Comments on: Jarrod Washburn’s Still An Idiot

By: Wells

Wells — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 00:54:32 +0000

Because something is far less useful than other things does not make that thing “useless”. You could stand to not make such blanket statements.

By: nathaniel dawson

nathaniel dawson — Sun, 29 Jun 2008 02:26:09 +0000

Yeah, what #14 said.

You say that result-based analysis is doomed (and, we must assume, because it’s flawed), yet what you’re doing is result-based analysis as well. You’re just using different results on which to base your analysis.

So……what exactly do you mean?

By: Typical Idiot Fan

Typical Idiot Fan — Sun, 29 Jun 2008 01:01:02 +0000

I hate Washburn:

“Yeah very much. When Roger (Hansen) was brought in and spoke to Joh and I think everyone was working hard at that time and we knew that communication was an issue and that guys not being on the same page was starting to come up, it was something. I don’t know if everyone has done it, but I know Joh and I have done a lot of work behind the scenes together to try and get on the same page, which we had done to that point but Roger must have said something to him that clicked because we are communicating a lot better and we are working together a lot better. Like I said before, I love Joh. He is a great guy and he works real hard, there were just times when we weren’t clicking in ball games, but yeah, lately we are getting better and better and I feel comfortable with him.”

“Me? Change? No. They whipped that other guy into shape to conform to me.”

Of course, it could be just the “success” making things “better” between them instead of Washburn getting demolished and needing to feed the bus.

By: msb

msb — Sat, 28 Jun 2008 23:12:01 +0000

FWIW, Drayer has the transcription of her talk with Washburn re: Joh up on her blog

By: theraven

theraven — Sat, 28 Jun 2008 22:28:24 +0000

#18 Now that response I like. The Mariners this year remind me of the current Marketing team where I work. Throw a bunch of mud, see what sticks, and we’ll go from there. Knock down the price of your product 50%, which allows you to achieve 15% more sales than you would’ve otherwise and it’s deemed a success (of course, you would’ve had to more than double your sales to achieve the same monetary value). The long story short? You’re right. Previously I was commenting more on the mental thinking (and superstitions) of a single player, but we’ve had the problem all year from the top down (”we won a game with Cairo at first, so let’s keep him there for a few games since we won;” it doesn’t matter that he didn’t perform well when he did play, the fact is he DID play and the team won).

By: kevlar

kevlar — Sat, 28 Jun 2008 22:16:40 +0000

avoiding the foul line when running back to or from the dugout is a very common superstition in baseball

By: Doc Baseball

Doc Baseball — Sat, 28 Jun 2008 22:14:30 +0000

The problem is that, although this particular thing is of course much closer to superstition than to legitimately-held results-based thinking, it is nonetheless reflective of an underlying truth: that Wash really is a results-based thinker — and as such is similar to almost the entire team’s thinking: we have no idea why we are doing well, we have no idea why we are doing poorly — we throw stuff against the wall and if we win, we attribute the winning to that, and if we lose, we attribute the losing to that and then throw something else against the wall. So, the big problem with accepting the “if the M’s continue to win when Wash visits the pen, then so be it” kind of thinking is that it allows or supports the M’s in never facing the reality that their thinking is bad — and thus the only hope they have of winning a championship is of the monkeys-typing-shakespeare type.

By: theraven

theraven — Sat, 28 Jun 2008 21:12:48 +0000

#16 So he’s superstitious, most athletes are in some way. Felix Hernandez won’t step on the foul line (at least, I’ve seen him noticeably avoid it a few times by hopping over it), but I’m not going to call him an idiot. Edgar Martinez used to weigh every bat to make sure they were the same weight. While that may make a slight (very very slight) difference, it would still fall under superstition. And if Washburn thinks volunteering in the bullpen is a help, and the M’s continue to win when he does, then so be it.

By: Doc Baseball

Doc Baseball — Sat, 28 Jun 2008 20:21:12 +0000

I guess you could say he’s an “idiot”…but…

Did you all see the quotation attributed to Washburn? He figured out that on the days over the last several weeks when he has volunteered to go down to the bullpen during the games and be available as a potential reliever that day, the M’s are 5-1. He is very proud of himself.

He’s an idiot. And still the same old pitcher.

By: north

north — Sat, 28 Jun 2008 19:41:29 +0000

I know what you mean by “results based” analysis, and your preference for “skills based” analysis, or at least metrics that are more dependent on the pitcher’s ability and less on luck and team defense.

Thanks for that comment. I was also quite confused by the term “results based” analysis, for the same reasons you give.

I offer an alternative:
“Butterfly wing flapping analysis.”