Riddle

Next week, I will be in New York City and will report on location from the former site of the Polo Grounds. In the mean time, here is a baseball riddle that I thought of. Send your answers to jonahharris27@gmail.com. The first person to answer it correctly will win, um, something good.

1. Rosaceae
2.
3. Wahoo
4. US Treasury Bill

Which one item of the below list does NOT fit in the blank space above?
A. Peach
B. John Boehner
C. Spoke
D. MQ-1C

Once you get it, it should be easy.

The Line

This is my first post in a few weeks. I hope I haven't lost too many readers.

Something occurred to me recently. I was looking through statistics on baseball-reference.com, and I found that I was not really impressed with .300 averages. What I mean is I would see someone hit, say, .306 and think to myself only, 'that's a very solid season.' But imagine how few players actually hit .300 throughout the entire season. Imagine how hard that is. And imagine how a .300 hitter looks like playing, It seems like you can't ever get him out.  A .288 hitting player will be a great guy to have, but looks mediocre on paper. I came to the conclusion that batting averages in general are too harsh. 

But wait. I remembered Aubrey Huff and Miguel Tejada, I have to think hard to remember any kind of hot streak from either one in 2011. They both hit abysmally. But if I look at their averages of .246 and .239 (respectively), they don't seem so terrible. Sure, not top-of-the-order numbers, but still serviceable on a major league level. Huff would only need to hit 27 more singles in 500 at-bats to reach .300. To me, it looks like players with low averages seem to hit even worse than their numbers imply. 

So I came to the conclusion that there was some line, wherever it might be, that serves as a cutoff. Above it, players are done a disservice by the batting average metric. Below, they are worse than their average implies. So where is this line? I'm not exactly sure. I know that Freddy Sanchez hit very well in his brief 2011 season, and ended with a .289 mark. I know Pablo Sandoval hit .268 in 2010, and seemed inept, but so did Andres Torres, who had a great year. Tim Lincecum has a career average of .121, but he doesn't seem like half the batter of a run-of-the-mill position player or a third of Ty Cobb. He seems like a tiny fraction of a normal hitter. I know Nate Schierholtz had a great year with a .278 average. It is hard to pinpoint exactly where the cutoff is. 

Many will say that the inconsistent image or whatever you want to call it is because of other factors- walks, home runs, power, and the like. This is possible, but I still believe that the line exists. Maybe the line is the league average. In the American League, which we use because pitcher's don't hit, the league average batting average in 2011 was .258. I would have thought it was higher but that is beside the point. It the line there? I'm not sure. It seems to be that the line, if it exists, should be higher. What do you think? Is there a line? If so, where is it?

Generation As 1999 scouting prospects

It is Sunday night, and I am tempted to change my NL MVP prediction to Matt Kemp. But I won't. So far, I'm 6-for-6 in award predictions but I do not expect to go 8-for-8. The MVP races are just too close. Enjoy the above clip.

Its my blog I'll do what I want...

Awards and Thoughts

I started work on a ballpark-related post, but I don't have time to finish it right now. Instead, here are some random thoughts and notes.

My predictions for the major 2011 awards:

NL Rookie of the Year:
Definitely Craig Kimbrel. Teammate Freddie Freeman was very solid in his first year, but Kimbrel became the league's premier closer and was untouchable much of the season. We'll see later today when the award is announced.

AL Rookie of the Year:
Jeremy Hellickson. He had an ERA under 3.00 in a division with the Red Sox, Yankees, and Blue Jays. He is also helped by the out-of-nowhere success of his team. But Mark Trumbo of the Angels and Eric Hosmer of the Royals are definitely in the picture.

NL Cy Young:
Clayton Kershaw. I mean, he won the triple crown. Enough said.

AL Cy Young:
Justin Verlander. This is the most sure I've ever been about anything. 2.40 ERA, 24-5, 250 K, 0.92 WHIP.

NL MVP:
Ryan Braun. Matt kemp had more home runs and RBI's, won the gold glove, and is slightly faster. But Braun was close to Kemp's HR and RBI totals and had a higher average, Slugging, OBP, and led his team to their first postseason in 800 years. It's close, but I think it'll be Braun, because of what the teams did.

AL MVP:
Justin Verlander. Pitchers are almost never voted MVP, even if their wins-above-replacement metric shows that they should. As such, it should be a challenge for Verlander to overcome teammate Miguel Cabrera. But I think his mind-numbing numbers and the tantalizing concept of a pitcher MVP should go a long way. It will be a Tiger this year- No Red Sock stands a chance after their collapse.

NL Manager of the Year:
Kirk Gibson. He led Arizona from worst to first in the division with the reigning world series champions. He is also extremely popular among his players and with fans.

AL Manager of the Year:
Joe Maddon. Many will say Manny Acta, but I remember how much the Rays were decimated during last offseason. I didn't think they had a prayer, and yet they made it to the playoffs.

Some other notes:

I like the Marlin's new uniforms. The concept of remaking the franchise is bold and I really do respect that. I still think they should merge with the Rays, though.

Terry Francona left. Theo Epstein left. David Ortiz openly considered going to the Yankees. Jonathan Papelbon signed a $50 million deal with Phillidelphia.  Unequivocally, the era of the Red Sox, winners of the 2004 and 2007 world series, is over. It'll be a new feeling next year.

the Chimerical Tale of Napoleon, the Splendid Splinter, and José Reyes

  

Entering the last day of the 2011 baseball season, the Mets' star shortstop José Reyes had the best batting average in the league at .336. At number two, Milwaukee's dynamic young slugger Ryan Braun was batting .335. At that point, Reyes would have to go hitless and Braun 3-for-4 or better for the Hebrew Hammer to take home the crown. On September 28, the last day of regular season games, Reyes bunted for an infield single, and promptly left the game. Braun went 0-for-4 that night and finished with a average of .332. Reyes, in his final at-bat of 2011, raised his average to .337 and became the National League batting champion.

Before we continue let me say this: I love the batting title. I have occasionally laughed at so-called "purists" who drool over stats like the 56-game hit streak and 2,131 consecutive games played but ignore things like win-loss records or Barry Bond's home run total. But in this sense I am a purist. I love batting titles. MVP and Cy Young awards are great, but I really appreciate how the batting title gives the "award" to the particular player who is the absolute best at a specific thing- which happens to be really important to baseball. Both the MVP and CY are subjective compositions of several different statistics (AVE, OBP, SLG, HR, OPS, RBI, ERA, WHIP….) and heavily rely upon holistic and unquantifiable qualities like popularity, "the look", the success of the team, and style of play. I'm not crazy. I know that there are flaws with the concept of batting average (in the future we may have a OBP champion) and that there are many other factors to look for when judging the best player or hitter in the league. But I still love it.

It suddenly seemed everyone hated Reyes for what he had done. To his credit, there is some speculation that New York's Manager made the call. Furthermore, Reyes was set to become a top-tier free agent likely to snag a nine-figure contract and had done very well for the Mets. He deserved a solo exit so he could be applauded one last time by fans at Citi Field, and so his leaving before even running the bases is understandable. Braun said he didn't mind that Reyes bunted and left, but practically no one else had anything less than contempt for the shortstop. People keep going back to Ted Williams, the baseball icon who famously refused to sit out the last two games of the 1941 season with a .39955 batting average, which would have been rounded to .400. But he believed that he didn't deserve a .400 average if he didn't play, so he laced up and went 6-for-8 in the two games against the A's, raising his average to the iconic .406. 

Maybe it is old fans lamenting the transformation of Baseball from a chivalrous pastime to a ruthless blood sport. Or maybe people just like Ryan Braun better than José Reyes. But either way, people point to the Splendid Splinter's example. But there is another precedent that too involves a baseball legend. If we look at it, we may be more charitable to Reyes and perhaps see that the game of yore was actually more cutthroat than now.

In September of 1910, Ty Cobb and Nap Lajoie were embroiled in a heated race for the AL batting title. Cobb had burst onto the scene in his sophomore (first full) season of 1906 and had never batted short of .316 from then on. Lajoie, 12 years Cobb's senior, had been playing so well for so long that he had his very own team named after him, the Cleveland Naps (now the Indians). As the two premier hitters of the time, and no doubt because of Cobb's take-no-prisoners rough style, the two were great rivals. Before the last day and last two games of the regular season, the Georgia Peach held the league's best average at .38507. Lajoie was a close second. Rather than risk losing his lead, Ty decided to sit out the final two games of the season. He was so reviled by other players, however, that the St. Louis Browns, playing Cleveland, were happy to let Nap get his chances in their doubleheader. 

St. Louis manager Jack O'Conner instructed his third baseman to play on the outfield grass. After two legitimate hits, a triple and a hard single, Nap took advantage of this and bunted to the left side five successive times for five infield hits. Lajoie came up an eighth time and did the same. But the official scorer decided that the play looked more like an error, and despite bribe attempts from both managers, did not change her ruling. Lajoie finished 7-8, giving him 227 hits in 591 at bats, a .384 average. If the last batted ball had counted as a hit, he would have eclipsed Cobb's mark. But as it stood, he lost the batting title. After an investigation, the final averages were announced: .385069 for Cobb; .384095 for Lajoie. 

It was so close that both men received new Chalmer's sports cars, the award for the batting title from 1910 to 1914. But Cobb was still technically the winner. But there's more. In 1981, The Sporting News reported that one box score in 1910 had been counted twice, Mr. 3000-style. That day, Cobb went 2-for-3, and if removed from the final result, he would have bated .383, and lost to Nap Lajoie.

The principle purpose of this was to tell a good baseball story, but it does tie back into the original point. Baseball is a competition. Participants SHOULD do absolutely everything they can to increase their chance of winning. And, as I mentioned in my first post, the fun of baseball comes not solely in pursuit of wins but of things like hit streaks and records. We cannot fault players for striving for these benchmarks with the same intensity we expect in pursuit of victory. Reyes made a strategic decision that payed off. Ryan Braun could have done the same thing had the positions been reversed. I would have him do no less. The premise that the Mets' shortstop will somehow find himself at odds with the baseball gods is ridiculous. People remember Ted Williams and Napoleon Lajoie to be sure, but they also remember and idolize Ty Cobb. Give José Reyes a Break.

"I am glad that something besides medals and trophies is offered for the championship in batting. I think the offer of a Chalmers '30' is simply great and I hope to be lucky enough to own a new Chalmers next fall." - Ty Cobb

Statistics source: baseball-reference.com 

Taiwan, Silver Sluggers, and LinceCain

The MLB all-stars tour of Taiwan is over, and the big leaguers swept the five-game set. What strikes me as odd is that anyone would have predicted differently. While the major league team was made up of, well, major leaguers (including a large contingent of stars), the Chinese team was made up of, at the most elite, US minor leaguers and NPB players. The local team actually impressed me and did make a few of the games close, but was, from the outset, very unlikely to win a single game. While the event was a success in terms of popularity, the series was meant to build goodwill, and it is good for no one if it is so one-sided. This is a baseball blog, so I don't want to get into the policy ramifications for US-ROC relations, but it seems obvious that the trip would have worked better as a show of goodwill if the games were not so embarrassingly lopsided. And a showing of competition against each other, rather than cooperation, does not seem like a effective diplomatic maneuver.

So here is what I think they should have done: Rather than play games between the Taiwanese National team and MLB players, mix up the teams. On the American side, split up the stars in a fun way, not necessarily on league lines but randomly. A pitcher could theoretically pitch to a hitter on his own team. The same would be done with the Chinese team, and the two integrated teams would play each other. The mix of teams could even reshuffle for every game, giving new and exiting matchups each time. It would be much more balanced, and interesting. And it would engender camaraderie between the Taiwanese and American players.

On the topic of the Taiwan series, the Giants had a very good showing. Bochy managed his team to a 5-0 record, Ramon Ramirez (why don't they call him Ram-Ram?) pitched well, and Torres seemed to get on base and make great catches at an amazing clip. Of course, the real star was Pablo Sandoval, and he did well, other than his short stint in left field. I'm happy that he was a hit in Taiwan, because he was completely snubbed for the 3rd base Silver Slugger Award.

Sandoval missed about six weeks of the season with a broken hamate bone, but he still should have received the Silver Slugger for his position. Aramis Ramirez, the Cub third baseman who is nine years Pablo's senior, won the award. No one else was close to these two, so we need only to compare them to each other. First of all, Sandoval is younger, a better fielder, a great comeback story, and a face-of-the-franchise. If, theoretically speaking, the two players had identical offensive numbers, the Giant should get the award on the basis of all the other things. But they did not have the same numbers. Pablo's were better. 

Player	Games	PA	AVE	HR	2B+3B	RBI	Snubs/ ASG	BB	OPS	OPS+
Ramirez	149	626	.306	26	36	93	1	43	.871	136
Sandoval	117	466	.315	23 (29)	29 (37)	70 (89)	0	32 (41)	.909	153

(Numbers in parenthesis give theoretical quantities of the selected action Sandoval would have done 

had he had 626 plate appearances, rounded to the nearest whole number. (23*626)/466=approx. 29)

His average is significantly better, .315 to .306. Both his OPS and OPS+ are well ahead of Ramirez's. And while the north-sider did walk and knock in runs at a better clip, it is only by a very slim margin; so one cannot say that he is much more patient or professional than Sandoval. And consider this: While Ramirez had 26 home runs to Sandoval's 23, if we adjust for plate appearances and give Pablo 626 (the same number as Ramirez) he would have 29, more than his competitor and almost to the magic slugger threshold of 30. The same principle holds for doubles and triples. While his 2011 totals were smaller, Sandoval's totals adjusted for PAs are higher than Ramirez's. Indeed Sandoval leads in almost all of the adjusted major offensive statistics, and in the two in which he does not his deficit is very slim. 

Lets review. Higher Average, Higher HR rate, higher extra-base hit rate, higher OPS; and very slightly lower RBI's and walks. Moreover, Aramis Ramirez snubbed the All-Star Game. While this did pave the way for Sandoval's selection to the NL roster, this is incredibly disrespectful to his teammates, fans, and the game and should practically disqualify him (read: Carlos Tevez). Pablo was robbed.  

On another note, I am ambivalent about the Melky Cabrera- Jonathan Sanchez trade. While Cabrera did have a good year, Sanchez is a very talented pitcher who is among the league's elite when he throws strikes. Hopefully, Sanchez's departure will give even more motivation to locking up Lincecum and Cain for a long time. Give those two as many years as they want. To get extra money to pay for extensions, the Giants should sell "LinceCain" shirts. I'd buy one.

"The way to get a ball past Wagner is to hit it eight feet over his head." -John Mcgraw on Honus Wagner

I have received several inquiries on how one can "follow" the blog or post comments. It isn't necessary to sign up for anything to read the blog, just take note of the address - brokenbatblog.blogspot.com - and periodically visit the site. I'll try to post something at least once a week. As far as commenting goes, you can only do that if you have a google (gmail) account. And yes, I will talk about present day baseball, not just history.

since this is a baseball blog, I now have to post something like this:

On this day in 1951, Roy Campanella won his first of three NL MVP awards, batting .325 with 33 home runs and 108 RBI's. Of course, Giants fans are forgiven if their associations with that year have more to do with a couple other things...

Blog #2: Eddie, Matty, and the Line-Up for Yesterday

                       Ogden Nash was a well known American poet known for his light (humorous) poetry who lived from 1902 to 1971. A baseball and Giants enthusiast (Note the 'F' stanza), he wrote Line-Up for Yesterday: An ABC of Baseball Immortals for SPORT Magazine in 1949. Somehow, I keep seeing bits of it again and again through my reading. Below is poem in its entirety. There are twenty-six letters (I sometimes forget exactly how many there are), and the "I" and "Z" represent the author himself and the zenith, respectively. All but one of the twenty-four players are hall of famers and the one that isn't maybe should be. Can you tell which players he writes about? How many of them do you know? Which sections are you favorite? Leave comments below. Personally, I just love the entries for Eddie Plank (man, would I love to see the pitching matchup Nash talks about), Walter Johnson (three strikes at a time!), and Nap Lajoie (who will probably be making an appearance in my next column). 

A is for Alex

The great Alexander;

More Goose eggs he pitched

Than a popular gander.

B is for Bresnahan

Back of the plate;

The Cubs were his love,

and McGraw his hate.

C is for Cobb,

Who grew spikes and not corn,

And made all the basemen

Wish they weren't born.

D is for Dean,

The grammatical Diz,

When they asked, Who's the tops?

Said correctly, I is.

E is for Evers,

His jaw in advance;

Never afraid

To Tinker with Chance.

F is for Fordham

And Frankie and Frisch;

I wish he were back

With the Giants, I wish.

G is for Gehrig,

The Pride of the Stadium;

His record pure gold,

His courage, pure radium.

H is for Hornsby;

When pitching to Rog,

The pitcher would pitch,

Then the pitcher would dodge.

I is for Me,

Not a hard-hitting man,

But an outstanding all-time

Incurable fan.

J is for Johnson

The Big Train in his prime

Was so fast he could throw

Three strikes at a time.

K is for Keeler,

As fresh as green paint,

The fastest and mostest

To hit where they ain't.

L is for Lajoie

Whom Clevelanders love,

Napolean himself,

With glue in his glove.

M is for Matty,

Who carried a charm

In the form of an extra

brain in his arm.

N is for Newsom,

Bobo's favorite kin.

You ask how he's here,

He talked himself in.

O is for Ott

Of the restless right foot.

When he leaned on the pellet,

The pellet stayed put.

P is for Plank,

The arm of the A's;

When he tangled with Matty

Games lasted for days.

Q is for Don Quixote

Cornelius Mack;

Neither Yankees nor years

Can halt his attack.

R is for Ruth.

To tell you the truth,

There's just no more to be said,

Just R is for Ruth.

S is for Speaker,

Swift center-field tender,

When the ball saw him coming,

It yelled, "I surrender."

T is for Terry

The Giant from Memphis

Whose .400 average

You can't overemphis.

U would be 'Ubell

if Carl were a cockney;

We say Hubbell and Baseball

Like Football and Rockne.

V is for Vance

The Dodger's very own Dazzy;

None of his rivals

Could throw as fast as he.

W is for Wagner,

The bowlegged beauty;

Short was closed to all traffic

With Honus on duty.

X is the first

of two x's in Foxx

Who was right behind Ruth

with his powerful soxx.

Y is for Young

The magnificent Cy;

People battled against him,

But I never knew why.

Z is for Zenith

The summit of fame.

These men are up there.

These men are the game.

As a side note, Plank and Christy Mathewson faced each other in the 1905 World Series. In game one, Mathewson pitched a complete game shutout, giving up four hits while Plank gave up three earned runs on ten hits. Matty took the ball again in game three and pitched another complete game shutout win. In game four Plank gave up one unearned run over eight innings and took a hard-luck loss, losing 1-0. This is where Plank's nickname, "Proto-Matt Cain" comes from. Game five came and Christy pitched another shutout, giving him a world series ERA of 0.00. The three runs the Giants' did allow were unearned, so Mathewson was not alone. New York set the unbreakable record of a world series earned run average of exactly zero.