SB Nation - Login for mobile commenting

Lookout Landing

12-10, Some Stuff

One of life's greatest pursuits is the desire to gain knowledge of how other people think about us. It may not apply to everyone, but generally speaking, the majority of us spend a lot of time wondering how we're perceived by outside observers. It seems silly and childish, but I think it's a perfectly natural impulse, and not something worth fighting provided it doesn't consume you.

The reason I bring this up is that, after today, I think I'm finally beginning to understand what it must've been like to face the Mariners over the past few years. I don't see the White Sox as much of a threat, and I hardly get all worked up about playing them, so the whole thing is just kind of 'blah', and you hope that in the end you've managed to come out ahead without putting the entire lifeless crowd to sleep. Just as the Mariners fought through a phase of irrelevance, so I perceived the White Sox today. It's weird, and it probably would've been different were Jim Thome in the lineup, but there you go. This is basically what it felt like to beat us - something sorta neat on the road to much more important, entertaining contests. It's actually kind of comforting to know that the Mariners were able to take some of the fun out of baseball for other people, too. The bad Mariner teams may not have obstructed anyone's success, but they damn sure made the fans enjoy it a little less.

Which isn't to say that I'm not having fun or anything, because this is a hell of a lot better than losing six in a row. I'll just be wearing a broader smile if the winning keeps up in New York.

  • I can sit here and talk until I'm blue in the face about how Batista's start today wasn't repeatable, but I'm not going to do that. You know why? Chicago has a team .239 BABIP. .239. That's 50 points below the current league average. This team sucks at hitting, so why should I criticize Batista for letting a crappy lineup put the ball in play and get itself out? He's shown the ability to miss a few bats this year, so as far as I'm concerned, today he went out there with the express intent of letting the White Sox own themselves. It's not the kind of approach that you can use over a full season, but in an individual game against a weak opponent when you want to keep the bullpen fresh, why not? There's nothing wrong with a little deliberate laziness.
  • Dave Sims' first guess as to how many pitches Jose Vidro sees per plate appearance: 9. His second guess: 6-7. Reality? 3.5. Sims then said that Vidro must be far and away the most patient hitter on the team. His P/PA actually ranks sixth on the roster among qualified hitters, between Betancourt and Guillen. Dave Sims, meet statistics. Statistics, Dave Sims. I still like the guy as a broadcaster, but it's painfully obvious that he hasn't been doing this too long.
  • Speaking of Sims, at one point Blowers asked him for his thoughts on Matsuzaka being eligible for the Rookie of the Year. Sims stammered out the first sentence of a response when Blowers realized this wasn't going anywhere, summed up his own opinion in a few words, and changed the subject. I don't bring this up to poke fun at Sims' lack of insight, though, but rather because it reminds me of the 2000 season, when I used to debate with an A's fan by the screenname of "MrSeanJazz" practically every day about Kaz Sasaki vs. Terrence Long. That man must've been the biggest TLong fan in the world, and he'd bring up the subject all the freaking time, which got more and more hilarious as TLong revealed himself as a terrible baseball player. MrSeanJazz liked to blame the downward spiral of TLong's career on his missing out on the RoY award, and while I knew he was joking, sometimes I like to pretend he wasn't. Better times, they were.
  • At one point, it was mentioned during the broadcast that Juan Uribe's #1 influence in his baseball career was Neifi Perez. This goes a long way towards explaning the gradual deterioration of his career, and makes for a terrific example of why managers should always keep a close eye over which players in the clubhouse are getting along. The worse a player is, the more he needs to be avoided, because suck is a virus, and no one's immune. With that in mind, a more progressive and forward-thinking organization probably would've built Jeff Weaver a separate dugout by now.
  • Jose Lopez has hit 16 fly balls this year. Six of them haven't left the infield. That 37.5% IFFB% is the highest in the league. For a guy being coached a certain way, Lopez sure makes a lot of unproductive outs.

I'm starting to run out of steam, so I'm calling it a night. Try not to fret too much over the Snelling trade and revel in the glory that is seven wins in eight games. Ho vs. Matsuzaka tomorrow at 4:05pm PDT. Somehow I don't think this showdown'll be as interesting as the last one, but I've been wrong before.

0 recs  |  37 comments

Comments

a separate dugout could be useful
stop spreading the suck!
Sexson
I think should set up camp in that dugout as well.
did Simms really guess 9 for Vidro??
im saying this off the top of my head, so I could be WAY OFF, but it seems like averaging 9 pitches per PA would be a record.  9 pitch AB's are considered by most..very long AB's, I doubt even the most patient hitters of all time have ever averaged 9 pitches for PA.

With that said I really like Simms and he is a breath of fresh air from Rick R.

You, sir, are correct.
I wouldn't read much into it
The M's announcers were all talking about how Vidro works the count and even when he gets behind he can get back to a favorable outcome.. blah blah blah.

I'm not sure if Sims was serious or not or if he was just keeping up with the other guys with some hyperbole.

I think it's because
he either seems to swing at the first or second pitch, or have an eight or nine pitch battle. It's like he's aggressive early, but is also, as Blowers put it the other night, "comfortable" with one or two strikes that he'll be able to get the count back in his favor.

I think it's classic confirmation bias -- they think he's a patient hitter, so they remember the at bats where he battled back and saw a lot of pitches. They don't remember the first swing groudouts following a walk with the bases loaded too much.

3.5 is actually 13th worst in the AL
#1? Jose Lopez, who sees 3 pitches per PA, a mark any of us could meet.
I'd go up there looking like Kevin Youkilis.
Not for the patience, mind you - but for the hilariously awkward batting stance.
what about the skinhead goatee?
I'm thinking of the villain in Miami Vice
And the assface?
I'm thinking... I dunno... a human ass.
Question about Lopez
I was looking at his hit chart for Safeco field.  It appears that everything that makes it to the OF is pretty well distributed across all the fields except all his HRs are in LF (no surprise).  The thing that surprises me is that almost all his groundballs are to the right side of the infield.  Does this mean he's trying to pull the ball but just getting on top of it?  If he was trying to be taught to go the other way by the org I would have expected to see alot more GB the other way (1B side).  Thoughts?
He's been pulling the ball more all year
I thought
people were complaining cause he hasn't been pulling it enough.  Maybe he just needs to get the ball in the air a little more.  I really can't see anybody saying to Lopez, "Hey you know what, we really want to see you hit more groundballs when you pull it so your chubby ass has to run a little more.  Sure chicks dig the long ball but we are huge fans of groundball outs to the shortstop."

I'm starting to doubt if he's that much of a different hitter right now than he was at the start of last year except that he was on fire for a couple months last year.  Maybe not, but at least there is a voice in my head that is doubting it now.

I think you'll find that's the general trend.
Right-handed batters pull the overwhelming majority of their grounders and go the other way with a lot of their fly balls (thank you, Dan Agonistes).

My concern with Lopez is this: from the day he broke into the league through the end of last May, his GB/FB was 1.11. Since then, it's 1.70. That's a substantial change, and given that groundball/fly ball tendencies rarely fluctuate very much (as opposed to, say, LD% or BABIP), it speaks to a change in Lopez's approach. And since the coaching staff was all about changing Lopez's approach from the beginning of ST last year, I think it makes sense that they shoulder some of the responsibility.

I would agree with you
IF... he was grounding out to the right side so frequently and not the left side.  The club had wanted Lopez to go the other way more often when they were pitching him outside.... the overwhelming majority of his groundouts are pulled to the left side... Now if he was suddenly grounding out all the time to second or first I'd think it was more with what the club was preaching to him.
True the jump in GB
is troubling but I just wonder why that would happen.  Do you think they have tried to shorten his swing which has sapped him of some of his power maybe?
I still have a lot
to learn, but my hypothesis is they are trying to make him hit it the other way.  So it has screwed up his timing.
Tlong
I have two A's fan friends and they used to call TLong "Rally Kill".

That guy was HORRRRRRRIBLE.  Mr. Sean Jazz is a douchebag.

I'm wondering
if there is any correlation between batting average, slugging and pitches per plate appearance....

Just thinking that a guy that hits for a good average, but doesn't hit for alot of power probably won't see as many pitches as someone that does hit for power but doesn't have as good of an average.  It would seem probably that a good average hitter is not going to "miss" his pitch nearly as much as a power hitter that's trying to drive the ball.

Just something I was curious about after seeing Jeff's comment.

Off the top of my head
I'm pretty sure you're right.
Correlations for '06
BA vs P/PA: -0.139 SLG vs P/PA: 0.286 So you're right. That's a weaker correlation than I'd have thought, though.
Neifi in the clubhouse
Jeff: I find it interesting that you'd buy into the "cancer in the clubhouse/bad influence on younger players" viewpoint, a philosophy which seems to resonate within the Mariners organization. I have it on good authority that the Mariners traded Rafael Soriano in part because he was considered to be a negative influence on Yuni and Jose. I'm not trying to justify the trade (which seemed ridiculous at the time---maybe a hair less so now that HoRam is pitching semi-respectably), but if my source is right, should we give the M's the benefit of the doubt? Usually, the stathead community downplays the importance of clubhouse vibes, but I'm wondering whether you think there's something to it. Perhaps you were just making the odd and inevitable Neifi joke........
This isn't so much the cancer angle
that players who are bad guys will bring everyone else down so they won't play well, but more that bad but likeable players will impart some of their badness through well-intentioned interaction.

Imagine if Sexson gave batting tips to Lopez, so that he kept grounding out weakly, but all of his good swings became strikeouts.  That would suck.

If you want examples from another sport
Look at the Portland Trailblazers Zach Randolph.

There's a lot things that cannot be measured that affect the game.  I think the best we can do is acknowledge that they do have an affect, the affect is significant, but we don't know how much.

We must also acknowledge that despite the unknown affect, there are things we can measure more specifically, that appear to remain constant regardless of the unknown affect.  My personal bias is that this is true for the regular season of baseball in general. But when you get to the win or go home moments, the "unknown" matters much more, and has a greater influence.

The thing is
If they have an effect they get counted in stats anyway, so it doesn't matter. Willie Bloomqsuit basic talent + HUSTLING LIKE A GRITTY HUSTLE DEMON = Willie Bloomquist's batting line.
Sure, over the course of a 162 game season
so when you look at a players production year to year, month by month, etc the trends do account for the unknown affects.

But what happens for that specific moment of significant importance?  Like tying run in scoring position, bottom of the 9th, two outs in an elimination playoff game?

Does that player in that special moment succeed because of personality and character controlling his skill, or is it purely skill?  

Would it matter that he was out drinking out all night before the game? Didn't bother to read the scouting report on the relief pitcher? Didn't study the video long enough?  Would his belief in himself provide the confidence to ignore the situation's pressure and persevere?  

 

But why would that matter?
He still did what he did, so we can tell he did it. How he did it doesn't really matter (or if it does, please explain why).

Assume that we can just put clean numbers to these sorts of things: A talent of 5 combined with a grit of 5 does not make a player better than a talent of 15 and a grit of -5.

Clarification
The point being made has to do with how a person can be influenced by another person, and how that influences an outcome.

"How he did it doesn't really matter (or if it does, please explain why)."

Over the course of a 162 game season, it doesn't matter.

But in a specific situation, where the pressure is at the highest threshold humanly possible, it does.  It's something that we have no means of measuring - at least at this time.

Talent can only be exploited as much as the mind is capable of.  Even if that talent is in the form of a reflex, it's still the discipline of mind that allows the body to act.

So if the influences around you could care less about such discipline, how likely are you to work at it?

Using your numbers - A player could have a talent level 15, and during highest pressure situation in a 162 game season it shows at 15.  But due to some intervening variable (say lack of confidence, laziness, lack of discipline), during a high pressure situation in the playoffs the player can only exploit a level 10 of his talent.

It comes back to the idea of the limits we put upon ourselves.

Ok, I agree with you that
Having talent AND hustle is preferable to talent alone. However... what a player does in high pressure situations is measurable. You -are- talking about clutch hitting, right?
re: clutch
Clutch hitting, pitching, pitch calling, throwing, managing, sliding, all of it I guess.    But I'm thinking clutch when everything is on the line.  How often does that opportunity come up, and is the sample size large enough?

Of course, there is the possibility of being too stupid to care - which is what I think happened to Weaver in the playoffs

Your sample size is too small
For the specific all or nothing 'win the WS or go home' scenario. But there have been detailed studies done on clutch hitting/hitters, and they've essentially discovered that there's a lot of variance in clutchness from year to year. The skill is there, but it's incredibly small. I don't know if that's relevent to what you're talking about though.
I figured so about the sample size.
Really, all this stems from the initial premise that people are influenced by others.  Therefor, it is possible that a bad influence leads to a negative outcome.

If so, then a bad influence on a young upcoming baseball player is likely to have a negative outcome.

If Jose Lopez learns to be lazy from Soriano, eventually that laziness limits his talent potential, or causes him to lose his concentration at a critical moment.    

I think we have more problems
Than a player being a bad influence on other players. Namely the coaching staff being a bad influence :(
too true
too true
Wow, Raffy a negative influence?
That's a new one.
Doesn't surprise me...
...but, then, well, I'm not going there...
Kenji has back spasms?

You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Lookout Landing to post a comment.