The New York Yankees Are Your 2009 AL East Champions

This is absolutely belated, but in case you haven’t heard, the New York Yankees are your 2009 American League Eastern Division Champions. I will give you two bits of information that make me feel warm and gleeful as I continue working on a slew of season-ending pieces:

• Number of wins added by the Red Sox’ clever, efficient, low-risk, high-reward, prescient, versatile, crafty signings of John Smoltz, Brad Penny, Takashi Saito, and Rocco Baldelli: 1.9

• Number of wins added by the Yankees’ nefarious, ruthless, unfair, greedy, gluttonous, shameful signings of C.C. Sabathia, A.J. Burnett, and Mark Teixeira: 16.2

• Number of homegrown players that contributed to the gritty, gutty, scrappy, hustling, playing-the-game-the-right-way, fiery 2009 Red Sox: 11

• Number of homegrown players that contributed to the soulless, evil, oppressive, corporate, mercenary 2009 Yankees: 14

Hey, I’m still a fan, right?

(NOTE: “Contributed” is, indeed, a vague term. I defined a contributing player as having 50 or more plate appearances or 25 or more innings pitched. I settled on these numbers after looking at the Yankees’ roster and realizing that I had nearly forgotten about nearly everyone below these marks, but remembered everyone above them. International free agent signings [Matsui, Matsuzaka, etc.] were excluded.)

Team-Wide Trends Continue To Elude Joe Morgan

I’d like to apologize for the lack of content recently. I spent much of last week working on a large piece, hoping to post it on Friday. Then I sent it to the smartest person I know, who lived up to that billing by pointing out several problems with the argument and its lack of focus. So, licking my wounds, I’m returning to the drawing board with no estimated time of arrival. I’ve also started a new job working with middle schoolers to improve their literacy skills (those of you that have followed Fan Interference since its inception can feel free to shudder now). Although it’s only part-time, it requires a significant commute and some work outside the classroom, so finding time to post will become marginally more difficult. But, much like utilizing both sabermetrics and scouting, I’m confident that a balance can be found.

Today’s offering is meager but meaningful. One week ago, I posted a blurb about ESPN analyst Joe Morgan’s infamous reluctance to look things up before offering his opinion. Well, Morgan did it again in today’s chat:

Matt (St. Louis): Hi Joe, From the current playoff contenders which team do you think is the best well rounded?

Joe Morgan: I think St. Louis in the National League. They have excellent starting pitching. Good relief pitching. Until recently Ryan Franklin was great as a closer and I think he can be again in the playoffs. In the American League, I’ve been believing in the Yankees for the last month. But you have to wonder about their starting pitching. Sabathia will get the job done, but you have to wonder about Burnett. Pettitte has the shoulder problems and Joba is a star in the Yankees’ minds and no where else. But I guess all the good teams have some weaknesses. Philly doesn’t have a closer. Anaheim is just now getting their pitching in order, but you have to wonder about their power. Boston, their starting pitching, Lester and then Beckett, but he’s been struggling until recently.

Astute baseball fans will quickly notice Morgan’s incorrect assessment of the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim’s perceived deficiency – lack of power. The Angels rank fifth in baseball in slugging percentage, 11th in home runs, 12th in triples, and 14th in doubles. Morgan’s argument for the St. Louis Cardinals is peculiar in two ways: (1) the Cardinals rank 12th in slugging, 15th in home runs, 19th in triples, and 11th in doubles and (2) his argument consists entirely of touting their pitching. I’m not sure the answer to Matt’s question is the Angels. But if Morgan is going to pass over the Angels because of their weak hitting, he can’t go for the Cardinals either.

The more interesting aspect of Morgan’s response is its relationship to the rest of the mainstream sports media. Traditionally, the sports media is slow to pick up on changes in a team’s style of play. I’ve written about this phenomenon before, in which people base their analysis on their perception of a team’s style (usually rooted in history) rather than what the data tells them. Good examples of this include last year’s persistent declaration that the Pittsburgh Steelers are a running team, even though they finished the season ranked 23rd in rushing. Or that the Minnesota Twins are built on defense and unselfish play (read: bunting), when in reality they rank 21st and 25th in those categories. It’s a pretty common practice.

Joe Morgan has consistently demonstrated an inability or unwillingness to evaluate each edition of each baseball team on its own terms. That much is unsurprising. What’s quite surprising – and more than a little disconcerting – is how he’s been left in the dust by even the most obtuse of his peers. I will refrain from naming names, because I still haven’t given up hope that a major sports media network will offer to buy this blog from me for millions of dollars (note: kidding), but I’ve consistently heard these members of the mainstream sports media admire the Angels’ sudden shift from a punchless team to a slugging one. I never thought I’d see the day when the talking heads aren’t praising the Angels for their headiness, grit, guts, baserunning, and timely hitting, but that day has come. The word is out, and everyone knows it: for the first time in years, the Angels can really, really hit. Everyone but Joe Morgan, professional baseball analyst, that is.

… And there goes my multimillion-dollar absorption.

Insufferably Cute Girl Briefly Makes Phillies Fans More Likeable

This is spreading like wildfire, but I just have to post it anyway. It’s just so… cute. There, I said it.

EDIT: Major League Baseball’s stormtroopers have discovered the video on YouTube and, because they hate fun, taken it down. You can find the official and Bud Selig-approved version here.

As Surely As The Sun Rises In The East, Joe Morgan Will Not Look Up A Statistic

Rajai Davis is the only athletic Oakland Athletic, as judged by Joe Morgan

I’m working on a fairly large (or dense, depending on how it works out) piece for the end of the week, so in all likelihood, posts will be sparse until then. For now, I offer you this irresistible nugget that confirms three things: Joe Morgan still hates the Oakland Athletics, Joe Morgan still has no idea when he’s being baited, and Joe Morgan still doesn’t look anything up.

Otto (CA): Hello Joe. What do the Oakland A’s need to do to be competitive again? Maybe Billy Beane should quit writing books and start acquiring some athletes.

Joe Morgan: Become more athletic. Sometimes, when I look at the A’s players, I think they’re playing softball. They have some big guys who try to hit the ball out of the ballpark. They strike out a lot. They just are not in position to make things happen on the basepaths. They’ve never really been a team to run or steal bases, bunt guys over or hit and run. They’ve always tried to hit the big home run. Now they have one guy in Davis. Their philosophy was working for a while, but now that philosophy doesn’t work any more. You have to be more athletic, steal some bases in order to be a well rounded team. You don’t have to steal a lot of bases, but you have to have the threat there.

The unathletic, basepath-clogging, stationary, one-dimensional Oakland Athletics have the fourth-most steals in Major League Baseball, having swiped 119 bags this season. Also, does anyone else find it weird that the only Oakland player that Morgan deems athletic is Rajai Davis, who just happens to be the only black position player on the team? Because I do.

Gus Johnson Opens The NFL Season, In His Own Inimitable Style

At 4:06 PM, my phone began persistently vibrating. I opened it to find three separate text messages from three separate friends, all saying something like “please tell me you just saw that play in the Broncos game.” I was on my way crosstown to watch the Giants at a friend’s apartment, so I told them no, I did not see that play, but please explain what happened. One friend described the play in great detail. One didn’t respond. And one simply wrote “GUS JOHNSON OUTBURST.” A huge smile spread across my face. Here’s the play that elicited a vintage explosion from the greatest and most genuine broadcaster alive, Gus Johnson.

Yankees’ Postseason Fate Closely Tied To A.J. Burnett’s Performance

Over the last year or so, I’ve realized that my ardent commitment to statistical analysis in sports has come at the cost of my youthful fandom. I remain a dedicated supporter of my teams, but some of the unadulterated enthusiasm has faded away. For example, when Robinson Cano rips a double on the first pitch of an at-bat, I can’t help but shake my head at his impatience instead of applauding his play. When Joba Chamberlain pitches a good game, I’m not only happy because he’s given the Yankees a quality performance, but also because this means I’m one small step closer to being right about his proper role in the major leagues. In short, I’m rooting more for me to be right than for the athletic displays themselves. It’s a bit of a somber realization, but I’ve come to accept its permanence.

Until recently, this change had all but done away with age-old question “who’s your favorite baseball player?” Ten years ago, I would have said Derek Jeter. Five years ago, it would have been Gary Sheffield. If you asked me in the last year, I would have blinked at you quizzically and named the Yankee with the highest WARP, because he would have contributed the most to my favorite team. But now, strangely enough, I have an answer to that question, and it’s largely without a statistical bent. A.J. Burnett is my favorite baseball player and he is, to my great trepidation, the key to the Yankees’ postseason chances.

John Sterling’s Notable Lack Of Spontaneity (And A Great Home Run Celebration)

I was reading Baseball Prospectus’ “The Week In Quotes” column yesterday when something struck me as fairly odd. It was a quote from Yankees radio broadcaster John Sterling, and it went like this:

“I like things to be spontaneous. Besides, there’s not much you can do with it. The number one Yankee in hits in history? The names are Gehrig, Ruth, DiMaggio and Mantle—what an honor. What else is there to say?” (on how he’ll call Derek Jeter taking over the Yankees mark for career hits)

John Sterling is many things. He is gregarious, misleading, passionate, exuberant, biased, overwhelming, underwhelming, and possibly blind. But he is not spontaneous. After all, he regularly and automatically uses the following catch phrases when a Yankee hits a home run:

• “An A-Bomb, from A-Rod!” – Alex Rodriguez (and, infamously, Hideki Matsui)
• “The Melkman delivers!” – Melky Cabrera
• “El Capitan!” – Derek Jeter
• “It’s a Tex Message!” and “You’re on the Mark, Teixeira!” – Mark Teixeira
• “It’s a thrilla by Godzilla!” – Hideki Matsui
• “Robbie Cano, don’t ya know!” – Robinson Cano
• “Hinske with your best shot!” – Eric Hinske

EDIT: An observant and industrious reader has pointed out it’s “El Capitan” and not “El Capitano.” Serves me right.

You get the point. John Sterling is not spontaneous. Now, on a less cranky note, I give you the Milwaukee Brewers’ amazing team celebration after a recent Prince Fielder walk-off homer. Baseball needs more of this, if for no other reason than to get the ornery Baby Boomers riled up (starts at the 0:50 mark):

David Cross Should Stick To Comedy

This afternoon, I returned to Manhattan from Connecticut on a very crowded train. I turned to my iPod for entertainment, but quickly realized that I have added little new music in recent months (suggestions are welcome), and that I am bored with my current selection. There was a cute and especially bug-eyed pug across the aisle, but with me being neither its owner nor adjacent, its fun factor was limited. The same went for another charming dog in the alcove ahead of me. I was a man with few options.

Consequently, I found myself reading my girlfriend’s copies of New York magazine (which included a heartening article by Jay Jaffe) and Time Out New York. The latter contained a barely noticeable excerpt from an exchange with comedian David Cross, who offered his opinions on the New York Mets:

“Oh, man. If you want to talk baseball, I’ll do that all day. I can’t believe they didn’t even make a play for [Victor] Martinez.”

“I feel bad for Mets fans. Now, I don’t really give a [damn] about the Mets – or Mets fans, really – but when you pay that much money for tickets, and then a little over halfway through the season you just say, ‘Nah, we give up. [Screw] it…’ I can’t imagine Minaya being there next year. Just some bad, bad moves. They go in and sign the best pitcher in the majors, and then there is no backup for him? John Maine?”

The most important bit of information here is the Mets’ record at the trading deadline and at the time of the interview. At the trading deadline, the Mets were 49-53 – ten and a half games behind the Philadelphia Phillies in the NL East and 6.5 games back in the wild card. In late August, approximately when Cross was questioned (I’m assuming), the Mets were 17.5 games back in their division and 13 games behind the wild card leader. Also, from the trading deadline through late August, the Mets were without the services of Carlos Delgado, Jose Reyes, J.J. Putz, John Maine, Carlos Beltran, Fernando Martinez, Jonathon Niese, David Wright, and Johan Santana for long stretches. And owner Fred Wilpon has lost millions in the Bernard Madoff scandal. What, exactly, would Cross have the Mets to do combat this litany of problems?

So – and I can’t believe I’m saying this – I think we can all forgive the Mets for not being totally equipped to handle this ludicrous streak of horrible luck. The Mets didn’t make a play for Victor Martinez because they (a) had no money and (b) were 6.5 games out of the division with most of their best players on the disabled list for the foreseeable future. The Mets did not say “[screw] it.” They said “we’re broke, we’re not looking good for the playoffs, and everyone is hurt – we probably shouldn’t trade prospects to take on more money for a lost cause.” Finally, is Cross really criticizing the Mets for not having a comparable replacement for Johan Santana? There isn’t a team in baseball that can replace 200 innings of 3.00 ERA pitching from within the organization.

Look, Mets’ general manager Omar Minaya has made some questionable moves and even more questionable public relations decisions. But everyone – sportswriters, fans, comedians – can feel free to stop piling on the Mets for a legitimately promising season that was derailed by a freakish, unforeseen, and unprecedented rash of injuries.

I know Cross is just a comedian, but give me (and if not me, the Mets) a break.

A Rough Look At The American League’s Superiority

For a few years now, I’ve fully embraced the idea that the American League features a higher level of play than the National League. To be honest, I don’t even think it’s particularly close. This sort of snobbery often comes out in baseball debates with friends, in which I routinely refuse to consider any NL team or pitcher the best in the game (Albert Pujols’ existence means NL hitters get a pass). It’s obnoxious, I know.

I have neither the time nor the patience to pore through recent baseball history and quantify the difference between the leagues. I can, however, offer a very rough look at this disparity because several starting pitchers have switched leagues this season. Brad Penny, John Smoltz, Jose Contreras, Cliff Lee, and Vicente Padilla began the season in the AL and are currently in the NL. The reverse is true of Chad Gaudin and Ian Snell. Here are their numbers in the AL:

• AL: 597 IP, 4.92 ERA, 1.53 WHIP, 6.4 K/9, 3.77 BB/9, 1.2 HR/9

And in the NL:

• NL: 274 IP, 4.32 ERA, 1.19 WHIP, 7.37 K/9, 2.34 BB/9, 0.58 HR/9

It’s a small sample, to be sure, and anyone with the requisite interest and time could resolve this issue. But at least for this season, there appears to be little argument about which league has the superior pitching (and hitting). Which means that the next person who tells me Tim Lincecum is better than Zack Greinke is getting a dirty look.

Statistics Have Huge Effect On A Game’s Outcome, Studies Show

During today’s Mets-Rockies game, Mets play-by-play man Gary Cohen said something that I found both confusing and – because I’m thin-skinned about this stuff – obnoxious. To very closely paraphrase:

“Nowadays, there’s so much more of an emphasis being placed on statistics and statistical analysis when putting together a team. You see more and more front offices embracing that way of doing things. Which is fine; there’s a certain place in the game for that. But the more you actually watch the game, the more you realize that statistics don’t win games.”

(color commentators agree, discussion on the importance of intangibles ensues)

I’ll tackle the confusing part first. Namely, I’m not sure I understand what point Cohen is trying to make. I would guess that he’s trying to say that you cannot rely solely on statistical analysis when evaluating individual or team performance, that there’s more to constructing a winner than high batting averages and low ERAs. This is, of course, true. Exclusively statistical analysis would suggest that the New York Yankees have a real prospect on their hands in Shelley Duncan, but anyone who has seen Duncan play in the majors knows that he is – at best – a bench player on a second-tier team. It took me forever to be able to admit this, but it really and truly takes the careful combination of objective (statistical) and subjective (scouting) evaluation to identify major league talent and assemble it effectively.

I’m almost positive Cohen was trying to endorse this balance. The problem, however, is that he actually said nothing like that. He said that “statistics don’t win games,” which is about as wrong as you can get. Baseball teams win and lose games based on the number of runs they score and allow. Runs themselves are a statistic, which should automatically disprove Cohen’s theory, but I’ll continue. Teams like Cohen’s Mets score runs (well, not these Mets) by hitting singles, doubles, triples, and home runs. They prevent runs by accumulating strikeouts, avoiding walks, and inducing put-outs. These, too, are statistics. Statistics represent events that determine the outcome of a game. Sure, whether or not David Wright thinks Angel Pagan (great name or greatest name?) is a raging jerk might affect Wright’s performance, but it remains inevitable that his play – as documented by statistics – will affect the level of his team’s success. As I hope you can see, Cohen’s thesis statement is totally incorrect.

In addition to the content, I also found Cohen’s tone more than a little obnoxious. More specifically, his condescending “the more you actually watch the game” rubbed me the wrong way. As many of you may know, a common stereotype amongst the old-school baseball contingent is that those advocating statistical analysis don’t actually watch the games themselves. Instead, it is usually implied and often said that we watch games through the box score, or perhaps in some Matrix-like alternate reality. I’m very (overly?) sensitive to this implication, but I can’t help how I feel. So, to Mr. Cohen and anyone else who thumbs their nose at advocates of objective analysis, I say this: For every stat geek that evaluates players based on nothing but VORP and SNLVAR, there’s a baseball romantic that judges exclusively on a player’s hustle and the look he’s got in his eye. The ultimate goal is to meet in the middle. Until we get there, however, I’d appreciate it if the subtle derision of the statistically-inclined community for its entirely valid (and often accurate) approach to evaluating baseball came to an end.