If scouting a team for three weeks instead of for a series or two had any real effect, wouldn’t every team do it all the time? What would it cost, a couple million bucks a year? Teams spend that on a utility infielder.

Yeah, I don't get that either. Like, every single Cubs game is on TV. Hell, they're all archived on MLBTV. What exactly does three weeks of in person scouting get you that just watching, say, the most recent half season of at bats wouldn't get you?

But it’s the same game. The games mean more, but the game is the same.

I don't see why this is true for baseball when it isn't true in other sports. In all team sports teams have a gameplan going in to every single game. However there is a qualitative difference in the depths of gameplans for the playoffs. This was true when I coached youth football and it is true in the NFL. As always when the saberists cry sample size, luck, or some other nonsense, I don't see why the rules of the universe don't apply to baseball.

What exactly does three weeks of in person scouting get you that just watching, say, the most recent half season of at bats wouldn't get you?

Scouting from the TV isn't particularly easy; you don't get quite as good a read on the break and movement of pitches from the CF camera (which covers about 90% of the camera shots) as you do from behind the plate.

Having said that, I'd agree that the value of in-person scouting is overstated. Teams have books on every player, and the main thing that in-person scouting can tell you is whether you need to make an adjustment to the book (by reason of injury and/or fatigue).

-- MWE

As always when the saberists cry sample size

It's possible that the game is both different *and* that it's a small sample. Indeed, the fact that three games is a "small sample" is inarguable. Whether or not it is the same game is arguable, and the conclusion of that argument does not invalidate the first.

3: IIR my one and only conversation with a scout correctly, he said that TV scouting doesn't work for defense and pitching, but that you can get a pretty good read on hitters using only video.

TV scouting doesn't work for defense and pitching, but that you can get a pretty good read on hitters using only video.

TV scouting absolutely doesn't work for defense, because you never see the defense; the camera follows the ball, and most of defense occurs before the ball ever gets in the vicinity of the fielder. And it doesn't work for pitching primarily for the reason I mentioned above. I agree that you can get a decent read on hitters using video, although a set of eyes behind the hitter helps to fine-tune the judgments.

-- MWE

The last old-timey scout I sat next to said..."You learn the most from a ballplayer on their timed-speed down the 1B line and the time of their pop-ups"

I then timed myself to the hot dog stand.

TV scouting absolutely doesn't work for defense, because you never see the defense; the camera follows the ball, and most of defense occurs before the ball ever gets in the vicinity of the fielder.

I'm surprised teams don't stick a camera on top of the stadium (I know such a camera exists, but you get my meaning) in order to track defense. Seems like you could scout pretty effectively the opposistion from that angle. Obviously this would work better intra-division when someone comes to your place 9 or 10 times a season, but every little bit helps.

you do things a little different in the playoffs as they are must win games. Very rarely do you see a team sandbag a playoff game to get ready for the next day. In double-headers, many stars skip one of the two games. You wouldn't (normally) bring in your starting pitcher on 2 days rest to come out of the bullpen.

What I'm getting at here is that post-season baseball has a few nuances and it IS a different game. I don't think any of those nuances are what cost the Cubs though.

What was the Dodgers record post-Manny?
Was it a better win%age then the Cubs over the whole season? Better than the Cubs over the last 2 months (minus the last week)? Is it not just perhaps possible that the Dodgers ARE the better team? I didn't see Andruw Jones get any AB's this series (didn't watch all of every game...so he might have...). That already makes the Oct Dodgers better than the May Dodgers.

What was the Dodgers record post-Manny?

30-24. They probably wouldn't have made the playoffs without Ramirez, but no, the Dodgers weren't a better team than the Cubs.

It's three games. Weird things happen over three games. There's not much you can do about it.

If I’m not mistaken...didn’t The Piniella-Verducci Theory record for Scrotummy Records in the 70’s?

An interesting wrinkle.

I'm surprised teams don't stick a camera on top of the stadium (I know such a camera exists, but you get my meaning) in order to track defense. Seems like you could scout pretty effectively the opposistion from that angle.

Well, what are you going to learn?

Say that you found out with this camera that Mike Cameron frequently plays weak lefties to the away field, but as the pitch arrives leans toward right. What are you going to do with that information? There is no hitter alive that could make use of it.

It would probably be very useful in terms of evaluating defensive ability (for the front office), and I would be shocked if there aren't many teams doing that.

TV scouting absolutely doesn't work for defense, because you never see the defense; the camera follows the ball, and most of defense occurs before the ball ever gets in the vicinity of the fielder.

This should be posted in every game chatter.

They lost because they opened the series with a right-handed junk-ball Exorcist. Every advanced scout trolling the underworld knows that Satans Minions feast on that crap. Lou shoulda gone down to Georgia and called up a left-handed flamethrowing voodoo priestess to fight fire with fire. Roun the Mountain, Run Boy Run, Devils in the House on Clark and Addison...

But it’s the same game. The games mean more, but the game is the same.

I don't see why this is true for baseball when it isn't true in other sports.

I think its because the basic skills that go into baseball are very, very fickle. Somedays a pitcher has his best curveball, somedays he doesn't. Somedays a hitter has his swing all together, somedays it's total crap. You can "gameplan" all you want, but it won't solve those sorts of factors. I don't think any other sport has that amount of variability in the basic physical skill set - sure, somedays a basketball player might not have his best jumpshot form, but that doesn't render him completely useless on the floor. That's why they play 162 baseball games rather than 16 or 82.

I don't think any other sport has that amount of variability in the basic physical skill set

Golf. Tiger Woods aside, lots of guys are very up and down. Ernie Els has gone from the top 5 to 30-something and recovered. David Duval was great and now he can't make a cut. Even from week to week, different guys run hot and cold. I know Steve Stricker and Kenny Perry were each nearly unbeatable at some point this season, but neither is anything close to the best active player.

they're all archived on MLBTV. What exactly does three weeks of in person scouting get you that just watching, say, the most recent half season of at bats wouldn't get you?

Out of your mother's basement?

I probably should chime in here.

A year ago, I would've told you that in-person advance scouting was overrated with a statement similar to this one...

"Yeah, I don't get that either. Like, every single Cubs game is on TV. Hell, they're all archived on MLBTV. What exactly does three weeks of in person scouting get you that just watching, say, the most recent half season of at bats wouldn't get you?

Not pickin' on ya Shredder as those would've been my thoughts exactly....last year.

Having advanced a team this year in case we were to face 'em in the playoffs, I can tell you definitively that you'll pick up a few things from behind Home Plate that you ordinarily wouldn't pick up on TV. It was actually quite eye-opening what advancing a team can do in terms of sharpening your scouting eye and an experience that I hope to do more of in the future (that would mean we're in the playoffs, of course).

I'm 95% certain that I picked up at least 2 pitcher's pitches. Difficult to tell the differences in pitchers' "tells" from the CF camera....at least, something that is usable to hitters that can update a current scouting report. Also, sometimes a defender's setup tells you pitch type/location....those are a couple that I couldn't have seen watching on TV.

9. Harris Posted: October 06, 2008 at 02:18 PM (#2971676)

you do things a little different in the playoffs as they are must win games.

Harris, that picture of you on your profile page. Which one are you, the one with the sunglasses or the one with the fins?

Scouting from the TV isn't particularly easy; you don't get quite as good a read on the break and movement of pitches from the CF camera (which covers about 90% of the camera shots) as you do from behind the plate.

Is there an obvious reason why there isn't a "behind the plate" camera set up as the primary TV camera?

One of my biggest complaints about the CF camera is that anytime the batter makes contact, the ball immediately leaves the screen. Popup? Homerun? (The batter's reaction is usually the best clue to how far he actually hit it...)

Judging by my experience at actual games, it seems like it would be much more enjoyable on TV watching from behind the plate.

My favorite place to watch is actually behind the plate but relatively high up - second or upper deck.

Is there an obvious reason why there isn't a "behind the plate" camera set up as the primary TV camera?

The catcher and the ump and some very expensive seats.

My favorite place to watch is actually behind the plate but relatively high up - second or upper deck.

Ditto.

The reason the Cubs lost. Harden, Dempster and to a slightly lesser extent Zambrano had bad starts. What more can be said. I guess a top QB having a horrible game in the NFL playoffs would be a similar occurence. Or a top goalie in the NHL having 3 or 4 bad games. Hard to overcome no matter what......

The Cubs didn't lose game three because of Harden and they didn't lose game 2 because of Zambrano.

They lost both games because the positional players failed miserably.

Harris, that picture of you on your profile page. Which one are you, the one with the sunglasses or the one with the fins?

The fins. I'm the world's smartest Mangrove Snapper. That idiot in the picture gave me a free piece of squid AND an awesome elevator ride to the top of the ocean for a photo up.

Why is it that the actual link to the actual story wasn't at the top here?

Are there still scouts that work freelance and basically farm their services out to more than one team? I seem to recall reading about this being the case at some point in recent history-- is it the exception or the rule?

It seems odd that a guy can make a living as being "the guy that scouts team X" and sells his services to anyone who wants it-- but I think there are guys that do this. Could a team ban such a guy from the seats behind home plate?

Are there still scouts that work freelance and basically farm their services out to more than one team?

No.

-- MWE

The fins. I'm the world's smartest Mangrove Snapper.

What is that? Three-quarters of a Lasorda?

The Nationals' new park has a great camera high behind the plate. They don't use it too much for live views, but it's great on replays because you can see how guys position and how they break for the ball, etc.

What was the Dodgers record post-Manny?
Was it a better win%age then the Cubs over the whole season? Better than the Cubs over the last 2 months (minus the last week)? Is it not just perhaps possible that the Dodgers ARE the better team?

Oh, for ####'s sake!

Dodgers overall Pythag record : 87-75
Cubs overall Pythag record : 98-63

Dodgers Aug. 1 and later (post-Manny): 30-24
Cubs Aug. 1 and later : 32-20

Dodgers run differential post-Aug. 1 : +33
Cubs run differential post-Aug. 1 : +54

Dodgers final two weeks of season: 7-7
Cubs final two weeks of season: 9-6



I swear I'm going to blow these ####### numbers up and sticky them on the front page if that's what it takes to make people understand.

There is NOTHING in those numbers that indicate the Dodgers were the better team. There is nothing to indicate that they were going to win the series, much less predict the absolute ass-hammering that occurred.

The Dodgers won the series because they pitched significantly better, hit significantly better, and played significantly better defense over the course of the three games than the Cubs did. It wasn't because they were better. It wasn't because they were "hot".

Period.

somedays a basketball player might not have his best jumpshot form, but that doesn't render him completely useless on the floor.

Unless he's Michael Redd.