Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Saturday, October 18, 2008

BPro: Sheehan: A Stathead Considers Chemistry

Take that, Intricately independentured servant!

And as the game trickles on, and 7-4 became 7-6, and 7-7, and 8-7, how do you not assign some of those runs—not all, not even most, but some, in a way you never have before—to the people, rather than the players. Was the experience of 2004 and 2007 on one side, and the callowness of the players who lack that experience or any like it on the other—was that a factor in what we saw? Last night’s game is an outlier, the extreme edge of the bell curve, a comeback almost unprecedented given the magnitude of the game. The facile storylines and trite labels that mark post-season coverage in the early 21st century are rightly regarded as meaningless, but when you’re out beyond two deviations, and you’re watching things that no one under 80 has ever seen, it is not only natural to question whether this could be the exception to your rules. It is mandatory.

And after the game, as you stare slack-jawed at the screen, reduced to monosyllabic expressions of awe and the occasional text message, you think about Saturday, and you wonder if there’s going to be an effect. “Momentum is tomorrow’s starting pitcher,” you like to say, quoting a baseball genius. Maybe, though, tomorrow’s starting pitcher is TBD, and momentum’s taking a day to think about whether, maybe just this once, he wants to grab a bat and take some swings.

So maybe that’s the legend of Game Five. It was the game that made a stathead consider chemistry.

Repoz Posted: October 18, 2008 at 04:30 AM | 17 comment(s) | Login to Bookmark
  Related News: GeneralSabermetricsSpecial Topics

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 1 of 1 pages
   1. Kiko Sakata Posted: October 18, 2008 at 05:11 AM (#2986198)
“Momentum is tomorrow’s starting pitcher,” you like to say, quoting a baseball genius. Maybe, though, tomorrow’s starting pitcher is TBD, and momentum’s taking a day to think about whether, maybe just this once, he wants to grab a bat and take some swings.
So maybe that’s the legend of Game Five. It was the game that made a stathead consider chemistry.


2005 NLCS. Game 5. Albert Pujols, Brad Lidge. Game 6. Roy Oswalt.
   2. Kiko Sakata Posted: October 18, 2008 at 05:11 AM (#2986199)
   3. vortex of dissipation Posted: October 18, 2008 at 05:12 AM (#2986200)
Could someone correct me on this if I'm wrong, but didn't Bill James say a long, long time ago that chemistry certainly existed, but that it wasn't quantifiable? My reading is that sabermetrics doesn't deny the existence of chemistry and intangibles, it simply states that they are not quantifiable, and so are not part of the process...
   4. Kiko Sakata Posted: October 18, 2008 at 05:16 AM (#2986201)
Could someone correct me on this if I'm wrong, but didn't Bill James say a long, long time ago that chemistry certainly existed, but that it wasn't quantifiable? My reading is that sabermetrics doesn't deny the existence of chemistry and intangibles, it simply states that they are not quantifiable, and so are not part of the process...


Yes, this is true (that James said it; I also think that what he says is true, although it's more opinion than fact).

It goes to the quote above: "how do you not assign some of those runs—not all, not even most, but some, in a way you never have before—to the people, rather than the players". I'm not even sure what this means. The players are people and to the extent what they did is quantifiable, it's quantifiable in the 8 runs that they scored.
   5. SoSHially Unacceptable Posted: October 18, 2008 at 05:51 AM (#2986207)
It goes to the quote above: "how do you not assign some of those runs—not all, not even most, but some, in a way you never have before—to the people, rather than the players". I'm not even sure what this means. The players are people and to the extent what they did is quantifiable, it's quantifiable in the 8 runs that they scored.


What I think it means is that Sheehan is suggesting that perhaps it's not just the Red Sox true talent as ballplayers, but that they have something extra, chemistry, clutchiness, whatever unquantifiable measure we often thumb our noses at, that allows them to summon more in these particular situations than logic and subjective analysis suggests will happen. Or, at least the events of Thursday night were enough to give a numbers-based analyst reason to reconsider those factors.

Strange that it comes a day after that "words-based" columnn that singled out Sheehan in particular.
   6. Halofan Posted: October 18, 2008 at 06:32 AM (#2986210)
I voted against the war before I voted for it.
   7. Nathan Kunkel Posted: October 18, 2008 at 06:37 AM (#2986211)
"So maybe that’s the legend of Game Five. It was the game that made a stathead consider chemistry."

Yes. This is what will be remembered.
   8. Jolly Old St. Neck Wound, Moral Idiot Posted: October 18, 2008 at 10:15 AM (#2986220)
2005 NLCS. Game 5. Albert Pujols, Brad Lidge. Game 6. Roy Oswalt.

Un, huh. If you want to play that game, then

1985 WS. Game 6. Don Denkinger. Game 7. John Tudor. ERA for 18 prior innings: 0.50. Game 7: 11 run meltdown. Or 1986 WS. Game 7.

I still think it'd be kind of cool to send Beckett out there tonight wearing a conspicuously bloody sock (or a 'bloody' jersey, with the catsup right on the part by his right shoulder), just for the hell of it, and just because every commentator in the world would instantly be noting that "IT WAS JUST 4 YEARS AGO, GAME 6, ON THE ROAD, WHEN THE RED SOX NEEDED A CLUTCH PERFORMANCE BY A PITCHER WHO WASN'T OPERATING ON ALL CYLINDERS...." Just think of the drinking games you could play...

And if Beckett got blasted, they'd blame it on his arm, but if he kept them in the game long enough for the Sox to eke out a win, does anyone not think that the Rays might be a bit less than 100% mentally prepared for game 7? IOW what do the Sox have to lose?
   9. Biff isn't really an apt handle anymore Posted: October 18, 2008 at 11:11 AM (#2986227)
IOW what do the Sox have to lose?

The game?
   10. bunyon Posted: October 18, 2008 at 12:10 PM (#2986234)
I like to think of Game 5 more as a case where the Sox were a hard acid and the Rays a soft base. But's it may be true that sterics were more important.
   11. Jolly Old St. Neck Wound, Moral Idiot Posted: October 18, 2008 at 12:47 PM (#2986246)
All this momentum and intangibles aside, why isn't Lester starting tonight, given how (a) he's their best pitcher, and (b) he'd be pitching on his normal schedule?

Seems to me that the extra day's rest would benefit a guy with an arm problem more than it would benefit a pitcher who's perfectly healthy and rested. What's the logic behind Francona's move, other than "Beckett is a big game pitcher"?
   12. Babe Adams Posted: October 18, 2008 at 03:06 PM (#2986294)
Most of the numbers tools are intended to be predictors of future achievement. The tools sometimes shortchange actual achievements that are already in the books.

In other words, Lou Brock did what he did.
   13. Bob Dernier Cri Posted: October 18, 2008 at 03:50 PM (#2986307)
The simplest way to look at it might be to say that yes, a lot of these Red Sox are pretty steely clutch guys, and that's a large part of why they have been able to slug .554 in the majors (Ortiz) or post a career 116 ERA+ (Beckett) or come back from innumerable injuries to compile a career 129 OPS+ (Drew) and other quantifiable accomplishments. They're really good players, they're mentally tough, and they win games. No discrepancy there.

Edited for clarity
   14. PreservedFish Posted: October 18, 2008 at 04:59 PM (#2986343)
Am I nuts? I watched this game. It was a great comeback. But it didn't seem earth-shattering, I didn't think "I will remember this game for the rest of my life." I am surprised at all the hullabaloo
   15. Big Ed Posted: October 18, 2008 at 08:36 PM (#2986439)
Chemistry, shmemistry. The Rays' relief pitchers were clearly gagging. Wheeler, and after a short time, Howell had no idea where the ball was going. If being calmer in the clutch is how chemistry is defined, then I'll buy it.
   16. SoSHially Unacceptable Posted: October 18, 2008 at 08:57 PM (#2986446)
All this momentum and intangibles aside, why isn't Lester starting tonight, given how (a) he's their best pitcher, and (b) he'd be pitching on his normal schedule?


The Sox set up the rotation before the playoffs, and they're not inclined to go away from it even if the situation suggests that shifting things around may be more prudent. Considering they resisted the temptation against Cleveland last year, when rejiggering the rotation to get two more starts from Beckett offered more payoff than Lester in Game 6 does, there was little chance they were going to change this year.
   17. chemdoc Posted: October 18, 2008 at 11:50 PM (#2986811)
And here I thought this was another article on PEDs.
Page 1 of 1 pages

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
tl; dr (Voxter)
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

Newsblog'Duk: Tim Lincecum slims down with swim routine, loses appetite for McDonald’s
(144 - 12:12am, Feb 08)
Last: Ron J

NewsblogWHALEN: Erstad talks big game, but let’s see if Huskers deliver
(1 - 11:57pm, Feb 07)
Last: Jim (jimmuscomp)

NewsblogSources: Cubs’ Starlin Castro Accused Of Sexual Assault
(5526 - 11:56pm, Feb 07)
Last: McCoy

Hall of MeritMost Meritorious Player : 1969 Discussion
(61 - 11:55pm, Feb 07)
Last: lieiam

NewsblogL.A. Times: Dodgers sign Clayton Kershaw to two-year, $19-million deal
(2 - 11:48pm, Feb 07)
Last: Tuque

NewsblogDJF: Decipher the Mind of Brett Lawrie with Translawrieate
(8 - 11:39pm, Feb 07)
Last: Yankee Redneck is a Pinhead.

NewsblogOT: NBA Monthly Thread, February 2012
(226 - 11:29pm, Feb 07)
Last: Athletic Supporter leads the nation in drifters

NewsblogOT: The Soccer Thread: January 2012
(719 - 11:26pm, Feb 07)
Last: Swedish Chef

NewsblogMONEYBALL~ Oscar Nominations 2012: Academy Award Nominees List ~ MONEYBALL
(556 - 11:07pm, Feb 07)
Last: Dock Ellis on Acid

NewsblogBASN: The MLB FRAUD - Oakland, Los Angeles, and New York
(45 - 11:02pm, Feb 07)
Last: Yankee Redneck is a Pinhead.

NewsblogEdwin Jackson turned down three-year offer from Pirates
(57 - 10:53pm, Feb 07)
Last: The District Attorney

NewsblogTrump's Son-In-Law Seeks To Buy Dodgers
(13 - 9:35pm, Feb 07)
Last: AndrewJ

NewsblogBeane To Sign Extension Through 2019
(8 - 9:07pm, Feb 07)
Last: Bitter Calculus Instructor

NewsblogNYBD: Silva: Yankees Fragrance and 1996?
(2 - 8:21pm, Feb 07)
Last: Mayor Blomberg

Transaction Oracle2012 ZiPS Projections - Miami Marlins
(31 - 8:16pm, Feb 07)
Last: Misirlou's got a busy day, he's wearing a vest

Buy MLB playoff tickets, plus 2011 World Series, 2011 ALCS tickets and NLCS game tickets. We also have Texas Rangers playoff schedule, tickets to Red Sox games and Yankees game tickets. Plus, buy Phillies baseball tickets, Tigers playoff tickets and the biggies like ALDS baseball tickets and 2011 NLDS tickets.

Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats

 

 

 

AllianceTickets.com has cheap MLB Tickets. Get all your Colorado Rockies Tickets, Seattle Mariners Tickets, San Francisco Giants Tickets and all your favorite baseball tickets here. We also carry cheap Denver Broncos Tickets, Seattle Seahawks Tickets and Denver Nuggets Tickets.

Page rendered in 0.4568 seconds
40 querie(s) executed