00 and be better than any of these projections claim. That's Schmutter's Bold Preseason Prediction #1.
Mike Pelfrey:
Marcel: 95 IP, 4.83 ERA, 66 Ks, 1.505 WHIP, 92 ERA+, 93 WHIP+, 79 K/BB+, 94 K/9+, 80 BB/9+, 117 HR/9+.
CHONE: 119 IP, 4.01 ERA, 102 Ks, 1.403 WHIP, 9 RoR, 108 ERA+, 102 WHIP+, 106 K/BB+, 119 K/9+, 87 BB/9+, 119 HR/9+, 98 RoR+.
ZiPS: 150 IP, 4.86 ERA, 90 Ks, 1.487 WHIP, 94 ERA+, 99 WHP+, 87 K/BB+, 90 K/9+, 87 BB/9+, 123 HR/9+.
Bill James: 139 IP, 3.95 ERA, 118 Ks, 1.281 WHIP
There's quite a bit of disparity here among the projections; Marcel and ZiPS think Pelfrey will be below average and CHONE and James think he'll be above average. It's likely that Pelfrey will fall somewhere in between, which is just fine with me for a #5 starter. It's rare for teams to have a league-average fifth starter, az I'll take it. Pelfrey is still a relatively unknown quantity because of his limited major league experience. I'm interested in seeing how he does, especially with the knowledge that El Duque is there to steal innings from him. Speaking of which...
Orlando Hernandez:
Marcel: 148 IP, 4.50 ERA, 123 Ks, 1.358 WHIP, 100 ERA+, 103 WHIP+, 99 K/BB+, 113 K/9+, 87 BB/9+, 76 HR/9+.
CHONE: 141 IP, 3.77 ERA, 124 Ks, 1.298 WHIP, 19 RoR, 114 ERA+, 109 WHIP+, 124 K/BB+, 122 K/9+, 101 BB/9+, 109 HR/9+, 207 RoR+.
ZiPS: 142 IP, 4.25 ERA, 119 Ks, 1.331 WHIP, 107 ERA+, 110 WHIP+, 121 K/BB+, 125 K/9+, 87 BB/9+, 94 HR/9+.
Bill James: 139 IP, 3.95 ERA, 118 Ks, 1.281 WHIP.
You see, since nobody really knows how old this guy is it's hard to predict when he's going to start showing his age. Some of these guys think he's already starting to regress, and the projections reflect that. Either way, it looks like El Duque will be right around league-average or slightly above. The Mets will probably use him out of the bullpen a lot, either as a situational guy for an out or two at a time, or as a long-reliever.
Pedro Feliciano:
Marcel: 63 IP, 3.57 ERA, 53 Ks, 1.317 WHIP, 120 ERA+, 106 WHIP+, 106 K/BB+, 114 K/9+, 93 BB/9+, 131 HR/9+.
CHONE: 41 IP, 3.51 ERA, 35 Ks, 1.268 WHIP, 5 RoR, 120 ERA+, 111 WHIP+, 135 K/BB+, 119 K/9+, 112 BB/9+, 122 HR/9+, 54 RoR+.
ZiPS: 65 IP, 3.19 ERA, 58 Ks, 1.246 WHIP, 131 ERA+, 116 WHIP+, 134 K/BB+, 133 K/9+, 91 BB/9+, 145 HR/9+.
Bill James: 68 IP, 3.57 ERA, 61 Ks, 1.309 WHIP.
Feliciano will be one of the prime setup men for Billy Wagner. Willie Randolph will often bring him in to face a couple of tough lefties earlier on in the game, and also to pitch the seventh inning to get the ball to Aaron Heilman for the eighth. He is projected to have an ERA in the mid-threes and not allow terribly many base runners. He'll also strike out his share of batters. He should be a solid presence in the middle of that bullpen.
Aaron Heilman:
Marcel: 77 IP, 3.62 ERA, 61 Ks, 1.221 WHIP, 119 ERA+, 113 WHIP+, 127 K/BB+, 107 K/9+, 116 BB/9+, 121 HR/9+.
CHONE: 112 IP, 3.46 ERA, 95 Ks, 1.277 WHIP, 15 RoR, 121 ERA+, 111 WHIP+, 125 K/BB+, 118 K/9+, 106 BB/9+, 129 HR/9+, 163 RoR+.
ZiPS: 87 IP, 3.21 ERA, 73 Ks, 1.184 WHIP, 130 ERA+, 120 WHIP+, 156 K/BB+, 125 K/9+, 112 BB/9+, 142 HR/9+.
Bill James: 87 IP, 3.41 ERA, 72 Ks, 1.230 WHIP.
Again, I find this surprising. Heilman has had many problems in the past, so I find it amazing that they all project him to be so effective. They think he won't walk many and give up very few home runs. I hope they're right. With Heilman, Feliciano, Sanchez, and Wagner coming out of the bullpen, a lot of these games might be over after five or six innings. That would be a huge improvement over last season.
Duaner Sanchez:
Marcel: 31 IP, 3.77 ERA, 24 Ks, 1.323 WHIP, 116 ERA+, 106 WHIP+, 100 K/BB+, 105 K/9+, 95 BB/9+, 116 HR/9+.
CHONE: 69 IP, 3.65 ERA, 54 Ks, 1.319 WHIP, 8 RoR, 116 ERA+, 108 WHIP+, 108 K/BB+, 109 K/9+, 99 BB/9+, 130 HR/9+, 87 RoR+.
ZiPS: 69 IP, 3.52 ERA, 53 Ks, 1.304 WHIP, 123 ERA+, 112 WHIP+, 113 K/BB+, 115 K/9+, 90 BB/9+, 137 HR/9+.
Bill James: 61 IP, 3.98 ERA, 45 Ks, 1.361 WHIP.
Man did we miss him last season. If it weren't for that freak traffic accident we'd have had a pretty decent bullpen. The projections say that he'll be solid coming out of the bullpen. If he can keep his walks down and return to form, then this bullpen will be scary.
Jorge Sosa:
Marcel: 105 IP, 4.46 ERA, 69 Ks, 1.419 WHIP, 101 ERA+, 99 WHIP+, 86 K/BB+, 89 K/9+, 97 BB/9+, 84 HR/9+.
CHONE: 119 IP, 4.24 ERA, 81 Ks, 1.378 WHIP, 4 RoR, 103 ERA+, 104 WHIP+, 95 K/BB+, 95 K/9+, 100 BB/9+, 79 HR/9+, 44 RoR+.
ZiPS: 4.47 ERA, 77 Ks, 1.427 WHIP, 103 ERA+, 103 WHIP+, 89 K/BB+, 88 K/9+, 92 BB/9+, 101 HR/9+.
Bill James: 112 IP, 4.38 ERA, 75 Ks, 1.426 WHIP.
Sosa seems to be your typical long-relief / spot-starter guy. He might stack up as a decent #5 starter on another team. He was pretty effective last year in his handful of starts, and held his own out of the bullpen the rest of the season. I'd say he's a good guy to have around, but I don' think he'll quite reach his Innings Pitched projections unless the Mets are inundated with injuries.
Scott Schoeneweis:
Marcel: 60 IP, 4.65 ERA, 41 Ks, 1.450 WHIP, 96 ERA+, 97 WHIP+, 79 K/BB+, 93 K/9+, 83 BB/9+, 113 HR/9+.
CHONE: 65 IP, 4.57 ERA, 43 Kso 1.523 WHIP, 5 RoR, 95 ERA+, 94 WHIP+, 89 K/BB+, 92 K/9+, 97 BB/9+, 114 HR/9+, 54 RoR+.
ZiPS: 56 IP, 4.34 ERA, 39 Ks, 1.464 WHIP, 105 ERA+, 101 WHIP+, 80 K/BB+, 104 K/9+, 59 BB/9+, 136 HR/9+.
Bill James: 60 IP, 4.50 ERA, 36 Ks, 1.467 WHIP.
I think Scotty should be relegated to the role of a LOOGY (Lefty One Out GuY). By all projections he doesn't strike anybody out, walks his fair share, and doesn't give up many home runs. I say bring him in once a game to get out that one left-handed hitter. Any more action than that will come to no good.
Billy Wagner:
Marcel: 66 IP, 3.27 ERA, 67 Ks, 1.227 WHIP, 127 ERA+, 113 WHIP+, 152 K/BB+, 137 K/9+, 110 BB/9+, 108 HR/9+.
CHONE: 69 IP, 2.74 ERA, 80 Ks, 1.058 WHIP, 15 RoR, 137 ERA+, 126 WHIP+, 227 K/BB+, 161 K/9+, 129 BB/9+, 130 HR/9+, 163 RoR+.
ZiPS: 73 IP, 2.71 ERA, 84 Ks, 1.082 WHIP, 141 ERA+, 127 WHIP+, 221 K/BB+, 172 K/9+, 115 BB/9+, 121 HR/9+.
Bill James: 69 IP, 2.74 ERA, 82 Ks, 1.014 WHIP.
Wagner remains one of the best closers in the game. As my brother reminded me last weekend, Wagner has the highest K/9 ratio of any pitcher with 500 IP ever. Even as he gets older, Wagner continues to mow down opposing hitters in the ninth inning. Expect another productive season for Billy this year.
Ambiorix Burgos:
Marcel: 44 IP, 4.50 ERA, 40 Ks, 1.409 WHIP, 100 ERA+, 100 WHIP+, 105 K/BB+, 123 K/9+, 83 BB/9+, 81 HR/9+.
CHONE: 85 IP, 3.92 ERA, 90 Ks, 1.424 WHIP, 7 RoR, 110 ERA+, 101 WHIP+, 106 K/BB+, 147 K/9+, 60 BB/9+, 106 HR/9+, 76 RoR+.
ZiPS: 67 IP, 4.97 ERA, 67 Ks, 1.388 WHIP, 92 ERA+, 106 WHIP+, 138 K/BB+, 150 K/9+, 82 BB/9+, 50 HR/9+.
Bill James: 45 IP, 4.60 ERA, 46 Ks, 1.422 WHIP.
I really couldn't tell you how much of an impact Burgos will have this year. The Met bullpen is pretty well stocked, so unless there are a couple of injuries I don't see Burgos getting much of a shot. And it's really a shame, because he has a blazing fastball that goes about a million miles per hour, and we never really got a chance to see it. Maybe he'll be lights out in spring training.
Joe Smith:
Marcel: 47 IP, 4.02 ERA, 41 Ks, 1.426 WHIP, 110 ERA+, 99 WHIP+, 108 K/BB+, 118 K/9+, 91 BB/9+, 107 HR/9+.
ZiPS: 49 P, 3.66 ERA, 49 Ks, 1.322 WHIP, 120 ERA+, 110 WHIP+, 129 K/BB+, 124 K/9+, 95 BB/9+, 151 HR/9+.
I find it intriguing that a pitcher like Smith, who got to pitch a bunch of innings last year is absent from two of the projections, especially considering his favorable expectations from the remaining two. Both Marcel and ZiPS expect him to be above average. He's still young though; a few months or another season in the minors couldn't hurt.
Matt Wise:
Marcel: 56 IP, 4.18 ERA, 43 Ks, 1.393 WHIP, 107 ERA+, 101 WHIP+, 108 K/BB+, 104 K/9+, 103 BB/9+, 107 HR/9+.
CHONE: 56 IP, 4.02 ERA, 41 Ks, 1.339 WHIP, 6 RoR, 108 ERA+, 106 WHIP+, 116 K/BB+, 102 K/9+, 112 BB/9+, 100 HR/9+, 65 RoR+.
ZiPS: 54 IP, 4.00 ERA, 42 Ks, 1.315 WHIP, 113 ERA+, 111 WHIP+, 135 K/BB+, 116 K/9+, 106 BB/9+, 120 HR/9+.
Bill James: 40 IP, 3.83 ERA, 31 Ks, 1.275 WHIP.
Wise looks like he'll shape up to be a nice addition to the pen this season. Interesting how he's projected at average or above average in every single area. I'll admit that I never heard of him before I looked at the Mets active roster, but I look forward to hearing a lot of him this year.
Brian Schneider:
Marcel: .253 BA, 8 HR, 56 RBI, 2 SB, .326 OBP, .365 SLG, .692 OPS, 94 BA+, 97 OBP+, 86 SLG+, 91 OPS+.
CHONE: .251 BA, 8 HR, 42 RBI, 1 SB, .316 OBP, .365 SLG, .678 OPS, 96 BA+, 99 OBP+, 92 SLG+, 96 OPS+.
ZiPS: .238 BA, 5 HR, 43 RBI, 1 SB, .316 OBP, .318 SLG, .634 OPS, 3.5 RC/27, 94 BA+, 99 OBP+, 81 SLG+, 89 OPS+, 83 RC/27+.
Bill James: .249 BA, 7 HR, 51 RBI, 0 SB, .328 OBP, .362 SLG, .690 OPS, 4.06 RC/27.
Well, he probably won't hit much worse than Paul LoDuca, and he'll probably play a helluvalot better defense. I still think that Ramon Castro should get a lot of at-bats because he's clearly a better hitter. Schneider has been quite durable and he's not old, so I don't think Willie Randolph will hesitate to use Castro as a pinch hitter quite often. I mean usually managers like to keep one catcher in reserve because it's the hardest position on the field to replace. But in this case, I think Randolph can be more flexible.
Ramon Castro:
Marcel: .262 BA, 11 HR, 42 RBI, 2 SB, .330 OBP, .454 SLG, .784 OPS, 97 BA+, 98 OBP+, 107 SLG+, 103 OPS+.
CHONE: .242 BA, 5 HR, 18 RBI, 0 SB, .320 OBP, .396 SLG, .716 OPS, 92 BA+, 101 OBP+, 101 SLG+, 101 OPS+.
ZiPS: .250 BA, 6 HR, 21 RBI, 0 SB, .318 OBP, .434 SLG, .752 OPS, 4.6 RC/27, 98 BA+, 100 OBP+, 111 SLG+, 106 OPS+, 109 RC/27+.
Bill James: .252 BA, 16 HR, 50 RBI, 0 SB, .322 OBP, .469 SLG, .791 OPS, 5.15 RC/27.
Uch, he's such a better hitter than Schneider. I mean look at those Slugging Percentages! He's an extra-base-hit machine! Erm, that is when he makes contact... But I guess that's why he's not an every day player. I think if Schneider sucks it up or gets hurt, and Castro gets an opportunity to play every day, he'll really show us what he can do. Those over-100 OPS+s are very good for a catcher.
Carlos Delgado:
Marcel: .265 BA, 25 HR, 90 RBI, 3 SB, .349 OBP, .485 SLG, .833 OPS, 98 BA+, 103 OBP+, 114 SLG+, 109 OPS.
CHONE: .256 BA, 31 HR, 86 RBI, 0 SB, .350 OBP, .489 SLG, .839 OPS, 98 BA+, 110 OBP+, 125 SLG+, 118 OPS+.
ZiPS: .257 BA, 26 HR, 93 RBI, 1 SB, .349 OBP, .476 SLG, .825 OPS, 5.9 RC/27, 101 BA+, 110 OBP+, 122 SLG+, 116 OPS+, 140 RC/27+.
Bill James: .269 BA, 30 HR, 101 RBI, 2 SB, .373 OBP, .508 SLG, .881 OPS, 6.48 RC/27.
Heee's baaaaack! After a horrible 2007, all of these projections feel that Delgado will bounce back, especially Bill James. If he can truly return to form, then the middle of the Mets batting order, Church, Wright, Beltran, Delgado, and Alou should terrorize NL East pitching. A lot of the blame for the Mets' struggles last year can be placed on Delgado. He'll be eager to show that he still has the skills that made him one of the most fearsome sluggers in all of baseball for the last decade and a half.
Luis Castillo:
Marcel: .290 BA, 4 HR, 42 RBI, 17 SB, .357 OBP, .371 SLG, .728 OPS, 107 BA+, 106 OBP+, 87 SLG+, 95 OPS+, 96 SB+.
CHONE: .293 BA, 4 HR, 49 RBI, 13 SB, .364 OBP, .369 SLG, .733 OPS, 112 BA+, 114 OBP+, 94 SLG+, 103 OPS+, 94 SB+.
ZiPS: .294 BA, 3 HR, 44 RBI, 18 SB, .361 OBP, .359 SLG, .720 OPS, 4.7 RC/27, 116 BA+, 114 OBP+, 92 SLG+, 101 OPS+, 110 SB+, 112 RC/27+.
Bill James: .299 BA, 3 HR, 40 RBI, 20 SB, .370 OBP, .360 SLG, .730 OPS, 4.85 RC/27.
Castillo is an interesting hitter. He has absolutely no power, and will hit very few extra-base hits. Nontheless, he manages to walk a lot and makes contact, so he still gets on base a ton. The Mets have zero Second Base prospects, so they need stopgap until they can get somebody young, az Castillo looks like he'll be a fixture in this lineup for the next four seasons. I DON'T think he should bat second like he did last year; I think Ryan Church should hit second and Castillo should hit eighth.
Jose Reyes:
Marcel: .292 BA, 12 HR, 62 RBI, 59 SB, .351 OBP, .442 SLG, .793 OPS, 108 BA+, 104 OBP+, 104 SLG+, 104 OPS+, 109 SB+.
CHONE: .294 BA, 13 HR, 69 RBI, 50 SB, .342 OBP, .440 SLG, .782 OPS, 112 BA+, 108 OBP+, 112 SLG+, 110 OPS+, 117 SB+.
ZiPS: .285 BA, 15 HR, 70 RBI, 71 SB, .356 OBP, .444 SLG, .800 OPS, 5.7 RC/28, 112 BA, 112 OBP+, 113 SLG+, 113 OPS+, 119 SB+, 135 RC/27+.
Bill James: .289 BA, 14 HR, 67 RBI, 69 SB, .348 OBP, .442 SLG, .790 OPS, 5.57 RC/27.
I'm upset that all the projections took Reyes's second half dropoff last year so seriously. Before that he was being touted as maybe the best all around player in the game. Now nobody projects him to have an OPS higher than .800. Don't get me wrong, he's still an outstanding player, but he's no longer expected to be that elite player. I think he'll outperform all of these projections. Schmutter's Bold Preseason Prediction #2: Reyes's OPS is higher than .825 and he outperforms Jimmy Rollins.
David Wright:
Marcel: .315 BA, 24 HR, 98 RBI, 23 SB, .397 OBP, .527 SLG, .924 OPS, 117 BA+, 118 OBP+, 124 SLG+, 121 OPS+, 115 SB+.
CHONE: .301 BA, 26 HR, 96 RBI, 19 SB, .387 OBP, .518 SLG, .905 OPS, 115 BA+, 122 OBP+, 132 SLG+, 127 OPS+, 115 SB+.
ZiPS: .313 BA, 29 HR, 113 RBI, 23 SB, .405 OBP, .540 SLG, .945 OPS, 8.4 RC/27, 123 BA+, 127 OBP+, 138 SLG+, 133 OPS+, 125 SB+, 200 RC/27+.
Bill James: .318 BA, 31 HR, 111 RBI, 27 SB, .407 OBP, .554 SLG, .961 OPS, 8.52 RC/27.
What a stud! There are a lot of sabermetricians out there who think he's the best player in the NL, and I don't know if I can argue against it. Now that Miguel Cabrera is gone, the only other players in the NL that have a chance to be as good as Wright for the foreseeable future are Chase Utley, Ryan Howard, Hanley Ramirez, and Ryan Braun. Utley's and Howard's numbers get inflated by their ballpark, and Ramirez and Braun are brutal defensive players, so it's really down to Wright and Utley. Those two will be challenging each other for the MVP all season. And if Delgado and Beltran can provide him some support and protection in the lineup, it will only help Wright more.
Moises Alou:
Marcel: .300 BA, 16 HR, 59 RBI, 4 SB, .359 OBP, .493 SLG, .852 OPS, 111 BA+, 106 OBP+, 116 SLG+, 112 OPS+.
CHONE: .282 BA, 17 HR, 59 RBI, 3 SB, .349 OBP, .459 SLG, .808 OPS, 108 BA+, 110 OBP+, 117 SLG+, 114 OPS+.
ZiPS: .302 BA, 13 HR, 48 RBI, 2 SB, .365 OBP, .489 SLG, .854 OPS, 6.6 RC/27, 119 BA+, 115 OBP+, 125 SLG+, 120 OPS+, 157 RC/27+.
Bill James: .292 BA, 19 HR, 60 RBI, 3 SB, .360 OBP, .477 SLG, .837 OPS, 6.28 RC/27.
I don't care if he is 93 years old, dude can still rake. I mean nobody expects him to play more than 100 games or so, but he'll still manage to be productive when he's healthy. Guy's a professional hitter, period (comma period period). I'm not too crazy about the prospect of Endy Chavez taking over when Mo gets injured, but that's the risk you take. I hear we've got this guy named Martinez down in the minors...
Endy Chavez:
Marcel: .283 BA, 4 HR, 35 RBI, 8 SB, .333 OBP, .407 SLG, .740 OPS, 105 BA+, 99 OBP+, 96 SLG+, 97 OPS+.
CHONE: .277 BA, 4 HR, 38 RBI, 15 SB, .326 OBP, .379 SLG, .705 OPS, 106 BA+, 103 OBP+, 97 SLG+, 99 OPS+, 109 SB+.
ZiPS: .275 BA, 2 HR, 27 RBI, 7 SB, .319 OBP, .379 SLG, .698 OPS, 4.1 RC/27, 108 BA+, 100 OBP+, 97 SLG+, 98 OPS+, 97 RC/27+.
Bill James: .273 BA, 2 HR, 19 RBI, 7 SB, .318 OBP, .368 SLG, .696 OPS, 4.19 RC/27.
Endy's a nice little stopgap for when Moises Alou inevitably goes on the disabled list. He filled in nicely a couple of years ago, and he will always have a special place in Mets fans' hearts for stealing a home run from Scott Rolen in game seven of the 2006 NLCS. And everyone likes to pull for the little guy. He has absolutely no power, but he always plays hard and will surprise us with the occasional home run. He's an outstanding defensive outfielder and will come in late in many games as a defensive replacement to spare Alou's rickety knees any excess punishment. All in all he's not a bad guy to have around.
Carlos Beltran:
Marcel: .271 BA, 26 HR, 92 RBI, 18 SB, .355 OBP, .498 SLG, .853 OPS, 100 BA+, 105 OBP+, 117 SLG+, 112 OPS+, 116 SB+.
CHONE: .271 BA, 28 HR, 87 RBI, 23 SB, .373 OBP, .496 SLG, .869 OPS, 103 BA+, 117 OBP+, 127 SLG+, 122 OPS+, 124 SB+.
ZiPS: .261 BA, 26 HR, 93 RBI, 15 SB, .347 OBP, .476 SLG, .823 OPS, 5.9 RC/27, 103 BA+, 109 OBP+, 121 SLG+, 116 OPS+, 134 SB+, 140 RC/27+.
Bill James: .275 BA, 32 HR, 106 RBI, 23 SB, .364 OBP, .515 SLG, .879 OPS, 6.73 RC/27.
I feel like Beltran is the forgotten man in this Mets lineup (as much as a man making $119 million can be forgotten); he's just so quiet and unobtrusive. Everyone marvels at Wright's youth, and Reyes's excitement, and Delgado's smelliness from last year, but Beltran really proves his worth day after day. He plays an excellent center field, steals bases, and hits for power. I think the Marcel and ZiPS projections are a bit low, and James might be a bit high, but if Carlos can put up an OPS of .850 and hit 30 home runs, we'll be very happy.
Damion Easley:
Marcel: .250 BA, 11 HR, 38 RBI, 3 SB, .325 OBP, .414 SLG, .740 OPS, 93 BA+, 96 OBP+, 97 SLG+, 97 OPS+.
CHONE: .249 BA, 6 HR, 25 RBI, 2 SB, .329 OBP, .402 SLG, .731 OPS, 95 BA+, 103 OBP+, 103 SLG+, 103 OPS+, 97 SB+.
ZiPS: .242 BA, 6 HR, 22 RBI, 1 SB, .321 OBP, .392 SLG, .713 OPS, 4.3 RC/27, 95 BA+, 101 OBP+, 100 SLG+, 100 OPS+, 102 RC/27+.
Bill James: .235 BA, 6 HR, 20 RBI, 1 SB, .326 OBP, .395 SLG, .721 OPS, 3.95 RC/27.
Ruben Gotay:
Marcel: .272 BA, 7 HR, 34 RBI, 4 SB, .337 OBP, .415 SLG, .752 OPS, 101 BA+, 100 OBP+, 98 SLG+, 98 OPS+.
CHONE: .251 BA, 8 HR, 48 RBI, 6 SB, .315 OBP, .373 SLG, .688 OPS, 96 BA+, 99 OBP+, 95 SLG+, 97 OPS+.
ZiPS: .245 BA, 7 HR, 41 RBI, 4 SB, .304 OBP, .361 SLG, .665 OPS, 3.6 RC/27, 96 BA+, 96 OBP+, 92 SLG+, 94 OPS+, 86 RC/27+.
Bill James: .258 BA, 3 HR, 16 RBI, 2 SB, .321 OBP, .406 SLG, .727 OPS, 4.33 RC/27.
Marlon Anderson:
Marcel: .278 BA, 8 HR, 36 RBI, 6 SB, .335 OBP, .443 SLG, .778 OPS, 103BA+, 99 OBP+, 104 SLG+, 102 OPS+.
CHONE: .267 BA, 9 HR, 34 RBI, 5 SB, .322 OBP, .419 SLG, .741 OPS, 102 BA+, 101 OBP+, 107 SLG+, 104 OPS+.
ZiPS: .257 BA, 6 HR, 29 RBI, 4 SB, .319 OBP, .410 SLG, .729 OPS, 4.4 RC/27, 101 BA+, 100 OBP+, 104 SLG+, 103 OPS+, 105 RC/27+.
Bill James: .262 BA, 3 HR, 15 RBI, 3 SB, .323 OBP, .402 SLG, .725 OPS, 4.57 RC/27.
Easley, Gotay, and Anderson are going to be the Mets top utility guys. They can play the infield and the outfield, and they can be used to benefit from the platoon advantage. They'll be good for a little pop off the bench, and will fill in nicely when Castillo, Delgado, Beltran, and Church need breaks or get injured. This is really shaping up to be be a solid bench. I should do some research on play from non-starters from recent successful teams.
Ryan Church:
Marcel: .274 BA, 15 HR, 65 RBI, 6 SB, .350 OBP, .465 SLG, .815 OPS, 102 BA+, 104 OBP+, 109 SLG+, 107 OPS+.
CHONE: .244 BA, 13 HR, 45 RBI, 5 SB, .324 OBP, .414 SLG, .738 OPS, 93 BA+, 102 OBP+, 106 SLG+, 104 OPS.
ZiPS: .272 BA, 17 HR, 63 RBI, 3 SB, .351 OBP, .469 SLG, .820 OPS, 5.7 RC/27, 107 BA+, 110 OBP+, 120 SLG+, 116 OPS+, 135 RC/27+.
Bill James: .273 BA, 15 HR, 66 RBI, 4 SB, .353 OBP, .463 SLG, .816 OPS, 5.71 RC/27.
For my in-depth Ryan Church analysis, see my post from November 20th, 2007, entitled "Church v. Hunter."
Mets Pitching Totals:
Marcel: 4.20 ERA, 1.345 WHIP, 106 ERA+, 104 WHIP+, 109 K/BB+, 113 K/9+, 103 BB/9+, 103 HR/9+.
CHONE: 3.84 ERA, 1.303 WHIP, 112 ERA+, 109 WHIP+, 124 K/BB+, 118 K/9+, 105 BB/9+, 106 HR/9+, 136 RoR+.
ZiPS: 4.25 ERA, 1.342 WHIP, 108 ERA+, 109 WHIP+, 125 K/BB+, 117 K/9+, 98 BB/9+, 110 HR/9+.
Bill James: 3.83 ERA, 1.281 WHIP.
By all accounts, this staff will match up with the best in the league. It's clearly the best staff in the NL East, and it will be interesting to see how it matches up with the staffs in the NL West, namely the staffs of the Arizona Diamondbacks and the San Diego Padres. Either way, what was considered a weakness in the team last season is now a strength, especially if the pitchers can stay healthy.
Mets Hitting Totals:
Marcel: .278 BA, .348 OBP, .446 SLG, .793 OPS, 103 BA+, 103 OBP+, 105 SLG+, 104 OPS+.
CHONE: .269 BA, .338 OBP, .419 SLG, .757 OPS, 103 BA+, 106 OBP+, 107 SLG+, 107 OPS+.
ZiPS: .251 BA, .341 OBP, .392 SLG, .733 OPS, 99 BA+, 107 OBP+, 100 SLG+, 103 OPS+, 119 RC/27+.
Bill James: .279 BA, .325 OBP, .453 SLG, .778 OPS, 5.31 RC/27.
I'm going to ignore the ZiPS projection because it has the most players on it. It gives projections for many players that probably will not see any major league plate appearances this year. The other projections show that the Mets' lineup will be above average all around. Again, they need to get good production out of Carlos Delgado and they need to stay healthy, but I guess I can say that about any team. Look for the Mets to go through some cold stretches, but the pitching should hold up its end of the bargain and minimize these cold stretches.
Final Bold Preseason Prediction: The Mets won 88 games last year, and that included a horrible month of September. I predict that the Mets will win 96 games and lose 66 games and win the NL East. Beyond that, who can say? The playoffs are a crapshoot anyway, right?

Blocking the Box

Just a heads up: the big Mets post is on the way. I'm still doing research and some analysis, so hopefully it'll be thorough and robust.

Anyway, an incident on the road last night reminds me of another driving story. First let's recap yesterday's events:

I was intending to go home after work, but I hate taking public transportation between the East Side and the Heights, az I usually just go back to my apartment, change, and then drive to the East Side. I had a lot of dirty clothes (comes with the territory when you have to wear a suit to work every day), so I needed to make a quick cleaners run. Az I tossed my clothes into the car and drove up to Monarch on Ft. Washington and 187th Street. I dropped off all the jazz and then decided to drive south on Ft. Wash to 178th Street where I would make a left and head down to Amsterdam. I heard on the radio that there was police activity on the George Washington Bridge, so I figured there might be a little congestion getting past the entrance on 179th Street. Hah! "A little congestion!" Famous last words right? Well, there wouldn't have been nearly as much congestion if people weren't so stupid. The people in the cars driving westwards on 179th Street towards the bridge all assumed that since the traffic on the bridge was moving so slowly, they had the right of way over the cars driving north and south. So they mercilessly and selfishly blocked the box preventing cars from getting by. It would have been fine if it were just one jerk; it happens. But EVERY SINGLE CAR did the same thing. I literally waited at the same green light three times because zero cars could get by. And by the time the cars moved they had a green light again and the cars behind got caught in the box again. It's a vicious cycle; "oh, that guy is blocking the street because he wanted to get through the light before it changed, so I can do it too." It's like the traffic equivalent of ma'aras ayin. It was a freakin' disaster. On the bright side, since there were so few cars getting across the bridge in either direction there was almost no traffic on the Harlem River Drive southbound, az I actually ended up getting home earlier than I normally would. Funny how things work out sometimes.

Anyway, that reminded me of another fun-filled driving event in the Heights. Remember when they started using those extendo-accordion-type city buses? Well, a couple of years ago I was returning to the city from a wedding? An engagement party? No nafka mina there. Anyway, one of my passengers requested to be let off at the subway station on 181st Street and St. Nicholas Avenue. No problem. Az I get off the bridge and head east to St. Nick, and then make a left to go north. Because of traffic on 181st Street, it took literally 20 minutes to drive two blocks. I mean my passenger got out after like five, but I was still caught. And here was the problem: 181st is SUPPOSED to be a big street. There are SUPPOSED to be two lanes, but everyone decides that they can double park, az there's really only one lane open. This makes it very difficult for buses (which travel on 181st because, again, it's SUPPOSED to be a big street) to get by, and since they're stopping anyway to drop off/pick up new travelers anyway, things don't move very quickly over there. So there I am, sitting on St. Nick between 180th and 181st and when the light turns green none of the cars going north can get by because the buttocks of one of the extendo-accordion-type buses is blocking us. Okay, I can understand. It took two lights, but the bus finally moved. But just as our light was about to turn green, ANOTHER extendo-accordion-type bus did EXACTLY the same thing as the one in front of it. And nothing is more infuriating than two people doing the same dumb thing twice in a row. I mean don't get me wrong; I do stupid things all the time, but I never make the same mistake twice, and certainly not in rapid succession. Just because you are a bus, and you provide a valuable service to the citizens of the city, it does not mean that you are allowed to cause gridlock.

Okay, that's my driving rant of the day. Stay tuned for the big baseball post. I know you're all excited.

So... Confused...

I mentioned in my earlier post that I read between 20 and 25 baseball blogs a day. Some of my favorite writers are Joe Sheehen of baseballprospectus.com and baseballanalysts.com, Rich Lederer of baseballanalysts.com, everyone on firejoemorgan.com, and Rob Neyer and Keith Law on ESPN. Law also has his own blog called "The Dish," which also includes his various ramblings on things unrelated to sports, mostly cooking. Az I was browsing The Dish this afternoon, and I noticed that one of the labels he uses is "Grammar," so I clicked on it, and four posts showed up. In one of them he makes fun of the New York Times copy-editors for missing something:

From the times: "...And the Giants, boosted by a 7-1 road record and the knowledge that none of the five top seeds are currently on even a two-game winning streak, see reason to view their postseason outlook optimistically."
Law: “None” takes a singular verb - none of the top five seeds IS currently on a two-game winning streak. So that’s bad, but not uncommon. What’s awful is that some copyeditor at the Times liked that sentence and used it for a pull quote, repeating the grammatical error...

Schmutter: Now, I'm pretty sure that using "none" with a singular verb is technically correct because the word "none" is an archaic contraction of "no one," which would definitely take a singular verb. However, I'm positive that these days the word "none" should ALWAYS take a plural verb. How can I respect a writer who corrects grammar incorrectly? I will have to do some research on that, but again, I'm positive I'm right.

Meanwhile in another of his grammar posts, he comes up with this gem:

Newsday: It’s generation-spanning plot combines one of the season’s favorite themes (the guileful acts of children) with one of its trendiest (turmoil in Afghanistan). And it premieres on the heels of nettlesome publicity involving stage-parent outrage and threats of bodily harm targeted at its youngest stars. … Like it’s author, “The Kite Runner’s” morose protagonist is the son of a Kabul diplomat who relocates to California as the Russians begin their incursions into Afghanistan.

Law: I deleted one paragraph in the middle, but in the span of five sentences, Jan Stuart manages to use the correct “its” twice and the incorrect one twice, even though every instance called for the same word (”its” without its apostrophe). This has to be one of the easiest grammatical rules to remember, and I see it screwed up all the freaking time. All Stuart had to do was remember Strong Bad’s helpful song:
If you want it to be possessive, it’s just “I-T-S.” But, if it’s supposed to be a contraction then it’s “I-T-apostrophe-S,” … scalawag.

Yes, Law just quoted Strong Bad. I don't know what to do! First he performs a MAJOR grammatical faux-pas, but then he quotes the King of Grammar Corrections himself! It's like that Halloween costume commentary by Strong Bad where he shows a picture of an attractive girl dressed up as Homestar. Hilarity ensues:

STRONG BAD: Dar, dar dar dar dar DA-A!! So confused... what to think?? Hot Homestar?!? My brain is splitting in half!
HOMESTAR RUNNER: Oh, hey Strong Bad!
STRONG BAD: Daa! You get outta here!
HOMESTAR RUNNER: Whoa, you sound tense. Do you want me to give you, like, a back rub or anything?
STRONG BAD: Uh... yes! No! I... don't know! Next picture, next picture!!
HOMESTAR RUNNER: I think this is the last one, sweetie.
STRONG BAD: WAAAAA!! {trails off as though he's running away}
HOMESTAR RUNNER: I should probably stop calling everybody "sweetie".

Okay, enough for today, sweetie.

To Be a Writer

Here I sit, humbly, at my bizarre looking keyboard and U.S. Trust Company owned CPU and CRT monitor, attempting to transmit my thoughts on an amazing week of sports. Those of you who know me would describe me as a generally laid back fellow who likes sports (especially baseball), mathematics, and grammar, and who occasionally has the audacity to put his ideas down in print. I read a lot. Whether it's a few stolen minutes of Torah on the subway, a dozen pages of the latest fantasy book, or one of 20-25 sports blogs that can be found in my internet bookmarks, there are almost always some words somewhere that are being seen by my eyes and interpreted by my brain. When one is exposed to so many authors on a daily basis, one tends to notice the varying styles of said writers. I find that when I write, I usually do so in a similar manner to the one in which I speak. Most of the good sports writers out there write the same way. Granted, these people can't be blamed because a statistical analysis generally does not provide one with much opportunity for linguistic creativity. On Friday, I read a post on baseballanalysts.com that honestly gave me chills. I don't know how he did it, but the writer had me totally engrossed in his short story. Maybe it was the words he used; his verbs, adjectives, and adverbs were all so powerful. I'm going to paste some of his sentences here in the hopes that I might soak in some of his expertise. His name is Russ McQueen, and here is how he writes:

-The new guy took the mound and things changed. An air of expectancy took hold, and the place got quiet. Sounds were reduced only to those necessary. It felt like a premonition of something terrible, or terribly great, like right before a big fish takes your lure and you know in your gut he's about to hit.

The first batter took his stance. Fast ball, strike one called. Not bad, right down at the knees and on the inside corner. With considerable zip. Not the one he wanted to hit, I thought. But then the new guy threw something I had never seen before. It was gorgeous, and it was terrible, and I wasn't sure I had seen it correctly. Fast like a heater, but in front of the plate it made a wicked dive, down and a little bit away from the batter, who buckled at the knees. Strike two called. Hearts beat faster – I know mine did.

"Throw it again," I prayed.

He did, only this time the batter mustered up a feeble excuse for a swing and made his retreat back to the bench, where he joined other mortals to watch the continuing carnage.

Five more up, five more down. One guy grounded out, but everyone else fell to that monstrous, terrifying curve ball.

I've seen the Grand Canyon and the Grand Tetons. I've walked into Yankee Stadium and Fenway Park and Wrigley Field on a Sunday afternoon. I've been to dozens of countries all over the world and seen it all. But I have never seen anything more riveting than that curve ball on that one cool, gray Saturday morning.

I have always remembered that awesome pitch as a big hammer the new guy swung and pounded batters with. It certainly went way beyond any fair deal I ever witnessed. To say "he threw a curve" was to understate the terror of the act. However ordinary the new guy looked to begin with, to me he had become substantially taller, heavier, and more dangerous.

For a moment there was no one sitting between me and Mr. Roebuck. "That's some kind of a curve ball," I managed, trying to make it sound as casual as I could so Mr. Roebuck wouldn't think I was overly impressed.

"Son, that's a pure yellow hammer," replied Roebuck. "And that is Bert Blyleven."
end

That kind of writing makes my heart beat slightly faster even now, after reading it three or four times. Apparently I need to use words like "pray" and "terrible" and "riveting" and "carnage" and "monstrous."

Meanwhile, there are a few other things I've read with which I'd like to bore you for a little while. Here is an excerpt from the firejoemorgan.com post about an article by Bill Plaschke. Plaschke's words are in bold and Ken Tremendous's are not:

-[Unitas] was football's Babe Ruth, and Bart Starr was its Lou Gehrig, and Sammy Baugh was its Ty Cobb, and Joe Montana was its Joe DiMaggio.

Dan Fouts was its George Sisler. Rich Gannon was its Paul Molitor. Rob Johnson was its George Kendrick. Jim Zorn was its Mark Loretta. Al Toon was its Wil Cordero. Marc Edwards was its La Marr Hoyt. Joe DeLamielleure was its Rick Rhoden. And, most obviously of all, Billy Joe DuPree was its Kevin Tapani. That's just a no-brainer.

Tom Brady is football's, well, um, Alex Rodriguez....right. He's the best player in the game.

Except that Alex Rodriguez, as boneheads like you are fond of pointing out, has never won a championship. So defend this statement, please.
end

The reasons I pasted this excerpt are a) because it's freakin' hilarious, and b) when I sent it to my brother, he responded by saying that I'm the Paul Assenmacher of bloggers. I still maintain that I'm the Juan Berenguer of bloggers, but that's neither here nor there.

I imagine there are two small items that my loyal readers (hello, hey, what's cookin'?, how's it shakin'? 'Sup, my man? There, now I've greeted all five of you) are expecting me to address. I will do so in chronological order. Bear in mind that I won't be saying much because most of the stuff I would say has already been said.

On Tuesday/Friday, the New York Metropolitans traded for Johan Santana, the best pitcher in all the known universe. It was a great deal; I'm very excited; he's going to make a huge difference. I woke up on Saturday morning to an argument between two of my roommates. I listened for a while, but I didn't actually join the discussion until I heard one of them say "how much of a difference can he make?" I was going to dive into a Win Shares analysis, but my brain wasn't entirely functioning yet. The point is, if Santana were on the Mets last year they would have made the playoffs. Period. It's as simple as that. Yes, the Mets are paying him an exorbitant amount of coin, but think about it for a second. I'm too lazy to do the actual math right now, but I've read that the average team pays between $4 and $5 million per win. If Johan Santana is worth five more wins over the course of the season than the average pitcher, then paying him $22 to $23 million is not really that ridiculous. If a slightly above average pitcher like Barry Zito can command $18 million a year for seven years, then $23 million for the best pitcher in existence is really a bargain. Okay, enough. If you want to read more analysis on the trade, read Rob Neyer's blog on ESPN, or aarongleeman.com, or beyondtheboxscore.com, or thehardballtimes.com. They're all way way better than me.

The New York Giants won the Super Bowl yesterday. I remember after the Super Bowl last year, I wrote that I can't wait for the Jets to play in one. Sitting with my friends in front of the TV yesterday was a riveting experience. The tension in the room was palpable. I'm not a Giants fan, but I was nervous all game too. I can only fathom how the Giants fans must have been feeling. I really don't know what else to say. I'm glad the Giants won; I'm glad the Patriots lost; I want the Jets to win. That's it and that's all.

I'm sure I'll have a lot more to say about Johan Santana and the Mets in the coming weeks. I'll mix in a few non-sports posts too. Peace.

It's All About the Timing

You ever feel like the entire day would go differently if just one thing had gone your way? I'm not saying that this is one of those days; I'm just tossing it out there.

So I drove to the East Side this morning, and here's why. Usually when I want to go home for dinner I just go back to my apartment after work and then drive home. That way I don't need to get up half an hour early. But this time I need to run an errand that just happens to be on my way to the East Side from work. Az everyone knows you need to leave an extra few minutes to account for traffic, az I left around 7:45 from the Heights. Traffic traffic traffic... yada yada yada... and I get off the FDR southbound at 96th Street. Everyone knows that it's a horrible intersection over there because you have traffic going in like 19 directions:

1. Southbound going through to York Avenue.
2. Southbound making a right onto 97th Street.
3. Southbound making a right onto 96th Street.
4. 96th Street making a right entering southbound.
5. 96th Street going straight entering northbound.
6. Northbound going straight onto 96th Street.
7. Northbound making a left towards York Avenue.

Anyway, they have a pretty clever traffic light sequence, but it's still a ridiculous place to be. Az they had a couple of traffic cops there directing cars this morning, and as my light turned green, there was one car making a left towards York Avenue, which prompted the cop to hold us up at the green light for about two seconds. Let's just say I was the very first car that missed the light. If the cop hadn't held us up for those two seconds I would have been gone.

Then, somehow, I managed to get into traffic on East End Avenue of all places! I mean, I guess it makes sense because there's a southbound FDR Drive entrance on 79th Street, but there's NEVER traffic on East End. Not to sound pompous or anything, but when you live on Park Avenue you're paying for the privelege of relative peace and quiet and no buses. When you live on East End Avenue, you're paying for the privelege of relative peace and quiet, no buses, and no traffic (and the hassle of there being no subways around. That's why East End isn't Park Avenue). Whatever.

So I dropped in on the fam for a couple of minutes, then I headed out to go to work. The buses on 79th Street were packed to capacity as usual, az I just walked up to Lexington Avenue over to the 6 train. I took the 6 down two stops to 59th Street, and here's where the real insanity occurs. There's about 20-25 steps that go down to the N, R, W platform on 59th Street, and there were literally 1000 people on those steps going up or down. I have never in my life seen such pedestrian traffic anywhere. I was actually inching my way towards the steps crammed among the throngs of subway riders. From the time I stepped off the 6 train, it must have taken me ten minutes to travel the 50 feet to the steps and then down them. Most of the people were courteous, although I did hear these two gems:

a) There was one "lane" of downward traffic on the steps that was on the left side, and a man going up bumped into a woman going down, az she says "excuse me."
The man replies "You people shouldn't be on this f**king side!"
To which she responds "This is nobody's fault. Let's all try to be more courteous."

b) One woman near me got pressed up against another woman, and the one in back clearly copped a feel, so the one in front says "please be a girl, please be a girl..." She was visibly relieved when she saw that it was a girl.

Anyway, I was only a few minutes late to work, az it all worked out in the end.

Express Check-Out

My brother requested the use of my car this weekend, az I got up early and drove to the East Side and left the car by my parents' apartment. As I usually do when I go to work from home, I took the six train down to 59th street, and then took the N or R, or whatever yellow train stops there to 49th street. When you get out of that station, you are standing at the north end of Times Square. As everyone knows, the billboards there are absolutely huge, and I saw something that was definitely post-worthy.

The problem was that I wasn't going to write up a post just for that, so this morning I planned to do a little bit of research to explain why the Mets should trade for Erik Bedard instead of Johan Santana. I must admit that I let my emotions get the best of me since Bedard starred on my second place fantasy team this year. It turns out that most of the support I expected to find doesn't actually exist. Erik Bedard is actually a few days OLDER than Santana, not a few years younger as I suspected. Santana's K/BB ratio is actually still way way better than Bedard's. The point is, the only thing Bedard has going for him is that he's logged far fewer innings on that left arm of his than Santana has. I just think Bedard is the sexier, less well-known pick in this situation, and he will probably be cheaper in the long run. Even so, I wasn't going to waste a lot of space posting up research that doesn't support my claim, az I decided to just put up some of those thoughts before moving onto the Pastrami of the hot open sandwich that is "Express Check-out."

Anyway, the point of the post is that the billboard I sawr (I've been using that a lot recently. You know like when a 6 year old kid tells you he sawr something?) was an ad for a new show on TBS called "10 Items or Less." I couldn't help but giggle at such a blatant disregard for basic grammar (Ohmygod, it's supposed to be "10 Items or Fewer." Pay attention people). But then I got to thinking, you see those signs by the check out counter at the supermarket all the time, right? English is an always evolving language containing all manner of idiomatic expressions and other exceptions to the rules. Could it be that "10 items or fewer" should be catalogued as an idiom, thereby rendering it grammatically correct? I mean, I definitely say things that are technically not correct, like "what are you up to?" or "this is the sort of nonsense I won't put up with." (Shoutout to Church Dub for that one). I mean people will look at me like I'm a raving lunatic (even moreso than they already do) if I start saying things like "up to what are you?" or "this is the sort of nonsense up with which I will not put." And worse, they'll probably think I'm some sort of maniacal Star Wars groupie. Anyway, the point is you shouldn't be embarrassed to speak the way you want to speak, especially around me. I might correct your grammar from time to time, but that's just my little way of saying I like you and I'm comfortable enough around you to bust your chops a little bit.

A Thursday Quickie

It suddenly occurred to me that after being swamped with work for the last three point five days, I'm actually free right now (I recently decided that I'm not going to use decimals anymore, unless I absolutely must. They're bulky and hard to use. I'm only going to be using fractions from now on. And no messing around with mixed numbers, you tricksters! Anyway, as I was saying, it suddenly occurred to me that after being swamped with work for the last seven-halves days, I'm actually free right now). Seriously, I have nothing to do, az in order to kill time for the last hour of the day, I looked through some of my old posts. My ninth post from August 31st, 2006 was a good one. It is entitled "Away Messages," if anyone is interested in reading it. The point is I mention that I made "a little SNAFU earlier with pronoun/antecedent agreement," which I didn't want to go back and fix. My excuse for that was "I just don't feel like going back to fix it. That's just my little way of sticking it to the man. Power to the people." You might be able to tell where I'm going with this. Basically, this episode reminds me of that commercial, which shows Sprint's CEO telling his assistant that he's now getting these ridiculous rates on his Sprint service. He says "that's just my little way of sticking it to the man." The rest of the commercial goes like this:

Assistant: But, you are the man, sir.
CEO: I know.
Assistant: So you're sticking it to yourself?
CEO: Maybe.

Anyway, it occurred to me while I was reading that post that I AM the man, az I was sticking it to myself. Just to set the record straight, I'm going to post the old sentence and then correct it, all for your viewing, reading, and grammatical pleasure. (Just so you know, the antecedent of the pronoun is "him or her")

Old sentence: "It could be that I really don't like talking on the phone and would prefer to speak in person, in which case I'd be asking for their whereabouts just on the off chance that they're in the neighborhood."

Corrected sentence: "It could be that I really don't like talking on the phone and would prefer to speak in person, in which case I'd be asking for his or her whereabouts just on the off chance that he or she is in the neigborhood."

Okay, so it's a little bit tedious, but at least it's robust. Now I can sleep easier. Easierly. More easily.

A Walk Down the Memory Baseline

Get it? It's like a walk down memory lane except I'm replacing "memory lane" with "memory baseline." It's a play on words. I'm merely using a different kind of place on which one might walk. Sigh...nobody understands me.

Anyway, I went to baseball-reference.com yesterday to look at their stat of the day blog, and all of a sudden my brain froze. Remember the Seinfeld bit from his live on Broadway special? I'm gonna botch this because I can't find some of the exact quotes anywhere, but it goes something like this:

"First ten years of my life I think the only clear thought that I had was 'Get candy!' Everything else was just an obstacle in the way of the candy. So when I first heard about Halloween my brain couldn't process the information. You're like, 'What is this? What did you say? Someone's giving out candy? Who's giving out candy? EVERYONE WE KNOW is just giving out candy? I gotta be a part of this! Take me with you! I'll do anything they want. . . I can wear that. I'll wear anything I have to wear. I'll do anything I have to do to get the candy from those fools who are so stupidly giving it away.'"

Anyway, that basically describes my reaction yesterday when I discovered that baseball-reference play index is entirely free until Friday. For those of you not in the know, the baseball-reference play index is an invaluable tool for looking up baseball statistics. For example, if you wanted to find out which players have ever batted .320, hit 25 HR, walked 100 times, and stolen 50 bases in the same season, you would just type those filters into the system, and the play index would produce the answers (there's only one, Joe Morgan in 1976). Usually the system will output only the top hit in the search and then skip the next 135 or so. Only paid subscribers have access to all that the play index has to offer, but this week it's all free. Az I was getting ready to look up all sorts of ridiculous s**t when my brain refused to behave itself. There I am, like a kid in a candy store, and there's just too much from which to choose. So this morning I decided to just fiddle around with the play index figuring that some ideas might pop into my head. Az I put in the search parameters that would sort every Mets batter from each season starting in 1990 by games played. So I'm browsing the Mets teams from each of those seasons, and something caught my eye in 1999, and that's where the idea for this post begins.

Remember John Olerud? He was well known for his sugary sweet lefty swing and his propensity for wearing a batting helmet while playing 1st base because his mother asked him to do so. He played for the better part of a decade and a half for the Toronto Blue Jays, New York Mets, and Seattle Mariners, and finished his career with very short stints with the Yankees and Red Sox. I remember him for his three seasons with the Mets in the late 1990s and for one big moment in the playoffs in 1999. I remember it clearly because the Mets started their National League Divisional Series on the road in Arizona against the Diamondbacks, so the game started at around 11:00 EST. Since it was past my bed time I held my radio under the covers and listened to the game until I fell asleep. I remember hearing Olerud hit a home run against Diamondbacks ace Randy Johnson, a feat made even more spectacular because he had only given up one homer to a lefty all year, and to this day has only given up 24 in his career (Oddly enough, I was at a Mets-Astros game earlier in the year, and Johnson who played for Houston at the time demolished the Mets 10-1. The only run he gave up was an opposite-field homer by the right-handed Roger Cedeno). The Mets went on to win that game 8-4, and then went on to win the series three games to one on Todd Pratt's walkoff home run at Shea Stadium in game four. I know I didn't see it live because it happened on Shabbat. I had gone for a walk with a friend that day, and we ended up walking from the Upper East Side all the way across the Queensboro Bridge and back. I was wearing my Mets jersey, and just as we were getting back to my building a man on a bicycle yells out "Mets won!" Little did I know what was in store for me when I turned on Sportscenter to see the highlights after Shabbat ended.

Anyway, the point is that John Olerud will always have a special place in my memories. So I'm looking at the 1999 Mets, and it occurred to me that Olerud really was a darn good hitter, az I clicked on him, taking me to his baseball-reference page. One of the cool things on baseball-reference is the comparisons they have for each player at each age. For example, on Alex Rodriguez's page, his top comparison at the age of 20 was Jimmie Foxx, at 21 it was Frank Robinson, at 22 it was Johnny Bench, at 23 it was Ken Griffey Jr., etc. For John Olerud, his top comps for ages 31 through 34 was Don Mattingly. Interesting. So I clicked on the link that shows you a comparison of the two players, and here were my findings:

Olerud (1989-2003): 6994 AB, 1076 Runs, 2079 Hits, 473 2B, 12 3B, 239 HR, 1145 RBI, 1198 BB, 935 SO, .297 BA, .402 OBP, .471 SLG, 11 SB, .873 OPS, 131 OPS+

Mattingly (1982-1995): 7003 AB, 1007 Runs, 2153 Hits, 442 2B, 20 3B, 222 HR, 1099 RBI, 588 BB, 444 SO, .307 BA, .358 OBP, .471 SLG, 14 SB, .829 OPS, 127 OPS+

These numbers sure do look uncannily similar. The only real differences are that Olerud struck out and walked about twice as often as Mattingly did, however the ratios are almost identical (.780 K/BB for Olerud, and .755 for Mattingly). Now don't get me wrong; I love Don Mattingly. I once saw an amazing poster of him in Cooperstown where he's dressed in a pin-striped suit, and he's holding his bat like a gun, and the title says "Hit Man." Outstanding. The point is, as much as I loved him, I just don't see how he can make the Hall of Fame. I'd be surprised to see Olerud garner much support once he gets onto the ballot, and I'd say his numbers are at the very least just as good as Mattingly's.

I Can't Believe I Have More Driving Complaints

I thought I had exhausted my supply of driving pet-peeves, yet clearly I have not. I realized two more last night. Not even one! Two! Well I guess one of them isn't really a pet-peeve; it's just the height of bad manners. Anyway, let's get started.

So last night, I, along with seemingly millions of other Jews, attended the Professional Bull-Riders rodeo at Madison Square Garden (the world's most famous arena!). Afterwards, several hundred thousand of us went to Jerusalem II to get pizza and sushi. Az there I am getting into my car on Broadway between 36th and 37 streets, and I want to make a right onto 36th street so I can go towards the West Side highway. We make our way westward, and I think it was between 9th and 10th Avenues that there was a truck double-parked, which was fine. There was clearly plenty of room for another car to get by, az it was no biggie. But here's the thing; there was a taxi that was dropping off a passenger, and he was stopped right behind the truck in such a way that NOBODY could get by. I mean, come on man! A little common sense! Either pull up another 20 feet in front of the truck, or pull back ten feet. Either way cars will be able to get by. Why do you have to stop in the exact wrong spot? It was entirely uncool and entirely unnecessary.

Here's the other one, and this one is just ridiculous. This is the type of thing that only happens when the other person is either a complete jerk or completely ignorant of his/her surroundings. Here's the sitch: I'm driving uptown on the West Side highway, and you know how there are traffic lights until about 59th street? Az I'm at 57th street and this yutz in a Mini Cooper is right in front of me. We've already gone through a couple of yellow lights, and I'm really anxious to make it through the last two traffic lights. So what does the moron in the Mini do? He slows down as the light is turning yellow and so do I, but at the last second he decides "hey, I can make the light," az he speeds up and goes through the next two lights leaving me stranded at 57th street. I was absolutely furious, as my passengers can attest. That's the sort of jerk move that you really have to try to do. It takes actual effort to be that ignorant. Meanwhile, he was probably up by 96th street by the time I got a green light. I'm really starting to believe that 99% of drivers are just plain bad.

I Think I Need to Change the Name of This Blog

Seriously, I should change the description to "One Man's Thoughts on Baseball, Driving, and Grammar." That's kinda like the post I had a while ago (Lighters, Shavers, and Pens, Oh My!), in which I note the absurdity of the Bic company, which sells three completely unrelated items. But if I changed the description I feel like I wouldn't have any readers. Hell, I don't have any readers anyway, but that's not important. It's not about how many people read; it's about how much I can get away with making fun of you all. I mean, it's about having a place for me to jot down my thoughts. Besides, I like "Schmutter's idea palace." If anyone has a suggestion for a replacement name, comment away.

Anyway, the point is I realized another driving pet-peeve last night, and this one really bakes my noodle (yeah, that's right. I'm trying to resurrect that fantastic line from the Matrix. We'll see if it takes hold). It's honestly one of the first things you learn when you take driver's ed, and it's something that is absolutely dripping with so much common sense that it almost boggles the mind that people don't do it. I'm pleased to present to you (drum roll please....) the turn signal! I'm going to share with you two instances from last night in which the turn signal was used (or not used, sigh...) in horribly noodle-baking ways:

1. After eating dinner at home, I drove over to my brother's apartment on 77th street between First and Second Avenues. I parked my car on 77th street, which goes westbound. After my visit (yes, don't worry, my nephew is extremely cute), I got back into the car and intended to continue west on 77th street. There was one of them ugly grey hatchback cars in front of me, and he was driving rather slowly. We arrived at the green light on Second Avenue at which I wanted to make a left turn, and the dude in front of me, continuing to go slowly makes a left turn (without signaling) into the second lane from the left. I was going to make another left onto 76th street, az I turned into the very left lane, and continued slowly towards the red light at the intersection. Then that very same dude cut into the left lane in front of me (again without signaling) and then we both turned onto 76th street. By this point I'm getting a bit exasperated. Now we're driving eastbound on 76th street towards First Avenue (again, very slowly), and once the light turns green he turns left onto First Avenue again without signaling!!! I would have been ahead of him two turns ago and not had to deal with him if he had just signaled once! It was one of the most frustrating things because I mamash had no idea what he would do next. It can be a very disturbing experience to have uncertainty on the road. The traffic system works on predictability, and when one yutz decides to be unpredictable, the entire system can break down.

2. After I finally arrived (uneventfully) back in the Heights, I decided to get Erin (my car. It's a hot name) a much deserved, and much needed car wash. I picked up a friend for company, because it's one of those cool car washes where they let you sit in your car while it goes through the conveyer. Az we're on the way back, driving south on Broadway at around 200th street, and we're stopped at a red light behind another car in the left lane. What happens? The light turns green, and all of a sudden, the guy in front of me puts on his left turn signal and makes me wait behind him until he lets the cars from the other direction go by (I've mentioned something like this before in my post "ACPJrB Redux," but bear with me anyway). As my friend can attest, I started going ballistic; I was yelling, and shaking, and quaking, and gibbering like a madman. If you don't have your turn signal on when that light turns green, I don't care if it takes you eleven hours out of your way, you better freakin' go straight.

It's so simple, my friends. The turn signal is there for a reason. I think I use it even more often than I should; I even use it in empty parking lots. On the road, it's always better to be safe than sorry.

Now let's move on to something else. Last week my brother asked me about two pitchers, Goose Gossage and Lee Smith. I won't go through the entire statistical analysis, but the point of the discussion was that I wouldn't vote one into the Hall of Fame without the other. The basis for my claim was that Smith had better overall stats, but Gossage pitched several hundred more innings. I determined that Smith's case was slightly better than Gossage's, but my brother disagreed. He called me last night and asked me try to figure out how important Innings Pitched should be when determining a pitcher's greatness. I told him I would do some research and get back to him, az here it goes.

I went to baseballprospectus.com, because I know I can find VORP listings there. Again, VORP stands for Value Over Replacement Player, and the number represents an amount of runs. Another words, a player whose VORP is 35 is worth 35 more runs to his team than the average bench player. I figured that VORP was a good metric to use for this analysis because it's a sabermetric counting stat. What I mean is that most of the sabermetric stats (ERA+, EqA, OPS+, etc.) are either only relevant for hitting, or are rate stats that don't take into account how much you've played. For example, a player who has only one at-bat and hits a home run will have an astronomically high OPS+, but that player is clearly less valuable than someone who hits solidly for an entire season. So I chose VORP because it will reward players who accumulated the most numbers.

That being said, here are a few observations about my results:
-The top 34 in VORP for pitchers in 2007 were starters. Rafael Betancourt was 35th at 39.8.
-The Baseball Writers Associaton of America did well in voting for the Cy Young award, at least according to this metric.
-I can't believe how good John Smoltz still is; he was eleventh in all of baseball and sixth in the National League in VORP at 56.7.

The actual results of the study are as follows:
Pitching a lot of above-average innings is extremely valuable. The top twelve pitchers in VORP pitched over 200 innings. 13th was Erik Bedard, whose strong season (6th in ERA+, 3rd in the AL) was cut short by an injury. C.C. Sabathia won the Cy Young award in the American League, in large part because he pitched 40.1 more innings than Josh Beckett, even though the rest of their stats are comparable. Beckett's ERA+ was 145 to Sabathia's 143, but Sabathia's VORP was quite a bit higher, 65.2 (3rd in MLB, 1st in the AL) to Beckett's 58.6.
Here's another example of the value of pitching a lot of innings: Of everyone in the top 30 in VORP, the lowest ERA+ by far belongs to Joe Blanton, a slightly above average 106. Blanton's ERA+ was tied for 48th best in baseball last year. However, since he pitched 230 innings of 106 ERA+, he was 25th in baseball in VORP. Another words, being a slightly above average pitcher who eats innings is immensely valuable in this day and age.

In conclusion one can see... wait a minute. This is not a five-paragraph essay, and I'm not in sixth grade. The point is, I'm pretty sure my brother was right in arguing that Gossage had a better Hall of Fame case than Lee Smith. I'm also pretty sure that Jake Peavy, Brandon Webb, C.C. Sabathia, and Fausto Carmona are going to make a s**t load of money over the next 10-15 years.

Ah, The Holidays

What's the most important holiday among Christians, Catholics, and Protestants? Is it Christmas? I dunno. I guess since there are two Federal holidays this time of year (Christmas and New Years), we call this time "the holidays." Aren't we Jews pompous? Oh sure, the rest of the world can have "the holidays," but in September and October we have "the high holidays." This is neither here nor there; it just came to me when I was about to start typing. Now we'll return to our regularly scheduled absurdity.

Let's add this one on to my ever-growin' list of driving pet-peeves. Let's say you're double-parked because you went in to the bodega to get a soda, or you're picking up/dropping off a friend. Here's what you're not allowed to do: don't just start driving if there is moving traffic; only start driving once there is a red light and cars are not moving. Here's an example that I hope will demonstrate my point. Let's say I'm driving uptown on a one-way street, let's say Amsterdam Avenue. Now let's say I want to make a right turn onto 81st Street. If you're double-parked on the east side of the street close to the end of the block, I will have to make my right turn from the second lane. If you're all of a sudden gonna start driving after being double-parked, I have no idea what to do! Are you gonna turn also? Are you gonna let me by so I can turn? Are you gonna speed up and get ahead of me and go straight so I have to jam on the breaks to prevent a collision? Next time, start driving when it's a red light so nobody will have to deal with your unpredictability. Seriously, drivers need to have more consideration for their fellow travelers. The roads are dangerous enough without your selfishness and disregard for others. It's very possible that I expect too much from other drivers, but I think it's much more likely that most people just don't care.

I was just typing my friend an e-mail, and I was saying how each time I go to Cafe K for lunch I get the same exact panini; I get the square panini bread with pesto sauce, mozzarella cheese, tomatoes, and basil. However, I always get charged a different amount; I've been charged as little as $4.50 and as much as $9.25 for the same food. Then I said that it might be a function of who is manning the cash register. That got me thinking. I'm using the word "manning" as a verb. The infinitive form of the word would be "to man." I will now look up the word "man" and look at the verb listing. Okay, done. Here's the one I'm looking for (from dictionary.com):

tr.v. manned, man·ning, mans
2. To take stations at, as to defend or operate: manned the guns.

Then there's a big gray box in which dictionary.com goes through a whole explanation of the word "man" as a general term for humankind. I won't go through that whole thing. The point is, I think I'm gonna start using the word "woman" as a verb, you know like "...and then she started crying! I can't believe she womanned me like that!" or "Uh oh! Our seven person meal just turned into a 19 person meal! Woman the kitchen!" This might get me into deep doodoo.

Anyway, I'm listening to the radio today, and from 1:00 to 2:00 every weekday, 1050 ESPN Radio broadcasts one hour of the Mike Tirico Show. Since every big radio host gets to go on vacation, they have all the understudies doing the shows today, az filling in for Mike Tirico today is Erik Kuselias (whenever he introduces himself it sounds like he's saying Eric Asillius, az that's how it's pronounced in case you were curious). He fills in on the radio a lot, usually for one of the Mike's on Mike & Mike in the Morning (curiously, neither of those Mike's is Tirico), az I've heard him enough times to be used to him. I don't find him that great; I think he's a bit arrogant, but he can be entertaining at times. He had an interesting segment today in which he listed the top-five awkward holiday moments. I though they were pretty clever, az I'll go ahead and list them here:

1. You get a really bad gift in person and you have to pretend you like it.
2. Someone at the company/family holiday party has too much to drink and either makes a fool out of himself by being overly friendly with you ("I love you maaan"), or finally lets out his anger and gets violent.
3. You give your significant other a gift, and someone else gives him/her a similar gift of greater value. (Caution!!!! Hypothetical scenario!!!! I repeat! Hypothetical!!!!) Like if I get my girlfriend an ipod shuffle, and her co-worker gets her an iphone.
4. You go to your significant other's house for dinner and his/her parents make your relationship a lot more serious than it is by asking you important questions about your future.
5. You and your significant other exchange gifts that are on completely different levels. Like if I were to give my (again hypothetical) girlfriend a new toothbrush, and she gets me a platinum watch.

I just thought some of those were interesting. Hope you enjoyed today's post. Happy painting, and G-d bless, my friends.

This Never Happens

A friend called me up last night for a favor at about 9:00. She asked me if I could drive her to the West Side just to drop her friend off, and then we could head back up to the Heights. Now, normally this would be the exact opposite of problematic, but in this case, my roommate had asked me if he could use my car to visit his little friend in Teaneck. The point is that I was forced to use my other roommate's car, inasmuch as he was gracious enough to offer it. He might have gone himself, but he goes to bed early, and it was already about 9:45(!) by the time we left. Anyways, we get down to the West Side and drop the girl off, and by this time I'm getting the mad munchies. That might've been due to the conversation we had in my apartment right before we left about rolling Js. Or it might just have been due to the fact that I hadn't eaten anything since that enormous shwarma I had from Grill Point five hours earlier. In any event, I needed some junk food, so I drove us over to Duane Reade on 106th Street and Broadway. I parked and we got out of the car. Now, when I get out of my car and lock the doors with the remote, the headlights turn off automatically. I drive a 2005 Acura TL. One time I had to rig my license plate to stay attached to the car using pieces of a wire hanger. My roommate drives a 1997 Geo Metro. He has his side mirrors hanging on for dear life with pieces of duct tape. My purpose in taking that unnecessary shot at my roommate's car is to demonstrate that his car, while it works perfectly and purrs like a playful kitten, isn't as technologically advanced as mine. Az when we got out of the car and went to Duane Reade, the headlights were still on. My friend said "isn't that bad?" So I'm like, "It'll be fine; we'll be in there for five minutes." Lo and behold, we get back in the car and it wouldn't start. Kudos to the girl for not crying, because the only cure-all for crying that I know is a hug, and I'd be way too nervous to do that. Besides, she assures me that my hugging her would only result in more crying, whatever that means. Anyway, if it were my car, I would just call Acura roadside and they would be there in like half an hour and jump-start the car for free. The last thing I wanted to do was call AAA and pay them with my million dollars bill, which I printed from my computer (see SB email #88, "Couch Patch." Jesus, it's been a long time since I referenced homestarrunner.com. Incidentally, that was the first SB e-mail I ever watched). I had actually been in a somewhat similar position last year when my old roommate's sister stalled his car on the West Side. In that situation, he called all his hatzolah buddies, and after a makeshift party right there on the sidewalk, one of them took out his cables and jump-started the car. So I figured I might as well do the same thing, inasmuch as my roommate was probably asleep and wasn't picking up his phone. I had figured that maybe you had to do something special to the car when it acts up, you know like kicking one of the tires, elbowing the dashboard, and turning the ignition while picking your nose. Who knows what sorts of tricks you need to know with these 1997 Geos? Anyway, I started calling every hatzolah guy I knew (and some I didn't know). One was asleep, one was in Florida, one's car was in the shop, and two didn't pick up. By this time, my other roommate finally answered his phone, az I asked him to wake up our roommate to tell him that his car wouldn't start. He gets on the phone and says "hit 'lock,' 'unlock,' and then 'lock' again on the remote control, and then try the ignition." And it worked! I wasn't really overly surprised that it worked, but the real astounding thing was that I was 100% correct about there being some kind of trick to starting the car. That never happens! What I mean is I'm right all the time because I'm ridiculously smart and know a lot of stuff, but in my capacity as Captain Optimistic Guy, I've come to realize that things don't always work out the way you want them to, no matter how much you hope. But this time I was right! It was freakin' unbelievable. Az there we are, sitting in the car, about to pull out of the parking spot, when one of those coach buses pulls up right next to us and starts letting out a busload of senior citizens in wheel chairs. An hour and a half later (really only like six minutes), we were on our way back to the Heights. It was an almost perfect night.

Cos-K?

No no, don't worry; it's not a math post. It's another baseball post!

I was reading baseball prospectus today, and they have a highlight video of new Cubs right-fielder Kosuke Fukudome. I watched the video and closely scrutinized his stance and swing. The first thing I noticed was "ohmygod, he's a carbon copy of Kaz Matsui," the former Mets "savior" who couldn't handle the New York pressure, yet managed to make the World Series as a member of the Colorado Rockies. I always thought that there was something mechanically wrong with Matsui's swing from the left side. When he would bat righty, it looked more natural when he drove the ball, like he actually knew what he was doing. But when he hit lefty, it looked like he was always stepping away from the plate with his front leg. This is symptomatic of many Japanese imports (Hideki Matsui, Ichiro, Akinori Iwamura), although I think it's less pronounced with H. Matsui. It appears that all these players have been trained to begin their natural stride towards first base during their swing so they have that extra quick step getting out of the batters box. I think this is an OK approach to hitting if you have little power (Ichiro was 2nd in lowest Isolated Power in 2007 for players who qualified for the batting title and hit over .300 at .080. Luis Castillo, another lefty slap-hitter was first. Ichiro was tops in 2006. Isolated Power measures your propensity for getting extra-base hits by subtracting your batting average from your slugging percentage.), like Ichiro, Kaz, and Iwamura, because when you're relying on your speed, that quick stride to first base can help a lot. But if you're a power hitter like Hideki Matsui or Kosuke Fukudome, you need to be stepping in towards the plate so you can get your powerful body behind your swing. I think Hideki figured it out early on; he "only" hit 16 home runs in his first season in America, but since then has hit 31, 23, and 25 in his other full seasons. We'll see how long it takes for Fukudome to adjust to American pitching.

Now, I'm far from being a good hitter. Anyone who has watched me hit over the last year or two knows that I basically hit line drives to center/right-center field, unless I'm deliberately aiming somewhere else. I think in 14 softball games last summer in about 40 plate appearances, I probably got out 18 times, walked eight times, and got 14 hits (wow, a .550 OBP and a .469 SLG. A not too shabby 1.019 OPS. Again, I was just estimating; I might be slightly off), which is great, but only one of those hits was for extra-bases (a double in our last regular season game). One thing I really cut down on was pop-ups. When I was in high-school, I was primarily known for my slick-fielding; I wasn't much of a hitter (G-d knows, we even had a DH for me a few times, and I was the 2nd baseman!). I used to ALWAYS step away from home plate with my front foot, so I would pop out to 2nd base/right field all the time. I really worked hard on trying to keep my body in close to the plate while I swung, so I finally started getting my not-as-ample-as-now-yet-still-ample-enough body weight behind my swing, and I started to drive the ball a little bit.

Kaz, and Ichiro should be trying to hit a lot of bloopers the other way as lefties, but I think they look a whole lot better when they swing at inside pitches (it's hard to pull your body away from an inside pitch and still get decent wood on it).

Of course, these things I've noticed could just be a trick of the camera angle, which usually comes in over the pitcher's right shoulder, but I don't really think so.

Anyway, I wish Fukudome all the success in the world; he obviously knows a ton more about hitting than I do (although I'll be surprised if he has a better OPS than I do this year ;)

Who Knew?

Seriously, where would I be without Joe Posnanski? He actually writes for a living, and consequently his blog is far better than mine. But I'm just a kid, right? Anyway, he made a very astute point today, one that I never would have realized without his help. I'm almost ashamed to put this in print (some of you will be suprised about this), but it seems that Keith Hernandez was at least as good as Don Mattingly. I would never have noticed this, especially because I grew up watching Donnie play, and Keith's best days were already behind him by 1988. Why don't we just dive into the stats, okay?

Overall:
Mattingly: 7003 AB, 1007 Runs, 2153 Hits, 442 2Bs, 20 3Bs, 222 HR, 1099 RBI, 588 BB, 444 Ks, .307 BA, .358 OBP, .471 SLG, .829 OPS, 127 OPS+, .300 EqA, 43 FRAA, 84.7 WARP3, 1127 RC, 6.06 RC/27, 249.85 WS
Hernandez: 7370 AB, 1124 Runs, 2182 Hits, 426 2Bs, 60 3Bs, 162 HR, 1071 RBI, 1070 BB, 1012 Ks, .296 BA, .384 OBP, .436 SLG, .820 OPS, 128 OPS+, .300 EqA, 207 FRAA, 112.5 WARP3, 1274 RC, 6.26 RC/27, 295.45 WS

Those numbers are really, really close. The counting stats are so similar it's almost a wash (Hits, 2Bs, RBI), and the rate stats are also nearly indistinguishable (OPS, EqA). If you take apart OPS, you start to see the differences; Hernandez walked A LOT more than Mattingly, but Mattingly hit more home runs to drive up that SLG. Otherwise, the only stats that really separate the two are strikeouts (you know how I feel about those) and fielding. Joe Posnanski put it best: "And while Mattingly was an outstanding defensive first baseman, Hernandez was a groundbreaking one, maybe the best defensive first baseman ever to play the game." Hernandez's fielding was worth 207 more runs than an average 1st baseman, while Donnie's was worth a respectable 43.

They both had their share of fantastic seasons; they both won an MVP award and finished in the top ten in voting three other times. One could argue that Mattingly should have won the award in both 1985 (when he actually won) and in 1986 when he had an even better season, although he lost that award to a tiny Texan pitcher named Clemens. Anyway, here are those seasons:

Mattingly (1985): 652 ABs, 107 Runs, 211 Hits, 48 2Bs, 3 3Bs, 35 HR, 145 RBI(!), 56 BB, 41 Ks, .324 BA, .371 OBP, .567 SLG, .938 OPS, 156 OPS+, .327 EqA, 5 FRAA, 10.9 WARP3, 136 RC, 7.72 RC/27, Gold Glove (1st of 9 in 10 years)
Mattingly (1986): 677 ABs, 117 Runs, 238 Hits, 53 2Bs, 2 3Bs, 31 HR, 113 RBI, 53 BB, 35 Ks(!), .352 BA, .394 OBP, .573 SLG, .967 OPS, 161 OPS+, .336 EqA, 9 FRAA, 12 WARP3, 150 RC, 8.68 RC/27, Gold Glove
Hernandez (1979): 610 AB, 116 Runs, 210 Hits, 48 2Bs, 11 3Bs, 11 HR, 105 RBI, 80 BB, 78 Ks, .344 BA, .417 OBP, .513 SLG, .930 OPS, 151 OPS+, .324 EqA, 21 FRAA, 11.4 WARP3, 135 RC, 8.66 RC/27, Gold Glove (1st of 11 in a row)

Geez, these guys are so similar it's almost scary. It is important to me that these stats remain unfrightening, especially since Don Mattingly could still get voted into the Hall of Fame.

Insanity

Okay, since this stuff was way too ridiculous and needs to be posted for posterity, I'll just copy and paste these e-mails. A lot of this will sound like incoherent, stream of consciousness type stuff. I can be the James Joyce of bloggers! Chrysostomos! Anyway, I took out everyone's names except for my own. Enjoy:

On 12/14/07, --------< --------->wrote: I think the most important thing to come out of this report is that we finally know how Randy Velarde made that unassisted triple play. Thoughts?

-----Original Message-----From: ------- <----------->To: ---------- <---------->Cc: noah.schmutter@bankofamerica.comSent: Fri, 14 Dec 2007 10:08 am
Subject: Re: Mitchell Report
We saw that play live! I'm having a long conversation with my brothers about this. To sum up my feelings briefly: None of this should surprise or really disappoint anyone. (I'm mildly disappointed to see Matt Franco's name on the list--he was our favorite player on the late '90s Mets teams.) I also don't think any info in here should factor into MVPs, Cy Youngs, HoF votes, etc.--the widespread availability of 'roids made it pretty much a level playing field over the past decade. Although I will admit to some serious schadenfreude upon seeing nine (9!) pages devoted to the attempted murderer Clemens.

On 12/14/07, Schmutter, Noah <mailto:noah.schmutter@bankofamerica.com> wrote:
Yeah, Matt Franco was our neighbor, so I'm a little upset to see him here too.I direct you to July 10th, 1999, when in a game started by none-other than maniacal juicer Andy Pettitte, Matt Franco ended a game against Mariano Rivera, with a walk-off single in the 9th inning. I'm also upset to see the formerly squeaky-clean Josias Manzanillo in the report. If anyone can sum up the Mets history of lying and cheating it's the formerly squeaky-clean Josias Manzanillo. Time to throw away all my Josias Manzanillo jerseys, including the home pinstripe, home white, alternate black, and away gray jerseys. Also the two starting lineup figures I have of him, the one where he's wearing his pitcher's jacket while leading off of first, and the other of his staredown as he looks in for the sign. Time to take down my life-size Fathead(TM) wall-decoration of Josias Manzanillo, and to destroy his bobble-head. I remember Josias Manzanillo Bobble Head Day at Shea. Ahh the memories. Josias, you have stolen my innocence, popped my proverbial cherry. I don't know about any of you, but his betrayal will tarnish my enjoyment of baseball forever.

From:--------- [mailto:---------] Sent: Friday, December 14, 2007 10:22 AMTo: ----------- Cc: Schmutter, Noah
Subject: Re: Mitchell Report
As I said to you last year about Bonds, McGwire, and the Hall of Fame, I think the players from this steroid era should go into the Hall if they have the numbers for it. No asterisks or other symblos should go along with them. It will be pretty obvious as the years pass that the late 90's to the mid-aughts was the "steroid era", just like the '80's were the "dead-ball era". And all statistics will be measured with that in mind. That being said, I gotta say that I'm more surprised at the names that DIDN'T appear in the report.... Where was A-Rod? Frank Thomas? Brady Anderson? Luis Gonzalez? Nick Punto!!! To name a few.Also, where were the Red Sox players?Also, did you know the Blue-Jays signed Eckstein to a 1-year deal? And it actually IMPROVED their offensive production at that position? I really don't know which story is more amazing.

On 12/14/07, Schmutter, Noah <mailto:noah.schmutter@bankofamerica.com> wrote: Interestingly, I noticed that among all players, Nick Punto was dead last (1,018th) in VORP last year at -27.1. Good thing they signed a power hitting shortstop to join him in the lineup. Oh no, wait, they signed Adam Everett, who at least was 961st in the league with a - 7.0 VORP. Meanwhile, John McDonald clocks in at 973rd in the league with a -7.8 VORP. However, McDonald (obviously) dominates Eckstein in Fielding Runs Above Average 40 to -10

-----Original Message-----
From: ----------To: noah.schmutter@bankofamerica.com; ---------Sent: Fri, 14 Dec 2007 10:40 am
Subject: Re: Mitchell Report
Damn you Schmutter!! I didn't realize Pettite's full name was "Manical juicer Andy Pettite", while the illustrious Matt Franco's full name wasn't even Matthew Franco. (or maybe it's Matisyahu Franco).

Anyways, F.P. Santangelo!?!? I mean really? He's got one of my most favorite baseball names with initials as a first name. (Other favorites include: U.L. Washington, R.J. Reynolds, C.C. Sabathia, J.J. Hardy, and J.C. Romero). Now his name is tarnished forever. Congradulations to U.L. Washington who now tops this illutrious list.

The King is Dead. Long Live the King.

From: ------- [----------] Sent: Friday, December 14, 2007 10:51 AM To: Schmutter, Noah
Cc: ----------
Subject: Re: Mitchell Report
Two quick unrelated notes:(1) None of the doubly initialed ballplayers mentioned above has as great a name as R.W. McQuarters. Just roll that around in your mouth a bit--it feels great.(2) My father could never remember Josias Manzanillo's first name, so in our house, we always called him Manzy Manzanillo. I still laugh whenever I see that. VORP does not include fielding, right? Because McDonald was supposed to be a pretty good fielder, I think. I'm too lazy to do the research--I'll just wait for it to show up on Tanblog. I'm actually surprised that Xtein could only get a 1-year deal--does that mean baseball GMs are getting smarter?

-----Original Message-----From: Schmutter, Noah <mailto:noah.schmutter@bankofamerica.com>To: ------ <--------->Cc: ---------Sent: Fri, 14 Dec 2007 10:56 am
Subject: RE: Mitchell Report
You really don't think F.P. Santangelo is a better name than R.W. McQuarters. I think it's a lot closer than you think it is. Also, I find it very hard to believe that R.W. is actually shorter than his first name. Hold on, I'm gonna look it up. Okay, R.W. is exactly the same amount of syllables as Robert William. There is absolutely no point in shortening his name. None. No point in shortening Frank-Paul to F.P. but that's neither here nor there. The point is, no one's nickname should be Nook, even if he took steroids. No one will respect you with a name like that.

From:---------- [----------] Sent: Friday, December 14, 2007 11:01 AMTo:---------; Schmutter, Noah

Subject: Re: Mitchell Report
Believe you me, I know RW McQuarters (or as we Giants fans call him Runny Waters McQuarters). But I was limiting myself to baseball peeps.Gritstein Von Hustlehoff is gonna make some serious bank for that 1-year deal. I have to imagine that the Jays could do a helluva lot more with that $4MM. And to think that it's the Jays and GM J.P. Ricciardi (another initialized first name) who should know better given his references in Moneyball.

-----Original Message-----
From: Schmutter, Noah To: -----------; -----------Sent: Fri, 14 Dec 2007 11:12 am
Subject: RE: Mitchell Report
Yeah, there's no way that was a Ricciardi move. That one definitely came from higher up, sort of a "John Paul! I want that Eck-man! Get that company laptop out of your pants and call his agent!" J.P isn't shortening John Paul either. What's the deal?! I think if you want to have a nickname or initials, it better be shorter than your actual name. Man law?

On 12/14/07, --------< --------->wrote:
I assume you mean "shorter" in the syllables department. But regardless, no way on that Man-law. R.W. needs to stick around, and Jean-Paul just sounds fruity.. JP Losman sounds bad enough as it is. I also love that Keith Law's nick-name is K-Law, or even sometimes Klaw(tm).

I neeeeeeed to get out more.

Kosher Lunch, A Bargain!

Last Friday, I went to Milk and Honey to grab a slice of pizza or two for lunch. Friday is easy because a lot of people don't take lunch, so I rarely see anyone I know, az there are no distractions. At MnH they have this deal where you get a free canned drink with your purchase of two slices of pizza. Az there I am with my slices and my soda and I notice the nice Asian girl at the register ringing me up for the soda! Now I'm thinking maybe she was trying to Jew me out of $1.25; maybe her instructions are to ring people up for the soda unless they say they're invoking the rules of the deal. So I said "don't I get the soda for free?" And here's the rub; she responds "We don't have that deal anymore. Didn't you notice we lowered our prices? Each slice of pizza is only $3." I was sooooo tempted to say "Only $3 for a slice of pizza?! What a bargain!" but I'm not that guy. Remember when we were in Israel for the year, and you got a slice of pizza at Pizza Rami for only five NIS? That came out to like a buck and a quarter. Now I'm paying 280% of that. What has the world come to?

At work I listen to ESPN radio all day. I've begun to memorize a lot of the commercials I hear (if I hear the Colin Cowherd Vizio commercial one more time... "a 1080P LCD under 1700! They are the HDTV of you the people! Vizio is available at Circuit City! Sears, Costco, Sam's Club, BJ's! And Walmart). Recently, they've started airing a new commercial, which I found highly entertaining, mostly because the woman's voice is so funny. I haven't the foggiest idea what the commercial is about, but it sounds like a guy is trying to figure out what to get his wife for Christmas. Apparently, the wife is the out-doorsy type, and the husband keeps saying things like "Isn't there anything you need?" And she replies "You're all I need! Unless I go camping, in which case I'll need a three-season tent." And then he says "At least let me make you something." And she says "Really you could just make me a card, and put it in a kayak!" For some reason I think that last line is hilarious. Maybe I'm weird. No wait; I'm definitely weird, but is that why I find that funny?

I just want to put in a quick word about the Mitchell investigation, which is supposed to reveal its findings at 2 pm EST today. I have a funny feeling that today is going to be a very bad day for Major League Baseball. A report came out that four current Yankees will be mentioned in the report. I imagine two of them are Jason Giambi and Roger Clemens, but I have no idea about the other two. Wouldn't it be incredible if one of them were Derek Jeter? That would really make my day. I hope all the other ones are bad men that people (read: I) don't like anyway, like Barry Bonds, and Jimmy Rollins (MVP? Hah!), and Albert Pujols. I would hate for it to be players that everyone loves and respects, like David Wright, Jim Thome, Frank Thomas, Ken Griffey Jr., etc., although in my heart of hearts I know it won't work out that way. I hope baseball can recover. Last time it took steroids to make everyone forget about the strike-shortened 1994 season. I don't know what it will take this time, but they better pull through.

Hawaiian Tropic Zone

So it's 25 degrees outside (including wind-chill), and I just got back to my office from lunch. I'm walking on 7th avenue and as I'm crossing 49th street, I see a bar and grill called "Hawaiian Tropic Zone." Great, it's New York, it's a bar/lounge, wonderful. I'm glancing through the window and I notice several young women wearing bikinis. Apparently, people will be attracted to a place that pretends that we're at the beach on a sunny 85 degree day (or maybe they're just attracted to a place that has several young women wearing bikinis). Whatever. I just found that noteworthy.

Meanwhile, there are about a million cars trying to wind their way through the streets of New York. This is something I just don't understand. I go out for lunch every day, and every day there's ridiculous traffic on 6th avenue and on all the side streets. And I don't mean just trucks making deliveries; I mean taxi-cabs and civilian cars. What the heck are all the cars doing here? Trucks, I understand; they have to make deliveries. But why on earth would someone be in a car in midtown? Where are they going? From where are they coming? And it's not like there's traffic some days and not on other days; there is traffic EVERY SINGLE DAY. These people obviously know that it's going to take them at least an hour to get through midtown; why don't they just take the subway?! It would be soooo much faster, and there are comparatively few people taking the subway at this hour. If someone could explain this to me, I will know a tiny drop more that I do already (which is a substantial amount. This explanation would barely increase my knowledge, percentage-wise).

Church v. Hunter

Earlier this week, the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim signed 32 year old, free agent Center Fielder Torii Hunter, to a five year $90 million deal. Today, the New York Metropolitans traded Lastings Milledge to the Washington Nationals for Catcher Brian Schneider and Center/Left Fielder Ryan Church. Ryan Church will make ~$400,000 this year. Let's compare the two and see who's getting more bang for their buck:

Hunter: 600 ABs, 94 Runs, 172 Hits, 45 2Bs, 1 3B, 28 HR, 107 RBI, 18 SB, 40 BB, 101 Ks, .287 BA, .334 OBP, .505 SLG, .839 OPS, 122 OPS+, 2 FRAA (Fielding Runs Above Average), 8.00 WARP3, .292 EqA, 24 Win Shares, 5.60 RC/27, .64 WPA

Church: 470 ABs, 57 Runs, 128 Hits, 43 2B, 1 3B, 15 HR, 70 RBI, 3 SB, 49 BBs, 107 Ks, .272 BA, .349 OBP, .464 SLG, .813 OPS, 114 OPS+, 14 FRAA, 7.10 WARP3, .288 EqA, 19 Win Shares, 5.70 RC/27, .15 WPA

Church (Projected to 600 ABs): 73 Runs, 163 Hits, 55 2B, 1 3B, 19 HR, 89 RBI, 4 SB, 63 BBs, 167 Ks, 18 FRAA, 9.06 WARP3, 24 Win Shares

Hunter is clearly better than Church, although not by very much at all. Church has far better plate discipline, as exhibited by his nine more walks in 130 fewer at-bats. And Torii Hunter's highly touted glove is - by at least one metric - only slightly above average, whereas Church played outstanding outfield last year. Church's numbers also suffered because he played his home games at Robert F. Kennedy Stadium. Let's look at his home/road splits:

Home: 229 ABs, 24 Runs, 61 Hits, 20 2B, 0 3B, 5 HR, 30 RBI, 1 SB, 28 BBs, 49 Ks, .266 BA, .356 OBP, .419 SLG, .775 OPS
Away: 241 ABs, 33 Runs, 67 Hits, 23 2B, 1 3B, 10 HR, 40 RBI, 2 SB, 21 BBs, 58 Ks, .278 BA, .342 OBP, .506 SLG, .848 OPS

That OPS and SLG difference is ridiculous. Now let's be crazy and project his away stats to 600 ABs and Church becomes a carbon-copy of Torii Hunter except with more strikeouts and more walks:
Away: 600 ABs, 82 Runs, 167 Hits, 57 2B, 2 3B, 25 HR, 100 RBI, 5 SB, 52 BB, 144 Ks

I have absolutely no problem paying this man $400,000 to hit 6th in my lineup every night. Not only that, but he'll be hitting in the Mets lineup surrounded by Jose Reyes, Carlos Beltran, David Wright, Moises Alou, and Carlos Delgado, az he should get much better pitches to hit. This was not nearly as poor a move by Omar Minaya as everyone thinks.

By Request, Football

For some reason I completely forgot to follow up my post about the most important stats in football. A friend reminded me over the weekend, so I went ahead and did some analysis this morning. Just in case y'all forgot what I was doing, I'll paste from the original post: "I thought about it for a while, and I came up with two answers: a. starting field position, and b. percentage of offensive series resulting in a first down or a score." Thanks, again, to one of my devoted readers for pointing me to the drive stats listed on footballoutsiders.com. I can't believe I didn't think to check there for the stats; I mean they wrote Pro Football Prospectus 2007, which I read cover to cover. Anyway, here are the results of my analysis (all stats through week 11):

I realized while I was compiling and sorting my data, that in order to be thorough I would have to do hours and hours of research. I really should look at offensive and defensive stats for the past few seasons, and then try to come up with a reasonable way of combining my two stats, because they certainly don't contribute to wins and losses evenly. Instead, all I did was look at offensive stats for this year, ranked the teams one to 32 in each of the two stats, and then I added up the rankings and ranked the sum.
For example, the New England Patriots' average starting field position is the 33.94 yard line, second best in the league. Their drive success rate is 84.3%, best in all of football. One plus two equals three, the lowest sum out of everyone, so they get the best ranking.
For one more example, the Kansas City Chiefs' average starting field position is the 28.35 yard line, 26th in the NFL. Their drive success rate is 59.3%, second worst in the league. 26 plus 31 equals 57, the hightest sum out of everyone, so they get the worst ranking.

Next, I decided to compare their rankings to their winning percentage. Here's where I ran into trouble, because luck plays a big role in wins and losses. One bounce of the football can mean the difference between 6-4 and 5-5; between a .600 winning percentage and a .500 winning percentage. Az additionally, I elected to look at Pythagorean projected winning percentage, which takes into account only points scored and points given up. For example:

The San Francisco 49ers have scored 113 points and given up 223. Inputting those numbers into the Pythagorean formula looks like this: 1 / (1+(223 / 113)^2) = .204. Their actual winning percentage is .200, so that's a very good projection.

Anyway, I determined that the results of the analysis were inconclusive. My system projects the Patriots, Steelers, Cowboys, Colts, Giants, and Buccaneers to be in the top nine. This agrees with their Pythagorean projections. However, my system loves the Browns (4th overall), Bengals (7th overall), and Redskins (8th overall), and their Pythagorean projections are 15th, 20th, and 18th respectively.

Next time I'll look at turnover differential and see what that data will show. I'm looking forward to comments.

Didn't Do It Justice

I should be embarrassed about my last post. I should hang my head in shame.

Before I continue to lambaste myself I have a little side issue to address. Don't worry, it's completely not sports related. Last week I received "Confessor" in the mail. It is the eleventh and final volume of Terry Goodkind's "Sword of Truth" series. This is my favorite fantasy series. I remember opening the first volume "Wizard's First Rule" on the Metro-North train to my aunt and uncle's house in Connecticut around nine years ago. I have been waiting for a long time for the series to end, and I can't wait to see what happens at the end. Just to put it in a frame of reference you can all understand, I'm going to continue the example using Harry Potter. A new volume in the series came out every three years, and in between the books would get discussed by fans endlessly. It would get discussed so much that the story would become the stuff of legend. And each time a new volume came out, it was as though the story was actually happening as you were reading it. Imagine you didn't know any of the stories in the bible, but you knew that the bible was the foundation of your belief system, or even that it was the basis for the beliefs of thousands of people. Now you're reading the bible for the first time, and you're internalizing the fact that what you're reading IS the bible. This is it. What you're reading is the only bible that there is, and the stories are the ones that everyone knows. Now let's go back to Harry Potter. As you read the last book you were thinking "wow, this is the story of Harry Potter. There is no other story about Harry Potter; there will never be any other story about Harry Potter." You almost start to think "who is J.K. Rowling that she can add on to the story that's already taken place?" You feel me? I'm definitely not explaining it well, but it's hard to articulate what I'm trying to convey. Anyway, the point is that this is the last part of the Richard and Kahlan story, and it can't ever be changed. I hope Terry Goodkind done good.

Anyway, I'm continuing to be beside myself with how badly I botched the last post. Thank the Lord for firejoemorgan.com. They made me realize how much more I should have written, and really how poor an MVP selection Jimmy Rollins is. I mentioned Hanley Ramirez a few times, but it didn't even occur to me that Jimmy Rollins wasn't even the best shortstop in his division this season. And you know what? I'm not even going to use fancy sabermetric stats, because the MVP voters don't look at those anyway; I'm gonna look at the old-fashioned stats. Since Rollins got 77 more at bats, I'm going to list Ramirez's actual stats and his projected stats with those extra 77 at bats (in parentheses):

Batting Average: Rollins: .296, Ramirez: .332
Runs Scored: Rollins: 139, Ramirez: 125 (140)
Hits: Rollins: 212, Ramirez: 212 (238)
RBI: Rollins: 94, Ramirez: 81 (91)
Doubles: Rollins: 38, Ramirez: 48 (54)
Triples: Rollins: 20, Ramirez: 6 (7)
Home Runs: Rollins: 30, Ramirez: 29 (32)
Total Bases: Rollins: 380, Ramirez: 359 (402)
Extra Base Hits: Rollins: 88, Ramirez: 83 (93)
Strikeouts: Rollins: 85, Ramirez: 95 (106)
Walks: Rollins: 49, Ramirez: 52 (58)
Stolen Bases: Rollins: 41, Ramirez: 51 (57)
Outs: Rollins: 521 (Led all of baseball, and the most outs of any MVP ever), Ramirez: 451 (505)
OBP: Rollins: .344, Ramirez: .386
SLG: Rollins: .531, Ramirez: .562
OPS: Rollins: .875, Ramirez: .948

I realize that projecting the stats isn't exactly fair, but even if I didn't do that, Ramirez still leads Rollins in BA, doubles, BBs, SBs, Outs, OBP, SLG, and OPS. They are tied in hits, and virtually tied in home runs. How can someone who is inferior to another player AT THE SAME POSITION, in just about every single important (and unimportant) statistical category beat the other in MVP voting 353 to 49? It just doesn't make any sense.

Blah Blah Baseball Blah

There are a couple of items I would like to discuss today. First up is the recent announcement of Jimmy Rollins as the Most Valuable Player in the National League. Hold on. Before I start a Jimmy Rollins rant, I want to make it absolutely clear that I hold no ill will towards Mr. Rollins. None at all. In fact, I'm glad he had gaudy counting stats this year; he really helped two of my fantasy teams. Rollins had a terrific season, and he helped his team reach the playoffs. This is not, I repeat, NOT a post from a bitter Mets fan about how much I hate Jimmy Rollins. I'm only looking at statistics here; that's all. The last thing I want to hear from anyone is that I'm not being fair to Rollins and I'm only seeing one side of the story, blah blah blah. This post is simply a statistical analysis; you'll never catch me making references to leadership and intangibles and red glasses and pre-season announcements.

Right off the bat I'm going to ignore Stolen Bases, Home Runs, and Runs Scored. We all know Rollins can steal bases with the best of them, and his 30 Home Runs, while not astounding, were quite impressive. Runs scored are absolutely meaningless, az STFU. These are the stats I will be using: Walks, OBP, SLG, OPS, OPS+, Runs Created, RC/27, Equivalent Average, Value Over Replacement Player, Win Probability Added, and Win Shares. And don't tell me that these stats don't capture all that Rollins brings to the table, because EqA, VORP, WPA, and Win Shares do just that. And just for the purposes of comparison, I chose eleven other players to examine, ten of whom got MVP votes, and one who's just interesting. Let's get started:

Walks: Jimmy Rollins walked 49 times this year, good for 46th in the NL. That's absolutely atrocious, especially for a leadoff hitter. Of all the guys on my list, only Ryan Braun had fewer walks, but he had over 200 fewer plate appearances than Rollins. I mean if you're Chase Utley and OBPing .410, then you're allowed to walk only 50 times, especially if you get injured and miss a bunch of games.
Noteworthy walkers: Pujols (99, 5th), Wright (94, 6th), Ryan Howard (107, 3rd), Todd Helton (116, 1st), Prince Fielder (90, 8th)

OBP: The .344 that Rollins posted is not good enough to be a leadoff hitter in the major leagues, and certainly not good enough to be MVP. In Moneyball, Bill James proclaimed that OBP is three times as important as SLG, az I think it should be more highly regarded by MVP voters.
Noteworthy On-Basers: Chipper Jones (.425, 3rd), Pujols (.429, 2nd), Wright (.416, 4th), Miguel Cabrera (.401, 7th), Matt Holliday (.405, 6th), Chase Utley (.410, 5th), Todd Helton (.434, 1st)

(Just as an aside. As I was looking up Chase Utley's stats on baseball-reference.com, I noticed that his full name is Chase Cameron Utley. I wonder if his parents were time-travelers and really liked House. Hameivin yavin.)

SLG: Rollins finally shows a bit of respectability here, posting a .531 SLG, good for 15th in the NL. Still not MVP worthy, but definitely above average, especially for a shortstop.
Noteworthy Sluggers: Jones (.604, 3rd), Pujols (.568, 5th), Cabrera (.565, 7th), Ryan Braun (.634, 1st if he qualified for the batting title), Holliday (.607, 2nd), Hanley Ramirez (.562, 8th), Fielder (.618, 1st), Utley (.566, 6th), Howard (.584, 4th)

OPS: Obviously since his OBP is terrible, his OPS will also be poor, although his SLG makes up for it. His .875 is 23rd in the NL and still very good for shortstops. If only he walked more I could actually take him seriously.
Noteworthy OPSers: Jones (1.029, 1st), Pujols (.997, 4th), Wright (.963, 8th), Cabrera (.965, 7th), Braun (1.004, 4th if he qualified), Holliday (1.012, 3rd), Ramirez (.948, 9th), Fielder (1.013, 2), Utley and Howard (.976, 5th)

Enough! This is ridiculous and tedious, and frankly I don't have the time for it. Let's just say that Rollins sucks in the rest of the stats as well:
118 OPS+, Chipper Jones: 166
135 Runs Created (5th), Matt Holliday: 151
.298 EqA, Jones: .340
66.1 VORP (9th), Hanley Ramirez: 89.5
3.20 WPA (15th), Holliday: 5.06
28 Win Shares (6th), Wright: 34

All How can this guy be an MVP? Great player, no question, but Pujols, Jones, Wright, Cabrera, Ramirez, Holliday, Utley, and Fielder are all superior choices.

Moving right along, the Mets decided not to sign Yorvit Torrealba to an absurd contract, and instead went with Johnny Estrada. Estrada's stats are better than Torrealba's, and Bill James predicts him to have a much better year than him, but there's one thing about Estrada that scares me. Of all players with at least 150 plate appearances last year, Estrada saw THE FEWEST pitches per at bat. Most players see around 3.75 pitchers per plate appearance, and the best see around 4.25. Last year, Estrada saw 2.99 pitches per plate appearances. HoJo better teach the man how to walk or else his playing time will drop.

Let's keep up with the hot stove and see what else gets cooked.

Letting it Go, and Another Thing I Won't Let Go

Apparently, the upper managment of the New York Metropolitans has heard the cries of our bondage, and has finally agreed to lead us out of the land of Torrealba. Reports are that the Mets have ceased negotiations with Torrealba and his agent. I guess they've decided to use the $14.4 million for something other than toilet tissue.

By the way, remember the old commercial for Publisher's Clearing House? "The house where dreams come true." Wasn't the tune to those words exactly the same as the tune for the end of the Chuck E. Cheese's commercial? "Where a kid can be a kid." For some reason I think they were the same.

Now that we're through with that bit of insanity, it's time to move on to another one. I've been saying this for the last month or so, and I really thought it might actually happen one of of this weeks. For the tenth straight game, the New England Patriots have emerged victorious, and for the ninth time out of the ten, they absolutely destroyed their opponent; this time they defeated the Buffalo Bills 56-10. As my esteemed colleague noted last night, "it's like they're playing Madden '08." Even with a 35-7 halftime lead, the Patriots continued to trot their best players out on the field in order to humiliate their opponent and flip a collective bird at the rest of the league. But honestly, what's the point of playing any sport? It's to win a championship. Why oh why is Coach Bill Belichick sending out his prized players after the outcome of the game has already been determined? I've been saying for the past month that they need to be punished. Seriously, the Bills hadn't even touched quarterback Tom Brady all night, yet they continued to play their conservative defense through the end of the game. I really think the Bills should have sent all eleven defenders after Tom Brady and knocked the stuffing out of him on every single play, even after the plays ended. Yes, the players and team would have been fined, and they would have given up more points, but so what? Bill Belichick needs to be taught a lesson. If he's going to say "F**k you!" to the NFL, then he deserves to have his players get hurt.

Now, I'm sure some of you out there are thinking "this guy's just a bitter Jets fan who hates the Patriots." I can assure you, that even though I am a Jets fan, I'm certainly not bitter, and I certainly don't hate the Patriots. And I absolutely do not wish any harm upon Mr. Brady; he is, after all, the father of G-d knows how many children. But for all of Bill Belichick's strategic genius, I honestly and truly believe that he deserves to be punished for putting in his best players when they have already won the game, and the vessel of G-d's wrath should be Brady.

I Can't Just Let This Go By Unnoticed

Player X: .255 BA, .323 OBP, .376 SLG, .699 OPS, 75 OPS+
Player Y: .285 BA, .331 OBP, .556 SLG, .887 OPS, 127 OPS+

One of these players was just signed by the Mets to a three year deal worth $14.4 million. The other was the Mets' backup catcher last year and makes no money. One of these players put up these numbers last year at Coors Field. The other put up his numbers at a pitcher-friendly Shea Stadium. Which one do you think is which?

Duh, Player X is the newly acquired Yorvit Torrealba, and Player Y is Ramon Castro. If Torrealba gets more at-bats this season than Castro I'm gonna go ballistic.

Yorvit Torrealba?!?!?!1?!?!1?!?!?! For almost $5 million a season?!?!!1?!!1?!!?! Are you freakin' kidding me?!?!?!1?!?!?!!1?!?!!

New Biggest Driving Pet-Peeve

Sorry to disappoint all of you, but my football post will have to wait. Just a quick thanks to one of my loyal readers for cutting my research time down by several hours.

Meanwhile, my nephew's bris was on Sunday morning. I'm proud to say that Binyamin Lev ben Yisroel Dov has entered into the covenant of Abraham, our forefather.

Here's a quickie. When I told one of my friends the name of my nephew, he was shocked because my brother and his father have the same Hebrew name, Yisroel Dov. And he said that it was a shame that his father's English name isn't as frum as my brother's, since his father is a Rabbi. Az then we got onto the topic of rabbis with secular names. Here are the ones we came up with. I will leave out last names so as not to embarrass anyone:
Rabbi Cary _____
Rabbi Dale _____
Rabbi Shawn Blair _____
Rabbi Harlan _____
I would love to hear some more from all of you; I think it's hilarious.

And now I will address the topic of my post. Before I start, I'll just say that it has been a pet-peeve of mine for a while, but now it's my biggest one. I've been noticing this more and more, recently, but the events of last night really take the cake.

I was driving back from a wedding with three women, and one of them requested to be dropped off on the Upper East Side. No problem, I know the East Side well, az it would only have taken an extra five minutes. The FDR Drive is great; I literally grew up on top of it, but when you're driving northbound you can get into trouble because the exits are spaced far apart. The woman requested to be dropped off on 86th street, az I could either have gotten off at 61st street or 96th street. I decided that 96th street was the better bet, so we just kept going. However, traffic stopped almost instantaneously after the 61st street exit. I turn on the radio and the first thing I hear is "I could give you 100 reasons to avoid the FDR Drive on the north-bound side." Oh good. Az we're sitting in traffic for about 20 minutes when we finally start to approach the 96th street exit. There's a long wait in the right lane because that's where everyone is going to exit. I'm waiting, and waiting, and waiting...and the exit is slowly drawing nearer, and cars from the middle lane are trying to force their way into the exit lane. This one guy tries to cut in front of me into the right lane, but he literally has zero room there, so I honk a few times and inch my way up right behind the car in front of me so the dude can't fit in, and he starts to go absolutely berserk. He screamed several obscenities, including some horrible things about my mother, although the meaning was lost through the two solid windows in between us. If it wasn't really late and raining, I would have asked him politely to retract his statments and apologize for using such language in the presence of women, but I was persuaded to just let him go through.

Here's the point. If you want to pass someone on the road because they're going slowly, you're more than welcome to do so. You're not screwing anybody by speeding up a bit to pass the slow guy. But if cars are lined up to exit, it's horrible manners to speed your way to the front of the line and then cut in. I promise we're not going slowly because we enjoy it. Please wait from the back of the line like everybody else. I don't care if your wife and children are suffering a lingering, rotting death; everyone else is in a hurry too. And the last thing you should be doing is expecting the cars to let you in, as if it's your G-d given right to do this. And also, please please don't honk your horn. I mean, when there are thousands of cars literally inches away from each other, honking your horn will do no good; we're all trying to go as quickly as we can. And also don't use foul language, especially in my car.

Thanks,

Your Friend,

Schmutter

Quick Update

Sorry I've been slacking for the last week or so. Things have been busy what with the new baby and all. For those of you who are not in the know, a baby boy was born to my brother and sister-in-law on Saturday morning, November 3rd, 2007, at 4:11 am via Caesarean Section. He was born at nine pounds, 14.8 ounces. Mother, father, and son have since left the hospital and are doing very well. They intend to move into their new apartment in the next two weeks.

Anyway, now that you're up to date, here's a coupla things I was thinking about over the last coupla days. Firstly, my "prediction" regarding Alex Rodriguez was right on target. Remember when I said: "Can you imagine what would happen if all the general managers got together and said 'What if none of us gives Alex Rodriguez a decent offer? What if we all decide that we're not gonna pay him more than $10 million a year instead of the $30 million+ that he's expecting?'" Now due to my horrifying lack of economical knowledge, I was unaware of the principal of collusion. No one else needs me to explain it, az I won't. I'm just a little bit shocked that I saw this happening.

Yesterday, my roommate who is not extremely knowledgeable in sports posed this question: "What is the most important statistic in Football?" He submitted that turnover differential might be it. I thought about it for a while, and I came up with two answers: a. starting field position, and b. percentage of offensive series resulting in a first down or a score. I'm pretty sure I should be able to find the starting field position stats for each team pretty easily, but since the second one isn't a tracked statistic I'll have to do that research myself. I'll try to get on that this weekend if I don't end up going to Atlantic City on Sunday afternoon. Anyone want to come with me?

T9 Trouble

I think y'all can figure out where this is going, but I'll do it anyway. Text Messaging has become huge in today's society, especially among members of the younger generation. Who cares that it can be more expensive than phone calls! Who cares that it takes ten minutes to write six words! Passing notes in class has become a thing of the past. As a matter of fact, last night I exchanged about a dozen (twelve) texts with someone who was no more than half a dozen (six) feet away from me. In the wake of the rise of the texting phenomenon, phone companies had to come up with a way to make it more efficient. Enter T9, iTap, and all their other smelly brethren. Now you don't have to punch 4666444664 to get the word "going," or 866->6->666777->7776663 to type "tomorrow." (If you'll notice, I like to hit the right arrow to move the cursor to type a letter on the same number as the previous letter. The other standard option is to let the cursor move by itself just by waiting a couple of seconds. I tend to grow impatient.) Instead, you can just punch 46464 for "going" and 86667763 for "tomorrow." This so called "predictive text" thing is terrific! I just increased my productivity by over 100%! But here's the problem, and you all knew it was coming. Sometimes the same number combination can produce different words. For example, and this happens all the time, 63 can either be "me" or "of." Another words, you need to proofread your texts these days. Here are some other fun examples, courtesy of Wikipedia:
5477 = kiss or lips (can you imagine? I want to lips you on the lips. Ignore that last text. I meant I want to lips you on the kiss. Crap! Forget it, let's be shomer.
22737 = acres, bards, bares, barfs, baser, bases, caper, capes, cards, cares, cases.
This is a cool one: 76476633 can be either "Smirnoff" or "poisoned."
I know this will happen to me one day because I'm a loser: "Will you go out with of? I mean will you go out with me?"
"I am 735328464 you."
"What? You're selecting me? Hurrah!"
"Umm, no. Sorry, Schmutter, I'm rejecting you."

Don't you just love pop culture?

I was hanging out with a friend last night while she was writing a paper, and it occurred to me that no one really writes papers any more. Honestly, when was the last time any of you wrote a paper with a pen or pencil? I know I haven't since like 5th grade. I think people should start saying "I have a paper to compose and type." That is obviously completely ridiculous, but isn't that what this is all about?

For those of you not interested in sports, know this: the next paragraph, while not sports-related, will be an introduction to the subsequent paragraph, which will be about sports. Another words, if you don't want to read about sports, stop after this paragraph. Anyway, remember back in high school a teacher would occasionally schedule an exam, or give you an assignment, which the entire class deemed unfair? Inevitably everyone would come together and decide that the class would boycott the test/assignment, because the teacher can't just fail everybody. But this never worked because there were always those goody-goody teacher's pets (read: Schmutters) in the class who were too scared to pull it off.

(Here..here's the sports part.) Can you imagine what would happen if all the general managers got together and said "What if none of us gives Alex Rodriguez a decent offer? What if we all decide that we're not gonna pay him more than $10 million a year instead of the $30 million+ that he's expecting?" This obviously would never happen, because inevitably one GM would think "hey, if I can get everyone else to go along with this I can get A-Rod for $11 million..." but wouldn't it be cool? Don't get me wrong, I really couldn't give a crap about how much money Alex Rodriguez makes, although if Barry Zito can make $126 million for seven years, the Rodriguez probably "deserves" to make at least 30. But wouldn't it be amazing if the entire league really stuck it to Rodriguez's agent Scott Boras? Boras, the guy who makes GMs nationwide collapse in collective apoplexy whenever a client of his becomes a free agent. The guy who ignores Major League Baseball rules by announcing A-Rod's decision to invoke his opt-out clause during the World Series. I would really love it if he got screwed.

Remember last year when I said that I was indifferent about the Mets signing Moises Alou for $7.5 million for one year? I heard this morning that they picked up Alou's option for another year. Now, I have nothing against Moises Alou; he's a very good offensive player. But he's like 139 years old and he only played 87 games last year. I really think the Mets should have Carlos Beltran, Carlos Gomez, and Lastings Milledge as the starting outfielders. Last year, Alou and Shawn Green earned a combined $19.33 million. Gomez and Milledge made a combined $766,000. I think they're both ready to play full time. Meanwhile, the Mets could spend the extra $18.67 million on a number two or three starter and a middle reliever or two. They could even (gasp!) make a run at signing A-Rod (I don't want to deal with this right now. I want to see what develops and then decide how I feel about it). I think the Mets should give the young'uns a chance.

Happy All Vegan Day.

Pitching Continued

Sorry to do this to all of you again, but because of a few discussions I had yesterday, I felt the need to defend myself. Hopefully this will be the last one; I don't want to lose any more readers than I already have.

Anyway, before I start, I said I would transcribe my brother's comment:
"Not that I agree (or disagree) with Ryan being in there, but I think you overlooked the "Bob's" as in Feller (1939 - 1948) and Gibson (1964 - 1973)."

Before I respond to that, I will explain a little bit of my methodology for choosing my players. At first, I browsed some stat lists and the Hall of Fame list to make my initial player list. Then I looked up their relevant stats. I immediately removed about six players from that initial list, az I was down to 34. Some of the 19 I chose from the 34 were obvious (Walter Johnson, Christy Mathewson, etc.), but others were very difficult. Right at the outset I should have said that many of the people on the bottom of the 19 are interchangeable with some that I left off the list; it's really a matter of preference. I imagine that the 19th and 20th greatest pitchers of all time were similarly successful. Anyway, here are the pitchers that were on the preliminary list but did not make the top 19:

Warren Spahn: 363 Ws, 382 CGs, 63 Shutouts, 3.09 ERA, 118 ERA+, 1.195 WHIP
Steve Carlton: 329 Ws, 254 CGs, 55 Shutouts, 4136 Ks, 7.135 K/9, 3.22 ERA, 115 ERA+, 1,247 WHIP
Gaylord Perry: 314 Ws, 303 CGs, 53 Shutouts, 3534 Ks, 3.11 ERA, 117 ERA+, 1.181 WHIP
Lefty Grove: 300 Ws, 298 CGs, 35 Shutouts, 3.06 ERA, 148 ERA+, 1.278 WHIP
Jim Palmer: 268 Ws, 211 CGs, 53 Shutouts, 2.86 ERA, 125 ERA+, 1.18 WHIP
Bob Feller: 266 Ws, 279 CGs, 44 Shutouts, 6.070 K/9, 3.25 ERA, 122 ERA+, 1.316 WHIP
Carl Hubbell: 253 Ws, 260 CGs, 36 Shutouts, 2.98 ERA, 130 ERA+, 1.166 WHIP
Bob Gibson: 251 Ws, 255 CGs, 56 Shutouts, 3117 Ks, 7.223 K/9, 2.91 ERA, 127 ERA+, 1.188 WHIP
Juan Marichal: 243 Ws, 244 CGs, 52 Shutouts, 2.89 ERA, 122 ERA+, 1.101 WHIP
Whitey Ford: 236 Ws, 156 CGs, 45 Shutouts, 2.75 ERA, 132 ERA+, 1.215 WHIP
Don Drysdale: 209 Ws, 167 CGs, 49 Shutouts, 2.95 ERA, 121 ERA+, 1.148 WHIP
John Smoltz: 207 Ws, 53 CGs, 16 Shutouts, 154 Saves, 2975 Ks, 7.952 K/9, 3.26 ERA, 127 ERA+, 1.170 WHIP
Dennis Eckersley: 197 Ws, 100 CGs, 20 Shutouts, 390 Saves, 3.50 ERA, 116 ERA+, 1.161 WHIP
Roy Oswalt: 112 Wins, 12 CGs, 4 Shutouts, 7.452 K/9, 3.07 ERA, 142 ERA+, 1.201 WHIP

As I mentioned to my friend last night, I would like to add a pitcher to my top 19. I put Babe Ruth on there because I thought it would be fun; now I'll put a real dude there. I admit I missed the boat on this one because I had never heard much about him:
Ed Walsh: 195 Ws, 250 CGs, 57 Shutouts, 1736 Ks, 5.271 K/9, 1.82 ERA, 146 ERA+, 1.000 WHIP

Here's the deal: the purpose of this post was not to list the 19 pitchers I would most want to pitch one game 7 of the World Series at their peak. I wanted to compile a list of the pitchers who had the best careers of all time. This is the crux of the argument I had with my friend last night. He would argue, based on yesterday's post, that Sandy Koufax, Addie Joss, Jack Chesbro, and Rube Waddell do not belong on my list. I will admit that Chesbro was a poor selection; I very much wanted to take note of his one ridiculous season. Chesbro's closing career line of 3.931 K/9 and 110 ERA+ are very pedestrian. I would like to retroactively remove him from the list.

That being said, I would like to explain why the other three should remain on the list. My friend maintains that a pitcher like Steve Carlton should be on the list because he was a terrific pitcher for 16 years. He claims that the last five-six years of his career should count less because he was older and was deteriorating. My argument is that if he plays poorly for long enough that his overall stats suffer, then he should be penalized for it. I think that if Carlton had retired in the early 80s instead of sticking around until 1988, he would be on the list. That's five full years of sub-par baseball forever attached to Carlton's stat line. My friend would argue that the other players I mentioned (Koufax, Joss, Waddell) got "lucky" that they never deteriorated or never had the opportunity to have those few bad seasons before they retired. I wouldn't exactly call Addie Joss lucky; he died of tubercular meningitis when he was 31. Waddell was "lucky" enough to learn and perfect pitching while outside of the Major Leagues, so he never went through a development stage. And Koufax literally destroyed his arm during the 1965 season, and despite the advice of his team physician he went out to pitch in 1966 and had another unbelievable year. He was forced to retire after that season even though he was at the peak of his performance.

Now, my friend would like to say that these pitchers would have worse career stats if they had played late into their 30s, and this is entirely possible. But I choose not to penalize players for the what-might-have-beens. In "Moneyball," Michael Lewis conveys Billy Beane's preference to draft players who have been successful; he doesn't go for the guys who have a lot of upside potential. I choose to do the same thing here. I don't care about what those guys might have done if they had played ten more years; I care about how they performed when they did play. And Koufax played to the tune of a 2.76 ERA, a 1.106 WHIP, and 9.278 K/9. Some of those other guys who played a long time have worse stats, mostly because they stuck around for too long. Carlton finished his career with a 3.22 ERA. Feller finished his career with a 1.316 WHIP, the highest on my list.

The only player I'm really penalizing for something out if his control is Bob Gibson. By all measures he deserves to be on my top 19. The reason I am penalizing him is because for only the 1968 season the pitcher's mound was raised, and pitchers as a whole enjoyed a season of success. The league ERA was 2.90 that year. The next lowest league ERA during Gibson's career was 3.27. Gibson enjoyed this season most of all:
22 Ws, 28 CGs, 13 Shutouts, 268 Ks, 1.12 ERA, 258 ERA+, 0.853 WHIP
Let's look at what happens to his career stats when you remove the 1968 season: his WHIP rises from 1.188 to 1.217, and his ERA rises from 2.91 to 3.07.
That's still a very nice career, but definitely less super-human. I guess I'm not being entirely fair; I really should replace that season with an average Gibson season, but that's too much work.

Anyway, keep your thoughts coming; I've already finished my work for the month, and there are still five business days to go. I'll need something to keep me occupied.

The K-Zone

Before I begin, I just want to publicize that today is International Stuttering Awareness Day. As a former severe stutterer (and a current occasional stutterer), I feel that it's important for everyone to recognize this disorder and to try to be patient in our dealings with people who stutter. It can be an extremely embarassing and frustrating condition, az at least today, please try to be extra-sensitive. Thanks.

Intro #2: I'm on full-time baby-alert from yesterday until whenever my sister-in-law gives birth. If you're hanging out with me, or if you're in the car with me or something, just know that I might have to leave at a moment's notice. For G-d's sake, we're on the brink of having another Schmutter in the world; things are about to get a whole lot crazier.

And now, the steak.

You guys wouldn't believe how many of my readers were up-in-arms about my pitching list. Would you belive it was only one? Still, he was disgusted that I put Nolan Ryan on my list over Warren Spahn, Steve Carlton and Lefty Grove. Needless to say, all three had outstanding careers, and one could make a case that they belong on the list over Ryan. Grove has two things over Ryan:
1. His ERA+ of 148 dominates Ryan's 112, even though their raw ERAs are very similar (3.06 to 3.19).
2. His record of 300-144 rocks Ryan's 324-292
Grove also had one horrifyingly good MVP season in 1931:
31-4 Record, 27 CGs, 4 Shutouts, 175 Ks, 2.06 ERA, 1.077 WHIP

Carlton and Ryan have numbers that are almost identical. They both struck out a lot of guys (4136 and 5714), they both have the exact same WHIP (1.247), and their ERAs are virtually the same (3.22 and 3.19). Carlton also "suffers" from the Grove/Koufax "what do you say I go ahead and be ridiculously dominant for a coupla seasons." As my friend pointed out so astutely, Carlton literally carried his team in 1972, when he won over 40% of the games that the Phillies won:
27-10 Record, 30 CGs, 8 Shutouts, 310 Ks, 1.97 ERA, 0.993 WHIP (Phillies won 59 games that year)
We'll get to Warren Spahn in a second.

Now I've made cases for both Carlton and Grove to appear on my list. At this point I'd like to dip into something I learned in Pro Football Prospectus 2007. Using their complex statistical theory, they determined that a running-back who consistently gets three to four yards a carry but does not get any big runs of ten or more yards is more valuable in the long term than a back who gets stuffed at or behind the line sometimes but breaks for big runs more often. You feel me? Let me try that again. Let's say Player Q and Player J both have 200 carries for 1000 yards in one season; they both average 5.0 yards per carry. Now let's say Player Q gains exactly five yards on every single carry, but player J alternates between having five straight carries of zero yards each and five straight carries of ten yards each. Which player is more valuable in the long run? According to their analysis, Player Q is more valuable, because each time he carries the ball, he has a successful play. If they give him the ball on every play, eventually they will score a touchdown on every drive. However, player J will probably produce very few touchdowns, because his team will be forced to punt all the time.

Let's get back to baseball. Nolan Ryan, I believe, was a more valuable player over the course of his career than Grove or Carlton. Ryan was never a feast or famine pitcher like the other two; he never had a stretch of dominant seasons. His best ERA in any season in which he got more than 25 starts was 2.76, very nice but nowhere near as good as the seasons I mentioned above. But for basically 25 years you knew what you were getting with Ryan; a guy who was going to give you seven or eight (or nine) solid innings and a chance to win the game. Warren Spahn was very similar; he never had any over-the-top outstanding seasons (except maybe 1953: 23-7 record, 2.10 ERA, 188 ERA+), but he was always solid year-in and year-out. I just don't think he compiled good enough numbers to merit being on the list (2583 Ks, 3.09 ERA, 118 ERA+). Anyway, as far as I'm concerned, here's the key: The most predictable pitchers are the ones who have success with repeatable statistics. Here's what I mean:
As my friends at beyondtheboxscore.com (and many others) state, for the most part, the pitcher and the batter are in control of three things: walks, home runs, and strikeouts. Anything other than one of these "Three True Outcomes," or TTO for short, depends on luck and defense (at least for now. Baseball technology is always progressing, and eventually there will be substantial and trustworthy tools for determining trajectories and flight patterns of baseballs so that we can better analyze which players are better at hitting line drives and which pitchers are better at preventing them). As I've said before, a strikeout pitcher will tend to be more effective because a player can't get any hits if he doesn't put the ball in play. And if a pitcher can prevent hitters from hitting the ball in the air, then it's likely the ball will never leave the yard. Another words, the pitchers who will have the most success in the long run are the ones who consistently strike out a lot of hitters and give up few home runs. That's why Nolan Ryan was so successful for such a long time; he was really good at striking hitters out and at keeping the ball in the yard.

And just for argument's sake, don't ever mention Wins as a viable statistic when determining pitching skill. I mean, obviously a great pitcher will manage to win a lot of games, but when comparing pitchers you definitely can't use them. You can't say Spahn was better than Ryan because he had 39 more wins. I mean from 1953 onward, Spahn pitched on some pretty outstanding Milwaukee Braves teams; they averaged around 90 wins a year for the 13 years Spahn pitched there. Ryan pitched on some pretty awful teams in New York, California, Texas, and Houston. Those teams gave him fewer than four runs of support each game, and that made it a lot harder to win. I would venture to say that if he got half a run more support per game for his career, Ryan would have 50 more wins.

Anyway, here are the stats for Grove, Carlton and Ryan: (Strikouts per nine innings, Hits per nine innings, Walks per nine innings, and Home Runs per nine innings)
Grove: 5.175 K/9, 8.791 H/9, 2.711 BB/9, 0.370 HR/9
Carlton: 7.135 K/9, 8.059 H/9, 3.162 BB/9, 0.714 HR/9
Ryan: 9.548 K/9, 6.555 H/9, 4.670 BB/9, 0.536 HR/9

I think this presents a very compelling argument in favor of Nolan Ryan over the other two. Carlton was absolutely an amazing pitcher, maybe the best left-hander ever, but compared to these other two he sure did give up a lot of hits and home runs. Grove did an excellent job of keeping the ball in the yard, but he struck out so few batters (which was pretty standard during the 30s) and gave up so many hits that his WHIP was too high for me to put him in the top 19. As I mentioned in my paragraph about Ryan in my pitcher post, he walked the most guys of anyone ever. By far. It's for that reason, and that reason alone, that there's even a discussion about how great he was. But look how few hits he gave up! If you're basically walking or striking out every batter that comes to the plate, you're going to be pretty successful, especially if you have a rubber arm and can throw 150 pitches per game like Ryan did.

I think I've done an admirable job of defending myself, but since I love doing this I'd really love to hear some feedback from some of you, especially from the person who inspired to do this extra research.

Tomorrow's post: Why Sandy Koufax was head and shoulders above the Bobs (Feller and Gibson). I'll transcribe the comment I got from my brother through Blogger (he doesn't use facebook; he's an old fogey).

Tzedakah Etiquette

As everyone knows, riding the subway can be a frustrating experience. This morning was just one such example. I arrived at the 59th street station at about 8:57, and a B or D train usually comes shortly. There are few things more frustrating than waiting for a B or D train and watching a C, an A, and then another C come by before the B or D. I'm sure you all notice this all the time. Like you'll be waiting on 59th street to go back uptown on the A and three Bs, four Cs, and two Ds come before the A finally arrives. And somehow this always seems to happen on a Friday when you're in a rush to get home for Shabbat. Anyway, that's just my daily vent.

Now, I'll be the first to admit that I'm not the biggest ba'al chesed (good-deed doer) in the world, but one thing I find easy to do is give charity. Hopefully none of you will ever be in the position to have to beg, but if ever you do, please learn from my experiences with beggars:

1. I mention this topic today because I was leaving Milk and Honey at about 1:00, and I was accosted by a Jewish man asking for tzedakah right outside the entrance. Firstly, the man was exceedingly rude. He did not ask for money; he demanded that he be given it. Not only that, but when I ignored him and kept walking, he actually nudged me with his hand. If you're a beggar, don't ever EVER touch people; it's gross.

2. This one might only be annoying to me, but I'll hear what you have to say. Everyone knows that the subways are riddled with panhandlers, and some are more creative than others. It's rare that one will actually experience a peaceful subway ride; there will inevitably be one or more people playing music and collecting charity afterwards. Now I would posit that a person or people with a talent would be less likely to make money begging, because they actually have something positive to contribute to society. Meanwhile, I'm sure there are a lot of subway riders who find the music players annoying and would have gladly given to a normal beggar rather than being disturbed by the constant noise. I usually spend my subway rides reading or learning, az I hate when my subway car turns into a concert hall, especially during sefirah or the three weeks.

3. The remainder of my noteworthy tzedakah experiences occurred while I was in Israel. Right around Rosh Hashana time, I was approached by a woman right outside Sha'ar Ha'ashpot near the Wall, and she wouldn't stop bother me about "Rav Bina!! Rav Binaaaa!!" Anyway, when I went to give her a few one and two shekel coins she refused to take them stating that she would only accept paper money. Somehow, in my naivete, she finagled a 50 shekel bill from me. G-d knows I'll never let that happen again.

4. On most Thursday afternoons and Saturday nights during my year in Israel, I would find myself on Ben Yehudah street. I would often be engaged in conversation with a number of other people at the same time, just standing on the street. There used to be an old man who spoke no English (and no Hebrew as far as I could tell) who carried around those red strings to give to people who gave him charity. Anyway, he used to barge his way in on our conversations and shake his finger at us threatingly. I never gave that guy. I mean, I don't blame him for panhandling on Ben Yehuda, since it was always filled with rich American kids, but do it the right way. Like this dude:

5. In much the same way as the crazy old man, there used to be a nice gentleman who would traverse Ben Yehuda street with his wife and kid, and they would also look for groups of us and ask us for tzedakah. The difference is that this man spoke proper English and spoke humbly and apologetically. He would apologize profusely for disturbing us, and then would ask us if we could spare the smallest amount of money so that his wife and kid could eat. He was kind and friendly, and I would always give him.

Another words, don't be rude. Don't think that anyone owes you anything. Don't treat those who are more fortunate than you with disdain. Don't look a gift-horse in the mouth. Say "please" and "thank you."

Geez, look at me trying to lecture people on begging etiquette. These people mamash have NOTHING, and I'm busting their chops? Who the hell do I think I am? I'm a monster. Ignore everything I just said.

Let's Do Pitchers

Let's do pitchers. Now in my last post I mentioned exactly 19 position players. 19 is a very special number to me for the following two reasons:
1. It is one of the prime factors of 190, which is the largest number such that it and all of its prime factors are palindromes in Roman Numerals. I'll let you read that again.

Digest it...

Chew it up into bite-size pieces...

See, 190 is CXC in Roman Numerals, and its prime factors, 2, 5, and 19, are II, V, and XIX in Roman Numerals, respectively (yeah, that was nine commas. That's too many...).

2. 19 is the number of resource hexes in Settlers of Catan.

Anyway, it's for those reasons that I will list 19 pitchers on my all-time team. And here they are:

(FYI, ERA+ is defined as a pitcher's ERA as compared to league average, also taking into account other factors such as ballpark and opponent. 100 is league average.)

Starting Five:

1. Walter Johnson (417 Wins, 531 Complete Games, 110 Shutouts, 3508 Strikeouts, 2.17 ERA, 146 ERA+, 1.06 WHIP)
The Big Train was definitely one of the greatest pitchers of all time. Don't get fooled by the low ERA, however; there weren't a whole lot of runs scored before the 1920s. Still, his ERA was about 38% better than league average for his career. His WHIP was also outstanding, fifth lowest of all time for starters who pitched over 1000 innings. Check out his 1912 and 1913 seasons:
1912: 33 Wins and 12 Losses, 303 Ks, 1.39 ERA, 240 ERA+, 0.908 WHIP
1913: 36 Wins and 7 Losses, 243 Ks, 1.14 ERA, 259 ERA+, 0.780 WHIP(!), and the MVP
As we get later in time, keep in mind that the pitchers pitched far fewer innings (Johnson threw 5914.2) and completed far fewer games. Still, Johnson has the most shutouts of all time, and his strikeouts per nine innings of 5.34 was very high for that era.

2. Christy Mathewson (373 Ws, 434 CGs, 79 Shutouts, 2.13 ERA, 135 ERA+, 1.054 WHIP)
Mathewson invented the screwball, and became almost unhittable for several years because of it. Check out these stats for the years 1907-09:
Wins: 24, 37, 25
Shutouts: 8, 11, 8
Strikeouts: 178, 259, 149
ERA: 2.00, 1.43, 1.14
ERA+: 123, 168, 222
WHIP: 0.962, 0.837, 0.828
His 37 wins in 1908 is third most all time in a season. In 1905, Mathewson pitched three complete game shutouts for the Giants in the World Series, giving up a combined 14 hits in the three games. ESPN selected this performance as the greatest in playoff history. The Sporting News ranks him as the seventh greatest player of all time. He was rightfully elected as one of the inaugural members of the National Baseball Hall of Fame along with legends Babe Ruth, Walter Johnson, Honus Wagner, and Ty Cobb.

Mordecai "Three-Finger" Brown (239 Ws, 271 CGs, 55 Shutouts, 2.06 ERA, 138 ERA+, 1.066 WHIP)
Brown became famous around the turn of the century for his pinpoint control and his unusual amount of spin on pitches. His throwing hand became mangled in a farming accident, and he turned this to his advantage, developing a deceptive curveball and change-up. His matchups with Christy Mathewson were the premier pitching events of the era. From 1906 to 1909 he and Mathewson were the absolute elite pitchers in baseball. In each of those seasons, Brown won at least 20 games, posted an ERA below 2.00, and had a WHIP below 1.000. Here is his pitching line from 1906:
26 Wins, 6 Losses, 144 Strikeouts, 1.04 ERA (lowest all time for a starting pitcher), 253 ERA+, 0.934 WHIP
His career 2.06 ERA is third lowest of all time for starters, and the lowest all time for pitchers who logged over 3000 innings.

Pedro Martinez (209 Ws, 3030 Ks, 10.201 K/9, 2.80 ERA, 160 ERA+, 1.03 WHIP)
Pedro is truly one of a kind. He is really a small dude for a modern baseball player at 5'11" and 170 lbs, and for such a "little" guy he's got the longest fingers I've ever seen. Anyway, nobody dominated his era quite like Pedro has. His 160 career ERA+ is the highest all time for any starter with over 1000 innings pitched. And his 2000 season might be the greatest season of all time for a pitcher:
18 Wins, 6 Losses, 7 CGs, 4 Shutouts, 284 Ks, 1.74 ERA, 285 ERA+ (highest all-time), 0.737 WHIP (also best ever)
I hope he's back for a full season next year; the Mets really need him.

Sandy Koufax (165 Ws, 40 Shutouts, 2396 Ks, 9.278 K/9, 2.76 ERA, 131 ERA+, 1.106 WHIP)
At the point of his retirement, Koufax was tops or close to it in almost every rate statistic. He was the first starter to finish his career having averaged more than one strikeout an inning. He is widely considered to be the greatest pitcher of all time at his peak, which lasted about six years, from 1961-6. In the final four years of his career he won at least 19 games, had an ERA no higher than 2.04, and a WHIP below 1.000. He was named to the All-Century Team, and was ranked 26th on The Sporting News's list of top 100 players. Just this year, he was honored as the last pick in the inaugural Israel Baseball League draft. In the words of Art Shamsky, former Mets player and current manager of Modi'in Miracle: "His selection is a tribute to the esteem with which he is held by everyone associated with this league. It's been 41 years between starts for him. If he's rested and ready to take the mound again, we want him on our team."

Relievers:

Denton True Young (7356 IP, 511 Ws, 749 CGs, 76 Shutouts, 2803 Ks, 2.63 ERA, 138 ERA+, 1.13 WHIP)
The man for whom the most prestigious pitching award in baseball is named hardly needs any introduction. He practically invented the art of pitching. He logged more innings and won more games than anyone ever. Additionally, Sabermetricians love him; from 1893 to 1906 he led the league in fewest walks per nine innings 13 times, and led the league in WHIP seven times. He is ranked 14th on The Sporting News's list of top 100 players and was named to the All-Century Team.

Grover Cleveland Alexander (373 Ws, 437 CGs, 90 Shutouts, 2.56 ERA, 135 ERA+, 1.121 WHIP)
Another outstanding pitcher, who is tied for the most wins in the National League with Christy Mathewson. He led the NL in ERA four times, wins five times, and strikeouts six times. The Sporting News ranked him 12th on the all-time list of players.

Roger Clemens (354 Wins, 118 CGs, 46 Shutouts, 4672 Ks, 8.553 K/9, 3.12 ERA, 143 ERA+, 1.173 WHIP)
I can't believe this guy is still pitching effectively. Some of those numbers up there are absolutely absurd for this day and age. Somehow, he managed to not only stay effective but improve during the steroid era. In addition to the impressive array of statistics above, he has also won a record seven Cy Young awards. His 4672 strikeouts are second all time to Nolan Ryan, and he's still going. He is currently ranked number 15 on The Sporting News's list, and he keeps rising. He is one of very few modern pitchers to win an MVP award, which he did in 1986.

Greg Maddux (347 Ws, 109 CGs, 35 Shutouts, 3273 Ks, 3.11 ERA, 134 ERA+, 1.141 WHIP)
You know, as much as he as vexed me and my Mets over the years, I never realized how truly dominant he was in the mid-90s. For a guy with a mediocre fastball to strike out that many guys is amazing; he's 12th all time. Did any of you even remember that he won four straight Cy Young awards from 1992 to 1995? Look at these two seasons:
1994 (strike-shortened): 16 Ws, 6 Ls, 10 CGs, 3 Shutouts, 31 BBs, 156 Ks, 1.56 ERA, 273 ERA+, 0.896 WHIP
1995: 19 Ws, 2 Ls, 23 BBs(!), 181 Ks, 1.63 ERA, 259 ERA+, 0.811 WHIP
Those seasons are borderline Pedro-esque. And he's still going. He'll definitely make it to 350 wins next season. Need I even mention the 16 Gold Gloves at the Pitcher position? A recent poll was taken from among a bunch of current players, and they were asked who the smartest person in baseball is. The only player (i.e. not a (general) manager) who received votes was Mr. Maddux.

Nolan Ryan (324 Ws, 222 CGs, 61 Shutouts, 5714 Ks, 9.548 K/9, 3.19 ERA)
There is a lot to be said about Nolan Ryan. No one ever pitched as long as Ryan did; his career spanned 27 seasons. For that reason he was able to amass incredible mounts of wins, and strikeouts (most all time by over 1000. His 383 Ks in 1973 remain a record). He has thrown the most no-hitters in history (seven), and holds the record for fewest hits allowed per nine innings among starters (6.56). However, due to his "power-pitcher" status and his longevity, he also holds the modern record for losses (292) and walks (2795, 962 more than second place.) Nonetheless, 27 seasons of Nolan Ryan are pretty darn good. One of the lasting images of my childhood is of a young Robin Ventura charging a 40+ year old Nolan Ryan on the mound after getting struck by a pitch. The still spry Ryan caught the 22 year old Ventura in a headlock and pummeled him in the head as the benches cleared. That dude was tough.

Tom Seaver (311 Ws, 231 CGs, 61 Shutouts, 3640 Ks, 2.86 ERA, 127 ERA+, 1.121 WHIP)
Tom Terrific obviously holds a special place in my heart because he is one of the three Mets whose number is retired, and he is the only one enshrined in Cooperstown to sport a Mets cap. I don't think I need to talk about his numbers much, but I would like to point out, for what it's worth, that at the time of his induction he received the highest percentage of votes of anyone ever, 425 out of 430. He was regarded by his peers as the best pitcher of his generation. The Sporting News ranks him as the 16th greatest player ever.

Randy Johnson (284 Ws, 98 CGs, 37 Shutouts, 4616 Ks, 10.776 K/9, 3.22 ERA, 137 ERA+)
The Big Unit has been among the most, if not the most intimidating pitcher of his time. At 6'10" tall, and pitching with a pronounced side-arm motion, batters have felt that Johnson appears to throw from much closer than other pitchers. Here's an amusing anecdote, which I'm sure many of you will remember. Back in the mid-90s in the All-Star game, Johnson had thrown a pitch inside to Phillies slugger John Kruk. Kruk was so afraid to get back into the box that he held the bat upside down for the next pitch. And who can forget the incident in spring training in 2001 when a 95 mph fastball seemed to spontaneously combust into a shower of feathers; Johnson had actually struck a bird in mid-flight. And now a couple of numbers. Johnson and Clemens are basically neck-and-neck in the race to finish second all-time in strikeouts. Johnson also has the highest K/9 of any starter ever.

Rube Waddell (193 Ws, 261 CGs, 50 Shutouts, 2316 Ks, 7.039 K/9, 2.16 ERA, 134 ERA+, 1.102 WHIP)
Waddell was the league's first true power-pitcher. No one had ever struck batters out as often as Waddell did. In 1903, Waddell led the league in strikeouts with 302, 115 more than second place. And in 1904 he had 349, 110 more than second place. Those 349 strikouts remained a record for one season for 60 years, and nobody struck out 300+ in two consecutive seasons until Sandy Koufax came along. If Babe Ruth is considered the inventor of the home run, then Waddell should certainly be considered the father of the strikeout.

Jack Chesbro (198 Wins, 260 CGs, 35 Shutouts, 2.68 ERA, 1.15 WHIP)
Chesbro was a contemporary of Waddell, and he actually was second in strikeouts to Waddell in 1904, the year Waddell had 349. Chesbro had an impressive enough career to garner a Hall of Fame election, even though his career only lasted for eleven seasons. Chesbro is noteworthy for having a most remarkable season in 1904:
41 Wins, 48 CGs, 6 Shutouts, 239 Ks, 1.82 ERA, 148 ERA+, 0.937 WHIP
His 41 wins remain a record that will probably never be broken.

Addie Joss (160 Wins, 234 CGs, 45 Shutouts, 1.89 ERA, 142 ERA+, 0.968 WHIP)
I love these old-school guys from the turn of the century; they're so interesting. Joss does not really get the recognition he deserves because his career was cut short by meningitis resulting in his early death at the age of 31. But for nine years he was one of the most dominant pitchers this league has ever seen. He has the lowest WHIP ever for any starter with more than 1000 innings. His election into the Hall of Fame in 1978 was also noteworthy because in order to be eligible, a player needs ten years of service. Joss is the only player for whom this rule was waived.

Johan Santana (98 Ws, 1381 Ks, 9.501 K/9, 3.22 ERA, 142 ERA+, 1.094 WHIP)
And he's only 28! In his eight years of service, Santana has proven to be the most dominant active pitcher. I can only imagine how much money he's going to make on his next contract (read: I can only imagine how much money the Yankees are going to throw at him). He has already won two Cy Young awards, both unanimously, and I'm sure he has a few more in him.

Closers:

Mariano Rivera (953 IP, 62 Ws, 443 SVs, 857 Ks, 8.093 K/9, 2.35 ERA, 194 ERA+, 1.046 WHIP)
Mo is almost unanimously considered to be the greatest closer of all-time, partially due to his almost pristine post-season resume. In 76 post-season appearances he has this line:
8 Ws, 1 Loss, 0.77 ERA, 34 Saves. It's hard to believe that every single batter who faces him knows exactly what pitch is coming, the greatest cut-fastball of all time, and they still can't hit it.

Billy Wagner (771 IP, 39 Ws, 358 SVs, 1014 Ks, 11.837 K/9, 2.40 ERA, 179 ERA+, 1.016 WHIP)
Hah, didn't see this one coming. But seriously, look at his numbers. He has the highest K/9 of any pitcher with more than 500 IP ever. Can't really do a whole lot if you can't put the ball in play. No reliever has thrown more pitches above 100 mph since the invention of the radar gun. He's still got a few years left in him, az we'll have to see if he gets the recognition he deserves.

And finally, just for fun:
Clemens: 118 CGs, 3.12 ERA, 1.173 WHIP
Young: 3.429 K/9, 2.63 ERA, 1.13 WHIP
Ryan: 3.19 ERA, 112 ERA+, 1.247 WHIP
Mystery Guest: 94 Ws, 107 CGs, 3.597 K/9, 2.28 ERA, 122 ERA+, 1.159 WHIP
Any guesses? It's Nick Punto! Just kidding. It's Babe Ruth! Geez, he coulda been a Hall of Fame pitcher too.

Okay, folks. Thanks for indulging my sweet tooth and allowing me to wallow in my own crapulence (how's that for a Simpsons reference!) for a short while. We'll return to my usual stupidity and lunacy next time.

100

I wanted to do something special for my 100th post, but then I thought, wait, 100 is just an arbitrary number with no more significance than 99 or 101. Like remember when The Simpsons had the 138th Episode Spectacular, and Bart wrote "I will not celebrate meaningless milestones" on the blackboard? Well, this is kinda like that, so enjoy.

Before we get things started I got a special request this week from a special reader to continue using the word "az." Now in order to reward my loyal readers, I will explain its origin. Seven years ago I spent an amazing six months at Yeshivat Hakotel in Jerusalem, the holy city. The head of the Yeshiva is Rav Aharon Bina, and his mastery over the English language is, umm, suspect. Not only that, but he refuses to actually speak to us in Hebrew for some reason. Anyway, he ALWAYS used the Hebrew word "az" instead of the English word "so," and anyone who ever does any impressions of him invariably will use the word "az" at one point or another. In an effort to please all my readers as much as possible, I will intermittently use the word "az" in the place of "so," az don't get scared.

Last night I went to a birthday party at a bar/club-ish type place on the upper west, and around midnight, there was quite a line to get in. While I was waiting I overheard that after midnight, patrons need to pay a $10 cover fee to enter, which was a tiny bit annoying because I got on line at 11:56, but okay, what can you do? I finally get to the front of the line, and the nice lady sitting by the door was clearly not having the best of nights, what with the constant pushing and complaining of long-time line-waiters. She even got so annoyed at a couple of women who were speaking ill of her once they got inside that she had the bouncer escort them out. (The cool part is that when the women were brought back outside one of the used the classic "what's your name?" line. You know like when you're having trouble with a Dell tech-support person or a verizon technician on the phone, and you want to scare them into helping you more, and you ask them their names so that you can tell their managers how poorly their help was? Anyway, the bouncer didn't even flinch; it was brilliant.) Now I was certainly in no hurry to get in, az I just engaged the woman in conversation, saying how people should chill out a little bit, and not always be so self-centered, and try to be more considerate, etc. So when I was finally allowed in she said I was nice and gave me a ticket so I wouldn't have to pay the cover. Az if you include the $10 I saved at the Verizon store (see the post "Fine, No Sports This Time (Much...), from July 17th, 2007), that's $20 I've saved so far just by being a nice guy. Lessons for all to learn...

Now we're getting to the delicious, room-temperature, creamy center of the Ring Ding that is my 100th post. I was discussing a few baseball related tidbits with my roommate the other day, and we decided we'd both come up with our all-time baseball teams. So I spent a little while at work compiling a spreadsheet with data about the top-players in history at each position. I haven't gotten around to looking up pitchers yet, but I'll get there next time. I'm going to list my all-time team and a few backups, along with some comments about each. (See my post "At the Risk of Losing Readership, Another Baseball Post" for the definitions of the stats.) Here goes:

Catcher: Mike Piazza (.308 BA, .922 OPS, 143 OPS+, 427 HR, 2127 Hits, .313 EqA)
And frankly, it's not even close. Piazza blows away the competition with a career OPS of .922 as compared to Yogi Berra at .830 and Johnny Bench at .818. His Equivalent Average also dominates any competitors at .313. No other catcher has a career EqA above .300. Granted, his defensive skills are definitely lacking, but he more than makes up for it with his hitting. It's Piazza in a landslide. Honestly, I thought this would be a lot closer, but I was wrong.
Backup: Bench (389 HR, 1376 RBI)

First Base: Lou Gehrig (Umm, everything: 1.079 OPS, 179 OPS+, .340 BA, 493 HR, 1995 RBI, 2721 Hits, .346 EqA, 10.8 RC/27)
I've only seen numbers of this magnitude from one other player ever (and we'll get to him a little later). Gehrig is just head and shoulders above all other first basemen. A 1.079 career OPS is just plain unheard-of these days. Even Alex Rodriguez who just completed one of the greatest offensive seasons of all time only had an OPS of 1.067. He really was one of the luckiest men on the face of the earth to have all that talent.
Backup: Albert Pujols (1.040 OPS, 169 OPS+, .332 BA, .342 EqA)

Second Base: Rogers Hornsby (1.011 OPS, 175 OPS+, 9.9 RC/27, .358 BA, 301 HR, 1584 RBI, 2930 Hits, .337 EqA)
And here all along I thought I was going to have to pick Joe Morgan, but once again this race isn't really close either. There has never been another second baseman to have a career OPS above 1.000, and for a period of eight years, Hornsby was absolutely unstoppable. From 1922 to 1929 (keeping in mind that he only played 107 games in 1923), these are his relevant stats:
Runs: 141, 89, 121, 133, 96, 133, 99, 156
Hits: 250, 163, 227, 203, 167, 205, 188, 229
Home Runs: 42, 17, 25, 39, 11, 26, 21, 39
RBI: 152, 83, 94, 143, 93, 125, 94, 149
Strikeouts: 50, 29, 32, 39, 39, 38, 41, 65
Batting Average: .401, .384, .424, .403, .317, .361, .387, .380
On-Base-Percentage: .459, .459, .507, .489, .388, .448, .498, .459
Slugging Percentage: .722, .627, .696, .756, .463, .586, .632, .679
OPS+ (remember, 100 is average): 207, 186, 222, 210, 124, 175, 200, 178
Jesus Freakin' Christ, this guy was a monster. And he was a bleeping second baseman!
Backup: Joe Morgan (132 OPS+, 268 HR, 1133 RBI, 689 SB, 2517 Hits, .311 EqA)

Shortstop: Honus Wagner (150 OPS+, .327 BA, 1732 RBI, 722 SB, 3415 Hits)
He's really the classic example of a dominant player from the dead-ball era. He only hit 101 home runs in his career, but still drove in about a zillion runs (18th all time) and hit a million extra base hits. It's no wonder his T206 card was once auctioned for $2.8 million. This is where my list got kind of dicey, because I wanted to limit my selections to players who have played at least 1000 games at his position, but the 3rd base position has been historically weak, so I made an exception. I selected Alex Rodriguez as my starting 3rd baseman and as the backup to Wagner, and put two backup 3rd basemen instead.
Backup: Alex Rodriguez

Third Base: Alex Rodriguez (.967 OPS, 148 OPS+, .306 BA, 518 HR, 1503 RBI, 265 SB, 2250 H, .324 EqA)
He's only played 621 games at 3rd base, but I'll give him a break because he's still active and he's way better than George Brett and Mike Schmidt ever were. What's interesting is that once again, even his historically good season isn't nearly as good as some of the seasons from back in the day, but it's a different game today. Anyway, by the time his career is over he'll be better than Brett and Schmidt in every single statistical category, and he already is in most of them. In six or seven more years he'll surpass Brett in hits, and he should pass Schmidt in home runs this coming season (518 to 548). I imagine he'll also end up with the requisite 1000 games as a 3rd baseman eventually.
Backups: Brett and Schmidt

Left Field: Ted Williams (1.116 OPS, 190 OPS+, 12 RC/27, .344 BA, 521 HR, 1839 RBI, .364 EqA)
Yeah, okay, maybe the greatest hitter ever. If he hadn't gone to serve his country in World War II and hadn't gotten hurt for about two seasons, he might have compiled a far more impressive array of numbers. He would definitely have gotten 3500 hits, 600 homers, and 2000 RBI. As it is, he had absolutely mind-boggling stats.
Backup: Barry Bonds (1.051 OPS, 182 OPS+, 762 HR, 1996 RBI, 514 SB, 2935 Hits, .356 EqA)

Center Field: Ty Cobb
Before you all get to roasting me for not picking Willie Mays, I just want to compare the stats, because this was really the toughest decision.
Cobb: .366 BA, .433 OBP, .512 SLG, .945 OPS, 167 OPS+, 8.8 RC/27, 117 HR, 1938 RBI, 892 SB, 4289 Hits, .329 EqA
Mays: .302 BA, .384 OBP, .557 SLG, .941 OPS, 156 OPS+, 7.9 RC/27, 660 HR, 1903 RBI, 338 SB, 3283 Hits, .328 EqA
The stats are really close. Mays obviously dominates in HR and SLG, but Cobb beats Mays in every other category. Now everyone says that Mays was probably the best fielding CF of all time, but Cobb was also extremely good. Again, this really was a tough decision, but Mays will still be in the starting lineup as the designated hitter. Or maybe I'll stick him in right field and let Ruth DH. Either one.
Backup: Willie Mays

Right Field: Nick Punto (.562 OPS)
Just kidding! It's Babe Ruth! (1.164 OPS, 207 OPS+, 12.6 RC/27, .342 BA, 714 HR, 2213 RBI, 2873 Hits, .368 EqA)
Yeah, there has never been and never will be a hitter quite like the Babe. Forget the fact that he invented the home run, no one has ever been able to duplicate his statistics. And I don't even mean his sabermetric stats that are adjusted for era, I mean EVER. PERIOD. He has the highest OPS of anyone who would qualify for the record. Same for EqA, same for OPS+, same for RC/27; I could keep on going. But I won't, because nothing more needs to be said. And besides, one of the funniest, and most apropos posters I've ever seen says everything for me. At a Phillies/Giants game last year, a fan held up a poster that read "The Babe did it on hot dogs and beer." Brilliant stuff.
Backup: Mel Ott (.947 OPS, 155 OPS +, 511 HR, 1860 RBI, 2876 Hits, .329 EqA)

Designated Hitter: Jimmie Foxx (1.037 OPS, 163 OPS+, 10 RC/27, .325 BA, 534 HR, 1922 RBI, .329 EqA)
Backup: Hank Aaron (155 OPS+, .305 BA, 755 HR, 2297 RBI, 240 SB, 3771 Hits, .326 EqA)
Backup: Mickey Mantle (.978 OPS, 172 OPS+, 9.3 RC/27, 536 HR, 1509 RBI, .340 EqA)

I'll come back to the pitchers one day this week.
Thanks to all my loyal readers and commenters. I couldn't have done this without your financial support. Wait, never mind.

Baseball Playoff System

Firstly, I've received a number of requests to stop using the word "az," so I'm gonna start using the word "so" again. There, happy? Sheesh.

Anyway, the rest of this post will be about sports, so anyone who's not interested in reading is free to skedaddle. Although, I don't quite understand how anyone can adamantly refuse to go to Shea Stadium because he or she hates the Mets and loves the Yankees too much, and still also dislike reading about baseball. But that's neither here nor there.

The point of this post is to point out the flaws in the baseball playoff system and to suggest possible options. Now, as everyone knows I am a staunch supporter of revisionist baseball theory, so the idea of doing things a certain way just because that's the way they've always been done makes me feel uchy (just as an aside, I had two separate girls use the adjectives "uchy" and "ichy" over the past two days. Wouldn't it have been great if one of them used the adverb instead? Like "uchily" or "ichily." What?). So right now the plan is to scrap the whole playoff system. Here's why the current system is not good:

1. Too small sample size: Each team plays 162 games over six months to get into the playoffs, and yet that can all end in a matter of three days. How can you get an accurate measure of which of two teams is superior in a best of seven (a best of five series, lo kol she'kein! Al achas kama v'kama) series? Over such a short stretch it is well within the realm of possibility that a guy like Alex Rodriguez can strike out ten times in a row and a guy like Kaz Matsui can hit five homers and have a .750 OBP.

2. Wrong teams make it: How is it fair that the team with the best record in the division will make the playoffs while a second or third place team with a far superior record will not? Take last year for example: the eventual world champion St. Louis Cardinals got into the playoffs by winning the NL Central division with an 83-78 record. However, the Toronto Blue Jays (87-75), Boston Red Sox (86-76), Chicago White Sox (90-72), Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim (89-73), and Philadelphia Phillies (85-77) did not. That simply makes no logical sense.

3. The league that wins the All-Star Game gets home-field advantage in the World Series. Nothing more needs to be said here; this rule is certifiably incomprehensible.

Here are a few options I've considered:
(Disclaimer: I understand that these suggestions do not have the fans' best interests at heart; I'm just trying to preserve the integrity of the game; I'm not trying to just make a few bucks.)

Option 1 (boring but safe): Revert back to the old system of having only the winner of each league advance to the World Series. However, instead of having just a seven game series, have a 21 game series! The reason I chose 21 is that under the current system the World Series winner must win a total of eleven games. I feel like 21 games are enough to sufficiently determine the superior team.

Option 2 (awesomer yet vastly more complicated): Construct a Round Robin tournament in which the top four teams from each league play two games against each of the other seven teams in the tournament, one at each home field. The team from each league with the best record in the Round Robin advance to the World Series. If there are ties for best record, set up a one game playoff at a neutral stadium to determine the winner. The World Series will be a seven game series like we have now except with the following provisos, termed "Proviso Alpha" and "Proviso Beta" (I will use the characters "a" and "b" for short):
a. All seven games will be played at a neutral stadium just like the Super Bowl.
b. In order to accurately assess the performance of each team, there will be no fewer than four different starting pitchers for each baseball squadron. Another words, each team must name a different starter for each of the first four games of the series. And to make sure that there's no funny business, we will forbid any starter from appearing in any subsequent game as a reliever.

Okay, that was my brain storm of the day. I think there are still a few more details to add, but that's the general gist. I'd be really interested in hearing other ideas.

A Smattering of Schmutter

I've determined that any events that occurred this weekend may be a result of my penchant for goading people into arguing with me about baseball statistics. I know I'm smarter than most people, az why do I feel the need to prove it to myself (and occasionally others) all the time? That's just silly.

Anyway, one of the aforementioned events, is not one that I need to discuss further. In fact, this event need not be discussed in my presence for the foreseeable future. The other events, which I will recount in exhausting detail, will be recounted in exhausting detail right now right now.

I spent the first days of Sukkot in Woodmere, NY. I think I like Woodmere a lot, but I'm not quite certain that Woodmere likes me. You see, I awoke Friday morning to learn that a tree branch from across the street broke in the middle of the night and landed on a branch on our side of the street, which proceeded to pendulum its way down and strike my poor car. I now have a slightly dented fender and a smashed right-turn signal. If I didn't figure it out then that nature (read: The Big Guy) was after my schmuttocks, it was the following day when I walked right into a low-hanging branch on my way to Cedarhurst. It certainly didn't help that I was reading while I was walking, but still.

Anyway, remember last year when I posted about how much I love Sukkot? At the same time, it's become apparent that some people (myself included) find it a burden, because if you want to have some semblance of a meal you need to find a sukkah in which to eat. I found this to be the case. However, if you actually try to go eat in a sukkah, you will often find yourself in excellent company. Par exemple, yesterday evening I had just returned from a not-so-pleasant event in Flushing Meadows, and on my way back I acquired for myself some shwarmas from Grill Point. I then joined some guys in the sukkah of one hundred and eighty two Bennett Avenue to eat said shwarmas. It really was quite the party; people were in and out of the sukkah all the time. The point is, it's nice to get together during the week and have a nice meal with a bunch of people. Az if you think you have time to get to a sukkah for lunch or dinner this week, give it a try; you might have a surprisingly nice time.

Remember when there was no such thing as amazon.com or bn.com or half.com, and if you wanted to buy a book you had to go to a bookstore and pay full price? I tend to buy used books on amazon.com a lot, az I have many old/used-ish books. Az like, the books usually have two prices on them, an American price and a Canadian price, right? Az you might see something like "In US $4.95, in Canada $5.95." Well, those days are ovah! For Nomah! (Hameivin yavin) I don't mean because books are more expensive now; I mean that for the first time ever (!), the Canadian dollar is worth more than the US dollar. I had to put the price of the Canadian dollar into the system at work today, and I noticed this. As of the close of the currency market today, one Canadian dollar is worth 1.0098 US dollars. The dollar is just getting clobbered these days. Even the Shekel is back up to a quarter each. Anyway, I just found that interesting.

That's all I got for today. I guess since it's now October 2nd, I'll wish you all a freilichen Gandhi Jayanti.

Schmuttblog is Sponsored by the Number Eight and Viewers Like You

I got an e-mail from a friend earlier, and if I didn't know any better, I'd say it was me, posing as a girl, sending myself an e-mail, because it was totally something I would think about. I immediately had to start writing this post. Here's what she said: "also i like that this year is gonn abe [sic] 2008 because i like writng [sic] the nuber [sic] 8. just thought you would like to know." (just in case some of you are not familiar with what's in the square brackets, here is the definition from wikipedia: "...in writing, [sic] is placed within square brackets and usually italicized to indicate that an incorrect or unusual spelling, phrase, punctuation, and/or other preceding quoted material has been reproduced verbatim from the quoted original and is not a transcription error." I, of course, never make transcription errors, or any other errors for that matter. Meanwhile, I have just been informed that the e-mail typer was "tired" az she should be given a get-out-of-jail-free card this time around. I've always used that excuse when I've accidentally ended a clause with a preposition, or when I've accidentally put one space after a period instead of two. Oh no, wait, how silly of me; there are no excuses.) At that point I started thinking, well, how many different ways are there to write an eight?

I determined that there are three ways:

1. I start at the top and move my pencil to the left and down, and do the entire figure eight without lifting my pencil. When I get back to the top I curve around again so I meet the beginning of the eight.

2. Some people like to do almost the same thing. The only difference is instead of curving around at the end, they just extend the line in the same direction, az it looks like the eight has a tail coming out of the top.

3. The weirdos out there like to draw two small "o"s that connect. IMHO, that takes entirely too long. I also don't enjoy when they are written quickly and the two halves don't actually touch. Then it just looks like a big colon.

I think my favorite numbers to write are "4," "5," and "9." Here's a funny story about writing the number nine. My junior year of college, I took a math course called Modern Analysis. It's a very theoretical discipline, az it's pretty hard to actually teach and learn. Anyway, a third of the way through the semester we had our first exam. Class went from 9:10 to 10:25 am, az the teacher, Patrick X. Gallagher, head of the math department and maniacal shirt-perspirer, would write the time on the chalkboard to let us know how much time we had left. Az since he wrote like "Time now: 9:35. Time left: 50 minutes," my friend and I actually discussed later how much we enjoyed the way he wrote the number nine. It occurred to us that we never noticed it until then because it was the first time all semester that he actually wrote the number nine. Modern Analysis is so theoretical that the only actual numbers he ever wrote were zero, one, and occasionally two. Otherwise he would only use variables. I hope I didn't lose any of you there. Better than writing about sports I guess.

Oh, and as long as I mentioned it earlier in my digression on "[sic]," I'd like to make sure that you all know the difference between parentheses, square brackets, and curly braces. Those things around the "sic" are square brackets. They're mostly used in math for matrices. Everyone knows what parentheses are, I hope. They're used in math to determine order of operations, in combinatorics, and when naming functions (e.g. f(x) is a function of x). Curly braces: { and } are mostly used in computer programming, but also in math for describing sets and probabilities, and for functions that have different definitions depending on the argument. For example:
f(x)
= {0 x<= 0
= {x x>0

Whenever I get a new student to tutor I always make sure that they know how to draw curly braces. If anyone wants a drawing lesson let me know. I charge $80 an hour. Good day all.

A Real Post This Time. Enjoy.

Az I've got a couple of items on tap tonight. Firstly, I'd like to add another product onto my ever growing list of things that are most commonly known by one of the brand names. Today one of my friends (you know who you are) e-mailed me, telling me that her coworker stole her whiteout, which made her sad, az she stole someone else's, which made her happy. Since it's right after Yom Kippur, and she needed to be punished for stealing, I corrected her usage of the word "whiteout" by saying that the brand name one is spelled "Witeout" without an "H." I'm kinda scared that she said that she totally knew I was going to say that. Anyway, put Witeout on the list, because nobody, and I mean NOBODY refers to the stuff as "liquid paper."

Moving right along... One of my friends referred me to a website called xkcd.com, which has a bunch of comics on it. As stated on the page, xkcd.com is "a webcomic of romance, sarcasm, math, and language." Another words, it's right up my side street. I can't even begin to tell you how much I enjoy some of the comics, but I'd like to mention one right now that really reminds me of something from my childhood. Comic #45 shows people walking on a tiled floor, and one of the people subconsciously walks on only the black tiles. The point is that the caption on the comic states, "the worst part is when the sidewalk cracks are out of sync with your natural stride." Anyone feel the same way? I totally remember that when I was younger I used to take exactly two steps every sidewalk tile. Maybe I'm weird but I know I definitely did this. Like you know how some baseball pitchers never step on the foul line when they come on and off the field (a la Turk Wendell)? It's the same thing. I never wanted to step on the cracks in the sidewalk. Now all that nonsense started to remind me of the stairwells down and up which I walked frequently when I was younger. Par exemple, I grew up in my parents' apartment on the third floor of 45 East End Avenue. I know that there are two steps in one direction and then 14 steps to the left to go up from the lobby to the second floor, and then there is one step up to the left and another 14 from the second to the third floor. I distinctly remember positioning myself in such a way that if I were to take two steps at a time with each foot, I would land on the ground with my left foot. Everyone following? Like to get from the second floor to the third floor I would start by going up the one step with my right foot, and then take two steps at a time up the 14 steps to the third floor beginning with my left foot.

Everyone has clearly lost me, but I don't care. I'm doing this for me. In fact, I was reminiscing with my friend last night, and in order to remember something I actually referred to my blog! I was immensely pleased about that for some reason.

Anywho, in closing (this is where I would restate my thesis if I were writing the good ol' five-paragraph essay), I want to respond to someone who commented on my last post. Now, I was expecting at least one comment when I wrote:

Sample statements that would not be allowed:
"The Yankees are the best team in baseball."
"Derek Jeter is a good shortstop."
"Willie Randolph should be fired."

I'm not saying that any of the above statements are false (Only 1 of them is probably true)

The person who responded said "It's the Jeter one, right?" Now this might be someone trying to bait me into getting my dander up and attacking them with stats until their head a splodes (see Strong Bad E-mail #94, Video Games), or it might be a genuine guess as to which one is true. Well, let me tell you Captain Smarty Skirts, that is clearly the only one that is blatantly false. Derek Jeter, by every true metric, is a far below-average shortstop. I don't have his exact zone rating numbers or his defensive +/-, but when I do, you're gonna be sorry you ever messed with THIS guy. The one that was probably the most true was the first one. The Yankees, at this point, might be the safest bet to win the world series because their hitting is clicking at the right time, and their once suspect pitching staff has really become very solid with the influx of new talent (Hughes, Chamberlain, Kennedy, Mussina (sshh...(Ooh, three nested parentheses; good for me. And a semicolon to boot!))). But don't tell anyone I said that. Maybe I'm just bitter about giving up 13 fweakin' runs to the fweakin' Washington Mutuals in my last game of the season. I need to go to bed. Gnight me.

Just a Quick Word

Here's a real quickie because I'm insanely busy at work, what with all these holidays and such. Everyone, and I mean EVERYONE must follow this rule, especially this time of year, and I'm going to put it in bold to indicate how strongly I feel about this:

IF YOU DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT SPORTS THEN YOU CAN'T COMMENT ABOUT SPORTS.

There are a few exceptions to this rule. If you don't know anything about sports you're allowed to make blatantly obvious statements, such as:
"Man, the Yankees are playing well right now."
"I heard about that James Thome hitting his 500th home run."
"The playoffs are starting soon."
"The Mets pitching has been pretty awful recently."

Sample statements that would not be allowed:
"The Yankees are the best team in baseball."
"Derek Jeter is a good shortstop."
"Willie Randolph should be fired."

I'm not saying that any of the above statements are false (Only 1 of them is probably true); I'm saying that unless you have an armory full of ammunition to support a claim like any of those, don't say it, because I will attack you with stats until your brain explodes.

I Am So Smart, I Am So Smart, S-M-R-T, I Mean S-M-A-R-T

Man, am I glad that Junior returned from Brazil. He was reading a mailbag with questions and answers by Jon Heyman, a baseball expert who frequently appears on the Michael Kay Show on ESPN radio (Oo we got Jon Heyman, oo we got Jon Heyman, oo we got Jon Heyman on the Michael Kay Sho-oo-o-oo-o-oo-ow). Anyway, Junior dives right in, and reacts to a question by "beautiful, charismatic, saintly Carolyn" from Boca, and an answer by Herr Heyman:

From Carolyn: "Regarding your NL MVP candidates, how about those two guys in Florida? Yes, the Marlins are not in playoff contention, but it's hard to ignore Hanley Ramirez and Miguel Cabrera, especially considering they're first and second, respectively, in the NL in VORP, and rank in the top three in Runs Created. It looks like you went through all the playoff-contending teams, and chose a "good" player from each. Let me ask you: If Cabrera were on a playoff-contender this season, would there be any doubt who the MVP was?"
-- Carolyn, Boca Raton, Fla.

Junior: Carolyn makes a lot of good points, and I imagine she lives in a gleaming white Spanish-style home in Boca Raton and rides horses bareback in the springtime. But back to the point: yes, Hanley Ramirez and Miguel Cabrera sit 1-2 in the NL VORP standings (BP subscription req'd), followed very closely by Misters Wright, Jones (Larry, not Andruw), Utley and Pujols. A San Francisco outfielder ranks seventh. So yes, Carolyn, Cabrera would be a very strong MVP candidate if his team were any good, as would Hanley. As for your accusation that Mr. Heyman only looked at playoff-ish teams --

John Heyman: "Actually, you're right. That's exactly what I did, and how I came up with Prince Fielder as my NL MVP leader. His "good'' year is actually more than good, and the Brewers are right in the thick of the playoff race."

Junior: Prince is having a terrific year, and he probably actually is the lead dog in the NL MVP race because it's an award voted on by guys exactly like Heyman. Is this just? Well, he's 10th in the league in VORP, a full 21 points behind both Cabrera and H. Ramirez. He has an excellent EqA (.322 -- lower than Cabrera's, Pujols', Bonds', Utley's, Jones', heck, even Hanley's), and he plays indifferent to bad defense at the easiest position on the diamond. To be honest, I don't think he's all that strong a candidate.

Schmutter: Anyone who read my last post may now come to offer their obeisance.

If you want to read this from the source, check out http://www.firejoemorgan.com/ and look at the posts from Wednesday, August 29th, 2007.

At the Risk of Losing Readership, Another Baseball Post

I was doing my usual perusal of the various baseball Sabermetrics blogs out there, and on beyondtheboxscore.com, as they do every week, they listed their weekly awards. Most of these awards are based on advanced statistics, and some of them make fun of traditional statistics, such as "The Rey Sanchez Batting Average Is All I've Got Award" and "The Harmon Killebrew Batting Average Is For Wussies Award." What caught my attention was the NL MVP award. He said that for the season, "the national media has seemed to have been hyping Prince Fielder and Ryan Howard more than Wright," although according to his metrics, the current MVP leader is Hanley Ramirez. Az I spent some time this morning compiling some stats from baseball-reference.com, baseballprospectus.com, and fangraphs.com, and came up with some of my own conclusions. I obviously chose to look at Wright, Fielder, Howard, and Ramirez, but I also tossed in four more legit MVP candidates (Utley, Pujols, Holliday, and Cabrera), and a couple other odds and ends (Bonds, Braun. (again, more odd than end)) to make it a nice round ten. I tossed in Bonds and Braun just to compare their stats with the others', even though there's a negligible probability that the Baseball Writers' Association of America (BBWAA) will vote either of them in. And that's also what this post is about, not only my feelings about who should win, but also who I think has a legit shot at getting the votes from the BBWAA, who look at much different factors than I would. Anyway, you'll see which stats I used once I get to the players, but what I also did was rank each of the ten players in a few of the important stats from one to ten and summed that total at the end. A low total is good. You'll get the idea.

Stats used: OPS+: On Base Percentage + Slugging Percentage, measured against the league average, and adjusted for ballpark factors. League average is normalized to 100.
RC/27: Runs Created if that player took every at-bat for his team for a whole game.
WPA: Win Probability Added: The sum total of the probabilities of winning each game that was added by each of that player's at-bats.
EqA: Equivalent Average: A calculation of several hitting stats averaged to .260 to mimic traditional Batting Average.
VORP: Value Over Replacement Player: A baseballprospectus statistic, which determines how many runs a player has produced during the season above a replacement level player.
WARP1: Wins Above Replacement Player: A baseballprospectus statistic, which determines how many wins a player has produced during the season above a replacement level player.
Let's start with the guys that beyondtheboxscore.com thinks will win:

-Prince Fielder, 1B, Milwaukee Brewers

Pertinent Stats: 39 HR, 97 RBI, 99 Ks, .376 OBP, .604 SLG, 150 OPS+(Rank: 6), 8.28 RC/27(7), 4.04 WPA(2), .316 EqA(8), 49.8 VORP(8), 5.1 WARP1(8), 39(which I got by adding 6+7+2+8+8+8) Total Rank(7).

Prince will garner a lot of attention from the BBWAA because of his gaudy counting stats (HR, RBI), especially since he leads the NL in Home Runs. Additionally, since the Milwaukee Brewers moved to the NL, the team has been a disaster, az their return to contention this season makes their offensive leader an attractive choice. I believe he's having an outstanding season at the plate, and I think he does deserve a few votes, but we'll see soon that he might not even be the top MVP candidate in his own infield.

-Ryan Howard, 1B, Philadelphia PhilliesPertinent Stats: 34 HR, 106 RBI, 1 SB, 152 Ks, .388 OBP, .566 SLG, 142 OPS+(10), 7.77 RC/27(10), 1.88 WPA(9), .310 EqA(10), 39.2 VORP(10), 4.7 WARP1(9), 38 Total Rank(10).

Umm, he doesn't even belong in the discussion. He is 2nd on this list in HR, Walks, and RBI, which is pretty good, I guess... but he's either last or next to last in all the Sabermetric stats. That's not to say that he's having a poor season, not at all! He's just not the MVP.

Now let's move on to the real contenders:

-Matt Holliday, LF, Colorado Rockies
Pertinent Stats: 44 2Bs, 24 HR, 103 RBI, 102 Ks, .338 BA, .397 OBP, .580 SLG, 144 OPS+(9), 8.26 RC/27(8), 2.98 WPA(7), .313 EqA(9), 53.5 VORP(7), 7.4 WARP1(7), 47 Total Rank(9).

Man, he's just getting crushed by Coors Field. He has very nice numbers in all the counting stats, but the normalized Sabermetric stats are really penalizing him for his ballpark. Although his WPA is still low on the list, az maybe he deserves to be low on here. He also plays brutal defense, although I haven't been able to get any Zone Rating data, etc.

-Chase Utley, 2B, Philadelphia Phillies

Pertinent Stats: 42 2Bs, 18 HR, 84 RBI, .339 BA, .416 OBP, .592 SLG, 156 OPS+(5), 10.24 RC/27(2), 3.07 WPA(6), .327 EqA(4), 57.9 VORP(4), 7.2 WARP1(5), 26 Total Rank(5).

Utley is an interesting case because he's been injured for the last six weeks, but he's still managed to accrue some very nice stats, especially for a 2nd baseman. However, the time he's missed has affected his Sabermetric cumulative stats (VORP and WARP1), and he also gets marked down by the Citizen's Bank band-box in which he plays. Nonetheless, his rate stats (RC/27 and EqA) are outstanding, and his performance over the last month of the season could push him over the top. I love Max Kellerman, but each time he says that Robby Cano is a better hitter than Utley, I lose a little bit of faith in him.

-Albert Pujols, 1B, St. Louis Cardinals

Pertinent Stats: 30 HR, 84 RBI, 79 BBs, 54 Ks, .319 BA, .420 OBP, .568 SLG, 157 OPS+(4), 8.19 RC/27(9), 3.64 WPA(3), .330 EqA(3), 56.9 VORP(5), 9.2 WARP1(1), 25 Total Rank(3).

Jesus, he is such a good hitter. He started off the season in a horrible slump, but has come back since June with a vengeance. He leads the NL in WARP1, he never EVER strikes out, and according to soulofbaseball.blogspot.com, he's the top fielding 1st baseman in the league. I don't quite know why RC/27 doesn't like him, but since that's like my favorite stat, that's going to count heavily against him. I think he might very well deserve to be the MVP, but the BBWAA won't vote for him because he doesn't have many RBI, and his team has not played well this year.

-Miguel Cabrera, 3B, Florida Marlins

Pertinent Stats: 30 HR, 91 RBI, 104 Ks, .318 BA, .397 OBP, .585 SLG, 158 OPS+(3), 8.43 RC/27(6), 3.49 WPA(4), .329 EqA(2), 60.9 VORP(2), 8.1 WARP1(2), 19 Total Rank(2).

What an excellent year he's having! It's really a shame that the Marlins pitching staff isn't nearly as good as it was last year, because if they made a playoff push, Cabrera would absolutely be the MVP if I had to choose. The only things that go against him are his RC/27 and his horrid play in the field. Again, I don't have any zone rating stats, but I've watched him play a lot, and I see that he has almost no range to his left or right, and watching him lumber in on a bunt is like watching an elephant on a nature show. Either way, he's still one of the best mashers in all of baseball.

-Hanley Ramirez, SS, Florida Marlins

Pertinent Stats: 101 Runs, 23 HR, 41 SB, .331 BA, .389 OBP, .558 SLG, 149 OPS+(7), 8.54 RC/27(5), 2.06 WPA(8), .318 EqA(7), 71.0 VORP(1), 6.6 WARP1(6), 34 Total Rank(6).

This guy sure does bring a lot to the table. He hits Home Runs, he steals a lot of bases, he gets on base, and all of these contribute to his league leading VORP. If he could develop a little more plate discipline (44 Walks) and learn how to play shortstop (even worse than Jeter according to Soul of Baseball), he could truly become the best all around player in baseball. He might be already.

-David Wright, 3B, New York Mets

Pertinent Stats: 23 HR, 86 RBI, 28 SB, 77 BBs, 102 Ks, .316 BA, .410 OBP, .530 SLG, 149 OPS+(7), 8.78 RC/27(3), 3.16 WPA(5), .327 EqA(4), 60.8 VORP(3), 7.6 WARP1(3), 25 Total Rank(3).

He's my favorite player. It's really a crying shame that he doesn't have more RBI because he's really putting together a memorable season. His plate discipline has become terrific, and he's one of the top fielding 3rd basemen in the league. He's very close to projecting to 30 HR/30 SB this year, which would be quite a feat. He really knows how to run the bases, and really picks his spots well (28 SB, 4 CS). Combining his offense and defense makes him a very strong MVP candidate, but I still have to go with Cabrera this season.

And now, for fun:

-Ryan Braun, 3B, Milwaukee Brewers

Pertinent Stats: 82 Games, 332 ABs, 25 HR, 11 SB, .334 BA, .378 OBP, .648 SLG, 161 OPS+(2), 8.69 RC/27(7), 1.30 WPA(10), .327 EqA(4), 46.4 VORP(9), 3.5 WARP1(10), 42 Total Rank(8).

If only he was the starter for the whole season... It's amazing that he's even better than Ryan Howard in VORP, which is a cumulative stat. He has the highest SLG in the NL, and is on pace to set the rookie record for SLG. And he's Jewish! Check his page on wikipedia (Hebrew Hammer, Hah!)

-Barry Bonds, LF, San Francisco Giants

Pertinent Stats: 27 HR, 64 RBI, 126 BBs, .495 OBP, .595 SLG, 184 OPS+(1), 40 IBB, 11.35 RC/27(1), 4.53 WPA(1), .368 EqA(1), 55.9 VORP(6), 6.2 WARP1(7), 17 Total Rank(1).

Even at 43 he's playing a different game than everyone else. It's absolutely ridiculous that he's still performing at such a high level. If he wasn't a huge jerk and a cheater he'd get a ton of votes. I hate him.

Az here's what I think:
Should win: Miguel Cabrera
I want to win: David Wright
Will win: Prince Fielder

Adventures with Cell Phones

Let's rewind. Around ten weeks ago, I finally switched my mobile phone service from AT&T/Cingular to Verizon Wireless. I used to have a great phone, the Samsung D900, the slimmest slider phone available at the time. It had a 3.0 megapixel camera, it played mp3s, and it had bluetooth technology. It came with all the software and wires that you needed to transfer pictures and music between the phone and your computer. It could even hold around 12 songs in its internal memory. The only accessories I bought were a car charger and an adapter that enables you to use regular headphones to listen to music. Once I switched to Verizon, I decided I needed a phone that was, at the very least, only slightly less awesome than my old one, az I got a Moto KRZR. I was pretty pleased with it for a while, az I went ahead and bought a few accessories for it. I bought a car charger, and I also got this cheap CD and cable so that I could transfer songs from my computer. See, these new Verizon phones all have VCast, which allows you to download songs and such. What they don't tell you is that in order to take full advantage of VCast you need to buy the Verizon music kit, which is designed specifically for each phone. I obviously didn't want to spend the $30 on it, az I bought that cheap kit online. Needless to say it didn't work. I also bought an SD memory card, because unlike the old Samsung D900, the Verizon phones can only hold like three songs. Meanwhile, I determined after a couple of weeks that I didn't really like the phone, az I went ahead and exchanged it for the far-cooler LG VX8700, the prom queen of phones, as I mentioned previously. Az it became a waste for me to have bought the KRZR car kit and the music kit. Fine, they didn't cost that much. No big deal. Az now I have the LG, and I know two other people who have the same one, az I asked them if they have the music kit, and lo and behold, one of them did! Az I borrowed the kit from her and attempted to use the software and cable to put some songs onto my phone. The SD card I had bought worked for this phone too, az I figured I was set. Well, needless to say, again, that didn't work either. At this point I'm thinking, "screw it, I'll just buy another used ipod on ebay." But I really have no business spending that much money right now, especially since I already invested so much effort into getting the phone to work. Az I spoke to another friend, and he said I should just buy a card reader/adapter for my computer. That way, I could take the SD card out of my phone and attach it directly to my computer and put songs on it. Az that's what I did; I went to Radio Shack today and bought the adapter for like $10. I figure even if it doesn't work for the music I could still use it for transferring pictures or something; it's a useful item regardless. I came home after work and plugged in the adapter, and put the card in it, and it worked! I put like 25 songs on the card and replaced it in my phone. I started up the music player and a not-so-terrible sound came out of the phone's speakers. So far so good. Now the phone comes with an adapter for headphones, az I plugged the adapter into the phone. Then, as expected, I hit the next snag; the outlet on the adapter only fits 2.5 mm headphones. 99.9% of headphones are 3.5 mm. Why the hell do they do that?! Seriously, I went to a website to see if I could get some help, and this is what it said on a site that reviewed my phone:
"In fact, the retail package includes only a charger and a headphone adapter, and the adapter only accepts 2.5mm headphones. As the phone is branded a "V Cast Music Phone," we think this omission borders on false advertising. We can think of no dedicated music player that lacks memory, a transfer cable and a pair of headphones, but still Verizon Wireless sells these as separate "accessories." We can't say it enough, this is an unacceptable nickel-and-dime practice, and phones that are advertised as music devices will always lose points in our ratings if they lack the essentials needed to actually listen to music."
Now I'm really at my wit's end. I planned to go to Target to pick up a few odds and ends (mostly odd, not so much end), az I went to Radio Shack next door to buy a 2.5/3.5 mm adapter. I literally asked the guy 19 times if it was the item I needed, and he was absolutely certain it was. Az I get home and I plug the adapter into the adapter, and plug my headphones into the new adapter. Guess what? I only heard sound through one of the ear pieces. Az I borrowed my roommate's headphones to try to determine which was the defective part. His headphones didn't work either, az now I think there's a problem with the phone. I think I'm gonna go to the Verizon store tomorrow and ask them what I should do. If they tell me to buy their music kit, which comes with their headphones, I just might throw a temper tantrum. Why oh why did I leave you, my precious AT&T/Cingular? I feel as though I've betrayed you. Please forgive me. I'll be back in a little less than two years; I promise.

Questions

Firstly, the first anniversary of my blog came and went without much fanfare last Thursday. Happy Birthday Schmuttblog! I didn't think you'd make it.

Anyway, I have noticed that there are certain questions people ask you, which are absolutely not fair. When people ask you these questions, they already assume that they know the answer, and no matter what your response is, they'll never change their minds, despite all anecdotal evidence to the contrary.

This one is an obvious one, and only applies when a woman is asking you: "Do you think I'm fat?" Never EVER answer this question. If you say "yes" then you're obviously a huge jerk and have absolutely earned a non-derech chiba smack in the face. But if you say "no," often times you'll be accused of lying and then you're in trouble because not only do you think she's fat, but also you lied to her face. See, women who ask you this ALWAYS think they're fat. Best to avoid answering this question if possible using one of the standard evasion methods: pretend you have a phone call, pretend you didn't hear the question, or pretend you need to use the bathroom.

The other two questions can come from members of either gender. The reason I bring up this discussion is because I had to deal with this question numerous times last night at my friend's wedding. "Have you had too much to drink?" Now, to be fair, I have developed a bit of a reputation as someone who enjoys a scotch from time to time, which is absolutely true, but I'm also an extremely responsible driver, az I feel completely confident that having one drink over a five hour span will not affect my driving. But someone who asks me that automatically assumes that I've had too much to drink and I'm only saying that I haven't because I want to be able to drive. Implying that someone has had too much to drink can be extremely offensive because there's no way to convince them otherwise. If you've been drinking, then unless you're completely plastered you won't admit that you're drunk. Feh!

This last one is a bit more innocuous, but can still be irritating: "do you like that girl?" As I said earlier, no one is asking you this question unless they think the answer is "yes." Now, if you say "yes" then you don't even get any credit for correctly responding, because the one who asked you will say something like "hah! I knew it!" and then act like it was his/her idea all along. But if you say "no," then the asker will say something like "okay, whatever you say..." and walk away smiling because he/she's positive you're lying. And then the only thing you can do is stand there, roll your eyes, turn your face up to shamayim and ask "why me?"

Tell me I'm wrong.

Malevolent

This morning I drove to work because I'm going straight to a wedding by the Jersey Shore. Now as everyone knows, you absolutely cannot park anywhere in midtown and it's foolish to even try, az I parked on 9th avenue and 45th street, roughly a 12 minute walk from my office. I drove two other guys down with me and we all got out of the car and started walking towards our offices. Around half a block away from the car I started to get the nagging feeling that I forgot to lock the car. That's the sort of thing that can drive a person mad over a period of several hours. Az I left work at around 11:45 for "lunch" and went to check the car. Obviously I remembered to lock it, az of course it was still there. I guess I'd gladly trade half an hour for some peace of mind.

Several months ago on Mike and Mike in the morning on ESPN Radio, the guys were trying to determine what word they should use to describe pitchers/pitches that are particularly difficult to hit. Baseball Tonight has a segment called "That's Nasty" where they show highlights of these pitchers/pitches. People e-mailed in suggestions to the Mikes such as "filthy," "raunchy," and "redonkulous." Some of those were okay, but the best I've heard is what I saw today in Bill Simmons's mailbag on ESPN.com. When referring to Joba Chamberlain's pitching, he says his stuff is "positively malevolent." Wow. Most of the adjectives they use have the connotation of physical cleanliness, but this takes it into the realm of good and evil. I never thought about a pitcher actually being a bad man when he throws certain pitches, but I like it.

On the topic of words, remember way way back, many centuries ago, not long after the bible began, my third post was about words I need to use more often. Well I was reading "The Guns of Avalon" by Roger Zelazny this week, and I came across an awesome word that I'll need to begin using immediately. One of the characters had called someone else a "ratfink" and the other character said that he was not familiar with that term of "opprobrium."
Opprobrium:
Disgrace arising from exceedingly shameful conduct; ignominy.
Scornful reproach or contempt: a term of opprobrium.
A cause of shame or disgrace.

Man, did Joba Chamberlain throw that pitch with opprobrium.

Just Churning Out Some More Insanity

I have a few entirely unrelated things to discuss today.

Rick Ankiel! Come on down! You're the next contestant on "The Price is Right!" Speaking of which, how the hell is Drew Carey going to replace Bob Barker as the host? He's awful! He was terrible on "Whose Line is it Anyway?" Whatever, totally off subject. Anyway, yesterday marked the return of Rick Ankiel to the Major Leagues. Now before I scare all of you away (blah blah blah, more sports, I hate you Schmutter, write more about the A-train, write a song about me, send Trogdor over to my house, put on a purple thing and dance around. Well I've had it! I will never ever ever ever ever write a song about Sibbie. See SB E-mail #76 "Sibbie." Wow, been a long time since I had a Homestar Runner reference.), this is not a rant about statistics or bad sports writing/commentating; it's a feel good story about a man. Rick Ankiel was drafted by the St. Louis Cardinals in 1997, and in 1998 was their Minor League Player of the Year. In 1999 he was named the Minor League Player of the year for the entire Minor Leagues, az the Cards called him up to the Show in 1999. He had a very respectable first season in the Majors, posting high strikeout totals and an 11-7 record. He continued to pitch well in his second year and his team made the playoffs. The manager selected him to start the first game of the NLDS agains the Braves, and he began the game fairly well, but in the third inning, Ankiel absolutely fell apart. Little did anyone know that this was the beginning of the end of his pitching career. Here's how the third inning went down for Ankiel:
1. Greg Maddux walks
2. Rafael Furcal pops out in foul territory (1 out)
3. Wild pitch to Andruw Jones (Maddux advances to second base)
4. Wild pitch to Andruw Jones (Maddux advances to third base)
5. Andruw Jones walks
6. Wild pitch to Chipper Jones (A. Jones advances to second base)
7. Chipper Jones strikes out (2 outs)
8. Andres Galarraga walks, wild pitch on Ball Four (Maddux scores, A. Jones advances to third base)
9. Brian Jordan singles (A. Jones scores, Galarraga advances to second base)
10. Wild pitch to Reggie Sanders (Galarraga advances to third base, Jordan advances to second base)
11. Reggie Sanders walks
12. Walt Weiss singles (Galarraga scores, Jordan scores, Sanders advances to second base)

And then he finally gets replaced. No one knows why he was suddenly unable to pitch; his mechanics didn't change and he was completely healthy. He just couldn't pitch anymore. Since then he's been up to the Majors a few times, but continued to throw wildly. He was sent down as far as the Rookie Leagues, playing with kids right out of high school. During his time in the Minor Leagues he worked on his hitting and in 2005 after his recovery from Tommy John surgery he decided to abandon pitching and tried to reinvent himself as a slugging outfielder. His progress was delayed because of knee surgery in May of 2006, but was healthy enough to continue playing at the start of the 2007 season. He began the season at AAA Memphis, and through August 8th hit .267 with 32 Home Runs and 89 RsBI. He played a quite respectable outfield too with only seven errors in 95 games. He finally returned to the Major Leagues on August 9th and got one hit in four at-bats against the San Diego Padres. His one hit was a three-run homer to deep right field, and the Cardinals went on to defeat the Padres 5-0. I'm going to leave it as it is for now and let each of you come up with your own superlatives about this story.

Moving right along, I was reading The Soul of Baseball blog by Tom Posnanski online today, as I often do, and he made some comments about today's society. He mentioned that we have so much available to us today that we don't even need to be exposed to things with which we might disagree or things we dislike if we don't want to be. For example, he was at a restaurant and he heard a Billy Joel song playing on the radio there. It was the first time he had heard this song for like 15 years, because he is entirely in control of the music to which he listens. What he means is that you can listen to only the music you want because of Ipods and satellite radio, etc. I only take note of this story because something similar happened to me this week. My friend picked me up from work on Wednesday and I was looking through her CD collection to see if there was anything worth hearing, and I found the first Shalsheles CD. Az I popped it in the player and listened to Mi Ho'ish for a minute or two before deciding to switch to song eight, Asher Bara. Now over the past six years or so I've copied numerous CDs onto my computer. When I first copied Shalsheles 1 all those years ago, I deliberately did NOT copy Asher Bara; it's just that bad. Every couple of years I manage to get my hands on that CD and decide to listen to that song on the off chance that I've been wrong all these years. Nope, it's really an awful song. Yitzchok Rosenthal should really just stick to composing the songs and quit singing them. He has a decent voice like I have a decent voice, but his talents really lie in writing songs.

As I mentioned in an e-mail last night, we're rapidly approaching the best time of the year on the sports calendar. Yes, my friends, as the baseball season heads into the home stretch of the pennant races, the clock is ticking down to the opening kickoff of football season. That being said, I'm trying to organize both a Fantasy Football league and an Eliminator league. The purpose of this post is not to promote my leagues, but if any of you or your friends want to join please let me know. What I AM trying to accomplish with this post is to obtain some help from you. Here's the thing: last year I was involved in two fantasy football leagues. Fantasy football is really awesome, but it can be extremely nerve-wracking and time consuming. Last year I invited my friend and his infant son to come over to my apartment to watch the J-E-T-S Jets Jets Jets one Sunday. Let's just say that he was really giving me a hard time because I was barely watching the game; I spent the majority of the time following the stats from all the other games going on to see how well my fantasy players were doing. Az please, friends, don't let me fall into the same routine this year. Seriously, at like 1:45 every Sunday, give me a call and ask me what the score is and how many yards Chad Pennington and Thomas Jones have accumulated. Thanks. <