An interesting article showed up in my Inbox anonymously (the sender forgot to add an identifying message). The story, published yesterday by UPI out of Los Angeles, takes a closer look at the whole "White Jays" controversy and the evolving nature of organizational decision-making viewed from a race-based standpoint. The story has more than a few holes, but it does make a lot of good points, including the fact (as we've already discussed here) that Jackie Robinson was the perfect sabrmetric player. It's worth a read, and I'd be interested in people's comments.
I'm still bothered, generally, by the prevailing sense that Latin players don't have the "plate discipline" that white players do. Not only does this raise unfortunate implications -- "plate discipline" is a term loaded with moral subtexts, and suggests Hispanics don't have the moral fibre to be patient and exercise good judgment -- but I also think it's convoluted logic. Maybe Hispanics do say "You cannot walk to the US" -- but that's probably because the US scouts haven't been looking for a good batting eye these past 30 years so much as for the "raw physical tools" that still entrance so many old-time baseball men. Are Latin Americans inherently less capable than whites of waiting for a pitch they can drive? I don't buy it.
Latin Americans, I suspect, are smart and talented enough to develop the skill sets that will get them employed, same as anyone else. Hispanic players may have lower overall walk rates than white players -- but I'd love to see those figures broken down by age and overall productivity. I'll betcha the younger and better Latin players have walk rates more or less identicial to the younger and better white players. The more Beanes and Ricciardis who come into the game, the more that strike-zone expertise will become a valuable commodity among scouts and in determining draft position -- and the more that young players of all shades will develop the skills they need to succeed.
https://www.battersbox.ca/article.php?story=20030724103755999