Athletics Nation

Thread! I'm fired!

By the way

Barton “almost had the go ahead run” in the 9th!

Oh, also......

“K-Hole” notched his 45th save tonite…....bastard!’

He's one of my least favorite players

On a short list at the top.

notsellingjeans - August 1, 2008 reply

Cust made some damn impressive defensive plays...

in LF tonight, too.

sarcasm?

or not? I’m in Sacramento where apparently we don’t deserve to watch Oakland A’s baseball…

chri5 - August 1, 2008 reply

no sarcasm...

he made some quite spectacular plays.

and i didnt get to see it

:sad:

chri5 - August 1, 2008 reply

Hardball Times defensive statistics...

suggest he hasn’t been that bad out there this year in left. Not good of course, but definitely an echelon above the Mannys and Adam Dunns.

notsellingjeans - August 1, 2008 reply

What do they say about Crosby???

You really should rely less on THT's defensive stats

They are useful, yes, but nor worth much without the context of other defensive stats, or observation, or aggregated observation.

Your comment in another thread about Hannahan being the second best (or at least tied for second best) defensive 3Bman is just stupid. Maybe he is the second best 3Bman, but stridently claiming that after looking up the numbers on THT is nothing other than very stupid.

Basically: If you want to comment on defense: reciting one year RZR numbers is ridiculous and misleads people who might misguidedly trust you as a “stat-minded” front page writer.

Maybe we know each other from somewhere else?

I’m sorry if I’ve offended you at some point mike. I can’t figure out why you’re so offensive about everything I write here.

notsellingjeans - August 1, 2008 reply

Look, I'm sure you're a good guy, and I enjoy many of your essays

But:
My problem with you is this:
You come around here once in awhile, express often outlandish ideas (along with many good ones), and style yourself as some kind of expert, which you are quite simply not. If you actually kept up on baseball analysis, you would realize the absurdity of your Hannahan-defense comment. You purport to talk authoritatively, but you often don’t know what the fuck you’re talking about.

I also strenuously object to the fact that you seemingly (maybe you didn’t) deleted your own comment in the “Duke for Fields” thread where you exhorted PT to “get [his] facts straight.” None of the rest of us can delelte comments when we embarrass ourselves. For you to do so is chickenshit.

well know nothing about it, but if true, he's not the first AN admin to do that

xbhaskarx - August 1, 2008 reply

Those other admins don't purport to know what they're talking about stat-wise

i fail to see the connection

between deleting comments and knowing about stats

hah

I thought you meant “not the first AN admin to purport to understand stats, but doesn’t.” But actually, I don’t know of any other AN admins deleting comments that turn out to be embarrassing to them. Do you?

yes

example?

by email if you like?

not worth getting into

but the only admins who have not done it (that i know of) are mb and bbg.

I ain't never done said nuthin I shulda been embrassaed bout

monkeyball - August 2, 2008 reply

For the record, the only comments

of mine I have ever deleted are ones with typos that I repost without the typo. I figure people don’t especially need to read “shrotstop” if they don’t have to.

but either way, chill out dude

xbhaskarx - August 1, 2008 reply

probably good advice...

personally, I rely on my eyes...

and, I think Hanny is pretty good defensively at 3rd. I’m being serious now. I know you’re not used to that, but, I thought Byrnes was good defensively in the outfield, too… And, year after year… the stats proved me right.

I think Hannahan is good based on my eyes too..

He’s a good third baseman. My issue is saying: “THT says he’s awesome, so he’s awesome, and you’re stupid if you think otherwise.”

ummm...

when you’re looking to back up your position on this site, rather than “your eyes”... you have to go somewhere. THT is as good as any, isn’t it?

Do you have something personal against NSJ? LOL

I don't have a problem with nsj saying Hannahan is great at defense

I have a problem with him saying, stridently, that THT likes his defense a lot this year, thus, he has been one of the top 3 defensive 3Bman in the AL. You just can’t do that.

ZR doesn’t like his defense, and puts him at below average. UZR and Dewan (which are the best two) don’t have him in the top three or the bottom three. Point is: without saying “I think Hannahan looks outstanding on defense” and THT backs me up, it is completely absurd to make such a strident comment as he did. Fact is, none of us know how good his defense is at this point.

okay...

defensive stats suck. They’re all over the map. (Even though, they all agreed that Byrnes was great). ;-)

defensive stats, in the aggregate, take Byrnesian routes to their conclusion

monkeyball - August 2, 2008 reply

When did I say anyone was stupid for thinking otherwise?

I haven’t said that. It sounds like you’re projecting some type of hostile intent on my part that really isn’t there mike. It never is. I come here (AN) because I love writing, baseball, the A’s, and sharing opinions. It relaxes me when I’m stressed. I’m really not trying to upset anyone or belittle them.

You just told me that I'm "stupid",  "don't know what the f* I'm talking about" and that I'm "chickens*".

notsellingjeans - August 2, 2008 reply

...

don’t know what the f* I’m talking about

and that I’m chickens*.

notsellingjeans - August 2, 2008 reply

I don't think you have hostile intent

I’ve clearly gone overboard here. But in prior threads (which I don’t have the engergy to look up) , you’ve definitely taken a condescending tone (and so have I, sure,), when it’s not clear that your perspective is right at all.

And to put a positive spin on it: My complaint is that you are a very smart guy, unlike a lot of people here, but I don’t think you really make the effort to catch up on what is known in baseball analysis, to use your high intelligence effectively.

Solution for both of you:

1. Drink a beer.

2. Look at boobs (real or internet. Doesn’t matter. Boobs are awesome)

3. Eat bacon. (Bacon is the best food ever. It’s like candy, but meat!)

4. Chillax. It’s just baseball! There’s plenty of time left for Hannahan to show that he sucks!

:-D

mikev - August 2, 2008 reply

+1

Especially the bacon part. Bacon has a calming effect on your heart. That’s why I eat several packages a day.

Thanks ... I needed a laugh

You’re concerned that nsj is misleading the unschooled AN masses about the value of defensive metrics? That’s pretty ~~silly~~ ~~ridiculous~~ ~~eye-rollingly absurd~~ funny. I mean, I kind of doubt hordes of newly minted RZR acolytes made a mad dash from the game thread to the THT stats page as a result of his Hannahan comment.

Also: I don’t think he purports to talk authoritatively any more than any other confident, articulate poster on this blog (such as yourself). In fact, I think he’s a rather self-deprecating fellow.

74mk - August 2, 2008 reply

are you a lawyer?

lol

Actually, I'm concerned that he's misleading people such as YOU

Not you, necessarily, but people like you. You often write about how you’re trying to learn about these things, and “someone like you” might read such a post and conclude that Hannahan is an awesome fielder, because, after all, that’s what the stats say. Anyone who understands the nature of the defensive stats wouldn’t DREAM of making as strident a comment as NSJ did.I haven’t commented much on his defense because I really don’t know, and the stats conflict with each other and would not be at all conclusive anyway.

You have written comments to the effect that An has schooled you in analytic methods of baseball analysis. NSJ is at best a marginal contributor to such an education, and people ought to know that.

I’ll make a list for the record. These people should be trusted:
Sal
andeux
rfloh
Danny

and no one else. Certainly not me. And even extra super-certainly not NSJ.

really...

not PT?

Forgot devo

devo belongs on that list.

Not PT. Not grover. Not me.

There are a good amout of people on here

I have learned a lot from. PT seems to know just as much as anyone Ive read on here.

Not disparaging anyone...

PT knows a lot. Plenty to learn from him. You are a great commenter, too. Just giving my opinion on the cream of the crop. PT comments so much that he is frequently wrong, and can be misleading. The commenters I mentioned are rarely very wrong/way off base.

Thx for the compliment.

Im just glad this site exists. Would be a lot more boring at work if I didnt have a site like this to read.

lol... personally, I agree with your list...

for stats. For prospects… there’s probably another list. For wanting to play poker against… there is only one. ;-)

Update

Ortiz: OPS+122
Pena:OPS+112

And Pena had a big lead. I don’t play poker, but I’d take my chances against you. (:

how many RBI does Ortiz have?

OPS+ is a WAY to esoteric stat for me to believe in.

Hey, I’ve made this suggestion before… AN Texas Hold ‘Em Tourney for Korach’s charity. You can find out if you wanna play me or not. So can PT.

First $500 in the pot is mine. No one need match. It’ll be a donation.

We on?

Ortiz doesn't have many rbis cuz he was hurt for awhile

You could probably beat me at poker, but I’d bet on PT over you in a long poker struggle.

(And when we were tossing around the bet, you agreed to OPS+ without hesitation…)

yeah, I know... OPS+ it was...

but, you didn’t bet. hehe

and, a Texas Hold ‘Em match may not last too long, so PT won’t have the advantage of a “long poker struggle.”

I would pay good money (~~$1) to see a poker match between you two

so would I

I think I just got insulted

Let’s see… how do I feel?

Like I want to inflict a massive amount of pain on someone. Therefore, I’m going to walk away from this thread and take some deep, cleansing breaths.

Now… mikeA… maybe you’re having a bad day. Happens to the best of us, Heavens knows I’ve had a few myself. That said, don’t ever accuse me of being untrustworthy on any topic again. I may not be right every time I post something but you can be damn sure I do my best to express that which I believe to be true.

On the topic of defensive statistics, I’ve always said they need to be taken with a grain of salt. I’ve used them in discussions but I tend to rely on Mark 1 Eyeball scouting when it comes to a player’s defensive ability. You’ve dragged me into this conversation and you’ve managed to piss me off… all for no good reason.

Sorry, damage done.

My mind really can’t be changed. It’s OOZ or bust for me.

I kinda sorta see your point, but you’re overreacting. nsj is part of what is good about this blog. And I don’t think I’ve yet been bamboozled into embracing bad analytics by virtue of some super-persuasive assertion by him or anyone else. The danger you describe (naive, trusting ANer misled by bombastic, misguided authority figure) is, I think, marginal. I (or, er, people like me) usually try to augment statements made in blog comment threads with, like, facts and supporting evidence and stuff before reaching a conclusion.

Don’t fret, mikeA. nsj isn’t leading anyone astray.

Crap. It’s one in the morning. Not sure how that happened.

74mk - August 2, 2008 reply

This entire exchange has been fascinating,

but this is the comment that really amazes me.

Your list of posters who are more trustworthy and reliable with their information looks reasonable enough to me. What seems odd is that even after specifically naming PT and grover as not on the list you still single out NSJ as the one who is “strident” and “condescending” and “purports to speak with authority”. Not PaulThomas? Not grover? But only notsellingjeans.

I find that odd. That you have a thing about authority figures is clear enough from this exchange, I just can’t figure out what it is about NSJ that it projects onto him and not from any of the others who seem more likely candidates.

Personally, I frequently pick up the “purports to speak with [unwarranted] authority” vibe you describe from grover; sometimes I get “condescending” from PT (and it’s obvious that many others are put off by his tone); but I’ve never had any problem with NSJ. I’ve tangled with grover once or twice when I thought he made claims that were way too sweeping, and occasionally I’ll call out PT if I think he’s over the line with snark, but never to the point of obscenities or calling each other names.

Basically, I have no problem with people speaking authoritatively, regardless of how much they do or don’t know. If you think someone is wrong on something specific, call him out on the facts (like you did about THT defensive stats). No need to get personal about it. If you think someone is unreliable generally, fine, just take everything he says with a grain of salt.

And let everyone else draw their own conclusions. No one appointed you as the defender of the poor ignorant uninformed masses on AN.

To be fair

I only come across as speaking with “[unwarranted] authority” to those who disagree with me.

Well, that would explain

why it only happens occasionally. :-)

I would say your commonest error is not being wrong per se, but rather that you tend to accumulate theories which are plausible but not proven, and then you run with them as if they’re established fact.

I know, I'm so seldom wrong

Of course, my lack of wrongness is tied directly to my lack of being around much anymore.

good point

before anyone gets pissed off

let me just say i have no problem with the, uh, vibes, of any of the three. i’ll take an a-hole who is mostly right over a friendly idiot any day. but snapping at nsj instead of grover or pt, for those reasons, is very ironic.

Which reminds me

Thanks again mikeA for dragging me into all this!

BTW, what happened to your team this year?

apparently when the a's suck

i get too pissed off at baseball to check my fantasy teams. it was never really a problem until last year and this year. i’ll probably check it out in a few days to remove DLs from my lineup and whatnot…

And I think some people subscribe to the equation:

front page=FP writer knows what they’re talking about

I think you give way too much credit to...

the front-page influence. I don’t believe a damn thing Nico says.

Agreed.

Or the Monkey.

And quite frankly, I’m suspicious of this “Blez” character.

Maybe... maybe not...

Rec'd

I didn't even see the comment

and while I’m not a fan of people taking advantage of admin privileges, I would be absolutely and wholeheartedly in favor of being able to edit and delete posts. I find it completely inane that I can’t correct an obvious spelling or grammar error, rephrase a badly worded point, or retract an unfair jibe without posting a separate “mea culpa” and having the error stick around forever.

Either let people edit until someone replies, or let them edit for a period of time (5-10 minutes, maybe). The forced preservation of silly errors does nothing but detract from the site.

hell, they'll never give me "delete" privileges...

I’d delete that damn bet.

I agree

Flashfire - August 2, 2008 reply

But do you not find it distasteful for one person to take advantage of it while the rest of us can't?

Not really

It’s a good thing for admins to edit stupid mistakes. It’s also a good thing for everyone else to edit stupid mistakes. For reasons I don’t understand, the latter is verboten. That doesn’t make it a bad thing when the former happens.

because if you give people the ability to do so

they could edit more than just stupid mistakes.
i would favor it only if there was some wikipedia-like ability to see the original unedited comment by clicking a button.

I think I'd favor it...

for like a 5 minute period. When one could correct stupid typos. I wouldn’t be in favor of editing the “record,” like my bad bet… that wouldn’t be fair.

I objected to this particular instance because...

NSJ styles himself as the master of mlb cba rules, and writes about it a whole lot.

He insulted YOU (and really it was insulting) for not having your facts straight, and then quickly deleted it when he realized he mistaken. I would LOVE to delete a bunch of dumbass comments I’ve made here, but those aren’t the rules, and it’s obnoxious that nsj took advantage of his privileges on a rather trivial mistake.

No retracting comments, please

by anyone. The small plus of typo-correction is dwarfed by the minuses of the lost conversational record. Posts build on each other, and removing a piece of context can make later comments look odd or even inflammatory. It’s also not fair to readers (who hear a different story depending on when they read).

The AN community values its historical record quite highly. Letting anyone revise that is bad enough; letting only selected people revise it is horrible.

FreeSeatUpgrade - August 2, 2008 reply

exactly

How would a 5-minute rule or restricting edits to un-replied posts not solve this?

I have a better idea.

Instead of allowing posts to be edited after they’re posted, AN3 should provide a preview box so you can read your post and make sure it says what you want before you put it out there on the permanent record.

Yes, because everyone always proofreads their posts carefully

before making any comment. And no one ever posts in haste or while fired up about an issue.

...

I do not understand what this fetishism of “the record” is coming from. At all. Even deposition testimony allows people to correct obvious errors, and that’s a sworn legal statement. Perhaps you can explain what purpose is served by not allowing people to edit posts, because I cannot for the life of me think of any.

I think you missed the sarcasm

As to the actual subject of editing posts, I don’t know how feasible it is with the current program. Technical aspects aside, I know there used to be a problem with posts being deleted by the admin at another SB Nation site and since then management (seems) hesitant to allow the option to edit to expand.

That’s just a theory and probably only partially covers (at best) the whole issue.

I was kidding.

I’m not sure if you failed to detect my sarcasm, or if I failed to detect yours.

I agree with you about fetishism of the record. I don’t see what’s the big deal. That cuts both ways. I don’t see why it’s so important to preserve everything as originally written, but at the same time I don’t see why it’s so important to have the ability to fix things.

I do wish people would proofread more, but if they choose not to, that’s their call. (There seems to be a fetish about posting quickly (or “first”), which I don’t share, either.)

I assume the primary reason for “not allowing” people to edit posts is technical. I would assume it adds a significant layer of complication to the data processing, which can be accommodated for those who have already been granted admin access but not for the thousands of regular members.

As for preference, I don’t feel strongly about it. I feel no need for an edit function, but I don’t think I’d object to it either. I’m inclined to agree with the arguments suggested above by Bhaskar and FSU, but I’ll leave it to them to make their cases if they care to.

Clearly I failed to understand your post

... or something. I assumed, from your post, that you were snarking me and were in favor of the no-edit policy.

The tech issue is a separate matter entirely but given that most (actually, virtually all—SBN is the only one I’m aware of that does not) boards have editing features I can’t see how it could be that difficult.

Facts of the situation:

1. This crossed the line about 2 rants ago from “argument with any real factual basis” to “personal vendetta.”

2. NSJ has handled said vendetta with an aplomb that, frankly, I envy. Had someone questioned my credibility and intellectual honesty in this manner, I would probably have engineered myself a ban from the site with my reply.

3. Everything posted on here is “caveat reader.” Like it or not, there is no seditious libel on AN. You can’t get banned, or de-front-pageified, for wrongness. If you could, every damned game thread would look like Marc Antony’s Rome with all the proscriptions. If someone is not actually lying to make their point, i.e. making a statement they know is false, then you really have two choices—let it stand, or refute it. That’s all. It’s not your place to go after the poster’s credibility. That speaks for itself.

4. I’m satisfied that what NSJ posts is a good faith effort to have fun by talking about baseball. I fail to detect this “condescending” tone that you claim is present, but that’s probably because I don’t go around looking for it. I don’t think NSJ has ever used the front-page gig as a bully pulpit before, and you really had better back things like that up with quotes before you start slinging them around.

Conclusion: While this thread and the past few like it have done nothing of any consequence to change my opinion of either you or NSJ as a baseball-analytic mind, you have managed to display a level of truculence and hostility that really makes me not particularly anxious to converse with you, at least not right now. Quite honestly, I don’t want or need your opinion of my, NSJ’s, or anyone’s credibility and don’t see how it can be anything but an irritating, hostile distraction. This isn’t “MetaAN: Who’s the Best Poster,” and the site is the worse for it every time it moves in that direction.

clearly, I'm the best poster...

now, that oaktoon is gone.

Seriously...

I’ve researched this… if you calculate RPOC (Responses Per Original Comment) in this thread… I have the highest RPOC percentage among all the posters. It’s pretty indisputable.

One of your best posts (while we're doing this..)

Criticism well taken. (I tend to concentrate my vitriol in a few threads once in awhile..)

I am not inclined, however, to back down on my criticisms of NSJ (not that I’ll be inclined to do so more than once in awhile). It will not cease to vex me when nonsense is received by the community as fascinating insight.

Dude,

if your peace of mind is contingent on whether large groups of other people choose to believe what they are told by people who mislead them by purporting to speak with authority, you have a whole lot of vexation to look forward.

I mean, seriously. Advertising, journalism, politics, religion, relationship advice, diet advice, fashion advice, etc, etc. People are going to believe what they’re going to believe, and what are you going to do about it? That is so in the “serenity” column, it’s ridiculous.

Speaking as someone

who does not contribute to the analytical side of this site at all, PT’s comment is excellent, and really important. There are many ways to “have fun by talking about baseball” and each of us has his/her own way, whether that’s statistical analysis of players, criticism of statistical methods, or just hanging around, being silly and occasionally spouting off some unsubstantiatable opinion. AN is big enough now where everyone’s going to have their subset of people that they like to hang with, just like real life. But when people start assigning hierarchies to those subsets, that turns us quickly from real life into high school.

And personal attacks ruin the fun for everyone. No one wants to read that shit.

oblique - August 2, 2008 reply

I don't know about that

I think at least 100 lurkers only visited AN to enjoy the grover-oaktoon spats.

You don't know what the f... you're talking about.

You’re a marginal contributor and you’re condescending about it. Oh, and you’re an ass.

I say this because I doubt your methodology in counting these alleged lurkers.

oblique - August 2, 2008 reply

Oh please

Like you vs. oaktoon was any less of a draw.

Or devo vs. oaktoon.

Or AN vs. oaktoon.

Rec

Good job, PT

And I agree about NSJ showing remarkable aplomb. I envy it too, and I don’t even especially care for plums.

too bad really,

as it brought my being an asshole into sharper relief…

And lord knows we need sharper relief!

Who is this Sharper

and what do they want for him?

Yes, but is his aplomb "Bond-like"?

Hear Hear!

I rarely post, mostly because many people on AN have more to contribute than I do. While I’m as much of an A’s fan as anlyone, I prefer to focus my intellectual energy in other endeavors. That said, I appreciate the analyses that those on AN bring to this site, and I think I’m smart enough to know that whatever argument is made that it’s only part of the story.

However, one reason why I stopped reading the MLB A’s site is the vitriolic attacks on others who have different analyses/opinions, such as “you’re wrong, and if you think that you must be stupid.” While this argument hasn’t quite devolved to this point, it’s close. So please, disagree respectfully. I’m sure there are many like me who you all reach, who don’t post a lot, and are influenced by your analyses (this applies to all of you but especially those on the front page) but are put off by personal attacks.

One more thing—one thing that came out of this discussion is the validity of different statistical websites. I’d like to see a discussion on that. What stats, or websites, are most and least informative, and why? Anyone want to take on this question in a new thread?

jmfox - August 2, 2008 reply

Depends on what you're looking for

Drop $5 a month on Baseball Prospectus and get access to a ton of material. Their defensive numbers are questionable so for that info you might want to try The Hardball Times. There stuff is some of the best free info you can find.

If you’re interested in contract info, the best place is Cots.

If you want to look at minor league numbers (especially a player’s Major League Equivalency) then go straight to here.

Grover,

Is BP worth the cover charge?

If you've got an extra $5 and like baseball, then yes

If the choice is BP or feeding your kid, then no.

I’ll admit, I primarily read BP to get more scouting info on prospects. If you’re looking strictly for stats then you can probably find everything you need for free if you’re willing to look around.

I think you're misreading me here

I’m not saying “be nice for the sake of being nice.” I think that’s pretty facile anyway, particularly when someone says something dumb. Politeness or the lack thereof is not what I’m getting at.

What I am saying is, “Stop trying to impeach people’s credibility.” I can form my own opinions about whether what a given poster says is reliable or not, thanks. I’m really not interested—at all—in what anyone thinks is the rank order of Who Is Most To Be Trusted, and attempting to argue that, or to verbally consign someone to the bottom tier, is rude and annoying.

If you think someone is full of shit on an issue, say so (and back it up). If they keep doing it often enough people will stop listening to what they have to say. But don’t presume to tell me whether someone else is authoritative or trustworthy. I am very capable of determining that on my own.

what sbnation really needs

is killfile compatibility. or hell, built a similar system into the site itself.
why not let certain people avoid each other if they chose to do so? it can only reduce potential conflicts.

Korach said...

...Cust played Gold Glove-caliber defense tonight.

(or sumthin’ like that.)

gdubb925 - August 1, 2008 reply

He's getting there

but its like the rest of the team, to litle too late.

lynnzgal - August 1, 2008 reply

yes he did!

Cust actually really “contributed” on many levels tonite…..

He still pisses me off the other 98% of the time!

+1

OakFaninFL - August 2, 2008 reply

Tough loss...

...but watching Taschner blow Lincicum’s lead cheered me up a little.

gdubb925 - August 1, 2008 reply

Street was damn lucky he didn't deliver another loss...

he managed to “save” the loss for Embree.

Yup

oaklandSMASH - August 1, 2008 reply

Could have been worse, though

He got two quick outs, then a dribbler to third. And after loading the bases, he came through with a pair of 3-2 strikes – good to see he could throw fastballs in a fastball count and still get Lowrie.

like I said... lucky

he loaded the bases. Got himself into a 3-2 count where he HAD to throw meatball strikes down the middle to a rook who was all over both pitches. And, Lowrie hit the second one pretty hard. Lucky for Street it was right at Cargo.

Yes, but you and I both know that

without BAD luck Street has a 1-2-3 inning and looks good doing it – because up through that dribbler to third base he looked like “the old Street”.

he seems always to have 1-2 innings...

then, go into disaster mode trying to get the third out. That’s his problem. Bad luck? I don’t think so.

It's his fault Hannahan couldn't make the play at third?

Hannahan is a fantastic defender at 3rd...

all the stats prove it. It’s Street’s fault for giving up the weak dribbler. ;-)

Too-Shay!

My point is he went 1-2-3 before having trouble

I won’t criticize him when he gives up a weak dribber for a hit. I also don’t really agree that the 1-2-trouble pattern is real. I can remember just as many times the problems started with the first or second hitter. More problematic, I think, is pitching with two strikes, not with two outs.

and, had Lowrie not had the reflexes to move out of the way...

Street would have given them the winning run on a HBP.

I'm not trying to be a Street apologist -

after the infield hit he struggled mightily. He did dominate the first three hitters though. The guy who looks dominant right now isn’t Street or even Ziggy – it’s Blevins.

Blevins is impressive...

Ziggy, Blevins, Devine… I’m excited about. Brown… I’m undecided until I see him pitch again when he isn’t injured. Street… I want him gone during the offseason.

I think if Devine comes back strong, looking like

the closer many think he can be, keeping Street as a set-up man along with Ziggy and Blevins could be smart. Until the A’s have a better than average offense, I think they need an especially deep bullpen – Street could be part of that.

I think Street is dealt for a hitter in the offseason

Sure, he’d be nice in the bullpen, because I don’t think he’s as bad as he has looked lately, but there ARE plenty of alternatives, and if Street performs well the rest of the season he’ll have a good deal of value on the trade market during the offseason.

okay... Street in the 7th...

Ziggy in the 8th, Devine in the 9th. I could live with that, I guess, because we’d still have a chance to come back from the run Street gives up in the 7th.

Think of it this way - without Street

those innings go to pitchers like Embree and Foulke. It’s all relative.

Embree and Foulke will NOT be on this team next year...

at least, they better not be. If they moved Street to the 7th inning pitcher this year and he never gave up another hit, I’d be ecstatic… not because it means it would propel us to a playoff spot, but because it would salvage some trade value for him during the offseason.

Get a hitter for him Billy and all is forgiven for this year.

My point is that post Embree and Foulke,

our relievers beyond the guys you like are going to be just like Embree and Foulke.

I'm not so sure that's true...

I think Braden is better than both of them. Especially, if they let him throw his screwball. Brown may be better than both, as well.

And, who knows which of our starting prospects may end up stud relievers.

A word to the wise:

Don’t get too giddy over Braden. He may become a decent LOOGY – I don’t expect much more. Street is a WAY better pitcher than Braden. By much a lot.

Street is better...

I’ll readily concede that. Street’s just not a closer. And, I’d settle for Braden as a LOOGY… every team should have one. I think he could be more, but, I’d settle….

Personally, I think there are similarities

between Street and Dotel, in terms of closer-worthiness. Dotel was actually pretty good in 2004, then pitched hurt and was bad by the end of 2005. Overall, he was a “serviceable” closer but not a front-line one – but he was one of NL’s very best set-up men. I think Street is good enough to be a solid set-up man; as a closer, I think he’s “ok”.

and, so... Street's pitching hurt?

maybe… but, didn’t we know Dotel was pitching hurt. I don’t know that about Street. He’s just not a good closer. He melts when he gets in trouble.

Does anyone have a clue why Braden doesn't throw the screwball?

richwol1 - August 1, 2008 reply

Organizational decision. They want him to throw his changeup instead.

His changeup is supposed to have “plus pitch” potential. One of the best on the team, SUPPOSEDLY.

Hasn’t worked yet, though.

I'd be pissed if I were Braden...

a pitch that I’ve worked on and perfected throughout my young life… a pitch that differentiates me from almost every other pitcher in baseball… my “out” pitch… then, these fuckin’ now-it-alls come along and make me throw a change-up, which makes me an average pitcher.

I’d be sayin’ to myself… trade me, Billy, to a team that’ll let me throw my best pitch. I’ll assume the injury risk, such as it is.

I dunno. I can't find anything solid to confirm it

but I recall statements that basically said his screwball really acted like a changeup throw by a righty anyway.

mikev - August 2, 2008 reply

An uprising I say!

Revolution!!!!!!!!!!!

Anarchy!!!!!!!!!!!

Long live the screwball!

mrod - August 2, 2008 reply

Yeah, it doesn't make any sense

If Braden doesn’t throw the screwball, he’s a below-average pitcher, a back of the rotation guy at best or a middling middle reliever, with a short career likely because he’s not very good.

If he throws the screwball, he has a chance to be an above average starter or a quality middle reliever, with the possibility of a short career due to injury.

I’d take the latter. It’s better for the team and actually, if Braden lasts into his arbitration years, much better for Braden.

richwol1 - August 2, 2008 reply

At some point he may have to throw it

Like Calero and the slider

WaddellCanseco - August 2, 2008 reply

Blevins is lookin' good

He's throwing with a ton of confidence

One thing I really like about Blevins is that he can hit the inside corner to a righty with his fastball. He’s becoming a classic “both sides of the plate” power pitcher.

Dude

has ice water running through his veins….have I mentioned this?

Pretty soon the pitching staff will "strike!"......

It was shaping up to be a good A's day today

I came across an A’s 1989 World Series Mug (which will now hold my hot chocolate) and my Gomola “Zebulon” Ultraman villain figure came in the mail from ~~Japan~~ Monster Island.

Funny—I get a dinosaur in the mail and Embree reminds us that he is a fossil on the mound.

Let’s win tomorrow, please? I can’t stand this Jekyll and Hyde season.

oaklandSMASH - August 1, 2008 reply

Jekyll is MIA.

And this current team makes me want to hyde. :-(

Sure he double-clutched that throw,

but it’s just one throw in a succession of thousands, a fleeting instant of failure tucked away in a remote cobwebbed corner of an endless galactic expanse, not particularly meaningful, and in any case if you finagle the parameters just so, tilt your head, squint a bit, suck down several glasses of wine, omit reams of inconvenient data, and entirely disregard your capacity for observation, you’ll discover that Bobby Crosby is the third clutchiest shortstop in all the majors, far, far clutchier than Hanley Ramirez, Derek Jeter, or Jimmy Rollins, all of whom probably stay up late each night studying film of game-on-the-line Crosby at-bats in a vain attempt to glean his magical recipe for success.

74mk - August 1, 2008 reply

"redacted"!

Can you imagine if that was actually a word?

Guess what everyone…Our super-hotties are going to win tomorrow!!!!! I won’t go into detail, but let’s just say “the stars align” – LITERALLY!!! Yup – someone just took a one-day workshop on Astrologoly!

XOXOXOXOXO

Cindi

try the word on scrabulous

or not

remind me again if it’s on facebook or not?

oaklandSMASH - August 1, 2008 reply

Cindi is the best fan...

she probably thinks Daric Barton will hit the game-winning home run tomorrow. That’s why we all love her.

I think that too. Barton for Mayor!

WaddellCanseco - August 2, 2008 reply

Richie Sexson needs a one-day workshop on acromegaly

PaulThomas - August 1, 2008 reply

Once again,

our problem had nothing to do with pitching … notsellingjeans mentioned Wakefield’s knuckler “was dancing more than usual tonight”. That’s just code for “once again the A’s exhibited what may very well be the worst offense … in any sport … at any level … in the history of the world.”

Vacafan - August 1, 2008 reply

no it's just a coincidence that every pitcher has a career game against the a's offense

xbhaskarx - August 1, 2008 reply

there must be a stat around to prove...

that it’s just bad luck.

Unluckily no one's found such stat.

WaddellCanseco - August 2, 2008 reply

I dunno, xbhaskarx - I think you just have to tip your hat

Regarding Barton and Hannahan's defense

Most of the defensive stats for single players require 3 full years of data before they start to stabilize and give you a good picture of overall ability, and even then it’s often wise to take an average of the available data as thy frequently are at odds. It’s just as premature to say that Hannahan’s a good defender based on the stats at this point, just as it would be premature to say that a rookie is a future HOF’er if he hits .400 in his first 50 ABs.

That being said, it’s not to early to look at the total aggregate defensive ability of the A’s infield and say that it looks like one of the best in the AL. Ellis certainly has a lot to do with that, but I don’t think you can discount the contributions of Barton and Hannahan. Clearly, if they were below average, the aggregate would not be as good.

MrIncognito - August 2, 2008 reply

That's good info, thanks

Also, I edited the diary/fanpost above to reflect mikeA’s important point above that I was citing only one defensive metric (I should’ve cited a source in the first place).

Dovetailing off your point, one thing that’s tough to separate is, “Do the A’s coaches position their infield defense better than some other teams?”

If so, that might make each infielder look slightly better than his “true talent” statistically, because he might get to a few balls that he wouldn’t have gotten to if he was poorly positioned.

In a situation like that, it would be hard to attribute all the credit/blame to the player alone.

notsellingjeans - August 2, 2008 reply

EDITING YOUR POST????

rant rant rant rant rant rant rant rant rant rant rant rant rant rant rant rant rant rant rant rant rant rant rant rant rant rant rant rant rant rant rant rant rant rant rant rant …

Josh Donaldson is up to 76 ABs for Stockton with this line:

.382/.447/.671 (1.118 OPS). That’ll do.

All the guys we got are raking in Stockton

Spencer is hot, Cardenas is hot.. Its awesome to see. Sucks about Sulentic being done for the year tho.

Now what...?

Let me guess—they asked him to charge the German trenches with only a whistle as a weapon.

Hit by a pitch.

Broken Hand I Believe.

Scratch that.

he was hit by a pitch and I believe it was his Ulna that was broke, not his hand.

Ugg

I just found the real report and it was a broken hand. Viva La Edit Post Button!

” Stockton Ports’ outfielder Matt Sulentic may be done for the season. The Dallas area native broke his hand when he was hit by a pitch earlier this week. If he is done for the year, Sulentic finishes the season with a .309/.368/.481 line.”

bummer, but at least it's not a worse injury

donaldson and spencer have been quite surprising.
there’s a chance donaldson can keep it up, i’m not so sure about spencer. anyone care to comment?

He was a blue-chip recruit entering college

but basically did nothing while he was there, resulting in his stock dropping a lot.

The consensus I got reading up on him after the trade was “talent masked by laziness.”

I have a brilliant reply to this, but can't be bothered to type it