It must be said - Hawk Harrelson has to go

[Steve9347]

It's been the same Hawk as always so far to me. Typical sound board.

 

Still talks over Stone and than tries correcting him after he makes a point. I don't know how Steve puts up with it sometimes.

[lostfan]

"sabermetrics" tends to mean whatever people who don't like it want it to mean to make whatever point they're trying to make at that given moment. Baseball has always been a game of numbers and all sabermetrics do is go deeper into those numbers and what they might mean. While there are people who hang onto numbers a little too much, dismissing them outright is just nonsense. When you find out a fast player you think of as a base stealer is only stealing at a 50% rate and that hurts more than it helps, you don't keep having him attempt steals do you? Unless your name rhymes with Rozzie Duillen.

[greg775]

Are you on drugs?

 

No. I like listening to Hawk n Stone a lot.

[Steve9347]

No. I like listening to Hawk n Stone a lot.

Honestly, I'll bet this is because you're an out-of-towner. It actually makes sense, because Hawkeroo is like the Sox fan you DON'T get to hang out with all the time. I could actually see out-of-town Sox fans being much bigger fans of Hawk.

[iamshack]

"sabermetrics" tends to mean whatever people who don't like it want it to mean to make whatever point they're trying to make at that given moment. Baseball has always been a game of numbers and all sabermetrics do is go deeper into those numbers and what they might mean. While there are people who hang onto numbers a little too much, dismissing them outright is just nonsense. When you find out a fast player you think of as a base stealer is only stealing at a 50% rate and that hurts more than it helps, you don't keep having him attempt steals do you? Unless your name rhymes with Rozzie Duillen.

I love how Hawk was like "what I need is some guys who want to win baseball games..."

 

That is where the problem lies here...the real answer is something in between the numbers and the unquantifiable...but both sides seem to want to outright dismiss the other...

[lostfan]

I love how Hawk was like "what I need is some guys who want to win baseball games..."

 

That is where the problem lies here...the real answer is something in between the numbers and the unquantifiable...but both sides seem to want to outright dismiss the other...

To me, that sounds like people saying Louisville just "wanted it more" than Michigan the other day. That sounds ridiculous. Michigan didn't want to win the championship that bad and that's why they lost? I thought it was because they were getting outrebounded and couldn't defend in the second half but eh. Having said that, intagibles DO exist and you have to "play the game" and that's not just a cliche. I think sometimes some "sabermetrics people" (for lack of a better phrase to describe them) get carried away trying to get away from dumb Joe Morgan type analysis and head in the extreme opposite direction.

[iamshack]

To me, that sounds like people saying Louisville just "wanted it more" than Michigan the other day. That sounds ridiculous. Michigan didn't want to win the championship that bad and that's why they lost? I thought it was because they were getting outrebounded and couldn't defend in the second half but eh. Having said that, intagibles DO exist and you have to "play the game" and that's not just a cliche. I think sometimes some "sabermetrics people" (for lack of a better phrase to describe them) get carried away trying to get away from dumb Joe Morgan type analysis and head in the extreme opposite direction.

Yep, both the scouts and the quants use the extreme examples.

[IlliniKrush]

I love how Hawk was like "what I need is some guys who want to win baseball games..."

 

That is where the problem lies here...the real answer is something in between the numbers and the unquantifiable...but both sides seem to want to outright dismiss the other...

It was beyond stupid. You want guys that want to win baseball games? No s***. Don't most people want to win baseball games when playing and put in a competitive situation? Not to mention wanting to win/trying harder does absolutely nothing in the middle of an at bat.

 

Stone completely owned him by pointing out the fact that most MLB teams have a guy in their office (if not multiple) who is a "saber" guy.

 

Things change, Hawk. There are better ways to evaluate talent. Avg/HR/RBI used to be it. Adapt or die, eh? Hawk probably still uses a typewriter, too.

Edited April 11, 2013 by IlliniKrush

[Dick Allen]

I think you do need a mix. If you are all sabermetrics and nothing else, or all old school scouting and no sabermetrics, I think you aren't going to win. The perfect formula is a mix, and how that mix is weighted probably fluxuates year to year. Moneyball really got it going, but one of the reasons for Beane's success early was he had the pitching in place. He made some wise moves based on sabermetrics, but might not have had Mulder, Hudson, Zito if he didn't depend as much on scouting earlier.

[lostfan]

I think you do need a mix. If you are all sabermetrics and nothing else, or all old school scouting and no sabermetrics, I think you aren't going to win. The perfect formula is a mix, and how that mix is weighted probably fluxuates year to year. Moneyball really got it going, but one of the reasons for Beane's success early was he had the pitching in place. He made some wise moves based on sabermetrics, but might not have had Mulder, Hudson, Zito if he didn't depend as much on scouting earlier.

Beane's thing was looking at factors other people hadn't caught onto, and getting extra value for his smaller budget out of it. It has less impact now that everyone's more or less onto that, though.

[witesoxfan]

Beane's thing was looking at factors other people hadn't caught onto, and getting extra value for his smaller budget out of it. It has less impact now that everyone's more or less onto that, though.

 

This is exactly it. Moneyball != sabermetrics. Sabermetrics is an in-depth and advanced look at numbers in baseball. Moneyball is finding factors in the market that help your team win ball games or at least improve over the long haul. In the early 90s, it was OBP and just getting fat dudes who could hit homers or walk. Beane found another market inefficiency he could take advantage of - trading players with arbitration eligible years remaining and flipping them. Teams don't want rent-a-players anymore and won't give up much for them. They will for players with years left. Hence, Dan Haren, Trevor Cahill, and Gio Gonzalez all get traded, and the A's load up on prospects.

 

Regarding the previous Moneyball thought, there are similarities today - the A's were 5th in walks last year as a team - but there are clear differences too - the A's had the 8th most stolen bases in the majors last year.

 

The other thing that gets lost in the shuffle is this 75% steal rate. That number has become the rule of thumb, but it actually changes from year to year and all depends upon run expectancy. How likely is that run to score from first vs second? Right now, because offense is down across the majors, it actually makes a lot more sense to take risks stealing bases simply because offense is so depressed around baseball. Now, if you have Adam Dunn up, stealing is probably the stupidest thing you can do, but if Jeff Keppinger is up? If I even have a 60% chance of that runner getting there, I'd probably take it.

[Chicago White Sox]

Didn't Rios try stealing last night while Dunn was up?

[southsider2k5]

I love how Hawk was like "what I need is some guys who want to win baseball games..."

 

That is where the problem lies here...the real answer is something in between the numbers and the unquantifiable...but both sides seem to want to outright dismiss the other...

 

This is the best line in the entire debate.

[witesoxfan]

Didn't Rios try stealing last night while Dunn was up?

If he did, he's an idiot, even if he has a perfect read and plenty of time. Dunn is going to walk or hit a home run in about approxmately 1/4 of his plate appearances, making any sort of stolen base entirely ineffective. He's going to strike out in 1/3. You are seriously looking at more than half of his plate appearances ending in a situation where a stolen base does absolutely nothing. He's also rarely going to GIDP too.

 

He is absolutely the worst player in the entire game to steal a base when up to bat.

[iamshack]

If he did, he's an idiot, even if he has a perfect read and plenty of time. Dunn is going to walk or hit a home run in about approxmately 1/4 of his plate appearances, making any sort of stolen base entirely ineffective. He's going to strike out in 1/3. You are seriously looking at more than half of his plate appearances ending in a situation where a stolen base does absolutely nothing. He's also rarely going to GIDP too.

 

He is absolutely the worst player in the entire game to steal a base when up to bat.

I think Alex thought he could get a jump more than anything...he took off waaaayyy early (Lance Johnson jump!) and Zimmerman saw him and turned and wheeled and threw to second for an easy out.

[iamshack]

This is exactly it. Moneyball != sabermetrics. Sabermetrics is an in-depth and advanced look at numbers in baseball. Moneyball is finding factors in the market that help your team win ball games or at least improve over the long haul. In the early 90s, it was OBP and just getting fat dudes who could hit homers or walk. Beane found another market inefficiency he could take advantage of - trading players with arbitration eligible years remaining and flipping them. Teams don't want rent-a-players anymore and won't give up much for them. They will for players with years left. Hence, Dan Haren, Trevor Cahill, and Gio Gonzalez all get traded, and the A's load up on prospects.

 

Regarding the previous Moneyball thought, there are similarities today - the A's were 5th in walks last year as a team - but there are clear differences too - the A's had the 8th most stolen bases in the majors last year.

 

The other thing that gets lost in the shuffle is this 75% steal rate. That number has become the rule of thumb, but it actually changes from year to year and all depends upon run expectancy. How likely is that run to score from first vs second? Right now, because offense is down across the majors, it actually makes a lot more sense to take risks stealing bases simply because offense is so depressed around baseball. Now, if you have Adam Dunn up, stealing is probably the stupidest thing you can do, but if Jeff Keppinger is up? If I even have a 60% chance of that runner getting there, I'd probably take it.

Russillo had Schilling on yesterday (because Van Pelt was doing the Masters) and they pointed out how little most coaches make, which is ridiculous, considering that even a fringe MLB veteran costs $2-3 million annually. Many good field coaches or minor league coaches are making less than a few hundred thousand a year, sometimes even $50k or so...

 

What a HUGE market inefficiency! These guys are critical in developing your young players...they may be some of the most important employees in your entire organization, and many are making the same as you and I...or less...

 

Seems like a wise thing to do would be to stack your minor league teams with some of the best developmental coaches in baseball by paying them above market rate...and this can go all the way up to the big league club's field coaches...Hell, even guys like your GM and your assistant GM's are having incredibly disproportionate affects on your organization in relation to their paycheck...

[Balta1701]

Russillo had Schilling on yesterday (because Van Pelt was doing the Masters) and they pointed out how little most coaches make, which is ridiculous, considering that even a fringe MLB veteran costs $2-3 million annually. Many good field coaches or minor league coaches are making less than a few hundred thousand a year, sometimes even $50k or so...

 

What a HUGE market inefficiency! These guys are critical in developing your young players...they may be some of the most important employees in your entire organization, and many are making the same as you and I...or less...

 

Seems like a wise thing to do would be to stack your minor league teams with some of the best developmental coaches in baseball by paying them above market rate...and this can go all the way up to the big league club's field coaches...Hell, even guys like your GM and your assistant GM's are having incredibly disproportionate affects on your organization in relation to their paycheck...

The other problem there is numbers. If you had coaches of singular ability that could not be replicated, that's worth a high salary, but if a guy can be replaced readily with many people with similar levels of experience (for example, if many of those spots were filled by ex-players who wish to continue involvement with the game), that will drive wages down.

[iamshack]

The other problem there is numbers. If you had coaches of singular ability that could not be replicated, that's worth a high salary, but if a guy can be replaced readily with many people with similar levels of experience (for example, if many of those spots were filled by ex-players who wish to continue involvement with the game), that will drive wages down.

Right, but if you can identify the ones that are truly "elite" at what they do, you can pay them above market wages to work in your organization rather than in others....and really, those wages would be a pittance compared to some of the wages you're paying your players.

Edited April 11, 2013 by iamshack

[Steve9347]

If he did, he's an idiot, even if he has a perfect read and plenty of time. Dunn is going to walk or hit a home run in about approxmately 1/4 of his plate appearances, making any sort of stolen base entirely ineffective. He's going to strike out in 1/3. You are seriously looking at more than half of his plate appearances ending in a situation where a stolen base does absolutely nothing. He's also rarely going to GIDP too.

 

He is absolutely the worst player in the entire game to steal a base when up to bat.

I love it when you analyze.

[iamshack]

I love it when you analyze.

/

Yooouuuu doooooo?

[Cali]

"Conner" and "Conor" are pronounced the same way.

[flavum]

"Conner" and "Conor" are pronounced the same way.

 

He's a f***ing hick idiot.

[oldsox]

With MLB.TV on the PS3, I get to hear a lot of announcers. It's like a breath of fresh air, listening to people who are younger than 100 years old talk about the game and reference players from the 90s, and have conversations that engage me that I haven't heard a million times before - Hawk doesn't do this.

 

Hawk's schtick - I am finally tired of it. You could just have a Hawkbot at this point and really have no idea he wasn't actually there. Cue up his catch phrases and have someone record player names in his voice.

 

As for Stone, I think he's brilliant, and with the right sportscaster he can be great, but with Hawk it just doesn't work. The reason is simple - no one with Hawk will work. He always turns it into a dick measuring contest, cuts the other broadcaster off, and winds up telling me about some garbage player from the Red Sox in the late 60s.

 

The tv feed needs a breath of fresh air, and someone who went to broadcasting school, a real broadcaster, doing the play by play, and then save the homerism and the baseball references for a guy like Frank Thomas to be the color analyst.

 

I have spent my entire lifetime listening to Hawk. I have laughed at his calls for years. I have yelled "HE GAWN" "STRETCH" "HEEYEEESSS" "DAT GUMMIT" "YOU GOTTA BE BLEEPIN' ME" - I have enjoyed it. (not so much the "HELL YEAH" though)

 

I am so f***ing ready for it to end and to finally have an on screen duo that entertains me.

 

Let the flaming begin.

You're not suggesting that Frank Thomas went to breadcasting school, are you?

[greg775]

Honestly, I'll bet this is because you're an out-of-towner. It actually makes sense, because Hawkeroo is like the Sox fan you DON'T get to hang out with all the time. I could actually see out-of-town Sox fans being much bigger fans of Hawk.

 

Could be.

[Jake]

"Conner" and "Conor" are pronounced the same way.

 

???