- This whole thing strikes me as incredibly stupid — as one of the commenters points out, the “Canseco milkshake” was more than likely just one of those high-calorie/high-protein thingumabobs. The Rickey argument — especially assuming an ordinary milkshake — makes sense. Not sure why Sandberg gets cred/suspicion for his anti-steroidism, when IIRC Rickey was always like “Rickey don’t need that stuff.”
- Speaking of drug paranoia … this is a nice piece on Wash, but Jack Farkin’ Cust — he did a little blow, he didn’t molest someone’s nephew.
- Tango takes up the ‘market-sabermetrics’ challenge, fails.
- nm heartbreak bait
- Geez, if we could get Beltre for this much (or a little above), I really think we oughta.
- George Will still talks like your grandmother’s underwear drawer.
- Gay gay gay gay gay. How in the hell did that blithering sociopath ever get a job as an assistant DA?
- Yale values
FK values 92
92 thoughts on “FK values”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Is there any interest in a group writing project? Nothing is set in stone, I’m just throwing this out there, but…
THT needs player comments for their preview. I can’t do it this year, I’m way too busy. Does it make any sense to attempt an FKollective project of 40 player comments? I can see tons of problems doing it this way, but I can see some upside, too. What say you all?
Not something I’m likely to have time for, except to dabble.
2: The first paragraph makes it sound like they did the drug test in his office. When I’ve done drug tests, they give me a little privacy and let me use the john.
I suspect he has a john attached to his office.
I find it hard to believe that his office is nicer than mine, and I don’t have an attached john.
A’s should try this:
3: His idea is far worse than the idea he quotes.
The people who built something should never be allowed to sell it.
Feature! Feature! Feature! Feature! Feature! Feature! Feature! Feature! Feature! Feature! Feature! Feature! Feature! Feature! Feature! Feature! Feature! Feature! Feature! Feature! Feature! Feature! Feature! Feature! Feature! Feature! Feature! Feature! Feature! Feature! Feature! Feature! Feature! Feature! Feature! Feature! Feature! Feature! Feature! Feature! Feature! Feature!
Clever in-joke!
Oh, and more features!
I think they’re just talking about different things.
When Ken talks about marketing sabermetrics I think he’s talking about what most of us see as the basic challenge- getting the general public, or at least the general baseball watching public, to understand and generally care about what are now seen as sabermetric concepts. Hence “Got Facts”, or, IMO more generally “Got Truth”.
When Tango talks about it I think he’s more interested in getting people to advance sabermetric concepts. I think in general he could care less about whether Joe Sixpack thinks WAR is a better way to pick an MVP than RBI. What he’s looking for is more participants to advance the boundaries of what we know. Hence, “Got Creativity” since that’s what sells him on investing the time he’s put into all of this.
Also, Ken Arneson is awesome and I wish he’d write more.
4: If that’s the situation, then go Red Sox.
I think it would behoove us to outbid both of them, but then I’m imagining they bid rationally.
5: Not unless all the good COF are gone.
Agreed. Beltre would be a good value at that price but it doesn’t do much to improve your overall team. Replacing Kouz with Beltre would probably only result in a 1-2 win improvement and would leave you with little budget leeway to further add to your team. I’d rather spend slightly more and look for a 5 win upgrade at the corner outfield positions.
I think even as recently as 10 years ago, Rajai Davis could be packaged as A Legitimate Leadoff Hitter to get a nice return. Too bad it’s 2010.
My guess is that the A’s hand Carter the LF spot and fill CF/RF with some combination of Buck/Sweeney/Taylor/etc. I really can’t see them spending much or even trading much.
1. You don’t think they’ll exercise Crisp’s option?
2. Buck? Really?
3. You envision a potential OF with Carter and Taylor at the corners, and a non-elite CF in between?
They have to keep Crisp. That would just be too stoopid.
3 is why we need a good COF in one of the two places.
I forgot about Crisp and the 70 games that he’ll play.
OK, so the A’s play Crisp in CF, I’m still convinced that they will give Carter the LF job (until Daric Barton, who I think will perpetually be on the organizational short leash, faceplants and Carter moves to 1B) and use whatever organizational detritus is hanging around to take care of RF.
I’d love for the A’s to get a real COF like Jayson Werth, I just don’t see it happening.
1. You think Crisp is actually fragile, rather than unlucky? (I kinda pretty much think he’s fragile, too, but I think there’s a case to be made that, considering only injuries, he’s a lot like Crosby)
2. You think Barton’s on a short organizational leash? Seems to me they really like him.
3. You think Barton’s gonna faceplant? Seems to me that while he’s got Sweeney Disease (as opposed to Crisp, who has Sweeknee Disease) and will never hit for more than doubles-power, he’s actually developing into pretty much the hitter he projected as — and his defense has been Sweeneyesque (in the 1-year-wonder outlier with stats but with good underlying fundamentals)
2: Yes, absolutely, considering the org’s best positiona prospect is a natural 1B.
3: No, I do not. I think Barton is awesome.
But Barton is already the best position player*, and, even if Carter develops as we hope, moving Barton aside would only make sense if they could recoup that value in a trade.
* Crisp was better on a WAR/game basis, but that’s probably a fluke.
MOOV BARTON TOO THIRD!!!
And you think my fixation is crazy…
The A’s don’t think Carter is a natural 1B. DH… maybe. But they’d actually prefer it if he could play a decent LF.
If they can play Cust in RF then can play Carter there.
If the A’s don’t improve at corner outfield, then … well, they’ll be pretty much exactly the same .500 team that they were this year.
If your second paragraph happens, then I really see no point in watching the A’s next season (unless you’re one of the iglew types who don’t care about the playoffs).
Also, I think handing Carter the LF job immediately next year would be a huge mistake, barring significant and quick improvement defensively. From what I’ve seen so far, he’s been anywhere from bad to atrocious in left and I don’t see him ever being better than, say, Ryan Braun.
Signing Beltre and dumping Kouz creates a little extra budget leeway.
Just saying.
How so? Beltre will likely cost 13-15 million for the next 4 years. After dumping Kouz’s salary, that’s still a plus of about 10-12 million dollars. Even if you assume that Wolff was just being facetious when he said the 22 million from Chavy’s and Sheets’s expiring contracts might not be available after next year, and the A’s actually are going to spend all of that 22 million (and the year after that and the year after that and the year after that…), that still only leaves about 10-12 million to gain the additional 8-10 wins just to match Texas of this season (and who knows what they’ll add this offseason or the Angels for that matter).
Angels will make Crawford their top priority. Rangers will go after Lee. Call it 4/56 to land Beltre.
Anyways… a good chunk of that 8-10 win gap needs to be closed by the continued maturation of the A’s young talent. But $10-12 million is sufficient if it is properly used. Plus, there’s enough flexibility in the current roster to turn that $10-12 million into $16-18 million should you choose to do so.
A long term break down requires more time than I have right now. I need to go play Sorry Sliders with my son.
Is that the game where you apologize to your body before eating at White Castle?
No, it’s the game Ziggy plays against lefties.
I thought it was the game Coco Crisp plays at third base.
It’s the game the Indians front office plays every year when they do group auditions to find someone to wear the mascot costume.
Hey now.
I’m a different kind of Indian.
That game makes no sense at all. It was the must-have board game last year, we finally got it, and it’s insane. If I wanted a home shuffleboard game I’d just use my hardwood floors.
And I hate to say this but… the Angels have all but said they’re going to the mats to land Crawford. They might be willing (and able) to go 7/120 for him, which means the A’s would have to go something like 6/120 to land him.
Especially if the Angels end up in 2nd place in the AL West. I worry that 4 straight sub.500 years will not help the A’s pursue FAs.
I think the ownership/ballpark situation would be far more of an obstacle than the on-field record.
I would do 6/120 to prevent the Angels from getting him.
Am I the only who doesn’t mind if the Angels get Crawford?
Their roster is aging, their budget is close to being maxed out even without Crawford, and they have holes pretty much everywhere in their lineup. Signing Crawford pretty much prevents them from doing anything about those other issues. And all their good prospects are about 2-3 years away. With Crawford, they’re probably still not a playoff team.
I would be much, much willing to overpay if it meant the Rangers don’t get Crawford.
Here’s what I think (absent other big acquisitions):
If we get him, we’re about as good as Texas
If the Angels get him we are clearly in third place
If the Rangers get him, we are basically out of contention.
If the Angels get him, the A’s can still contend if they sign Werth and throw the farm at Rasmus or trade for Kemp…..
Yeah, 2011 is basically fucked.
It seems like Beltre would be a bigger upgrade for the Angels than Crawford.
Here’s hoping Seattle signs him!
7:
KRUGMAN THINKS
WAR IS GOODSUPPLY-SIDE ECONOMICS IS RIGHTWE SHOULD HAVE LET HITLER KILL EVERYBODY!!11!1!Logic fail of the month (comment #3):
I don’t see that as a failure of logic, but a failure of ignorance; specifically, of the fact that the single greatest determinant of income/class status is income/class status of one’s parents.
However … I think there’s a case to be made that the gubmint does have a rational interest in rewarding/encouraging behaviors of classes. Now, you and I and other Good Liberals believe that it also has a rational interest in doing what it can to encourage unrewarded classes to adopt behaviors more likely to result in upward mobility; but not everyone else believes this …
Notice how the logic-fail poster uses the word “choice” and you use the word “determinant.” I won’t take sides, but I think this speaks to two very different worldviews.
I see what you’re saying (though it took me a minute), but I look at it as two complementary perspectives on the same phenomenon: certain people are better/worse equipped with life tools by the circumstances of their upbringing.
Sure, but I still think there are worldviews wherein (at the extrema), some think that no matter the circumstances of your upbringing, you are always capable of making good choices; and some think that no matter what choices one makes, the circumstances of one’s upbringing will dominate your life arc.
One thing which I think is damaging about the platonic ideal of the American Dream is the concept that one can pull oneself out of poverty given pluck and hard work and reach a comfortable lifestyle in a single generation. I think that in many cases, it takes more than one generation. Making the “good choices” may not get you to middle class comfort if you start low enough, but may increase your status enough that your children might get to middle class comfort. Many immigrant families experience this phenomenon.
For me the problem with the American Dream is that even if we accept the proposition that anyone can, by definition not everyone can.
Many poor people do A.
Therefore, if you are poor you must have done A.
Therefore helping the poor is rewarding A.
I don’t see the commenter making the jump from 1 to 2 (though they do pretty much go straight from 1 to 3).
I’d actually argue that while 1->2 may be a logical fallacy, there is a (class/upbringing/life-skills) truth nonetheless in #2 — if indeed the greatest determinants of income/class are parental income/class. In other words, there’s more poor people who were raised poor than were raised middle class (though, to be sure, the latter category has been increasing).
1. Underwear
2. ??????
3. Profit
But some po chiilinz don’t even HAVE underwear!!!
So now you support commandos?
No, the gubmint does.
It’s a good day to die.
And yet, nobody talks about my preferred strategy: increased government spending on bermuda shorts.
Given the change of short length over the last 20 years, down to the knees or further, is there even such a thing as Bermuda shorts any more? Perhaps the adaptation we need is a return to short-shorts.
A chicken in every pot, a thong in every crack.
The US should start investing in offshore funds that bet on stocks to go down?
The US should start investing in 30 minute films about the tropics?
As the A’s season whittles down to nothingness I find I’m losing interest in pretty much anything more taxing than opening beer cans and watching reality TV shows. Suggestions?
{gubmint rewards FSU for his indolence}
Racer 5.
Good advice, although opening beer bottles might take a little more effort than he’s looking to expend.
With the big bottles he only has to open half as many.
I was counting kegs as cans.
Didn’t MB play the cymbal for Counting Kegs?
Ken Burns doc is on tonight.
So, wait, who the fuck is Tom Boswell and why is this asshat saying Rickey used steroids?!
Slusser’s enthusiasm is waning:
Also: Kebob hearts Unicorn
More Slusser:
… and that’s what we got for batting Zk 3/4 most of the season. In addition to putting an inferior hitter (not to mention a big GIDP risk) in a premium batting order position, by putting him there it made him an even worse hitter.
I don’t really understand this. He was leading the team in HRs (and hitting well overall), which caused him to make changes to try to hit more HRs, and those changes caused him to hit fewer HRs (and poorly overall)?
Sure. He was hitting the HRs largely on accident and probably figured maybe if he actually tried to hit HRs he’d hit more. So rather than just trying to hit the ball hard, he was trying to crush a 5 run HR every at bat.
Exactly. He was trying to hit like a “run producer” (perhaps in the same way Barton was trying to hit like a “#2 hitter” in the first half?).
I think most casual analysts grossly underestimate the impact of such “mindset and approach adjustments” on a player’s actual performance.
I think most post hoc analysis grossly overestimates those effects, because we aren’t wired to believe that hot and cold streaks (especially our own) are just random variance, even when they are.
I never underestimate the ability of someone to mind-fuck them self.
It’s how I drummed myself out of baseball.
And, for example with Cust the evidence that he was swinging more and less hard was pretty convincing.
I. Was. Right.
You sound shocked.
Called it back in early June. This is just to rub it in mikeA’s face.
Maybe, but … I think that when a player does a thing that coincides with him sucking, even if the player explicitly blames the sucking on the thing, it is still not necessarily so. Possibly professional athletes are different than the rest of us, but in my experience people tend to rationalize rather than analyze, post hoc, and to andeux’s point, are willing to believe just about anything in order to avoid settling on randomness as an explanation.
Generally, I would agree as players pretty much always credit SSS hot streaks to some “adjustment” that apparently only works for a week or two or however long the hot streak lasts. But in Suzuki’s case, I think there’s genuine evidence his plate approach has been oriented towards hitting the long ball this year. His IFFB% (popups) increased to an astounding 22% this year, leading the league, and besting his previous high by around 12%. By my eye test, his swing has gotten long and slow with a much more pronounced uppercut which corroborates with the popup percentage. Kurt doesn’t really possess the strength or bat speed of a prototypical power hitter so his swing has been resulting in popups instead of home runs.
Fair enough.
That son of a bitch! I had a feeling about this son of a bitch! We silence him! And we do the same to Mink this very night!
You’ve seen this graph before, but still.
Upshot of the McD insurance spat:
1. Workers don’t really have insurance
2. They will really have insurance (for less money) when HCR kicks in.
Obama is clearly a soshulist
I heard the blurb on the radio about this and was wondering, “What is a ‘mini-med’ plan?” Wow, it’s like what I’m offered when I inquire about direct purchase of dental insurance. So I self-insure on the dental; it just makes more sense to take the money that would go to the premium and invest it instead. That’s dental, though, and the “worst possible outcome” just isn’t that terrible. For anyone to suggest that “mini-med plans” are an acceptable solution for anyone’s general medical care is just pathetic; they appear to be “worse than nothing” because of the amount of money that gets sucked away for administration of the plan.
Cool pic