Kickass Baseball Media 2008

file under "oof"

lol

geez, Goldman just had thyroid surgery.

DokLivy (Austin, TX): Rany, is there ANY hope for the national league? I've been a Cardinal fan for 30 years and it kills me how much talent leaves the league to play for the larger payroll teams in the American. It's not like the National League is a small market league. New York. Chicago. LA. Phoenix. Houston. Atlanta.

Rany Jazayerli: The imbalance between the leagues today reminds me of an essay Bill James wrote in one of his Abstracts in the mid-80s, back when the AL West was (in his words) the "Third World" of baseball. His point was that teams have an incentive to build to their competition. If you think 85 wins is all it will take to make the playoffs (hello, NL Central), you're best served by making decisions that maximize your chances to reach 85 wins, even if they reduce your chance at 95 wins.

In other words, NL teams know they don't have to compete with the Red Sox or the Yankees (at least until they get steamrolled in the World Series), so they don't feel the need to expand their payroll to nine figures or go way over slot to sign draft picks. Which means we're not likely to see a change in the AL's dominance for some time to come.

Although I usually hate "LOL NL CENTRAL" pieces, this is kind of true. But it has a big hole -- it's kind of dumb to assume that every team can afford nine figures' worth of payroll and that the ones who can't are just lazy or afraid. Especially coming from a Royals fan!

well, I think he's specifically talking about teams who could re 9 figures.

(do you really think Jazayerli thinks the Pirates are keeping under $100M out of laziness?)

Well you might be right. In fact, you probably are. BUT IT KILLS ME TO SAY THAT.

:)

don't know if this qualifies as kick-ass but it's just kind of interesting, from Dave Studeman's column in today's The Hardball Times:

"In one feature of the Season Preview, we simulated the 2008 season 100 times to try to predict how it will play out. Our projected standings not only give each team’s predicted win total, but also its probability of making the playoffs. With the caveat that we ran the numbers before the Santana trade, only four teams missed the playoffs in all 100 simulations.

That indicates a fantastic amount of parity in the MLB, and portends an exciting—and, despite our best efforts, sometimes unpredictable—season ahead."

Sorry, that's David Gassko not Studemann.

Okay this article is all kinds of amazing: http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3243227&lpos=spotlight&lid=tab2pos1

Unless you're a Padres fan! :(

But it's so sympathetic to the Padres, esp the owners and poor ol' Trevor Hoffman, whom I admire so much more now than I ever did before. What a mensch!

Wow!

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/2008-02-19-3622276460_x.htm

"Pence said he was in a hot tub at the home where he's staying and got out to use the bathroom. He had left the door open, but didn't noticed that a friend had just closed it. He hit it with his shoulder, leg and head and it shattered."

lolol

looks like someone was having a soak n' toke!

very Martin Sheen in Saigon

The NYT article on Johan Santana's changeup is fairly interesting, but it's the detailed diagrams linked on the left, under "A Study in Stealth" that are kickass.

You’re wasting your time, Rick Morrissey! The more you ignore PECOTA, the closer it gets.

The heart bars are a nice touch, too.

Chris O'Leary's Evaluation of the Pitching Mechanics of SI.com's Baseball's Top 20 Young Pitchers for 2008

Excellent stuff.

6. Francisco Liriano: Oh the humanity! Such incredible, historic statistics. Such crappy mechanics. He's also one reason why I hate the slider.

Back to the photo.

This is a very generic view that tells us little to nothing about the root cause of his elbow problems.

Looks like he's throwing a change-up. Notice the 3 fingers + thumb on the ball. The only thing that's a little funky about this photo is how he seems to be falling off to the Third Base side at the release point. That may be due to the tremendous horizontal forces he generates due to his (really bad) arm action. By the time this photo has been taken, most of the really bad stuff has already happened. I give him a year before his arm rips apart at the shoulder.

Such a waste.

I'm totally not sold on Chris O'Leary's analysis, especially in this case--for half the photos he admits that there's nothing interesting to glean about the mechanics! He's got one or two very specific things he hates and no baseball credentials to speak of. He's very thorough with his photo analysis but there are plenty of differing opinions out there on mechanics. Carlos Gomez, for example, likes some stuff that O'Leary doesn't and got himself hired by an MLB team.

Goldman bullet-preview, picks Reds for 2nd!

http://web.yesnetwork.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20080331&content_id=1440032&oid=36019&vkey=6

wrong thread

(not kickass but mildly amusing)

ESPN.com contributor Jim Baker's alternative Major League Baseball ’08 team slogans:

* White Sox: “Fix-free since 1919.”
* Cubs: “Tinkers to Ever to Not a (bleeping) Chance.”
* Astros: “Come watch the roof close!”
* Padres: “If games lasted seven innings, we’d be World Champions.”
* Yankees: (A tuxedo T-shirt) “We’ve spent $1.4 billion since 2001 and all we got was this lousy T-shirt.”
* Red Sox: “Your pity no longer required.”
* Indians: “Founded in 1901, lost since 1949.”
* Mariners: “Only 188 days until Richie Sexson’s contract expires.”
* Braves: (With tomahawk logo) “We put the die nasty in dynasty.”
* Marlins: “Where big leaguers make less than you do.”

Padres: “If games lasted seven innings, we’d be World Champions.

What's he got against Heath Bell?

Maybe he thinks Cla can't pla?

Joe Sheehan gives it up to Bruce Bochy:

"Bochy went from Rajai Davis against Heath Bell needing a single to Brian Bocock against Heath Bell needing a single, and wasted a player for the privilege."

Oh I really want to see a T-shirt saying "I was on the World Champion 1997 Florida Marlins and all I got was this lousy trade".

At least one for every no-hoper clubhouse in MLB.

and then you have mike piazza who actually got traded TO the 98 marlins

". . . and all we got was a Lousy 1-tool Catcher"

Eric, Boston: The number of "black" MLB players drops to 8 percent. Or should it be the number of "black" MLB players skyrockets with the Latin influx in to the game? Or even better: Who cares? If David Ortiz and Alphonso Soriano are not black, then who is? I guarantee you they would qualify as "black" in any other situation (grants, the census, etc). Don't like the term "black"? then African American makes it even more obvious. If your ancestors came over on a big ship in chains from Africa then who cares whether your birth certificate is from the Dominican or Milwaukee?

Rob Neyer: (12:12 PM ET ) I'm on your side, Eric, and I would blog about this except I'm trying to steer clear of sensitive subjects for the moment (don't ask). The whole thing is distasteful and, I worry, counter-productive.... I think we should allow kids to play the games they want to play, and not attribute their choices to some spectral, non-specific prejudices.

Wow.

Um shouldn't that be on the Dumbass thread?

Seriously.

If David Ortiz and Alphonso Soriano are not black, then who is?

Not crazy about the phrasing of the question, but the hue-and-cry about who's playing what has always puzzled me. (especially after 3 hrs of Joe Morgan saying a whole lot of not-very-much during the Civil Rights Game)

yeah why is it distasteful, counterproductive or indicative of any kind of prejudice anywhere to point out that fewer black americans are playing baseball than ever

morbius its about mlb & baseball not reaching a big segment of the american populace, which i think is a problem worth trying to correct

I would be concerned with their efforts to make the game appealing to black fans at least as much as to develop more MLB-caliber black American ballplayers.

exactly? is not really obvious that the two go hand-in-hand?

I don't get that. Why just black Americans, not all Americans?

xp

because weve been seeing a long & steady decline in baseballs popularity among black americans at the exact same time were seeing a long & steady upswing in baseballs popularity w/ americans on the whole

I see Neyer's point about "sensitive subjects"

I think we should allow kids to play the games they want to play, and not attribute their choices to some spectral, non-specific prejudices.

I thought it was a commonly-understood point that it's very difficult for a lot of African-American kids to play baseball, even if they want to. Is that bullshit? Neyer is usually on the ball and I'm genuinely confused by this.

declineinafricanamericansplayingbaseballvsrisein_athletic_quarterbacks.xls

i dunno what the fuck he's on about CoD, his argument for why mlb has isolated 1/3 of america seems to be that 'kids will be kids' or something, which...how do you even start w/ that, really

what do studies show? is it more an issue of access to facilities, or indifference to the sport?

In other occupations where race discrimination has played a factor, studies usually show it is a combination of subtle institutional discrimination + a lack of mentoring. Proponents of such studies argue that the disproportionate statistics can only be explained by discrimination.

In a field where a player has to advance through many levels and many decision-makers before reaching the MLB level, perhaps there is something to it. I wonder what the numbers are for the minor league levels.

Well, here's Joe Sheehan.

its not specifically about racism, preference, or access, its about all those things, though institutional ignorance played a far larger part in getting baseball to where it is now among blacks than racism did, imo.

this is all common sense stuff to me but anyway:

-kids idolize & want to emulate people they see on tv & there are fewer black baseball players for black kids to want to idolize or emulate than ever before
-basketball & football are both far simpler sports than baseball, in that in football, just about any particularly remarkable physical specimen has a chance to succeed, & will likely as not be noticed & set on the path to do as much. basketball requires more finesse, but can be played in just about any environment with a ball & a hoop, & can be played alone, with friends, or by walking into the middle of a pickup game. baseball requires lots of space, multiple players, & caters to a unique skill set that literally cant be properly quantified or eyeballed unless the athlete is actually playing the sport, & has been playing it for awhile, & has been coached in some fashion. so while with football a dude can say "im fast/strong, i should play football", & while basketball offers plenty of opportunities for anyone to refine necessary skills almost literally anytime, baseball ideally needs some kind of structure set from above early on if kids are gonna have the fullest opportunities to succeed at it
-and this structure is sewn into the fabric of much of white america to the point that its just sort of what you -do-, as a 6 year old kid, you play tball, then little league, etc. 99% of these kids are shed off down the road due to lack of talent or interest but baseball has become a part of them, & a spark can reignite dormant passions at any time

the problem goes from the very top down & from the very bottom up both; thats why i say it all goes hand-in-hand. but mlb cant control how many black players are currently in the bigs, or will be anytime soon - its up to them to do their best to make sure urban areas receive the proper coaching, facilities, equipment, etc, to give kids there the same opportunity to both succeed at & love the sport as any hick from nebraska already gets.

i can only guess that neyer/sheehan view this kind of attitude as either paternalistic or exploitative or both as i genuinely have no idea why we 'shouldnt care' about this issue (sheehans article is gay-for-pay so i cant read it). i think its both sensible & fair & i truly dont see who doesnt benefit from it, aside from non african-american professional baseball players, i guess.

thank you.

Posting not because I agree with it (I don't), but because everyone else should have a chance to read:

Prospectus Today
Eight Point Two

by Joe Sheehan
Printer-
friendly
Contact
Author
In what has become an annual tradition, we were informed today that baseball’s rosters number only 8.2 percent of its makeup from African-Americans, the lowest level in decades.

In what is also an annual tradition, I scratched my head and wondered why I should care.

Maybe it’s because I’m too young to have any memory of overt racial conflict in America. Maybe it’s because I grew up in a mixed-race neighborhood, played in mixed-race sports leagues and attended mixed-race schools. Whether it was any or all of those things, the obsession of many with race in sports—or more accurately, non-white participation in sports—has always fallen flat with me. I have always seen sports as the one place where race doesn’t matter as much as it does elsewhere. If you have game, you play; if you don’t, you don’t. I can’t say my being a white kid was never an issue in a neighborhood that was trending towards first-generation Dominicans, but I can say that on the courts of Inwood Park, your ability to ball was a hell of a lot more important than anything else.

On any given day, you might see 10 Hispanic guys in a run, or five Hispanic guys, three black guys and two white guys. Or six white guys, three black guys and one Hispanic guy. You showed up, you called "next," you got your five and if you won, you stayed. It wasn’t a utopia and I’m not presenting it as such; I’m saying that on the court, game to 20, with the netless rims and aluminum backboards, your skin color was less important than in any other place I knew. You didn’t get to run because of your race; you got it because of your game. Biases existed, but whether they persisted was entirely tied to how you played ball.

So when I read that African-American representation on rosters is at a low point since the early days of the game’s integration, I don’t understand the importance. I analyze baseball decision makers for a living, and I am certain that the decisions they make are, in toto, as race-blind as the basketball courts of Inwood Park were in my adolescence. That is to say that while individuals may harbor biases, and may even act upon them in their words or actions, how they build baseball teams is not subject to racial discrimination. How they select players for their organizations is not subject to racial discrimination. Baseball and, in fact, all professional sports at the highest levels are as meritocratic as any entity in human history.

Moreover--and this gets to the point of the press release--there’s nothing MLB is doing or not doing that would discourage young men of any race from playing baseball. If anything, MLB has bent over backwards, to the point of pandering, in an effort to associate itself with the minority heroes of its past, to fund the development of baseball talent in African-American population centers, to market the top African-American players in today’s game, and to make inroads in the game’s management for African-American executives. At some point, you have to acknowledge the determined efforts of Bud Selig—who has driven all of these initiatives—and stop using a silly number like “percentage of African-Americans on rosters” to beat the game into submission.

The 8.2 percent figure quoted is the product of trends that no amount of MLB money and power in any one direction will arrest. In part, it reflects a change, occurring across three generations, from baseball to basketball as the preferred sport of African-Americans. There is nothing wrong with this, and so much of the perceived problem is attempting to make it wrong. People’s tastes change; witness the rise of NASCAR and the decline of ice hockey for two other examples in the American sports world. Yet Richard Lapchick, who has made a career of this, solemnly notes:

Baseball has probably lost a whole generation here. African-Americans just aren't playing it at this point. They're going to have to increase their efforts.
Why, exactly, does MLB have to "increase their efforts"? The integration of Major League Baseball was a critical moment in race relations in America, and is no doubt in part responsible, in a limited way, for the fact that a black man is within months of the presidency. However, if over time the game becomes less popular among that segment of America's population, why is it a crisis? Why is it MLB’s problem if this particular group of people prefers to watch and play football and basketball, or ignore sports in favor of other entertainments or careers, so long as MLB itself not erecting barriers to participation and enjoyment? If anything, MLB is doing the opposite; short of coercing the NCAA to change scholarship distributions, which would likely change the incentives involved in choosing sports among youth, what can MLB do that it isn’t already doing? More money? More programs? More artificial, self-conscious events such as the Civil Rights Game?

If, as a group, African-Americans prefer to play and watch other sports, that’s a perfectly valid choice. I can disagree with it, because I love baseball and I think people who don’t are missing out, but that’s the same for anyone who doesn’t like the game. To say that MLB has to "do more" is proffering a solution in search of a problem.

The 8.2 percent figure, as compared to where the number peaked back in the 1970s, has nothing to do with MLB somehow acting in a manner that would exclude African-Americans. It has to do with changes in the mix of the player pool that has served to lower American participation in the game at the same time. The game is global now, with talent from all over the world. Pointing to "8.2 percent" and building a case around it is exactly as dumb as using Prince Fielder’s home-run total to say that he’s the MVP.

I come back to this: why should we care? Baseball is wildly successful at the moment, with record revenues and attendance, with a new peak reached in terms of play, with fans in all parts of the world getting exposed to the game. As an industry, baseball has not reverted to its pre-World War II past, and watching any game on any day will tell you that. Rosters are a melange of colors and nationalities; by any reasonable measure, baseball is the most diverse of all the major sports. Only by a bastardized definition of "diversity" could you compare the NFL or NBA favorably to MLB in that regard.

Baseball is a meritocracy. In the year 2008, it has absolutely nothing to be ashamed of its racial composition, its hiring practices, or its outreach programs.

baseball is the most diverse of all the major sports.

I was going to allude to this earlier but it really has to be futbol/soccer, right?

"As an industry, baseball has not reverted to its pre-World War II past"

areyoufuckingkiddingme

these guys seem to be so incredibly ignorant of why this is an issue that its actually painful to read there arguments as to why its not

Count me as one of those who doesn't understand why this is an issue

why isnt this an issue?

I don't know! You tell me!

this grilled cheese sandwich has mayonnaise on it WHAT

lol

deeznuts, you do realize that there is a lower % of caucasian players in MLB than there was 20 years ago, right? your whole "sewn into the fabric of much of white america" statement looks pretty limp considering where the new found talent in MLB is being imported from (dominican republic, venezuela, japan, etc.).

also i think we touched on this topic in the dontrelle thread.

This issue twists my brain into many directions. It is so much deeper than the matter of whether or not MLB is culpable for the decline in black players, or US-born players, or whether "we" should or should not give a fuck about basketball or soccer being more popular. So here is a quote instead of a block of scattered thoughts (in part 'cause I'm pretty sure I did that somewhere else here).

Mike Banks, Detroit high school baseball coach:

Some of the kids make it, and some of them don't. I lose some of them to the war. Some of my baseball players, they're young, they're full of testosterone, they want to prove themselves, so some of them join the Marine corps. One of my favourite players, man, he joined the Marine corps. I was so sad, because I thought he could have made it in baseball. But the recruiters, like in that Michael Moore movie, they're on their ass, they're challenging these boys, almost like challenging their manhood. It's a kid, and of course he's going to step up and defend his manhood, so they end up joining. It's tough. I lose some of them to that, I lose some of them to the street, some of them start selling drugs, that drug life is so appealing to them, cos of the money. Some of them carry on with baseball. It's like slavery. You lose two thirds of them on the trip. I'm thinking about not continuing coaching, because you lose so many of them.

The "we need more AAs in MLB OMG JACKIE ROBINSONG WTF" battle cry REALLY happened, what, five, six years ago when MLB built all those parks and development fields in Los Angeles, right? Logically, we shouldn't even see The Next Great African American Players for another four or five years MINIMUM and that's assuming any good players come out of those programs anyway.

Plus all the shit about quen sport es mas macho...

my point being that this discussion is only a few years old and it will take decades for there to be any real tangible results wrt these programs and incentives so any conversation along the lines of OMG WAHT DO WE DO \(0_o)/ is a non-starter for me.

What is MORE valuable and more important to discuss/promote is the NFL Play promos they're doing to encourage kids to get up and, like, PLAY OUTSIDE and develop a love of exercise VS. encouraging them to engage in any particular sport (i.e. baseball vs. football vs. basketball is not the point so long as children enjoy the idea of sport on some level)

Four years old but a good read:

http://www.metrotimes.com/editorial/story.asp?id=6203

yeah but you at least seem to admit its a legitimate issue

and yeah i get that playing outside is increasingly lost on kids, but then that has been a complaint since like the 80s -- despite this dudes are gonna look to maximize their athletic abilities to attract girls & guys & agents all, its in our nature -- because of the nature of the sport a baseball players skills are gonna remain hidden to those who dont have the best opportunity to capitalize on them

so you can either say that this is the way things are because thats the way they are, as neyer & sheehan seem to want to do, or you can say that we can change this & with some money & effort realize the potential of a lot of kids whod otherwise be ignored xp

I don't know that I'm willing to call it an issue. There are plenty of poor dominican/puerto rican/venezualan kids who are getting a LOT of money that they wouldn't dream of otherwise AND they seem to be willing to give back more to their community than, say American ballplayers of any stripe so... if this is the 'way things are going to be' then I'm OK with that.

And like I noted, MLB is throwing money/pr campaigns/dontrelle willis at the perceived problem and we won't know the results of those efforts for another ten years or so, so keep trying to get inner city kids involved with the game and in the meantime everyone ("the royal we") just chill the fuck out.

Yeah fuckers, step off with your misplaced concern. It's not like African Americans were ever banned from baseball until the late 1940s or anything.

Is the percentage decline in African-Americans disproportionate to a decrease in American players overall?

Baseball seems like a riskier career path than football or basketball somehow. The those sports seem like a better hedge because the college game is so commercial and scouted. Plus you go to college. Don't know much about it but they seem less cronified than MLB.

shasta/jimmy, the decline in white americans playing baseball is entirely reasonable given the spike in the sports popularity on a global scale, & the recognition of this by mlb - i think it goes w/out saying that in venezueala & the dominican especially baseball is not only ingrained into the culture but is seen as an actual means of escape - this is something that cant really be matched in the US. but it can still mean just as much to nebraskan or texan or compton raised kids all, if those kids are given similar opportunities to succeed at the sport.

felocity, baseball also has a higher immediate payoff - peak (1st rd) amateur bonuses typically range from 1M to 7M these days, with HS players making as much as college kids. you can also look at the situation like this: football = 3 yrs before real payoff, basketball, 1 year at best (& its ulitmately gonna be less than you get from) baseball - instant payoff out of HS; & biggest payoff possible if you make it all the way.

there's plenty of incentive to play baseball but the opportunity is more or less denied to millions of americans. look at the top american amateurs today -- the % is pretty extraordinarily white. it seems worthwhile to me to wonder why this is, & why so many black american athletes turn to football or basketball, & how that can be changed.

basically either neyer/sheehan et al are arguing things are 'falling into place' or theyre arguing that mlb should be apathetic about people (esp people who previously cared about their sport) not caring about their sport -- either one of these seem like completely 100% retarded arguments to me.

Latin American kids do fairly well reaching the majors starting out with a stick, a crappy homemade ball and a family income around $6 a day.

"As an industry, baseball has not reverted to its pre-World War II past"

areyoufuckingkiddingme

??? Has the reserve clause reappeared or sumpin?

morbius i just think its kind of ridiculous to bring up pre-integration as a point of reference when trying to make a point about the health of the game today

and i still dont get why black latins are even a part of this discussion, this isnt about baseball fulfilling the full range of the human color spectrum or something

I mean the reasons why this declining is happening are presumably varied and complex, but if the main argument against going deeper is "well maybe they just don't like baseball" then that's fucking retarded and the last thing I would expect from bright dudes like Neyer and Sheehan. I don't think anybody should lay the blame entirely at the feet of MLB--I don't know how extensive or effective their outreach programs are but they do have them--but it's going to take cities, youth groups, foundations, etc. working together to at least give kids the opportunity to decide whether they like baseball or not and I think the reason this is an "issue" is that that may not be happening.

*I have this weird feeling like I read somewhere once that Sheehan is rather conservative politically, which may explain his head-in-the-sand bullshit.

As an aside, if we feel like generalizing, African-Americans used to fucking love baseball! I just finished up A Well-Paid Slave, which is about Curt Flood and his lawsuit, and him and a ton of other black kids in Oakland were crazy about baseball! Is there any reason to think that a generation or two would change that without serious economic/social/environmental factors at work??

I mean, fucking everybody loves baseball! The last argument I would expect a bunch of dudes who loved baseball so much they made careers out of writing about it to make is that well gee maybe there are just huge tracts of the population who just don't like it and oh they all have the same socioeconomic background, isn't that a weird coincidence.

Mudcat Grant came through town yesterday and they asked him what to do about getting African-Americans to play baseball and he said church leagues- I guess I can't disagree. Whether a kid wants to play football or watch TV or whatever doesn't matter to me but I don't even know if some inner city
kid has the oppurtunity to join a league if he wants to play baseball. I don't think Little League exists on the eastside of Cleveland- tho I could be wrong.

As an aside- John McGraw carried around a piece of rope that had been used to lynch blacks in the Springfield Ill race riots. It was a "good luck" charm for the 1908 pennant run. ugh

all blacks are poor lol.

kidding. that said, poor inner city ppls of various stripes be not having huge tracts of land to play baseball on shockah.

expanding again: multi-use fields do not lend themselves well to baseball diamonds as much as football; you can fit nine basketball courts in the same space as one football field.

John McGraw was a total lunatic! He said he would get a surgeon to chop off all his pitcher's first fingers a la Mordecai Brown if he thought it would get them a little extra on the curve.

destroyer, I think you are oversimplifying the Sheehan view, and Neyer didn't even write a column about it.

I think fewer black kids like baseball than did in 1950 for many of the same reasons fewer white kids do.

Billy Crystal?

"*I have this weird feeling like I read somewhere once that Sheehan is rather conservative politically, which may explain his head-in-the-sand bullshit."

He is.

And it sort of does.

Neyer "We should let kids play the games they want to play" is a bullshit oversimplification and I don't care what the format is, he should be called on it.

I agree with Sheehan to a large degree actually: People who use this to bitch that MLB doesn't do enough are barking up the wrong tree. But if he's also saying that he genuinely doesn't care who is/is not playing or why, then I think that's bullshit too.

Yeah, an explosion in interests/hobbies/outlets + TV and internet and whatnot does mean that across the board fewer people may like any one thing. The point to me is giving everyone the same chance to be exposed to things so that they can decide what they like, and the open question is whether a lot of poor urban kids have gotten a fair exposure to baseball. I don't know the answer, but I can't be convinced that the question is not worth further study.

hay wut happened 2 my post

looks like someone has gone "mod" with power to me, cankles

You continue to use slurs after people complained. Clean up.

I don't even know if some inner city kid has the oppurtunity to join a league if he wants to play baseball.

OTM. And it isn't just baseball to which poor urban kids aren't being exposed - it's the coaches and adult mentors and community organizations - all that infrastructure that, by necessity, forms a huge part of your life if you're a kid playing Little League. There were a fair amount of kids on my Little League teams - myself included - who were being raised by single mothers, and for whom exposure to Dudes Who Had Their Shit Together was a real eye-opener. This can't be underestimated.

Also, IMHO a large part of the intrinsic allure of baseball is this idea that baseball is more aware of its own history and more ready to place individual accomplishments in a historical context - we hear about somebody tying Willie McCovey or Ted Williams's HR records or whatever much more frequently than we do in other sports. Cubs fans are being inundated with references to things that happened 100 years ago as if they have any bearing on what Lou Piniella does tomorrow. This almost never happens in any other American sport.

So it feels totally disingenuous to see MLB come to terms with its segregationist history, embrace its Hank Aarons and Jackie Robinsons et al, and make a less-than-concerted effort to reach out to kids who don't have the means to play organized baseball. I don't think it's willful neglect so much as bad marketing, but something really should be done differently.

I guess what bums me out about Sheehan and Neyer's responses to this is that they, of all people, should be aware of these implications. They're not even talking about youth baseball as if it exists as part of a bigger, holistic thing.

Baseball and, in fact, all professional sports at the highest levels are as meritocratic as any entity in human history.

Uh huh. There sure are tons of female and minority coaches and front-office administrators, Joe.

The other problem with that last quoted Sheehan sentence is that, uh, Joe Sheehan's whole career has been founded upon pointing out the many occasions when baseball is not run as a meritocracy.

No doubt -- Kim Ng to thread!

lmao, maybe you should CLEAN UP the sand in your vagina while we're at it~

anyway. i guess what i really want to know is, why the continued agonizing over the issue? it's not that it isn't an interesting question worth addressing, but why so much hand-wringing? i don't doubt that there's a level of inequity wrt opportunities to play the game in tha inner city, and i certainly don't advocate the sheehan-style head in the sand approach (esp since those dudes have a much greater incentive to care about this issue), but at the same time the level of concern about this NATIONAL CRISIS!!!!! seems disproportionate to me?

I don't think anybody should lay the blame entirely at the feet of MLB--I don't know how extensive or effective their outreach programs are but they do have them--but it's going to take cities, youth groups, foundations, etc. working together to at least give kids the opportunity to decide whether they like baseball or not and I think the reason this is an "issue" is that that may not be happening.

yeah, but... who cares? I mean, if you don't have a vested interest in the health of major league baseball, why would you be interested in the amount of effort and money required to coordinate that? the most important thing is that these kids be given access to organized sports so they can reap benefits from the mentorship, positive male role models, participating in activities in a structured, safe environment. and you already get all that from football and (to a degree) basketball!

I mean, fucking everybody loves baseball! The last argument I would expect a bunch of dudes who loved baseball so much they made careers out of writing about it to make is that well gee maybe there are just huge tracts of the population who just don't like it and oh they all have the same socioeconomic background, isn't that a weird coincidence.

-- call all destroyer, Wednesday, April 16, 2008 3:44 PM (3 hours ago) Bookmark Link

ahaha yeah, exactly! that's the weirdest part to me - these dudes SHOULD be concerned about things that pertain to trends in the game's makeup and popularity.

all blacks are poor lol.

kidding. that said, poor inner city ppls of various stripes be not having huge tracts of land to play baseball on shockah.

-- Jimmy The Mod Awaits The Return Of His Beloved, Wednesday, April 16, 2008 3:46 PM (3 hours ago) Bookmark Link

expanding again: multi-use fields do not lend themselves well to baseball diamonds as much as football; you can fit nine basketball courts in the same space as one football field.

-- Jimmy The Mod Awaits The Return Of His Beloved, Wednesday, April 16, 2008 3:49 PM (3 hours ago) Bookmark Link

see, this is where i'd like to know more about the scope of the RBI program - because most NFL players don't come from the inner city. football players tend to be some country ass mofos from rural-and-suburban ass areas. mb MLB is targeting the wrong kind of blax! ¯\(°_o)/¯

the basic question at hand here is pretty interesting, and idk what i think of it. i mean, like - yeah, maybe you can succeed at basketball and football based more on athleticism than in baseball, but football requires A LOT more in the way of organization, infrastructure and equipment, and pop warner is available everywhere.

who's the sandy one?

~*~*~felicity~*~*~

huh, fooled me.

Felicity said what many of us have said in the past, cank. Let's just move forward from here, okay?

In light of 2000-06 events, maybe we should worry more about black people having their votes counted and not being drowned before we prioritize getting more of them to play ball.

People can do both. They were talking baout it on some ESPN show today.

It's really astonishing how uncomfortable some people get when things don't fit into the neat little boxes.

yeah morbius thats a really really silly line of argument

appropriate of nothing but i just had an author email me back saying "sorry for the hassle man".

i can't tell if he was being snarky or not.

"In light of 2000-06 events, maybe we should worry more about black people having their votes counted and not being drowned before we prioritize getting more of them to play ball."

If MLB is going to start working on this issue, I am all for it.

lol, this thread =
http://www.cinema.com/image_lib/6821_heading.jpg

http://images.allmoviephoto.com/2001_Hardball/keanu_reeves_dewayne_warren_hardball_001.jpg

I can’t say my being a white kid was never an issue in a neighborhood that was trending towards first-generation Dominicans, but I can say that on the courts of Inwood Park, your ability to ball was a hell of a lot more important than anything else.

how old is sheehan, i think i might know his brother. lmao at "ability to ball"

Sheehan's a bit past 40, maybe.

(or at least close to it)

Wikipedia sez born '71.

Yeah but he's got MAD STREET CRED because he once played HOOPS against BLACK GUYS so AGE IS NOT A FACTOR.

OZZIE! (via MLB.com):

Give Ozzie Guillen credit for being a man of his word where the team’s philosophy on offense is concerned.

The White Sox manager mentioned numerous times during Spring Training how he didn’t necessarily want a speed guy at the top of his order, but instead desired any sort of leadoff hitter who consistently could get on base. So, the fact that the White Sox had an American League-low one stolen base entering Wednesday’s road contest against the Orioles didn’t fly in the face of Guillen’s aggressive style.

“We don’t have the type of ballclub that’s going to steal 100 bases,” Guillen said. “As long as we run the bases well, as long as we stay aggressive on the basepaths ...

“I’d rather have people on base, have 100 people on base than have 100 guys stealing bases. I think the on-base percentage is pretty important.”

TORTOISE 1, HARE 0

Talk about a classic contrast: 900-year-old Jamie Moyer of the Phillies recently out-pitched former Mizzou ace Max Scherzer, a Diamondbacks rookie.

Moyer’s “fastball” touches the low 80s. Scherzer, on the other hand, hit 98 miles per hour during his major league debut.

Naturally, reporters asked Moyer what he was clocked at during his big league debut back in 1986.

“Back then, I don’t think they had radar guns,” Moyer said.

^_^

Nick Cafardo:

I think Sidney Ponson (2-0, 1.30) must have swallowed Roy Halladay or something.

http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2008/05/12/sports/0512stadium_index.html

These pictures of the abandoned, decaying Tiger Stadium are completely fucking haunting.

^reminiscent of my trip to decayed Memorial Stadium in Balt about 10 years ago

So why IS power down in the AL so far?

http://baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=7514

Will Leitch, Deadspin.com: “One of our favorite early-season baseball rituals is the old ‘on-pace-for’ game. Unfortunately, it’s slim pickings this year; no one’s hitting a ton of homers, and there aren’t many individuals completely tearing up the league. (It’s almost as if they’re missing some sort of value-added supplements they’ve had in the past. Theoretically.)”

Love this article by Doug Glanville:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/25/opinion/25glanville.html

Seattle Mariners first baseman Richie Sexton, responding recently to a question about why he charged the mound

I remember the day when typos in the Times just didn't happen. (/miserable old git)

where's the typo

It's Sexson, not Sexton.

USS Mariner evaluates CHEMISTRY!

http://ussmariner.com/2008/05/19/evaluating-chemistry/

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2342/2261289377_0a5d43f730_o.jpg

http://www.kansascity.com/594/story/649383.html

And something for the dumbass baseball media thread:

Yet another selfless act from the greatest bassist and singer in the world. Rush rules all!!!!

*
Posted by: PC
*
* 6/7/2008 7:30 AM

Recent Comments

* Geddy so cool! Rush is the greatist band ever! The show will be my...
* Yet another selfless act from the greatest bassist and singer in...
* What a wonderful thing to do! Actually, I'm not surprised to learn...
* RUSH IS AWESOME!!!!!!!
* Very nice thing to do Geddy! I'm sure many in KC and abroad will...

»Read More

the comments section made me dizzy.

RUSH IS AWESOME!!!!!!!

When they should be throwing to the cutoff man, they are reading Men's Health for ab workout tips. When they should be sacrifice bunting, they are buying effeminate designer jeans. When they should be fouling off pitches, they are masturbating. Always, they are masturbating.

Drew (Boston MA): Keith, why are you so angry? You're like the Milton Bradley of ESPN.com chats.

Keith law: (1:04 PM ET ) Send me your address so I can come "introduce" myself.

More Goldman,

Freddy Sanchez has gone 12-for-28 (.429) over the last week. Could one of 2008's most pointless hitters finally be finding his stroke? It's been so bad that hitting .400 for a week has only raised Sanchez's numbers to .241/.265/.337. Those numbers are the inverted nipple of baseball.

http://sadtrombone.com/

Sheehan on pitcher workloads re lifting Santana on Tuesday:

This may seem strange coming from a BP guy, but the truth is pitchers are babied these days, and that babying has gotten out of hand. When we were advocating paying greater attention to pitch counts in the 1990s, when Rany Jazayerli was developing the Pitcher Abuse Points system, and then when Rany and Keith Woolner were improving upon it, the push behind it was largely about two things: young pitchers, and the extreme edge of high pitch counts. This was a time when Kerry Wood would go from striking out 20 hitters to missing 20 months, when David Cone would throw 300 pitches over two starts, when going past 130, even 140 pitches, wasn’t unusual.

Rany and Keith applied a data framework to the discussion, and we wrote about and talked about it, and the industry was working to answer the questions itself, and over a period of 10 years, the problem pretty much solved itself. Young pitchers are now handled with great care, and virtually no one with influence suggests treating them like Salem treated witches. Starts of greater than 130 pitches have disappeared from the landscape, and with so much misplaced emphasis—for which we have to take some blame—on "100 pitches," even starts of 120 or more throws are becoming rare.

That was never, ever the intent. The argument that a 21-year-old Kerry Wood shouldn’t throw 120 or more pitches five times in six weeks, or that pitchers of any age should max out around 130 or so pitches in modern baseball, has absolutely nothing to do with whether Johan Santana can come out for the ninth having thrown fewer than 110 pitches. If we’ve reached a point, as an industry, where the default setting isn’t to have the best pitcher in the game taking the mound in that spot, something has gone terribly wrong.

http://baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=7858

That's what I'm talking about.

isn’t to have the best pitcher in the game taking

only one win in the last 7.5 weeks! :-D

no feed neb!

r u HERE, SS?

i am not. :-(

http://www.slate.com/id/2194929/

Unrelated to Baseball.

http://ballhype.com/video/ohman_does_carey/

If you didn't catch Will Ohman's player intros the other day.

hah, i came here just to post that. here's another edition of it from yesterday:

http://media.790thezone.com/podcasts/0730_Ohman_Lineups.mp3

You know what, you (expletive)? You come in here. Yeah, I know I’m 40, or 39, or whatever years old, I know you think you can get it in. But I’m looking in here. You throw that first-pitch heater in here, and I’m gonna turn on it.

“You know, uh, you know uh, uh, I don’t know,”

That's a great Tino Martinez impersonation right there.

Closing, "the most overrated position in sports":

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=caple/080805

2002 called. They want their article back.

i wish closers as they exist now would kind of dry up and vanish.

esp if their names rhyme with Shmilly Bagner

for J the Mod -- Jonah Keri on why K-Rod shouldn't be MVP, and the least deserving MVPs of all time:

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=krod/080805&sportCat=mlb

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=keri/080805

those are likely better but the idea that k-rod should be mvp should really be a non-starter to begin with. I didn't read the caple article (i saw it on the front bb pange) and I was like, 'that's what ya boy epstein was trying to tell you, dipshits.

The Tigers would gladly accept someone who can, with some regularity, pitch in the ninth (or 14th) without giving up a run. (Or would they?)

Alex (Houston): Would Bonds be a good fit for the Stros the rest of this season?

Joe Sheehan: They're playing Ty Wigginton in left field, and Geoff Blum is getting the extra ABs. Forget any kind of warmup, sign Bonds, start him tonight, and he'd be better than those choices.

But winning doesn't matter as much as perpetuating the myth. Say, did anyone see that Paul Lo Duca is back in the majors?

wow, that WAS kickass.

We know that the Mets' bullpen loses games. That's been the story all season long. However, losing a game when you allow two tenth-inning home runs to Brad Ausmus (number two on the season) and Darin Erstad (number three) is not only a new low, it might be an all-time low. To use a spectacularly geeky analogy, this loss is tantamount to having your 12th-level magic-user killed by a "Black Pudding" in Dungeons & Dragons.

http://web.yesnetwork.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20080520&content_id=1443601&oid=36019&vkey=6

D&D refs, I am disappointed (and happily uncomprehending)

i wasn't sure what board to post this on, but it's pretty amazing imo: roger ebert craps on jay mariotti

http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080828/COMMENTARY/808289997

lol

http://www.google.com/search?q=jay+mariotti&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

(wikipedia blurb)

lol...

"Jay Mariotti - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jay Mariotti, a homosexual, (born 1959 in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania) was a columnist for the Chicago Sun-Times until he resigned on August 26th, 2008. ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jay_Mariotti - 65k - Cached - Similar pages - Note this"

cankles wept

His parents named him after a year?

:0 at Ebert pwning Mariotti

Casey, LA, CA: If people are going to play the "2nd half surge for a playoff team MVP talk" and are bringing up Delgado in the talk. What about Dr. DRE in LA or Manny? Both have a higher VORP than Mr. Delgado.

Keith Law: (1:06 PM ET ) The problem I have with that line of thinking - other than it being stupid - is that once you move into fungible criteria like that, you can slice it any way that suits your argument. Best second half? How about best two months? Best in games against contenders? Best on alternate Tuesdays? How about best for the WHOLE SEASON, people?

Anyone who doesn't vote for Pujols this year should have their cards pulled.
He even has a GREAT STORY! His arm might fall off any second!

Yeah, it really has to be Pujols. Last year I can understand voting for Holliday over Wright or etc., but this year is pretty cut-and-dried.

Sheehan last week:

I’m rooting for Carlos Delgado to win the NL MVP Award. It would, I hope, put an end to the BBRAA awards as a credible arbiter of such honors to have a player not half as good as the actual MVP, and playing alongside two clearly superior players in his own infield, walk away with the hardware. Go Carlos.

Saber guys whining about season awards is starting to get really sad.

Whining about "saber guys" who rail against the dipshitty herd that likes to award undeserving dudes with these awards is about as sad, tho.

They really don't obsess over it. That was one bullet point in the middle of a long JS column.

Unless you meant ME! (as I'm in SABR and I don't believe Sheehan is)

The MVP award is a joke because everyone votes by their own personal set of criteria. This is not news. I don't even see why it's worth getting passionate about until this changes. If Sheehan seriously thinks that there is an MVP choices that would make the masses rise up and revolt against the BBWAA or something he's kidding himself. We had this discussion when Rollins won. We had this discussion when Morneau won. BPro should make its own awards if it knows what a "credible arbiter" would do.

And no Morb I did not mean you. Is Pujols your pick?

yes.

BP is pretty closely linked to the Internet Baseball Awards.

HINDER '05

see:

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/iba/

delgado won't win, not as long as ryan howard is carrying the phillies!~

If anyone other than Pujols wins it will be the worst vote since ________.

but Berkman has more Win Shares?

(I have never understood WS)

Nobody has.

My vote would be for Barry Lamar Bonds.

Pujols is leading Berkman in every traditional metric (AVG, OBP, SLG) plus EQA, VORP, WARP and is comparable in all the defensive metrics as far as I can tell (at least BPs and Hardball Times.) There is only about a 30 PA difference between them at this point (although 12 games more for Berkman). Win Shares is crazy.

Mike (Brooklyn, NY): Keith - big fan of your work. What possess the Wilpons to give Minaya an extension?! His record screams "mediocrity." Thanks for Castillo Omar.

Keith Law: (1:22 PM ET ) Talk about tone-deaf ... why exactly did this extension have to be done now? Was Omar going somewhere next week? Was he secretly taking the Seattle job? The Wilpons sort of gave the middle finger to their fans. I'm not saying Minaya was undeserving - he's done some very good things, landing some big-ticket players and committing more resources to Latin America (which is already paying off in their system) - but that's a definite PR FAIL giving him an extension during another late-season slide.

Jay Jaffe: At least with regards to first-round matchups, actual Won-Lost records are less predictive than Pythagorean records. Of the 100 first round contests (League Championship Series from 1969-1993 excluding 1981, and Division Series from 1995-2007), only 42 of them were won by the team with the better raw record. 49 of them were won by the team with the better Pythagorean (first-order) record, 47 by the team with the better third-order record. Limiting it to just the five-game series of the Wild Card era, the numbers are 24/52 for actual, 29/52 for first-order, and 26/52 for third-order. The take-home message is that short series are mostly tossups in which anything can happen, and that looking solely at teams' raw records (and probably head-to-head records) isn't a great way to judge these matchups.

Plz fwd to all TV color analysts (esp old pitchers):

Ted (Milwaukee): The old practice of starting pitchers pacing themselves, saving their best stuff for key situations -- to what extent is it still around, given five-man rotations and seven- and eight-man bullpens?

Joe Sheehan: It's not, and what you describe is more an effect than a cause. Pitchers can't save their best stuff when every hitter they face is a threat to hit the ball out of the park. This is the single biggest reason why the never-ending comparisons to pitchers of the 1960s and 1970s are wildly invalid, and the point can't be made often enough or strongly enough. In those eras, teams had 2-4 guys in EVERY lineup who couldn't drive the ball. Now everyone can, so pitchers can't just downshift some of the time. That's why no one goes nine any longer--it takes the same amount of effort to go six or seven now as it did to go nine or more back then.

I thought Gammons was pretty on the money here:

http://insider.espn.go.com/espn/blog/index?entryID=3642992&name=gammons_peter

BOSTON -- Joe Maddon never whined about being in the jungle land with the New York and Boston money, or with Toronto's consistent strength. "I embraced it," he says, "because it forced us to deal with reality, forced us to have to play tough, forced us to make hard decisions, forced us to grow up fast."

So when Matt Garza dominated the Red Sox on Monday night at Fenway and the Rays hit four home runs to take a 2-1 lead in the ALCS, the point had been reached at which the novelty had worn off, where the Bad News Rays were no more. "We know what we have to do and just do it," said Evan Longoria, matter-of-factly.

Because the fact is that being up on the defending world champions is not hitting the lottery. OK, the Rays won three fewer games than the Angels, but L.A. played 57 games against AL West teams that were a combined 55 games under .500 and outscored by 250 runs. Tampa Bay won more games in its division (43) than any team in baseball, and was 28-26 against the Red Sox, Yankees and Blue Jays, who were a combined 54 games over .500. This team that hadn't won a series at Fenway Park in the 21st century not only went into Fenway the first week of September in a fight for the AL East title and won two out of three, but beat the Red Sox two out of three in Tampa Bay the next week to win the season series and finish first.

So, for a moment, put aside the embarrassing clown who is shown on the Trop message board teaching people how to use to their cowbells, or the tacky "Scream for your team" message. This is all new. Look away from the harsh realities facing the Red Sox -- Josh Beckett having two swings-and-misses at his fastballs in the postseason; Jon Lester hitting the wall Monday 67 innings past his career high; the offensive problems of David Ortiz, Jacoby Ellsbury and Jason Varitek.

The Tampa Bay Rays were the best team in the American League, if not the major leagues, during the regular season. In Longoria, B.J. Upton, Carl Crawford and Carlos Pena, they have very good and borderline great young players. They have the best defense in baseball. They outhomered the Red Sox, despite the injuries to Pena, Longoria and Crawford. Their starters' ERA was second behind only the Blue Jays, their relievers' ERAs was behind only Toronto and Oakland; their save percentage was better than the Red Sox; and in the postseason, the bullpen's ERA is 1.57 and has held opponents to 2-for-18 with runners in scoring position.

"We believe we're a pretty good team," Pena says. "Better than some people think." Well, once the Red Sox let them off the hook in Game 2 and Lester's velocity dropped five miles an hour in the second inning Monday, even the hardest of the New England Red Sox diehards began thinking about it.

"[The Red Sox] are really good," Longoria says. "They are the world champions. They have come back in many series in the past [such as 0-3 to the Yankees and 1-3 to the Indians in their last two ALCS runs]. But I don't think you see any sense of panic in us. We know we belong."

"I think this is where the division helps us," Maddon says. "We have to play tough, grinding games all season. We play in tense, filled parks like Fenway and Yankee Stadium, and all season we had to play those teams to get this opportunity. Playing those guys, playing in those parks force young players to grow up in a hurry."

So while the Rays haven't experienced being down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004 or 1-3 to the Indians last October, they have had to experience the edge of Fenway Park and Yankee Stadium. And after beating Lester on Monday night, they had won three straight in the Fens: two in late September for the division title, one in the ALCS. They lost the first game of this series and had to face Beckett and Lester …

And went up 2-1.

Are the Red Sox whole? No. Ortiz's bad wrist severely limits his power, and his best bolts come down with topspin. Last year's World Series MVP, Mike Lowell, is out. J.D. Drew's back is not right. Beckett insists he is fine because he never makes an excuse for anything, but even if all the shots he took for his oblique have quelled the pain, he is in the early stages of spring training, searching for power and command, and 18 hits, 12 runs, five homers and two fastball swings-and-misses in two starts are not normal Josh Beckett numbers.

But Crawford's finger isn't right. Upton needs to have an offseason operation on his left shoulder. No one says anything about Scott Kazmir, but he's throwing 88 with no breaking ball. Troy Percival had to be held off the roster.

"There is a long way to go yet," says Garza, who threw 94-96 mph Monday night for six innings and appears on the brink of being an elite power pitcher. "We know that. They are very tough."

Next, Tim Wakefield, who will lay his soul on the field. Then Daisuke Matsuzaka, who looked like the reincarnation of Greg Maddux when he cranked out his two-seamer in Game 1. Then Beckett and Lester again.

Then the cowbells, the Mohawks and the guy on the board screaming in Tampa Bay, all of which disguises that the Rays should be in a position where they can win the American League pennant. These are not the '85 Royals or '87 Twins; these are the guys who grew up on the mean streets of the American League East, and for the six-month regular season were the best team in the American League.

EricN Erie, CO: What are those rope thingies that some of the guys (e.g., Lester) wear around their necks? They look heavy and stiff.

Rob Neyer: (12:29 PM ET ) They're made of titanium, and developed by the same people who brought you Scientology and Intelligent Design. I'm sure they make a real difference on the field, and I'm surprised that every player doesn't wear them.

(when he feels like it, Neyer can outsnark KLaw)

they are Phiten from JAPAN! they've been around for a whilesies.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phiten

"We're being sold!!! To the Konishi Toy Museum in TOKYO!!!"

It's a bit of an overstatement to say that every hitter these days is a threat to hit the ball out of the park., but Sheehan's main point seems otherwise dead-on. (half a dozen xposts or so)

"drive the ball" ≠ "hit the ball out of the park"

I'm trying to pinpoint when I began to hate Joe Sheehan... hmmm.