Friday, May 29, 2009

It's almost college baseball season, and replay bites the Gnats in the thorax


We're less than two months into the season, and one team has been, in the Nachoman's eyes at least, eliminated from playoff contention. How's that, you say? Take a look at the
Baseball Prospectus playoff odds . A computer "plays" each remaining game in the season and computes the final standings. Then the computer does the same thing for another pretend season. Then again and again, a total of a million times. Of those million pretend seasons, the Nationals have made the playoffs just 53,000 times, or 0.5 % of the time.

I call that "effectively eliminated." Why? Baseball in something resembling its current form has been around for just over 100 years. The probabilities computed by BP suggest that the Nationals have well less than one chance in 100 of making the playoffs. My conclusion: the Gnats ain't making the playoffs without a Moses-level miracle.

At the other end of the spectrum, the Dodgers are listed at a 96% chance of making the playoffs, best in the league. What's most surprising: the early-season darling Pirates still have a 9% chance of making it; and both the Royals and the Reds are still in the 20-30% range. Moses level miracle, indeed.


Do you spit in the gruel of your most bitter rival if you can?
The ACC baseball tournament has an unusual structure. The eight qualifying teams are split into two pools. Each pool plays one game against each team in the pool; the winners of each pool face off in a championship game.

With four teams in a pool and only three games to play, it’s highly likely that two teams tie for the top spot in the pool. The tiebreaking procedures are reasonable: If two teams tie, then the head-to-head victor advances. If three teams tie, then the best regular season conference record among the teams gets to the title game.

On Saturday afternoon, the last day of pool play produced a strange situation. At 4:00, Clemson took on North Carolina. Clemson was out of it, at 0-2. North Carolina, 1-1, had to win in order to have any chance of advancing. At 8:00, Duke at 1-1 was to play pool leader Virginia, 2-0. A UVA win obviously put them in the title game. But if Duke were to win on Saturday night, then craziness would ensue.

Carolina had the best regular season record. So, if they, Duke, and UVA all tied at 2-1, Carolina would advance. Look at the timing of the games: the Tar Heels played first. If they won, then Duke would have no prayer of advancing, but must beat UVA for Carolina to advance.

Now, one might expect that a team tries to win in all circumstances. And I do not believe that the Blue Devils would ever purposely lose. But remember the bitter blood feud that exists between UNC and Duke. Knowing that a loss hands UNC the championship, and that a win would be meaningless, might they subconsciously give less than their best effort?

(It turned out to be a mute point, as UNC lost in extra innings in the 4:00 game. Virginia beat Duke to advance to the ACC championship game.)



Why was there a 30 minute no-rain delay in Florida on Sunday?
At the scheduled start time of 1:10 PM, the tarp at Wayne Huizenga’s “It Was Good Enough For Baseball When We Lobbied For An Expansion Team” Stadium still sat on the field. I didn’t expect the game to start on time, because the weather forecast on Yahoo indicated a tornado warning in north-central Dade County, which is the approximate location of the stadium. Nevertheless, the forecast was clear for the rest of the day, and no rain had fallen in the stadium all day. Finally, at about 1:15, the grounds crew began to pull the tarp off the field; the game started at 1:40 or so.

So, why did the game start late if no rain ever fell? The turf at IWGEFBWWLFANET stadium drains extraordinarily well. Knowing that clearing skies were approaching, the tarp could have been left off for warm-ups pending the actual arrival of actual rain.

Problem was, the Marlins bullpen was completely burned out from long outings on the previous couple of days. They couldn’t afford the possibility of their pitcher having to come out of the game due to rain in the second inning. Since the home team, not the umpires, determines whether conditions are suitable to start the game, the Marlins chose to avoid even the remote chance of their starter being forced out of the game early.


And the best way to avoid walks is to throw strikes
I was on dorm duty on Tuesday, during which I watched the Reds-Astros game. Nonetheless, I still had responsibilities as the duty master for the evening. As I walked around the dorm around lunchtime, I found two rooms that smelled really bad. To the residents’ credit, they tried to do something about the odor: they opened their doors and turned on several fans. One person even put some kind of perfume near the fan. While I appreciated the effort to remove the smell, I had to turn off the fans, as fans in unoccupied rooms are considered a fire hazard.

Both rooms had full garbage cans, even after the fans had been on much of the day.

The residents looked at me with interest when I noted that the best way to avoid a smelly room is to keep the trash emptied. This was new, world-changing information.


Oswalt’s meltdown
On Tuesday, for only the7th time in his career, Roy Oswalt walked a batter with the bases loaded. And for only the second time in history, Mr. Oswalt took the loss against the Cincinnati Reds.


Every hit a pitcher ever gave up was the result of a pitch “out over the plate.”
[1]

Jeff Brantley: “That’s [Felipe] Paulino’s problem, elevating the baseball.”

Mr. Paulino had just given up a home run to Jay Bruce. The first replay showed the catcher presenting a target above the waist. So Mr. Brantley did a MacCarver:

“Yes, his catcher wanted the ball elevated in this case, but look where that pitch was.” [Brantley drew a line on telestrator.] “Here’s where the catcher wants the ball, WAY up there, and here’s where the pitch is.”

The replay ran... The pitch hit the catcher’s glove right on top of the line drawn by Mr. Brantley, meaning that the pitch essentially hit the target. But Brantley continued with his Bush Administration science: “See he elevated the ball, but not enough. The ball ended up out over the plate.”

Later, on a swinging bunt, Willie Taveras raced toward first base. The throw from the catcher was well wide of first base, allowing Mr. Taveras to reach third base. The Astros protested that Taveras had run out of the three-foot running lane, and thus should be called out for interference.
[2]The 2003 Iraqi Foreign Minister made an appearance in the guise of Jeff Brantley, who said “[Taveras is running] on the line.” No he wasn’t. Replay clearly showed Taveras’ feet never touched the white baseline.


Nevertheless
See, for some stupid reason I like Brantley. He’s not afraid to say what he thinks, even when he’s wrong. Sometimes he’s even right. For example, he talked about Jay Bruce. “When he came into the big leagues, he was surrounded by guys who were only concerned with hitting the ball out of the ballpark. Now those two guys are gone. He’s adjusting his approach, because now he’s surrounded by guys who know there’s more to offensive baseball than crushing home runs.”

Now, one could argue with Mr. Brantley about Bruce’s approach to offensive baseball, but it’s about time that someone took Mssrs. Dunn and Griffey to task publicly for the way they played the game.

Then, he suggested that “a team learns a lot about itself through its mistakes. This ballclub got swept in San Diego, and it was an utter embarrassment. Sometimes that’s the best way to come together as a team, to be utterly embarrassed.” Right on! On one hand, the repeated references to teamwork and inter-team relationships has an almost Joe Morgan-like feel; but attitude has more of an effect on baseball teams than many Sabermatricians like to admit, and Mr. Brantley’s insights are occasionally useful.

Brantley kind of reminds me of Joe Nuxhall (RIP), who would have flunked out of broadcast school. No one was a better foil for Marty Brennaman, though. Nuxhall’s folksy delivery, his knowledge of and place in Reds history, and his storytelling made up for his deficiencies in his fundamentals, at least for Reds fans. I can say the some of the same things about “Cowboy” Jeff Brantley.


Replay Fiasco, only three months into the replay system
On Wednesday night in New York, Met Daniel Murphy hit a long fly ball to right field. Adam Dunn, who patrols right field as Frank Drebin patrols Los Angeles, gave up on what he thought to be a sure home run. But the ball landed in the field of play, hitting the top of the fence on one bounce. Mr. Dunn recovered from his surprise, threw back to the infield, and managed to nail a baserunner at home plate.

BUT WAIT! The Mets asked for a replay review, the fourth review in a Mets game in five days. Three umpires headed for the replay room. Six excruciating minutes later, the umpires reversed themselves and awarded Mr. Murphy a tiebreaking and eventually game deciding home run.

On Wednesday night, the Atlanta Cracker wrote to me asking my thoughts.

Sayeth the Nachoman (who didn’t see the play, but watched it on a small-screen highlight):
I didn't at first realize this was a replay review. I thought the umpires just got together to sort it out. If a non-calling umpire had a better angle, then the crew generally would defer to him. Furthermore, if the calling umpire wasn’t totally sure, better to let play go and THEN ask for help than to call a mistaken home run.

Sayeth the Atlanta Cracker:
Yes, it was a replay review. But I'm more interested in what you think of the physics of it. Look at it again and tell me if you think it's physically possible for that ball to hit the Subway sign, then bounce on the field and bounce up high against the wall. I say no, and I think that should have been something the umpires considered. But I bet they just looked at the video around the sign itself and decided that they thought it hit the sign.

Nachoman:
Yes, it's physically possible. I see it now ('cause I got it in high def). The "Pepsi Porch," as I learned when I first watched a game from Ponzi Scheme Field, hangs out OVER the playing surface. It's like old tiger stadium. You hit the "Pepsi Porch," it's a home run.

AC:
I don't think you're understanding my objection. The two MASN announcers debated this, and I actually think one of them had a fairly good idea of the physics involved. The other one seemed clueless.

I realize the porch hangs out over the field. The objection is that a ball that hits the porch would at best (if the collision is fairly inelastic) fall straight down or, more likely (if the collision is more elastic) bounce back towards the infield. It would not fall to the ground and then bounce towards the wall. Look at it again. The trajectory of the hit is very high, which is why I think the umpires guessed it could have hit the Subway sign and fallen down without bouncing back towards the infield much. Fine. But look at how it bounces off the field and then high up off the wall. The only way it could have bounced like that is either by not hitting the "Pepsi Porch" at all or by just barely skimming the bottom edge of it---and of course there's no way to tell from the video if the ball just barely skims the bottom edge.

NM:
Yes, I see... I had the SNY announcers. But I think you kind of agree with my point: if the Porch were not hanging over the field, then the trajectory you indicate would be impossible. But with the porch in front of the fence, then the ball can maintain some momentum toward the wall after the collision, and still bounce further toward the wall. I am thinking precisely of a collision that you would describe as "skimming" the bottom part of the sign.

AC:
OK, but only with the "skimming" collision, right? Is there any way the ball could smack the face of the sign, come down, and then because of some sort of spin from the collision bounce like that towards the wall? I can't imagine it happening, but I could be wrong.

So basically, what the umpires were saying is that the video review shows indisputably that the ball barely skimmed the sign. What a crock.

NM:
You're right, the video is inconclusive from every angle I saw. And the umpires should take physics into account, of course.

By the way, the plate umpire was Sam Holbrook, one of the Wendelstedt School instructors. He has a masters degree... in sports administration. And he didn't look at the replay.

AC:
Interesting. Why would one umpire sit out the replay session? I assume that's standard procedure, not just that he didn't feel like going over to look.

NM:
I think the idea is to keep one umpire in case something untoward happens... like a fight, or someone stealing bases (Lou Pinella style, not Ricky Henderson style).

AC:
Two other points:

#1: The MASN announcers were all over the first-base umpire, to the point that they were suggesting he look into a new line of work. It was really harsh and completely unwarranted, as far as I could see. Apparently they had some complaints about a call from a previous night, but last night it came down to stuff like any time a close call didn't go Washington's way, who was responsible? That umpire, of course!

#2: The MASN sideline reporter actually went up to the "Pepsi Porch" to talk to the Mets fans there about the disputed HR, and they were in agreement that the Mets got a gift there---none of them thought the ball hit the sign.

NM:
You’ve hit on the Nachoman’s entire objection to instant replay, in all sports, not just baseball. Replay exists to rectify obvious errors of judgment. If a call cannot be reversed using one quick look from each camera angle, then the “error or judgment” was in no way “obvious,” nor was it necessarily an “error.” If anyone can say, with even a shred of credibility, “I looked at the replay, and I still wasn’t sure whether the official was right or wrong,” then the call on the field has to stand. Unfortunately, that’s not how replay has actually worked in practice in college basketball, college and pro football, and now baseball. All replay has done in these sports is prolong the already interminable games, interrupt their flow, and cause more arguments than they’ve settled.


Next week:
Amid widespread calls for improving the quality of the Nachoman’s officiating, the Woodberry Athletic Department spends 2/3 of their remaining budget installing an instant replay system for intramural flag football.




[1] The following are approximate quotations written down immediately after I heard them. I don’t claim word-for-word accuracy, but the gist is correct.
[2] The umpires correctly ruled no interference. Since the throw was nowhere near Mr. Taveras, then he could not have hindered the fielder taking the throw at first base. If he doesn’t interfere with a throw to first, a runner can go to first on any path he wants.

Saturday, May 23, 2009

Nats-Pirates, Ford the Prefect, and a tenuous defense of Kerry Wood

We’ll begin not with the Dodgers or the Yankees, but with the other end of major league baseball.

I was a bit sad that I had to miss the Woodberry Forest varsity baseball banquet on Tuesday night. I had already been scheduled to work the Pirates-Nationals game for STATS. I bemoaned the quality of my assigned game to El Molé, but he took an optimistic attitude: “At least it will be an even match,” he said.

And it was – the Gnats came back to tie the game in the 9th, but the Pirates won in the 10th.


Adam Dunn made a play!
In the first inning Tuesday, Nate McLouth crushed a ball down the first base line, the wind held it up, and it looked like a sure double. But, here came Adam Dunn, reaching up and then back behind him, making the catch – An awkward catch, to be sure, but a catch. When Mr. Dunn was with the Reds, I used to cringe on every ball hit his way. But Tuesday, Dunn made a total of three above-average-difficulty plays in right field. Even a blind nut finds a squirrel once in a while. Or something like that.


Color me surprised
I continue to enjoy listening to Rob Dibble on Nats broadcasts, and not just because he tells stories about the 1990 Reds. On Tuesday, Pirates leadoff hitter Nyjer Morgan started the game with a double off of rookie Shairon Martis. Mr. Morgan’s slugging percentage of .370 should not scare anyone. So, as Mr. Dibble pointed out, why throw a changeup to him? That just sped up Morgan’s bat, and resulted in a hard liner.


Thursday night marked Brave pitcher Kris Medlen’s first start. This gentleman had been known in the minor leagues for his command, his ability to pitch to contact successfully. In spots, Mr. Medlen showed just why scouts were so high on him. Problem was, in the fourth inning, Medlen suddenly lost all semblance of control. He gave up a leadoff hit, walked the bases loaded, and then hit a batter. (As if things could be any worse, the batter he hit was the opposing pitcher.) Bobby Cox slapped Mr. Medlen on the butt and wished him good evening.

“So, what is Kris Medlen’s personal quirk,” you ask, and I’m glad you did. He wore the bill of his hat flat, not rounded, so that one could (in principle) balance a cup of coffee on it. Interestingly, SportSouth showed Medlen’s parents in the stands during the game. While mom looked normal, Dad wore his cap just like his son’s: the bill was parallel with the earth.


I thought I was done with Adam
Now that he’s no longer with the Reds, I thought I was through watching Adam Dunn’s unwillingness to cut down his swing in an RBI situation… but no. With the game tied, runner on second base, and one out in the ninth, Dunn had two chances to hit 3-2 pitches. All he needed was a base hit to win the game – “just make contact, Adam, just make contact!” said I. I might as well have been vicariously shouting for Travis Henry to use birth control.

Yes, I have heard all the arguments that despite all the strikeouts, Adam Dunn is a valuable hitter. I agree, generally. Strikeouts usually hurt less than people think, if the alternative is frequently a home run or a double. Problem is, good players adjust their approach to the game situation. Either Mr. Dunn is incapable of shortening his stroke for the purpose of making contact – in which case he isn’t nearly as good as he thinks he is – or, he’s too stubborn. Either way, and coupled with his general defensive ineptitude, I don’t want Adam Dunn on any major league team that I root for.


Awesome!
As of Tuesday, the Nats had scored at least 5 runs in 10 straight games.


But they still stink
The Gnats are 1-9 in those games.


The hurtin’ Mets

Injuries forced three starters out of the Mets lineup for Monday’s game in Los Angeles. The Mets started Ramon Martinez instead of Jose Reyes at short; Angel Pagan instead of Gary Sheffield or Daniel Murphy in left; Fernando Tatis at first instead of Carlos Delgado.

Mr. Tatis went 0-5. Mr. Martinez made two errors at short and went 0-5 at the plate. Mr. Pagan had a good night offensively, going 4-6, but contributed to a critical misplay in the bottom of the 11th – he failed to yield to his centerfielder, who (according to Carlos Beltran’s postgame quotes) called for the ball six times.

As if that weren’t enough, Jeremy Reed entered the game as a pinch hitter, and took over for Mr. Tatis at first base. In the bottom of the 11th, after the Pagan misplay that was scored as a Beltran error, the Mets had their chance to get out of the inning. With one out and the bases loaded, a grounder to Reed could have been an easy double play ball, or at least a fielder’s choice at home. But Mr. Reed threw wide to home… fifth Mets error on the night, and ballgame.

As if THAT weren’t enough, check out the TOP of the 11th inning. Ryan Church singled with two outs, then came around to score on a Pagan triple. BUT WAIT! Church failed to touch third base. Take a look at this excellent screen shot of third base umpire
Mike DiMuro watching Mr. Church round third. A Dodger appeal nullified the run and ended the inning. AARRGH, said Mets fans. Their starters can’t come back soon enough.


The continuing saga
The Mets picked up right where they left off on Tuesday – left fielder Daniel Murphy got picked off to end the top of the first, then dropped a fly ball to allow a leadoff baserunner in the bottom of the first. Final score: 5-3 Dodgers.


Epilogue
Murphy was moved to first base for Wednesday’s game.


I will not discuss the sausage race this week
After the 4th inning of all home games, the Nationals stage a Presidents Race, which is eerily reminiscent of the Milwaukee Sausage Race: four presidents with enormous foam heads run around the stadium. On Tuesday night, the race was a relay involving both Presidents and Pirogies.
[1] A pirogue tripped over a hurdle, allowing a determined George Washington to pass the pirogue and cruise to victory.


Creepy clickable advertisements

I’m becoming increasingly annoyed at the online clickable ads tailored to a specific location. Somehow, no doubt using the kind of “cookie” you can’t eat, various websites know that I live in Woodberry Forest, Virginia. And the ads that I see, in principle, can be adjusted based on where I live.

Problem is, these ads are woefully uncreative, dishonest, and downright creepy. It’s one thing to put up an ad for a blues club on Rush Street for someone in a Chicagoland zip code, or to keep Carl’s Junior ads confined to the west coast. It’s simply stupid to create an ad with a fill-in-the-blank for a city: “Our internet-based or nationally known company has special deals for people in Kokomo, Indiana this week!”

This latter approach is what I see most of the time. Thing is, Woodberry Forest is a “town” consisting of about 40 families. Though we’re technically a town with our own zip code, really we’re a boys’ boarding school, where the faculty live on campus with our families. I know every person who lives on campus; I see most of them every day, even sometimes in the summer. Everyone who lives here is either a faculty member, a faculty spouse, or a faculty child.

So, I see, on mainstream websites such as yahoo.com and usatoday.com:

“Woodberry Forest mom lost jiggly fat. See how a mom dropped 43 pounds of fat and kept it off.” – no, I and my wife would have noticed if there were (a) a Woodberry Forest mom who lost 43 pounds, or (b) a Woodberry Forest mom who even had 43 extra pounds to lose.

“Woodberry Forest Man makes $10,000 a month. ‘I got fired! I now earn more than my old boss!’” No, if you got fired from Woodberry, you don’t live here anymore. And I would now be asking this person for money if he or she existed.

“Meet Woodberry Forest singles!” By the picture of the sultry and scantily clad young lady included with this ad, it is referring to “singles” of the female variety.
[2] Problem is, there are no female singles of marriageable age who would list their hometown as Woodberry Forest, Virginia. There are three high school girls in our “town,” as well as a gaggle of little girls. The (six-year-old) Nachoboy and I have already met each of these girls, so we have no need for an introduction service.


Help prevent the scourge of bootleg prayer crosses
An ad during Spongebob Squarepants promoted the “prayer cross,” a spiritual as well as a jewelry accessory. When held to the light, the words of the Lord’s Prayer “almost miraculously” appear. Each prayer cross comes with a money back guarantee, presumably if the appearance of the prayer is not quite miraculous.

Each also comes with a “certificate of authenticity.” What, is it signed by God himself?


BOUX to MASN
In between innings, their perky sideline reporter conducted an interview with Adam Dunn’s mom. Let me repeat #44 of Nachoman’s 99 Baseball Theses
[3]: during a game, it is inappropriate EVER to interview ANY relative of a player who sits in the stands. We tuned in to watch a game, not the Oprah Winfrey show. (You want to talk to Mrs. Dunn in the pregame or postgame, okay, fine with me, but not during the game.)


Double BOUX to SportSouth
…whose perky sideline reporter conducted an in-game interview with Kris Medlen’s parents. Double BOUX for extending the interview while game action was going on! Aargh!


Good catch by plate umpire Bob Davidson
In the 3rd inning on Thursday, Yunel Escobar grounded out. The bat flipped out of Mr. Escobar’s hands, and landed in Bob Davidson’s lap. Mr. Davidson juggled the crazily spinning bat, and finally held on while he sported a bemused look on his face. Replays showed Mr. Davidson angrily gesturing at Mr. Escobar upon returning the bat. Braves announcers noted that this was not the first time umpires or opponents have gotten angry about Escobar’s bad bat-dropping habits.


Just pencil in the 4-3 and be done with it
Aaron Cook, the Rockies sinkerballer, pitched against the Braves on Thursday night. He faced 32 batters, of whom 23 hit the ball on the ground. Of these grounders, 3 were hits, 20 were outs. Second baseman Clint Barmes had 10 assists.

The Braves broadcasters mentioned a deal an old timey pitching coach used to make with his pitchers: get 18 ground ball outs, and he’d buy the pitcher a suit. Nowadays pitchers can generally afford their own formalwear, but I still suggest that someone in Rockies management owes Mr. Cook a dashing outfit in recognition of Thursday’s outing.


I will check, Mr. Meek, whether you bring up your “holds” at your next contract negotiations.
Evan Meek of the Pirates entered Tuesday’s gamein the 7th with a one run lead. Right off the bat he went 3-0 to Christian Guzman, the Gnats leadoff hitter. Guzman ended up walking. A double play ball followed – phew. The next two batters walked. Mr. Meek barely escaped by inducing a deep fly out.

But he gets a “hold,” the most useless statistic in baseball, because he didn’t give up the lead. It’s not like he didn’t make every attempt to let the Gnats tie the game. Therefore, Mr. Meek, you earn the Nachoman’s Stinky Cheese award. Next time you plan on walking three batters in an inning, do it when I’m not watching.


I want to see clean innings from a closer
Kerry Wood blew a game for Cleveland on Tuesday. He entered in the 9th with a three run lead, but then he allowed the Royals two homers, a walk, a triple, and a game winning sac fly. He stinks, right?

Well, on that night, certainly. And it’s quite possible that Mr. Wood is truly washed up, no good, or whatever. But let’s look deeper at his 13 appearances as of Wednesday. Six of those thirteen appearances have been completely “clean,” meaning no hits or walks allowed. Granted, that’s a crude statistic – one of Mr. Wood’s appearances was for just one batter. I propose that a “closer,” whose job it is to get just a few critical outs in tight games, should more often than not get the opposition out 1-2-3. Despite Mr. Wood’s self-destruction on Tuesday and despite his high ERA, the number of clean innings he’s thrown stacks up against some other, similarly-used relievers. I tested my proposition by looking at some other teams’ closers.

Brad Lidge, PHI: 3 of 19 clean appearances
Francisco Cordero, CIN: 4 of 16 clean
Mariano Rivera, NYY: 3 of 16 clean
Kevin Gregg, CHC: 4 of 19 clean
Jonathan Broxton, LA: 10 of 18 clean
Francisco Rodriguez, 7 of 19 clean
Heath Bell, NL saves leader: 7 of 16 clean

This is just a sampling, but I submit that so far this year, Mr. Broxton has clearly outperformed Mssrs. Cordero and Rivera and Gregg and Lidge, and Mr. Wood’s performance hasn’t been that far outside the norm. Sure, I haven’t looked up exactly what happened in those games in which Mr. Broxton gave up hits or walks – perhaps Mr. Cordero or Mr. Wood did a much better job stranding those baserunners. I’m just saying that Mr. Broxton usually doesn’t even have to worry about baserunners. He shuts the opponents down for (usually) one inning, which is exactly what a closer is supposed to do.



But should she even want her tooth back?
Deadspin reports about the
woman who got stuck in a Citi Field Toilet. She dropped her gold tooth in the commode, reached in to retrieve it, and got stuck. Plumbers had to be called to disengage the poor lady. The question is, would you put an item in your mouth after it had spent time in a stadium potty?

I’m reminded of Weird Al Yankovic’s famous song lyric: “I’d rather clean all the toilets / in Grand Central Station with my tongue / than spend one more minute with you.”


Barry Zito has first successful outings since the Clinton Administration
Mr. Zito started the year with two outings that must be described as complete crap. But since then, three of his six starts have been Nachoman Quality Starts, with only one subpar game thrown in. On Tuesday night, he went 8 innings, giving up just two runs, but still took the loss.

Is he worth the $200 million or so that he signed for a couple of years ago? No. Has he been solid this year? Well, since Aprill 22, he’s pitched well. Credit should be given where credit is due, even if it does seem that Mr. Zito is robbing the Giants blind by underperforming his contract. Remember, it takes two to dupe: one unscrupulous agent to dupe, and one credulous GM to be duped. Don’t blame Mr. Zito for accepting a dumptruck full of money.


Sporcle
Thanks to my physics teaching colleague Jacob Sargent, I discovered a wonderful time waster the other day:
sporcle.com. This site provides “quizzes” in electronic format suitable for communal play. For example, I had some time left with my seniors in the last class on the last day of school. Most had finished their assignment. What did I do? I brought up the sporcle quiz in which we were given 16 minutes to name the artist responsible for each of the top 100 songs of the 1980s. With everyone shouting out ideas, we got 70% of the answers right. (They then demanded the 1990s game, and several students stayed late to finish.)

The site is captivating, especially if you’re wasting time in a group setting. Try pressing “random game” to see what’s available. On dorm duty Wednesday night I checked out a few random games, and found:
“Can you name the players listed in the Mitchell Report?”

Thing is, I had all kinds of trouble. I only got 9 out of 86!

Perhaps most interesting about the quiz is the results page. More than 12,000 people have taken the quiz. So, which player named in the Mitchell Report do you think was guessed successfully most often? Think about it…

Answer: Roger Clemens, guessed correctly by nearly 80% of the quiz-takers. Barry Bonds was guessed second most often, and he only got 70% of the popular vote. How can you not immediately connect “Barry Bonds” and “Mitchell Report?”


Slip of the tongue, but for the first time all year
At the boarding school where I work, each hall is assigned a 12th grader to serve as prefect. The prefect is responsible for maintaining order and cleanliness.
[4] The prefect on the bottom floor of the dorm I work on is named Ford Schwing.

You may recall the Hitchiker’s Guide trilogy
[5] by Douglas Adams. This series was a cult classic from back when I was in elementary school. A major character was Beteljuician Ford Prefect. For the first time all year, tonight I slipped up by asking a student if he had seen “Ford Prefect” rather than “Ford Schwing” or “the downstairs prefect.” I’m surprised I made it the whole year without that mistake.


Next week
There SHOULD be a column, assuming I survive this afternoon. The six-year-old of “real burp or fake burp?” The good news is, when he noted that one of his burps was both real and fake, he listened attentively to a discussion of quantum superposition states.









[1] What do presidents have to do with pirogues? No, sorry, no joke here, I’m honestly asking. I understand the Milwaukee-sausage correlation, and the Washington-president correlation, but a race involving Thomas Jefferson and a potato-filled noodle just doesn’t have a rationale, except perhaps illicit substances in the executive suite.
[2] Though chemistry professor Jason Getz notes that such sultry young ladies generally don’t have any need to go on line to meet available men.
[3] Intended to be nailed to Allan H. “Bud” Selig’s office door, the Nachoman’s Theses are not nearly as weighty, nor as historically significant, as Martin Luther’s.
[4] Or at least a facsimile thereof
[5] Consisting of five books

Friday, May 22, 2009

Full post coming, but probably tomorrow


I will not, in fact, discuss the sausage race, but I will mention a similarly surreal baseball event.
NM

Friday, May 15, 2009

Playground baseball and bad science at the gentlemen's club


It’s still early in the season, but some things are sorting themselves out. The Pirates, now in their standard lowest-potential-energy state at the bottom of the NL Central, are not as awesome as some proclaimed them to be. On the other hand, the Rangers and Reds have, so far, outperformed all expectations, while the Royals and Giants are also above .500. What does it really mean to be barely above .500 in mid-May? Couldn’t that change in just a few days?

Well, of course. Let’s look away from the won-lost record, and instead look at the
probability of making the playoffs as determined by Baseball Prospectus. Their computers play the season a million times, using each team’s established level of performance to approximate who will win each game.

Who’s most likely to make the playoffs? The Dodgers, of course, who have the best record in the majors. Their four-game lead over the Giants as of Thursday translates into an 84% chance of making the playoffs. The Royals are a 50-50 shot. The Giants, though they have a slightly better record than the Royals, have only a 13% playoff probability – they play in a tougher division. The vaunted Yankees are down to 18%. No one is effectively eliminated yet;
[1] the Orioles, at 14-20 in a strong division, are the worst bet at 3%.

How rapidly do these probabilities change? The case of the Mariners is instructive. They have won just once in the past week, during which their playoff probability has dropped from 24% to just 9%.


Why do we venerate the hitting streak?
Ryan Zimmerman of the Nationals had his 30 game hitting streak snapped this week. I ask, why do we care?

Not that I’m downplaying Mr. Zimmerman’s ability. He is a proud member of the Electric Marshmallows, the Nachoman’s fantasy team, so I am acutely aware of his ability to get on base consistently. Such ability would be far more interesting if the Gnats pitchers had any ability to keep opponents OFF base, but that’s an irrelevant tangent.

My point is that I’ve always suspected the “hitting steak” to be a concept invented for the sole purpose of venerating Joe DiMaggio. Over a long season, batting average, on base percentage, slugging percentage, and other stats can allow a reasonable comparison between players. Over a single night of baseball,
Willy Taveras can outperform Albert Pujols. Whether a hitter maintains a long hitting streak is far more a manifestation of luck than of differentiated skill – everyone who has ever hit for a long streak is a good hitter, but I dispute the conceit that DiMaggio is better than Rose by a score of 56-44.


A simple, obvious rule change that would net the Nachoman major dough
I took last week off because I’ve been traveling for two straight weekends. First I was in Oak Ridge for the US Association of Young Physicist Tournaments board meeting, where we made plans for our February 6, 2010 physics debate tournament. Then I drove to Richmond, VA to run an all-day Saturday prep session for students about to take the AP physics exam.

That session was paid for by a Virginia nonprofit group who has obtained a multi-million dollar federal grant for the improvement of AP science teaching. I can’t object to the purpose behind that grant; millions for AP science teaching is certainly better than spending federal money researching the
connection between ovulation and strippers’ tips. Nevertheless, I have an easier way to ensure quality AP science teaching: make the teachers ace the AP exam.

Currently, any schmo who earns science teaching certification can teach AP physics in a public school, no matter how much physics that person knows, no matter how good that person is at teaching, and no matter how much effort that person puts into his or her course. The major problem with evaluating teachers is that teaching talent and effort are nebulous, subjective qualities.
[2]

Physics knowledge, though, is not particularly subjective. Although I agree that too many teachers who know physics well have zero ability to help others learn the subject, I also submit that it is impossible to teach a subject in which one has insufficient fundamental knowledge – no matter how good the teacher. Since it’s next to impossible to fairly evaluate teaching ability and effort, why not test a teacher’s physics knowledge?

In fact, we have an excellent, nationally normed, standardized exam which tests physics knowledge: the AP exam itself. I suggest that public schools eliminate the arcane and worthless teaching certification rules, and instead allow anyone with a college degree to attempt to teach AP physics, if that person can get a top score of “5” on the exam. (And if that person fails to get a 5 on the exam, then that person cannot teach the course; I don’t like my tax money paying people in jobs for which they are not qualified.)

Now, I’m sure the local NEA union chief has already started writing a nasty response to the Nachoman reminding me that, even were all physics teachers to pass the AP exam, many would still stink as teachers, and would thus be unqualified for the money they earn. I can’t argue with that point. So, tell me again, why is it a bad idea to root out the one mode of incompetence which can, without question, be rooted out?

Finally, you might ask why such a simple rule change could net the Nachoman some dough. You see, the number of actually qualified AP physics teachers is relatively small. If a school must hire from a limited pool of teachers, then they will be forced to pay higher wages – that’s just supply and demand. Instead of offering workshops and seminars and programs with multi-million dollar federal grants, why not just use that money to pay truly qualified teachers? That’s a lot simpler, and would net the country substantially better results.


Not ALL umpires look like this
If you watch mlb.tv, you may have seen advertisements for the week-long mlb umpire camp in southern California. I met several veterans of this camp when I was at Umpire School – apparently the camp is sort of a point of contact to help the major leagues scout for umpire talent.

Unfortunately, the video from this camp (a screenshot is to the right) plays into the hands of those who stereotype umpire physiques. Not all of us have enormous bellies! Some of us have merely large bellies.


It’s easier to blame the umpire than your teammate's crappy performance
After Tuesday’s extra inning loss to the Mets, Braves legend Chipper Jones lashed out at umpire Greg G
ibson for costing his team the game. In the 9th inning, the Braves led by a run with one out and a man on second base. Carlos Beltran bolted for third base, McCann made a perfect throw… and replays indicate that Mr. Jones applied the tag an instant before Mr. Beltran reached the bag. Greg Gibson ruled “safe” – he missed a bang-bang call.

He missed the call, but did he truly cost the game? Possibly… Mr. Beltran scored on a sacrifice fly to tie the game, when a proper out call would have put the Braves one out from victory with the bases empty.
Nevertheless, consider how the game ended in the 10th inning. Pitcher Jeff Bennett got two quick outs, then gave up a single and a stolen base. He intentionally walked starter Alex Cora to face pinch hitter Ramon Cas
tro, whose career batting average is a paltry .238.

Mr. Bennett proceeded to go 3-0 on Castro, finishing up with a 5-pitch walk. That brought up Carlos Beltran, who took two straight balls, eventually walking to force in the winning run.

Jeff Bennett, you earn the Nachoman's Stinky Cheese award for your 10th inning. And Mr. Jones, I feel your pain about the out in the 9th, but your teammate blew the game, not the umpire.


Strippers and bad science
The previously referenced article
“Ovulatory cycle effects on tip earnings by lap dancers: economic evidence for human estrus?” earned the 2008 Ig Nobel Prize for economics. Why? Well, for one, the premise is funny. But I dispute the study’s conclusions.

Read the study’s abstract. The conclusion drawn by the authors is that ovulating strippers earn better tips than non-ovulating strippers. Their evidence: a control group of strippers on birth control pills earned, on average, relatively constant tips over the course of a month. However, the strippers on their natural reproductive cycle earned almost twice as much money when they were ovulating than when they were not.

I see two major problems with the research methods. The first is that results were self reported. Especially if the women involved knew what the researchers were investigating, they might have adjusted their reporting to meet the researchers, or their own, expectations. Secondly, the sample size is just 18 women over merely two months. Presumably that’s only about nine women in the control group and nine in the investigatory group. The chances are immense that random events – a performer having a bad day, a dancer in one group being significantly better than the others, A-Rod showing up at the club – could have significantly skewed the results.

To check the validity of this study, I suspect I can obtain a large contingent of volunteers from my E period class who would love to redo this study properly, with or without a federal grant. To address my concerns about the methodology, they propose the use of video analysis rather than self reporting.

And there are people who say science isn’t applicable in "real life."


A TV broadcast gimmick that’s actually interesting and useful
No, it’s nothing so revolutionary as the “Fox Box” or the yellow on-screen first down marker, but nothing as crappity as the infamous glowing puck. Sportschannel New York, which broadcasts Mets games, shows what they call the “pitch differential.”

The Nachoman has long advocated that an in-depth evaluation of a pitcher’s outing should be on a pitch-by-pitch basis. One should look at the accuracy and movement of the pitch rather than the actual result. If the catcher wants a slider down and away, but the pitch goes up and in, then that’s bad. But if the pitch is a nasty slider dead on the catcher’s glove, that’s good, even if that awesome slider gets knocked for bloop double.

SNY’s “pitch differential” highlights the catcher’s target with a blue circle; the actual pitch location is highlighted in yellow. Viewers can see for themselves how badly the pitcher missed his target… or, viewers can see that a pitch was actually quite good, even if the batter hits it. “Pitch differential” makes it difficult for broadcasters to engage in one of the Nachoman’s pet peeves, the color man who describes every hard hit ball as coming off of a pitch “out over the plate.”


Playground baseball: why young players don’t know the rules
I worked a middle school baseball game as the plate umpire on Tuesday. Early in the game, the visiting pitcher tried to pick off a runner at second base, who slid back to the bag safely. The alert shortstop held the tag on the runner as he got up. The 13-year-old took his hand off the base before he contacted the base with his foot; since he was still being tagged, he was out. I’ve never seen that before.

Soon thereafter, the visiting pitcher pivoted, stepped toward first base, and faked a pickoff throw there. I called a balk. Now, at the varsity and especially at the collegiate or pro level, the umpire is directed never to engage in explanation of a balk unless asked; even then, the explanation should be succinct. “He faked a throw to first from the rubber” is sufficient, because the assumption is that everyone knows the rule.
[3]

With a 13-year-old on the mound, though, I felt comfortable asking the pitcher if he knew what he did wrong. With eyes as wide as saucers, he shook his head. I briefly explained that he wasn’t allowed to fake a throw to first base unless he first stepped off the back of the rubber. The boy nodded… but later in the inning he took my partner aside for more clarification. Between innings I asked the coach if he was clear on the rule; he said he was, and he took the pitcher aside for a cram session.

So what’s your point here, Nachoman?

My partner noted to me between innings that these coaches seem not to have taught their players some basic tenets of baseball: maintain contact with the base or call time after a slide, you can’t fake a throw to first from the rubber. Me, I don’t blame the coaches. They get a bare minimum of practice time, during which they rightfully should be more concerned with developing physical skills. Rules and tactical tidbits are learned not by coaching but by experience.

And this brings me back, as always, to the Fundamental Theorem of Nachodom: Baseball is best learned by 10-15 year olds playing numerous unstructured “playground” games without adult involvement.

Think about how you learned various rules of the game. I personally am a nerd about such things, so I learned a lot by noting unusual occurrences in major league games. But some of the most lasting lessons came by playing experience. To wit:

When does the batter run to first base after a dropped third strike? I couldn’t have told you when I was 12. At least, not until I ran into a triple play. I was on third base, bases loaded, none out. The batter struck out, and the catcher dropped the ball. “Run!” shouted an assortment of ignorant soccer moms insistently, with their tone of voice indicating that we baserunners were worse than stupid for failing to run. Realizing that I was forced home if the batter ran to first, I ran. The catcher, of course, tagged me out easily, then threw to second base to put out another confused boy for the triple play. The coach didn’t hold his temper well after the game, when he explained that the batter ONLY has to run to first base if the base is open, or if there are two outs.

You may not remember your own confusion when you were young, but the rule about retouching your base after a caught fly ball is not obvious to novice players.
[4] All the boys in Beechwood Elementary School’s third grade in 1981 learned that one the hard way. We drafted teams for kickball in gym class one day, and of course nerdboy Nachoman was chosen last. The captains had been one boy and one girl, who had picked on strict gender lines. Thus, I was stuck as the odd boy out on the girls’ team.

Top of the first inning, the first two boys smugly kicked singles as the girls in their girly way acted as if the ball would mess up their hair if it touched them. With runners at first and second and none out, the next boy who thought he was awesome popped the ball up to me at shortstop. I caught it, and noticed that the runners had just sprinted to the next bases. I stepped on second, tagged the runner from first base, and I had executed an unassisted triple play.

The more games that a kid plays in, the more chances that kid has to learn little bits of baseball knowledge. Nowadays, I hardly ever see pickup games of baseball, softball, stickball, kickball, or whatever. Kids play football or lacrosse or even soccer in those rare times when they are free to fool around by themselves. I haven’t seen any sort of recreational baseball on Woodberry’s campus in five years, when a small group of seniors organized a daily stickball game. Is it any wonder that today’s best baseball players come from the Caribbean?


I call balogna
Mets pitcher J.J. Putz
[5] used to be the “closer” for the Mariners, but this year he signed a huge contract with the Mets to be their “setup” man. Francisco Rodriguez was signed to be the closer.

Now, what difference should the defined roles make? Not much. Both pitchers are expected to pitch a single inning in tight game situations. Whether that inning is the 8th or 9th should be rather immaterial. Holding a 1-run lead in the 8th is nearly as critical as holding that lead in the 9th; if the pitcher’s team ends up pulling away in the 9th, then the pitcher’s 8th inning work is MORE important to the victory. Nevertheless, relief pitchers have been conditioned by journalists, agents, and each other that they must pitch the 9th inning to be a mensch.
Mr. Putz has had a rough stretch, which can be attributed to a recently diagnosed shoulder injury. He just took a cortisone shot which should allow him to pitch through the pain. According to Yahoo Fantasy Sports:

“[The injury] explains his recent struggles, though Putz thought his mild drop in velocity was due to the "lack of adrenaline" from pitching in the eighth rather than save situations.”

Oh, boy… Mr. Putz, you’re saying you’re going to stink until you get the adrenaline rush from the 9th inning again? Are you truly talking about the adrenaline rush of a 3-run lead facing the 7, 8, and 9 hitter for the cheapest save in the universe? Or are you REALLY talking about the adrenaline rush picturing the yacht you’re going to buy with the extra money a save can earn on your next contract?
Of course, if mlb would abolish the save statistic, then maybe relief pitchers would be evaluated and paid in better relation to their actual ability and performance.

And if pigs could fly I could have a pulled pork sandwich on my next cross country flight.


Sore loser department
On Sunday night, the Red Sox and the Devil Rays engaged in what looks now, on paper, to be a good game, until the line “time of game: 3:30” jumps off the page. The Nachoman didn’t even bother to watch, knowing that an AL East game on ESPN was nearly guaranteed to be excruciating.

Instead, I found game 4 of the Celtics-Magic playoff series. I’ve kept up a wee bit with the Celtics’ progress this postseason just because I read all of Bill Simmons’ columns. I was thus aware that Glen “Big Baby” Davis has been thrust into action due to the absence of aging former MVP candidate Kevin Garnett.

On the decisive play of this game, with the Celtics down one, Mr. Baby set a screen for Paul Pierce as the clock ticked under 5 seconds. Both defenders jumped Mr. Pierce, surmising correctly that the high profile player would be expected to take the last-second shot. Mr. Pierce cagily and correctly passed off to Mr. Baby, who had a wide open 17 foot jump shot for the win. To everyone’s surprise, including Mr. Baby’s, the shot went in, evening the series.

You can see video of the shot everywhere on youtube,
including here. A couple of notes:

(1) Watch the video in real speed, and ask yourself if the shot beats the buzzer. I suspect your answer will be, “yes, obviously.” I mean, the red light indicating the expiration of the game doesn’t come on until the ball is swishing thorough the basket. No question. Nevertheless, the officials wasted more than a minute checking the replay before they declared the game official. My goodness… they should have been thoroughly confident of their call so as not to even need replay. But if they DID need replay, why did it take more than one quick viewing? The first replay I saw on television was as decisive as could be. What took so long?

(2) Note the title of the video: “Glen “Big Baby” Davis Hits the Game Winner At the Buzzer! (And Pushes Kid.) TNT didn’t show it live, but on replay you can see Mr. Baby make mild contact with a pre-adolescent boy on his way to celebrate with his teammates. The boy’s hat fell to the floor. Sniff. From the Associated Press:

"The father of the 12-year-old boy bumped by Celtics big man Glen ''Big Baby'' Davis after Sunday's game-winning shot is demanding an apology.

Ernest Provetti told the Orlando Sentinel that he wrote the NBA office demanding an apology from Davis for acting like a ''raging animal with no regard for fans' personal safety.'' NBA spokesman Tim Frank confirmed the league received the e-mail but declined to comment on it. "

I hope Mr. Frank demands an apology from Mr. Provetti’s son for his failure to control himself during the last seconds of the game. Look at the video again – Sore Loser Boy had jumped far out of his courtside seat, putting himself within a foot of the court itself. The animal raged within the confines of his cage; Sore Loser Boy was the one who jumped into said cage, and is lucky he merely got his hat knocked off.


Next Week
Noting that Mr. Provetti obtained the apology he sought, as well as 15 minutes of ill-gotten fame, the city of Cincinnati enlists Mr. Provetti's assistance to demand an apology from Mike Brown for two decades of incompetence.


[1] The Nachoman defines “effectively eliminated” as a less than 1% chance of making the playoffs.
[2] I often bastardize justice Potter Stewart’s quotation about quality physics teaching: I can’t define it, but I know it when I see it.
[3] This is usually a good assumption. Managers and players will often feign ignorance in order to argue a call, or in order to get what they hope will be an advantage, but they usually shut up once it’s clear that the umpire knows his business. If a high-level coach in fact is ignorant of a rule, he can get a detailed explanation between innings.
[4] In particular, I remember trying in vain to explain this rule to Thomas the Frenchman on our Haverford College physics department softball team.
[5]
Pronounced “puts,” as in “The boy puts matzoh on the table.” Not the other way.




Wednesday, May 13, 2009

Ribbie Reporter -- NCAA day 1

Salisbury 3, Washington and Lee 2

Well then. W&L started Chuck Davidson threw 8 innings, gave up 2 hits and walked 2 ... and took the loss. Argh. Washington and Lee outhit Salisbury 7 to 2 ... and lost. Oy.

Playing the No. 3 team in Division III, a team that has a 2.71 ERA and a .355 team batting average, W&L played very, very well ... and lost. It was a brisk affair, over in 1:35 with complete games from each team.
The 3rd inning was the exciting one. W&L loaded the bases with two outs, and on a 1-2 pitch Catcher Will Lewis demonstrated some great hitting by staying behind an outside fastball and lacing it into the left center gap. W&L led 2-0.
But things went bad in the bottom of the 3rd. With a man on first, Salisbury hit a routine, but spinning, grounder to first. 1B Hunter Serenbetz booted it. Two batters later, with one out and the bases loaded, the number two hitter tapped a slow roller to short. The ball died in the grass, and SS John Ditore tried to make a flip towards second rather than going to first. The Salisbury runner beat the throw to second, so everyone was safe and a run scored. This proved critical when Salisbury's next batter had another RBI groundout that was only the second out instead of the third out.
Two mistakes. But they came in the same inning and at a bad time. And that's all it took for W&L to miss a beautiful upset chance.

They're back in action at 10 a.m. tomorrow vs. Washington and Jefferson. Game broadcast will be available at http://wlur.wlu.edu

Monday, May 11, 2009

Ribbie reporter -- Stay tuned later this week for D-III action

The Ribbie Reporter has been enjoying the great outdoors -- and some high school baseball up at Woodberry -- instead of watching the Royals waste good pitching with terrible hitting, baserunning and defense. He heads out tomorrow for Salisbury, MD on the Eastern Shore, where Washington and Lee is the No. 8 seed (out of 8) in the NCAA D-III regionals. The winner of the 8 team double elimination tournament heads for the D-III World Series.
Here's a list of the seedings:
1. Salisbury (37-6)
2. Shenandoah (28-6)
3. N.C. Wesleyan (27-19)
4. Christopher Newport (24-11-2)
5. Washington and Jefferson (33-12)
6. York (Pa.) (27-14)
7. Johns Hopkins (24-14)
8. Washington and Lee (22-13)

The only team in this bunch that W&L faced this year was Shenandoah. The Generals lost 5-4 in Lexington and certainly did not look outmatched at any point. We used out #3 starter and our #4/swing reliever in that game. Salisbury will be a tough out of course, and they'll have the advantage of a home crowd behind them. But W&L started the conference tournament by beating Lynchburg College (No. 1 seed in the ODAC) in Lynchburg. It'll help in this case that the game is at 1:15 on Wednesday.

-- Stay tuned later this week for recaps and analysis of all the action.

Friday, May 8, 2009

No post this week -- suspension



The Nachoman had been suspended for 50 columns for use of performance enhancing substances. These include spell-check, wikipedia, baseball-reference.com, and word processing software. Back in the days when sportswriters wrote pure columns, they had offices full of reference books and a non-electronic Smith Corona typewriter without white-out. We must get back to untainted baseball writing.


On appeal, the Nachoman's suspension was reduced to just one week. He will be back on May 15 with all kinds of clever tidbits about the world of baseball. For a given value of clever, anyway.





NM

Saturday, May 2, 2009

Physics and Baseball in Oak Ridge, Tennessee


Less major league baseball this week for the Nachoman than usual, folks. I’ve got two weeks of heavy umpiring, plus two weekends straight out of town. Currently I’m in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, at a board meeting of the US Association of Young Physicist Tournaments. We’re considering moving our yearly physics debate tournament to Oak Ridge because, as Oak Ridge High School physics teacher Peggy Bertrand puts it, “In Oak Ridge you can’t throw a stone without hitting a physicist.” In central Virginia the same mantra applies, as long as you throw your stone with a cruise missle.

Don’t worry, despite my travels, I have compiled some interesting tidbits about baseball, which you can read in the rest of this 3000 word column. But the first tidbit is about both baseball and physics. Kind of.

The USAYPT needs money. (Who doesn’t?) We need to be able to pay travel costs for the jurors at our yearly tournament, and we’d like to make it less expensive for the teams to attend. The USAYPT directors are all physics teachers, who are utterly clueless about raising money. I thought, perhaps, that the major leagues’ most famous and only physicist might be able to help out.

The following is a letter I sent to Jeff Francis, the pitcher for the Colorado Rockies who had declared a physics major in university in British Columbia before he was drafted. Mr. Francis is on the DL this year, but he signed a fat contract recently… so he might have time and money on his hands.

Dear Mr. Francis,
I’m going to tell you about “physics fights.” I’d like to invite you to sponsor and judge an international physics debate tournament. Let me explain…

I’ve been teaching high school physics for 13 years, most of which have been spent at a boys’ boarding school. I’ve watched your career with some interest, as you’re the only authentic physicist that I know of in the major leagues. (I can’t tell for sure from your bio… clearly you declared a physics major in college, but did you graduate with a degree? If not, how far did you get? What classes did you get to? I’d love to know…)

Anyway, I’ve been professionally involved with baseball as well as physics. I work for STATS, INC scoring games; you are on my list of pitchers whose games I love to work, because you work fast and throw strikes. I’ve written the Everything Kids Baseball Book. I broadcast Woodberry Forest’s games over the internet for the players’ parents to hear. Last year I was given a sabbatical, so I attended the Harry Wendelstedt Umpire School. (If you ever have a chance to talk to Paul Nauert, the school’s chief instructor, ask him about me. I was the crazy guy in the orange shirt and squash goggles who was really, really loud and asked lots of questions.)

For a few years, my main focus outside the classroom has been the USAYPT. I am the director of a day-long tournament in which schools from all over the world come to Woodberry Forest to present their work on four undergraduate-level research problems. The tournament itself consists of “Physics Fights,” ritualized debates in which teams of students present and dispute their results. Think of typical high school debate team, but with physics rather than with politics.

The tournament is growing. Last year we had eight teams attend, including teams from California, New York, Virginia, Tennessee, Singapore, Australia (Brisbane Girls’ Grammar School), and Slovakia. In order to accommodate this expansion, we need to make the tournament into a two-day event.

The issue with a two-day tournament is getting a professional jury. So far, we have survived by asking college professors within a 2-hour radius of Woodberry to volunteer for a day. For a two-day event, we would need to pay for transportation and hotel costs, and hopefully give each juror a small stipend. Problem is, we don’t have that money.

We could run this two-day tournament for $20,000. Our organization’s secretary is starting the process of fundraising, but I thought I’d start with you… on one hand, we hope you’d sponsor us out of the goodness of your heart and a desire to help physics students the world over. That said, think of the unparalleled public relations opportunity this could be... “Major League Pitcher Judges International Physics Tournament” as a headline on Deadspin or as a Sportscenter story could be a coup for you, your team, and for our organization.

The USAYPT is a registered 501(c)(3) public charity, meaning all donations to us are tax deductable. Check our website (
www.usaypt.org) for more details about us. Our 2010 tournament will be held on the Friday-Saturday February 5-6. You may contact me via the email address or phone number shown below. I look forward to hearing from you…

Greg Jacobs


Hey, Nachoman, that letter might work! Jeff Francis might be totally inspired to reply!
Yes. And Bud Selig might appoint me Official Physicist of the National League.

And if a frog had wings, he wouldn’t bump his but on the ground when he hopped.


Weird situation of the week
At our monthly meeting, an umpire crew brought up an unusual play they had seen at a local high school game. With runners at first and third, the runner on first base took a lead near the outfield grass. The pitcher threw to the first baseman, who began chasing the runner – who bolted into right field! As the Keystone Cops-style chase ensued, the runner on third jogged home. Is this fair?

Several rules issues are in play here. To start with, the initial lead on the outfield grass is perfectly acceptable. A runner is not required to remain in a straight line between first and second base. (No one ever questions a runner’s right to take a wide turn around first when legging out a double, do they?) The rules state that the runner establishes his own baseline; that means, if the runner wants to establish a baseline in the outfield, so be it.

So, you ask, what’s that rule that allows a runner to be called out for running “out of the baseline?” The key point is that the “out of the baseline” rule only applies WHEN A PLAY IS BEING MADE ON THE RUNNER. If no one is attempting to put the runner out, then he can go where he likes. But when a fielder tries to tag him, he must stay on a line between his position and the base he’s going to. He goes more than three feet outside that line to avoid a tag, he’s out.

In this case, once the first baseman takes a step toward the runner in a bona fide attempt to put him out, that constitutes a “play.” The runner at this point must go straight from his position toward first or second base. When he runs into the outfield, he leaves his established baseline to avoid a tag; thus, he is called out.


Awkward Joey Votto Interview
David Brown, of Yahoo’s “Big League Stew” blog, convinced Joey Votto to grant an interview for his
“Answer Man” feature. (Scroll down to the bottom to read Answer Man” features from folks other than Joey Votto.)

In Mr. Brown’s interviews, he asks offbeat, oddball questions designed to get the normally staid baseball men to loosen up and give authentic, spontaneous responses. I suppose the idea of the feature is to reveal a more authentic characterization of the player than can be inferred from the clichés he must spout after each game. Problem was, Mr. Votto didn’t seem to understand the purpose or tone of the interview. He did NOT loosen up. And afterwards, he
complained to a beat reporter about Mr. Brown’s interview. He said he should have refused to answer most of these questions… he called his cooperativeness in the face of strange questions a “learning experience.” Come now, Mr. Votto… I don’t deny that the press corps can be evil incarnate to the professional athlete, but giving your fans a peek into your stance on bowling and mustaches should not be a PR disaster for you.

Deep Dish writes:
We haven't had the chance to talk baseball much over the past couple of weeks.

Yeah, Deep Dish, amazing how crazy it can be as a teacher at a boarding school even though a trained orangutan could teach my courses in the spring. With only a week to go before the AP physics exam, my guys are either ready or they’re not. Once high school baseball season is over and I stop umpiring, I'll be ready to watch baseball religiously again. And the Reds will be out of the race by then, so I'll be willing to watch the Cubs or Cardinals or whoever. Not the Yankees, though. I flipped on the TV at 8:30 Sunday night and they were STILL playing a game that started at 4:00.

Here's a random prediction for 2009: keep your eyes on the Pirates.

I've happened to see bits and pieces of a few of their games for no real reason. Tonight I watched the first four innings of their game against the Padres (who have also come a long way). This is backed up by absolutely no concrete statistical data, but it seems to me the Pirates are doing a few things really well:

1) Starting pitching -- actually, I do have some data here. Combined, their starters have one of the lowest ERAs in the majors.

Agreed. Still small-sample-size time, though... I saw the same thing about the Royals LAST year, when they were hanging around after a month. We all know how that turned out, right, KC fans?

2) Defense. They're hustling and getting to a lot of tough balls.
Yes. This is perhaps the most underappreciated aspect of good teams: defensive talent and hustle. It can't be measured well.

3) Moving runners over -- sac bunts and sac flies all over the place.
Perhaps, but those are still outs. Baseball Prospectus rates managers essentially in REVERSE order of the number of sacrifice bunt and hit and run orders. One of the themes of modern statistical analysis is that "little ball," as championed by Dusty Baker et al, is in general less likely to produce runs than Earl Weaver style wait-for-the-three-run-homer. How many times last year -- three, maybe? -- did Dusty Baker order one of his middle-of-the-order guys to bunt late in a tie game... the guy failed, then hit a two-strike walk-off home run.

4) Terrific new old-school uniforms--Obviously the most important factor at work.
Awesome. I haven't see them, but they've got to be better than the technically illegal duds the Pirates have worn for the past two years. (Illegal because of the patterned dots on the sleeves.) I wore an old-school Astros hat to the cookout yesterday, and a student from Texas offered his compliments. You see, I'm the only man in America who liked the 1980s Mike Scott era "rainbow" uniforms.

Cubs are up-and-down. The Cards look really good (the starting pitching point applies here as well). And the Reds played well against the Cubs during their series last week. Cueto beat Zambrano, I think.

As I predicted last year, Johnny Cueto has outperformed Edinson Volquez this year, primarily because Edinson couldn’t hit Jabba the Hutt with the ball if he were standing next to Princess Leia.

NL Central could be more interesting than many thought -- in the preseason predictions almost everyone had the Cubs running away with it.

Could be, but I think the Cardinals defense, or lack thereof, might be their eventual undoing. That and their relief pitching – I watched Kyle McClellan walk three in 0.2 innings before giving up a game-winning two run single.

Don’t worry, folks, you’ll hear more from Deep Dish in later episodes of Nachoman’s Baseball.



The dangers of generalizing based on one week
Carroll Rogers of the Atlanta Journal Constitution wrote one of those 500 word “what we've learned about our team in six games” articles a while back. The Braves started the year 5-1; since then they’ve gone 5-10, and now stand solidly in third place in the NL east. Here’s were the six things that Mr. or Ms. Rogers said he or she had learned. (I don't know whether Carroll Rogers is male or female. That wouldn't matter at all to the Nachoman, except that I desire to refer to him/her with an honorific. Do I say Mr. Rogers? Ms. Rogers? No, I choose "Mx. Rogers." I use "Mx." when a person's gender is unknown and/or irrelevant. Good grammatical invention, no? No? Really, no? Phthphth. I'm using it anyway.)


1. “ The Braves have some pop after all.” Mx. Rogers went on to list all of the Braves with a home run six games into the season. Of course, the Braves rank 23rd in the major leagues in homers as of April 30.

2. The rotation is shored up. Here Mx. Rogers might be on more solid ground, but not because of one week’s worth of performance. It was clear before even Derrick Lowe and Javier Vasquez had even thrown a pitch that the Braves had improved on last year’s starters. Mx. Rogers noted that Braves starters were, after one week, fourth in baseball in ERA; now they’ve only dropped to 6th.

3. The bullpen might have some issues. Gotta love these “might” predictions – they “might” be right, they “might” be the worst sort of bet-hedging. After a few well-publicized first week meltdowns, the Braves bullpen has settled a bit. But they’re still only 20th best in the majors by ERA. (Once again, this isn’t something Mx. Rogers learned in week 1 – the flakiness of the Braves bullpen was a topic in Baseball Prospectus’s Braves article this year.)

4. Jeff Francoeur is showing signs of a comeback. Mr. Francoeur’s OPS stands at .729. That ranks 132nd out of the 198 qualified (i.e. 3.1 plate appearances per game) players in the majors.

What’s funny about this one is how Mx. Rogers draws general conclusions from pitches faced – “He’s going a little deeper into counts (3.62 pitches per plate appearance is up from 3.49 last year).” Really? After 25 at-bats, Mx. Rogers, you think 0.13 pitches per plate appearance is significant? Had Mr. Francoeur seen just THREE more pitches all year, he would be back to his old tricks of jumping on pitches early in the count.

5. Jordan Schafer can hang with the big boys. Well, his OPS is .827. Not bad. Good enough for 82nd of the 198 qualified major leagures. Does that qualify as "hanging with the big boys?" Only time will tell.

No Busch at Busch
Busch beer was created as a homage to Busch stadium. Well, not really a homage, more like a marketing ploy… when the original stadium was built, major league baseball did not allow fields to be named after products or companies. (Baseball has since changed their collective minds.) Nonetheless, it was forbidden to name the field “Budweiser Stadium.” So the Busch family named the field after themselves, “Busch Stadium.” And they created Busch beer.

But now, as reported by Chad Garrison in the
Riverfront Times
, it is difficult to find Busch Beer at Busch stadium. He and concessionaire Sportservice dispute precisely how many concession stands offer the namesake beverage; he says 3, Sportservice says 10-15. Nevertheless, most beer kiosks offer only Bud, Bud Light, Bud Dry, Bud Ice, Lady Bud, Raspberry Bud, and Tartar Control Bud.


Announcers being critical for the sake of being critical
Leadoff the 5th inning Sunday in San Diego, Macias hit a ball deep into the corner in right field. He picked up the ball (replays showed him looking into right field before he rounded the second base bag) and turned on the jets for third base.

Problem was, he stumbled about three steps beyond second, and he almost fell to the ground. He regained his footing, but a perfect throw retired him in a close play.

The Pirate announcers used this occasion to launch into a diatribe about the “poor baserunning decision.” As the rules of baseball read, apparently, anyone who makes the first out of the inning at third base should be publicly humiliated.

Yes, that’s usually a good rule of thumb – if you can’t make it to third easily, then with no outs, stay at second. In this case, though, Macias would have made it to third easily had he not stumbled! And even with the stumble, it took a perfect relay throw to get him! How is that a bad baserunning decision? What, was Mr. Macias supposed to anticipate his stumble?

No, folks, this is instead a bad announcing decision, to criticize a player incorrectly. FSN Pittsburgh compounded their error upon return from commercial – they showed the entire play again, including the stumble and the bang-bang play at third. The same announcer maintained his idiocy – despite the video evidence to the contrary, he claimed that Mr. Macias would have been thrown out easily even had he not stumbled. Aarrgh! Are you too vain to admit you made a mistake in your criticism? Of course you are… instead of acknowledging that you were too quick to throw stones, you essentially told your audience that the sky is green. If Macias was not thrown out “easily” in the real play, how would he have been thrown out by a greater distance without a stumble? Grrr.


And Marv Levy is still in negotiations about the Bills game
The Cincinnati-Pittsburgh game of Sept. 27 has been moved to 4:15 so that the New York-Tennessee game can be played at 1:00. This is due to the Jewish Holiday of Yom Kippur.

NachoGrandpa says: Apparently Dolly Parton and Reba McIntyre complained that they wouldn't be able to watch the game and also make it to Kol Nidre.


Next Week
The Nachoman notes his displeasure that most Oak Ridge residents look and act like physicists, not like the Oak Ridge Boys. I didn’t hear country music anywhere in the town.
NM
P.S. Thanks a million to neighbor Jason Getz -- who needs a theme name -- for tracking down an early draft of this column and sending it to me via email.