I hope Towers is going hungry today.

Wow Moffatt, great song choice!! Hunger Strike by Temple of the Dog (you all remember them right, the Seattle super-group with guys from Soundgarden and Pearl Jam, before Pearl Jam had formed).

Griffin didn't write an article trashing JP today?... odd..
I wonder if he's ok....

I mentioned this at the end of yesterday's game thread, but I thought I'd bring it up here.

Yesterday on the fan JP said that they (the Blue Jays) use their eyes to evaluate defence, not a computer print out.

Is this a good idea? Should they be using Zone Rating or Range Factor or Ultimate Zone Rating? I thought that Oakland had developed a new metric to measure defence that they thought was superb... wouldn't JP at least know about this?

http://www.battersbox.ca/archives/00002283.shtml
So then one could safely call the keystone in Toronto Temple of the O-Dog?

Yesterday on the fan JP said that they (the Blue Jays) use their eyes to evaluate defence, not a computer print out.

Is this a good idea? Should they be using Zone Rating or Range Factor or Ultimate Zone Rating? I thought that Oakland had developed a new metric to measure defence that they thought was superb... wouldn't JP at least know about this?

I answered this to some degree in another thread. The Blue Jays, I'm sure, do use statistics to evaluate defense. They use them only a little. The main reason for this is that defensive statistics are not tremendously useful or reliable. J.P. has heretofore demonstrated a good eye for players' defensive abilities (in my view) while admittedly trying to stretch a large number of players to positions they are not ideally suited for.

It's one thing to use statistical measures to do player evaluation; quite another to rely on it. Statistical data is but one component to player evaluation; more reliable for hitters, less so for pitchers, even less so for fielders.

The most impressive thing I saw this week was 6'5'' 270 lbs Calvin Pickering hitting a triple. Yikes. Alex Rios could have circled the bases twice.

That Pickering triple was a Vlad misplay. I've always thought Vlad gets way too much credit defensively. As JP says, according to these eyes, he's just not that good. He's got the flashy throwing arm, but he seems to make adventures out of routine balls and misplay others.

Craig, isn't the whole point of objective scouting that you can't always believe what your eyes say?

I mean, it's easy to believe UZR if it's telling you that Hudson and Wells are the two best defensive players are their positions, but it's hard when it tells you that Hinske is still below average. I've stayed out of debates about Hinske's defence, but sometimes I think people get a little crazy. Better than Chavez and ARod? Or Beltre and Rolen? Is be ever better than Coskie?

Perhaps part of the problem is that there aren't that many great defensive third basemen in the American league. When you don't watch the other teams every day it's easy to convince yourself that Hinske is better than Youkilis or Muehller or Mora (although he probably is better than Mora). This just gets back to the problem that every team has: they all think they have the best defensive shortstop in the league, because their shortstop is the one they see making the beautiful play day in and day out.

I have much more faith in mgl's abibility to objectively analize Hinske's defence than in Mike Wilner or even JP's ability. I strongly suspect that they want to see an improvement in Hinske, so they do see it.

I'm not trying to say that Hinske hasn't improved, I'm sure he has. But the evidence doesn't seem to suggest that he's improved all that much.

Anyne else notice that Bruce Chen threw 7 shutout innings for the Orioles last night?

The most impressive thing I saw this week was 6'5'' 270 lbs Calvin Pickering hitting a triple.

I saw the replay of that. I was half expecting him to try to sack the third baseman. Second down and 22 for the Angels..

100 million points split between alsiem and David Goodwin for identifying the song. The Temple of the Dog album is one of the top 4 or 5 albums from the 90s, IMO. An absolute classic.

Of course, I owe you guys a picture as well:



Such a happy dog.

In other news expect to see Russ Adams, Guillermo Quiroz and Eric Crozier get called up when rosters expand in September.

I can't wait to see these guys up here. I wish there were other reasons to be excited about this team in September than watching the young guys, but at least it's something.

Craig, I just read your comments in the game thread.

Let's just say that I'm unconvinced defensive statistics are a poor way to measure a player's defence. I'd agree that they're only part of the picture though.

Hm. I think I'm mostly just confused by the issue. I haven't really been convinced either way.

Is there anyone here who's watched Hinske and thinks he's a bad defender? This might be better if we weren't all Blue Jays fans.

Anyne else notice that Bruce Chen threw 7 shutout innings for the Orioles last night?

I guess that explains why Chen was lifted Sunday against Syracuse after all of 1 inning for the Ottawa Lynx. I guess those 2 K's must've really impressed the O's. Pitched a hell of a game last night vs. Oakland. Where was that in spring training?

http://aaronreynolds.ca
So then one could safely call the keystone in Toronto Temple of the O-Dog?

Fantastic! TEMPLE OF THE O-DOG must become a Cheer Club banner.

Hey, Jim, did you get rid of those tickets?

isn't the whole point of objective scouting that you can't always believe what your eyes say?

Back in the initial BB interview with JP he talked about it a bit:

BB: On the major league level, do you attempt to quantify defensive value, and if so, how much weight do you put into that versus visual observation?

JPR: Keith Law does a lot of that, reminding us of the importance of the defensive end. That’s why we have him here. We’re looking for the complete player, but we have a $50 million payroll, and sometimes you don’t get everything. We have to think of where we play, and what’s important to us – we need to be able to score runs, and we need to be able to pitch. We’re going to put all our resources into offence, especially on-base percentage, and pitching. That may mean we’re a little short defensively in some areas, which we don’t want to be, but again, if I had a hundred million dollar payroll, I could address most things a little easier.

I imagine they probably don't rely on stats, but if stats contradict what they see I suspect they'll dig deeper.

I'm unconvinced defensive statistics are a poor way to measure a player's defence

Well, they're not a poor way. They're just not very good when used all by themselves.

Why are peeps complaing about the lack of defensive stats being used? Some of those defensive stats come from other people using their eyes and deciding whether or not the ball should have been got to. Right?
May aswell do the same thing.

Ouch. I guess that's what happens when Manny Ramirez finally takes his Ritalin.

"Duh... me swing at strikes!"

Damn. I was hoping he'd forgotten that one.

Y'know, maybe the popcorn yesterday overloaded his brain or something.
That or the itchiness of his glove.

I think one thing we have to consider when looking at evaluating defence, which I often forget off a first impression, is that there is a difference between professional evaluators examining defence and average fans. Many of us automatically react against observation because we immediately associate it with Yankee fans who think that Jeter is one of the best defensive shortstops in baseball. I very much doubt that Brian Cashman sees things that way too.

However, I've read pieces indicating that the A's are working on a system to track every ball and will use that to evaluate defence. With their recent emphasis of defence (Kotsay, Ellis) it seems to me they think they've found a leg up on the competition with regards to that. And I doubt Beane is just going to gamble his small payroll that he is a better subjective evaluator of defence than other executives.

What I don't understand about Billy Beane and the A's is why they don't gaurd their "trade secrets" better. If it's all about hording undervalued commodities in the market, why broadcast to everyone exactly what you're doing? To quote Joe Morgan: "Billy Beane never should have written Moneyball." I'm joking of course. But is it pride that drives them to show everyone how innovative they're being? Or would people figure it out anyway?

Keith, I think it's one of the many misperceptions about Moneyball, that it's a guide to how the A's run their team. Really, what does it tell us? They evaluate players statistically, with a particular emphasis on OBP, they look for undervalued players, they prefer established college draftees over raw high schoolers. There's nothing earth-shattering in there; every major league team uses stats, they all should realize that OBP is a very important stat (though it appears that some do not), everybody looks for bargains, everybody has their own theories (and they're usually very set on them) when it comes to College vs. High School. Moneyball does not go into any specifics on how the A's do what they do, much less prove that it is indeed an optimal way of doing things.

Keith,

The hard part is identifying which commodities are undervalued by the market. For that you have to know:

1) How much the commodity is worth on the baseball field (difficult to do, but with systematic study, error in this regard could be reduced over a purely intuitive approach)

2) The current value of that skill (much easier, but it's not a formality).

Then you have to be able to predict the future worth and market value over the next several years of a given commodity (lot's of guesswork here).

The devil is in the details.

FWIW, Rick Ankiel has made 2 starts in AA pitching 9 innings with 7 Ks and 2 BBs without giving up an earned run yet.

It'd be good to see him come back. At one time he was the next big thing.

Yesterday on the fan JP said that they (the Blue Jays) use their eyes to evaluate defence, not a computer print out.

I heard the interview last night and I think JP's comment may have been a little bit "political".

JP, although a very honest and open GM, would not be able to admit that some stats show Hinske to be a poor 3rd baseman - Hinske was part of one of his first deals in Toronto and was also signed to a long-term contract which gives him, I think, a pretty healthy raise for 2005. To admit what those stats may show would be to admit two rather large mistakes.

Moroever, it would open up the media can-of-worms about being a "stathead".

In truth my guess is that the Jays evaluate players using any method available, including stats and their eyes.

It's silly to use any method available: you have to use the one or ones you think work best.

Just some ramblings - my sons and I were at last night's game at Fenway North.

The Cheer Club (complete with drum) was marvelous, especially in a game with little to cheer about after the 4th inning. Even the Bosox fans surrounding us thought it was pretty cool, especially the loud "Menechino" after the drum roll for his first at-bat. I took my boys over to 518 (we were in 520) to meet the guys - it was great to put some faces to handles.

It is a disgrace that the Bullpen Store (a mandatory stop when you have kids the ages of mine) has a large section of Yankees stuff. I know the store is there to make money, but do they honestly think all the Yankee fans coming in this weekend won't already have caps etc?

It is a disgrace to our city that the Bosox fans outnumbered (or seemed to outnumber) Jays fans. I know the team has been lousy, but clearly the marketing of the team and the stadium experience has failed to touch anyone, except maybe those of us who are already fans (I have thought for the last two years that Jays advertising is really just preaching to the choir and probably has not generated one new fan). I can remember in the early days when we had some truly awful teams, watching good teams beat up on our team in a stadium pretty much filled with Jays fans.

We had a good time, despite the outcome, aided very much by the efforts of the boys in 518. It was an eerie feeling, though, when the loudest cheers were for Jays outs or Bosox runs.

I can remember in the early days when we had some truly awful teams, watching good teams beat up on our team in a stadium pretty much filled with Jays fans.

Then you must have a pretty selective memory. Check out average attendance figures from 1979, 1980 or 1981. Of course that was Exhibition Stadium, so unless we are talking June to August, I wouldn't expect big crowds.

that was Exhibition Stadium, so unless we are talking June to August

Would have been. In those days I was in school out of Toronto.

But, and correct me if I'm wrong, didn't the Jays set attendance records even in the early years?

No.

But, and correct me if I'm wrong, didn't the Jays set attendance records even in the early years?

Depends what you mean by attendance records. I imagine they did set records for most fans to see a Toronto based sports team ever.

Now that I think about it, I believe the Jays did set the record for most fans to see an expansion team in their first year. Maybe that's what you were thinking of.

Yes, they did, but they were only competeing with 9 other clubs for that honour. No doubt, during the first few years, fan support was very good considering the quality of play and the attendance at other parks in the AL. It's a testament to how hungry Toronto was for major league baseball at the time.

Depends what you mean by attendance records. I imagine they did set records for most fans to see a Toronto based sports team ever.

Taken from the Jays site - History, 1979:

"September 23, Blue Jays complete their home schedule and announce a expansion attendance record total of 4,695,288 fans have come to see Blue Jays baseball in the first 3 seasons"

Not a terribly impressive record, I suppose.

I'm surprised at the number of attendance records this team has. Maybe I shouldn't be, but I am.

http://me.woot.net
For those thinking about getting a PVR, I suggest you read my Review of the Rogers PVR.

In short: if you are happy with a fancy VCR, you will be happy with the Rogers PVR. If you've ever heard of a TiVo, you'll be disappointed like I am.