Banny Log 05.11.08
Posted: May 11th, 2008 | Filed under: Banny Log | 33 Comments »
Start No. 8: Vs. Baltimore Orioles
Innings: 8
Earned runs allowed: 0.
Strikeouts: 5
Walks: 2
Homers: 0
Decision: Win (4-4)
Number of pitches: 109
Number of strikes: 75
BABIP: .095 (2 for 21 — now we’re talking!)
Season BABIP: .276 (45 for 163)
So, OK, you people really, really hated the last blog look. I kind of liked it — simple, elegant, no frills, my kind of blog. However, at last check 82% of the people voted against it, which is, yeah, a pretty direct message. Even Hillary would bow out at 82%*.
*Not to talk politics but I do disagree with all the people getting mad because Hillary will not quit. I mean, she’s not going to win, and she’s probably doing damage to the Democratic party and all that. But, hey, I’m always drawn to delusional people who refuse to quit. I remember a couple of years ago, at the Winter Olympics in Turin, a few of us went to a curling match featuring the United States men. As I remember it, they were still in contention for a gold medal, and this was an important match, and even though I’m not exactly a curling expert — and somewhere along the way I managed to tick off a lot of curling fans — I thought it would be a worthwhile writing event.
It was not. The U.S. team lost so badly they conceded before the match even ended, and then were pissy afterward. I realize that they had to be upset with the loss, and I always try to be sympathetic to athletes who have just tasted bitter defeat but … um … come on. It’s curling. You want to sell your sweepy sport, you might want to put away the Steve Carlton attitudes the one time in four years anyone is actually paying attention. Maybe that’s just me.
Anyway, on the bus back, we all realized that we had absolutely nothing to write. The U.S. team had conceded, they had not avoided questions when it ended, what the heck was there to say? So, for fun (and because I was high on Italian chocolate) I started saying that we should all rip them for conceding before the match was even over. What kind of Olympic spirit was that. I was kind of joking at first but after a while (being high on Italian chocolate) I kind of started to believe what I was saying. I mean they did quit when it was still mathematically possible to win. It was not ACTUALLY possible for them to win, I guess (I think it would have taken the equivalent of two gutter balls in a row) but hey, play it out, what the heck else are you going to do, right?
Well, we were all bored, so we kept this gag going for a long time. We made it back to the press center, and it was about midnight, and the only place open was the McDonald’s so we went there and kept the gag going for a little while longer. There was only one other guy in the place. He listened to us for a while, and then suddenly he said: “Excuse me guys, it sounds like you’re talking about my sport, curling.
And then this guy — this is absolutely true — reaches into his gym bag and pulls out … A SILVER MEDAL. It was the silver medal he had won curling in Nagano.
“The sport’s not going anywhere,†he barked at us as he shook the medal. “The people are watching! The kids are playing!â€
Turns out he was a pretty good guy. He was editor of the Curling News or something like that, and he said that he was a little tired of all these people bagging on curling, but he seemed to have a pretty good sense of humor about it. Of the three of us, two were pretty apologetic — hey we didn’t mean anything by it, we were just joking, we LOVE curling and all that. I’m proud to say I was the third. I’m telling you, I had eaten A LOT of Italian chocolate.
“Hey man,†I said. “Let me ask you a question.†And I told him that, in all seriousness, I thought it was pretty wimpy to quit at the Olympics when you still had a mathematical chance to win. And then this guy surprised us one more time. He actually AGREED with me. He thought the U.S. should have at least tried for the miracle. Isn’t that what America’s about?
OK, so now I’m floating this new blog look … it’s not quite as busy as the old blog, but still has a little pizazz and I can change that photo to something else. And if you don’t like this one, hey, I’ve got plenty of others. I can change this thing every day. Hey, I’ve got more looks than Russell Crowe**.
*One more pozterisk before we get to the show. I have a friend who cannot stand Russell Crowe, which I find a perfectly acceptable position. I think he’s good, and he’s got a little bit of that “I might just go bonkers any minute and punch you in the nose†Hollywood instability which I like and which played so well with Brando and Penn. So, yeah, I like him. Still, I don’t have a slavish devotion to him, and I certainly understand and appreciate why someone might despise the guy.
BUT her reason for despising Crowe is this: “Oh, he always plays the game guy.†And that’s unacceptable. I mean, look, there are a thousand reasons to not like Russell Crowe — hate his voice, his attitude, his hair, his mannerisms — but … always the game guy? Seriously? I’m at a total loss here. I mean, LA Confidential and Beautiful Mind and Gladiator and Cinderella Man and the Insider? As far as I could tell, there were NO similarities among these characters or the way he played them. So, sadly, I have no choice but to reject her dislike of Russell Crowe. I call this my “Show your work†rejection. I’m fine with anyone having any opinion at all … but if their work and reasoning is entirely faulty, I have no choice but to decline their request. I have a friend who has been trying to hate U2 for 15 years, but his reasoning is stupid and false and so I simply do not accept his right to dislike them.
* * *
All right. Finally. Banny. This blog is not about saying “I told you so†but … yeah. Is Emil Brown having a better year than Jose Guillen? Yes, he is. Are my Tampa Bay Rays playing sparkling ball (and look out below, Kazmir’s healthy, C-Craw is beginning to start hitting, Troy Percival is dealing) while the Blue Jays plotz around? Yesh. I mean I cannot do much more for you people. I’m giving you gold, Jerry. Gold*.
*Thank God for small samples. As soon as Guillen passes Brown and Rays collapse, I’m disappearing in Mexico.
And I TOLD you people watch Banny closely this time out. He was coming off a couple of bad starts, and you just had to know he was going to make some necessary adjustments. I have not had a chance yet to talk to Banny about his adjustments — and he might not want to get into specifics right now — but it seems to me that he was throwing with more purpose. I mentioned that in his last outing, he was throwing quite a few pitches in the mid-80s — fastballs at 85, sliders at 84, cutters at 85. Brian and I have talked at some length about pitching back and forth; he believes (and I concur) that it’s so important when you can’t throw 96 mph to be able to keep a hitter guessing about how fast the pitch will come. This, in fact, seems to be the big advantage of a flame thrower — if you are facing Josh Beckett, you better pony up because that speedball can throw right by you (make you look like a fool, boy). Anything good coming at a lesser speed makes for a tough adjustment. It’s not as tough when the top speed is 88 or 89.
Banny’s pitchers were much more defined on Sunday as far as pure speed. Look at the middle innings:
3rd inning
1st out, 83 mph slider.
2nd out, 76 mph curve.
3rd out, 89 mph fastball.
4th inning
1st out, 89 mph fastball.
Walk to Nick Markakis (Banny decided not to mess with him — walked him twice)
2nd out, 88 mph fastball
3rd out, 88 mph fastball.
5th inning
1st out, not listed.
2nd out, 84 mph changeup (Looks like a brutal pitch on pitch fx but he got away with it to Adam Jones)
3rd out, 89 mph fastball.
6th inning
1st out, 82 mph changeup (much better pitcher, up and away)
Melvin Mora reached on Alex Gordon error after 83 mph changeup
2nd out, 89 mph fastball (struck out Markakis — caught stealing third out)
It was like that. Banny was mostly working fastball as he does when he’s successful, but his secondary pitches were generally not coming in the red-zone 84-85 mph range. Plus, it looked like Banny had a really good fastball. He got 11 swinging strikes, which is a lot for him, and most of those came on fastballs. He had his command too. I sent him a text after the game, and he wrote back to say: “Just had to let my Babip regress before I started dealing again.â€
Seriously, how can you not love this guy?
Before I go to find a new blog theme, I think it’s worth it take a look at two stat lines:
Pitcher A: 15 innings, 6 hits allowed, 0 runs, 12 strikeouts, 0 walks, 10 saves in 10 save opportunities.
Pitcher B: 14 1/3 innings pitched, 4 hits allowed, 0 runs, 16 strikeouts, 1 walk, 8 saves in 8 save opportunities.
It’s not too tricky. Player A is, of course, Yankees reliever Mariano Rivera. The guy’s just a freak of nature, that’s all. He’s 38, he’s still throwing that same one UFO cutter pitch that he’s been throwing for 14 years, and he’s more unhittable than ever. The guy is Professor Simpson come to life, that’s all, he discovered some sort of chemical substance that makes the world’s best hitters poke routine ground balls to a middle infielders. Carve the guy’s face into Rushmore. Ain’t nobody like him.
Except … a lot of people think Pitcher B IS like Rivera. That’s Joakim Soria. They throw different pitches, of course (because nobody before or since has ever thrown whatever it is that Mariano throws), and they don’t look alike really … but there’s something about the kid that makes you think “Mariano.†Maybe it’s the way he sets up with his glove sort of folded into the crease between his chest and his arm. Maybe it’s the placid look on his face, like he’s watching it all on Tivo (“I already got this guy out … he just doesn’t know it). I don’t know. But I’m telling you, lots of people noticed a similarity last year. And obviously, as you can see by the numbers, the similarities are pretty pronounced this year. The kid’s out of sight.
Loading ...
You know who is himself no matter what role he takes on? Ben Affleck, that’s who. And Matthew Mcconaughey a bit. But I digest. Bannister could have completed that game, I think, and still not Oriole would have fluttered over to second.
I like the book stack photo, Mr. Posnanski. Now if you could just incorporate that old book smell…
That text from Bannister seals it…that might push me from a “jersey-buying” fan to “firstborn-named-after-him” Bannister fan.
Can Banny explain this?
This Season…
Night Games Day Games
W-L 0-4 4-0
Hits 33 12
HR 5 0
ERA 8.02 0.62
It’s not just this year either…
Career
Night Games Day Games
W-L 8-13 10-1
IP 165 88.1
HR 20 4
ERA 4.58 2.65
Weird, just weird.
FWIW, I like the new look just fine…
I don’t dispute your point about not giving up. If I ever have children someday, and they play sports, I’m going to teach them that you don’t give up, and how you play even when it’s clear that you’re not going to win says a lot about you, and it means something to your teammates and your supporters as well. I absolutely agree with that.
However, I do want to make it clear that there is a culture associated with the sport of curling, and in curling, a concession does not have the same connotation as it does in other sports. It’s very accepted, and in some situations, it’s even expected. That is, you could be looked down upon if you *don’t* concede. In football, if team picked up their stuff halfway through the fourth quarter because they were getting blown out, they would be called pansies, quitters, and every other name in the book. It’s not the same in curling.
Now, I’m not saying anything about how Fenson’s team handled themselves attitude-wise after the concession, but the concession itself would be standard. Also (and this I looked up because I certain did not remember), it looks like the only game the U.S. conceded was the 11-5 loss to Canada (which *did* knock them out of gold medal contention, though they still played for the bronze which they won), and after nine ends, no team at this level would have played the tenth end. Mathematically possible, yes. Practically speaking, no. But the point isn’t whether it’s possible or not, but that curling convention dictates that you concede in that situation.
The reason Hill might want to quit is because the longer she goes on, the longer she burns through her supporter’s money and her own and digs a big hole of campaign debts that need to be paid back.
I think the new photo is ok, but I think a better look would be something baseball related since this blog is about 80% baseball. How about a photo of Duane Kuiper or a shot of the old Cleveland Municipal Stadium? Something like that.
A million thanks for giving voice to the “Show your work” rejection. I’ve been harping on that for years. You know, I’d rather people just give up and say, “I don’t know why I hate (fill in the blank), I just do”, rather than make up some obviously bogus reason. It’s akin to my kids telling me they hate broccoli or some other vegetable despite having never tasted it, to which I give the same standard response. “Nope, try again.”
Joe,
I was at the SF Giants game on Friday night* and I saw something that may interest you.
* I live in Massachusetts and this is the first time that I’ve been out there — awesome park, especially compared to Oakland, which was pretty depressing.
Anyway, I was in the clubhouse and I saw that they had Giants t-shirts of their old ballplayers. You know the type, it looks like a uniform shirt with the team name on the front and the number and name on the back except like a million times less expensive.
They had a Duane Kuiper shirt. I immediately thought of you and actually had a debate (in my noggin) about whether to buy it for you. My practical side won out as I couldn’t figure out where to send the shirt to you, and I wasn’t sure if you would wear it with a Giants’ logo on the front.
But if you would, you can go to the Giants’ clubhouse website and pick one up. I think it’s about $20.
BABIP Theory Q–
I’m not CPT Math, but I wonder if the assertion that BABIP will always work out to around .290 is correct for all pitchers. If a particular pitcher is working to induce weak, off-balance contact and another is gunning for K’s, it seems like that would cause a major variance in BABIP.
Dan
Dan V- Hill’s already burned through her supporters money. She’s now working her way through her money. Which she certainly has every right to do. But I’ll still be much happier when she goes home.
Dan- The only pitching style I’ve heard of that gets consistently different BABIP is the knuckleball. Keep in mind that going for K’s is irrelevant, since those aren’t even Balls In Play (are you thinking of power pitchers, in general?).
Kudos, Joe on the “show your work” theory. Couldn’t agree more. Pacino, sadly enough, has come to the point that he’s always playing Pacino (or maybe always playin gthe character from Scent of a Woman — Hoo-ah). Nicholson has moved this direction, but Crowe? Also, I have a friend who dislikes U2, becuae, he says, they “sold out” starting with The Joshua Tree. Never understood how you could consider them continually changing their sound to be selling out, just because it sells.
AMusingFool, I understand that K doesn’t factor directly into the BABIP, but I’d be curious to see how a strikeout pitcher (certainly with power pitchers included) affects BABIP. Because they’re trying to make a batter miss, does that mean that contact looks different than a pitcher that’s trying to induce weak grounders, thus giving a different BABIP? Maybe, as you said, the knuckleballer is the only notable exception.
Overall, my point is that maybe Banny’s pitching style doesn’t necessarily mean a low BABIP indicates regression in the future, but is a function of his pitching style and prowess, since his goal is to induce contact.
I know he’s looking for more K’s this season, so that could be an opportunity to see how it affects his BABIP. Probably too many other variables, though.
I’m no stats expert, but I don’t think that BABIP is assumed to regress to the ~.290/.300 level for pitchers. It’s a convenenient benchmark as the league average, but BABIP tends to correlate to Line Drive percentage (LD%), and will generally regress to roughly towards .12 above the LD% (knuckleballers aside). The average pitcher allows an 18% LD%, so the average BABIP goes towards .300 (.18+.12). So a pitcher who is getting roughed up and allowing a bunch of line drives, say 25%, should expect a regression towards a .370 BABIP, not a regression towards .300.
This doesn’t necessarily relate to whether a pitcher is a “strikeout” pitcher or not, but it certainly affects whether a pitcher can reasonably expect a .300 BABIP.
How could you mention the placid look in Soria’s face, and not mention the fact that he looks amish??
Seriously; that’s gotta be the greatest chinstrap ever, right? Kingpin was on Starz the other night, and I swear I saw him playing with Blues Traveler at the end.
Brother Hezichia Soria–>Here, here!!
- Love the new wallpaper.
- Thanks for sharing the Banny text message. This blog is such a perfect idea.
I’m wary of this reckless mix of baseball and politics in one blog. But as long as we’ve already made the leap, do you think Hillary could get a ball deep enough into the outfield to bring a runner home from third? Because anyone who can do that these days has my vote.
You’re stat line is wrong. Mo has yet to walk a batter this season. But anyway, ridiculous start to the year for both Mo and Soria. Maybe the Yanks can come in swipe Soria in free agency once Mo’s done. He’ll be tough to replace.
I’m fairly confident in declaring that the Rays are not going to collapse. With the possible exception of Percival and the back end of the ‘pen, these players are for real. Their assault on the AL East status quo is serious, Toronto is in big trouble, and I wouldn’t rule out a 2nd-place finish and a very legitimate run at the wild card for Tampa.
!!
Pictures have no ability to control BABIP, or it is masked by so much noise as to be indistinguishable from defense and park factors. The issue is not entirely settled, but BABIP just doesn’t correlate from year to the next. The link below should be considered required reading for any stats geek.
http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=878
I just wrote “pictures” instead of “pitchers” after reading the word “pictures” somewhere. Uh oh.
You know your blog has arrived when it is almost always about baseball but is frequented by an avid curling fan.
Seriously, how much would most bloggers pay to be able to say, “Curlers love my blog.” You’ll notice there are never any curling questions in The Sports Guy’s mailbag.
You also know your blog has arrived when commenters try to go after old arguments like “Pitchers can’t control BABIP.” Just as long as nobody tells Banny that…
Joe – If you don’t concede it is considered unsportsmanlike. Curling is one of those odd games where everything is based on calling your own fouls and playing pair. We Canadians have some different sporting traditions.
Plus if you concede the game, you to start drinking earlier. Add this to the fact that the winning team buys the first round, it’s a win win for all those around.
Joe … In golf, if I lie 20 feet from the 18th hole after four strokes, and my competitor is six inches from the hole shooting for a three, am I quitter if I concede his putt, and thus the hole, and even the match? No, and in fact I’m a jerk if I make him putt it. But I still enjoyed the story.
Tom Tippett actually showed fairly convincingly that pitchers do have some control over BABIP in the following article:
http://www.diamond-mind.com/articles/ipavg2.htm
Key quote: “In a sample of 351 pitchers with at least 6000 career balls in play, more than 12% of them posted results that would happen less than 1% of the time by chance.”
I skimmed both articles because its late and their long .
I can see both sides. There is some definitely randomness that makes some ABs into a single thru the left side and some into a GIDP.
It just seems inutitive that a good pitcher that won’t allow hitters to square up a ball will get more outs on balls in play . On the other end of the spectrum, if a pitchers serving up meatballs, he’ll still get people out, but not at the rate that he’d like. The .290 just doesn’t correlate to my limited observations.
Maybe we can’t solve this tonight…
I don’t think anyone who has ever seen more than a handful of Maddux starts can truly believe a pitcher has no control over his BABIP. Limited control, I’d go along with, but not zero percent.
People who understand stats better than I tell me that studies have proven this to not be true, but it has always seemed to me that the difference is in the line drive rates. When it comes to liners, your fate is in the hands of the three old crones and where your defense is positioned. But if hitters aren’t making solid contact and all your balls in play are soft bleeders, a greater percentage of them should result in an out. And some pitchers certainly do give up more liners than others.
Intuition, mine included, violently rejects the notion that a pitcher’s BABIP does not reflect an underlying skill. Sure, the issue isn’t completely settled, but I think it’s safe to conclude that, insofar as high-BABIP and low-BABIP pitchers exist, the difference between the extremes is not very great over large sample sizes.
The issue is this: if one pitcher has a career BABIP-against of .285 and another has a BABIP-against of .292, that fact by itself reveals very little about the expected success of either pitcher. Looking at K-rates, BB-rates & HR-rates on the other hand, will leave little doubt as to who’s good and who isn’t. Greg Maddux isn’t great because he’s suppressed hits on balls in play, he’s great because he’s struck out 3.38 batters for every one he’s walked.
Not every strikeout is because a pitcher’s stuff is hard to make contact with (even Livan Hernandez strikes out batters, after all), but one can easily see that the league leaders in Ks are about the same from year to year. Same with walks. Look at hits allowed, though, and you’ll see wild fluctuations.
Baseball is crazy complex and any statistical analysis of it necessarily starts with abstracting a very narrow slice of reality. Here, it doesn’t matter if a pitcher manages to induce a lot of weak contact, because the chaotic chain of events following that contact means that this skill doesn’t show up in stats.
Nice curling story, Joe. We remember the encounter well.
See you in Vancouver…?
tenks
[...] not a direct comparison, but it’s certainly valid. Anyway, Joe mentions a hilariously awesome text message exchange after the game. It was like that. Banny was mostly working fastball as he does when he’s [...]
[...] Royals were already sabermetric fan favorites due to the presence of Brian Bannister, who famously said: Just had to let my Babip regress before I started dealing [...]