a700hitter

I don't think the disruption is equal to pitcher, defense and hitter. Disruption to the defense is not a good thing to the defense. It forces errors, makes players play out of position etc. Speed is a valuable weapon. Are you taking the position that disruption to a defense caused by speed is a positive or neutral for the defense? That is just silly.

I disagree that the bigger need after 2014 was offense. While our pitching was okay in 2014, it was only because we had Lester, Lackey, and Peavy in the first half of that season. The staff got completely dismantled at the trading deadline. Our starting pitching was decimated going into the off season after 2014. Pitching was the top priority and it was insufficiently addressed. We could have plopped Holt at 3B and pursued pitching. Instead, BC pursued and overpaid a human doughnut to play 3B. Then he signed another IFer for big bucks and played him out of position. His priorities were ridiculously misplaced.

And you lean toward being a homer and there is nothing wrong with that, but you don't like that label.

I don't think that they are the same issue at all. I think that is a real stretch. Are you saying that disrupting the defense is a benefit to the defense? That is laughable.

How many times do I need to state it? i have no strong opinion on this, so I don't care what the study would conclude. I just don't think it was an adequate study to provide definitive proof either way. Do you want to keep going in a circle here?

There are far more 6'2" plus pitchers at the major league level because a higher percentage of tall kids throw harder than the shorter kids. The short kids that make the major leagues are the exception who have defied the odds. Give credit to the scouts who found them. There is not some great untapped pool of hard throwing little guys. That is some sort of fantasy land. If you want to promote more scouting, I am in favor of that, but scouting resources are always limited and very costly. Therefore, they need ways to narrow down the pool of kids that they spend time scouting. The height - velocity correlation is based in science and not a myth. You may not like it, but it is called physics. It's not opinion. Natural gifts do not always translate to success, but you do need the the natural gifts. There are no 5'5" 200lb pitchers because they do not have natural gifts, not because they are victim of bias.

The correlation between height and velocity is not a false assumption. Physical science is such that taller guys produce velocity more efficiently than shorter guys. Does that mean that short guys can't throw hard? No, but the percentages are heavily in favor of tall guys being able to throw at high velocity. Isn't sabremetrics about playing the percentages?

If you are going to pay a guy a ton of money and change his position, you had better be sure that he can play that position or have a fallback position. I really can't think of another free agency signing where the acquiring team moved the player from the infield to the outfield when the player hadn't played a single inning in the outfield.

I would accept stats that debunked my beliefs if I thought that the statistical study was comprehensive and reliable. Also, you continue to misstate what you think is my so-called traditional position. With regard to item number 1, I did not feel at that time that those studies were comprehensive or compelling enough to establish anything. Secondly, I do not feel strongly about the so-called traditionalist view that speed on the bases gives batters an advantage. I said that in my last post on this, but you continue to misstate my position on this. I know of several batters that have hated having runners jump around on the bases. Yaz used to tell them to stop. I do firmly believe that speed on the bases puts pressure on and disrupts defenses. That is a much different issue than the issue addressed by your studies. As for the second issue, I have explained that the bias against smaller pitchers is a bias in favor of velocity, and that bias is based in science (not sabremetrics) which dictates that taller guys with long limbs produce velocity more efficiently. A bias based in science is not unreasonable bias. It is called playing the percentages. They know that percentage-wise a much higher percentage of taller guys can hit high velocities than smaller guys. Isn't sabremetrics all about playing the percentages? If you want to debunk what you think are my traditionalist views with statistics, first you need to correctly characterize and identify my views and then you need to provide statistics that are comprehensive and compelling. The fact that you continue to misstate my positions looks like a desperate attempt to win an argument or put a label on me. I don't like labels, because the label of "traditionalist" that you put on people is meant to marginalize and discredit the opinions of those people with whom you disagree as uninformed. I and most baseball obsessed fans look at whatever we need to learn about the game even if we watch a lot of it. I have been digging into stats for 50 years. I have seen stats used in a compelling way and I have seen stats misused. The best stats member that we had at TalkSox was Jayhawk Bill. He presented compelling cases that opened peoples eyes, and he did it without labeling other members who disagreed with him.

I am on a different page than you on this. The bias is in favor of velocity, which science dictates that tall guys can generate more efficiently. That's just science not bias. The real question of bias is whether velocity should be the be all and end all of pitching skills that are scouted. I see it with my great nephew. Scouts and coaches don't seem to put any importance on commanding the strike zone or movement, but a 13 year old kid hitting 80 on the gun gets a lot of attention.

lol!!!

This is not true. I will accept stats that contradict my opinion. When I have seen a lot of a player, the stats almost always confirm my opinion, so there is no need to change my opinion. With regard to players that I see less often, especially west coast players, I resort to stats and advanced stats frequently. Why is it so important for you to label people? I use the best resources available to form my opinions. When it comes to the Red Sox, my eyes are usually my best resource. With regard to players on teams other than the Red Sox, I don't rely on my eyes as much.

That's why I have stated that "everything else being equal" taller guys have the physical advantage. The other things the scout can't see and doesn't know if those other things will develop. He can see height. Height more efficiently produces velocity. It is an advantage. It is a way of thinning through tens of thousands of kids. I think in this discussion we have not gotten to the true bias in scouting that I think is a mistake. it isn't the bias against small pitchers. It is the bias in favor of velocity. Obviously, you need to have some heat, but you don't need to throw 95+ to be effective in the major leagues. There isn't enough emphasis put on command and movement of pitches. It doesn't matter how hard you throw. You will not succeed unless you have command and movement -- regardless of height.

But according to you, I am a traditionalist, and I was right.

From a Manual of Structural Kinesiology--Basic Biomechanical Factors & Concepts http://www.kean.edu/~jeadams/docs/Kinesiology/Kines_Power_Points/Kines_PPT_PDF_Chap3.pdf There is a lot in this manual about levers in the body. The longer the Lever (arm) the more efficient at producing velocity. A shorter lever is an advantage for a quick release, but a disadvantage for velocity. Now, none of this precludes a shorter pitcher from being successful as we all know. But the advantage of being tall and long limbed is undeniable physical science.

With everything else being equal that goes into athleticism, being taller with long limbs is an advantage. It's physics which trumps sabremetrics every time.

Welcome Zeke.

I watch a lot of baseball and I saw a lot of Pujols when he was a Cardinal and I have seen a lot of Howard too. This may disturb you but I would never even consider picking Howard over Pujols in any year unless his stats completely overwhelmed Pujols' stats -- and then I would resort to advanced stats for more information. BTW, I didn't make the point that traditionalist views are so often wrong. You conflate traditionalist views with someone who lets their opinions be dictated by basic or (as you would term them) traditional stats. That assumption is incorrect. The point that I did make is that there are a lot of sports writers who are idiots.

Keep an eye on how Farrell's teams run the bases too. His teams in Toronto and Boston run recklessly.

Of the 20 pitchers on the A's roster, 6 are under 6'2".

No one is saying that humeral rotation isn't important and no one is saying that small guys can't throw hard. When these scouts are wading their way through tens of thousands of kids. Each kid can't be examined precisely. What they do know is that the physics of leverage dictates that a tall guy with the same type of musculature and humeral rotation as a shorter guy will throw at a higher velocity. Height and body type are an advantage due to science, so if it is bias it is based in science. Height doesn't guarantee success and lack of height doesn't prevent success, because the aspects of athleticism need to be present. Being tall and long limbed is still an advantage. The physics of that can't be denied. Some squat guys with short legs are fast, but if you were scouting for wide receivers you wouldnt be looking at guys with squat builds. It is advantage to have long legs and an athletic build. Again it is bias based in science.

The Blue Jays add Drew Storen to the back end of their bullpen. The ALE teams are building very strong late inning pens.

Okay, Kimmi. The whole baseball establishment is wrong about the big boys being a better pool to find high velocity pitchers. I guess that there is a treasure trove of short guys out there just waiting to be tapped. It sounds like quite an opportunity for a forward thinking GM.

There are plenty of idiot sportwriters. Even being a so-called traditionalist, I would not have let a handful of so called traditionalist stats fool me into thinking Howard should have been in the running with Pujols for MVP that year.

No, I didn't feel that there was adequate data presented to make a compelling case. I really don't feel strongly about whether speed generally improves the performance of hitters that follow him in the order. I do feel strongly that speed does put pressure on defenses and disrupts them. The studies on the performance of other hitters in the lineup does not address that.