Yes, sayeth the Nachoman… in the case where a team sweeps a competitor for the division title. Anecdotally, I recall the 1989 NL west race, in which the Reds led the Giants in July. The Giants made a big to-do about printing playoff tickets. “How arrogant,” we Cincinnatians said. “It doesn’t matter, though, we [the Reds] will make those tickets into useless collectors’ items.”
Then the Reds embarked on one of those “west coast swings” that they had to take three times a year back in the days of the NL west: San Francisco, San Diego, and Los Angeles, usually nine or ten games over a week and a half, 2000 miles from home. I can’t tell you how many times this swing seemed to mark the death knell of an otherwise successful Reds team. In the case of 1989, the Reds took a division lead into San Francisco for a four game series as the Nachoman departed for Band Camp. Each night – starting at 10:35 eastern time – we listened, hoping that the series would cement the Reds’ postseason plans. Each night, the Reds lost. That series sweep put the Giants in front to stay, and catapulted them to the Earthquake Series.
So, was that a “big” series? Certainly, but only because the Giants swept. Similarly, if the Reds had taken all four games, they possibly would have cruised to the division title, having put their biggest rival in a gaping hole. Had the teams split the series, nothing would have been decided at all. No one would have remembered nor cared what happened that weekend, because a different decisive moment in the pennant race would have emerged later.
This week, contenders for the title played each other in each of the NL’s three divisions. How “big” did these series turn out to be?
In the east, the Phillies visited the Mets. Before the series, the Phils led the Mets by a game. After taking 2 of 3, the Mets led the Phils by a game. The Phillies probability of making the playoffs dropped from 49% to 38% during this series; the Mets probability jumped from 54% to 64%.
In the west, the Dodgers played 3 over the weekend against the Diamondbacks, taking 2 of 3. Before the series, the D-backs were 54-44 favorites to win the division; afterward, the teams were tied, each with close to a 50-50 probability of winning.
The central sported the truly BIG series. On Monday, the Cards and Brewers were respectively 2 and 3 games behind the Cubs. The Brewers had a 55% chance of making the playoffs; the Cards, 39%. A Brewers sweep put them within a game of the division lead. Now, Milwaukee is an 82% bet to make the playoffs – that’s better than the Devil Rays’ chances, by the way – while the Cardinals are down to 15%. Don't you think that if the Cardinals don't make the playoffs, they'll look back on this week a tipping point?
Then the Reds embarked on one of those “west coast swings” that they had to take three times a year back in the days of the NL west: San Francisco, San Diego, and Los Angeles, usually nine or ten games over a week and a half, 2000 miles from home. I can’t tell you how many times this swing seemed to mark the death knell of an otherwise successful Reds team. In the case of 1989, the Reds took a division lead into San Francisco for a four game series as the Nachoman departed for Band Camp. Each night – starting at 10:35 eastern time – we listened, hoping that the series would cement the Reds’ postseason plans. Each night, the Reds lost. That series sweep put the Giants in front to stay, and catapulted them to the Earthquake Series.
So, was that a “big” series? Certainly, but only because the Giants swept. Similarly, if the Reds had taken all four games, they possibly would have cruised to the division title, having put their biggest rival in a gaping hole. Had the teams split the series, nothing would have been decided at all. No one would have remembered nor cared what happened that weekend, because a different decisive moment in the pennant race would have emerged later.
This week, contenders for the title played each other in each of the NL’s three divisions. How “big” did these series turn out to be?
In the east, the Phillies visited the Mets. Before the series, the Phils led the Mets by a game. After taking 2 of 3, the Mets led the Phils by a game. The Phillies probability of making the playoffs dropped from 49% to 38% during this series; the Mets probability jumped from 54% to 64%.
In the west, the Dodgers played 3 over the weekend against the Diamondbacks, taking 2 of 3. Before the series, the D-backs were 54-44 favorites to win the division; afterward, the teams were tied, each with close to a 50-50 probability of winning.
The central sported the truly BIG series. On Monday, the Cards and Brewers were respectively 2 and 3 games behind the Cubs. The Brewers had a 55% chance of making the playoffs; the Cards, 39%. A Brewers sweep put them within a game of the division lead. Now, Milwaukee is an 82% bet to make the playoffs – that’s better than the Devil Rays’ chances, by the way – while the Cardinals are down to 15%. Don't you think that if the Cardinals don't make the playoffs, they'll look back on this week a tipping point?
This week's quiz:
Without looking it up, name the top three teams in runs scored in the National League. Number 3 will surprise you. My answer uses stats as of Thursday.
The Ribbie Reporter (after making a snide yet vilely accurate remark about the NL being AAAA baseball) guessed:
1. New York
2. Chicago
3. Cincinnati
The actual answer is at the bottom of today's column.
We love you, Barry, but please shut up already.[1]
Last Saturday night, Barry Larkin was inducted into the Reds hall of fame. He gave a speech to the assembled throngs, including other Reds HOFers on the field with him, and the FSN television audience. He thanked a lot of folks, including the Nationals’ owner and president (Mr. Larkin currently works with the Nats). He thanked Nats GM Jim Bowden, producing loud “boooo!!!”s from the audience. (Mr. Bowden’s unsuccessful reign as Reds GM from 1992-2003, as well as his trade of injured Gary Majewski to the Reds in 2006, provoked the crowd’s hatred.) Mr. Larkin actually had to interrupt his speech to wave a cautionary finger at the crowd, saying, “You can boo him later, but not while I’m on the stage.”
Okay, that was funny. But Mr. Larkin went on and on, in a poor imitation of the worst Oscar acceptance speech. He thanked everyone but his kindergarten teacher, and thanked each one at length with over-the-top praise. He talked well passed his allotted time. All I could say was, “Come on, Barry, shut up already, we’ve got a game to play.”
Mr. Larkin had so little self awareness that he even responded over the microphone to the Reds PR person who tried to hurry him up. “I know there’s a game to play,” he said. And he kept talking.
I might be able to forgive a bit of Barry’s excesses. After all, he is without question a Reds legend, and the induction meant a lot to him. Problem is, Mr. Larkin is a television commentator – it’s not like he ain’t used to speaking in public. Someone who’s paid ten or more times my annual salary to talk about baseball should be able to give an appropriate speech.
Speaking of appropriate, Mr. Larkin thanked his shoe rep at length. Huh? And then he made references to the “Nike family?” Then he did the same thing for the brand of glove that he wore. I understand when an athlete insists on thanking his friends, relatives, and mentors. However, I cannot respect the use of an induction speech as an advertising vehicle. This part of Mr. Larkin’s speech was completely classless, from an otherwise classy guy.
Last Saturday night, Barry Larkin was inducted into the Reds hall of fame. He gave a speech to the assembled throngs, including other Reds HOFers on the field with him, and the FSN television audience. He thanked a lot of folks, including the Nationals’ owner and president (Mr. Larkin currently works with the Nats). He thanked Nats GM Jim Bowden, producing loud “boooo!!!”s from the audience. (Mr. Bowden’s unsuccessful reign as Reds GM from 1992-2003, as well as his trade of injured Gary Majewski to the Reds in 2006, provoked the crowd’s hatred.) Mr. Larkin actually had to interrupt his speech to wave a cautionary finger at the crowd, saying, “You can boo him later, but not while I’m on the stage.”
Okay, that was funny. But Mr. Larkin went on and on, in a poor imitation of the worst Oscar acceptance speech. He thanked everyone but his kindergarten teacher, and thanked each one at length with over-the-top praise. He talked well passed his allotted time. All I could say was, “Come on, Barry, shut up already, we’ve got a game to play.”
Mr. Larkin had so little self awareness that he even responded over the microphone to the Reds PR person who tried to hurry him up. “I know there’s a game to play,” he said. And he kept talking.
I might be able to forgive a bit of Barry’s excesses. After all, he is without question a Reds legend, and the induction meant a lot to him. Problem is, Mr. Larkin is a television commentator – it’s not like he ain’t used to speaking in public. Someone who’s paid ten or more times my annual salary to talk about baseball should be able to give an appropriate speech.
Speaking of appropriate, Mr. Larkin thanked his shoe rep at length. Huh? And then he made references to the “Nike family?” Then he did the same thing for the brand of glove that he wore. I understand when an athlete insists on thanking his friends, relatives, and mentors. However, I cannot respect the use of an induction speech as an advertising vehicle. This part of Mr. Larkin’s speech was completely classless, from an otherwise classy guy.
Isn’t this an NCAA violation?
Barry told the story of a Wilson rep giving him a glove as a sophomore in college. He admits that he used the glove throughout his career at Michigan. Is that allowed? Isn’t that an unauthorized gift?
Talk about overmanaging -- from the Ribbie Reporter
Though Trey Hillman has only been in charge of the Royals for 100 games, he's already perplexed fans with a few questionable decisions and his general unwillingness to think outside the box, even though that was supposed to be a strength of his. In any event, here's a case where Hillman thought too hard.
Against the Rays Thursday night, Gil Meche worked around a pair of singles in both the first and second innings. He then walked one batter in the 3rd but didn't let the man move forward. A 1-2-3 fourth was followed by a single and double play in the 5th. Meche then retired the next six batters to carry him through the 7th inning. He'd thrown exactly 100 pitches and allowed only one aserunner in the last four innings (and had gotten the double play). So Hillman, illogically, decided to yank Meche with the Royals up 4-0, even though the Rays 8, 9 and 1 hitters were due up in the 8th. On came Ron Mahay, who gave up a double and then a pair of groundouts to break up the shutout. In the 9th, since the game was now a save situation, Hillman turned to Joakim Soria, the Royals lights-out closer. But Soria was just interested in dimming the lights tonight. He yielded a double, a single and then a sac fly before finally settling down to get the last two batters. The Royals won 4-2.
Now, both Mahay and Soria have been excellent all year. Both have ERAs under 2.00, so it's understandable why Hillman wanted them in the game. But why not let Meche have the complete game? If you want, keep him on a short leash when the heart of the Rays lineup comes up in the 8th/9th. But the team is paying Meche $11 million a year to pitch like a staff ace. When he's doing that, why lift him? Meche is 29; it's not like he's some young guy who needs to have his arm protected. He made all 34 of his scheduled starts last year (tied for most in the MLB) and is tied for the MLB lead in starts this year with 21 so far. He threw 216 innings last year. Maybe I've missed something, but is there a new rule now that says only Roy Halladay of the Blue Jays can throw complete games. He's got 7 complete games so far this year, more than every team
in baseball except for the Indians, who have 7 from their entire starting rotation. Stop over thinking! If your pitcher is cruising, leave him in until he runs into trouble!
Same thing happened on Tuesday night to a higher profile team
Phillies at Mets in the first of a three-game showdown of the NL east leaders… Johann Santana pitched 8 innings, giving up 2 runs. He was cruising with a 3-run lead, having thrown 105 pitches. What should the manager do?
Me, now, I’d tell one of the decade’s top pitchers to go get ‘em in the 9th. Not Jerry Manuel, though…he called on four different relievers to give up six different runs to lose the game. Sure, he could have called on his bullpen had Mr. Santana run into trouble, but why go there to start? Johann is the best pitcher the Mets have. Use him!
Praise Bob, a useful sideline report!
Sunday during the FSN Cincinnati telecast of the Mets-Reds game, the miracle occurred. In a tie game in the bottom of the 9th, Adam Dunn drew a one-out walk. Mr. Dunn stayed in the game, even though it seemed a good situation in which to use a speedy pinch runner. After three pitches, though, here came the rabbit Corey Patterson. He attempted a steal a bit later in the inning, but the pitch was popped up, and Mr. Patterson remained stranded on the basepaths.
The FSN sideline reporter reported[2] that as soon as Adam Dunn arrived at first base, the Reds coaches had a stopwatch out to time Mets reliever Duaner Sanchez’s pitches. On the bases of the stopwatch readings, they determined that Corey Patterson would be able to swipe second base. So, Dusty Baker asked Mr. Patterson, “You ready?” and sent him in.
In reply, color man Jeff Brantley noted that a well-prepared organization would have opponents’ pitchers time to the plate scouted in the pregame.
More fun notes from Baseball Prospectus playoff odds
The Reds were effectively eliminated from playoff race by their loss on Sunday. What does “effectively” mean in this context? The odds of the Reds making the playoffs dropped below 1%. My reasoning here is that baseball playoffs of some sort have existed for just over 100 years. If the odds of making the playoffs are less than 1 in 100, then that means “less than one chance over the same number of seasons that have ever been played.” To me, such a team is effectively eliminated from playoff contention.
The list of effectively eliminated teams, as of Thursday:
Jays
Orioles
Royals
Indians
Mariners
Gnats (whose playoff probability is 0.00000)
Pirates
Astros
Giants
Padres
Teams on the bubble, whose win probability is in the single digits:
Rangers
Marlins
Braves
Rockies
Cardinals broadcast banter
The play-by-play man noted the repeated spittle emitting from baseball players, and the resulting state of the dugout floor. He asked the ex-jock color man:
“Did you do that when you played?”
“Not anymore,” he responded. “Don’t worry, the floor in here is nice and clean.”
“Well, we certainly won’t be saying that in New York this weekend.”
A comparison of headlines on major sports websites
Tuesday was a slow sports day by most definitions. Sure, several baseball series matched top teams in a division, but it’s still July, more than two months from the end of the season. I can’t blame a sports website for reaching for stories.[3] As long as the stories meet standard journalistic criteria for relevance and correctness, I can understand.
Let’s take a look at the actual headlines on four major sports websites. For each, I copied just the list of headlines at about 9:00 on Wednesday morning. I awarded points based on the relevance of each headline in the context of American sports, deducting points for headlines that delve into celebrity worship, including discussions of athletes’ contracts.
Since I’m exclusively concerned with the list of headlines, you may quibble that I missed relevant stories that a site covered, but on a different part of the web page. (Or, you may quibble that I didn’t deduct points for blatant A-Rod/Madonna “news” on another part of the front page.) That’s deliberate – since I tend to scan the headlines immediately upon arrival at a sports site, they are in my mind the most important portion of the site. I don’t mind if a story about Brady and Bundchen appears by the bikini photos in the bottom left corner of the page. I merely ask that headlines refer only to news.
Scores were abominably low. I’d bet they would be much higher on, say, October 7 or so, when the sports calendar picks up a bit.
Nevertheless, here we are, the first ever Nachoman Sports Site Headline Ratings:
Si.com:
Phil Mickelson joins the Dan Patrick Show
[-5 shameless self promotion]
MORNING JOLT: Red Sox may let Manny walk
[-2 reporting on something that hasn’t happened yet; -1 reporting on an athlete’s contract; -10 putting unsubstantiated rumor in a headline]
Reports: Urlacher agrees to contract extension
[-1 athlete’s contract, +1 for limited relevance]
Big Unit outduels Harden, now 13-0 vs. Cubs
[+4 reporting on a game; +1 ‘cause it’s a RELEVANT game]
Howard 'ready to go' as Team USA opens camp
[-1 out of season, +1 relevant reporting]
Bengals' Johnson says he'll be at camp on time
[-2 hasn’t happened yet; -1 out-of-season; -5 publishing a non-story because Chad’s a prima donna]
Posada returns to DL; season could be in doubt
[+2 actual news about an in-season team, +1 more ‘cause it’s important news]
Wie opts to tee it up in another PGA Tour event
[-2 hasn’t happened yet; -5 publishing a non-story because Michelle’s a prima donna]
Camby still irked by Nuggets' treatment in deal
[-1 athlete’s contract, -5 publishing a non-story because Marcus’s a prima donna, -8 more ‘cause an athlete’s “feelings” about his contract are a verboten topic (Nachoman’s “shut up and play” rule)]
Clemson picked as preseason favorite in ACC
[-1 out-of-season, -2 publishing preseason predictions[4]]
Nets get Dooling from Magic in sign-and-trade
[+2 actual news[5]]
SI total: -40 points
ESPN.com
Giants' Shockey traded to Saints for picks
[+2 actual news, +1 important news]
Surgery? Posada unsure; Matsui no
[+2 actual news, but no bonus for important news because the headline only discusses athletes’ surgery decisions, not the players’ status]
Sources: Urlacher, Bears agree on new deal
[-1 athlete’s contract, +1 for limited relevance, -5 for failure to cite who the “sources” are, even in the article (the SI column cited two Chicago newspapers).[6]]
Lester, Red Sox blank M's Ortiz continues rehab
[+4 reporting on a game; +1 for noting further team news]
Wood gets new treatment on blister, may avoid DL
[+1 kinda relevant in-season news]
Florida State's Bowden not ready to step aside
[-1 out-of-season, -4 creating and publishing a non-story]
Bengals' Johnson to report on time
[-2 hasn’t happened yet; -1 out-of-season; -5 publishing a non-story because Chad’s a prima donna]
New Clip Camby upset at way Nuggets dealt him
[-1 athlete’s contract, -5 publishing a non-story because Marcus’s a prima donna, -8 more ‘cause an athlete’s “feelings” about his contract are a verboten topic (Nachoman’s “shut up and play” rule)]
Gates tests big toe at Chargers' training camp
[-1 no actual news in article, -1 out-of-season]
Officials: Ricco [Tour de France guy] tried to skip test
[+2 actual news, +1 mildly interesting news]
ESPN total: -20 points.
Yahoo Sports
Reports: Bears, Urlacher agree to deal
[-1 athlete’s contract, +1 for limited relevance]
Giants trade TE Shockey to Saints
[+2 actual news, +1 important news]
Big Unit wins 291st, beats Cubs again
[+4 reporting on a game; +1 ‘cause it’s a RELEVANT game]
Yankees win eighth straight at home
[+4 reporting on a game]
Bush gives US Olympians rousing send-off
[-1 out of season, -3 politician reference[7]]
Kazmir, Longoria lead Rays past A's 4-0
[+4 game, +1 relevant game]
Cabrera's 5 hits spur Tigers' 19-4 rout
[+4 game]
Marion Jones seeks commutation from Bush
[-2 hasn’t happened, -5 publishing a non-story because Marion’s a prima donna]
Yahoo total: +14 points
Foxsports.com
Giants unload Shockey to Saints Bad trade?
[+2 actual news, +1 important news, -5 inserting opinion to the headline]
Reports: Bears to give Urlacher $18M extension
[-1 athlete’s contract, +1 for limited relevance]
Damon returns as Yanks romp Posada to DL
[+4 game, +1 further relevant information]
Johnson: I'll be at Bengals camp, ankle still sore
[-2 hasn’t happened yet; -1 out-of-season; -5 publishing a non-story because Chad’s a prima donna]
Truex [Nascar driver] penalty appeal denied DEI in trouble?
[+2 actual news, +1 relevant news. No penalty for mentioning NASCAR, though maybe there should be.]
Brewers blow lead, then rally past Cards in 10
[+4 game, +1 relevant game]
Reports: Celtics hang on to House, Tony Allen
[-1 athlete’s contract, +2 actual news]
Fresh off LPGA DQ, Wie to play vs. men again
[-2 hasn’t happened yet; -5 publishing a non-story because Michelle’s a prima donna]
Case clothed: FCC Super Bowl fine thrown out
[+2 actual news, reported in a timely fashion]
Marion Jones asks Bush to commute sentence
[-2 hasn’t happened, -5 publishing a non-story because Marion’s a prima donna]
Fox Sports total: -8 points
Overarching conclusions?
My rankings, based on one slow news day in July:
1. Yahoo
2. Fox Sports
3. ESPN
4. SI
Correlation does not indicate causation. Nevertheless, take a look at the ComScore sports site rankings (which are essentially the website equivalent of the Nielsens) for June:
1. Yahoo
2. ESPN
3. Fox Sports
…
9. SI
All I have to say is, “Hmmm….”
Always show the counterexample where appropriate
Monday night in St. Louis, bottom of the ninth of a tie game, 2 outs, with runners on 1st and 2nd… up came King Albert Pujols.
I’ve written about my observations of similar scenarios previously. It seems that every time the King steps to the plate in this kind of spot, he ends the game with a hit, or, often, a home run. Rex Pujols has inspired legends of his late game prowess.
Thus, it’s important for this physicist to poke a hole in the legend. Even the best hitters make outs nearly 70% of the time. The King flew out. The Cards went on to lose the game in the 10th.
Who’s scored the most runs in the NL?
1. Chicago, 530
2. Philadelphia, 503[8]
3. Pittsburgh(!), 494
4. New York, 493
5. St. Louis, 484
6. Florida, 484
All of the teams above are contending for the playoffs, except the Pirates. What’s up?
Obviously, it’s the runs allowed that’s killing them. Runs allowed in the NL:
1. Pittsburgh, 568
2. Colorado, 536
(NL average: 473)
Next Week
The Nachoman will be running an AP Physics Institute at Manhattan College, which is NOT located in Manhattan – it’s in the Bronx. I was hoping to attend a Mets game with reader and physics teacher Steve Panitz, who will be attending the Institute – but, it turns out that the Mets are out of town for the week, putting the kibosh on my last chance to visit Shea Stadium. If the Cardinals broadcasters are right, though, I won’t have missed much.
[1] Huh, that’s almost exactly what Reds fans have been saying to Joe Morgan for decades.
[2] Don’t call this a poor choice of verb. The principal problem with sideline reporters is that it’s a remarkable occasion when one actually does some reporting.
[3] That said, now is the perfect time to do some serious analysis of the baseball season. Look at the teams out of contention… what (if anything) went wrong from their preseason plan? As for the teams in the races, who has contributed unexpectedly? Can we review some early season games that might bode for the playoff push? At least, that’s what I would publish, if I had a stable full of “expert” baseball reporters.
[4] According to Nachoman sports journalism rules, a magazine or website gets ONE stab at preseason predictions, which must be written unambiguously at season’s eve. Multiple pundits may make picks, as long as they’re all published simultaneously and clearly. Reporting on other organizations’ picks, especially (as in SI’s case) without saying which organization, is not acceptable.
[5] This doesn’t count as out-of-season, as now is in fact the season for NBA player transfers.
[6] ESPN is known for their sliminess in citing news sources. If an ESPN reporter breaks a story, the headline is “ESPN’s Chris Mortensen has learned…” However, if CBS breaks a story, the headline becomes “ESPN has learned…” Not false, just ridiculously disingenuous. In this case, the ESPN article credited the report to “sources,” as if ESPN had their own Deep Throat embedded within the Bears organization. SI.com properly noted that the story was reported first by the Chicago Newspapers. ESPN’s investigative journalism in this case consisted of reading the paper.
[7] The “politician” penalty is -10 points if anyone but the president is mentioned in a story. Since the president serves the function of the monarch in American politics, and so is more than a run-of-the-mill celebrity, I will cut some slack to mentioning him. However, I still object to sports media giving any sort of attention to a politician. Make politicians pay for their advertising just like everyone else.
[8] Philly was the Nachoman’s preseason pick as the top-scoring team
No comments:
Post a Comment