Torii Blunder - Sam Miller - The Orange County Register
And while there’s almost no baserunning gaffe that could possibly compete with that, he was thrown out trying to steal third down with nobody out and down by six runs in the seventh inning on June 15, which is pretty much unimaginable. And he was thrown out trying to steal second down by five in the fourth inning on May 3, which is questionable at best. And overall, he’s been caught 11 out of 19 tries this year, one caught stealing off the league lead, for goodness sake.
Here's the video of Hunter's attempt: Wieters nails Hunter at third in the ninth - Matt Wieters fires down to third base to catch Torii Hunter stealing for the first out in the top of the ninth. I just don't understand this play. And what makes it worse, it happened before. This season. I respect Hunter, especially after his "team first" attitude when moving to right field, but his repeated attempts at running and his repeated results at getting caught, just don't make sense. Is he stupid? Arrogant? What?
Orioles vs. Angels: Orioles squeak past Angels, 9-7 - baltimoresun.com
In the first two games of the series and the Showalter era, the Orioles have scored 15 runs and pounded out 22 hits. With their 6-for-12 effort with runners in scoring position Wednesday night, the Orioles are 11-for-23 in such situations over the past two games. In the five games before Showalter's arrival, the Orioles went 4-for-35 (.114) with runners in scoring position. They haven't made an error, and their starters -- Guthrie on Tuesday and Matusz on Wednesday -- have allowed just four earned runs and no walks in 13 innings.
I think I've previously written about the Angels ability to make the opposing teams' pitcher suddenly gain control of the strike zone, but I was curious how the Angels compare to the rest of the league. The Angels rank 27th (out of 30) in getting on base via a base on balls. The only three teams who have walked less? The Kansas City Royals, Houston Astros, and Baltimore Orioles. Teams who are a combined 127-195. Last season I championed Bobby Abreu's apparent tutoring of his teammates in the art of patient hitting. I was wrong. Anyway, the only highlight I'm posting from last night's game is the only highlight that matters: Bourjos gets two hits, a steal and a play - Peter Bourjos collects two hits, a steal and shows off his defensive skills.
Angels-Orioles Preview - FOX Sports on MSN
Jake Arrieta (3-3, 5.47 ERA) will try to keep that going by ending his recent struggles. The rookie right-hander, who has never faced the Angels, is 0-1 with an 8.56 ERA in his last three starts and hasn't gotten through the fifth inning in his past two. He threw 102 pitches while giving up three runs and walking a career-high five over 4 1-3 innings Friday at Kansas City, but escaped without a decision in a 7-5 loss. As they try to get back to .500, the Angels will try to help Dan Haren (0-2, 2.63) to his first win with the team and first since June 12. The right-hander, acquired from Arizona on July 25, has been given a combined two runs of support in two starts with his new club and is 0-6 with a 4.12 ERA in his last nine outings.
Haren is winless in his last nine starts. Just sayin'.
Royals trying to build with team-first players - FS Kansas City
There are many reasons why Royals general manager Dayton Moore was active before the trading deadline – obviously, economics played a significant role. But don’t discount Moore’s attempt to rebuild the baseball character of this organization. Trading away players such as Rick Ankiel and Alberto Callaspo certainly takes away offense from the Royals. But neither player was a good fit in the Royals’ clubhouse, and certainly not great examples for any Royals’ prospects to follow. Neither player seemed all too concerned about doing the little things (moving runners, playing selflessly) that help successful teams (i.e. Twins) win.
Is "team chemistry" real? And if so, is it important?
Nolan Ryan, Chuck Greenberg group outbids Mark Cuban group to win Texas Rangers auction - ESPN Dallas
An investment group led by Hall of Fame pitcher and Texas Rangers president Nolan Ryan won a contentious and unusual auction for the team early Thursday, beating back a nearly $600 million offer from outspoken Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban.The winning bid was made just after midnight. Although the Cuban-Crane group had made a $390 million cash offer, part of a $598 million bid, the Greenberg-Ryan bid was considered higher because of how the bids are structured; it included a $10 million to $13 million breakup fee that would have been paid to the Greenberg-Ryan group if it lost.
Alex Rodriguez hits 600th career home run - FOX Sports on MSN
Alex Rodriguez became the youngest player to hit 600 home runs and did it with style, driving a pitch into Yankee Stadium's Monument Park in center field exactly three years to the day after his 500th homer.
St. George franchise ceases operation; lack of beer sales blamed - Deseret News
"I know it was a controversial issue, but beer sales was critical to our success here, in terms of increasing attendance, increasing revenue, and as a factor in attracting necessary outside capital investment. It simply makes no sense to operate a minor league franchise without beer sales. Beer concessions comprise about 33 percent of total revenue stream for minor league baseball operations."
Angels " Win Probability " Wednesday, August 04, 2010 - FanGraphs Baseball
Third place:
| American League West | |||||||||||
| Team | W | L | Pct. | GB | |||||||
| Texas | 62 | 45 | .579 | - | |||||||
| Oakland | 54 | 53 | .505 | 8 | |||||||
| L.A. Angels | 54 | 55 | .495 | 9 | |||||||
| Seattle | 40 | 68 | .370 | 22½ | |||||||
Third place plays like a third place team:
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Game Information |
| Attendance - 13467 |
| Game Time - 3:22 |
| Temperature - 93 |
| Umpires - Home - Mike Winters, First Base - Hunter Wendelstedt, Second Base - Bruce Dreckman, Third Base - Jerry Layne |
0 recs | 156 comments
Stupidity
Not just on Toriis part but also on Sosh and Ebel for telling Torii to steal 3rd when he’s already in scoring position
Epic Dean - August 5, 2010
no way
did anyone tell Torii to do that. he did that on his own me thinks. Soth looked pissed after he got thrown out.
2pintsofbooze - August 5, 2010
The fact that Torii has a green light, leaving him to make decisions like this in light of his pisspoor performance on the bathpaths does, however, highlight Soth's stupidity.
snowhor - August 5, 2010 via mobile
I doubt Torii
has the greenlight to go whenever he wants in the way you are making it sound. I think its more of the coaches knowing Torii is a veteran and should know what he’s doing on the basepaths. if a player wants to run but isn’t given the greenlight, he can still run. there’s really no way for coaches to stop someone from doing something stupid on the basepaths, as has been shown time and time again this season.
there is zero evidence showing that Dino gave Torii the sign to “steal if he wants to” or that the coaches have told Torii to feel free to run whenever he feels like it. the coaches want the players to be aggressive, but only when the time permits. unfortunately this was not one of those times.
blaming Soth for that play is plain moronic IMO.
2pintsofbooze - August 5, 2010
I think you miss the point.
I’m not saying there is a sign given to a player to steal if he wants. I’m saying he has a perpetual greenlight, no sign given. And this is a dumb thing to give Torii.
snowhor - August 5, 2010 via mobile
I got the point
I’m just saying that they trust Torii to make the right call. who’s to say they haven’t already talked to him about only stealing when given the sign, and that Torii simply thought he could make it?
2pintsofbooze - August 5, 2010
That's just a really long way of saying:
Torii’s a vet, the coaches trust him, so he has a greenlight to act like a vet and do the right thing.
The other posters are right to say that he should have been put on a leash by now. He’s one off the league lead in CS this year. He’s hurt the team on the basepaths. Coach that does his job stops the bleeding.
Turks Teeth - August 5, 2010 via mobile
Right now, I think it
wumbug - August 5, 2010
.....continue.........
Right now, I think it’s fair to say that Reagins’ job is temporarily safe from Torii’s shameless lobbying.
wumbug - August 5, 2010
Man I hope Dan Haren gets his first win today
Slyintine - August 5, 2010
Why isnt there a poll option for both?
Because that is the correct answer!
PhiSlamma - August 5, 2010
This.
I suggest changing “other” to “both.”
snowhor - August 5, 2010 via mobile
I wonder if Dino has a sign for "don't steal"?
If not they need one.
Fred Fredrix - August 5, 2010
DON'T STEAL
Rally Killers will be punished by the Soth.
I had a better version, but apparently image sharing sites have been blocked at work now. :(
Commander_Nate - August 5, 2010
thought you had a project and wouldn't be around for 2 weeks?
you lied to us, only to make the sting of your awful joke a little less painful
not cool dude, not cool
2pintsofbooze - August 5, 2010
Hasn't started yet
I just found out about it yesterday…whenever all the pieces are in place I will be confined to my prison of boxes.
Commander_Nate - August 5, 2010
can't wait
just kidding
2pintsofbooze - August 5, 2010
Sosh didn't tell him
In the post game comments, both Torii and Sosh said that it was a stupid move, and it was definitely Toriis call. Sosh said that he knew that Torii was trying to be aggressive and get something going, but that there was a right time and place for a move like that, and that clearly wasn’t it.
I can’t knock him for trying to make something happen, that is what he is supposed to do. But being the captain means making decisions on the field that make sense, and are smart. That wasn’t a smart play and it killed the rally. Torii knew it too.
AP2TUDE - August 5, 2010
I still love ya Torii!!!
but God damn was that an awful decision
2pintsofbooze - August 5, 2010
Ignorant
SMUangelFan - August 5, 2010
Yep.
That’s my bet. I don’t think he realizes that he’s lost a step speed-wise. It shows in the outfield, too.
Slasher52 - August 5, 2010
Dave Cameron calling it "Worst baserunning play of the year"
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/the-worst-baserunning-play-of-the-year/
hk47 - August 5, 2010
Surely a blunder made by a team in contention will surpass Torii's
Thanks for the link, though.
Downing Rules - August 5, 2010
lets hope so
and stop calling me Shirley
2pintsofbooze - August 5, 2010
The Angels, previously down 9-1, had rallied back and given themselves a 17.5 percent chance of winning the game. When Hunter was thrown out, that dropped to 4.1 percent.
i can’t stop laughing at these percentages and the people who type them with a straight face.
There will be a 16.75 percent chance that I might actually get back to work.
clover_black - August 5, 2010
Actually, the benefit in getting to third means...
that he is GUARANTEED to score on a single instead of it possibly being a close play at the plate. That’s the benefit, although, it still does not make sense; if he scores, the halos are still down a run. If he steals third and Howie grounds out RBI, we are talking about the “rapist’s wit” of Torii Hunter on that steal. (no, I don’t respect those people, but just wanted to get in a “Dumb and Dumber” quote)
Downing Rules - August 5, 2010
Not much of a benefit at all.
Really, no benefit. He scores on a single or out, so what? Angels down 9-8 if he scores on an out. Only thing that matters is getting another run from a batter following Torii in the inning. And if the next batter finds a way to get on and score, then Torii scores before him even if he’s being the most careful, conservative baserunner ever.
RallyMonkey5 - August 5, 2010
The unmeasurable statistic known as MOMENTUM is the benefit.
It happens, this momentum. Believe it.
Downing Rules - August 5, 2010
I will only believe in this momentum if you can quantify it.
Please… quantify.
clover_black - August 5, 2010
Momentum = Mass x Velocity
Other than the fact that a baseball has momentum, I’m not convinced that “momentum” really exists in the game of baseball.
Suboptimal - August 5, 2010
My adult league softball team...
holds a 6-run lead going into the last inning. If we get two quick outs, we are feeling pretty good about our chances of winning. If we give up an opening walk, we don’t feel so good about winning. We usually lose anyway, but you feel like you are right there when you get those first two outs. That would be momentum. That opening walk or hit ALWAYS seems to lead to a flow of runs for the other team.
Downing Rules - August 5, 2010
Think of it this way
What is most likely to lead to a flow of runs? A lead-off hit or walk. You can’t do much with two outs because, well, there’s only one out left. It’s not a strange fact of human behavior, it’s just the nature of the game.
You can take it a step further, even. Why was there a lead-off walk, for instance? It could be because you have a bad pitcher on the mound, since they walk guys more frequently. Maybe the guy at the plate is just a good hitter, which means the next hitter is probably good too, since teams group their good hitters together in the lineup. Perhaps it’s a bad pitcher facing a bunch of good hitters, and then you’re really in trouble.
Suboptimal - August 5, 2010
So, you're saying Torii is a moron because he killed the momentum we had after back to back doubles by that stupid attempt to steal third?
Completely agree with you, Torii is a moron and fucked up bigtime.
snowhor - August 5, 2010 via mobile
Momentum exists
It gives the next player in line that extra push because they dont want to be the one that stops the rally. Its purely psychological but sometimes, thats all you need
Halos2011champs - August 5, 2010
It certainly does
Unless you’ve never coached or played sports, I don’t know how you can say there is no such thing as “momentum.”
Perhaps this concept is aligned most iconically with the words of Hamlet: "There’s more to heaven and earth, Horatio, than meets your philosophy "(or your qualitative analytical approach to sports)
Raaddad - August 5, 2010
the only example one needs to prove momentum is
Game 6
2pintsofbooze - August 5, 2010
I think momentum exists in sports
Even if you can’t really quantify it. Anyone who’s played anything knows that feeling. You’re ahead, the other team starts coming back, and you feel powerless to stop it.
Gorbachav5 - August 5, 2010
I don't understand why you think it's silly
The percentages use historical data to estimate how often a team in that situation would win the game. It’s not that hard. It’s just odds, like in poker.
Gorbachav5 - August 5, 2010
except in poker math is involved
because we know how many cards there are in the deck that can help, which makes it much more quantifiable. in baseball it is not so black and white given any number of a hundred different things can happen on any given play.
2pintsofbooze - August 5, 2010
It's the same concept
I still don’t understand why people think it’s crazy. It’s just a tool to see how much a play is worth, and I think it’s valuable. That stat tells us that Torii’s move cost the Angels a very big chance to win the game, and it’s nice to see it quantified so you can compare it with other individual plays.
Gorbachav5 - August 5, 2010
It's crazy.
So was trying to steal third.
Downing Rules - August 5, 2010
I get it
I just think that comparing it to the odds in poker is a bit of a stretch.
the thing with percentages is that we are supposed to look at them and think “ok, if there is a 16% chance they would’ve won, then that means if they were in this situation 100 times they would win it 16 of them.” but that doesn’t seem as easy to predict in baseball with so many players and so many different things that can happen on any given pitch. the percentages should be altered after each and every pitch, to whch point it seems like its just a waste of time.
there are smart people in this world who love statistics and also love baseball. just because they merged their 2 passions to try and equate the chances of a team winning doesn’t mean we should fully buy into it.
2pintsofbooze - August 5, 2010
That's why it's not a prediction
It’s a calculation based on historical data and statistics. You’re supposed to look at it as the value a certain play is estimated to contribute to a team’s chances of winning (or losing, in this case). It’s not trying to be a fortune teller.
The cards you’re going to get in poker are just as unpredictable, but yes, the math is easier to see. Take the stat for what it’s worth. It’s a much more useful stat than, say, pitcher wins or RBI’s. It’s by no means perfect or all-encompassing. Just a helpful tidbit of information.
Gorbachav5 - August 5, 2010
I get where you're coming from
but now comparing it to other stats (RBIs and Ws) that players accumulate is another stretch, especially saying its more useful.
lets just say its a fun little tool that some find interesting and others find useless. cool?
2pintsofbooze - August 5, 2010
It's not a stretch. You're just being ideological about it.
It’s not predictive — it’s completely descriptive. There’s absolutely zero black magic in it.
It’s as simple as this — to the extent we have records, what % of the time did the team go on to win when the scenario matches this one?
Turks Teeth - August 5, 2010 via mobile
again, I totally get what you guys are saying
but the way I see it is that the records you are going off of can’t tell us much or be all that accurate when the players are different in each scenario. if the same situation happened last season but Mariano Rivera was pitching and Jeff Mathis was up to bat the record would not be useful given who was pitching last night and who was up to bat.
I’m not saying there is black magic involved. I’m just not one to give a shit about the variance in winning precentages after each given play. if you are really that interested in it then more power to you, but please stop trying to convince me it is such a useful tool when I really don’t care. I knew it was going to be harder to win after he got thrown out, I don’t need a graph to tell me exactly how many percentage points harder it just got, especially the morning after it happened.
with poker you know the odds of the card you need coming out. in baseball you are told after the fact how the odds changed after important plays. big whoop.
2pintsofbooze - August 5, 2010
The real value in it
Is looking at extreme plays like this, when one baserunning blunder costs your team a 14% chance at winning the game. Or it is in comparing different plays at different points in the game and seeing how each had a marginal impact on the outcome of the game. It quantifies how “clutch” a player’s performance was – maybe he didn’t do well in the first inning with nobody on, but his at bats later in the game when it was on the line helped the team tremendously.
If you don’t want to look at it, that’s fine. My original point was that clover black thought the numbers were hocus pocus and conferred no meaning. That’s not at all true.
Gorbachav5 - August 5, 2010
I'm cool with that
2pintsofbooze - August 5, 2010
92.36% quantifiably incorrect
as stated, i don’t need to see EXACT percentiles of a play in baseball, in which a child could tell you what’s wrong.
This is funny. Trust me on this, my little robot friend.
clover_black - August 5, 2010
And who here is comparing win expectancy with RBIs?
Or suggesting they’re equivalent? The latter is a counting stat, the former is a valuation and a risk estimation.
Still math, just like poker. Feels weird to me that someone could be down with conditional probability in poker, but be skeptical of it in baseball, which is still a game with a clear rulebook and limited outcomes. The factors that lead to those out comes may be complex, but we still have historical stats to measure risk and value – and that’s all win expectancy does. Again, there’s no black magic in it.
Turks Teeth - August 5, 2010 via mobile
pretty sure Gorbachav compared them
which was why I said what I said about it. feel free to read the whole comment stream before continuing to try to convert me to loving winning probability metrics.
2pintsofbooze - August 5, 2010
Gorbachev5 isn't saying they're similar or equivalent.
He’s saying one is more useful for valuation that the other. One’s also effectively a component of the other. Sugar and berry pies aren’t equivalent, but they have a relationship. Same here.
Turks Teeth - August 5, 2010
even if he's not saying their similar or equivalent
he did in fact use them as a comparison.
2pintsofbooze - August 5, 2010
I compared their usefulness
That’s all I did. If you extrapolate more than that, it’s on you. So yes, I did compare them in the sense that I find win expectancy a much more useful stat in terms of the information it provides than RBI’s or Wins. They don’t even remotely measure the same things and my statement wasn’t at all meant to convey that.
Gorbachav5 - August 5, 2010
Quantifying something a 4 year old could tell you is silly.
And there, good sir, is where the humor lies.
clover_black - August 5, 2010
I guess now I know what people mean
when they say the stat-heads can be pretty annoying when they find people who aren’t enthralled with it, like they are.
why do you even care what I think? I’d rather know the % of how many cards in the deck can win me the pot then know the % of the Angels losing the game. but thats just me.
2pintsofbooze - August 5, 2010
Isn't this an opinion thread?
You give your comments, I give mine. If you are too fragile to handle occasional contradiction or questioning — if it “annoys” you — then you found the wrong forum.
Generalizations about “stat-heads” is weak sauce. You’ve said baseball isn’t black and white, then you put people in boxes, hewing to the soft-headed stereotypes of a Mark Whicker.
It’s applied math. One doesn’t have to be “enthralled” with a spreadsheet to find it useful.
Turks Teeth - August 5, 2010 via mobile
I guess
I was reacting to your comment where you said “who here is comparing win expectancy to RBIs?” you were attempting to make me feel stupid about my previous comment, but my comment was in fact in response to someone who actually did compare it to wins and RBIs, another guy making the same arguments you are making. but you make no reply to him making that comparison, you only come at me because I don’t see things the way you do, which is weak.
usually stereotypes are there for a reason, and the stereotype for stat-heads such as yourself is being proven to me through these comments. argue all you like, but there is a reason people say stat-heads are annoying, and you are meeting that reason to a T.
2pintsofbooze - August 5, 2010
I'm nowhere trying to make you feel stupid.
I’m not all that interested in what you feel, or might feel, because I have no idea who you are. I could be debating with the ghost of Pinochet or Belushi for all I know.
Stereotypes short-circuit thinking. They’re a crutch. I don’t need to generalize to some universal class of crutch-bearers, and then place you within that class, to dislike stereotyping. If you’re just opening your mouth to recycle some other dude’s bad breath, then join a chorus. It ain’t thinking.
Turks Teeth - August 5, 2010
if sterotypes
short circuit thinking, what does win probability metrics do? they tell you the Angels have a 4.1% chance of winning, meaning feel free to go walk the dog. but if you disagree with the percentages and tell the dog to hold on and Napoli hits a game tying 2 run HR, the metric was incorrect…just as stereotypes often are.
2pintsofbooze - August 5, 2010
I don't follow your argument.
In this case, the statistics were completely consonant with the outcome. If you think about the statistics, and learn from them, you know not to pull risky shit that almost never results in success.
You haven’t even attempted to disprove the validity of the metric here — nobody suddenly stops a game because their win probability decreases. But it was pretty clear that Scioscia and Hunter read the cards when Hunter got thrown out. The rally was over. The win probabilities just describe the same scenario in a different way. It’s like getting two camera angles on a common location.
I think you’re reaching the limits of your argument here. You’ve just attempted to argue that absorbing a new piece of information and using it to synthesize a conclusion is the opposite of thinking.
It’s not a good use of my time to continue this debate.
Turks Teeth - August 5, 2010
I knew I reached the limit when i wrote it
but I hit post anyways just for shits and giggles.
again, I have not tried to disprove the validity because I don’t disagree with it. I’ve been saying that I don’t care for it and therefore do not use it. but for whatever reason you aren’t ok with that.
again, like I just stated below, I responded to someone comparing it to the odds in poker, to which I disagreed with. how we got to where we are now is a bit baffling to me, honestly.
2pintsofbooze - August 5, 2010
I just think its boring.
It’s like watching a ballgame with Spock.
Rally Manatee - August 5, 2010
good example
2pintsofbooze - August 5, 2010
It's not a stretch
It’s true that you can’t analytically compute the odds of scoring a run the way you can calculate the chance of drawing a royal flush. But you also can’t analytically compute the odds of a wing falling off an airplane, yet there are still government regulations about such things. Statistical analysis still gets the job done well enough for people to regularly bet their lives on it. Win expectancy is actually a fairly reliable method for doing what it’s supposed to do: decide the optimal strategy. It’s called a Markov chain model, and it is real “math.”
There are some baseball people out there who might applaud Torii’s aggressiveness without knowing what the penalty for failure in that situation really is. Well, his stupidity in that one moment actually cost the Angels about as much of a chance to win that game as the four runs the Orioles scored off Ervin Santana in the fourth inning (it’s close, -13% to -14%). If he’d succeeded, the payoff would have been maybe 1%. If you know that as the team’s manager, you know not just to tell Torii to dust himself off, go out there and get ’em tomorrow. You make him sit in the corner for an hour and then send him to bed without dinner.
Suboptimal - August 5, 2010
I do not disagree with it being math
or that it shows the probabilities of winning and how a play can change those pobabilities. I think everyone knew the chances of winning the game after Torii got thrown out decreased, we don’t really need a specific number to tell us how much the chances dropped. or at least I don’t.
like I said previously, some people use it and love it. I’m not one of those people (and I’m a numbers guy as I have my bachelors in finance and do statistical analysis in the comemrcial real estate market to make a living).
and I still think its a stretch to compare it to poker. with poker the percentages change after each card. with baseball it would change after each pitch, meaning the probabilities change a couple hundred times a game, at least. I just enjoy the game on the field and in my fantasy league (and this blog). I’m good leaving it at that.
2pintsofbooze - August 5, 2010
I don't care if you love it or not
Not everyone watches live WPA updates while their favorite team plays. That’s totally cool. Enjoy the game however you want. But I think what baits us “stat-heads” is misrepresentation. The fact that the percentages change so frequently in baseball is immaterial. We have computers for that now. We’re both fundamentally in agreement that Torii’s decision was stupid. If we didn’t, we could have a real argument. Sometimes it’s not clear who should win such an argument, and that is when it helps to have numbers to compare. Again, it’s fine if that’s not your thing, but sabermetrics isn’t only the result of some bizarre and demented numerical fixation (although some of us are like that anyways). We just want a little credit for trying to understand the game the best way we know how, or at least, that’s all I really want.
Suboptimal - August 5, 2010
if its credit you're searching for
you’re not going to find it from me. If you decide to devote time to these things to better understand a point about the game that is pretty apparent already (ie: Torii getting thrown out equating to the Halos having less of a chance of winning), then more power to you. I could easily do the same, but I have neither the time nor the want to do that.
its cool, different folks, different strokes. but there really is no need to try to make others share your passion for these things. we both have a passion for baseball, and namely the Angels. we can share that without arguing over how we each prefer to interpret what we’re watching.
2pintsofbooze - August 5, 2010
I'm not trying to make anyone share any passions of mine
You keep saying this, but I don’t know where you’re getting it. I’m not trying to evangelize, I’m just trying to explain myself after being implicitly called a fool for describing the game of baseball a certain way. You seem to be projecting a preconception of “statistical elitism” onto myself and others and assuming that we are trying to convert you. I’ve said that I’m more than happy to let everyone go their way and enjoy the game however it most appeals to them, but no one likes being called a fool.
Suboptimal - August 5, 2010
I haven't called anyone a fool, nor think that they are
but I do feel like I’m being called one because I choose not to pay homage to a metric that I don’t see much use in.
the last thing you said was you wanted credit for trying to understand the game the best way you know how, but now you are saying all you want is for people to enjoy the game as they wish. do you still want the credit from others or are you ok with me not caring or using this system?
2pintsofbooze - August 5, 2010
How is this contradictory?
I am extending you credit by saying that if you want to enjoy the game another way, then rock on. Feel free to completely ignore anything regarding WAR, WPA, leverage index, or whatever. But when you say, “WinEx is stupid,” you have to expect a response, just as I would expect one if I said “CERA is stupid.” By saying I want “credit,” all I mean is that if you choose not to enjoy the game this way and decide against learning why we think the way we do, then please allow us to do so without objecting to our doing so.
Suboptimal - August 5, 2010
I never said it was stupid
and I don’t think it is. I just choose to not use it because I don’t think it changes my view point compared to where it was when actually watching what happened. after Torii was thrown out I knew the chances of them winning were much slimmer. I don’t care what the numbers decreased by because those don’t matter to me.
and I haven’t said I refuse to learn about why you think the way you do, but I just don’t care about it, especially when I’ve got 3 guys trying to make me understand when it couldn’t be more obvious that I don’t care.
I originally commented on someone comparing it to the odds in poker, but I disagree with that. to a certain extent, yes there are similarities, but to say that the odds of a card coming up on the river is the same as the odds the Halos are going to come back to win is ridiculous. but this is my opinion, and I have no problem that you guys feel differently.
2pintsofbooze - August 5, 2010
They are different in the way they are usually calculated
If that’s your point, then it is correct. But it doesn’t make one method inherently more reliable than the other. You could use historical data to compute the probability of obtaining a certain card on the river, and with a large enough data set, you would get the same answer as you would by counting cards.
This is really a long-standing philosophical problem: there are multiple ways to define a “probability.” When you say that chance is determined by some underlying cause, like the number of queens in a deck of cards, you are expressing faith in the “propensity” interpretation. Win expectancy isn’t a propensity, it’s a relative frequency. I’m agnostic about how to interpret probability. I say if it works, use it.
This doesn’t really have to do with baseball anymore. It’s just perspective that people have been arguing about this kind of thing for centuries and still not finding agreement. For what it’s worth, most of the people who worry about this stuff for a living don’t even care about propensities and frequencies anymore.
Suboptimal - August 5, 2010
sorry Suboptimal
I’m right and you’re wrong, and thats final.
just joking man. I respect everything you’ve said (except perhaps the wanting credit part), and just because I prefer to not use the metric you guys love to use doesn’t mean we can’t end it on a good note.
changing the subject: how bout that Bourjos?
2pintsofbooze - August 5, 2010
The page margin is already in the middle of my screen
But there will be plenty of opportunity to discuss our favorite new toy. I just wish he wouldn’t wear those dorky high socks all the time. I associate them with popgun hitters like Reggie Willits and Juan Pierre.
Suboptimal - August 5, 2010
"our favorite new toy"
thats the best description of him I could imagine, at this stage in his career. nice
2pintsofbooze - August 5, 2010
and btw
saying all you guys want is credit could be perceived as a form of elitism
2pintsofbooze - August 5, 2010
Sigh
Suboptimal - August 5, 2010
If it's real "math"
why is “math” in “quotes?”
“Wink” wink.
Rally Manatee - August 5, 2010
Good "point"
Suboptimal - August 5, 2010
"Thanks,"
said Rally Manatee.
Rally Manatee - August 5, 2010
Y"o"u're W"elc"o"me"
snowhor - August 5, 2010 via mobile
haha
Fair enough. The point is, statistically or logically, it makes no sense to run there. Overlooked is the fact HK had to take a cut at a bad pitch (wasting a strike) trying to protect the absurdity that is Hunter trying to swipe third. He didn’t even get a good jump there.
Leave the stealing of third to Borjous. Hunter is struggling to steal 2nd this year.
hk47 - August 5, 2010
Dave Cameron is a fucking clown
hauldog - August 5, 2010
Stat wonks jack off to this shit.
A few on HH get a chubby when a couple of percentages are thrown around, like fact., to prove a point that even a 4 year old could tell you.
Was it 13.4 percent detrimental? I slightly disagree, i would lean towards the 12.28 detrimental.
The mind-set of a stat wonk captivates me. Where in life did it all go wrong?
clover_black - August 5, 2010
Not sure some of it so hysterical to me.
Forget everything you have seen., there is a stat for that.
Cameron by the way is so biased it is outrageous. They should not let him write about the Angels.
hauldog - August 5, 2010
The ad hominem attacks really further the discussion
Seriously, get over the fact that other people enjoy the game in different ways than you do. Don’t criticize what you don’t understand.
Gorbachav5 - August 5, 2010
touchy
hauldog - August 5, 2010
Sigh...
How is responding to an unjustified criticism touchy?
Gorbachav5 - August 5, 2010
How do you know he was refering to you?
hauldog - August 5, 2010
I don't think he was referring specifically to me
He was obviously referring to anyone who was defending the viability of the win expectancy statistic, which I was participating in.
Gorbachav5 - August 5, 2010
What are the odds of me becoming your friend?
clover_black - August 5, 2010
I want to be your friend.
Text me!
Slasher52 - August 5, 2010
I only have a pager.
clover_black - August 5, 2010
I don't even remember the codes we had for pagers...
I feel old now. Wait! I remember one: 143.
Slasher52 - August 5, 2010
wow
Still got your 8-tracks and vhs tapes?
Raaddad - August 5, 2010
Typical Dave Cameron Halos hating hyperbole
Yeah, Torii’s gaffe was bad, but is it the "Worst Baserunning Play of the Year"? Not a chance. This one is still the winner and it’s not even close:
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/the-baserunning-blunder-in-anaheim/
Quad Fin Rider - August 5, 2010
I think Torii's was worse
This Dodger example was just bad timing and a great throw by Rivera.
hk47 - August 6, 2010
I agree with QFR ...
as the Dodger one specifically was a run that was could have tied the game. Torii’s run was going to cut the lead to 1.
Downing Rules - August 7, 2010
gotta love Cuban
even though he didn’t win the auction, he managed to drive up the price on the Rangers by many many more millions (I think somewhere around $65 million more, but I don’t have the numbers in front of me).
could this mean that the team now won’t have the financial resources to sign some big free agents this offseason? it would seem so.
2pintsofbooze - August 5, 2010
Old Boys Club Reigns
Cuban losing is pretty significant I think. It is the continuation of the old boys club of owners, which means that few waves will be made.
I think it is good news for us facing division rivals, but bad that we won’t have someone to really put the spurs to us for years to come and really push us into the same league as the Yankees and the Red Sox.
AP2TUDE - August 5, 2010
the money men for the Rangers
WAY out strip Cuban as far as deep pockets go. When they arrived yesterday evening at the courthouse is when the Greenberg/Ryan group became a legit threat. They went from argung about the value of specific financing between their bid and Cuban’s to saying we will go 385M, cash.
Those two have much more wealth than Cuban and this actually might be a bad sign that Cuban forced them to become personally involved and emotionally invested in the situation. Texas oil money is almost limitless…
laxtonto - August 5, 2010
Torii was trying to light a fire under the team's ass
It’s not like this sole play is going to cost the Angels the Division or something. Somebody needs to slap these guys awake. Was it smart? Not really. But shit, don’t flame the guy for trying to get something going. Hell, there’s no guarantee anybody can rip a single anymore. Why not try to get into Sac Fly range?
Torii probably saw something in the pitcher’s delivery and tried to take advantage. Maybe he thought he’d catch them all sleeping.
He’s lost a step this year and maybe he was trying to instill some glimmer of hope in his eyes of yesteryear’s speed. I wouldn’t call him arrogant or stupid though.
Chone's Chonies - August 5, 2010
sorry but it was stupid
and I think Torii would be the first to agree, after the fact. I don’t think it was arrogant though.
in a 1 run game you try to get that bag to setup a sac fly, but not when your run wont make up the difference in the game.
I think it was more of the fact that the Halos had been running all night on Weiters and Torii thought he could get away with it. but we’ve seen him trying to steal 3rd this season and it hasn’t worked out. just because he stole 2nd earlier in the game does not mean he should try to steal 3rd when the tying run is at the plate.
2pintsofbooze - August 5, 2010
I wouldn't call him arrogant.
But it was stupid.
halofan4life - August 5, 2010
You highlight the problem right there.
Torii is allowed to think and make decisions. Normally this would be fine for a players, but considering that his success rate on the basepaths, which clearly shows he has no business EVER trying to steal, does not enter his thought process is grounds to forbid him from making decisions on his own during the game.
snowhor - August 5, 2010 via mobile
Why not try to get into Sac Fly range?
Because Hunter didn’t even represent the tying run.
Rally Manatee - August 5, 2010
It was stupid
Even if his goal was to light a fire, how much would that fire have helped? The risk wasn’t worth the reward. If he was the tying run, I would have at least understood the impulse to get yourself to third base with less than two outs. If he was on first base, I would have understood the impulse to remove the possibility of a double play.
But the Angels would have needed either a homerun or two hits anyway. Getting to third didn’t really help.
Gorbachav5 - August 5, 2010
Maybe, just a little bit,
Torii was trying to show that Pete isn’t the only one who is fleet.
raskul - August 5, 2010
How funny...
I thought that same thing when he made the break.
Downing Rules - August 5, 2010
And equally funny that he proved the opposite.
snowhor - August 5, 2010 via mobile
Pete's not the only one.
Aybar and Abreu are both faster than Hunter.
Rally Manatee - August 5, 2010
Torii just bought some new super fast looking shoes
righteous halo - August 5, 2010
At Dicks Sporting Goods.
red floyd - August 5, 2010
and a new big screen tv at Howards
Angels_48 - August 5, 2010
He also donated his car to Kars for Kids
Gorbachav5 - August 5, 2010
Common guys we all know tori got caught on purpose!
He wants to make way for peter and step down out of the lime light. He is showing his humilty by acting like he can’t steal anymore and get caught by a mile. “l guess I’m just not as fast as I used to be, but that peter is the man” -Tori (in his humble abode)
IWishWeStillHadTimSalmon - August 5, 2010
A great quote from hunter from the LAA MLB site
“That was stupid,” Hunter said softly. “That was so stupid. Can’t take it back, killed the rally, terrible. They teach you that in Little League — don’t make the first out at third. [It] might have been the dumbest thing I’ve done in years.”
IWishWeStillHadTimSalmon - August 5, 2010
My problem with that
Is that I’m not sure if Torii realizes why it was so stupid, from his comments.
1. You don’t make the first out at third base – true, but if this is a one run game, or in the first inning, there is some value in getting to third, if you can do it 95% of the time it’s OK to risk the 5% CS.
2. The bigger reason it was dumb is because the Angels were down 2 runs in the final inning. It does not matter whether Torii gets closer to scoring on that play or not. The only thing that matters is the Angels get another baserunner and he scores as well. If Torii would have been safe 99.9% of the time, that remaining 0.1% is still not worth trying to steal.
RallyMonkey5 - August 5, 2010
I think he gets it
Even if his thought process wasn’t that nuanced. He knows it was a dumb play.
Gorbachav5 - August 5, 2010
idiotic move........
on par for an idiotic team
norcaliangelsfan - August 5, 2010
All I know is that Bourjos is awesome and I think he's cemented his place as a major leaguer last night
RexTookMyStash - August 5, 2010
Those hits were pretty weak but his D is fabulous.
hauldog - August 5, 2010
I see your point about the hits....
I suspect all of us are watching extremely closely, trying to understand/predict what is going to happen because of our BWood experiences. He’s struck out only once so far.
wumbug - August 5, 2010
I like that. He needs to continue making contact
hauldog - August 5, 2010
His first hit was a shot.
I didn’t see the second one. But his defensive skills are awesome. He reminded of erstad last night with the way he runs.
angelskid2210 - August 5, 2010 via mobile
He hit the first one very hard, but I thought it should have been caught
hauldog - August 5, 2010
Whether it should've been caught or not it wasn't hit weakly.
That’s all I was saying.
angelskid2210 - August 5, 2010
I meant weak as in not impressive
hauldog - August 5, 2010
That's not what she said.
snowhor - August 5, 2010 via mobile
That's what she said.
snowhor - August 5, 2010 via mobile
The second hit
was a perfectly placed weak dribbler down to third base. With his speed, the 3B never had a chance to throw him out.
RallyMonkey5 - August 5, 2010
It's refreshing to hear 'speed' in an Angels conversation again.
We’ve been a team of Benji Molina’s lately.
RexTookMyStash - August 5, 2010
We'll see plenty more of those from the boy.
Rally Manatee - August 5, 2010
Ok getting ready to head down to Camden Yards
I hope the Angels show up to!
kbrown2225 - August 5, 2010
Take some pictures and post them later
Pictures are always good.
WiHaloFan - August 5, 2010
Going to Camden Yards next month...
Bring back tips for a first timer!
Slasher52 - August 5, 2010
Poor Torii was a hero yesterday and is now a goat today.
Downing Rules - August 5, 2010
GOAT?
Greatest Of All Time?
hauldog - August 5, 2010
Obviously Torii isn't the base stealing threat he thinks he is.
But at least he’s acknowledged he’s not the CF he once was.
Monkeyspanked - August 5, 2010
both of these things = Torii is not the player he once was
Trying to do too much = stupid.
hk47 - August 6, 2010
My other vote is explained by Torii is an aging player that is not fully aware of his physical decline
Just last year he stole 3rd 6 times and got stealing 3rd just one time, in 2008 he stole 3rd 6 times and was caught 0 times. He’s just an aging player who is having to learn to deal with the idea of losing a step. 35 years old can be associated with the decline of alot of baseball players just look at our very own Garret Anderson, look at his stas from 2007 til now compared to 2006 and before there’s a marginal difference. Talent can never be taken away but sometimes age takes its toll on the tools and unfortunately Torii is in the year that he’s discovering alot of tools are getting dull.
devildogamp - August 5, 2010
and just to be clear I wasn't calling Torii a tool
devildogamp - August 5, 2010
This is a good point
I used to play water polo and I’ll get in for an alumni game or something every now and again. I’ll still try to do stuff I used to do, mainly because my body remembers what to do. But my body also just can’t do it any more because I’m out of shape.
Torii’s baseball instincts are so ingrained that he’s still taking actions that would have succeeded a couple years ago. He has to train himself not to do those things any more because he’s physically incapable.
Gorbachav5 - August 5, 2010
Great analogy
At 54, I am constantly fucking up thinking I can do things I used to . . . much to my kids’ delight and wife’s horror and approbation
Raaddad - August 5, 2010
You're 54?
You look good old man.
WiHaloFan - August 5, 2010
Feelin it lately
You’re lookin pretty good yourself, my friend.
(Ps, no pressure, but we sure could use a good comic right about now :)
Raaddad - August 5, 2010
Damn... and I'm feelin' old at 47
red floyd - August 6, 2010
My gramps would call Torii's indefatigable pursuit of stealing 3rd
as an act of “chutzpah;” my mom would say “moxie.” I would say, “Well that was freaking brilliant,” face and words dripping with sarcasm.
Raaddad - August 5, 2010
It was the stupidest baserunning play I think I've ever witnessed.
I challenge anyone to top it.
Remember a few years ago when Ruben Rivera played for the San Francisco Giants, and was running around in circles, lost on the base paths? It was worse than that.
bc56274 - August 5, 2010
Video-goodness
He also stole Derek Jeter’s glove…
Slasher52 - August 5, 2010
Link implied that I was referencing an article about the glove theft.
It’s my Friday. Leave me alone.
Slasher52 - August 5, 2010
Tori, Tori, Tori...
Well at least we’re back talking about Tori. All that math talk hurted my brain. Enough of the lighting a fire talk, it had already been lit as we crawled back into the game. The fire was there, something we haven’t seen much this year and then it was gone. Caught stealing more times than not??? That should tell u something right there Mr. Hunter. Not every team has spaghetti armed catchers like we do.
aces666high - August 5, 2010
Wasn't that a WWII movie?
red floyd - August 5, 2010
Yea, with Toshiro Matsui in the lead role as the bad guy
Oh, that’s Mifune . . .
Raaddad - August 5, 2010
Why yes, it was! ;)
Sweep! F(U)-rod II comes thru again
aces666high - August 5, 2010
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Halos Heaven to post a comment.