Note: I can't ask about the Cubs, specifically (there are NDAs about that sort of thing).

Obstructed View: Where do you want to be 10 years from now? Do you aspire to be a GM?

Tom: More of the same, I think. I have no desire to be a GM.

Obstructed View: How did you end up meeting MGL?

Tom: We both posted at an old baseball forum called BaseballBoards.com, which later became Fanhome. Voros, Patriot, David Smyth were also some of the posters there. (Note: How incredible would it have been to be in that environment?)

Obstructed View: I worry sometimes that my father might misunderstand sabermetrics because the barrier to entry is too high. Are you ever afraid that advanced statistics are off-putting to people who might just be getting into baseball, or are already overmuch familiar with low-quality stats like RBI and Wins? Do you have recommendations on ways to introduce advanced stats to those who may not be comfortable with all of the math, or is it just not for them?

Tom: I'm not worried about it being off-putting. Everyone should be comfortable with wherever they are.

I think the reliance on RBI and Pitcher Wins is a barrier, but as we saw with Felix and others, pitcher wins is starting to erode.

I think picking up an old Bill James Baseball Abstract through inter-library loan is the best way.

Obstructed View: The Book came out in 2006, almost 7 years ago. What part of it do you think has held up the best and what part do you think has held up the worst?

Tom: Sales every year has been pretty constant, which means it's getting pretty good word-of-mouth. Looking back, I don't think there's any one part that is better or worse in terms of timelessness. We wrote the book on the idea that it would be timeless.

Obstructed View: What aspect of baseball do you think is least understood, from a statistics standpoint? What is holding the sabermetric community back as far as exploring that subject?

Tom: Least understood by who? The only thing holding back the community is access to the relevant data. Without data, we have no way to test the hypothesis.

Obstructed View: Whose work in baseball do you most respect from a statistics standpoint? Whose work in baseball do you most respect from an “old-school” standpoint?

Tom: There are plenty of people. Bill James, Pete Palmer, MGL, Andy Dolphin, Tom Tippett, Dan Fox. Really, it's a very long list, and I can spit out another dozen names or three if you give me a few minutes. I'm just really happy to be part of such a community.

Obstructed View: What statistic do you like the most that you DIDN’T invent? Any moments where you were surprised someone “got there” before you did?

Tom: Well, Voros invented DIPS, which is about the most important finding in the last 15 years. Pete Palmer introduced us to Linear Weights. I'm never surprised, since everyone has their own creative input. We're all building on the work of others.

Your question seems to suggest some single-lane race, when really, it's about all of us on some scavenger hunt, coming from all over the world, picking up items on our journey, and agreeing to meet at Times Square, and see what we can all share with each other by the time we get there. It's cooperation, not competition.

Obstructed View: Many managers have started to embrace the new thinking as far as sabermetrics are concerned. In your opinion, will people with a purely statistical background ever be on-field coaches, giving strategic advice? How far away might we be from having, say, Dave Cameron advising Eric Wedge on when to use his bullpen?

Tom: I don't even know what "purely statistical background" means. Are you suggesting someone who only has a vocation in some various mathematical disciplines, but has no baseball experience at all? That would be the worst person to put on the field. You need a subject matter expert, and that means someone who lives and breathes baseball as the first requirement. 

Obstructed View: I'm afraid I may of framed the question incorrectly. I meant to say someone who perhaps never played baseball at a high level, but has a masterful grasp of the percentages and that sort of thing. With Billy Beane, Theo Epstein, Andrew Friedman, etc. changing the way front offices operate, I was curious if you thought that a similar thing might happen in the dugout (if it hasn't happened already). I think some managers are becoming much more receptive to the idea of using more and more specialized stats already.

Tom: Ah, I see. Well, I'm not really qualified to answer that question.

Obstructed View: How important do you think FIELD f/x will be as far as clearing up defensive metrics? Will we ever get to a place where fielding is as well understood as hitting? Should FIELD f/x ever be made public?

Tom: Tracking player movements and ball movement is critical. We do it all the time with our eyes. So, now we need to have a systematic, precise way to do all that on a large scale. A system that does that will remove all the uncertainty we currently have.

Obstructed View: From previous interviews, I know that you aren't a fan of the current system of the Hall of Fame. Do you think there is a place in the hall for sabermetricians and internet writers to have a say in who gets in? Do you think we'll live to see the day where someone like Bill James gets inducted for his contributions to baseball?

Tom: There's some really passionate fans out there, who devote their time and energy on baseball and its history and they don't get paid for it. Any time I run my many polls, I'm quite happy with the results I get. The IBA shows how you can have a good system with good fans produce good results.

Obstructed View: Anyone who has heard you speak about Rock Raines knows you believe he’s a no-doubt Hall-of-Famer. In my mind, Edgar Martinez is in the same boat – his numbers look to me like he’s better than maybe half of the Hall (not to mention that 3B are SORELY underrepresented in the Hall), and he hasn’t really received any support (languishing in the
mid-30’s). With the growing backlog of worthy players that will “take votes away” from Gar, he most likely won’t make it in until the Veteran’s Committee, if at all. Do you think Edgar should make the Hall? Do you think he will?

Tom: If you think a Hall of Fame should have about 20-25 new members every ten years, then Edgar would likely be part of that group. If you think it should be 10-15, he's probably outside that group.  If you think it should be 30-35 members, he's easily inside that group. So, you have to first decide the size of your hall of fame. The readers on my site have suggested that we should have 20-25 new members every ten years.

Obstructed View: Are there any players in particular that you think are “better than their numbers?”

Tom: It's a given that some players are better than they've performed so far, and others are worse. It's just a sampling issue.

Obstructed View: What topic would you most like to research, but haven’t been able to?

Tom: There's a long list of things, and I'm really happy that we've got a broad community that someone somewhere is addressing each one and will eventually publish it.

Obstructed View: How good are these Blackhawks? Are they for real?

Tom: I've only been following the Canadiens and Devils so far, but eventually, I'll pick up on a few more teams. I still they think have the best uniform in all of pro sports in USA/Canada.

Thanks again to Tom Tango for answering the questions.

The post Interview with Tom Tango (aka tangotiger) appeared first on Obstructed View.

Those of us who follow the Cubs a little too closely know by and large what to expect from the 2012 version: mediocrity will hold sway. Bountiful and unabated mediocrity. The question that has kept us on the edge of our seats over the past roughly five months is: “how will the new front office put its stamp on this team?” The answer is still unclear, but seems to involve terms like “incrementally” and “deliberately.” Since we’ve been talking about playing time around here lately (there’s still time to enter the OVBlog over/under challenge), I decided to poke around the pasts of our front office heroes and see if anything could be learned about what to expect on the field.

Playing Time Distribution

My first instinct in confronting questions like these is always to put my nose in a spreadsheet and take in the sweet numerical aroma. While Theo’s Red Sox never looked like anything resembling this year’s Cubs, Jed’s Padres are a fair comparison. They, like the Cubs, have been short on impact talent (on the offensive side, at least), and have experimented with a variety of players in trying to fill that void.

Hoyer took over the Pads following the 2009 season and kept a low profile. Despite a surprising run at the playoffs in 2010 and the splashy Anthony Rizzo trade the following offseason, his name was rarely mentioned in national circles right up until rumors of his imminent hiring with the Cubs started to swirl.

One of the nice things about Hoyer’s time with the Padres, for those of us trying to tease out his influence in the product on the field, is that longtime manager Bud Black was retained by the new GM. Any changes in playing time following Hoyer's arrival are likely to have been influenced (directly or indirectly) by Hoyer’s guidance than by the whims of a newly-arrived manager. As an initial look at the Hoyer-era Padres, I focused only on the offense, and compared the distribution of plate appearances for the two years pre-Hoyer to his two years with the club. The results are not altogether unexpected.

Lots of Experimentation, Few Iron Men.

Hoyer’s Padres weren’t shy about mixing it up on the field. In 2011, only Jason Bartlett managed 600 plate appearances; in 2010, that mark was reached by two players, Adrian Gonzalez and Chase Headley. There was thus lots of room for experimentation. In 2010 and 2011, the Padres averaged 12.5 players with between 150 and 550 PAs, as compared to 10.5 (slightly above league average) in the two years prior.

The distribution of these plate appearances ran the gamut of the player universe. Veteran “contributors” Ryan Ludwick and Miguel Tejada were acquired for the 2010 stretch run. Fringy younger players like Jesus Guzman, Kyle Blanks, and Tony Gwynn Jr. were given extended looks. Retreads like Jerry Hairston, Chris Denorfia, Jorge Cantu, and Alberto Gonzalez filled out the bench, and found their way on the field more often then one might hope. The Pads even managed a seemingly successful reclamation project in stealing underachieving Cameron Maybin from the Marlins.

One of the side effects of this mix and match strategy is that very few players ended up in the 1-49 PA bucket. In fact, the Padres had the fewest number of “1-49ers” in the league in ‘10 and ‘11, after being among the league leaders in ‘08 and ‘09. I’m not sure there’s a whole lot to make of this, and it may be due in part to limiting the at-bats of relief pitchers (always a good thing).

Implications for the Cubs

We have already seen the Cubs experiment in a variety of ways. Sabermetric darling David DeJesus looks to be the regular right fielder for the next two years. Ian Stewart is currently playing the role of reclamation project, and will most likely get a full season’s worth of at bats on the chance that he turns things around. The first baseman’s job, on the other hand, is currently PCL-oldster Bryan LaHair’s, and don’t be surprised if he only gets 200 PA to prove himself. Even then, someone not named Rizzo could very well be given a shot, especially if the young first basemen starts out cold in the PCL. If the Padres are any guide, I expect to see lots of turnover, time-shares, and chances taken in the years to come.

The post Will The Cubs Resemble Hoyer’s Padres? appeared first on Obstructed View.

By way of reassuring readers regarding my temperament, none of these moves have put me into a full Ted Lilly-, Carlos Zambrano-, or H.L. Mencken-type fury. And objectively, these moves range probably range from “practically meaningless” to “that definitely only bothers you.” Nonetheless, annoying.

10. The bunting contest. How about a home run derby? When did that become out of the question?

9. Moving Samardzija to the rotation. Not likely to end well (and I needed ten of these).

8. The rise of the Regulartron. Yes, there is undoubtedly some money to be made here. But color me completely unconvinced that it outweighs the brand value of that time machine on the North Side. And nothing drives me crazier than the constant blather of these things.

7. Leaving WGN. Hasn’t happened yet, obviously. I am among those out-of-staters dreading paying for MLB Extra Innings because the Cubs left the sole remaining national affiliate in favor of a glorified SportsChannel/FoxsportsChicago/CSN. If they can work out a deal with the new NBC network or find another way around the regional restrictions, I will promptly redact, but there is a lot of downside here among casual fans in particular.

6. Trading Zambrano. Yeah, I know, the veterans were tired of him and that was the last straw and all the rest. But couldn’t we turn the page on The Hendry Era by getting rid of someone like oh, say:

5. Reed Johnson. No? OK, fine.

4. Caving on Theo’s compensation. I’m sure that some folks are completely enamored with Kurcz and Carpenter, but I’m not one of them. However, Bud was obviously reticent to step in here, due to the future consequences of his decision. Why not call his bluff? We know that Theo put on his lawyer pants and drew up a pretty good case, complete with the glaring absence of any precedent. What’s the worst that could happen? Losing “uberprospect” Josh Vitters? It would have been worth it on the off-chance that Bud decided to tell Lucchino and Co.: “You will take Michael Brenly and like it.”

3. Ryan Flaherty. There’s no space on the 40-man for a 25 year-old lefty-hitting middle infielder with some pop? Did all of Koyie Hill’s detached appendages require their own spot?

2. Sitting out free agency. A wise man once said, “The bottom line is you can’t go out and buy young players, there is no opportunity to do that anymore.” So, what exactly is the plan? It’s nice to say that the organization needs to rebuild from the ground up, but what does that really mean in practice? Developing homegrown talent takes years, especially if your current minor leaguers more or less stink, and your only hypothetical advantage is scouting and developing marginally better than everyone else. Sure, free agents are expensive. Thing is, they are likely to get more expensive as their supply dwindles due to teams increasingly coercing young talent to sign long-term deals. It’s not like the Cubs were reluctant to spend money this offseason, as they seem to have offered in the neighborhood of $100 million dollars for three Cubans (allegedly), a McDonalds, and a vocational high school in the Dominican Republic. It would have been nice to sign a few vets likely to still be contributors if and when the young talent starts coming up, instead of the Maholms and DeJesuses of the world.

1. Failure to put a specialized strategist on the bench. As far as I can tell, “smart” front offices around the majors swooned over Dale Sveum for his tendency to pore over spray charts. That’s all well and good, but is it so out of the question to put someone on the bench who is actually numerate? It’s not like no one has ever considered the effects of various individual strategies on seasonal basis. There would still be plenty of room for leader-of-men types that inspire confidence by instigating bean-ball wars. Theo and Co. had the capital to really take a chance here, and instead they went traditional with Sveum et al.; the bench remains sacrosanct and decidedly quant-free. What we did get was a voluminous manual full of corporate speak, to be read and digested by a group of functional illiterates. The Cubs Way indeed.

The post Worst Moves of the Epstein Era appeared first on Obstructed View.

The post Big Ten Revenue Sharing Isn’t Working appeared first on Obstructed View.

If you were in last year, you should have already auto-enrolled into this year's league. If you want in this year for any spots that open up, post that in the comments of this thread. Spots will be given on a first-come first-served basis as they become available.

Plus if you win, you get this:

The post Discredited Fantasy Baseball II: Attack of the Chones appeared first on Obstructed View.

Indy Theo Parody

The post Fun with Photoshop appeared first on Obstructed View.

The article stresses Scott’s relationship with his teammates, particularly the Latinos and African Americans. I searched the article for the phrase”I’m not racist. I have a black friend. See?” but I surprisingly could not find them. Felix Pie spoke highly of Scott, pointing out that Scott helped resurrect his career after he was traded from the Cubs. Scott apparently told him “…he was running out of time in his career and that he lacked the qualities of a person with good character.” That comes off as pretty insulting and self righteous, but maybe Pie needed some tough love. Scott’s exact words were a bit harder to excuse:

“I tell him about some of the ways he’s acted: ‘Look, you’re acting like an animal, you’re acting like a savage. So I throw (plantains) in his helmet. Here are my banana chips to remind him that whenever he acts like an animal, ‘Hey, that’s what other people are thinking. They’re just not telling you, but that’s what they’re thinking about. And I’m telling you so that you’re aware of that so you can make a cognitive decision to not behave like that.’ I would want someone to tell me that instead of letting you making a jerk of yourself.”

Ummmm…insert awkward silence here. An animal and a savage; why didn’t he just call him a monkey? Everyone in the Orioles clubhouse defended Scott and said that he ribs people and they rib him right back, and that may be so. But doesn’t it seem odd for a man who has a race-related image problem to say those things to a journalist?

h/t to Mercurial Outfielder

The post Luke Scott is racist appeared first on Obstructed View.

WSD contest for April 2012

It's a bit early, but figured we'd get a head start.  If you guess "zero" and Tony Campana gets injured in spring training, then you're pretty much automatically in the random drawing to win (dying laughing)

The post A contest for folks who like scrap and heart appeared first on Obstructed View.

The post Obstructed View on WordPress Wish List appeared first on Obstructed View.

Paterno contends that ignorance was the context with which he heard McQueary’s disturbing story in 2002. McQueary, sitting at Paterno’s kitchen table, told him that he had been at the football building late the evening before when he heard noises coming from the shower. “He was very upset and I said why, and he was very reluctant to get into it,” Paterno said. “He told me what he saw, and I said, what? He said it, well, looked like inappropriate, or fondling, I’m not quite sure exactly how he put it. I said you did what you had to do. It’s my job now to figure out what we want to do. So I sat around. It was a Saturday. Waited till Sunday because I wanted to make sure I knew what I was doing. And then I called my superiors and I said, ‘Hey, we got a problem, I think. Would you guys look into it?’ Cause I didn’t know, you know. We never had, until that point, 58 years I think, I had never had to deal with something like that. And I didn’t feel adequate.”

At that point, Paterno set up a meeting for McQueary and Curley, the athletic director, and Schultz, who oversaw university police. McQueary has testified that he gave both men a far more graphic description of what he witnessed, which he believed to be Sandusky sodomizing a boy of about 10, who had his hands against the shower wall. At the preliminary hearing for Curley and Schultz on Dec. 16, McQueary said he had been reluctant to go into similar “great detail about sexual acts” with Paterno, out of respect for the coach, who was 78 at the time.

Schultz and Curley have maintained that McQueary failed to impart the seriousness of what he saw to them as well. They never told police about the allegation, instead informing Sandusky he could no longer bring children to university facilities. Prosecutors say Sandusky continued to abuse boys for six more years.

Paterno has said, “In hindsight, I wish I had done more.” — Washington Post

When it's now your job to figure out what to do, I strongly suggest you don't sit around for 10 fucking years and do nothing.

The post Joe Paterno speaks appeared first on Obstructed View.