This Made Me Happy in a Way Few Things Can...

A new study was released recently at a meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (still no cure for cancer) that ranked baseball players based on their fielding average and probability of making a play on a ball hit their way.

"[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."

The best shortstop in MLB?

Alex Rodriguez.






And here's the stat that I love: Worst Shortstop in MLB?

Derek Jeter.






Shane Jensen, the Penn student/teacher/stat-nerd who led the study said, "[the information] suggests the Yankees have one of the best defensive shortstops playing out of position in deference to one of the worst defensive shortstops."

Sure this doesn't take into account intangibles like banging supermodels and Alyssa Milano and whatnot, but still.

And Tom Emmanski might want his endorsement money back. The worst first baseman?

Noooo! My childhood was a lie!




On a Reds note, we apparently got our money's worth with our newly locked-up second baseman Brandon Phillips, who ranked second overall at his position.

Also, on an semi-related topic, if you guys haven't read Jayson Stark's article on Dusty yet, I think it's pretty good. The video with Krivsky is boring and uninformative, but Dusty's got some things to say on videos at the Reds' official site.

In reference to something that was written in Stark's article, I also think this year's rallying cry should be "What's up, Big Daddy," which is way cooler and more indicative of the attitude of the team than the consummately queer "C you there" that currently dominates the web-page.

Pitcher of Record

Baseball is the most intricate and detail oriented sport in America (Cricket has it beat, but I am not worried about sticky wickets). It is that detail that makes it great, and frustrating. Its detail is one of the reasons the modern fan does not appreciate baseball because they are either too stupid or too impatient to understand the nuances. However there are some rules that make absolutely no sense, and were obviously made in the 1800’s. The rule that bothers me the most is the rule behind the pitcher of record.

In order to earn a win as a starter you must go 5 innings. If you go under that you do not qualify, regardless of the score. You can lose if you go under 5, but not win. By itself that rule does not seem intimidating, or complicated, or jaded or whatever you want to call it. The problem arises when it comes time to decide who does actually win.

The part of the rule that gets me is if a starting pitcher leaves a game with his team winning before he pitches 5 innings, he is still ineligible for the win, even if the score does not change. In that situation, it is up to the discretion of the official scorekeeper to declare the pitcher of record. Therefore the official scorekeeper decides which relief pitcher did the most to contribute to the win, and that pitcher gets the win. But the starting pitcher cannot get the win. So as long as the score never ties and the lead never changes, the official scorekeeper decides the winner.

So here is my problem, didn’t the starting pitcher contribute the most to the win? Didn’t he do enough for his team to win? Shouldn’t that be the measure of who gets the win? In the logic of the rule some guy who comes in with 2 outs in the bottom of the 9th and gets 1 out can get the win for only facing 1 batter, but the starter who went 4 2/3rds innings and only let up 1 run can’t get the win. Also by that logic, every subsequent pitcher can give up 2 or more runs, thus giving up more runs than the starter, but as long as the lead does not change the official scorekeeper still must chose someone to get the win, and it can’t be the starter.

The starter can leave a game with the score 2-1 in the 5th with a blister, and by the end of the game the score is 25-17 he still can’t get the win. He could have the least earned runs, most innings pitched and most strikeouts of entire staff for the night, and still not win. I think that is a travesty of the rule system.

This is obviously an archaic rule hearkening back to the days before regular relief appearances and fragile starters. For Cy Young to not go 5 innings he either had to give up like 20 runs or get shot by Ty Cobb. Back then I understand the rule. But today it makes no sense. So shouldn’t we change the rule?

I have 2 possible solutions. First we can change the rule to read that a starting pitcher can only win if he leaves the game with his team ahead (pending runners and earned runs factored in), but there is no minimum. Or, we change the ‘win’ stat to reflect who earned the win, the starter win (SW) or the relief win (RW). For example if a starter goes only 3 innings, but his team never trails and wins the game he can earn a SW. But if a reliever comes in and cleans up the mess he earns a RP. This would fix the problem and add a new stat for fantasy junkies and Elias to track.

At the end of the day this situation only happens a handful of times a season, but with fantasy championships and players’ salaries tied to these stats, every win counts. Just think, if they kept those stats maybe ‘The Loogy’ would have won.

Schuerholz to Step Down ... The Best GM Ever?

In the biggest MLB story of the day, it appears that John Schuerholz will be stepping down as the General Manager of the Atlanta Braves. See the story here. From the Atlanta Journal Constitution (the preeminent source on Vick news, by the way), they report that Schuerholz will be moving to team president, allowing long time assistant Frank Wren to take over the GM reigns.

Either way, it looks like Schuerholz's tenure as GM of the team of the South is through. What then is his legacy? I would argue that he ranks at the very top of list for modern athletic GMs.

From a Moneyball perspective, the goal of the GM is to put a team in position to make the playoffs, and hope that you win the playoffs with a dissproportionate frequency. As Billy Beane stated, he built teams for the regular season so that the talent and numbers he'd acquire would win over a large 162 game sample. When thrown into a 5 game or 7 game (at most!) crapshoot of a playoff series, anything can happen. Thus, you cannot blame Schuerholz one bit for his team's playoff shortcomings (1 title in 14 postseason appearances).

That's why, I'd argue the accomplishment of Schuerholz is incredible. His teams reached the playoffs in 14 straight seasons. That's unfathomable in this era of MLB parity. His teams acheived a cumulative record of 1,594-1,092. He successfully transitioned from two distinct eras of Braves teams and players. Some may argue that what the Marlins have done is more remarkable - having two fantastic championship seasons interspersed with abject futility. Not me. I would say that to stay that good for that long is much, much more impressive.

Thoughts on the Schuerholz era? Is there a better GM in baseball?

MNF: Bills and Boys

Monday Night Football rolls to Orchard Park tonight as the 1-3 Bills host the undefeated Cowboys. It’s the first time the Bills have hosted MNF since the last time the Democrats had a majority in the House (Fall of 1994, for those outside the Beltway). After a heartbreaking, last-second opening loss to the Broncos, the Bills have lost as expected on the road to Pittsburgh and New England then upset the Jets at home. The Boys on the other hand have steamrolled through Giants, Fins, Bears and Rams winning by nearly twenty points per game.

It will be an uphill battle, but look for the Bills to try to control early with RB Marshawn Lynch, considering rookie and former Stanford Cardinal QB Trent Edwards will be making his second start. Protecting the football will be imperative as the Cowboys lead the NFL in turnover margin (+7). Ideally, the Bills don’t want to be in a position where they will have to ask Edwards to make big plays, but if the Boys have any weakness, it is their pass defense.

On the opposite side of the ball, Tony Romo will try to rip apart the worst defense in the NFL; opposing quarterbacks have averaged nearly 285 yards per game, easily the worst in the league. Watch for TE Jason Witten to have a big game catching balls across the middle. With the game in hand, the Cowboys can control the tempo with Marion Barber III (his friends call him Trip) and Julius Jones.

My prediction is that the Bills keep it interesting in the first half, but quick scores in the third quarter lead to an easy Dallas victory. Holding with my prediction from the Pickem Challenge, I’ll say the Bills add a late score to cover.

Dallas 28

Buffalo 20

What's your prediction? What are the keys to the game? Who will have a fantasy breakout? Post in the comments.