Thursday, February 16, 2006

The Right Enemies

I guess it's Stupid Crap on the Internet Day. Sammy Sosa's agent starts us off.
"He decided he didn't want to put himself in the position of possibly underperforming to the very high standards he sets for himself," Katz said. "So he is gratefully and respectfully declining the Nationals' offer."
Right, it's not because they wouldn't give him a million dollars. It's because of his high standards.

As long as I'm reading the Post, no it's not.

I've mentioned a couple of times that I wish I'd kept my season ticket renewal invoice just so I could make myself feel better by throwing it away again whenever the Nats do or contemplate something unbelievably stupid (i.e., weekly). This makes me wish I'd kept it just so I could let this high-minded philanthrophist renew for me.
Since I'm struggling to get the wording right so that it doesn't come off like I'm a rich prick who doesn't care about fans, it took a little while.
I think you needed a little more time.

Ken Rosenthal runs down the four best and four worst moves of the offseason. Go ahead and guess what the worst one was.
1. The Nationals' acquisition of second baseman Alfonso Soriano from the Rangers for outfielder Brad Wilkerson and Terrmel Sledge and Double-A right-hander Armando Galarraga.

Nationals G.M. Jim Bowden likes to think big, but this time he over-reached; this would be a bad trade for the Nats even if Soriano were willing to move from second base to the outfield, which he isn't.
And this is from a guy who thinks we should extend Soriano's contract as soon as possible. Which may say more about Rosenthal than anything else, now that I think about it.

Hoo boy, this is fun. Will Carroll? Nailed.
Perhaps Carroll thinks he can get away with that because he published his article behind the shield of "pay content", and since the BP pay content audience is mostly BP disciples, now one is going to question the published Will Carroll. Well, any jackass can get published in this country, especially if they "get creative." How else can Ann Coulter's books be explained? Because Carroll didn't think he was going to get challenged, perhaps that is why he authored an article with steaming cow pies.
Baseball Prospectus? Nailed.
I suppose that is some improvement in civility from 2001 when Sean Forman critiqued Pitcher Abuse Points, leading to a vicious debate in which the congenial blokes from Baseball Prospectus sent a Cease and Desist Letter to Baseball Primer, threatening them with a copyright infringement suit. Some of my readers might think I am "being creative" now; I'm not; this nonsense really happened. Most importantly, most of the neo sabes proved themselves incapable of listening, so fuck them; there is no pulling punches these days.
Some other guys? Nailed.
In terms of pitching abuse studies, putting [Keith] Woolner and [Rany] Jazayerli next to Wright is like putting Sponge Bob and his side kick, Patrick, next to Neil Armstrong. Wright was a true pioneer while Sponge Bob and Patrick are cartoon characters that kick up dirt in uncharted waters so their creators can make money. The idea that Woolner and Jazayerli "showed" anyone value is ridiculous. In fact, it is safe to say their work on Pitcher Abuse Points put research back at least five years. Oil spills on Alaskan shorelines are easier to clean up that the mess they pumped into the baseball environment. It takes a long time to make strawmen disappear.
I don't know if he's right, but he's got the right enemies.

7 comments:

JammingEcono said...

Excellent post Ryan. Truth be told, I never quite understood your jihad against Will Carroll, but after reading the articles denigrating PAP/BP, I can see where you're coming from. From now on, no more sourcing of Will Carroll on BoTA except to mock him in support of your mighty anti-Will crusade!

Yuda said...

"I think you needed a little more time."

Brilliant!

El Gran Color Naranja said...

Something about a rift in the sabermetric community behind the scenes about pitcher abuse points strikes me as hilarious. "Neo-sabs"? Coming out against PAP as "Dropping a nuke"?

This level of self-importance over something rather meaningless reminds me of Student Body elections in college.

Nate said...

"This makes me wish I'd kept it just so I could let this high-minded philanthrophist renew for me."

Carroll-esque? Strawman? Pot calling the kettle what now?

Basil said...

I suppose that is some improvement in civility from 2001 when Sean Forman critiqued Pitcher Abuse Points, leading to a vicious debate in which the congenial blokes from Baseball Prospectus sent a Cease and Desist Letter to Baseball Primer, threatening them with a copyright infringement suit. Some of my readers might think I am "being creative" now; I'm not; this nonsense really happened.

Well . . . sort of. All of those events really happened, and they all happened around the same time, and some speculated the one caused or was in reaction to the other.

But there had also been bad blood between the respective groups since the mid-90s, at least. PAP was certainly not the first time. (Primer didn't exist until early '01 but, as many know, it rose from the old Big Bad Baseball Annual.) And, from the , it's apparent that BPro's issue, while rather insubstantial and relayed in a bullying fashion, wasn't in itself frivolous.

Basil said...

Crap. That link is to the Primer thread in late March 2001 concerning the cease & desist letter.

Ryan said...

JE: A Carroll jihad seems like fun until it consumes you. It's . . . too late for me.

Nate: Straw? Kettle?! CARROLL?! I'm not the one pretending anyone cares about Matt Lawton, and I don't look like Bob Wickman, either. I look like Todd MacCulloch.