Totally Unreadable

[Slaky]

I'm all for increased statistical analysis in baseball, but this expression of Bernstein's wet dream would make broadcasts unlistenable:

So no more, "He took a really good route to that ball." That now becomes, "Here you see what would have been a perfect route to that ball, and Mike Trout does a remarkable job of keeping 94 percent route-efficiency."

No more, "Yu Darvish is really getting great rotation on his curveball." That's now, "His curve is averaging 1700 RPM, which is 100 more than it did in his last start and 12 percent above league average."

Has to be better ways to integrate advanced analysis than that.

This is, in many ways, the worst article I have ever seen.

[InternetApex]

I also wish Pete Rose would hurry up and die so they can put him in the Hall Of Fame.

10. There's still a ton we probably don't know about Rose's gambling. This has always seemed the shutdown argument. When Rose voluntarily agreed to his ban, part of the deal was MLB would halt its investigation of him. That's to say: There may have been far more gambling involvement with Rose than we know now. Do we know that? No. But we do know that when Rose agreed to his ban, he did so in large part so the investigation would stop. As Matt Snyder from CBS Sportsline put it: "We'll never know what more the investigation would have found and revealed, but we do know Rose wanted badly enough for it to stop that he cut the deal and volunteered to be banned from baseball for life."

Fuck Rose.

This.

Gambling is bad, juicing is good.

Still can't do an article without mentioning the "cards"

This article is the most imbecilic thing that Leitch has ever written.  That is really saying something.

I'm sure he works in plenty of douchebaggery in support - unreadable to be sure - but I agree with all ten of his main points completely. 

That, too.

Yep, and yep.

Ditto and tritto.

Apart from point 6, clearly:

"There's still not a ton of proof that PEDs work the way many claim. We know throwing games works. Many intelligent observers have long argued that the supposed "steroid era" of baseball might in fact have been a juiced ball era; the only proof we have so far of the benefits of PEDs have been in helping players recover from injury and workouts.  (There has been no connection proven between taking PEDs and being able to hit a baseball, farther or otherwise.)

[emphasis is mine]

This bugs the shit out of me.  It's not too far removed from the surprisingly commonly-held notion that steroids, somehow, magically make you stronger even if you sit on your arse all day long.  The whole fucking point of steroids, and the whole reason that professional athletes use them, is that they help them to recover faster from injury and, especially, workouts.  If you recover from your workout faster, you can work out more often and harder, and your physical development, firstly, is accelerated and secondly, can be maintained at a level that wouldn't otherwise be possible.  Thus, you can hit (or throw) a fucking baseball harder.  Guh.

Oh, the horror.

[Quality Start Machine]

I'm all for increased statistical analysis in baseball, but this expression of Bernstein's wet dream would make broadcasts unlistenable:

So no more, "He took a really good route to that ball." That now becomes, "Here you see what would have been a perfect route to that ball, and Mike Trout does a remarkable job of keeping 94 percent route-efficiency."

No more, "Yu Darvish is really getting great rotation on his curveball." That's now, "His curve is averaging 1700 RPM, which is 100 more than it did in his last start and 12 percent above league average."

Has to be better ways to integrate advanced analysis than that.

This is, in many ways, the worst article I have ever seen.

Although I do like the comparison of Hawk Harrelson to a combination of a dead guy and Paula Deen.

[Bort]

I'm all for increased statistical analysis in baseball, but this expression of Bernstein's wet dream would make broadcasts unlistenable:

So no more, "He took a really good route to that ball." That now becomes, "Here you see what would have been a perfect route to that ball, and Mike Trout does a remarkable job of keeping 94 percent route-efficiency."

No more, "Yu Darvish is really getting great rotation on his curveball." That's now, "His curve is averaging 1700 RPM, which is 100 more than it did in his last start and 12 percent above league average."

Has to be better ways to integrate advanced analysis than that.

Good Christ that is terrible. Not even the biggest Yeti on the Baseball Prospectus subscriber list wants to hear that shit.

Here's a wacky announcer idea: just base your opinions of players' skills on evidence, not feelings. Leave the in-depth stats analysis for the interwebs. Now give me a radio show.

[Slaky]

I thought we all agreed Barry Bonds, while an asshole, is the best player ever. If we don't we should. We should agree on that right now.

[Eli]

I'm all for increased statistical analysis in baseball, but this expression of Bernstein's wet dream would make broadcasts unlistenable:

So no more, "He took a really good route to that ball." That now becomes, "Here you see what would have been a perfect route to that ball, and Mike Trout does a remarkable job of keeping 94 percent route-efficiency."

No more, "Yu Darvish is really getting great rotation on his curveball." That's now, "His curve is averaging 1700 RPM, which is 100 more than it did in his last start and 12 percent above league average."

Has to be better ways to integrate advanced analysis than that.

Good Christ that is terrible. Not even the biggest Yeti on the Baseball Prospectus subscriber list wants to hear that shit.

Here's a wacky announcer idea: just base your opinions of players' skills on evidence, not feelings. Leave the in-depth stats analysis for the interwebs. Now give me a radio show.

I'm excited that this technology exists, but you're right that it sucks for a broadcast. Tennis has actually had some of this stuff for a few years now thanks to the Hawk-Eye system and it'll get tossed out on occasion that Rafael Nadal's forehand is 4,000 RPM. Cool, I guess, but it doesn't mean anything without context and just clunks up the broadcast.

Front offices, on the other hand, should be wetting their pants about all this data.

[J. Walter Weatherman]

I'm all for increased statistical analysis in baseball, but this expression of Bernstein's wet dream would make broadcasts unlistenable:

So no more, "He took a really good route to that ball." That now becomes, "Here you see what would have been a perfect route to that ball, and Mike Trout does a remarkable job of keeping 94 percent route-efficiency."

No more, "Yu Darvish is really getting great rotation on his curveball." That's now, "His curve is averaging 1700 RPM, which is 100 more than it did in his last start and 12 percent above league average."

Has to be better ways to integrate advanced analysis than that.

Good Christ that is terrible. Not even the biggest Yeti on the Baseball Prospectus subscriber list wants to hear that shit.

Here's a wacky announcer idea: just base your opinions of players' skills on evidence, not feelings. Leave the in-depth stats analysis for the interwebs. Now give me a radio show.

I'm excited that this technology exists, but you're right that it sucks for a broadcast. Tennis has actually had some of this stuff for a few years now thanks to the Hawk-Eye system and it'll get tossed out on occasion that Rafael Nadal's forehand is 4,000 RPM. Cool, I guess, but it doesn't mean anything without context and just clunks up the broadcast.

Front offices, on the other hand, should be wetting their pants about all this data.

The thing about it is that there's nothing inconsistent with the commentator "quotes" Bernstein says will be a thing of the past and this data he thinks will bring us analytics nirvana.

I think it will be less a case of "no more 'he took a really good route to that ball'" than one of "[ques up shiny, Fox DTrax-enhanced replay showing with fancy, glowing lines in the outfield how closely a fielder's actual route to the ball tracked the 'ideal' route] Wow! He took good really route to that ball right there!"

[Slaky]

I'm all for increased statistical analysis in baseball, but this expression of Bernstein's wet dream would make broadcasts unlistenable:

So no more, "He took a really good route to that ball." That now becomes, "Here you see what would have been a perfect route to that ball, and Mike Trout does a remarkable job of keeping 94 percent route-efficiency."

No more, "Yu Darvish is really getting great rotation on his curveball." That's now, "His curve is averaging 1700 RPM, which is 100 more than it did in his last start and 12 percent above league average."

Has to be better ways to integrate advanced analysis than that.

Good Christ that is terrible. Not even the biggest Yeti on the Baseball Prospectus subscriber list wants to hear that shit.

Here's a wacky announcer idea: just base your opinions of players' skills on evidence, not feelings. Leave the in-depth stats analysis for the interwebs. Now give me a radio show.

I'm excited that this technology exists, but you're right that it sucks for a broadcast. Tennis has actually had some of this stuff for a few years now thanks to the Hawk-Eye system and it'll get tossed out on occasion that Rafael Nadal's forehand is 4,000 RPM. Cool, I guess, but it doesn't mean anything without context and just clunks up the broadcast.

Front offices, on the other hand, should be wetting their pants about all this data.

The thing about it is that there's nothing inconsistent with the commentator "quotes" Bernstein says will be a thing of the past and this data he thinks will bring us analytics nirvana.

I think it will be less a case of "no more 'he took a really good route to that ball'" than one of "[ques up shiny, Fox DTrax-enhanced replay showing with fancy, glowing lines in the outfield how closely a fielder's actual route to the ball tracked the 'ideal' route] Wow! He took good really route to that ball right there!"

Bernstein makes me want to hate facts out of spite.

Imagine a Bernstein-Kenny program.

[Saul Goodman]

I'm all for increased statistical analysis in baseball, but this expression of Bernstein's wet dream would make broadcasts unlistenable:

So no more, "He took a really good route to that ball." That now becomes, "Here you see what would have been a perfect route to that ball, and Mike Trout does a remarkable job of keeping 94 percent route-efficiency."

No more, "Yu Darvish is really getting great rotation on his curveball." That's now, "His curve is averaging 1700 RPM, which is 100 more than it did in his last start and 12 percent above league average."

Has to be better ways to integrate advanced analysis than that.

Good Christ that is terrible. Not even the biggest Yeti on the Baseball Prospectus subscriber list wants to hear that shit.

Here's a wacky announcer idea: just base your opinions of players' skills on evidence, not feelings. Leave the in-depth stats analysis for the interwebs. Now give me a radio show.

I'm excited that this technology exists, but you're right that it sucks for a broadcast. Tennis has actually had some of this stuff for a few years now thanks to the Hawk-Eye system and it'll get tossed out on occasion that Rafael Nadal's forehand is 4,000 RPM. Cool, I guess, but it doesn't mean anything without context and just clunks up the broadcast.

Front offices, on the other hand, should be wetting their pants about all this data.

The thing about it is that there's nothing inconsistent with the commentator "quotes" Bernstein says will be a thing of the past and this data he thinks will bring us analytics nirvana.

I think it will be less a case of "no more 'he took a really good route to that ball'" than one of "[ques up shiny, Fox DTrax-enhanced replay showing with fancy, glowing lines in the outfield how closely a fielder's actual route to the ball tracked the 'ideal' route] Wow! He took good really route to that ball right there!"

Bernstein makes me want to hate facts out of spite.

Imagine a Bernstein-Kenny program.

Today, on Baseball Assholes:

SPEAKING TRUTH TO THE PITCHER WIN PEASANTS!
THEN WE'LL EXPLAIN WHY ANYONE WHO LIKES RBIs IS PROBABLY A CHILD RAPIST!
The Cubs have hired a new beer vendor.... BUT DOES THAT GET THEM CLOSER TO WINNING A WORLD SERIES????
AND: JOIN US FOR ANOTHER LINE-BY-LINE, PLAY-AND-PAUSE CRITIQUE OF HAWK HARRELSON'S ENTIRE GAME TAPE!

[Quality Start Machine]

I think having this type of data at a broadcaster's disposal is only as good as the broadcaster using it. Telling somebody the number of RPM on a breaking ball would be horrendous if it were Hawk Harrelson talking about it, because he can be talking about naked chicks and shit blowing up and it would suck. Besides, data like pitch RPM is useless without context. The Hawks of the world would never be bothered to provide that.

At the same time, if Lou Boudreau were still alive and in his prime, he'd overanalyze it as if he were talking about the different grass heights in a single major league infield - interesting data at a high level, but you really wouldn't want a deep dive while you're having a beer and listening/watching.

[World's #1 Astros Fan]

I think having this type of data at a broadcaster's disposal is only as good as the broadcaster using it. Telling somebody the number of RPM on a breaking ball would be horrendous if it were Hawk Harrelson talking about it, because he can be talking about naked chicks and shit blowing up and it would suck. Besides, data like pitch RPM is useless without context. The Hawks of the world would never be bothered to provide that.

At the same time, if Lou Boudreau were still alive and in his prime, he'd overanalyze it as if he were talking about the different grass heights in a single major league infield - interesting data at a high level, but you really wouldn't want a deep dive while you're having a beer and listening/watching.

LUBE UDEROW!

[Quality Start Machine]

I thought we all agreed Barry Bonds, while an asshole, is the best player ever. If we don't we should. We should agree on that right now.

Intrepid Reader: Babe Ruth

Hi.

[ChuckD]

I thought we all agreed Barry Bonds, while an asshole, is the best player ever. If we don't we should. We should agree on that right now.

Intrepid Reader: Babe Ruth

Hi.

I'd agree with that. And if Bonds missed 3.5 years of his prime while killing Nazis and Communists, I'd put him at #2. That said...

Intrepid Reader: Ted Williams

Why hello there.

[Bort]

I thought we all agreed Barry Bonds, while an asshole, is the best player ever. If we don't we should. We should agree on that right now.

Intrepid Reader: Babe Ruth

Hi.

I'd agree with that. And if Bonds missed 3.5 years of his prime while killing Nazis and Communists, I'd put him at #2. That said...

Intrepid Reader: Ted Williams

Why hello there.

Intrepid Readers: 40 Theriots

But we win ball games.

[ChuckD]

I thought we all agreed Barry Bonds, while an asshole, is the best player ever. If we don't we should. We should agree on that right now.

Intrepid Reader: Babe Ruth

Hi.

I'd agree with that. And if Bonds missed 3.5 years of his prime while killing Nazis and Communists, I'd put him at #2. That said...

Intrepid Reader: Ted Williams

Why hello there.

Intrepid Readers: 40 Theriots

But we win ball games.

What's the marginal Value Over Replacement Nazi-Killer of a Theriot?