Edward Tufte Would Be Happy

In a terse disavowal that would make Edward Tufte (an infographic master and vocal critic of Power Point ... the guy who laid the 2003 Space Shuttle rentry burn-up and disintegration firmly at the feet of the dumbing effect of PP) proud, a prominent American general speaks out against Power Point, Microsoft's ubiquitous presentation software.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/27/world/27powerpoint.html?th&emc=th

Apparently the general is not alone. Many other military officers are quoted in this Times article.

While this is not really a baseball story, we statistically minded analysts love a great infographic. This story echoes criticisms the guru of infographics, Edward Tufte (if you're not familiar, look him and his GREAT books up ... excellent stuff), has been directing at Power Point for over a decade.

Check out the Times article, and then Tufte. His work is so outstanding and jaw-droppingly good I can't say enough about it. Anyone who is interested in stats at all would benefit from a look at Tufte's work.

- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone

www.jamesireland.ca

Location:Canada

A-Rod: Classless in Oakland

A-Rod as we Blue Jay followers remember pulled that classless and real bush league move a couple of seasons ago of calling off Jay infielder Howie Clark on an infield pop-up as he ran past and behind him. Clark thought his shortstop was calling the ball and so he retreated. As a result the easy popup fell in and all were safe.

Over A-Rod's protestations most of baseball identified the incident for what it was; scumbag superstar acting like a bratty petulant Little-Leaguer toward a journeyman player who had little opportunity to retaliate.

Around the same time a Toronto paparazzo caught Stray-Rod stepping out with a suspicious looking female escort. One presumes Rodriguez figured Toronto was too small a backwater for anyone to notice him walking around major city thoroughfare coseying up to a flashy woman who was not his wife.

Well A-Rod's at it again, and once again doesn't even have the class to appologize or even plead ignorance of one of baseball's core codes of conduct; baserunners do not, EVER, cross the mound during a game.

The Yankee third baseman even had the utter lack of class to add a cutting and demeaning comment about Oakland's pitcher to the effect that he'd only won a few games in his career so he shouldn't be complaining about anything. One thinks of Salieri and Mozart in "Amadeus"; I'm sure you can figure out which guy is the bratty but talented Mozart in this parable.

A-Rod it would seem is getting more stupid and arrogant as he gets older, the reverse of what's supposed to happen as one ages; becoming more mature, more humble and gracious.

For the full article about the incident (and how A-Rod then started the first around-the-horn triple play in 42 years for the Yanks in the next inning) click here:
http://j.mp/aGdhCu

Watch for a fast ball aimed at Rodriguez's head in the next game or two. I suspect some pitcher somewhere will send a message for all of MLB pitchers over the latest juvenile A-Roddery.


- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone

www.jamesireland.ca

Location:Toronto,Canada

Be Back Soon

The fam damily is on the move and we're on our way.

Sorry to leave you hanging there. I have a lot of Jays thoughts after yesterday's game.

Since today's a travel day for the Jays, I hope it's OK if I take one too!

So much to write, and so little time with life always there and stuff to do. More soon on our struggling Blue Jays (my little girl here has something to add too for sure!).





She's taking a few calls while we're busy moving her toys.


- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone

www.jamesireland.ca

Location:Scenic View Ct,King,Canada

With Aaron Hill On The Shelf

I wrote a couple of entries about Aaron Hill not too long ago. I argued that the Blue Jays should trade him, and soon.

Well, with Hill's trip to the D.L. I kind of back-burnered the promised statistical facts that would back up this argument. With Hill due back officially on April 23rd, I thought it appropriate to give a taste to readers about just how unusual Hill's 2009 season was, and why he is so unlikely to repeat it.

To that end, a question; name the ONLY two active players who hit 36 or more homers in a season, yet SLGed less than .500 in the same year? (Hint #1: this is one of the very few things these two guys could conceivably be thought to have in common from a baseball point of view. Hint # 2: If you arrived here from my Twitter feed then you read the answer there, but not the surprising stats these two players had in common!)

The answer here is very shocking indeed. When I was designing the queries about Hill's 2009 season in my database I couldn't believe my eyes when only these two players came back as returns that matched some of my search criteria; such an unusual and unlikely pairing is hard to imagine.

Among active players, only Aaron Hill and Adam Dunn hit 36 homers or more, yet SLGed less than .500 in the same season. Hill did it in his age 27 season, 2009. Dunn did this with the Cincinnatti Reds at age 25, in 2006, a year in which he hit 40 homers, yet SLGed only .490 and struck out an awesome (and MLB leading) 194 times.

It is difficult to envisage two players that even most well-versed baseball fans or statheads would think of as more different. One is a small (5'11" is his official height, and until 2010 he was listed at 195 pounds ...hmm ... I think these numbers a tad inflated???) middle infielder with some pop, but only when he pulls the ball (Hill). The other is a huge (6'6" and 285 pounds) first-base/corner-outfielder/DH-type masher, a real TTO (three-true-outcomes) hitter whose power to all fields and his walks serve to overcome the immense number of strike-outs he accumulates (Dunn).

The genuine, undeniable disimilarity between these two players is a part of one of the reasons I argue that Aaron Hill is so unlikely to repeat his performance from 2009 this season, in 2010.

He is just not a 35 homer a year hitter, and won't repeat anything like this again, especially now that he is in his age 28 season this year, and is going to lose about 50 PAs due to time lost to this recent hamstring injury and the current trip to the D.L.

But the hope that he just might be able to repeat his homer heroics again, or at least go on a similar tear for the latter part of the season, is one of the reasons the Jays might find some teams interested in dealing for him when the play-off front runners and hopefuls for 2010 start to emerge. Now though, Hill will come back with something to prove to any suitors. They will be watching more closely for lingering effects of injury. What they will probably see is just Hill reverting to his actual skill level with respect to SLGing, which could be mistaken for the effects of injury. Either way it will be harder to convince anyone that Hill is a legitimate 30 plus homer hitter.

As I have said, the potentially hot market for Hill will have cooled after this D.L. stint. It is still clear that the Jays 2010 are not heading for the play-offs. The best use of Hill right now is still going to be in accumulating as many prospects as possible from a trade partner, prospects that might go on to form parts of an improved and rounded-out Blue Jays 2012 or 13 or 14, teams that might have a legitimate shot at the play-offs. It is still up to G.M. Alex to act while his All-Star second baseman still has any credibility as a big power threat before reality becomes clear to everyone.


- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone

www.jamesireland.ca

Location:Willis Dr,Aurora,Canada

The Jays Are More Aggressive Birds In 2010

As I tweeted after the game earlier today Sunday (gosh is it Monday morning already!) where the Jays were downed by the Angels 3-1, the Jays really are more aggressive birds thus far in 2010. Scoring the game today at the Rogers Centre Pressbox I noted that only seven of the Jays 31 PAs today went more than four pitches, and no Jays walked today, but six struck out.

I wondered aloud if perhaps Cito has been directing his rag-tag crew (quickly falling to earth after a quick start out of the gate) to be aggressive, perhaps very aggressive at the plate. A couple of those close by agreed that Ervin Santana seemed to be cruising, getting out of multiple innings on less than ten pitches on his way to a complete game win on 106 pitches, with 70 for strikes. Let's quickly look at a few numbers that include figures up to but not including today's (Sunday's) game.

So far in 2010 the Blue Jay's team batting pitches per PA is down from 3.75 to 3.72 over 2009. American League averages for these figures for 2009 and 2010 are 3.84 and 3.88 respectively. So, under Cito the Jays have seen less pitches every time they approach the plate than the American League average. Just how far below the league average you ask? Well, in 2009 the Jays ranked dead last in the A.L. in pitches per PA (Pit/PA). Leading the league in this figure for 2009 were the Rays at 3.96 and Boston with 3.94 Pit/PA.

Now, so far in 2010, the Jays 3.72 Pit/PA is third lowest in the American League, with Cleveland and Boston (again!) leading this category at 4.14 and 4.13 respectively. There's a reason Red Sox games seem to last so long ... in a "typical" game they see 10 or so more pitches than the Jays have so far in 2010.

Other similar figures jump out more clearly still. The Jays are far above the average thus far in 2010 in almost every statistic that marks a more than average aggressive approach at the plate. For example (I'll give the Jays number first, then the league average for each statistic): swing and miss strikes (Jays 19% / A.L. 14% ... the Jays lead the A.L. in this dubious category): swinging strikes as a percentage of all strikes (Jays 74% / A.L. 71% ... the Jays are tied for 2nd highest in this figure), percentage of pitches swung at (Jays 46% / A.L. 44% ... Jays are 2nd highest in the A.L. in this category too). Perhaps most telling regarding the Jays aggressive tendencies is the figure for first pitches swung at. The Jays have swung at 29% of the first pitches they have seen so far this season. The A.L. average is 23% here, and the Jays lead the A.L. in this category so far in 2010, and by 2% above the nearest A.L. team (the Rays, at 27%).

One couldn't see a more marked difference in approach so far this year in the American League than the two teams at the Rogers Centre today. The Jays leading the A.L., with 29% of their hitters taking a hack at the first pitch they see, while the Angels hitters only swing at 15% of the first pitches they see. And the Angels are tied for last in the A.L. in this category (with Boston ... of course), showing the most patience on the first pitch in the American League. Today we saw two teams that couldn't have a more different approach at the plate early in the count, with the Jays being about twice as aggressive as the Angels. Figures that show this much disparity are obviously showing a statistically significant difference, and one which one suspects reflect a directive from management about how to approach each plate apprearance.

Typically teams that are more patient at the plate, work counts deeper, force starting pitchers to throw more pitches, and get into their opponents bullpen earlier are rewarded with a higher OBP (the most sure indicator of a teams likelihood of success at scoring runs and winning ballgames) and more wins. Today Mike Scioscia's approach won over Cito Gaston's; a fine effort by Jays starter Ricky Romero was wasted due to an almost complete lack of run support. Scioscia's approach worked on Saturday too, with the Angels beating the Jays 6-3.

This is certainly an element of Cito's management style that deserves careful attention when the Jays struggle to get on base, cash in runners in scoring position, or even to score enough runs to support a fine start like Romero's was today (8IP 1R 1ER 2BB 6SO 0HR and 1.57 ERA for his 3 starts so far this season, for which the Jays have only managed to support him for 1 Win, 1 Loss, and 1 No Decision).

Winning games such as Sunday's eventual loss to the Angels has been a problem for the Jays for a few seasons now. Roy Halladay's record suffered in years past from a lack of run support. Maybe Cito should take a look at reconsidering this hacktastic approach going forward.







As always ... leave me your comments.


James "Daddy Hardball" Ireland

How Do You Solve A Problem Like Lyle Overbay?

I'm not a fan of "Lyle Ooooverrrbaaaay", I must admit. A starting first baseman should slug more than .450 and hit more than 15-20 homers per season. Oh, and he shouldn't show such an abysmal inability to hit lefties that he needs a platoon partner.

He is done, and should be moved out of the way soon. If not for young prospects Cecil or Wallace waiting on the farm, then maybe a repurposed Adam Lind for now. When Overbay went and shaved off his Fu-Manchu moustache, with it went the most entertaining part of his game thus far this season. Bah!

Unfortunately the economic reality of ex-G.M. J.P.'s crazed exuberance in the 2006 and 2007 seasons (don't even get started about Vernon Wells Leviathan contract) is this:

Lyle Overbay-INF (1B)
4 years/$24M (2007-10)
4 years/$24M (2007-10)
Re-signed 1/07 (avoided arbitration)
$3.8M signing bonus
07:$0.4M, 08:$5.8M, 09:$7M, 10:$7M
Award bonuses.

So Overbay is owed $7 million for this season, and by my reckoning this makes him the second or third highest paid Jay this season. It's unlikey that in this economy new G.M. Alex is going to cut bait and swallow this, but it might be worth considering. Overbay might even be moveable if the Jays are willing to pay some or all of this figure to a trade partner with a low-upside prospect on offer. Let Overbay finish his career elsewhere, anywhere but here.

Looking at this another way, with a crowd of just over 10000 again tonight the Jays fans will, in effect be paying exclusively to see Overbay's veteran mediocrity for about 20 such 10000 fan home games this season if we assume the average fan has spent $35 at the park. I think in the long run fans would rather see a prospect get a shot than the sort of baseball where $7 million gets handed to the likes of Lyle.

I was scoring tonight's Blue Jay game for a well knows sports statistics firm at the Rogers Centre and watched Overbay's futile efforts first hand.

The glimmer of hope we can see if Overbay carries on here in Toronto for the remainder of 2010 is the following. Before his four Ks tonight Overbay's K percentage was only up a bit over his career 20% of PAs (too high IMO when one SLGs only about .450 ... but let's put that aside for now) and his walk percentage only down a bit below his 12% career number.

The direction these percentages are taking are troublesome tendencies to be sure, but before tonight's game Overbay put the ball in play 28 of his 39 PAs. Pop ups aside, Overbay's BABIP (batting average on balls in play) is a more than a tick under .200, and with a league average of .290 to .300 for BABIP we should expect to see some recovery to Overbay's OBP and AVG over time. In short, he has been somewhat unlucky on batted balls so far this season, and we should expect to see this correct somewhat over time.

But this still leaves us with a .450ish SLGing first baseman who can no longer hit left-handed pitching; one who is being paid (if not earning!) $7 million for the task of winning games, or at least entertaining us.

He is doing neither, and the time is right for a change at first base as soon as is practical, and by creative means if necessary. While Toronto fans might have to watch some other players not earning their pay in 2010, the Jays can afford to dispense with their current first baseman, even if this means eating a big piece of the remainder of the contract. There is no better way to hasten a brighter future than making obvious and necessary changes sooner, rather than later.

With only 10000-odd fans in the park tonight I think it safe to say the fans won't miss Overbay's performance.

- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone

www.jamesireland.ca

Location:Jarvis St,Toronto,Canada

Aaron Hill: Did It Just Get a Little Colder in Toronto?

Markets change for any number of reasons, and the market for Aaron Hill just took a hit.

While the Jays dithered for the better part of a week hoping their All-Star second baseman might recover and in time to make the home opener, questions regarding the nature and severity of his injury were allowed to swirl.

The Jays finally decided to place Hill on the 15-day D.L., on April 12th (retroactive to the previous Thursday), with an injury declared to be a strained hamstring that is perhaps a little more serious than anyone with the Jays has thus far been willing to admit.

Now this leaves the Jays with an even more serious problem regarding Hill than before. He is now developing an injury history. The better part of a season lost to a concussion (CNS problems that do not quickly resolve are always cause for serious concern) in 2008; and now in a season in which Hill needs to get off to a hot start in order to prove 2009 was not a fluke, instead we have an early trip to the D.L. after two games, 9 PAs and as yet uninspiring .125/.222/.250 (albeit after a rather hot spring, which counts for something or nothing, depending upon who one asks).

The problem here is that Hill can no longer just play through the first two months of 2010, while the Jays peddle Hill version 2009 to teams that are hoping to win-now around the All-Star break and need help or what they might hope is an upgrade at second base.

Now this is impossible. Teams will be looking much more closely at Hill after he returns, and as I argued last time, whatever numbers Hill posts early this season, they are unlikely to match his 2009. But now after a return from a significant stint on the D.L., suitors will be looking more closely at the merchandise, and more questions will be there.

This injury to Hill might well have repercussions for the Blue Jays for several years to come. As I said, the truth about Hill will become clear through this season, and trade partners are now much more likely to notice when deciding the worth of Hill version 2010 to their aspirations for this season's stretch drive, and going forward.

It might now be too late to trade Aaron Hill 2010 as if he's the same player as Hill 2009.



- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone

www.jamesireland.ca

Location:Scenic View Ct,King,Canada

Please Leave Me Your Comments!

Please leave your thoughts and comments on what you've read, or what's on your mind. Please keep them close to on topic. You don't have to agree with me, or even be nice, but I'll be grading you on grammar and spelling and whether or not your comments contain an argument, or at least make any sense.  If you fail in this regard, believe me ... it'll be on!

Have fun! 

~ James "Daddy Hardball" Ireland ~

Aaron Hill - Trade Bait 2010!

Yes, I said the answer for who should be on the block right away in 2010 is none other than one of the few players who are worth paying to see on the Blue Jays 2010 edition; second base slugger Aaron Hill.

Controversial maybe. But as I said last time there are five very good reasons to move him now.

He lead second basemen in homers in 2009, with 36 and had one of the finest offensive seasons at the keystone (particularly with respect to home runs) in the last 30 years. In fact he had the 11th most homers for a second baseman since 1901. He had the best ever season by a Blue Jay (and tied for the second best too) second baseman.

But Hill is very very unlikely to match this again, or even approach this figure going forward. That is the first reason he should be traded.

In fact if we look more closely at Hill's numbers for his All-Star 2009 season, we discover some disturbing facts about what else Hill did, and did not do with the bat in 2009 that his gaudy 36 homers are hiding from plain view. We will look at some of these facts next time.

Some may have gauzy memories of defensive wizardry from Hill. That too is gone, and his best defence was only ever very good, not great, and all signs indicate that this skill level with the glove is behind him.

Hill does not, (nor has he ever), contribute much offensively on the basepaths; not a sin for a second baseman, but it helps if there exist other shortcomings offensively.

His contract appears for now to be very economical, and whoever might be interested in Hill would control him into 2014. Of course this fact is a double-edged sword. It could also be argued that even 70% of Aaron Hill 2009 edition is worth holding on to at the reasonable salary. I would argue that the time is now to cut bait on 2010 and see what Hill might fetch from a win-now team in terms of prospects who could help a rebuilt 2013 or 14 Toronto Blue Jays; a team that might have a future in ways that Jays 2010 just do not.

And, lastly, Hill should be traded quickly; the earlier in the season the better. The reason for this is to limit the amount of time interested teams have to watch Hill regress to his real talent level with respect to homers, and for them to realize the comparative future value of the prospects that Hill could fetch the Jays in a trade.

The inevitable drop off in homers from a 28 year old under 6 foot, under 200 pound second baseman as the season progresses will shine a light on Hill's other issues, especially his disinclination to walk, a lot of strike outs, his low batting average and his verging on abysmal on-base percentage, and a tendency to slump in the latter two categories.

So there is the short answer to my last post's provocative question.





NEXT TIME: A little more meat on the bones of this argument. I'll look at some of the numbers that back up this call to move the Blue Jay All-Star sooner and not later.

James Ireland


- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone

www.jamesireland.ca

Location:Scenic View Ct,King,Canada

The Most Valuable Player on the Toronto Blue Jays and The Five Reasons He Should Be Traded Immediately

Hey, I know it's MLB Opening Day which merits a full blog post, and the Blue Jays are just starting the season as I type, but I am miles away from home.

Besides, this gives you the rest of the day to argue this point before I fill you in on the answer on Wednesday.

And there it is ... the first pitch of the 2010 Blue Jay season!




Check back here Wednesday for the answer and the full blog post!



James "Daddy Hardball" Ireland


- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone

www.jamesireland.ca

Location:Scenic View Ct,King,Canada

Lola

Lola, my daughter, trampoline and trick-riding partner wishes you a happy new year. Watch for our circus act coming soon.


- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone

www.jamesireland.ca

Location:Canada

NEWTONIAN BASEBALL

While I'm a firm believer in the Newtonian approach to baseball; for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction; I also believe a healthy dose of the Einsteinian approach sometimes makes more sense; around a source of great gravitation, time slows down.

I'm referring to the absence of the $20M man from the mound today. Roger Clemens was sitting out his suspension for plunking Alex Rios in retaliation for the earlier plunking of Mr."Ha Ha" (Alex Rodriguez ... OT ... my dad said something interesting about A. Rod last week. I said that he would probably end up with the home run title within 8 - 10 years if he can avoid major injury. My dad disagreed and said he'd find a way to blow it. He elaborated by saying that A. Rod. is one of those odd people in life that you see or meet that actually get more stupid as they get older! Something I'd never thought about, but it's worth considering.). The Yankees lost today. While it's hard to say what might have happened, one thing is certain. The guy who pitched today is paid FAR less than the guy who was sitting on the bench when he should have been pitching.

For that matter I could have plunked Alex Rios for FREE. (Sorry Alex Rios ... if I was given the chance to throw one MLB pitch and I was told to throw at you ... I'd do it.)

I believe that the use of chin music and the brush back BELONGS in baseball. It is a necessary part of the game for pitchers to help them control the strike zone and keep even skinny kids from leaning out whenever they want and getting 20 dingers a year. I even believe that the retaliatory plunking of a batter once in a while is part of the game. While I believe that the DH has made the pitcher less fearful of getting hit themselves, pitcher's won't last too long if they display indiscreet use of the intentional hit batter.

This is what I mean by the "Newtonian" approach to baseball. For every action, you can expect an equal and opposite reaction. This is not problematic. But as Einstein opened our minds to a new universe, I think it is wisdom to recognize that while time may be relative, it never stops; choose how long to wait and don't lose a $20M pitcher to exact revenge. That was a $1M plus pitch that Clemens threw that hit Rios (Clemens missed a start today ... at least $1M if he makes it to 20 starts by the end of the season, which is doubtful ... but I digress ... you get the point), and I don't think it was wise to choose him as the tool for immediate retribution. Clemens isn't paid to make these kinds of decisions, and we'll never know if Joe Torre told him to do it, but I doubt it. Clemens has never been shy about pitching inside. But any reliever could have served to send that message later in the game, and at much less cost to the Yankees. Newton recommends reaction ... Einstein adds time and patience. At least this makes sense of the universe to me.

The 2007 Tools of Ignorance All-Star Team

O.K. Mea culpa ... It's been a while, and I'm going to come at this a little backward, as time (and the All-Star Game) waits for no one (well ... they don't wait for me anyway).

So, without further ado, I'm going to announce my current picks for the All-Star Game starting roster, and leave it up to you to try to identify what kind of skills I regard as indicative of all-star calibre play.

CATCHER .......... A.L. - Victor Martinez ... (CLE) ... N.L. - Russell Martin ... (LAN)

FIRST BASE ...... A.L. - Kevin Youklis ..... (BOS) ... N.L. - Prince Fielder ..... (MIL)

SECOND BASE . A.L. - B.J. Upton ......... (TBA) .... N.L. - Chase Utley ....... (PHI)

THIRD BASE ...... A.L. - Alex Rodriguez ...(NYA) ... N.L. - Migueal Cabrera . (FLA)

SHORTSTOP ..... A.L. - Carlos Guillen .... (DET) .... N.L. - Jose Reyes ....... (NYN)

LEFT FIELD ........ A.L. - Carl Crawford .... (TBA) .... N.L. - Barry Bonds .......(SFN)

CENTRE FIELD ... A.L. - Grady Sizemore . (DET) ... N.L. - Carlos Beltran ... (NYN)

RIGHT FIELD ...... A.L. - Maglio Ordonez ...(DET) .... N.L. - Ken Griffey, Jr. .. (CIN)

As I said, as an exercise try to identify what kind of skills these guys have in common (trust me ... they are there). Some of these names won't surprise you, some of them probably will. Remember I'm not judging my team by reputation, what the sportcasters say, or gauzy memories of glories achieved in years-gone-by; no, my team is selected by concrete, mostly offensive skills and contributions demonstrated so far this year (and to a lesser extent, the second half of last year), and have been demonstrated by the player for a significant enough period of career time that they can be regarded as real, not merely luck, or random chance.

Also, over the days leading up to the game, I might post this list again, and you'll notice that some of the names will have changed, for indeed, some of these spots are hotly contested battles for top spot in the skills that I value.

NEXT TIME: We'll try to get back on track and evaluate just what these skills are that I prize so highly; the skills and contribution that are the mark of an all-star.

He Got Skills

Last time I left us some questions. The first, and most fundamental question is; just what is a skill? We think we can recognize skills in ballplayers (and people) and sometimes we are right. In baseball though, with its panoply of statistics, we can be easily confused. A statistic is not a skill. The two can sometimes be related, but there are stats that should not be confused with a skill, especially some particular stats. Many of the so-called sabremetric or new baseball stats are more closely related to actual baseball skills, because incorporated in them is the notion of skill we are looking for.

Quite simply, a skill is an ability to complete a task, and complete it the same way in a highly predictable fashion, due to the fact that the person who possesses it has the right set of characteristics, mental and/or physical that allow for this. It should be also noted that a skill is an ability to complete a task repeatedly in circumstances that are fair to all of the many different possible outcomes of the task, and do it at at level beyond that which you would expect beyond random chance. So, for instance, it is not a skill to be able to flip a coin for a head and then a tail; this you would expect from random chance. It is not even a skill to flip a coin six, seven or eight times in a row for a head. This too could be just random chance, or it could represent a loaded coin (not fair to the two outcomes that are possible). Beyond this, at ten or twelve times in a row, you would have to expect that either the coin was loaded, or the person flipping it had some sort of skill to complete the task repeatedly, because beyond 8 or 10 or 12 flips in a row all heads (assuming no cheating), it is highly statistically unlikely that it is just chance determining the outcome.

I won't go in to the math here, but this would qualify as a skill, if the coin flipper could do this with regularity (always able to flip 8, 10 or more heads in a row, most of the times he was asked to do this task). In a fair environment, being able repeatedly to complete a task at a predictable level of ability beyond the level of probability of success that can be explained by random chance, qualifies as a skill.

OK then, with this definition of skill in hand, let's venture out into the world of ballplayers. There are a shocking array of statistics about baseball players all vying for your attention. Which ones should we pay attention to? Which ones should we pay the most attention to? Which ones are pretty much useless and should be ignored. This is where our new idea of a "skill" comes in. One thing I neglected to mention above about skills is that in order to be useful to us in evaluating baseball players, these skills must be measurable in some way. The simplest form of measurement is counting ("how many times did he do "X"?); the next simplest is rate measurement ("how many times did he do "X" for every opportunity, or for every time "Y" happened)?

Counting is easy, but unfair, as it credits those that have more opportunities than those who have less opportunities. Rate measurement is more fair, and levels the playing field, but in a game whose goal is not to perform at a certain rate, but to simply outperform your opponent's runs scored, we need to look for those players who actually perform at a high rate over many many opportunities (after all, a player who is injured or sick or suspended for bad behaviour for 5 days of the week, but performs at a high rate in some skill, is not, at the end of the week, worth as much to his team as the player who performs at a somewhat lower rate, but never misses an inning).

These are the two basic forms that most baseball statistics take: counting statistics, and rate statistics. Depending on context, each kind is important. But how do we know which statistics are most closely related to skills? In general, rate statistics are easier to evaluate as valid measurements of skills, because they remove the unfair advantageous influence that increased opportunity can introduce to counting statistics. Without going into the math though, it is very important when using rate stats as a means of determining skill to ensure that the number of opportunities used to measure the rate (the "Y" above) is sufficiently high to guarantee that you aren't just observing random chance or luck at work. Remember the coin flip. Two or three heads in a row is not anything unusual. However, 11 or 12 heads out of 12 flips is statistically significant, and is very highly unlikely to be due to just random chance or luck.

With this in mind, what we are looking for are statistics that reflect skills, that is, those statistics that, for a given player, do not vary dramatically from year to year (the player can repeatedly complete a task in a consistent fashion). Of course players get injured, and often play injured, and over time a player's skills can improve as he matures; and, as he ages, decline, but these two factors can be accounted for accurately when one is using a good statistic, one that actually measures a skill. I can't stress this enough: the best statistics to use to evaluate a player's skills are those that do not vary considerably from year to year, or those that show a predictable increase as the player grows and gets more experience, and then decline as he ages. These statistics are the ones that are the most reflective of a player's skills, because, we are safe to assume, the skill of a player is fairly constant for several years, so well thought-out and defined statistics should reflect this, and remain fairly constant, allowing us to compare players in a fair manner.

The flip-side of this of course is that we should be suspicious of statistics that swing widely in value for a given player from season to season, as these fluctuations are likely to reflect the influence of factors other than a player's skills. These highly variable stats could be showing the effect luck has on the outcome of his performance, or the influence of the skills of the other players on the team he plays on. These stats are of limited use to us in evaluating players and their skills and contribution to winning (and therefore each's objective value as a player). Of course it's always important to remember that we are looking for skills and stats that are related to the scoring (or prevention of scoring) of runs, as runs are what contributes to winning. It's great if a pitcher can consistently throw the ball at 102 mph (and therefore has this as a skill), but only if this can be shown somehow to contribute to winning ball games.

NEXT TIME: Which stats are good ones and which common stats are poor ones if our aim is to evaluate a player's skills and contribution to winning ball games? Remember, we are going to stick to the player's we can vote for on the All-Star ballot, so we won't look at pitchers stats ... well ... OK maybe this one time. Your homework is to answer this: which stat do you think better represents a pitcher's skills, ERA (Earned Run Average) or K/9 (Strikeouts per nine innings pitched)? For batters which is a better measure of a skill over two or three seasons; a player's RBIs (Runs Batted In), his AVG (batting average) or his K/PA (strikeouts per plate appearance). I'll give you a hint ... go look up the numbers for some of your favourite players and see which of them vary the least from season to season.


Until next time ... James

A Note On The Method For Choosing "Our" All-Star Team

First of all, my assumption here is that "our" All-Star Game is to be played by the players who are the best at their positions right now, and whose talent limits, if as yet not completely established, are likely to either stay the same, or improve (barring injury).

Let's leave the Hall of Fame in Cooperstown. And leave to the HOF too the players who, while once great (and are no doubt headed there), must be held to the same standard of excellence as the player who has only two or three seasons in the majors, if he is to play in the All-Star game. After all, we wouldn't roll out Babe Ruth's empty uniform from the HOF to play right field would we?

So, although it happens all the time, even in MLB organizational head-offices, let's not judge who is best right now based on a player's performance from several years ago, or even last year (i.e Gary Matthews, Jr.'s 50 million dollar catch last year ... that kind of thinking like the Angels indulged in with the soon to be 32-year-old Matthews) for that matter. What we are looking for is players who have the best skills right now.

So ... what is a skill ... we think we know one when we see it. And in the case of the guys who are still playing and are probably headed for the HOF, but no longer possess All-Star level skills (and most are still tempted to credit with the skill they once possessed); how do we know when the skill is going ... or gone?

NEXT: What is a skill? Which skills can we establish? Which skills are more important in a game where the talent level of all the players is usually very high? Since we voters can't choose the pitching staff, we're going to stick with the position players' skills, offensive and defensive.

"Finding Lost Runs and Wasted Outs"

Over the last year it's occurred to me that it was time to start writing again, but this time, unlike in grad. school, I'd write about things I really know about and care about. This blog is the start of a new project inspecting baseball; one of the greatest sports ever invented, and one that's great to argue about endlessly.

One thing we can take as a given form the outset is that baseball clubs intend to act rationally in their tactics and strategies. Another is that they often fail to do so. Aiding and abetting them are hordes of employees and old ball players that don't really know how to evaluate what is going on in the game that pays their bills.

One further observation ... the majority of fans crave genuinely to understand the game of baseball; a game that has accumulated more numbers around it than perhaps any other professional sport, and it has been doing so for over 100 years; yet well paid and polished professional commentators feed fans simplistic, outdated, and just plain wrong-headed "truths" about the game. And both of these groups tend to feed each other back and forth, leaving the fans wanting.

Anyway ... there are also intentions, perhaps commercial ones, to this endeavor in the real world. Tools of Ignorance Research and Statistics(TM) is dedicated to aiding clients in ... to coin a phrase ... "Finding Lost Runs and Wasted Outs"(c). A simple truth often disregarded ... runs are what win ball games, and outs are the currency that buys the runs. Twenty seven of them that are spent to get more runs than your opponent. Twenty seven runs that your pitchers and fielders try to extract from the opponent before they score more runs than you. Something to remember always when reading these posts ... this truth should never be far from your mind. It is always in the forefront in mine.

Thanks for joining me here ...


NEXT: All-Star voting has already begun on the MLB website.

Let's have a look, position by position, who's really got the goods this year, and who's probably going to make the starting line-up singing "The Way We Were".

'Til then,


James