Sunday night, Bears at Packers. Illegal contact is called by the referee. NBC’s cameras replay the source of the action, which was a near-interception by a Green Bay cornerback.
Al Michaels asks, with a bit of indigence, “Where was the illegal contact?”
Probable John Madden (or pretty much any other “analyst,” especially one who played offense) response: “I don’t know, Al, *I* certainly don’t see any illegal contact. I can’t imagine what the officials were thinking.”
Chris Collinsworth response: “It was downfield.”
Mr. Collinsworth, seemingly alone among announcing booth denizens, knows that illegal contact is ANY contact that occurs more than 5 yards downfield before the ball is thrown, even away from the eventual focal point of the play. I appreciated how Collinsworth’s quick, concise response refocused the broadcast on the game rather than on the purported incompetence of the officials.
Monday, September 14, 2009
Friday, September 11, 2009
A note about Troy Palamalu's hair
A note from last night's NFL opener, Titans-Steelers:
On the crazy-sick Polamalu interception, the Tennessee receiver’s leg touched Polamalu’s hair. I read a couple of years ago that the hair is considered part of the uniform for the purposes of “touching.” Therefore, Polamalu should have been ruled down after the interception, and his ~10 yard return should have been disallowed. I’m surprised Jeff Fischer didn’t challenge. I’m also surprised that the most astute commentators on television, Michaels and Collinsworth, didn’t notice.
P.S. Isn’t it great to have Collinsworth in place of Madden? I’m enjoying the announcers, which is a highly unusual state for the Nachoman.
P.P.S. I sighed to myself as I headed to bed last night, "Be prepared for the onslaught of lazy sportswriter columns decrying the NFL overtime system." Sure enough, SI.com had one at 11:39 a.m. Come on, folks, just deal with it. If you don't want to lose in overtime because the other team won the coin toss, you have two options: (1) win the dang game in regulation, or (2) make your defense and special teams stop the opponent. If you can't do either of those things, TS.
On the crazy-sick Polamalu interception, the Tennessee receiver’s leg touched Polamalu’s hair. I read a couple of years ago that the hair is considered part of the uniform for the purposes of “touching.” Therefore, Polamalu should have been ruled down after the interception, and his ~10 yard return should have been disallowed. I’m surprised Jeff Fischer didn’t challenge. I’m also surprised that the most astute commentators on television, Michaels and Collinsworth, didn’t notice.
P.S. Isn’t it great to have Collinsworth in place of Madden? I’m enjoying the announcers, which is a highly unusual state for the Nachoman.
P.P.S. I sighed to myself as I headed to bed last night, "Be prepared for the onslaught of lazy sportswriter columns decrying the NFL overtime system." Sure enough, SI.com had one at 11:39 a.m. Come on, folks, just deal with it. If you don't want to lose in overtime because the other team won the coin toss, you have two options: (1) win the dang game in regulation, or (2) make your defense and special teams stop the opponent. If you can't do either of those things, TS.
Friday, August 28, 2009
Two important notes about the August 28 Dodgers-Reds game
(1) No, it’s NOT a save situation when the pitcher comes in in the 9th with one out, no one on, and a 3 run lead. Sorry, FSN Cincinnati.
(2) The game should have been over a batter early! With two outs in the 9th, and the bases loaded, Andre Either swung at a pitch that hit his foot for strike 3. Plate umpire Chuck Meriwether let the wild pitch go… the ball went to the backstop , a run scored, and the inning continued.
Well, if it WERE a wild pitch, then that’s correct – the batter can run to first even though first was occupied because there were two outs. However, a pitch that hits the batter is always dead, even if swung at. The correct call is strike 3, ball dead, game over.
Good thing Crappy Cordero, who made a three-run lead with two outs to go interesting, got Manny to take strike 3.
(2) The game should have been over a batter early! With two outs in the 9th, and the bases loaded, Andre Either swung at a pitch that hit his foot for strike 3. Plate umpire Chuck Meriwether let the wild pitch go… the ball went to the backstop , a run scored, and the inning continued.
Well, if it WERE a wild pitch, then that’s correct – the batter can run to first even though first was occupied because there were two outs. However, a pitch that hits the batter is always dead, even if swung at. The correct call is strike 3, ball dead, game over.
Good thing Crappy Cordero, who made a three-run lead with two outs to go interesting, got Manny to take strike 3.
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 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.
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.
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.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
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?
“[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,
(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.
[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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)