Salon's Kaufman accuses Kindred of 'ignorance'

Part of your post reminded me of a conversation I had with Gary Danielson a few months ago about the spread and single-wing formations in college football, how forcing defenses to play 11-on-11 football had them on the run looking for answers to the mismatches that would often occur. Defenses react, and good offensive coaches (such as Urban Meyer) react accordingly. Danielson talked about how Meyer made adjustments coming into this season because of what defenses were doing to adjust.

Danielson said a popular management style is "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." He said he's more a fan of "If it ain't broke, you're not looking hard enough. It's already breaking, but you haven't looked hard enough to find the cracks yet."

Or something like that. Interesting stuff then and now, after reading your post.

 

that was funny. it really was.

i was responding to "what's your point?"

 

I know.

 

and you think morris should be in the hall. why am i not shocked?

 

Everything. It makes an examination of what made that team tick structurally defective.

Tim Hudson is mentioned on nine of the 301 pages (six more than Adam Piatt). Zito is mentioned on six pages, same amount as Eric Hiljus. Mulder is mentioned on two pages (one more than Dick Ruthven).

The great Scott Hatteberg gets mention on 28 pages.

 

Bill James and the Red Sox don't go to the 2004 World Series without a stolen base. They go home.

 

Because you are board clown?

 

In 2000, Oakland scored 947 runs, third to the Indians (Jim Thome, Manny Ramirez at their peak) and the White Sox (joke of a ballpark). In '01, before the league began to catch onto some of Beane's methods, the A's scored 884 runs. More than the Yankees.

What did Zito, Mulder and Hudson do to contribute to that run production? Just curious.

 

correct me if i'm wrong, but didn't you just violate board rules?

 

The sabermetric principles aren't absolute - "No stolen bases!!! Ever!!!" It's a game played by human beings. Of course it is. And decisions, particularly in must-win situations like that one, remain situational and always will. Anyone who argues otherwise - and Michael Lewis came damned close to it in "Moneyball" - is as full of shit as scouts deciding to draft a player because of the way he spits his tobacco.

But on a limited budget, it's a pretty good tool for team-building and minimizing risk. And it would be just as stupid, more stupid, to ignore what the trained scouts are seeing.

 

Yes, writing incomplete sentences is cause for expulsion.

 

With an interrogative? That asks if you put white and red pancake on?