MLB 2014 season thread

Gotta find the story, right? There's always a story. Who cares if it's true as long as it's fun to believe?

Those scrappy Giants just have heart that the poindexter A's don't understand. That's a story you can believe in.

The Giants are pretty good at baseball. They have some pretty good baseball players. Sometimes good baseball teams go 27-10. Hell, I've probably seen a bad baseball team go 27-10 from time to time.

But like I said: there's no way in a million years that you will ever accept that, because the fundamental attribution bias is hard-wired into the human brain. Hell, I feel it too. I just know that my feelings are wrong.

 

They know how to stretch their talent, I'll give them that.
Unlike a team such as Washington or Detroit.
That doesn't mean they're fun to watch.

 

What isn't luck is that the Giants have put themselves into position to be this lucky. I know I'm supposed to hate Sabean or something because I'm a stathead, but he's been one of my favorite GMs for a long time.

He doesn't overdo the stupid "competitive cycle" crap that I've always hated and am horrified to find my Cubs in thrall to. He just goes out and tries to find good baseball players to put on his baseball team each year. They've won 86 games or more 5 out of 6 seasons. He puts his teams in position to get lucky, so I don't begrudge him that when they do.

 

There is no such thing as clutch, but man, do some teams get lucky a lot.

 

Yep. And you're going to continue to believe that if there can't be a number affixed to it, it is irrelevant to athletic success.

In their last 13 postseason games, the Giants have allowed 16 runs. That's very fortunate indeed against some of the best offenses in baseball. Maybe they're just a team entirely made up of Libras and Scorpios.

 

The Giants have some pretty good pitchers. Allowing 16 runs over a 13-game stretch is completely within their skill set under ordinary circumstances, no special circumstances needed.

But what on earth is this "can't put a number on it" thing? Virtually every argument you've made has involved a number.

 

LTL doesn't realize it, but his entire argument is based around numbers and mine is based on an understanding of The Human Element.

 

The "can't put a number on it" is about why guys like Vogelsong come up big in the postseason. It's not just chance.

Aside from Vogelsong's part, it's also smart managing -- he never goes more than about five innings (or wherever 85 pitches takes him). And that's the "managing differently" part that all of us seem to understand but that guys like Matt Williams, Don Mattingly, Dusty Baker and Bob Melvin tend to bungle.

 

But how do you know he's coming up big? You're using numbers.

You love numbers, so long as they tell you what you want to hear.

Why can't it be? Because you feel like it cant be? It just feels better to believe it's not, doesn't it?

The human element: We suck at understanding probability and *hate* feeling like our lives are influenced by chance.

Hmm. Here's his pitch total for postseason starts:

95, 106, 102, 104, 81.

None of his usage pattern remotely resembles what you just described, except for the one start he's made this year. Would that be the cognitive bias of Recency Bias coloring your memory and analysis?

Of course not. Cognitive biases don't exist. Our gut feelings are right.

 

All right. I was wrong on pitch count (didn't double-check). His innings tell that story, though: 5, 7, 7, 5.2, 5.2.

Not too often you see a guy yanked before finishing in six innings in a game he'd be otherwise considered to be dominating.

 

Oh look. You came up with a story, the evidence didn't support it, but you're trying to find ways to make sure the story stays alive. Because the story feels good.

But that *never* happens...

 

All right. Well, continue to believe the Giants' and A's postseason fortunes are similarly accidental. It's more fun that way.