Top Four Reasons Not to Buy a New Car Right Now!
Repairing Breyer Horses: Fixing Broken Legs
Complications of Anorexia Nervosa and Bulimia Nervosa
- Amenorrhoea (no longer having a menstrual cycle)
- Anemia
- Osteoporosis
- Loss of Bone Density
- Damage to Immune System
- Increased Risk of Getting Gall Stones
- Constipation
- Kidney Damage
- Cardiovascular Disorders
- Renal Damage
- Stagnation of Body Fluid
- Arterial Pressure Decrease
- Increased Risk of Heart-Circulatory Failure
Does Anybody Ever Get Approved for Zero Interest Car Loan?
A roster is as complicated as the Antikythera Mechanism
2005 White Sox … +741 runs, -645 runs allowed … 91 predicted wins, 99 actual wins 1997 Dodgers … +742 runs, -645 runs allowed … 91 predicted wins, 88 actual winsSo an educated GM would project those teams (other things being equal) to win the same number of games the next year, right? Because the "luck" would even out — and random fluctuation is the dominant predictive compass we use? I'll wait while you go look up how many games the 1998 Dodgers and 2006 White Sox won. === Cognitive Dissonance, Dept. === The Dodgers won 83 the next year; the White Sox won 90. This happens again, and again, and again, James found. Overachieving per Pythag — winning more games on the field than your run differential allows — is a very strong sign that you're going to do well in the following season.* In fact, in James' study, he found that 100 "overachieving" teams beat 100 "underachieving" teams, the next year, by 348 games. That means that for every overachiever who got no overperformance, there was another team that got 7 games' worth of overperformance the next year. Don't read further until you've figured out why… ;- ) this isn't a phenomenon to shrug and ignore. . === And Now For Something Completely Different === There are a lot of moving parts on a 25-man team. 25 moving parts. Even one is hard to predict. But 25? You figure Morrow for X runs, and that's off by four inches. You figure Shelton for Y runs, and that's off by six inches. You figure Branyan for Z runs, and that's off by three inches. How many inches are you off at the bottom of the table? When you build a house, do you cut boards off of the same board template, or do you keep switching boards every time you cut one against another? You'll be off by four inches at the end of the day… ……………………….. 25 moving parts. That's why every year, there is a team that wins or loses 15-20 more games than expected — in 2007, it was the White Sox, who went from 90 wins to 72 despite few major changes. In 2005, the Twins won 83 games (exactly where skeptics say the M's were in 2007); in 2006, they won 96. …. why? Not because they went out and changed their roster. They just had a lot of guys have better years. This happens every year. A team has a bunch of guys have good years together, and wins out of nowhere. ………………………….. An amigo responds, the intelligent thing to do is to assume that for every Richie Sexson who sees his BABIP bounce back, there will be a Raul Ibanez who has an off year. In Strat-O-Matic … perhaps that's what you might assume, yeah (but even then you wouldn't use that as an excuse to resign). But what happens in baseball is that a factor X, a human factor, the element of chemistry sweeps a clubhouse. And then 25 moving parts are all being affected by an invisible wind — it's no longer a strictly luck-and-chance assumption that we can use. Last year, in 2007, I surmised that this meant a possible UP indicator for the 2008 M's. To my lasting regret. :- ) Ah, well, life and baseball are complicated. Lesson learned? Don't predict teams ... …………………………….. Every year there is a team that just won 83 games, and now will win 96. Or that won 90, and will now lose 90. Why? 25 moving parts. And chemistry. For some reason, Pat Gillick's teams seem to have rosters full of players who have good seasons together. Will Zduriencik's "Safeco-Friendly" roster create early momentum towards the same goal? Hm. Cheers, jemanji ................ image: http://asymptotia.com/wp-images/2006/11/29comput650.jpg
Kitten Safety Tips
Mark Teixeira
It TEX a village...
... full of cash, to land a player like this one. Kevin Ess at Mariner Central pointed out the SI.com rumor that the Mariners are in it, early on, for Teixeira.
.............
Sports Illustrated recently printed (in some kind of paper-magazine form of SI) the article "Tex, Inc.", which contained a number of points I hadn't paid much attention to.
First of all, Teixeira is a good actor - for example, he amused the Angels with the fact that they could never catch him blowing a bubble or looking into the stands with his head down during the National Anthem -- nope, standing perfectly stock-still, head down, yada yada.
He comes into the clubhouse, carefully turns off his cell phone so as not to distract others.
He follows an Ichiro-like pregame routine, eating the same sandwich at the same time, a PowerBar in a particular inning, etc. etc.
As you know, Tex is a polished defensive player -- remember our Bill James rule that the good guys, the unselfish guys, are the ones who work on their defense.
He's handsome, professional, intelligent, a leader, yada yada -- and therefore an ideal "face for the franchise." (Remember that the M's were going to unload huge $$ on ARod and Junior precisely because they saw them as the Team Brand.)
.................
According to SI, this leadership extends to in-game situations. Supposedly the Angels sat on the bench, with their hitting coach, and discussed Tex's exemplary AB's as he was taking them. They went from #29 in walks, first half, to #21, second half.
I don't say it's the gospel truth. But you know that this club has has its share of negative examples...
..................
The Mariners' offense didn't lurch to a halt when Junior left. The offense was barely affected when ARod left. But the Mariners' run-scoring machine did a bug-on-the-windshield dance when: Edgar Martinez Stopped Hitting.
In my view, the key piston in the M's engine was Edgar's OBP plus SLG. Night in, night out, Edgar would put nightmarishly difficult AB's on pitchers, wear them down, take his bases, and his teammates would march in behind him with renewed faith...
With Teixeira, you're talking the OBP renaissance.
.................
So you've got an Edgar type here, except he's lefthanded for Safeco.
You've got an Edgar type, who hits 36 homers per 162 AB's for his career.
You've got an Edgar type, who has multiple gold gloves on defense. Defense is all the rage in Seattle, supposedly trades 1-for-1 against the bats on the European sabr market, so you'd think people would get to adding up Tex's offense plus defense.
...................
Tex was 28 last season and is coming off two consecutive 150 (one hundred fifty) OPS+ seasons. Ken Griffey Jr's lifetime OPS+ is 138. Absent the Kingdome, Junior was probably a 140 guy. Teixeria is, roughly, as good a hitter as Ken Griffey Jr.
...................
Would Tex play here, and would Boras recommend that he do? I don't know -- would ARod play for a loser, if they offered the biggest contract? Oh.
In the SI article, Boras gloated that he had laid out the 10x$20M parameters and, to his amazement, 10 teams were interested.
I'm sure that if the M's were the highest bidder, you'd see Tex in an M's unie with the ARod shtick, "hey, two or three players and we're right there." (Never mind that Teixeira himself IS two or three players.)
..................
In roto, you've got a $260 budget and you don't go out and buy those $6 Sheltons and Branyans so that you can finish .500 for $204, and leave $56 on the table -- giving $56 advantages to your enemies. You find the $6 Sheltons so that you can go out and get the $35 Teixeiras.
Getting a bargain for your dollar is a great thing. But saving money isn't the object of the 162-game season. Did the Red Sox insist on a bargain for their dollar with Dice-K? Are the Angels going to insist on a bargain if Tex becomes the face of their franchise?
You don't have to get a bargain on EVERYthing. Sometimes you just pay what you have to pay to get the irreplaceable commodity (such as your wife...), and then you save money elsewhere (such as with your Mariners' seat).
................
The M's might not win in 2009, but the paradigm isn't to make sure that we lose this year. Teixeira would still be here in 2010 and 2011, and we wouldn't be sacrificing a thing by locking him up now. He's not going to be available next year.
In Stars and Scrubs -- as well as in every rich city other than Seattle -- the question isn't WHETHER you want franchise players. The question is WHICH franchise players are you going to bet on.
Teixeira in Safeco? Sounds like your beloved peanut-butter-and-jelly to me, Mark.
Cheers,
jemanji
...................
image: http://www.prosportsmemorabilia.com/Images/Product/33-57/33-57593-F.jpg