Turn The Page? It May Be Time On Moneyball!
by Goldzone on Jul 23, 2008 4:37 PM PDT
422 comments
With yet another one run loss earlier today and another boatload of strikeouts, the 2008 version of the Athletics are not only a frustrating group, a good many of them are not even major leaguers! And the "Moneyball" theory is not playing out as all had hoped for!
This is course is no surprise to the many green and gold faithful who have in many cases called this group a AAAA quality team. It is now painfully clear that this group way overachieved in the first half of this campaign and things are now balancing out!
I give Bob Geren and his staff props for keeping things going in the first few months despite having questionable talent on the field! But the braintrust is not without fault! Far from it!, A few weeks back I made a post referring to the resting of key players such as Suzuki and Sweeney in key games that at the time mattered greatly! Well, as I stated then, they could rest in less important games down the road when things either looked rosier or bleaker! Well now they look very bleak and Geren can go ahead and rest those players as well as others all he wants! So the point is they should have fielded a full complement of their key players in games such as the final one in Anaheim and the final one against the White Sox a few weeks back! Both were very winnable games and games that would not just have mattered in the standings, but mattered from a confidence perspective as well. I hate to say I told you so, but I told you so! Rest up all you want now guys!, You're out of the race!
As mentioned, there are several major leaguers on the A's but there are also several minor leaguers as well as major leaguers that should be walking a beat in the National League where they can be successful. I will list a few here....
1. Jack Hannahan- Clearly no more than AAA American League and possibly pine rider in NL.
2.Jack Cust- Despite power, were it not for the DH he would be back in AAA. I would think he could excel in the NL, but without the DH he should be basically a pine rider in AL or playing in Sacramento.
3.Bobby Crosby- Starter in NL; Back up at best in AL. despite promising start to his career.
4.Daric Barton- Puzzling season... Should be continuing to make a mark at AAA to mature. Jury is still out!
5.Ryan Sweeney- Solid American League starter. Strong accurate swing; smart and swift baserunner; very good outfielder. Future Star?
6. Carlos Gonzalez- Basically should be in AAA still, however he has five tool potential and now that the A's are out of it, I am glad he is working in centerfield in Oakland.
7.Mark Ellis- Starter in AL or NL. However, he is a complementary player that relies on an excellent lineup to maximize his potential. And unfortunately he will not get that in Oakland consistently enough to be successful. Should leave after this season to raise the level of his game elsewhere.
8.Kurt Suzuki- Solid American League starter and potentially a future star. However, there is a concern from my vantage point that he wears down to quickly and needs some hand holding. I could be mistaken about that! So only time will tell, but either way he is great!
9.Matt Murton- Solid hitter in the National League; back up at best in the AL.
10.Emil Brown- Pinch hitter and back up in either league. Although something tells me if he was told that he would be in left field everyday he could produce and prove people wrong.
11. Rajai Davis- :Potential NL Starter; AA or AAA in American League.
The others not listed are either currently disabled or too young to make a fair assessment at this stage. As far as Thomas and Chavez are concerned, both are stars in either league when healthy, but both should hang up the cleats!
I will take a look at the pitchers in my next post, but looking at this meager lineup it is truly amazing that we are still over .500! So we basically have three or four players that are quality starters in the AL and some that are backups and or should be playing in the National League. If it wasn't for the pitching where would we be??? But with the recent trades, that will now surely take a hit as well.
The future clearly has some bright spots but it may be time to scrap some of the "moneyball" ideals of the past and move forward. Because the A's are not playing by the "moneyball" rules anyway. The theory is valid and has given us A's suppporters several winning years, but if we want to move forward and start scoring runs, Billy Beane may want to move away from plate discipline hitters and back to seeing if the wack and attack hitters of old can get us over the hump! The sand in the "moneyball" hourglass could very well be down to it's final few grains!
3 recs |
422 comments
Email
Print
Comments
I live for the day
when someone writes an article saying that the abject failure of the Mariners this year is proof positive that Moneyball was right all along.
It’s sort of unfortunate that most of the people who are smart enough to understand the point of the book are also too intellectually honest to write something as silly as that.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jul 23, 2008 4:43 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Sometimes, I really really like you.
Imagine waking up at 2 a,m. and thinking of Bobby on Greyhound somewhere in the Texas wastelands..."Does your little iddy biddy back hurt, Bobby?! Does it, you SOB?!" -Alox
by Leopold Bloom on Jul 23, 2008 5:11 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
PT, WHAT?
Do you mind elaborating on your point!? Because the Mariners are a failure this year is not proof positive that Moneyball is the long term answer. I state that Moneyball has for the most part been a success, but would’nt you say that the Angels philosophy is as good if not currently better? Considering they have a title and are in the hunt for another, my point has validity. So calling it silly is just stirring up the pot once again!
Shane F. Wray
by Goldzone on Jul 23, 2008 6:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Of course it isn't
That’s my point. The success or failure of one given baseball team in one season is maybe—and I’m being generous here—10% related to the “philosophy” of the GM. I’d rate all of the following as more important:
Success or failure of the team’s talent evaluators
GM’s “general aptitude”, eg willingness to make good trades, promote players at the right time, etc
Payroll
Level of opposing competition
Luck
That’s not to say it’s unimportant—any horse handicapper would kill for a 10% edge—but it is to say that cherrypicking a few example teams and building an argument on them without controlling for other variables is rubbish.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jul 23, 2008 7:24 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wait a minute.
Your first two qualifiers are directly related to the GM. He’s the one who hires/fires the evaluators. He’s also the one who makes personnel decisions.
I’d say that factors into a lot more than a 10 percent edge. Beane also has the advantage of having a free hand throughout the organization. He can reach down and touch anyone at anytime for any reason. And everyone knows it. So yeah, I think he bears responsibility for the drek we have had to endure the last week or so, more so than most any other GM in baseball. Which is not to say I would want any other GM out there. I wouldn’t. The only thing restraining Beane is the only thing that usually matters. Money. Payroll. He has no control over that, if he did we would be the RS west. Only better.
"You may glory in a team triumphant, but you fall in love with a team in defeat."--The Boys of Summer
by alox on Jul 23, 2008 7:34 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You misunderstand me
Yes, the first two are part of the overall “rating” of the GM. They are not, however, part of the GM’s “philosophy,” unless you think some GMs have the philosophy of “sucking”, or of “liking to screw with prospects,” or something.
John Schuerholz was less “sabermetric” than JP Ricciardi. Nonetheless I don’t think there’s anyone on the planet who would argue that Ricciardi is a better GM than Schuerholz was. The fact that Schuerholz’s teams did better doesn’t prove that sabermetrics is wrong. Schuerholz was a shrewd dealer and a guy who surrounded himself with capable people, and Ricciardi is a hack who prefers sycophants and doesn’t maintain good relationships. That’s independent of their “philosophies” at GMing, which is more or less the only area in which I’d grade Ricciardi higher.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jul 23, 2008 8:02 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I kinda figured I did.
But the clarification was cool.
"You may glory in a team triumphant, but you fall in love with a team in defeat."--The Boys of Summer
by alox on Jul 23, 2008 11:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ricciardi's philosophy
includes acquiring way too many 3b in some years, and now way too many SS. It includes cutting Thomas after a very small sample of struggles.
I’ll take Schuerholtz’ philosophy over Ricciardi’s.
ZIPS: Milledge: 466 HR, 485 2B, 2282 hits, 278-379-524
by rfloh on Jul 23, 2008 11:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Would you include the injuries in the luck category?
by Tyler Bleszinski on Jul 23, 2008 11:38 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hm
Part of it is luck. Part of it is maintaining and promoting a culture of good health practices. But I’d say that’s less important than a GM’s philosophy as an overall part of a team’s success. (Still important, though.)
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jul 24, 2008 1:26 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
And the biggest part may be getting durable players
When you have a chance to get a guy like Sean Gallagher, you take it!
by WaddellCanseco on Jul 24, 2008 8:24 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Moneyball
you cant argue with the facts.
one playoff series win in ten years..
Trading away the best players.. even if Billy makes a good discovery in a player which he does a lot.. I’m starting to say what’s the point? if you’re going to trade them away when their at their best. Here’s a thought as well – Bobby Crosby is not good at all. Beane has stuck with him far too long. Does anyone on this site remember how the theme a few years ago was “rebuild for 2008” Obviously that did not happen. Here’s an another issue. How is this team going to be good in the near future? You cant’ win with no power.
Lets go Oakland! obvious.com
by bballfanr33 on Jul 24, 2008 9:51 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You also can't argue with this fact
5 playoff appearances since 2000 on a limited payroll.
Would you rather have that or what teams like Kansas City and Pittsburgh have?
I’d rather have the chance than no hope at all.
Last of the Ninth - Photography Site / jamesvenes.com - Blog
by Flashfire on Jul 24, 2008 10:03 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Trading players away before they hit free agency isn't "Moneyball"...
... it’s, “shit, we have no money.”
Ryan Sweeney: I probably irrationally embraced him before you did.
by Joey C. on Jul 24, 2008 11:03 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why do people all assume that that
the NL is so inferior to the AL.
I mean you’re saying players could be starters in the NL… or should be AAA starters in the AL.. I never really thought the talent level was THAT far apart.
by buddahead9 on Jul 23, 2008 4:51 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Well, probably because Interleague play over the past 3 seasons has yielded about 100 more wins for the AL
When the NL has the inherent advantage in those games.
http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/
by thejd44 on Jul 23, 2008 5:40 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Whaaaaa?
I do think that the AL is deeper (few horrible teams) and may even be stronger at the top. You’re 100% wrong that interleague is an inherent advantage for NL teams though. When they trot out crappy pinch hitters to DH against guys (Vidro excepted) who are far superior I don’t understand how you can even make this argument with a straight face.
by nevermoor on Jul 23, 2008 5:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's quite simple
The AL’s DH is typically one of the 2 or 3 best hitters on that team. The loss of offense caused by replacing that guy with a pitcher far, far, FAR outweighs the advantage they get in AL parks when the NL gets to put in a decent hitter in for the pitcher. You act like the guy DHing is always some Lenny Harris type. What usually happens is a bad defensive player like Adam Dunn gets bumped to DH, and a competent hitter/pretty good fielder gets 4 at bats instead of a pitcher.
The NL advantage really isn’t close.
http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/
by thejd44 on Jul 23, 2008 5:56 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I completely disagree
In NL parks, the AL team just has a far superior pinch hitter (or take a hit defensively by putting their DH in the field).
In AL parks, NL teams trot out the likes of Tony Clark and Greg Norton. It’s true that some teams DH a defensive liability, but they still have to put someone in that player’s position (and it’s not like that replacement player will hit like David Ortiz).
All told, it’s always better to have too many good hitters than too few. In NL parks, AL teams have too many good hitters. In AL parks, NL teams have too few.
The AL advantage really isn’t close.
by nevermoor on Jul 23, 2008 6:09 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You forget that the NL
teams will not have a player capable of playing the DH position. No NL team is going to carry around a DH for a dozen games or so.
The end result is you have 4th OFs, backup middle infielders DHing for the NL.
ZIPS: Milledge: 466 HR, 485 2B, 2282 hits, 278-379-524
by rfloh on Jul 23, 2008 11:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Look at it this way
The negative difference between the AL losing the pitcher is greater than the positive difference in AL DH vs. NL DH. The AL loses one of their best hitters for games in which the NL plays just as they always do, and in games when the AL gets to have that hitter, the NL gets to play a hitter who is a competent major league hitter. And, most likely, that guy gets to play defense while a lesser player gets to DH for those games.
http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/
by thejd44 on Jul 24, 2008 1:36 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The problem here is that
the NL often does NOT have a guy who is a competent major league hitter. The guy DHing is usually a 4th OF type, a guy who hits like a CF but can’t play CF.
Even if they move their corner OF or 1b to DH, the guy who will fill in usually can’t hit. Which is why he’s sitting on the bench. If he could hit, he would be starting somewhere.
And the AL teams don’t lose their best hitter. They put him at 1b.
ZIPS: Milledge: 466 HR, 485 2B, 2282 hits, 278-379-524
by rfloh on Jul 24, 2008 9:49 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nah
This just isn’t true. Pretty much every NL team has at least one guy who could pass as a regular. The Cubs have Daryle Ward, and he would be a regular DH on a lot of teams. I’d say there’s an equal number of truly crappy first-guy-off-the-bench NL players as there are AL DHs who really ought to not be a regular.
If Frank Thomas were healthy for all the NL games this year, he would have played exactly 0 of them at first base.
http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/
by thejd44 on Jul 24, 2008 11:23 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
but he would have been available to PH...
and the NL teams cannot afford to have someone of his presence on their roster if they cannot play in the field at all. Boston moves Ortiz to first, and sits Youkillis/Lowell until they need them for defense in the later innings.
Advantage AL.
by elhefe on Jul 24, 2008 11:38 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
padres did
with Tony Clark – dumped (“traded”) him to Arizona after interleague was finished.
Then again, it’s the Padres – not going to say they’re a shining example of how to have a great season.
by rollierollieOxenfree on Jul 25, 2008 4:05 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Tony Clark had a 91 OPS+ with San Diego this year
Not a bad example there. Is he great? No. But the difference between the typical AL DH and him is less of an advantage for the AL than iot is when the AL DH sits down for some games and the pitcher hits.
http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/
by thejd44 on Jul 25, 2008 10:35 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
What?
The difference between AL pitchers and NL pitchers is zero.
The difference between AL DHs and NL DHs is not zero.
It’s almost tautological to say that the AL has an advantage here. It can’t not have an advantage.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jul 25, 2008 12:55 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Small sample size, I know
But CC Sabathia just mowing down the NL sure makes it look like the NL is fairly week. 4-0 with 3 CGs and 1.36 ERA? I’m guessing he grabs a couple beers in between innings knowing what he’ll be facing out on the hill.
Might as well Jump! - Van Halen
by sprtsnwyn on Jul 24, 2008 2:58 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Weak, damn it
Might as well Jump! - Van Halen
by sprtsnwyn on Jul 24, 2008 2:59 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, except his own team
which is fairly Weeks.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jul 24, 2008 3:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I wish there was a post permantly on display
That explained just how valuable Jack Cust is to this team.
by GusanoQuemador on Jul 23, 2008 4:56 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Or we could hire somebody to travel all over the country and just punch people in the throat
It’s not like reading a well-argued defense of Cust would actually get through to people.
http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/
by thejd44 on Jul 23, 2008 5:41 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
does that come with dental?
Who needs competence as long as everyone smiles? @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jul 23, 2008 5:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
it was in a post
a couple pages back
oh wait, that was you
"It's not my fault your team's so shitty." -Steve Friend, head coach, Chabot College, to Laney College's head coach, who asked why we scored so many runs after we beat Laney 30-3 in 2006
by flipgatey3 on Jul 24, 2008 2:01 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
1. What does any of this have to do with Moneyball?
2. The NL is probably actually better than the AL this year.
3. You’ve wasted 2 minutes of my life that I will never get back.
"It's for your own good. Big strong Devo knows whats best for Poppy" -- Mossback
by devo on Jul 23, 2008 4:56 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
+1
Nothing really wrong with the post over all, except that it has nothing to do with “Moneyball” whatsoever.
"Dispatch knuckleheadedness with Bond-like aplomb." –74mk
by iglew on Jul 23, 2008 5:03 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
so by "nothing really wrong"
i hope you mean, “critically flawed”, yes?
by oakinboston on Jul 24, 2008 5:36 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It didn't convince you when the NL was left holding it's arse in interleague
for the nth straight time?
The A's colors are green and gold.
by mikeA on Jul 23, 2008 5:13 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, you're right ...
never mind … there were 3 NL teams that were better than .500 in interleague play!
"It's for your own good. Big strong Devo knows whats best for Poppy" -- Mossback
by devo on Jul 23, 2008 5:23 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
But....
I’m hard pressed to pick an Al team over either the Cubs or the Brewers in a 7 game series right now. Even the hated Sox or the Angels. And I suspect the Rays’ time is still ahead—not this year.
by windyfelix on Jul 23, 2008 10:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
some of your assessments of the players are correct, however
until the rules of baseball change, not making outs and putting the ball in play are always going to be valuable attributes for a baseball player.
by emar24 on Jul 23, 2008 5:07 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
+1
Who needs competence as long as everyone smiles? @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jul 23, 2008 5:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Daring Post Around Here.
I’m not sure if it has anything to do with “Moneyball,” but Beane and his associates have been absolutely inept at finding or developing any kind of young hitters. The offensive struggles are nothing new to this year, the offense has been anemic since 2004, when the steroid infused talent finally filtered out. Aside from this past offseason, Beane has not one time drafted for, or traded for a prospect that is anything but average(I’m not talking about established guys like Guillen or Dye). Browsing through the A’s amateur draft picks, since 1997 the only standout guys are Eric Byrnes, Bobby Crosby, and Nick Swisher. Thats not saying much in the ways of evaluation.
It’s nice and all that Beane is trading guys that have multiple years left with the team for minor leaguers now, but what has he been doing for the last 10 years to the farm system? What guys in there have any talent that didn’t come in this past off-season’s trades??? When Matt Watson, Dan Johnson, are Daric Barton are guys you look forward to seeing promoted to the MLB, there is a problem. WHEN MATT MURTON IS YOUR CLEANUP HITTER, THAT IS A PROBLEM.
Quiet simply, the A’s seem to be very good at evaluating/developing pitchers. Thats only half the battle though. When your offense is worse than the Kansas City Royals the only thing that pitching is going to do is prolong the inevitable. Obviously I’m a little down on Beane right now, but I think my reasons are justified. From an outside view it looks like Beane’s hard headiness and neglect of the farm system has set the franchise back 2-3 years. Not only that, but if his current prospects continue to improve at the rate of his past guys, there isn’t going to be much of a dynasty. Sooner or later Texas and Seattle are going to improve, and the Angels aren’t going anywhere. While I like how the A’s could look in 2010 or so, there is absolutely zero guarantee of success.
What about Barry?
"Barry who?" Forst said, and I felt like I was in the middle of a knock-knock joke.
by KMoAsFan on Jul 23, 2008 5:11 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
This post makes a lot more sense than the one to which you're referring.
"PECOTA can pretty much kiss my ass."-Nico
by jeepers on Jul 23, 2008 5:15 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Could it simply be that
(and this is a vast simplification of things) hitting for average and hitting for power are both things that are never undervalued? If the whole point, and I think I’m understanding the main point of Moneyball to be that, as a franchise, the A’s pursue players/situations that are undervalued. Hitting for average and hitting for power are two things that are never undervalued. Everyone who is remotely familiar with baseball, even those who are disdainful of math, understands the concept of how many homeruns someone hits and/or how many times in a thousand they get a hit.
Imagine waking up at 2 a,m. and thinking of Bobby on Greyhound somewhere in the Texas wastelands..."Does your little iddy biddy back hurt, Bobby?! Does it, you SOB?!" -Alox
by Leopold Bloom on Jul 23, 2008 5:19 PM PDT up reply actions 6 recs
I like this post and have recommended it
That is exactly the point. Now, it’s true that the A’s could draft and develop good hitters (average and/or power) without spending money they don’t have. I suppose the “they can’t draft good offensive players” argument has some merit. But it’s absolutely true that the A’s will never find some awesome hitter on the cheap.
They can, however, get guys who are flawed but productive on the cheap. Shannon Stewart and Mike Sweeney are good examples of that. To a lesser extent, Jay Payton fits (except he was all empty average and way too expensive).
It’s not like you’re ever gonna grab Albert Pujols out of the bargain bin unless he’s, well, a 38- (or 40-) year-old Frank Thomas.
If someone thinks BIlly Beane wants a bunch of guys who hit .240 with no power because that’s his “philosophy,” well, I’m actually quite amazed you have the ability to operate a keyboard with any level of competence.
Also, exclamation points rule!
http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/
by thejd44 on Jul 23, 2008 5:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
or, y'know, they could draft Jemile Weeks
Who needs competence as long as everyone smiles? @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jul 23, 2008 5:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
or sign a few free agents
I hear Emil Brown is available.
Imagine waking up at 2 a,m. and thinking of Bobby on Greyhound somewhere in the Texas wastelands..."Does your little iddy biddy back hurt, Bobby?! Does it, you SOB?!" -Alox
by Leopold Bloom on Jul 23, 2008 7:41 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I've been traveling and haven't had much access to the Internet
and as I read this post that was my first wonder. When is someone going to bring up the exclamation point excess? Elaine Benes would looooove this fanpost.
by Tyler Bleszinski on Jul 23, 2008 11:41 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
cindi thinks an "exclamation point" ...
... is when Mr Beane signs a washed-up California Raisin, and he crosses home base.
Who needs competence as long as everyone smiles? @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jul 24, 2008 12:29 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Undervalued Hitting
It is in fact very difficult to find an undervalued guy who is just coming around. If they are in AAA, then it’s going to cost you, Hanley Ramirez comes to mind. Problem is, when Beane has traded away a top player he has failed to get anything worthwhile in regards to prospects. Thats where finding and drafting guys with high upsides comes into play. You don’t even need a high first round pick to land a potential star. .
What about Barry?
"Barry who?" Forst said, and I felt like I was in the middle of a knock-knock joke.
by KMoAsFan on Jul 23, 2008 5:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Carlos, Gio, Ryan, and Brett resent being called not worthwhile
Chris, Dana, Joey, JoshD, Adrian and Greg don’t think they’re chopped liver either. Fautino says “don’t you forget about me”.
When you have a chance to get a guy like Sean Gallagher, you take it!
by WaddellCanseco on Jul 23, 2008 5:51 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
And Dan Meyer is... oh... ok, I won't push it.
http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/
by thejd44 on Jul 23, 2008 5:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I clearly said:
“Aside from this past offseason.”
What about Barry?
"Barry who?" Forst said, and I felt like I was in the middle of a knock-knock joke.
by KMoAsFan on Jul 23, 2008 5:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Dan Haren
Is one, among many, prospects we got in previous seasons who would consider themselves “worthwhile”
by nevermoor on Jul 23, 2008 6:12 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Please read more closely.
I was addressing the offense. I clearly pointed out Beane has been fully capable of finding pitchers.
What about Barry?
"Barry who?" Forst said, and I felt like I was in the middle of a knock-knock joke.
by KMoAsFan on Jul 23, 2008 6:23 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ok, here we go again
Some successful offensive Draft Picks
Travis Buck
Andre Ethier
Nick Swisher
Eric Byrnes
Mark Teahen
Bobby Crosby
Some successful offensive Trade Acquisitions
Jeremy Giambi
Eric Hinske
Jermaine Dye
David Justice
Carlos Pena
John Mabry
Ray Durham
Erubiel Durazo
Bobby Kielty
Mark Kotsay
Michael Barrett
Jason Kendall
Daric Barton
Milton Bradley
Jack Cust
Some of the trades are for “established players” which you excluded, but certainly not all. All told, you’re wrong to say Beane has no eye for offensive players. It’s true he’s more interested in pitching (as he should be considering our park effects, and the proof that pitching wins supplied by the Rangers every year).
by nevermoor on Jul 24, 2008 8:54 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
What is your definition of success?
Mark Teahen is a successful offensive pick? Career OPS+ of 97. Year by year OPS+: 82, 122, 98, 87. Career EQA, 258, year by year, 240, 287, 260, 243 while playing corner OF. He would be a successful offensive pick, if he played 2b or CF. Even at 3b, he’s below average.
And I don’t see how you can count Crosby as a successful pick. His career EQA is 241. SS average is usually 250-255.
You are counting 2 guys who are comfortably below positional average over their careers, as “successful”?
If you want want to give Beane the benefit of the doubt on Crosby, fine, the pick is neither a bust, nor a success.
As for your successful acquisitions, you are also stretching there. Bobby Kielty is a “successful” acquisition? Even putting aside the idiocy of trading a young starting pitcher for him, Kielty put up numbers that were below average for a corner OF, even with him being platooned.
Michael Barrett didn’t play for the A’s. Why does he count? Damian Miller probably can be counted as successful.
Eric Hinske also didn’t play for the A’s.
Carlos Pena had a 92 OPS+ with the A’s while playing 1b.
ZIPS: Milledge: 466 HR, 485 2B, 2282 hits, 278-379-524
by rfloh on Jul 24, 2008 10:07 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed
You’d think we’d come across ONE guy who hits .275/.380/.500.
by GusanoQuemador on Jul 24, 2008 10:17 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's a lot to ask for
Especially in the Coliseum. Most of the 36 players with >= .880 OPS this year wouldn’t have one if half their games were in the Coliseum.
Obviously it would be great to have Pujols, but every team in the league (including the Cardinals) passed on him a lot of times. All that shows is that lightning hasn’t struck us yet.
Also, it’s worth noting that last year Cust was that sort of hitter. .256/.408/.504
by nevermoor on Jul 24, 2008 10:33 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
If those guys are all successes...
Then why has the offense been consistently near the worst in the league the last four years? I’m not seeing anyone on there being anything but average. No Chase Utley, David Wright, Matt Holliday, Albert Pujols, Ryan Braun, Jose Reyes, Joe Mauer, Justin Morneau, Grady Sizemore, Josh Hamilton, Evan Longoria, Ian Kinsler, Conor Jackson, Mark Teixeira, or Xavier Nady.
Heck, even a guy like Brain McCann would be an upgrade over any prospect Billy Beane has ever signed. It’s time people stop blindly following Beane, and look at what much lesser GM’s have been able to achieve. As Gusano said, it would be nice to have one .275 hitter!
What about Barry?
"Barry who?" Forst said, and I felt like I was in the middle of a knock-knock joke.
by KMoAsFan on Jul 24, 2008 10:26 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Answers
1. Park Effect. To hit .275 for the A’s you have to have an EqA much higher than .275. Only Jason Giambi regularly hit above .280 with us. Johnny Damon is a prime example. He’s a very good player but just couldn’t hit in Oakland.
2. Bad Luck. Minus a broken leg, Dye would have been that type of player. Minus a ton of injuries, Chavez would have been that type of player.
3. “Heck, even a guy like Brain McCann” is crazy talk. McCann is one of the best players in baseball. Also, I’d argue that several players on your list (Holliday, Reyes, Mauer, Morneau, and Jackson) wouldn’t have superstar stats (just good stats) if they played for us.
by nevermoor on Jul 24, 2008 10:37 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Ryan Sweeney / Kurt Suzuki / Carlos Gonzalez
.306 / .286 / .269 (close)
by Colorado Fan on Jul 24, 2008 10:42 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
By the way
Sweeney is getting mad love around here
But i think his BABIP is near .350. I believe we may be in for a disappointment soon. Haha, as a means of protecting ourselves, we should avoid too much love for swooney (see Buck, T.).
by ohmangoAs on Jul 24, 2008 10:55 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not really sure I'd use that list as something to back up a point
Buck? Currently trying to find his stroke again in the minors.
Ethier? Decent hitter, nothing amazing.
Swisher? Low average, walks a lot, strikes out a lot, has average power.
Byrnes? Human crash test dummy, emphasis on dummy.
Teahen? LOL!
Crosby? LOL!
The rest?
Jeremy Giambi? When was he ever anything special?
Hinske? Traded before seeing the majors with the A’s. Career OPS+ of 101.
Dye? Could’ve been something here, but the injury killed his A’s career.
Justice? Here in the twilight of his career.
Pena? Attitude problems and poor performance was his ticket out of here.
Mabry? Are you serious?
Durham? Rent-a-player.
Durazo? Not much of a holy grail if you ask me.
Kielty? Gimmick.
Kotsay? Solid player who dropped off a lot because of injuries.
Barrett? Never played for the A’s.
Kendall? Solid career NL hitter for average that gave the A’s a couple nice moments but he never hit very well here.
Barton? I still like his upside but he’s struggled mightily his first full season.
Bradley? Now we’re getting somewhere, but injuries, attitude and pending contract status combined to see the A’s unload him for whatever they could.
Cust? Strikeout, walk, homer machine. Terrible hitter for average. When he’s your main offensive threat, you’ve got bigger problems.
Last of the Ninth - Photography Site / jamesvenes.com - Blog
by Flashfire on Jul 24, 2008 10:39 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Some of this is fair
I consider any draft pick who has a real major league career a success. I think that’s especially fair as these guys all started in MLB.
Buck has/had the talent to start, here’s hoping he gets going again. Ethier is a solid major leaguer. The White Sox certainly see Swisher as a lot more than that, they traded their entire farm system. Byrnes has had some pretty good years.
Obviously the stars of trades are Dye and Kotsay, but Mabry hit about .400 for us the month after we got him, we got value out of moving Hinske, Justice played well for us, Pena took longer to develop than we had patience, but it turns out he can hit, Durazo was a stud in 2004 (but didn’t stick to it), Kendall wasn’t what we expected, but ok for a catcher.
I’ll admit Barrett shouldn’t have been on the list. I was going too fast through the trade spreadsheet.
The point is that it’s crazy to say we can’t get offensive players here.
by nevermoor on Jul 24, 2008 10:48 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hardly Crazy.
The offense is terrible, and has been consistently awful for Beane’s time here. It’s really that simple.
What about Barry?
"Barry who?" Forst said, and I felt like I was in the middle of a knock-knock joke.
by KMoAsFan on Jul 24, 2008 10:52 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
No. It really isn't
If we morphed the Oakland Coliseum into Wrigley Field (which would be pretty sweet), we’d have a lot more people with pretty offensive stats (and a lot fewer pitchers with sexy stats).
Tomorrow’s lineup, of course, is almost completely bereft of talent, but “for Beane’s time here” we’d have some pretty solid lineups in an offense-friendly park.
by nevermoor on Jul 24, 2008 10:55 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It sure was better in the earlier 2000s.
At least in 2000 and 2004 they had solid offenses, especially for the Coliseum. They scored 947 runs in 2000 (almost 6 a game), then went down to 884 in 2001, followed by 800 in 2002, 768 in 2003, 793 in 2004, 772 in 2005, 771 in 2006, 741 in 2007, and they’re on pace for 683 this year. Ouch.
Last of the Ninth - Photography Site / jamesvenes.com - Blog
by Flashfire on Jul 24, 2008 11:00 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Okay, I see a little more where you're coming from
Given the odds of players making it to the Majors in the first place, there’s something to be said to that. At the same time, how many haven’t?
Unfortunately the Coliseum is death to hitters. Get a new ballpark, get less foul territory, all that will change. You’ll also see pitching affected by it as well.
Last of the Ninth - Photography Site / jamesvenes.com - Blog
by Flashfire on Jul 24, 2008 10:54 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Amen
I’ll defer to grover on the draft success rate (but I think his conclusion is that we’re above average with hitters and way above average with pitchers, if that’s wrong disregard this).
I couldn’t agree more about park effects. People whine about not having .300 hitters but don’t seem to mind Duke’s 1.8 ERA.
by nevermoor on Jul 24, 2008 10:57 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I know you said that, but it seemed like an arbitrary exception to me
When you have a chance to get a guy like Sean Gallagher, you take it!
by WaddellCanseco on Jul 23, 2008 6:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Carlos Gonzalez isn't a worthwhile hitting prospect?
He’s 22 and doubles once every 10 at bats. He’s not perfect, but I’d say he’s a pretty freakin’ good hitting prospect.
http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/
by thejd44 on Jul 23, 2008 5:51 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Again.
I said aside from this past offseason twice in the first post.
What about Barry?
"Barry who?" Forst said, and I felt like I was in the middle of a knock-knock joke.
by KMoAsFan on Jul 23, 2008 5:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
so you're cherrypicking
the years that we spent putting a good team on the field in the majors while (somewhat) neglecting prospects…but when we turn around and start getting prospects, you cherrypick the years when we weren’t necessarily focused on that? gee, that’s fair.
"It's not my fault your team's so shitty." -Steve Friend, head coach, Chabot College, to Laney College's head coach, who asked why we scored so many runs after we beat Laney 30-3 in 2006
by flipgatey3 on Jul 23, 2008 6:35 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
How is that cherry picking?
We weren’t trading good prospects to get those competitive teams. There has not been an impact bat in the farm system in years. The best player to come out of it during Beane’s tenure has probably been Swisher. That is not saying much. Thats why the team used to be affected so badly by injuries.
What about Barry?
"Barry who?" Forst said, and I felt like I was in the middle of a knock-knock joke.
by KMoAsFan on Jul 23, 2008 6:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
maybe cherrypicking
was too strong, but it just feels like it’s easy to argue against something we weren’t “focusing” on, per se, at the time.
"It's not my fault your team's so shitty." -Steve Friend, head coach, Chabot College, to Laney College's head coach, who asked why we scored so many runs after we beat Laney 30-3 in 2006
by flipgatey3 on Jul 23, 2008 7:11 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
hey – Steve Swisher is a very good position player.
And an undervalued one at that.
The 2009 A's draft pick... getting higher every game.
by rebus on Jul 24, 2008 1:21 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nah. He sucked. He gave the Pirates the 1973 division title
when he dropped a 3rd strike and let Bob Robertson reach 1st on the last out of the game. Pirates came back and won.
When you have a chance to get a guy like Sean Gallagher, you take it!
by WaddellCanseco on Jul 24, 2008 8:27 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
what stats are you looking at when comparing the royals and the a 's
by emar24 on Jul 23, 2008 5:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Lets see
Runs scored, hits, doubles, HRs, total bases, batting average, slugging, ops, stolen bases, and fewer SOs.
What about Barry?
"Barry who?" Forst said, and I felt like I was in the middle of a knock-knock joke.
by KMoAsFan on Jul 23, 2008 5:55 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
but, but...
how about walks?
Foolsh, the most insane regular poster on AN since oaktoon left - salb
by FoolshGame22 on Jul 23, 2008 9:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Carlos Gonzalez may be pretty good. You have to credit Beane with that.
Ryan Sweeney could also turn out pretty well. I still have hope for Barton. So it’s just possible Beane’s learned from his past mistakes.
When you have a chance to get a guy like Sean Gallagher, you take it!
by WaddellCanseco on Jul 23, 2008 5:46 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The A's cant seem to find
position players in the draft. Where is the fault to be laid in the A’s Org.? Is it the scouts? Is it Beane? Is it the Minors development system? Coaching? Im assuming that they already know that they have not developed a very good-great hitter in along time. I would just like to see them hire some scouts, coaching or whoever that know something about hitting. We all know that A’s are great at finding and developing pitching. Maybe its just time for two scouting departments in the A’s Org. One for hitting and one for pitching.
by asfaninpismobeach on Jul 23, 2008 6:27 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Browse a little more
Beane has not one time drafted for, or traded for a prospect that is anything but average(I’m not talking about established guys like Guillen or Dye). Browsing through the A’s amateur draft picks, since 1997 the only standout guys are Eric Byrnes, Bobby Crosby, and Nick Swisher.
Some prospects whom Beane traded for who are/were arguably better than average:
2000: Aaron Harang, Chad Bradford
2001: Eric Hinske
2002: Carlos Peña
2002: Justin Duchscherer
2004: Dan Haren
2004: Kiko Calero
2005: Chad Gaudin
Some players drafted by the A’s since 1997 who are/were arguably better than average:
1997: Tim Hudson
1998: Mark Mulder, Gerald Laird
1999: Barry Zito, Ryan Ludwick
2000: Rich Harden
2001: Jeremy Bonderman, Andre Ethier
2002: Joe Blanton
2004: Huston Street, Kurt Suzuki
(If you count guys we drafted but didn’t sign, you can add a couple more, like Jonathan Papelbon and Brad Ziegler.)
"Dispatch knuckleheadedness with Bond-like aplomb." –74mk
by iglew on Jul 23, 2008 9:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
just so i can beat the rush
justin smoak
"It's not my fault your team's so shitty." -Steve Friend, head coach, Chabot College, to Laney College's head coach, who asked why we scored so many runs after we beat Laney 30-3 in 2006
by flipgatey3 on Jul 23, 2008 11:13 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
we drafted him out of high school
"It's not my fault your team's so shitty." -Steve Friend, head coach, Chabot College, to Laney College's head coach, who asked why we scored so many runs after we beat Laney 30-3 in 2006
by flipgatey3 on Jul 24, 2008 12:25 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm just posting
so I can finish a sentence with an exclamation point! I think I’m going to go get a soda!
"PECOTA can pretty much kiss my ass."-Nico
by jeepers on Jul 23, 2008 5:14 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Sodas rule! ::high five::
http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/
by thejd44 on Jul 23, 2008 5:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh yeah, and ...
this was a rebuilding year, remember? The team was supposed to suck. But, you’re right, BB needs to learn to suck better so that he can get better draft picks …
"It's for your own good. Big strong Devo knows whats best for Poppy" -- Mossback
by devo on Jul 23, 2008 5:24 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
No, because then people will kvetch that he didn't draft the best hitter in the country...
... never mind that they couldn’t meet his ridiculous signing bonus quote.
Ryan Sweeney: I probably irrationally embraced him before you did.
by Joey C. on Jul 23, 2008 6:05 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hey -- cut it out! I came here to say that.
Are you the one who planted the transceivers in my fillings?
The meaning of life is not so much 'found,' as it is 'made.' --Opus
by The Dogfather on Jul 23, 2008 6:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not a well articulated argument or well written post but
Beane does seem to come off the Jeremy Brown – Mark Teahen – Steve Stanley type and focused more on hitters with power and speed over the last couple of years. It may be that he’s turned the page two years ago.
When you have a chance to get a guy like Sean Gallagher, you take it!
by WaddellCanseco on Jul 23, 2008 5:49 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I don't think Brown/Teahen/Stanley are really at all comparable to each other
http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/
by thejd44 on Jul 23, 2008 5:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I was selecting high picks from the 2002 draft that the Moneyball book
described as Beane’s discovered market inefficiency.
When you have a chance to get a guy like Sean Gallagher, you take it!
by WaddellCanseco on Jul 23, 2008 6:28 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh, ok
Because Brown was a slow, plodding, OBP guy. Stanley was a no-power, stolen base, high average guy. Well, he was supposed to be that. Only thing they really had in common was patience. I don’t think Beane has deviated from looking for that in young players.
http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/
by thejd44 on Jul 23, 2008 6:34 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Whereas now, we're taking more speedy, athletic guys like Weeks over Wallace
Nino Leyja (who BA didn’t like at all), Dixon, Carlos (who supposedly was a free swinger), etc. Beane seems to have changed to a philosophy more dependent on speed and power rather than OBP.
This makes sense in a low-scoring environment where maximizing your opportunities is more important than wearing down the opposing pitcher. It also may be that younger players are better at executing this than older players. This fits with the emphasis on pre-FA players for the limited budget, the emphasis on defense to lower the scoring environment and save pitchers, and the overall downward trend in scoring in MLB.
When you have a chance to get a guy like Sean Gallagher, you take it!
by WaddellCanseco on Jul 23, 2008 7:28 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think it might be as much a response to the ridiculous injury problems
as anything else—ie the A’s are drafting guys with strong bodies because those are the only guys they can count on actually staying healthy.
I certainly don’t think they’ve gone away from emphasizing plate discipline as the #1 attribute in their hitters—I can’t think of a single high draftee in the past few years that I’d think of as a minus in that category, although obviously Gonzalez is. Sean Doolittle, Josh Horton, Petey Paramore, Matt Sulentic—those are “Moneyball” draftees, and no mistake. Last time I checked Leyja’s stats he was showing a great eye, and Dixon is too far from being a finished product for us to tell but at least seems to have the potential to walk 50+ times a year.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jul 23, 2008 7:36 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
And then there's Emil Brown
When you have a chance to get a guy like Sean Gallagher, you take it!
by WaddellCanseco on Jul 23, 2008 8:11 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Guys at or near the MLB level are a different animal
If a guy has already proven he can succeed without a high walk rate, that’s one thing.
But having a bad walk rate at low levels is a good predictor that a guy is going to be a crummy hitter.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jul 23, 2008 8:36 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
So which one is Emil Brown?
When you have a chance to get a guy like Sean Gallagher, you take it!
by WaddellCanseco on Jul 23, 2008 9:12 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
He's in the "near-replacement roster filler" category
Although he used to walk more than he does now.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jul 23, 2008 10:34 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Seems to fit nicely with how to combat the Angels version of how to play baseball
Of course this requires you to agree with Nico’s main page post
by Lafayette Scotsman on Jul 23, 2008 9:59 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm interested to see how Beane adapts to the (mostly) post-PED era
But I don’t think we’ll know until we see exactly how the game changes. It’s not a given that power numbers will continue to trend downward.
http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/
by thejd44 on Jul 24, 2008 1:41 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Excuse Me, Mark Twain!
Not a well articulated or well written comment, but….
Shane F. Wray
by Goldzone on Jul 23, 2008 6:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well it was hard to understand what you were trying to say.
When you have a chance to get a guy like Sean Gallagher, you take it!
by WaddellCanseco on Jul 23, 2008 7:28 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Let me guess: We just went a on a losing streak, didn't we?
I love the fact that in baseball, a sport in which strategy is (or should be) built on the concept of “what happens more often than not,” people can point to isolated incidents and say, “well, shit, that doesn’t work.” One minute, you’re trying to explain to a friend that Gary Matthews, Jr. is overrated, the next minute, he hits a home run and your friend is screaming in Will Ferrel fashion “THAT JUST HAPPENED!”
Or you’re trying to tell him or her that bunting over the guy on first isn’t all that smart with zero outs, down by 2, and a non-pitcher up. Then the next batter after the bunt hits a bomb, tying the game up, and your friend is dancing under a ticker tape parade of confetti made out of Moneyball first editions (as Joe Morgan has so often dreamed of doing).
The hypothesis that Moneyball doesn’t work: Lack of winning after being forced to field a squad made up almost entirely of subpar or unready players because of injuries in what was supposed to be a year marked by less talent at the MLB level due to rebuilding, anyway?
Pard, that dog just won’t hunt.
Ryan Sweeney: I probably irrationally embraced him before you did.
by Joey C. on Jul 23, 2008 6:07 PM PDT reply actions 4 recs
Agreed
There’s a difference between fielding a team that you think fits your mold and fielding a team that is essentially a “sub” team. Make no mistake, this isn’t Beane’s idea of a great lineup.
On the other hand, whose fault is it that the A’s have little in the hitting department? I think Beane and the A’s scouts have to take the blame for what the ball club is, because they failed to build the necessary depth to deal with this predictable situation.
by oaktownmario on Jul 23, 2008 6:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
make this one green
+1
"It's not my fault your team's so shitty." -Steve Friend, head coach, Chabot College, to Laney College's head coach, who asked why we scored so many runs after we beat Laney 30-3 in 2006
by flipgatey3 on Jul 23, 2008 6:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You have no concept of what "moneyball" is....
It’s not that Beane wants Murton bating cleanup… it’s that he’s the best cleanup hitter we can have for league minimum.
"I'm not going to buy my kids an encyclopedia. Let them walk to school like I did." -Yogi Berra
by brenarlo on Jul 23, 2008 6:26 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I love overreaction to a losing streak :)
The facts are that Beane is a proven winner, and that even this year the A’s are performing exceptionally well. They are 52-48, but their RPI is #9 in MLB, they’re Run Differential is +60 which is 5th in the majors, and had they a few more clutch hits/pitches (e.g. Huston Street’s 5 blown saves), they could be 58-42 (their expected W-L). They are a young team, and they have sustained several injuries. Hannahan and the crew are filling in for injured players. And your point about Cust is just ridiculous. A lot of players would not be in MLB if not for the DH. Cust is #1 in walks in the entire major leagues, I think that’s valuable. Beane correctly understands that they’re not going to beat Anaheim or Boston this year (or next year), and he’s trying to build a perennial pennant winner. Just check out their Minor Leages for a second and see how many guys are tearing it up. Be patient my friend, you’ll live longer.
by warriordrp on Jul 23, 2008 6:26 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Your right
It’s not working, what was I thinking.
-signed Billy Beane
Enjoy the game
by DCinWC on Jul 23, 2008 6:27 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
those 6 or 7 years in the playoffs this decade weren't good enough i guess...
"I'm not going to buy my kids an encyclopedia. Let them walk to school like I did." -Yogi Berra
by brenarlo on Jul 23, 2008 6:28 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Five, actually.
This year will mark missing the playoffs for the fourth time in five tries.
"PECOTA can pretty much kiss my ass."-Nico
by jeepers on Jul 23, 2008 8:16 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Pessimist
When you have a chance to get a guy like Sean Gallagher, you take it!
by WaddellCanseco on Jul 23, 2008 8:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
you spelled "you're" wrong
sorry to be a d-bag, but i can’t stand that
"It's not my fault your team's so shitty." -Steve Friend, head coach, Chabot College, to Laney College's head coach, who asked why we scored so many runs after we beat Laney 30-3 in 2006
by flipgatey3 on Jul 23, 2008 6:38 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Are/were you, by chance, an English major?
Imagine waking up at 2 a,m. and thinking of Bobby on Greyhound somewhere in the Texas wastelands..."Does your little iddy biddy back hurt, Bobby?! Does it, you SOB?!" -Alox
by Leopold Bloom on Jul 23, 2008 7:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Because you have to major in English
to notice a missing apostrophe…..
"Dispatch knuckleheadedness with Bond-like aplomb." –74mk
by iglew on Jul 23, 2008 9:58 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
naw
i’m a kinesiology major/psychology minor, actually…it’s just a pet peeve of mine. how hard is it to determine whether replacing “your” with “you are” makes sense before you put the thought out for all to see? i just can’t stand that it’s so easy, but yet so many people get it wrong so often.
/rant
"It's not my fault your team's so shitty." -Steve Friend, head coach, Chabot College, to Laney College's head coach, who asked why we scored so many runs after we beat Laney 30-3 in 2006
by flipgatey3 on Jul 23, 2008 11:17 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I support all English language-related rants
Next, can we please get one on why people who pluralize a word with an apostrophe should have a finger chopped off? Or why people who use “seen” as the past tense of “see” (instead of “saw,” as “seen” is actually the past participle) should be mocked for their insufficient education?
I think this should be an entire fanpost.
http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/
by thejd44 on Jul 24, 2008 1:43 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
or
the fact that you can’t loose a game? i hate that one too.
"It's not my fault your team's so shitty." -Steve Friend, head coach, Chabot College, to Laney College's head coach, who asked why we scored so many runs after we beat Laney 30-3 in 2006
by flipgatey3 on Jul 24, 2008 1:48 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh would you just be quite already
:)
http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/
by thejd44 on Jul 24, 2008 1:50 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
i think you mean
allready
"It's not my fault your team's so shitty." -Steve Friend, head coach, Chabot College, to Laney College's head coach, who asked why we scored so many runs after we beat Laney 30-3 in 2006
by flipgatey3 on Jul 24, 2008 1:51 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
there/their
Drive’s me fuking crazee
I'll try not to swear.
by Tony on Jul 24, 2008 1:51 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
good one
this one goes a little deeper, but when i coached an 11U baseball team this summer, there was a team called TABU. this stood for “try and beat us”, which is grammatically incorrect. it should be “try to beat us”.
maybe i should be an Englishmajor. ;)
"It's not my fault your team's so shitty." -Steve Friend, head coach, Chabot College, to Laney College's head coach, who asked why we scored so many runs after we beat Laney 30-3 in 2006
by flipgatey3 on Jul 24, 2008 1:54 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe they're telling teams what will happen, and not offering a challenge
As in, “We’re not that good, so if you try, you will beat us.” In that sense, “Try, and beat us” (I’m not sure on if that comma actually belongs there, but I’m including it for effect) might work.
I suspect they did not think about it that much.
http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/
by thejd44 on Jul 24, 2008 2:10 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
they are actually
the #1 team in california for the age group
"It's not my fault your team's so shitty." -Steve Friend, head coach, Chabot College, to Laney College's head coach, who asked why we scored so many runs after we beat Laney 30-3 in 2006
by flipgatey3 on Jul 24, 2008 10:24 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I seen that, like, three times today
I generally bemoan the profusion of Mr Sabermetric Sporks in the Scrabble ranks who don't know the meaning or usage of 50% of the words they use. -monkeyball
by JediLeroy on Jul 24, 2008 8:33 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Definitely an entire fanpost
if you’re going to bring up “I seen”. Do you realize where that leads?
"Dispatch knuckleheadedness with Bond-like aplomb." –74mk
by iglew on Jul 24, 2008 10:04 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Probably nowhere, since so many people don't seem to realize they're doing ti wrong
http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/
by thejd44 on Jul 24, 2008 11:26 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
"I seen" is part of a grammar
which is completely developed and logically consistent, but differs from the dialect which is accepted as standard.
Many years ago, the City of Oakland tried to use this fact as a way to finagle more education funds from the state of California. This resulted in an enormous national controversy, largely based on ignorance of the facts of the case.
"Dispatch knuckleheadedness with Bond-like aplomb." –74mk
by iglew on Jul 25, 2008 9:53 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Depends on who is using it
I’m not actually some Miss Fidditch or anything. I actually am intrigued by different dialects and cultural tweaks to language; however, I see a difference between certain groups using certain “wrong” language (most of the time intentionally) and people using a word wrong just because they don’t know any better.
http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/
by thejd44 on Jul 25, 2008 10:39 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
wrongly
Who needs competence as long as everyone smiles? @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jul 25, 2008 10:44 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
by the way
people who have just as many fAnPoStS as comments…yeah.
"It's not my fault your team's so shitty." -Steve Friend, head coach, Chabot College, to Laney College's head coach, who asked why we scored so many runs after we beat Laney 30-3 in 2006
by flipgatey3 on Jul 23, 2008 6:39 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Christ alive.
God I hate humanity.
Children, until we have taught them better, will be perfectly happy with a seasonal round of games in which conkers succeeds hopscotch.
by salb918 on Jul 23, 2008 6:40 PM PDT reply actions 2 recs
Do like Nico does
Switch to goats.
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on Jul 23, 2008 9:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
So that's why Nico challenged Chupacabra to a cage match...
http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/
by thejd44 on Jul 24, 2008 1:46 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why would anyone new ever post here?
The cliquishness clubiness of this site has gotten sickening in the last year or so.
It’s completely predictable that given this guy’s well-intentioned, legitimate, and, yeah okay, somewhat inaccurate post, about ten or so of the self-inflated, self-important, imperious gasbags who rule this site would take him to task—either lecturing him about Moneyball, dismissing his evaluation of talent, or mocking his argument.
I’ve come to hate this place for the predictability of all that.
And the truth is the writer has a point. Beane has seemed to fail at bringing in or drafting offense. And part of that may be the philosophy of excessive focus on OBP and a commitment to not being aggressive.
by RLangford on Jul 23, 2008 6:56 PM PDT reply actions 2 recs
+1
Except for the part about “hating this place” – why not love it for the people who don’t do what you’re describing (I think they’re called “females” but actually quite a few of us penisoids too)? Where’s the love, RLangford – where’s the love?
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
by Nico on Jul 23, 2008 7:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
AGREED.
I swear, some people around here must be on the A’s PR staff’s payroll.
What about Barry?
"Barry who?" Forst said, and I felt like I was in the middle of a knock-knock joke.
by KMoAsFan on Jul 23, 2008 7:05 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
What! I can get paid for this?
When you have a chance to get a guy like Sean Gallagher, you take it!
by WaddellCanseco on Jul 23, 2008 7:30 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed with an !!
I still read the site daily but am no longer compelled to post. The site used to be so fun with funny takes on the A’s and outside the box comments, now it just seems like the rep has gotten out more people have joined over the last two years who truly believe their elitist opinion matters. Now its bust out your baseball prospectus, open excel and pick a random page in your thesaurus so you can do your best to try and make somebody else look/feel stupid. I think 1 in 3 posts are worth my time as I have become accustomed to living around the Mendoza line. That being said, much like heroin, I still chase the AN dragon.
The first rule of Oakland is - you do not talk about injuries. The second rule of Oakland is - you DO NOT talk about injuries." - Larry Davis
by norcalfan on Jul 24, 2008 12:10 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I meant 1 in 5. I suck :(
The first rule of Oakland is - you do not talk about injuries. The second rule of Oakland is - you DO NOT talk about injuries." - Larry Davis
by norcalfan on Jul 24, 2008 12:11 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
im thinking
the culture cycles to a certain extent. read the posts during a time when there are many things to argue about (slump, trading top players, chasing first place) and you will find dissonance.
legend has it, however, that if you read during the middle of the off-season/spring training, and wit and hilarity abound.
by oakinboston on Jul 24, 2008 5:56 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
you may be right about it being clique-y
and i tend to agree a bit, but just think about if people were allowed to speak like those at LL, etc. it would be an absolute mess.
"It's not my fault your team's so shitty." -Steve Friend, head coach, Chabot College, to Laney College's head coach, who asked why we scored so many runs after we beat Laney 30-3 in 2006
by flipgatey3 on Jul 23, 2008 7:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It wasn't all that bad.
The poster received a lot more support for his position than I would have thought, especially in light of the title of his post. Only one response seemed overly acerbic. Maybe two….one may have just been a casual pronouncement on all mankind, which I happen to agree with 22 out of 24 hours on any given day for a wide variety of reasons other than baseball.
I was thinking about your last point though. Has there been to much emphasis placed on working the pitcher for a walk? Or are the A’s just not good enough to capitilize on the one good pitch they’re going to see in a given AB? It does seem like the A’s philosophical approach to hitting should undergo a serious review and possible revision. Times….they are a changin….
"You may glory in a team triumphant, but you fall in love with a team in defeat."--The Boys of Summer
by alox on Jul 23, 2008 7:12 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The A's just need some better players at doing what they do best
Jack Hannahan is a Billy Beane type player, but not a very good one. He’s a semi-serviceable replacement for injured players. It’s not like Beane thinks he’s sliced bread #2.
It’s possible to have better players who do what these guys do, but they don’t suck so much. And some of the guys on the current roster might actually be better players in the near future and it won’t really be an issue anymore.
http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/
by thejd44 on Jul 24, 2008 1:49 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sadly, the A's seem to have reverted to doing
what they do best. Stranding runners. I realize the strategy behind the philosophy, but it’s so frustrating when it fails to come to fruition time after time.
Sometimes I think you have to play the cards your dealt, injuries and all. At least if they went up there hacking my level of frustration would drop considerably.
But in the end, I know you’re right. I just hate it.
"You may glory in a team triumphant, but you fall in love with a team in defeat."--The Boys of Summer
by alox on Jul 24, 2008 1:52 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
+1
The problem isn’t necessarily the one true Jack Hannahan – right now it’s a squad made up of about 8 Hannahan’s, a DFA and 3-Outcomes. In the years where the A’s offense actually worked, we still had a fair number of less-than-ideal “Billy Beane type player(s)”, but there was always at least one difference maker who symbiotically made everyone around him more dangerous. There were still an awful lot of times where runner’s would be left stranded in scoring position – but a few times a week, the odds would swing in our favor.
Most recently, “that guy” was Frank Thomas, benefitting Swish, Bradley, et al. I wouldn’t be shocked if DFA/3-Outcomes benefit similarly from his return in the second half.
by elhefe on Jul 24, 2008 2:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
When Chavez came back and was healthy for about 3 weeks
He was producing, and the entire lineup seemed to just be that much better. And Chavez really isn’t an impact bat anymore. Right now the lineup is basically Sweeney, Suzuki, Cust, and 6 guys. That’s just not going to cut it, and it’s not like Beane wants all 6 of those guys in the everyday lineup. There just isn’t much choice at this point.
http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/
by thejd44 on Jul 24, 2008 8:28 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That is a rather amusing comment,
given the acid vehemence with which you tend to express your opinions.
by 74mk on Jul 23, 2008 7:35 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hypocrisy...
da da dee da dum…
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jul 23, 2008 7:41 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Predictable you'd chime in
Because you know that you’re one of the voices here that most tramples on those whose insights might be a little too simplistic.
by RLangford on Jul 23, 2008 7:59 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
For me, for PT, and no doubt for you, too
by RLangford on Jul 23, 2008 8:13 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
No doubt.
But that’s like saying we all have bellybuttons or eardrums.
Some blind spots are more stark than others, and your comment above struck me as an extreme example. I mean, you’ve got to be kidding, right? Like half your posts drip with dismissive disdain.
That doesn’t mean I don’t enjoy your contributions. I do. But you taking the community to task over tone is laughable.
by 74mk on Jul 23, 2008 8:36 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comfort the afflicted, afflict the comfortable
And if you can point out the posters I ripped, go ahead. What you’re saying is nonsense. Nothing like half my posts drip with dismissive disdain. That’s just a something you’re throwing out there that has nothing to do with the truth.
But you’re not hypocritically disdainful, right?
by RLangford on Jul 23, 2008 8:56 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
"I'm calling some people out but I'm not really calling them out because I'm not naming them."
Last of the Ninth - Photography Site / jamesvenes.com - Blog
by Flashfire on Jul 23, 2008 9:05 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Posters I ripped
I meant in the alleged acidic history he’s claiming I have. I was pretty up front about who I was criticizing in this post.
Or would it be better for you if I’d written
“I don’t even understand what you’re saying but I’ll continue to write stuff in quotes under it.”
under your post in the brilliant style that you seem to have perfected.
by RLangford on Jul 23, 2008 9:20 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
lol
now that was a good response. Like the initial post, it shall be rec’d.
"Behind both goals were banners bearing the word 'Calamity' while another carried the warning: 'You will drown in the Bosphorous.'"--Threats made by Turkish soccer fans to the British from a match in 2003. Tribute to their miraculous run in Euro 2008.
RIP Tim Russert, quintessential Buffalonian.
by Cutthemullet on Jul 26, 2008 12:46 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wait ...
You did click on that link, right?
“I haven’t visited these game threads in a while. A lot of you are complete idiots.”
I’ll cop to the passive-aggressiveness. And the cheesy aphorisms. All true. But seriously: You really don’t see even a tiny kernel of hypocrisy in your original post?
by 74mk on Jul 23, 2008 9:23 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Okay, truce
There’s a little hypocrisy, but it’s inevitable when you are angry about those in power (the insiders here) whacking on someone who has less power and is not such an insider. It’s inevitable that I’d do some-or try to do some-whacking myself. So, yeah, I cop to some unavoidable hypocrisy that I worsened by my choice of words.
As for the one comment you cherry pick. I know exactly when it was made. I’d pretty much stopped coming here because the game threads were so unbelievably reactionary. It was the game in which Cust dropped the can of corn flyball against the Angels. I came in to say that Duchscherer was a little responsible for the inning too. But what I saw was some unbelivable invective directed at Cust. And more. That’s what my comment was owed to. Another defense it turns out.
(And of course as it turned out, Cust was the star of the game in the end.)
But that post you linked doesn’t define me. Half my post don’t drip with dismissive disdan. Not even close.
So are we cool now. I hope so.
by RLangford on Jul 23, 2008 9:36 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Could I get a list of those insiders in power, please?
I’m kinda curious to know if my name is on the list.
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on Jul 23, 2008 9:56 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You're definitely one
But not lethal. Grover, you don’t know me, but like many here I anticipate all your posts and am very grateful for what you write.
by RLangford on Jul 23, 2008 10:02 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Powerful yet non-lethal
Kinda like a Taser, maybe?
Here’s my problem with the whole “insider power” discussion. I’d agree I’m an insider, I’ve been on AN since nearly the beginning and Hell, I’m a front page writer! But I’ve got no more power over the citizens of AN then the newest newbie. I can flag comments that I think are a CGV.
That’s it.
Now it’s true that the site managers are folks who have been around for a long time but that seems fairly logical, Blez is going to ask for help from people who have shown a strong interest in AN. It’s not like he can recruit folks from other sites to come in and moderate! He can’t contact SmackMyAss7 over at Swirly.com and ask him (or her) to help moderate a site to which they have little interest.
A lot of people have said that I get a pass on borderline comments because of my tenure. Not so. I get a pass because I know exactly where the line is and I do my best not to cross it because when I do… I get nailed. I can be vicious in my attacks on the ideas presented but that’s OK. Lines are crossed when you attack the poster. I’ve seen a few comments that say the diary was crap. That’s allowed. I haven’t seen anything that I consider an attack against the poster himself.
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on Jul 23, 2008 10:35 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I got a copy of the power rankings last week g,
you’ve gone down a few spots since fire season started-but I still have faith in you.
"Camelot sure fell apart, didn't it?"-Steve McCatty
by 5Aces on Jul 24, 2008 9:47 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sure, definitely
I didn’t go hunting through the AN archives for evidence of disdainful behavior on your part or anything – I just remembered that particular comment, and was freshly amused, given your original post here and the obvious contrast.
The “drip with dismissive disdain” comment was absolutely hyperbole, intended to be read as such, and honestly I used it mainly because I kind of liked its alliterative aspect.
I wish you would post more, actually … lots of new traffic here on AN, and while, you know, the more the merrier, sometimes I think the astute posters (of which you are clearly one) get drowned out a bit.
by 74mk on Jul 23, 2008 11:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
"comfort the afflicted, afflict the comfortable"
I’d make that my sigline before I’d dismiss it as a “cheesy aphorism.” I know I’d probably never be able to set foot into Istanbul if I did (see current one), but, well, the consequences there would be perefctly consistent with the aphorism I’m defending—I’d be a comfortable American being afflicted by a drowning in the Bosphorus (which would be inevitable given my swimming skills…in honor of Batman, I’ll invoke a line from Christian Blae’s best movie, The Machinist, as a defense for why I struggle so: “if you were any thinner, you wouldn’t exist.” And yes, believe it or not, that line was actually said to Bale’s character in that movie, not by him…he lost something like 80 lbs. to fill that role. Can’t knock the effectiveness of the coffee and apples diet.)Anyway, when all this comes to pass, my martyrdom for the saying, that is…hero to RLangford, pariah to 74mk. But you wouldn’t be able to knock me on the grounds of hypocrisy, now, would you?
"Behind both goals were banners bearing the word 'Calamity' while another carried the warning: 'You will drown in the Bosphorous.'"--Threats made by Turkish soccer fans to the British from a match in 2003. Tribute to their miraculous run in Euro 2008.
RIP Tim Russert, quintessential Buffalonian.
by Cutthemullet on Jul 26, 2008 12:59 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
And no it's not like saying we all have bellybuttons
What I’m saying is that your passive-aggressive acidity isn’t hidden very well behind cheesy aphorisms.
by RLangford on Jul 23, 2008 9:03 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
heh
I now see my post was misguided. Hard to follow conversations after a certain amount of replies and interruptions by people like me. Goodbye, chronological order
"Behind both goals were banners bearing the word 'Calamity' while another carried the warning: 'You will drown in the Bosphorous.'"--Threats made by Turkish soccer fans to the British from a match in 2003. Tribute to their miraculous run in Euro 2008.
RIP Tim Russert, quintessential Buffalonian.
by Cutthemullet on Jul 26, 2008 1:17 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
"those whose insights might be a little too simplistic"
Such as, say, day-game-thread trolls who don’t understand Cust’s value and engage in relentless we’re-gonna-die negativity?
Who needs competence as long as everyone smiles? @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jul 24, 2008 12:49 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You mean we're not going to die?
Huzzah!
When you have a chance to get a guy like Sean Gallagher, you take it!
by WaddellCanseco on Jul 24, 2008 8:32 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
can one engage in negativity?
People engage in actions. Negativity is a word used to describe a prevailing emotional state, or climate/atmosphere I suppose if we’re talking about a collective attitude as opposed to a personal one. Anyway, substitute, say, “self-pity” for “negativity” and it seems pretty clear that the answer to the question I asked in the title of the post is no.
And no, LeopoldBloom, I wasn’t an English major. I’m just trying to afflict the comfortable, heh.
"Behind both goals were banners bearing the word 'Calamity' while another carried the warning: 'You will drown in the Bosphorous.'"--Threats made by Turkish soccer fans to the British from a match in 2003. Tribute to their miraculous run in Euro 2008.
RIP Tim Russert, quintessential Buffalonian.
by Cutthemullet on Jul 26, 2008 1:09 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
"I don't like how some of you act, so I'm going to act like that."
Last of the Ninth - Photography Site / jamesvenes.com - Blog
by Flashfire on Jul 23, 2008 8:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
What the hell are you talking about
I was trying to defend a poster many of you were all smugly dismissing.
by RLangford on Jul 23, 2008 8:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Try reading what you wrote again
“I don’t like how some of the people here take posters to task. Gasbags!”
Last of the Ninth - Photography Site / jamesvenes.com - Blog
by Flashfire on Jul 23, 2008 9:04 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Take NEW or NAIVE posters to task
Do you get it now? I was asking “Why would anybody new ever post here?” That was the title of the post. I was saying that we’re a little harsh on fanposts like the one at the top. And, yeah, in the process it meant I was criticizing the people being harsh.
And in your mind, you get excited and think it’s an insight to point out that calling harsh people harsh in a harsh way is ironic or hypocritical.
And that was an insight to get excited about in 5th grade maybe, but now it’s something you should have moved beyond.
by RLangford on Jul 23, 2008 9:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Except for it being the truth
You can easily make your own points without resorting to the same type of stuff you’re complaining about others doing, and I don’t need you telling me what should or shouldn’t be moved past by now just because you don’t like the response YOU’RE getting.
As it is, it seems this place has been getting a lot of people lately who make new accounts just to post stupid crap, and some people here are getting tired of it. I don’t think it’s out of line to be annoyed with stuff like that.
Last of the Ninth - Photography Site / jamesvenes.com - Blog
by Flashfire on Jul 23, 2008 9:36 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
True enough about the new posters
But I felt like goldzone took some time and had some real pride in what he had posted, which wasn’t all that bad. And then when I saw the, for me, predictable scorn directed his way, I reacted. You’d say overreacted. Fair enough. I probably did overreact a little. But still, instead of my hypocrisy, isn’t the larger problem here that there is a group of insiders that, as revealed in this thread, feel entitled to be dismissive and condescending when the better path would be to engage the writer in a conversation (which, I know, I should have done as well).
by RLangford on Jul 23, 2008 9:43 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, that's probably true for the most part
Last of the Ninth - Photography Site / jamesvenes.com - Blog
by Flashfire on Jul 23, 2008 9:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks RLangford!
I really am surprised a simple post about player reviews would be trashed like it was. My reference to Moneyball was probably not appropriate to be coupled with a review of current players on the roster. I should’nt have tied it together, even though some of the players being reviewed are “moneyballers”. The anger in A’s fans right now is at an all-time high!
Shane F. Wray
by Goldzone on Jul 24, 2008 12:23 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
you seemed pretty angry
with all those exclamation points…it seemed like a rant at times almost. but yeah, i agree…i don’t see the “moneyball” connection with every single player listed
"It's not my fault your team's so shitty." -Steve Friend, head coach, Chabot College, to Laney College's head coach, who asked why we scored so many runs after we beat Laney 30-3 in 2006
by flipgatey3 on Jul 24, 2008 12:28 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You haven't read many of his posts, have you
I think it’s safer to assume that he is speaking really, really mildly when he DOESN’T use an exclamation point, and normally when he does.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jul 24, 2008 1:30 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
well actually, i confess
that i stopped reading this one after about ten exclamation points to end a sentence in a row
"It's not my fault your team's so shitty." -Steve Friend, head coach, Chabot College, to Laney College's head coach, who asked why we scored so many runs after we beat Laney 30-3 in 2006
by flipgatey3 on Jul 24, 2008 1:32 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Anger displacement on AN
We all need some group therapy instead of taking out on others. It’s gonna be ok guys/girls… I BLAME BB for this….haha jk
by rightbackin on Jul 24, 2008 12:34 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
God, that second paragraph is so true
Look. It’s not that I, salb, Flashfire, etc etc are trying to scare away newbies. Far from it. If someone shows up and says “hi, I’m new around here but I like the A’s, what’s this site about” I (and most others) will try to be as helpful and polite as possible.
What I (and I gather others) find irksome is people who sign up and immediately launch into some incoherent, borderline illiterate rant about something or other—a phenomenon which has gotten totally out of control in the last few weeks or so (basically starting with the Harden trade). It’s the blog equivalent of just randomly starting to yell about some minor issue on a street corner. Illegal, no—impolite, annoying, worthy of being smacked down, yes.
Frankly, I think a lot of people’s patience is getting worn really thin—and posts like this one, which could really use a copy editor and expresses a position against the mainstream to some extent, but is at least long enough and contains enough content to be a legitimate FP, get caught in the backlash.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jul 23, 2008 10:46 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
A good example being that briandouglas guy...
...who came in the other day talking about “magic Beane” this, “drinking Kool-Aid” that, then he went into us being thin-skinned and compared himself to Bush at an ACLU rally.
Er, what?
Last of the Ninth - Photography Site / jamesvenes.com - Blog
by Flashfire on Jul 23, 2008 10:56 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
there you go passing judgment again.
I don’t ever remember voting for you to be a moderator. You may not be trying to scare away newbies, after all, how could you even see them from atop your soapbox? You are the hall monitor in jr. high.
The first rule of Oakland is - you do not talk about injuries. The second rule of Oakland is - you DO NOT talk about injuries." - Larry Davis
by norcalfan on Jul 24, 2008 12:23 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
dude
you are missing the point.
all the “why aren’t we going for it this year” and “let’s trade for a hitter” and “fire beane” posts are getting SO OLD. most of them are not well-thought out, and frankly, i feel like 75% or more are from trolls (bluemoon, vegasgm, etc.).
that’s what paul is saying. it gets annoying to read a heart-on-sleeve fanpost every day, when it’s obvious to many that the move was for the better.
"It's not my fault your team's so shitty." -Steve Friend, head coach, Chabot College, to Laney College's head coach, who asked why we scored so many runs after we beat Laney 30-3 in 2006
by flipgatey3 on Jul 24, 2008 12:30 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
and by
“a” heart-on-sleeve post, i mean about 129415795305 of them.
zonis, thanks again for your thread.
"It's not my fault your team's so shitty." -Steve Friend, head coach, Chabot College, to Laney College's head coach, who asked why we scored so many runs after we beat Laney 30-3 in 2006
by flipgatey3 on Jul 24, 2008 12:32 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
OK
What part of “I do not give a s**t about your opinion” have you not grasped?
You can stop replying to my posts with this crap whenever you feel like it.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jul 24, 2008 1:35 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Interesting bit in his profile
“I am in favor of wood bats in the majors and aluminium bats to knock Paul Thomas off of his high horse.”
Last of the Ninth - Photography Site / jamesvenes.com - Blog
by Flashfire on Jul 24, 2008 1:36 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm glad you noted that
Normally I am not in favor of attempting to get people banned, but I will cheerfully do so for someone whose sole purpose on the site is to attack and denigrate me.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jul 24, 2008 1:38 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Relax Paul.
Your the one who got to him. Besides, it’s funny. It’s quite honorable to make someone’s profile in such a manner. At least according to me….but I’m sort of twisted.
"You may glory in a team triumphant, but you fall in love with a team in defeat."--The Boys of Summer
by alox on Jul 24, 2008 1:40 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I just flagged him for it, too.
Last of the Ninth - Photography Site / jamesvenes.com - Blog
by Flashfire on Jul 24, 2008 1:41 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Somehow,
I get the feeling Nico and company are going to start their morning off with a ball busting laugh. I hope he’s not drinking coffee when he reads the flag or you might end up owing him a monitor. There are worse ways to wake up.
"You may glory in a team triumphant, but you fall in love with a team in defeat."--The Boys of Summer
by alox on Jul 24, 2008 2:32 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not the sole purpose by any means
Just like you find people so irksome for their opinions, and make sure to belittle said persons, I find it irksome that you feel the need to judge people and denigrate them behind your keyboard. So now I can’t feel irksome? Typical. Look back a little bit PT. You are the only person in over four years that has literally made me want to stop reading a site that has become my morning coffee. Don’t flatter yourself, I have no purpose other than to read about the A’s from A’s fans. Problem is I can’t seem to read single posts without having YOU attack somebody and I am certain I am not the only one! Is Stanford really so boring that you have to act as if you created this site? Simply put, this site was infinitely more enjoyable before you came along / started posting or whatever.
The first rule of Oakland is - you do not talk about injuries. The second rule of Oakland is - you DO NOT talk about injuries." - Larry Davis
by norcalfan on Jul 24, 2008 5:23 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Whatever your opinion of PT is, I'm pretty sure it's crossing the line...
...to talk about hitting him with a bat.
Last of the Ninth - Photography Site / jamesvenes.com - Blog
by Flashfire on Jul 24, 2008 9:24 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
7 out of your last 10 comments
have been personal attacks on me.
Your sole purpose here is to attack me. That is undeniable fact. You have apparently decided to kamikaze your account against me in the hopes that both of us will be banned. So be it, but I will not bite on that.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jul 24, 2008 12:16 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I totally agree with the last sentence
"Behind both goals were banners bearing the word 'Calamity' while another carried the warning: 'You will drown in the Bosphorous.'"--Threats made by Turkish soccer fans to the British from a match in 2003. Tribute to their miraculous run in Euro 2008.
RIP Tim Russert, quintessential Buffalonian.
by Cutthemullet on Jul 26, 2008 1:24 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
My apologies.
The first rule of Oakland is - you do not talk about injuries. The second rule of Oakland is - you DO NOT talk about injuries." - Larry Davis
by norcalfan on Jul 25, 2008 8:21 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That is fucking hilarious
Come on, lighten up. The criticism is uncalled for, definitely so above where PaulThomas is self-effacing, honest, and apologetic—and then gets inexplicably bashed by norcalfan—but if that’s in his profile, he’s at least got his sense of humor to redeem him.
by RLangford on Jul 24, 2008 1:56 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
All this bitching is making me nostalgic
For the good old AN days when everyone would gang up on one person and ride them mercilessly until they left.
Ah…..teamwork
I'll try not to swear.
by Tony on Jul 24, 2008 2:01 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
uh. wow.
Duly noted (and added to).
Who needs competence as long as everyone smiles? @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jul 24, 2008 10:05 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Calling My Post Stupid Crap Is A Little Too Much!
Are you disagreeing with my player reviews? If you are that’s great,but another person’s opinion that differs from yours is not “stupid crap”. It reminds me of the late George Carlin’s line… “Move your crap over, so I can put my stuff down”.
Shane F. Wray
by Goldzone on Jul 24, 2008 12:40 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I didn't call your post "stupid crap."
I said there have been a lot of new people creating accounts to post stupid crap.
Last of the Ninth - Photography Site / jamesvenes.com - Blog
by Flashfire on Jul 24, 2008 1:02 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
vegasgm, bluemoon...etc
"It's not my fault your team's so shitty." -Steve Friend, head coach, Chabot College, to Laney College's head coach, who asked why we scored so many runs after we beat Laney 30-3 in 2006
by flipgatey3 on Jul 24, 2008 1:33 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I can dig a lot of your player reviews
but to use the small sample size of this season as the crux of your argument that Moneyball has failed, has justifiably ruffled some feathers. The back of the AN shirt even says, “In Billy We Trust.”
At the start of the season, many of us here did not expect much because we believed this would be a true rebuilding year. Because of that, I’ve thought it was unfair to Billy and the A’s brass to criticize so much when the A’s have been playing surprisingly good baseball for the limited cast of characters we are able to field. Shouldn’t that be indicative of how well the future A’s can play and not a damning of a whole team’s management policy?
Would it be better to trot out the A’s of the 90’s to play games for the team? Of course not.
People unduly crucify Beane for trading away great A’s talent just to stay fairly good in the future. The one thing you can say about the A’s is that you can see the moves the club makes and know they are being played with confidence. In full rebuilding more, most of us are confident that this will pay off in the close future and not far off into some unknown future decades from now.
So far, I’ve enjoyed how moneyball works because it is different and it has given us something different than the other team’s in the league. It is the sense that when the chips are down, the A’s are really just getting ready to strike hard when the timing is right.
Green Hulk Fists
by oaklandSMASH on Jul 24, 2008 1:11 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
you weren't "criticizing the people being harsh" -- you were name-calling and engaging in ad hominem attacks
Who needs competence as long as everyone smiles? @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jul 24, 2008 12:51 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Great that you could join in
after this portion of the thread had pretty much been resolved amicably.
Look, what are you saying exactly, that it wasn’t okay for me to say what I did? Did you bother to read what some of the other posters—not trolls, not serial diarists, just fans not blessed with your education and erudition—had to say? Don’t you think it is reasonable to defend the original diarist? Isn’t the issue I brought up a bit bigger than you tsk-tsking me about my name-calling?
I’m sorry you’re bothered by the phrase “self-inflated, self-important, imperious gasbags,” but I thought it needed to be said.
by RLangford on Jul 24, 2008 1:25 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
well, regardless of the content or idea, it was a clear violation of the CGs, and I flagged you for it
Who needs competence as long as everyone smiles? @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jul 24, 2008 1:34 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
and it was the escalation from that name-calling ...
... that resulted in the situation that needed to be resolved.
Who needs competence as long as everyone smiles? @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jul 24, 2008 1:36 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You flagged me for it?
Honestly, I could look it up, but I don’t even want to know what that means. You sound like the Reese Witherspoon character in Election, and with about as much credibility.
It’s great when you try to defend one of the have nots, and speak out a little to harshly against the haves, one of those haves makes sure to put you in your place.
What I’d like to say to you to end this I can’t because you’ll “flag” me again or something, so I’ll just give you the reference—you’ll know it. It’s what Ricky Roma says to the office manager Williamson at the end of Mamet’s Glengarry Glen Ross.
by RLangford on Jul 24, 2008 1:47 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Election
I hated that fucking movie
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on Jul 24, 2008 1:48 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
This thread is getting good
I mention a movie and an f-bomb is dropped.
The director Alexander Payne’s barely hidden scorn for most of humanity bothers me. Didn’t really like About Schmidt, didn’t really like Sideways, but liked Election a lot.
by RLangford on Jul 24, 2008 2:01 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
agree with you 100% on Payne and the particulars
Who needs competence as long as everyone smiles? @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jul 24, 2008 10:27 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It is a potential cause of receiving a "strike"
which, if you get three of them, results in getting banned from the site. I am somewhat familiar with this procedure, as my activity on the site was notably… um, more restrained (some would say “more boring”) for four months or so earlier this year when I had two of them.
Incidentally, mods, I just changed my email account to one I will probably be reading more regularly. So, uh, any additional strikes should go to the new one.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jul 24, 2008 2:16 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
uh, dude ...
Look, I like you. And you made a good argument. But including personal insults in the argument ain’t cool. And it’s very specifically against the rules of the site. If you feel that’s too heavy the Hand of the Man harshing your mellow, that’s too bad.
Who needs competence as long as everyone smiles? @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jul 24, 2008 10:26 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
i mean that really got out of hand
yeah, brick killed a guy
"It's not my fault your team's so shitty." -Steve Friend, head coach, Chabot College, to Laney College's head coach, who asked why we scored so many runs after we beat Laney 30-3 in 2006
by flipgatey3 on Jul 24, 2008 1:57 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
"Boy that escalated quickly"
Best scene in the movie.
by RLangford on Jul 24, 2008 2:03 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I didn't think it was too bad...
...and the comment in 74mk’s link is pretty funny.
The A's colors are green and gold.
by mikeA on Jul 24, 2008 2:20 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I remember a night you went off in the same way
It was the crushing loss in Anaheim to the Angels about 3-4 weeks ago, when Geren gave Embree the 8th and GA took him deep. The site went ballistic and you said some things similar to my comment.
by RLangford on Jul 24, 2008 3:18 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
This is turning into one of those fights
I have w/ my girlfriend where I try and use the “I didn’t call you a bitch….I said you were acting bitchy”
God, I love AN fights.
I'll try not to swear.
by Tony on Jul 24, 2008 1:22 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
True enough
But come on can’t you see we resolved it—and the make-up sex was great.
by RLangford on Jul 24, 2008 1:26 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, my fights don't usually end that way unfortunately
NIce resolution, bitches!!!
I'll try not to swear.
by Tony on Jul 24, 2008 1:28 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Excessive focus on OBP
Yes, hallelujah!!
I think this is one of the reasons why we failed in the post season every year when we got there this decade.
We see better pitching in the post season and with that less walking and more outs due to lack of aggressiveness when it was warranted.
Same thing is going on now even though the hitters are sub par for the most part. They are so worried about getting on base and trying to drive the SP out of the game by way of pitch count instead of what the Angels (for example) do and that is get a pitch to hit and take advantage. It’s fine to get a lead off walk but not fine when they get left on base because we have little power to wait for the blast. You get a pitch to hit and hopefully you drive the runner in. I noticed Crosby was hitting .205 with the bases loaded for his career which is below his already career batting average.
There are others on the team like this and there have been many in the past.
IMO (and I emphasize my opinion), the organization has drilled this OBP thing so much into the players that they become almost trance like at the plate in key situations and fail to take advantage of the obligatory meatball that usually is thrown once every at bat the pitcher sees.
I look at stats but don’t spend as much time as some of the others here who are quite knowledgeable in this area but I have seen enough to feel that Beane needs to change tactics a little in this area.
It would work fine with three 15,000,000 per year sluggers who would actually drive some of the walks in.
by Trainman on Jul 23, 2008 7:40 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Everyone's hitting gets worse in the postseason
The Angels scored like 4 runs in three games last year, or something. They’ve had their own postseason follies in the post-2002 era.
The fact is, there’s no magic formula—the only way you can even slightly “beat the odds” is to have an elite top of your rotation, and both the 2001-2003 A’s and the 2004-2007 Angels have had that and lost anyway. The real way to win is to get there a lot and hope for the best.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jul 23, 2008 7:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with that
You do need luck. Look at St. Louis a few years ago. Detroit was rusty from all the days off and St. Louis was on a roll.
I am excited about the pitching prospects we have and with Sweeney and Carlos in the OF we have 2 very good defenders to help the pitching.
I find myself checking the minors more now so I can see how all our youngsters are progressing.
I know the more baserunners the better chance of scoring but I just wish we could be more aggressive in those situations even with the hitters we have now.
by Trainman on Jul 23, 2008 8:02 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
"Hoping for the best"
I think there’s more to it than that. Though it might not have anything to do with aggresiveness, but rather more with preparation of momentum or metality or time of between series—matters not particularly discernible or quantifiable.
The reason I say this is that I felt both the ‘88 and ‘90 A’s teams under LaRussa were just woefully lifeless in both of the World Series they played. And, yes, I realize that were talking about one Gibson home run, one dominant pitcher, and Mickey Hatcher in ‘88. And I know we’re talking about another dominant pitcher, a ball on the foul line, and Billy Hatcher in ‘90. But it did seem like something collectively was just dead in those teams.
I’ve just never quite trusted the crapshoot theory as the sole answer to post-season.
by RLangford on Jul 23, 2008 8:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Christ, I really need to preview before I post
“preparation or momentum or mentality”; “we’re”
by RLangford on Jul 23, 2008 8:12 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Someone recently calculated
that it would take a best-of-269 series to conclusively (95% likelihood) determine the better team between two teams, one of which wins 55% of the time (a large edge in baseball terms).
Best of two hundred and sixty nine.
It’s a crapshoot.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jul 23, 2008 8:39 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, someone calculated that
What I’m asking is that if we actually played the series would it turn out that way? Or are there other factors that such calculations don’t take into account.
In the main, I agree with you. But I wonder if we’re too quick to dismiss some of the human element that, in the extreme, many players and analysts attribute far too much to, but that still may play a part.
by RLangford on Jul 23, 2008 9:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The crapshoot theory doesn't explain the large number of lopsided series
3-0, 4-0, 4-1 between relatively evenly matched teams. These apparently come up a lot more than random chance would predict. The lack of explanation for this phenomenon leads people to guess the reason—momentum, guts, clutchiness…
When you have a chance to get a guy like Sean Gallagher, you take it!
by WaddellCanseco on Jul 23, 2008 9:16 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Do they?
Among 2 evenly matched teams, 1 in 8 series should end in a 4-0 sweep.
1 in 4 should end 4-1. 1 in 4 5-game series should be sweeps.
That seems pretty consistent with reality to me. And since teams aren’t actually evenly matched, there should actually even be a few more sweeps than the above would suggest.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jul 23, 2008 10:56 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The 2005 White Sox won 3-0, 4-1, and 4-0
And I’m not convinced they were better than any of the three teams they beat. Despite some of those pitching performances, I don’t know if they even actually had the best pitching in all 3 of those series.
http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/
by thejd44 on Jul 24, 2008 1:55 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
i have a stathead-like friend
who doesn’t believe in hot streaks. this is a great example of one.
"It's not my fault your team's so shitty." -Steve Friend, head coach, Chabot College, to Laney College's head coach, who asked why we scored so many runs after we beat Laney 30-3 in 2006
by flipgatey3 on Jul 24, 2008 1:56 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Of course there are hot streaks
What doesn’t exist is one pitcher’s performance “carrying over” to another’s. Also, streaks aren’t a predictor of future performance. I could go 10 for 10, that doesn’t make me any more likely to get a hit in my next at bat.
http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/
by thejd44 on Jul 24, 2008 11:28 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, of course, the WS, who had the best record in MLB
in 2005, and who rolled through the playoffs, were simply lucky.
When they’re good, it’s because they are lucky. When they are crappy, it’s because they put together a roster that was easily predictable as being crappy.
ZIPS: Milledge: 466 HR, 485 2B, 2282 hits, 278-379-524
by rfloh on Jul 24, 2008 10:17 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Their pythag record was +8
They had 3 different closers, a piece of crap leadoff hitter, and career years from no fewer than 7 pitchers. They also had FOUR COMPLETE GAMES IN A ROW in the ALCS. That just doesn’t happen.
They were a decent team that was like 5000 times luckier than this year’s Angels team.
http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/
by thejd44 on Jul 24, 2008 11:29 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
There is a "magic formula".
And you already nailed it. Get there as often as you can. Anything can happen after that.
"You may glory in a team triumphant, but you fall in love with a team in defeat."--The Boys of Summer
by alox on Jul 23, 2008 8:59 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
This has something to do
with why I really try to avoid confrontation/arguments here. If you’re here and you post with any regularity, you’re an A’s fan. And that means at the end of the day, you and me, we’re rooting for the same thing to happen. Now, how we get there (in what fashion, with whom and who deciding) is where the points of contention lie.
No doubt, we got some smart fuckers here. And we got some people who are really “into” showing off how genuinely smart they are and into tearing other people’s arguments down. And sometimes those embody the same persons. This is similar to the difficulties I had with the concepts behind grad school. Competition/argumentation/criticism—these work for some people, work extremely well for some, including people with whom I am close.
As my friend Steve E. says, I’m the other kind. Some people only grow when they feel their views are valid and being heard. And some people just want to vent about the team or revel in the team’s success or whatever. Some people need to be sure they won’t be laughed at, and when we censor that voice with intimidation or threat, we run the real risk of cutting ourselves off to some beautiful ideas.
Ultimately, it’s about the A’s. I’m not sure what the original intent of the site was, what Blez had in mind. I’m fairly certain it wasn’t to create a hierarchy of ideas. IMO and experience, there is no need to rate ideas or thoughts or (especially) feelings. Your thoughts are your own and mine are my own. We come here, in my mind, to share them with one another, not to tear them down.
That being said, sometimes people are just negative creeps and deserve a good PT smack down.
Now, I will put away my sitar and put out the incense and allow you to go on, smile on your brother, on your own.
Imagine waking up at 2 a,m. and thinking of Bobby on Greyhound somewhere in the Texas wastelands..."Does your little iddy biddy back hurt, Bobby?! Does it, you SOB?!" -Alox
by Leopold Bloom on Jul 23, 2008 7:58 PM PDT up reply actions 5 recs
I prefer to mark their name....
if they insult me. Then I’ll stalk their sorry ass at the coli and add them to a long list of other statistics. And put that shit out before the cops show up.
"You may glory in a team triumphant, but you fall in love with a team in defeat."--The Boys of Summer
by alox on Jul 23, 2008 9:04 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sorry, but
1. I’m kind of grumpy, and
2. a lot of that is nonsense
I’m fairly certain it wasn’t to create a hierarchy of ideas. IMO and experience, there is no need to rate ideas or thoughts or (especially) feelings.
So everything is relative? All opinions are magically imbued with equal value the moment they slip loose from our tongues or keyboards?
Look, I’m sure Goldzone is a great guy. He probably ladles soup at a homeless shelter after work, adopts stray puppies, conserves energy, stays faithful to his spouse, and runs four or five cub scout dens. Nevertheless, the moment the AN community loses it’s willingness to aggressively differentiate between his opinions and, say devo’s or sal’s … well, that’s precisely the moment AN becomes utterly uninteresting to me. I’m all for maintaining a dignified, respectful tone, but I think it is sophistry in the extreme to suggest that it’s not at all useful (or welcome) to knock down ill-informed or obtuse assertions. The best threads are the ones boiling with disagreement, where empty notions are discarded and sharp insights rewarded, such that what emerges for the reader is a smart, clear elucidation of all sides of the issue at hand.
Further, I consider it a grand gesture of condescension to pat people on the head and tell them that, gosh darnit, their opinions are just the same as all the others when that is plainly not the case. When you author a fanpost, you are inviting commentary. You are asking people to agree, disagree, argue, criticize, etc. If you prefer to remain innocuous, then by all means cede the center-of-attention high and restrict yourself to offering comments in existing threads.
And we got some people who are really "into" showing off how genuinely smart they are …... I’m the other kind.
Well, sure. I guess.
Certainly, you maintain a light tone. But enough with the “look at me, I’m so modest” schtick. You are absolutely invested in making sure everyone knows how smart (culturally savvy, well-read, politically tuned-in, etc.) you are; you accomplish this differently than the arguers (via reference dropping, mostly), but you do it, and often. I’m not criticizing that, per se, and in fact I should stress that you’re no different than me or anyone else in this respect. However, your attempt to propound personal growth life lessons by way of back door self-aggrandizement is, well, unconvincing.
by 74mk on Jul 23, 2008 9:28 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Ouch
Especially the last paragraph. You’re pretty good at evisceration, aren’t you. Damn funny post, though. You must have been proud as hell of his one.
Still, I think you’re creating a false dilemma. The choice shouldn’t be between patting people on the head or drilling them. There’s a whole range of other possibilities. But you know that.
I’d write more, show off what I know, counsel compassion, and beyond; but I don’t want to put myself out their with Leopold Bloom, the graduate student in English who made the mistake of revealing just enough of himself that someone as cool and self-aware as you could come along and hack him up.
by RLangford on Jul 23, 2008 9:55 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh know, misspelled "there"
There’s likely plenty to deconstruct about that. Or even in this comment on that. Go to town, 74mk.
by RLangford on Jul 23, 2008 10:05 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, fair enough.
Last paragraph was probably unnecessary.
It just aggravates me that posters such as PT get casually stained with this “show off” scarlet letter, while others who “show off” just as much get a pass because they do it more subtly (or not even subtly, just differently). And, actually, the “show offiness” doesn’t bother me at all (it’s not as though I don’t do it) – only the double standard.
If I appeared to set up that false dilemma, then I articulated my point poorly. My objection was/is to the rejection of all disagreement (eg “no need to rate ideas or thoughts”). As I said in the post, I heartily endorse a dignified tone, though I sometimes (perhaps often) fall short of that ideal .
by 74mk on Jul 23, 2008 11:05 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Okay, you've hooked me
There’s an immense difference between saying “I’m smart and witty and well-informed and willing to dance,” and saying “I’m smart and witty and well-informed and willing to dance and I’m significantly better at it than you. Here, let me tell you why.”
There’s no such thing as better or worse arguments, just some are more refined and more difficult to attack. Simply because you’re more skilled at constructing (and that is the exact right word) arguments than another does not mean your point is more valid or intelligent. It just means you’re more skilled at defending and attacking. Those words are not mistakes. That’s the type of interaction you’re proposing to undertake here. And I’m not interested in any of that.
That said, there are plenty of people who I respect who feel that’s the only method by which we come to truth. I think it can be a good tool in furthering thought, but I also think it can be used in a way that proves nothing, other than who’s really good at verbal sparring.
And you’ve fallen short here of being civil. Between this post and the one above, you’ve succeeded in really hurting my feelings. So, missino accomplished there, Sparky. Good job.
Imagine waking up at 2 a,m. and thinking of Bobby on Greyhound somewhere in the Texas wastelands..."Does your little iddy biddy back hurt, Bobby?! Does it, you SOB?!" -Alox
by Leopold Bloom on Jul 24, 2008 7:10 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
This is going to be really long-winded
Between this post and the one above, you’ve succeeded in really hurting my feelings.
I am genuinely sorry to have hurt your feelings, but I’m somewhat confused: What in the post directly above was hurtful?
I expressed contrition for my overzealous conclusion to the prior post, and took pains to (again) reiterate that I don’t at all consider the behavior I described to be problematic. And while I’d agree that the final sentence of my original post was unnecessarily caustic, I’m not sure what makes the rest of it so terrible.
So while I am happy to apologize (mea culpa), I think you are perhaps plumbing depths of pain not really in proportion to the offense.
As to this:
There’s an immense difference between saying "I’m smart and witty and well-informed and willing to dance," and saying "I’m smart and witty and well-informed and willing to dance and I’m significantly better at it than you. Here, let me tell you why."
Sure. But a) that’s a different formulation than what you articulated above, and b) I think you overstate the distinction. My point is that the cliquism and exclusivity that result from the former are not much different in practice than the latter, and in fact there is a way of embodying the former that manifestly implies the latter, and – in my view – is every bit the “look at me” spectacle.
Again, to avoid misperception: I think all of that is just fine, and I don’t exempt myself from any of it. I simply think your distinction can be taken too far, and is often used (not by you, necessarily) to mendaciously conflate smart, well-informed, effectively argued perspectives with assholishness in order to evade, you know, the argument itself.
As to the rest of it:
I think you are saying that all opinions are equally correct/valid/worthwhile, that they are only differentiated out there in the universe of blog discourse and pub discussion by virtue of each person’s ability to articulate them. Therefore debate amounts to not much more than a empty rhetorical fencing match.
I don’t really know what to say about that. I really, really (really!) disagree.
You seem to be (consciously or not) misconstruing my original point, which addressed the relative value of opinions, not artful sentence construction or debate agility. Some contributors to this site know (a lot) more about baseball than others. Their opinions carry more weight, because they’ve thought them through, and are able to call upon a large reservoir of knowledge and context to support their arguments. As I said above, I’ve no doubt Goldzone is a good guy, and I endorse his right to submit this fanpost. But I’m not going to pretend his opinions are equivalent to andeux’s or PT’s or [pick your poster], because that would be silly, and quite obviously false. They’re not. No amount of verbal parrying acumen is going to make up for that. And you know, it’s not the end of the world! I sure as hell don’t know half as much about baseball as 40-50 regular AN posters. But I also try to make a point of reserving my stridency for areas where I feel I’m on solid ground.
The larger point concerning tone is certainly valid, and one I’ve expressed many times, but I think it is critical to avoid framing vigorous disagreement and respectfulness as mutually exclusive. We should be careful not to suggest that we can only respect each other by not ever telling anyone that they’re wrong.
I understand that a lot of people come here for game thread repartee, picture post reverie, and casual chats in the DLD, and I think that’s great. Please don’t misunderstand: I enjoy that stuff as well. However, AN would become instantly boring if no arguments ever broke out about anything. I don’t know about you, but I learn a lot when astute posters spar about prospects, stats, roster construction, game decisions, and so on. Those threads vet perspectives for me, as a comparatively un-schooled reader, such that (again, repeating myself from above) I gain a better understanding of the issue at hand. And I worry that if AN were to adopt your views regarding opinions and argumentation, much of what I really value about the site would be lost.
by 74mk on Jul 24, 2008 10:12 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I suppose the most "hurtful" aspects of it
have a lot more to do with you framing an argument with a complete misrepresentation of what I said, in particular your “fun” little misuse of ellipsis:
And we got some people who are really “into” showing off how genuinely smart they are …
... I’m the other kind.
There’s a WHOLE lot between point A and point B, and I wasn’t even ATTEMPTING to say I was not like that. I was saying that some people learn from constant critique and I was not one of them. And you pulled that shit, and you’re smart enough to be fully aware that you pulled that shit. And you did it against someone who has repeatedly told you, you, that he was not interested in engaging with you in that manner. You’ve pulled the equivalent of attacking the Swiss. Very brave. Mea culpa, indeed.
So, to recap, you’ve continued to try to engage me in argumentation with you when I’ve repeatedly told you that I have no interest in that, to the point where I feel (re-)traumatized. You’ve completely misrepresented me to a community I feel very significant connection to in order to make your point that I, too, like for other people to know how smart I am and that somehow makes my disdain for argumentation invalid, and now you’ve essentially made fun of me for having basic human emotions. Again, well done.
Imagine waking up at 2 a,m. and thinking of Bobby on Greyhound somewhere in the Texas wastelands..."Does your little iddy biddy back hurt, Bobby?! Does it, you SOB?!" -Alox
by Leopold Bloom on Jul 24, 2008 10:47 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Traumatized?
I know I traffic in hyperbole as much as anyone, but give me a break. Now you are just being ridiculous.
1. You really should refrain from forwarding opinions altogether if you are going to resort to the “I’m mortified that you dared use sarcasm to contest my argument” silliness.
2. Re: The ellipses. I don’t think they obscure either your point or mine, nor were they employed with that effect in mind.
3. I actually took quite a bit of time in an attempt to explain my perspective as thoroughly and reasonably as I could, so as to avoid the obfuscation you accuse me of fomenting. It aggravates the shit out of me that you skipped over all of that to persist in this immature self-victimization.
4. This is how it always goes:
Person A: “I think X.”
Person B: “X doesn’t make sense. You are wrong.”
Person A: “Stop criticizing me! Everyone has an opinion! Why can’t I express mine? I’m hurt. You’re mean.”
5. It gets even more rich when in the course of expressing X (which doesn’t really add up), Person A makes all sorts of oblique inferences that sure could be construed as criticisms (maybe even of real, flesh and blood people!), then, because he relied on vagueness and inference rather than assertion, feels not at all compelled to defend his position (which, you know, no one demanded he advance in the first place), and becomes righteous with hurt and suffering at the hands of Person B, who is, after all, an aggressive meanie.
6. Re: Misrepresenting you to the community. You take yourself too seriously. You make 50+ comments a day here (more, lately), and I very much doubt this single interaction (which is boring the crap out of everyone right now) will have even the slightest impact on the community’s assessment of your character, especially if my “misrepresentation” is so plain to see.
7. You’re a smart guy, but you do something that drives me bonkers: You are forever offering opinions (that is, arguing a point), then, when confronted with disagreement, you retreat behind the “I don’t really believe in arguing, it’s all the same” canard. You can’t have it both ways. It’s bs.
8. Okay, so #7 is basically #4. And #1. I don’t care. Worth repeating.
by 74mk on Jul 24, 2008 12:22 PM PDT up reply