How to succeed in (baseball) business
Posted by John Autin on June 27, 2011
"Let the word go forth...."
Buster Olney says that managerial hopefuls should become fluent in sabermetrics:
"A lot of current general managers are the spawn of Moneyball: really smart and talented people who could've been bankers or lawyers or businessmen, and instead they followed their love of baseball. They see the numbers as a way of predicting results, a tool to perhaps getting some results. The Tampa Bay Rays are thought to use statistics as extensively as any team, and manager Joe Maddon and general manager Andrew Friedman consult frequently and often use numbers to shape lineups and affect change in the way players do things. At the outset of spring training, for example, a set of statistics were presented to pitcher James Shields, as the team suggested changes in his pitching approach.
"But there aren't a lot of general managers and managers who necessarily are on the same page in this way. It would behoove the next generation of managers to learn this language of numbers, in the same manner that a student spending a semester in Spain might want to have a working knowledge of Spanish."
Note that this isn't a sabermetrics proponent pushing his own agenda. Olney is simply giving practical advice to would-be managers, because that's the way many MLB front offices are trending. There are some who still think that -- in the words of a B-R reader -- sabermetrics is the "tank top and shorts" at MLB's "black tie dinner." It's time for that crowd to wake up and smell the microchips. Sabermetrics is "inside baseball" now, in every sense of that phrase, and the invitations are increasingly being written by the tank-toppers.
"Ask not what Ultimate Zone Rating can do for you, but what you can do for your career with Ultimate Zone Rating."
June 27th, 2011 at 2:09 pm
"Note that Olney is promoting statistical analysis not because he believes in it, but because that's the way many MLB front offices are trending."
And, what's wrong with that? Should it matter what Buster Olney personally believes or doesn't believe?
My take is that his piece is a reaction to Jack McKeon and Davey Johnson being hired. Olney is questioning (or wondering) whether old-school guys will be attuned enough to today's game, including use of advanced statistical data to assist or guide managerial decision-making.
While McKeon and Johnson may well be fully conversant in use of modern statistical tools in baseball, it's probably a reasonable question for Olney to ask considering their vintage and time away from big-league managing.
June 27th, 2011 at 2:16 pm
@1, Doug -- I'm sorry if that sentence wasn't clear. I only meant to emphasize that Olney's advocating Sabermetrics 101 for Managers was intended as practical advice for landing a job in a time when many GMs believe in statistical analysis -- not a case of a sabermetrics proponent (such as myself) pushing his own agenda.
June 27th, 2011 at 2:33 pm
No worries, John.
I just thought it curious that it appeared (to me, anyway) you were taking Olney to task, and it wasn't clear to me why.
June 27th, 2011 at 2:39 pm
Doug, I'm always glad to hear if my message is unclear. I've touched up that paragraph in the post.
June 27th, 2011 at 2:48 pm
Joe Maddon and general manager Andrew Friedman consult frequently and often use numbers to shape lineups Is there any team in MLB that does not do this? Has there been anything written that Joe Madden is a SABRmeter?
June 27th, 2011 at 2:57 pm
JA, isn't Bill James (forgive me for bringing up his name again) consulting for the Red Sox? If so, I would expect their management to the most sabermetrically attuned.
June 27th, 2011 at 2:58 pm
@6
Darn, "be" is missing in the last sentence.
June 27th, 2011 at 3:16 pm
I believe that the majority of MLB teams already use some sort of mix of advanced statistical analysis and scouting reports. We here may label teams "pro-sabermetric" and "anti-sabermetric", and many in the mainstream media may be resisting sabermetrics entirely (and mock it every chance they get), but the inevitable trend is towards increasing use of advanced statistics.
In twenty years baseball historians will look back on this era and wonder what this contrast of "stats versus scouts" was all about, and why any MLB team would have been foolish enough to ignore all advanced statistical analysis.
June 27th, 2011 at 3:56 pm
Fair enough. Evolution is taking baseball this way, as are statistics in many other sports. However, is there research on when statistics don't work or have less influence? I hate the thought of a "game" becoming too mechanical. I mean something has to be said for going with your gut for players and managers. After all, would we have seen Gibson hit his famous home run if Tommy didn't have a gut feeling? (please don't bring up Grady Little). Or how about Steve Rogers and Rick Monday? Not a soul in the world wouldn't have brought in Rogers to face Monday. But I bet the stats would have been in favor of bring in Woody Fryman. I just think we need contrasting info in order to make fair judgment.
June 27th, 2011 at 4:12 pm
@9, Kenh -- I think your fears are groundless. All the research in the world won't change the fact that the game depends on execution.
I don't think there are any meaningful stats that would have told Lasorda that one of his remaining healthy hitters was a better option to PH for the pitcher than the one-legged Gibby. And was it a "gut feeling" that told Lasorda to use a lefty hitter against the righty Eckersley? We've known about platoon differentials for decades, but it hasn't hurt the game (except, of course, when Tony LaRussa makes two pointless lefty-righty pitching changes in an inning just to stick it to the opposing team's fans).
P.S. There was a recent discussion in these blogs about Steve Rogers coming in to face Rick Monday. There are more souls who take the other view than you might think. 🙂
June 27th, 2011 at 4:26 pm
Understand that UZR (along with many other SABERmetrics) can be readily observed and used to evaluate players by coaches and scouts who have never heard or read the definition of such terms.
June 27th, 2011 at 4:38 pm
@11, Jaxx -- ... and that evaluation, by any other name, would still be statistical analysis. Or am I missing your point?
BTW, I have my doubts about how many coaches and scouts are willing to perform the volume of observation needed to derive meaningful defensive ratings -- but let me not cast aspersions when none are needed. They certainly could do that, if they chose.
June 27th, 2011 at 6:54 pm
"tank tops and shorts". I love shorts. Haven't worn anything else, since I moved back!
Well, except for one time, a somewhat formal affair. Then, I wore pants. And, along those lines, I'd say that there is a time and place, for everything.
I'm not a mathematician, although I do enjoy these conversations very much. Having given full disclosure, the major problem, that I have with going 'totally saber', is that it seems to me, that the defensive stats are still not anywhere close to being up to speed.
Also, it seems, that defense gets undervalued, today. If you have a young pitcher/pitching staff, or one that pitches to contact, you might want the good-fielding shortstop, over the OBP guy.
I think, that there's still a place, for a manager, that knows his players, outside of a spreadsheet.
June 27th, 2011 at 7:32 pm
Thank you for the mention, John, even though it wasn't meant as a compliment, I appreciate it nonetheless.
As they say in Hollywood, "there's no such thing as bad publicity."
Buster Olney is a tool.
"Sabermetrics is "inside baseball" now, in every sense of that phrase, and the invitations are increasingly being written by the tank-toppers."
Support?
June 27th, 2011 at 9:25 pm
@9
Kenh, is the ultra sabermetric triumph to just put a computer in each dugout and let them make the game decisions? Heaven forbid baseball, the game we love, would ever come to that in some brave new world. The human element must remain.
So your point is well taken. Where is the fine line between "gut feel" and knee jerk sabermetric managerial reaction, whether it be a pinch hitter, pinch runner or pitching change?
June 27th, 2011 at 9:30 pm
@ JA's original blog and @14
Chuck, I have to give credit where credit is due. Your use of the phrases "tank top and shorts" at MLB's "black tie dinner." was (almost) legendary, even though I disagreed with your point in the thread.
JA has paid you tribute.
June 27th, 2011 at 9:42 pm
@ 1 & 8
Davey Johnson is not an old school guy. He was way ahead of his time. He used closer by committee with Orosco and McDowell. He platooned 2nd, 3rd, CF, and LF regularly. He also left a pitcher in a game to play left field so he could take the advantage away from left/right situations without loosing an arm.
He also had 7 different players record a save for the '93 Reds.
I think he is more situational than most.
June 27th, 2011 at 10:36 pm
Agreed on Davey Johnson, he is not an old school guy, I don't think he will have a problem with understanding statistical data - he has a mathematics degree from college, and I remember hearing that he has made a lot of money in investing.
June 27th, 2011 at 11:15 pm
@14, Chuck -- I felt sure that you wouldn't mind being used as a foil for my commentary, based on your recent statement to Andy and me, and I'm glad to see you stand by that.
Now, then:
"Support?", you asked?
Hold on a sec -- now you think that claims should be supported? You sang a different tune recently when I asked you to support your own position that Jeff Bagwell wasn't one of the top 10 first basemen in baseball history; you just said that he wasn't, and that "anyone who knows what he's talking about" would agree with you.
But I'll answer. One piece of support is right there in the piece I quoted from. Now, you can call anybody names (and you often do), but that doesn't change the fact that Buster Olney is a respected columnist who frequently reports things that GMs have told him, and so I have to think he has a much better handle on the workings of modern MLB front offices than you do. You have dropped hints here and there about certain connections, but until I see some evidence of your wide access to MLB front offices, I have to figure that Buster has more credibility.
More support? Well, let's see:
-- Bill James is a Senior Advisor on Baseball Operations for the Red Sox.
-- Billy Beane's been using modern statistical analysis for many years.
-- Andrew Friedman of the Rays is a big stat guy; here's a quote: "This is a good time to be a baseball fan as there is a ton of data in the public sphere with a lot of validity. In a general sense, some of the publicly used methods are similar to what we do internally; of course, we also have trained eyes whose evaluations play an important role in our process."
-- Here's a long quote from Jim Bowden, a former GM now writing for ESPN: "Most Major League Baseball teams have their own statistical systems that blend complex formulas, algorithms, sabermetrics and old-school statistics. Several clubs are also in the process of inventing complex GPS-driven fielding statistics that will eventually measure first-step quickness, angles and range at levels never accomplished before, and they will bring together defensive metrics, statistical analysis and scouting. ... Most teams hire graduates from Ivy League schools, Stanford, MIT or other top-notch colleges to make sure they have the latest and most brilliant young minds to always look for better ways to analyze, scout and assess talent. ... as much as the public is aware of and embraces statistics like Wins Above Replacement (WAR), WHIP, and OPS, many clubs have algorithms that are much more complicated and helpful."
-- We also know that statistical analysis is gaining in other sports, particularly the NBA. Houston GM Daryl Morey is on the leading edge of making personnel decisions with a big input from advanced statistics. Chad Buchanan, recently named GM in Portland, is another one so inclined.
-- Here's a scholarly report looking at the speed with which "Moneyball" concepts were absorbed by some MLB front offices, which helped close off some of the market inefficiencies Beane's gang had exploited:
http://hubcap.clemson.edu/~sauerr/working/moneyball-v2.pdf
If you need more, let me know and I'll do a longer post.
Chuck, for what it's worth -- I do appreciate hearing your point of view, even though I don't care for your tone sometimes. I’m not trying to drive you off or embarrass you. And neither I nor anyone I’ve read in the sabermetric movement claims that statistical analysis is the One True Thing that replaces every other form of baseball insight. All I’m saying is, we’re here; get used to it. We’re not the party crashers any more.
June 27th, 2011 at 11:55 pm
John, (and others who may care)
Since August of 1978 I have generated income through a varied of opportunities through major or minor league baseball.
While those opportunities no longer pay the bills, I have enough of an association where my finger remains on the pulse of what goes on.
None of you have spent a second inside a press box, clubhouse, draft room, whatever.
The sabermetric movement has peaked.
Without people like you and threads like this, sabermetrics would be deader than Lindsay Lohan's career.
Toronto, Pittsburgh, Kansas City and Seattle, among others, have scuttled their stat departments and have returned to a more scout, "traditional" view of doing things.
It is not a coincidence these teams have begun a turnaround back to respectability.
"Bill James is a Senior Advisor on Baseball Operations for the Red Sox."
How do you know he's not consulting on what tie Theo wears, or where to order lunch?
Bill James is a big guy, about 6'4" or five. I've seen him walk unrecognized through a sold out spring training game.
He's not a celebrity.
"Billy Beane's been using modern statistical analysis for many years."
Considering his record sucks, not a good example.
"Here's a long quote from Jim Bowden, a former GM now writing for ESPN:"
That should read "unemployed GM"
Come out to Arizona for the AFL, John.
A couple of nice hotels across the street from the complex in Surprise.
We'll get into the park on my credentials and sit behind home plate with the fifty or so scouts and PD people, then head up to the press box for awhile.
If you hear any references to sabermetrics, without you bringing them up first, I will reimburse you for your flight.
You're living a fantasy.
June 28th, 2011 at 12:09 am
@20
Chuck, what the .......?
You don't have to prove anything to us. But you are not "above" BBRef posters.
June 28th, 2011 at 12:11 am
@20
Chuck, why do you have so much attitude?
June 28th, 2011 at 12:26 am
The natural question is, why does such a self-satisfied blowhard waste his time on this site?
"Since August of 1978" yadda-yadda ... That was probably the last time he had an open mind.
June 28th, 2011 at 12:34 am
@23
John, you are the gentlest of souls, but thank you for calling it like it is.
June 28th, 2011 at 12:50 am
If the Tampa Bay Rays, use advanced stats to set the lineup can someone show an example of this? Is there a game say in the last week or so where you can look at the lineup and say we batted this guy here, and moved this guy there? I would find that interesting. For example tonight the Rays had Damon leading off, how would that fit into the sabr formula?
June 28th, 2011 at 12:57 am
Not sure about all of Chuck's points, but he did have one about the A's being on the leading edge of SABR usage, and they really haven't done much lately How about say the Texas Rangers or the Giants? They were in the WS last year, do have a Bill James-like figure to help set lineups and give advice to pitchers?
June 28th, 2011 at 1:06 am
Timmy, nobody inside a front office is going to talk publicly about exactly how they use statistical analysis; to use a phrase you might appreciate, that would be letting the cat out of the bag. But I gave you a quote from Andrew Friedman's mouth showing that they do use it heavily. What more do you want on that count?
And nobody said that every front office is deeply into sabermetrics. Brian Sabean is rather well-known as one who does not give it a lot of weight. But if you think his team's success last year wholly validates his position, don't forget that the Giants had 4 straight losing seasons from 2005-08, much like the stretch Oakland is going through now.
As for your reference to "the sabr formula," I think you know there's no such thing and are just being good ol' playful Timmy P.
June 28th, 2011 at 1:35 am
I didn't mean anything by saying sabr formula. I'm just saying that for someone that follows baseball regularly I can see where a manager tweaks his lineup for a lefty pitcher, or they pitch certain hitters certain ways. Surely if you're a true believer and avid follower of SABRmetrics, you can watch a game and say that manager is using the SABRmeter . It's a serious question.
June 28th, 2011 at 1:41 am
What is a SABRmeter?
June 28th, 2011 at 4:32 am
@20Chuck: I appreciate what you are saying, and think, as I've said, that there is a place for everyone, in baseball. Myself, I do appreciate, have a soft spot, for the old-school way of thinking. But, to credit this years successes, (as they are) of Pittsburgh(6thNL in ERA), and Seattle(2ndAL in ERA) to any kind of baseball philosophy? Nah, it's just good pitching.
Toronto, at .500, has one money pitcher in Romero, at least....Kansas City(14thAL in ERA), with almost the worst record in the AL, considered, as turning it around?? Not yet......
Quality pitching will hide a lot of ugly, and embellish a lot of good (in whatever statistical form, that it comes in).
June 28th, 2011 at 12:36 pm
I bet if every MLB team hired a SABRmeter, or better yet a team of SABRmeters, we could put a serious dent in the unemployment rate. Esp among Ivy league grads looking for work!
June 28th, 2011 at 2:30 pm
@20
I consider this post to my "Eureka" moment for Chuck. Now all his vitriol has some proper context. Chuck believes himself to be the one writing the invitations - which is why he does not want anyone flashing the "Sabermetrics" card on the guest list. Chuck is probably the closest thing we have on this board to those old scouts that Billy Beane was railing against in the Oakland draft room. His posts make sense now because he works in baseball, and anyone writing about it from the outside (ie: Bill James, Michael Lewis and Baseball Reference posters) is attacking his divine right of baseball genius. Haven't you heard that he has the his finger on the pulse while we are just observing from outside the operating room?
But in 2002, John Henry hired Bill James as a special consultant for Boston. Any analyzation that James has provided since then has sadly not been for public consumption, since he is now working "inside" baseball, and not publishing his insights for us outsiders (I wonder what we have missed out on). But according to Chuck, the fact that the Red Sox ended their 86 year championship drought, and won again to prove it was not a fluke, is merely a coincidence. Any resemblance to Boston finally getting over the hump and the hiring of Bill James should be ignored.
Bill James is not a celebrity.
Bill James probably just knows good takeout places in Boston.
Bill James probably just knows how to pick the correct tie to go with Red Sox.
What is a celebrity to you? Someone who the paparazzi waits for outside restaurants with their cameras loaded?
"In 2006, Time named him (Bill James) in the Time 100 as one of the most influential people in the world."
In that Time article Red Sox GM Theo Epstein (read: "employed") said:
"The thing that stands out for me is Bill's humility. He was an outsider, self-publishing invisible truths about baseball while the Establishment ignored him. Now 25 years later, his ideas have become part of the foundation of baseball strategy. But where's Bill? Where's the gloating? Where's the publicist? He's like somebody outlining the Internet in the '80s and watching silently as it comes to pass."
He is probably quite happy with being able to walk around unrecognized (although YOU recognized him. I must compliment you on your ability to recognize non-celebrities).
That Time magazine article was written by John Henry, Principal owner of the Boston Red Sox. He was a Sabermetrics guy and a Bill James reader and believer before he even bought the team.
Care to escort him out of the party?
I suggest telling him that, "You're living a fantasy."
If I were the owner of a two time World Series winning baseball team, I might feel like I was - and pinch myself.
June 28th, 2011 at 3:02 pm
@32
Wow, Thomas, you can write well! I appreciate that the tone of your post was positive.
You make your points well, without putting the other person down.
June 28th, 2011 at 3:08 pm
I have never understood people who are so against sabermetrics to the point where they seem to take new ways of evaluating baseball players as a personal attack.
Many times the narrative is shaped as old vs. young or intangibles vs. technology, but I suspect it really comes down to those who are open to critical thinking against those who are not.
Any moderately intelligent 7-year-old can realize that assigning a win or a loss to the pitcher of record was often times misleading. We've all seen games where a pitcher goes eight innings, allows one run, then the closer blows it for him, only for his team to rally and give that very closer an undeserving "W." It doesn't mean the starter didn't pitch a great game.
We've all seen the big slugger strike out in a "clutch" situation. We've all seen the no-name scrub get the game-winning hit. If you follow baseball, you know these things happen. It doesn't mean Francisco Cabrera is better than A-Rod.
Statistics are just a record of what happened. Information. Like anything else, if you know how to use that information, it can be quite valuable. It's really as simple as that. All the tired cliches about robots managing, watching a game from a pressbox, and computer nerds in their mother's basement miss the point. The ongoing pro vs. anti sabermetric "debate" is really just about critical thinking.
June 28th, 2011 at 3:31 pm
@33
Thanks for the compliment Neil. Your posts on here are always "must read" as well.
June 28th, 2011 at 4:02 pm
@34 Colonel - I have to say that I am extremely uncomfortable with trying to keep people out of the HoF because they don't meet SABRmeter standards. Jack Morris being a good example, and now they're gearing up the gang to go after Johnny Damon.
June 28th, 2011 at 4:19 pm
@36, Timmy P -- Just my opinion, but ... What's going to keep Damon out of the Hall is not the new stats, but the oldest form of evaluation there is: Nobody who ever watched him thought they were seeing a great player.
June 28th, 2011 at 4:35 pm
@37 I like the idea of a good player banging away and reaching milestones he's not suppose to reach, and then being rewarded for it. Damon is not Stan Musial you're right.
June 28th, 2011 at 5:13 pm
Players don't get kept out of the HOF. They get invited in. Induction is not a right, it is an honor. One that will become less special if every John, Jack, and Timmy gets elected.
June 28th, 2011 at 5:23 pm
@32/ Thomas Court, @34/ Colonel Duke LaCrosse -
BRAVO! - very well stated. I was going to post something similar, but you two said just about everything that I wanted to, and expressed it better.
All I can add is: it's not that the "anti-sabermetric crowd" is uncomfortable using statistics to evaluate players; it's mainly that they insist that everyone use the the same basic stats that _they_ grew up with (and are comfortable with).
As you said so well in @34, " I have never understood people who are so against sabermetrics to the point where they seem to take new ways of evaluating baseball players as a personal attack...". If there's a (possibly) better way of evaluating players, I honestly do not understand why someone would completely reject it.
June 28th, 2011 at 8:09 pm
@40 The pro-sabermetric talks about removing batting average from the triple crown in favor of OBP. Some if the posters here talk about folks that value RBI's and BA as the "the ignorant masses". Buster Olney says managers should become fluent in SABR. It seems like SABR is more than just a new way to evaluate players, it's a new way to walk, talk, and think!
June 28th, 2011 at 8:42 pm
@15
Neil L. - I have a similar issue with all the talk about instant replay in baseball. Is going that route going to eventually result in computers for umpires? I mean if a computer can be a flawless umpire, why have human umpires? I don't think it will go that far but we must continue to be aware of how much technology we want in our lives. It can be overwhelming.
June 28th, 2011 at 8:55 pm
@35
Ahhhh, gee, shucks, Thomas. 🙂
~~twists his toe in the dirt with embarrassment~~
I am a statistically light-weight poster but I know my role ....... I am the Wal-Mart greeter of BBRef. 🙂
Not that I post insincerely. I will not flatter a BS post.
June 28th, 2011 at 9:02 pm
To chuck,
You were in the club house in 1978 and none of us were there or were ever there and will never be there and we stink?
Well chuck, I personally saw Babe Ruth rub the polio off a wheel chair stricken youth in 1932. I also held down Phil Rizzuto to allow Bill Skowrin and Mantle slap him with wet towels. BTW, Rizutto had no body hair and took his punishment like a man. I was paid $14 and a hot dog, so nanny nanny neener.
Your baseball affiliation says nothing to anyone that you have more knowledge about baseball.
How does a presspass make you smarter than anyone. I think they give retarted kids access to press boxes, so? Do you arrive at the park in the short bus.
And if your affiliation with baseball was so magical, why are you a rotten old crotch?
And Why, with your magical skill set, are unable to earn money doing what you did in 1979. Did you run out of cigars, cabana shirts and racing forms, or has your dementia taken hold.
I know most people won't recognize Bill James. And that is a point because....
What does JR Ricarddi look like?
Who the hell cares?
Besides you?
If you haven't noticed, many of us are not concerned with what a consultant looks like, even 6'4'' James.
I imagine Earnest Borgnine's ghost will play him in money ball.
I counter your invite to JA to my invite to Li-lo's next trial, and if anyone mentions FREAKY FRIDAY, your tickets on me. and no chuck, not the 1978 - Jodie Foster one, but the remake.
Just for the HOF argument, and in support of a pantless Timmy P. (OH, JOSE REYES JUST HIT TRIPLE 15) but I think what bothers everyone is not who is deserving or who isn't, it is that there is no pecking order. Once your in, whether your Rabbit Maranville or Babe Ruth, your plaque looks the same.
A european visting Cooperstown wouldn't know the difference.
JA made a good point a few threads ago. Everyone who passes a test, or graduates Harvardis not the same, but their diplomas all read the same.
June 28th, 2011 at 9:04 pm
@42
Kenh, thank you for replying. I was hoping you would continue the thread.
My post @15 was prompted by the computer line calls on the professional tennis tour. No one wants baseball to go the same route.
BBRef readers, in other threads, have accused Joe Girardi of being a "robot" manager. I don't think Tony LaRussa could ever be tarred with the same brush.
June 28th, 2011 at 9:10 pm
@44
Duke, ~~potentially in awe~~, who are you?
June 28th, 2011 at 9:26 pm
For Timmy P & a knock on NEWSTAT.
Jose Reyes is leading ALL MLBers batting leadoff in OBP with a .392 clip as of tonight's game. He has just 26 BBs.
Of the 15 other, non-leadoff guys ahead of him on the OBP list, only Adrien Gonzalez has near (28) the walks of Reyes.
And to even defend that, noone NO ONE, wants to walk Reyes, who is the fastest guys in the league, where noone NO ONE wants to pitch to Gonzalez.
I'll take a hit over a walk.
I'm not knocking walks, but just don't think they are created equal.
June 28th, 2011 at 9:35 pm
Just a dude who has been in clubhouses sniffing jock straps since 1978, THE DARK AND DANGEROUS CARTER YEARS, instead of doing namby-pamby stuff like looking and adding numbers.
I could tell a guy would be good just by sniffing his elbow. That's how it was done in '78.
I sniffed more elbows than any other club house lingering sociopath in 1978, just ask Mark Fydrich. I sniffed his elbow out of the majors.
Damn good elbow.
Add your numbers sissies.
I'll just stare at my TV and drink my Rolling Rock and know everything.
June 28th, 2011 at 9:40 pm
Mustachioed Rep,
I have no idea why I even have this link.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidents_with_facial_hair
June 28th, 2011 at 9:47 pm
@48
Duke, please, bear with me. I can't follow your posts.
You have a legitimate frame of reference for observing baseball. Why are you down on yourself?
(I am taking your remarks as honest.)
June 28th, 2011 at 10:01 pm
Oh, sorry Neil, I was doing my best at channeling chuck and his supreme baseball knowledge - bordering on omnipotence. A legend of the smokey clubhouses and moldy shower stalls of '78. A true baseball man on the cutting edge. Able to see into the future of a career by just being in a clubhouse. I'm sure it was in his backyard tree, but he was there and no calculating-number-crunchinhg-money-ball cheat will deprive him of the summer of 78, the year he saw STAR WARS eight times in a row.
I'm sure he still has BETA and EIGHT TRACK... a man with a vision.
June 28th, 2011 at 10:30 pm
@51 funny,
June 28th, 2011 at 10:42 pm
@51
I need a couple of Rolling Rocks. I took you at face value. I thought you were an armpit-sniffing clairvoyant. 🙂
June 28th, 2011 at 11:00 pm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidents_with_facial_hair
I'd love Obama to grow out an afro and goatee, start channeling Eldridge Cleaver, and scare the shite out of everyone.
June 28th, 2011 at 11:14 pm
Yeah, why has raceipedia left out the PRESIDENTS WITH AFROS PAGE.
I nominate the honorable Bake McBride!
June 29th, 2011 at 12:48 am
@41, Timmy -- I don't know if it makes you feel any better, but I was distressed by the phrase "ignorant masses" and similar language in that thread. I think that stuff is totally counterproductive; it just hardens people in their own views. Nobody really listens after being told, "I'm smarter than you!"
I think you know that I enjoy your posts; above all, you seem to want the conversation to be fun, and even though I may seem to take this stuff way seriously, I'm also into the fun/funny side of it.
You and I won't vote the same way on Johnny Damon, but I think we'd enjoy watching a game together. It's not all about stats for me; I also appreciate cat-like quickness.
June 29th, 2011 at 12:53 am
Neil -- Rolling Rock!!! "Same as it ever was...."
Do they still make Molson Golden? I never seem to find it when it's time for my quarterly brewski.
June 29th, 2011 at 12:55 am
We need to start a B-R Hall of Fame for blog rants. Duke @44/48 is up for induction.
June 29th, 2011 at 3:06 am
@58
If that happens and someone is going to have to invent sabermetrics for blog posts...