Again the point you, I and others have been making all along.

We can all be passionate with our opposite beliefs and even be stubborn enough not to give an inch to see the other side of the fence, but even with that, the conversation does not have to degenerate into personal insults.

None of them truly understand that even today Sandy isn’t really doing the evaluations DePo is!
He listens to what DePo says!

I was hoping that you guys might have caught on – that I was using the words and arguments made by others and expanding upon them to simply show how correct you, Bayonne and others are. I guess you can say I was taking their position on things, abiding by their own rude and sarcastic manner, to expose flaws in their own credibility. Guess I was so convincing that I even fooled you!

I would never use these tactics with others we have disagreements with. As you know, the individuals in question are so condescending in their personal accusations that they lack the understanding of the civility and respect expected of those in a polite society.

There’s no magic system.

But I will say this

If you knew anything about Harold Reynolds, you wouldn’t say “So in 2 days we’ve had 2 highly respected analysts”

I mean just because a philosophy of having plate discipline exists, doesn’t mean its magic. Ike for example still has to do his job. He’s not. When he’s swinging he’s not swinging at pitches he should a lot of the time. That’s his failure, not a hope for plate discipline.

We have to also remember that YOUNG players still have a lot to learn at a big league level and just because they fail now, doesn’t mean the idea of wanting them to know the zone is a bad idea

Statistics tell what the full population of all pitches ever thrown for the period under study has been. They include the results of all intentions, achievements, mistakes and give us a full history. The one thing they don’t give is the differences between pitchers. They could but it would be even more tedious than this discussion has become.

Anyway have a good night. It was great to win today.

Bobby O and Harold Reynolds are right, taking pitches is only going to lead to the advantage going to the pitcher. If you happen to work a deep count and it’s NOT by design then fine, that’s old time baseball. Having every hitter take the approach like a leadoff hitter is wrong on every single level

And you know what’s gonna happen if every game lasts 4-5 hours because of guys standing around all day taking pitches? MLB will intervene, expand the strike zones and make these guys SWING the bats! These guys are athletes and they make their money with their ability to HIT not sit there and take pitches all day

They’ve changed the strike zone before so no reason they cant do it again and if it ever got to that point then they should expand the strike zone because fans are not paying to see guys standing at the plate all day doing nothing during 5 hour long games.

Question: How do you guys explain the no-hitters? Are we headed towards another dead ball ear?

Harold Reynolds, who’s expertise I love listening to had this answer:
“Terrible approaches, waiting for the ball to get deeper on you, getting deep in the count – that’s DEFEATED HITTING! That’s why the hitters are getting beat up so bad”

..and he was very emphatic on the last part of that sentence. Way to go, Harold!

So in 2 days we’ve had 2 highly respected analysts TRASH this garbage of trying to work a count or “work a pitcher” (which is a stupid phrase itself) HOW ABOUT JUST TRYING TO GET HITS? And using your God given talents, your own eyes and leave the coaching to the coaches for individuals on case by case situations, instead of a bunch of beanes and aldersons dictating how organizations should operate and ruining the game.

Like I said before if all teams took on this approach we’d be watching a bunch of guys taking pitches all day long and the games would last 5 hours. And you know what? MLB would and should expand the strike zone if it ever came to that. These guys are athletes due to their exceptional ability to be able to HIT not LOOK.

When was that taught? In 1982 when he was hired or in 1992 When sandy started making decisions on baseball and ran the show!

You could have worked in TV for 10 years and I could teach you something NEW today and if you said that it would not mean I taught you anything you knew 10 years ago!
Or even that I KNEW it 10 years ago!

The timeing of the qote says Sandy taught him something new, but when it was said and when it was taught says nothing about the years before it was taught and what the teacher knew BEFORE he taught it!

Don’ you see that we both were wrong on this?

Grady Fusion was hired as a scout in 1982 by Oakland. While one would think that means he already had built up a reputation for evaluating talent it doesn’t necessarily mean so. He was probably not so good at it and that is why he is quoted to have said that he (and Bill Gayton do “credit Alderson for teaching them a whole new way to evaluate talent.” After all, Sandy had joined Oakland as it’s legal counsel the year before and a year later, as general manager, began showing Fusion how limited his understanding really was based on data.

You see, most scouts are wrong when they say data on the high school and college level has limited use and one must count on their instincts of observation. Once you read the attached I’m sure will find so many holes in it regarding on the overall aspects of scouting and thus better appreciate how Sandy Alderson was an innovator in this field. It hardly touches upon computer analysis and video.

http://www.worldwidebaseballprospects.com/pages-added/professional-baseball-scout.php

I mean after 25 years in the game Matt Stark, who was the focus of this interview, doesn’t even have a format:

“I do not use a format. I have a feel and a sense of what a player will be able to do, and let my 25 years of experience, work for me through observing the player, his body movements, agility, reaction time, athleticism, physical make up and everything else you can throw in the blender to make a intelligent decision when scouting and evaluating a player.”

See how much he really needs to be taught a whole new way of evaluating talent? It’s obvious to me.

SO while Sandy may have taght them what other teams would eventually request from Scouts he did not really teach them what to look for just what stats would be required!

Sandy sure did revolutionize the game and has taught so many “EVERYTHING THEY KNEW ABOUT TALENT EVALUATION”. It is documented in this response I got about my suggesting he was more involved more in the business and legal aspects of the organization and that others do the footwork about player personnel:

“I showed him about a dozen links probably many more than that which showed scouts, farm directors and many other “Baseball People” giving Alderson credit for teaching them how to every thing they know about talent evaluation. He still chose not to believe it. Can you say “Agenda”. Bill Gayton. Grady Fuson themselves credit Alderson for teaching them a whole new way to evaluate talent. Basically you bag groceries, and then become a baseball man but if you went to Harvard Law School there’s no way possible you can then become a baseball man. I find it funny though how he thought Theo Epstein being a lawyer was different because he wrote for his college sports paper. LMAO.”

So we should recognize that Sandy has indeed made a imprint on how player talent is evaluated and how the game should be played. And it goes beyond just that. Sandy also had the insight to make a point in a Union-Tribune interview in 2010 that front offices should be hesitant to build a team around a ballpark, because half the games are played on the road. This also shows how little Brian Cashman and Joe Girardi know since after the 2009 season Girardi said the Yankees had the insight to build a park that favored the team’s strength instead of working against it. Now, just because the Phillies built a band box to emphasize hitting , it hasn’t impeded the pitching staff from still being the best in the National League or the team winning all those division titles. Just luck.

Oh, as I side note, I said Theo Epstein was the sports editor and not just a writer for the daily Yale University newspaper. It is also interesting to note that he studied Law while working in the public relations department for the San Diego Padres but that he was not admitted to the State Bar. This is not the same background as Sandy Alderson who devoted all his efforts to the legal field, being admitted to the State Bar and working for a prestigious San Francisco Law firm before coming to Oakland to serve as the legal counsel but we should remember doesn’t mean that Theo was any more involved and understood sports than Sandy.

Now you know why I was wrong to infer that Sandy might be involved more in the financial and legal aspects of running the club than making hands on decisions about player personnel. Do you now agree?

The rest was Murphy who is precisely what the gys in the booth are saying they should be more like and Turner who was so damn clutch in driving in rns when he had the opportunity!

It was not the batting approach that scored those runs it was a high OB Reyes and Beltran returning to his former batting self plus Murphy and Turner taking over when Reyes, Wright and Ike went down!
It was really those two who made the team as good as it was before we gave up and started mortgaging all our big chips!

But it is typical of you to attack anyone who doesn’t drink the OBP Sabermetric kool aid as if they are a pariah!

Similarly in the AL the Sox-Yanks were 1-2 in OBP and also 1-2 in runs scored. Getting on base is a good thing.