DePodesta on the Baek trade
If you’re not hitting your head on something while reading the Beane interviews, well…
- Find a nice solid wall. I’ve always found that drywall has a nice give to prevent serious injuries while offering a satisfying crunch
- Put two hands on the wall, shoulder height, elbows out, palms flat on the wall.
- Read this
- Proceed
I’m not saying that the trade’s good, or bad, though I’m obviously not enamored of it — but the Padres are looking to stats like FIP to add information to their scouting evaluation. In the Beane interview, he talks about their use of internal and external defensive stats while talking about Barton.
What do you think the chances are the M’s do anything like this? 0%? Less than zero? Am I allowed to use negative percents? What about curse words?
Comments
90 Responses to “DePodesta on the Baek trade”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
USSM uses and recommends
You have to divide by zero to figure out what the M’s are trying to do here. Pretty cool that DePodesta keeps a blog though…
That makes my head hurt for a number of reasons:
1) The fact that Depo is running a blog and I didn’t know about it.
2) The auce Dumb and Dumber reference.
3) The use of statistical analysis interwoven with scouting (the way it should be).
4) The fact they tried to acquire Baek earlier this year and we rebuffed them, only to turn around and give him to them for (virtually) nothing.
Good find, Derek.
DePodesta quoted Dumb and Dumber. I like him even more now!
At least it isn’t a terrible decision following a terrible decision. It’s the possibly the best case following a bad decision. But, yeah. Should have never happened.
I keep hearing DePodesta’s name in connection with SF next season- is that a forgone conclusion or do you think we can coax him a little further north?
Good lord. DePodesta actually quoted using FIP. And that Baek “pitched a little better than his ERA would indicate.” Admissions like this throw out all sorts of signals. The most glaring being: The Mariners measure things wrong.
Now I have to go cut myself or something. Thanks, Bill. Just thanks.
I think the odds that the Mariners look at things like FIPs is 100%. FIPs isn’t exactly the bleeding edge of sabrmetric research. The fact is, teams track tons of stats that we don’t “know” about and that they don’t want other teams to know about. How much would we really know about the Oakland operation if they hand’t been outed in Moneyball? Does anyone remember that system the reverse-engineered that essentially tracked the path of every ball hit? It was mentioned both as a system that the A’s had been working on since Beane came into the office as well as a product that a consultant firm had offered them (or perhaps they were already licensing it, my memory isn’t perfect here), yet we don’t “know” anyone is “using” that data yet. We can be sure that several teams are probably using it but not blabbing it to the press/competition.
It’s not as if Bavasi (who’s done a crappy job, no-doubt-about-it) is a stone-age cretin rejectin’ fancy book lernin, it’s just that he fundamentally believes that the human eye and analysis is better than a number based analysis. It’s a really fundamental wall that few dare to cross. Wondering why Bavasi doesn’t change up is like wondering why George W doesn’t give all his belongings to the poor and take up Buddhism.
I agree. I think DePodesta probably made a point of saying they were looking at FIP in this situation, to make it clear that the Mariners obviously weren’t.
I’ve heard some questioning of his people skills as a reason he didn’t last long in LA, but at this point I’d take someone who has poor people skills but has an understanding of how to put together an MLB roster.
Well, I think Bavasi would check up on FIP, but like McLaren, Bavasi doesn’t “read computers.”
The M’s think FIP is a bunch of crap. They don’t buy into the DIPS theory at all.
No way. It’s not on a standard stats page. It’s not on MLB.com. They’d have to go out and get it.
And as something they “look at” in the sense of “consult and consider?” Doesn’t happen.
A ton. Go back and read pre-Moneyball Beane interviews.
That just makes it extra frustrating that the M’s don’t care.
Geez… this thread makes me want to curl into a ball on the floor, while time zips by at a lightning pace, to reach a time when the M’s will do things logically.
I am speechless, when will this merry-go-round stop?
This bares a striking resemblance to other trades in recent M’s memory where there was an opportunity to get top value, only later to drag their feet and get a mediocre return instead.
Once again, this is a great find. Very nice job. I also didn’t know about the blog.
I love the Mariners, I hate the Mariners, I love the Mariners, I hate the Mariners…
It’s more like, “I love the Mariners, the Mariners hate me. I love the Mariners, the Mariners hate me…”
The M’s think FIP is a bunch of crap. They don’t buy into the DIPS theory at all.
Dave — you have let your cynicism and frustration lead you into telling outright lies.
Your statement cannot possibly be true….
What do they believe in then? ERA? Grit? Magic hokum?
I wish Bavasi had a blog…
It is true.
I’m not sure why you think it can’t possibly be that way. Especially as it is.
#10: No way. It’s not on a standard stats page. It’s not on MLB.com. They’d have to go out and get it.
And as something they “look at” in the sense of “consult and consider?” Doesn’t happen.
Isn’t that what Matt Olkin is doing for the Mariners?
A couple of years ago either you or Dave commented about Bavasi with regard to stats that, while he didn’t understand the numeric analysis well himself, he knew there was information out there worth getting and he wanted to bring that information in. Are you now saying that Bavasi has reversed course and returned to a purely scouting analysis?
How could it possibly be FALSE, given their behavior?
I’m sorry you think I’m lying, but, well, I’m not, and I have no idea how to convince you that I’m not, so I will give up. Believe what you want.
Mat Olkin doesn’t work for the M’s anymore.
#19 Link goodness.
It’s actually something you wrote in BP 2005, as mentioned in this post from Jan 2005 re Olkin’s hiring.
I sure did get too excited about them turning the corner, there, huh.
Yup. I really wanted that to be true.
Too bad it turned out to be such a let-down. I’ve tried to take the lesson there.
Is there some refutation of DIPS theory that they use to justify their disagreement, or do they just reject it outright out of ignorance?
#22: Mat Olkin doesn’t work for the M’s anymore.
And not replaced then, I presume?
Your statement cannot possibly be true….
I need bigger, clear tags.
It is just so pitiful to me that this statement is true — it really is literally shocking. This is not advanced sabermetrics or some stunning in-house analytics or evaluation that relies on unbelievable databases or mind-boggling statistical frameworks. This is routine baseball analysis — and Bavasi’s (and the entire front office’s) failure to understand and employ this speaks to the very heart of their numbing ineptitude at talent evaluation.
Re some of the above discussion, maybe something implicit needs to be explicit.
I am presuming that when Dave/Derek make comments such as … “The M’s think FIP is a bunch of crap. They don’t buy into the DIPS theory at all.” … that comment is based on conversations that have occurred with people inside the organization about player evaluations. This isn’t a case of bloggers sitting on the outside speculating and projecting about what people inside the organization are thinking.
Dave/Derek: Is that correct?
sorry, that was supposed to say -sarcasm- tags….
Steve,
Right – I’ve talked with M’s people about the DIPS theory (or the basic concepts of it, at least), and every single one has told me that they don’t buy it. Pitchers give up hits, and if they just had better location, they would give up less. Yada yada yada.
I have not the slightest doubt, nor do I think anyone here does, that Dave’s & Derek’s comments about Bavasi’s approach come from direct knowledge, and not in the least from any kind of geek-boys-in-the-basement speculation…
OK, how about this.
Does Bavasi or anyone else in the front office believe that underlying factors may skew the surface stats they *do* recognize and use to help evaluate players?
I mean, even if it isn’t fielding- or defensive-independent pitching stats, per se, the concept behind them has to factor into their evaluation process.
Maybe?
More startling to me is that a high ranking member of their FO publishes a team-oriented blog AND has the Comments section enabled. That’s just mind-blowing to me.
RE: Mariners hate FIP
I keep trying to convince myself that this all one big sarcasm party . . . that there is no way a professional baseball franchise would completely ignore something as fundamental as FIP. For the love of cavemen, Johnny Roto Fan uses FIP!
Um, wow. That’s bordering on willful ignorance.
#30:
Ergo, when Washburn is ERA leader and has an abnormally high strand rate that is a skill related outcome. Lather, rinse, and repeat for Carlos Silva.
#31:
I didn’t doubt, nor do I think any of the people who have been regulars doubt it. But I think there are a lot of people visiting the site now, and who occasionally jump into the threads, who have exactly that impression of Mariners bloggers, USSM included.
Even if Dave and DMZ didn’t talk to people that work for the Mariners, I think we can all pretty much do some results based analysis and know that that is clearly the case.
And it’s just a coincidence that folks that came up with that theory and championed it started working for Boston right before they won their World Series, right?
*sigh*
Maybe the Mariners simply don’t need stats. Maybe, instead, they base all their decisions on what would piss USSM off more. The Olkin link above mentions how Olkin will prevent them from getting Miguel Batista. Dave wrote a post about how Sexson is a landmine, they got him. Dave wrote about about how Silva is a landmine. Boom.
Who needs stats when they just do the opposite of this website. Though maybe if you guys refute DiPS theory they’ll start believing it.
Dave/Derek,
Do you have any sense of how Bavasi does actually feel about some of his trades (like Soriano for HoRam) …. or acquisitions (like Washburn, or Weaver, or Silva, or Batista) where/when the player he has chosen to go after is just so blatantly worse than the options he has foregone or traded away? Is there any sense of him thinking about or engaging in any kind of process of evolving (as Beane referenced)? Does he feel like some have worked (e.g., Guillen), while others haven’t and once you go for a “decent” guy, how it actually works out is a crap shoot — or what ??
It is just so stunning to see such abject failure and then stay in denial and resist learning….
I don’t think they believe in [blogs] or have ever been on the internet for that matter.
Yeah, it’s “bafflement.”
Really. “We thought we were getting x, y, and z, when we got him — who could have seen that coming?”
“Carl Everett was a proven middle-of-the-order hitter with a long record of success. I don’t think anyone could have forseen…”
Anyone who saw Bavasi at a feed can verify this.
Such abject failure is no doubt very painful for him and all of them, especially when they cannot make any sense of it….
But in most places I know, that is used as intense motivation for evolving….
Here’s my subjective way of knowing that Bavasi doesn’t follow the statistical theory:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/mariners/2004423593_marinotes19.html
No level of detail, just “he was bad, but we thought he should be better, so he’s going back until we think he would be better again, and then he can go to Cooperstown!”
Can you imagine Beane ever saying this?
Like moths:
“Hey look! Light!” . . . “Ouch! It burns?”
“Hey look! Light!” . . . “Ouch! It burns!”
“Hey look! Light!” . . . “Ouch! It burns?!”
“Hey look! Light!” . . . “Ouch! It burns!!”
“Hey look! Light!” . . . “Ouch! It burns?!?”
jro -
I was also baffled/stunned by the comment. I still don’t think I understand what the heck he is even talking about.
Bavasi’s days are numbered, I don’t think there is any denying that. I just hope he doesn’t shipwreck this franchise anymore than he already has on the way out.
This honestly goes against one of my maxim’s for life: Always be able to afford to be wrong. Bavasi & Co (which may just be HoLinc & ChuckArm) have invested too much against new metrics and statistics to go back. However, they do not go back and look at their evaluations with a historian’s perspective. Simply looking at choices that were made and the rationale for these would not hold up to scrutiny. They may also be baffled by “odd coincidence” that statisticians are often shown to be better than average at evaluating talent.
As someone with a background in history, this appeals. Particularly if the results were cross-referenced with the free-agent markets. Were it to simply go back to 2000, the task isn’t that daunting.
Re 46…
That reminds me of a popular definition of insanity, i.e. doing the same thing over and over again while expecting different results. Maybe we should send Bill a copy of Peter Senge’s collected works.
Yeah, I remember hearing Bavasi talk about Carl Everett and thinking to myself “seriously? You honestly believe what you’re saying, here?”
I’ve been to several of the feeds and can vouch that this is exactly Bavasi’s thought process. That’s why I can only shake my head with bewilderment when he’s quoted in the local paper saying exactly these same statements…
“Who could have possibly forseen….”
“We thought we were getting…”
He’s a standup guy who is totally incompetent in his chosen line of work.
You know when you go to a Doctor, you can listen in in their thought process and get a decent idea if they have any diagnostic skills or they are clueless fools? I’ve had a few primary care physicians in my life that I’ve walked away from, knowing that they had no idea how to diagnose a patient when presented an array of symptoms. That’s the same impression I get from Bavasi listening to him talk. Stuff comes out of his mouth but it’s really quite apparent that he lacks the ability to gather information and reach viable conclusions from the data.
I was pleased when USSM reported he had at least hired some people to do the heavy lifting for him. I thought they were just being ignored. It’s another significant step backward if those people are no longer employed by the organization.
Well it looks like in 06 someone was already calling for Bavasi’s head … even so much as to purchase a domain and pay for hosting.
Dont know if you guys know of its existence or not but: update this site …
Last blog update Jan of 06 …
This only proves the point that Terry Ryan, Larry Beinfest, Brian Cashman or someone along those lines needs to be the President/GM of this team next year rather than Chuckie and BB.
Most of the media — national and local — reinforce the “who could have foreseen?” viewpoint. It would help if anyone outside of weblogs were holding Bavasi accountable for his stubborn ignorance. I wonder how long it’s going to take for the front-office revolution in baseball to penetrate the media.
It’s Bavasi’s job to do PR, so comments like these shouldn’t be taken at face value. He probably wanted to say, “Yeah . . . this really sucks. Considering the options that were available, I can’t believe we ended up with Carl Freaking Everett. Feel free to thank Lincoln for that one.”
No.
Bavasi’s entirely willing to discuss their failures, the limitations they work under, and other business concerns quite candidly. This isn’t that.
You realize that the chance of Howard Lincoln hiring a replacement for Bavasi who is even a little bit interested in DIPS is nil, right? The question isn’t going to get asked in the interview, and if the candidate brings it up himself, he’s going to be removed from consideration.
They’re like creationists, I swear.
scraps – I don’t know if you saw this but yesterday in the TIMES ran a story about exactly what you are talking about:
This is something this team/baseball club/organization is lacking very much at this point. So I guess some papers are going to start calling for accountability … but we need to continue to call for it on the web blogs.
The squeaky wheel gets the grease. Right?
Bavasi has said all along that he’s interested in “using stats” as well as traditional scouting. He said at the feed I went to “we’ll look at everything”.
The problem is, when Bavasi says “stats” he means “splits”. He means leftie-rightie, day game-night game, last week, last month type of stuff. He thinks that “Silva’s had good success against this guy” is analysis.
It’s ESPN Sportscenter-level “statistics”, not real statistics.
Which basically means that he knows LESS than the truly old-fashioned guy who only knows batting average and won-lost, because the vast majority of these splits are fairly meaningless samples of a dozen at bats or whatever. Leftie-rightie has its place, but batter-versus-pitcher stuff is just trivia.
Pretty self evident.
It’s going to take AT LEAST another decade of wallowing before both Armstrong and Lincoln retire before there’s a glimmer of hope for change.
My feeling is that calling for accountability is meaningless unless you also insist that they pay attention to the correct way of doing things. Until you get them to admit that their tools for analysis are bad, they aren’t going to change a bit.
Exactly. Accountability is just another one of those vapid sportscenter words that doesn’t mean anything. Accountability for what? Does it help the club become better if Bavasi says “it is my mistakes that have made this team bad”? What then? He’s not going to change his way of thinking, and if he resigns they’ll hire another guy just like him, probably worse, who they believe also embodies the mystical values of character and accountability that have got us where we are.
We don’t need accountability. We don’t need character. We need knowledge and understanding, and we need flexibility. An accountable creationist is just as wrong as a shifty-eyed creationist. We will never get what we need as long as Lincoln is there.
Someone just needs to hijack Bavasi’s daily stat report and replace it with a USSM altered version. The “ERA” column would actually be FIP, EQA could be disguised as batting average, and we could somehow correlate “Errors” with actual defensive ineptitude (based on some of the advanced defense metrics).
Then someone would just have to convince him that young players are actually grizzled veterans that have been through the wars, and that below replacement level 34 year olds are immature young rookies who will walk all over his lawn.
Even if we don’t get someone with knowledge and understanding, hiring someone who realizes they don’t have THE ANSWERS and is willing to entertain multiple perspectives (particularly opposing viewpoints) would be an improvement.
That’s another thing. Statistically, the peak year of a ball player is at 27. Say that the peak years of players are 25-31. The bias for vets, the bias for proven players and free agents pretty much runs counter to the actual data.
Yeah, creationists all over….definitely not part of the reality-based community…
So: the FO doesn’t believe in DIPS theory — that is, they don’t think defense has an impact on their pitching staff — and that’s clearly and evidently not true (even if you didn’t read the theory, you could point to any number of incidents just in the past week’s games to make the case). Yet they also think defense is a strength of the team (why do they care, if it doesn’t matter?), and that’s obviously false also. The Mariners truly are on the wrong side of the Looking Glass
Honestly, for those of us still following the Mariners, the collected works of Lewis Carroll are a far better companion than those of Bill James and Tom Tango. The FO’s guiding philosophy:
And for the rest of us at USSM:
Lewis Carroll, and his spiritual brother Yogi:
“You’ve got to be very careful if you don’t know where you’re going, because you might not get there.”
“We’re lost, but we’re making good time.”
Maybe we can write a new chapter to the story where Bill Bavasi is incarnated as a blind squirrel…
“Goodness, Bill Squirrel, it seems it’s been an awful long time since you found a nut…wait a minute…is that a blindfold you’re wearing?!”
They know defense matters, but they underestimate how much. And they think defense means not making mistakes. Few errors means good defense. More errors means bad defense. Balls the fielder can’t get to are the pitcher’s fault.
they think defense means not making mistakes. Few errors means good defense. More errors means bad defense. Balls the fielder can’t get to are the pitcher’s fault.
Stop it, stop it. You guys are killing me.
BAVASI — are you reading this?? Will someone send it to you if you are not?
Mocking sarcasm means you have to change your ways, Bill. Bill, please, please, for the love of god,
all day yesterday I kept hearing the vsrious show hosts putting the blame on the players, as they should be playing at least as well as they did last year, and there was no way to know that they might not do as well this season ….
just to be pedantic, that was a column, not a story.
The only stats the M’s front office cares about is this one:
$$$
and DePo is polite about others:
Paul DePodesta said…
There have already been a few comments regarding our analysis versus the Mariners, and they’re not exactly fair to the M’s. There were reasons for both of these teams to do this deal, which is how deals get done. I’ve already given you part of our analysis.
On the Mariner side, they were caught in a bind that happens to all of us once in a while, and there’s really nothing you can do about it. They had back-to-back days early last week when their starters weren’t able to go deep into the game (2.1 ip and 4 ip). They used Baek in both of those games for a total of five innings, and then the bullpen needed a fresh arm the following day just in case something happened to the starter again. RA Dickey was called up, and Baek was the odd man out. It’s not as though we knew something the M’s didn’t. They simply ran into a tough stretch, which has happened to us a few times this year as well.
#74
I thought that was a funny comment from Depodesta. So the Mariners liked Baek enough not to trade him when the Padres inquired before the start of the year. The Mariners liked Baek enough to use him in those games to “wear” him out. But the Mariners didn’t like Baek enough to keep him. Paul certainly isn’t going to show up other organizations on his blog but wow are the Mariners idiots.
Translation: let me take this opportunity to publicly state that the M’s are NOT mis-managing this, in order to ensure that we keep the lines open so that we can continue to improve the Padres at the expense of the M’s.
Softy (yeah, I know, KJR) is at least calling Bavasi out. His club, his roster, his blame. I guess someone has to play the foil on the homerwaves.
On the DePo front, why would he want to reinforce the growing chatter that this trade was symbolic of everything Bavasi and the M’s do wrong? If you’re playing poker and your opponent tips his hand in one fashion or another, are you going to criticize his bet and then admit later that you figured out his hand? Not if you want to keep taking his money (even if it’s pennies at a time).
Paul DePodesta said… There have already been a few comments regarding our analysis versus the Mariners, and they’re not exactly fair to the M’s.
Can ANYONE put together any kind of rationale or argument that even theoretically can defend this move as being of equal value for both teams, let alone that the M’s got the better of the deal? A legitimate major league 5th starter for a minor leaguer with declining skills and worse minor league numbers. Please, someone tell me, how can Lincoln and Armstrong defend this deal? How can Bavasi justify it if he were simply asked: Bill, please explain how this deal, this set of moves you made with CSB, makes good sense for the Mariners?
This deal is small and who cares, but Bavasi just continuously shows he is flat-out incompetent at the GM job.
Baek is a replacement level pitcher. Seriously, giving him away doesn’t matter – you can get another Cha Seung Baek whenever you want. They’re everwhere.
Jared Wells sucks, but this trade doesn’t matter.
Steve:
I do agree with the statement that we need knowledge, understanding as well as flexibility.
However, there does need to be accountability. The accountability should be from the very, very top –
IF Howard Lincoln said (in better wording): “We have really messed up, we are replacing Bavasi with a ‘new school’ GM who understands the new ways to analyze talent, rate on field performance and rate future talent” wouldn’t this appease you?
I for one believe that USSM’ers would be thrilled. Not only would it prove that they recognized their mistakes but that they are taking steps to fix the problem.
You are right, if Bavasi says only: “boy did I mess up, I am sorry” we are in for a long next few years.
Accountability for actions is always the first step in starting fresh.
Whether this will happen or not is up in the air… I personally believe that it is only a matter of time before they understand the new ways of analysis.
It is eat or be eaten.
Of course in the scheme of things, this one trade doesn’t matter, but it is yet another in a long string of inept moves by Bavasi. Throwing away $5 on a stupid blackjack bet after losing thousands by playing bad poker doesn’t make or break the night, but BB shouldn’t be in the casino at all.
Baek is a replacement level pitcher – you can get another Cha Seung Baek whenever you want. They’re everwhere.
For example, the M’s just happen to have 3 more right on hand — for a mere $30 Million a year, they’re all yours….
Baek isn’t $5. He’s a penny. Bend over, pick up another one, move on.
We’re all just way too emotionally depleted to perseverate on this, but don’t sign Silva and instead keep CSB and then it’s true, Baek is not $5 — he’s $12 Million going on $48 Million.
The point is … big deal, small deal, virtually any deal you examine … Bavasi seems to display a singularly poor skill set as GM.
Point well taken, Baek is easily replaceable. It’s just the gratuitous bending over in your example that gets me.
Dave or DMZ- Is DePodesta an attractive GM candidate (for team looking) who got a raw deal in LA or is he better suited to be an asst type? Any insight would be great.
#85: It’s just the gratuitous bending over in your example that gets me.
Who ever said the bending over was gratuitous??
I find it hard to believe that the Ms are that ignorant of statistical measures. However, they seem to be well below the curve in that regard. Decent statistical analysis must be a prerequisite for a job like this. Even first year psych students how to do some basic stats… surely the Ms front office has someone who did psych101.
Not that I had any sort of insider’s view of things, but I was following the Dodgers pretty closely at the time, and near as I could tell, his “poor people skills” included the following:
a) Not returning an LA Times columnist’s phone calls rapidly enough
b) Not realizing that said LA Times columnist was lobbying his team’s owner for his ouster, or realizing it and not believing that said lobbying could possibly be successful
c) Not feigning emotional attachment to players who were regarded as sentimental favorites in town, and being willing to trade said sentimental favorites (even at the risk of hurting the team’s “chemistry”) or allow said sentimental favorites to leave as free agents if their price tag was way too steep
The M’s could really, truly use a GM with those sorts of “poor people skills.”
Please, Howard Lincoln and/or Chuck Armstrong, please hire Paul DePodesta.
I understand why we should believe that, and as far as I know it’s even true, but…
…employers who’ve just fired someone often tend to hire, as that person’s replacement, someone who’s the polar opposite of the just-fired guy. It’s for that reason that I allow myself to entertain the faintest sliver of hope.
And so I beg again: Howard Lincoln and/or Chuck Armstrong, please hire Paul DePodesta.
Patrick Meighan
Culver City, CA
Well, that disqualifies him for the Ms right there….