Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Win or Lose, Boston Celtics' New Big 3 Era A Success

Interview with Jin Wong, Director of Baseball Administration for the Royals (Part 1)

I would like to start out by thanking the Jin Wong and the Royals media relation staff, Mike Swanson and David Holtzman in particular, for giving me the opportunity for the interview. The interview was conducted on 11/17/11 and here is the first half of the interview.

How does a Group Sales Manager for a AAA team become a Director of Baseball Administration for a major league team?

I went to a small school in Virginia, played baseball there and didn't know what I wanted to do. One of my advisers, that had a lot of influence on where I am today, Larry Pinwell, found an internship with the Atlanta Braves and few other jobs. I only applied for just one baseball internship. I did eventually get a call back from the Atlanta Braves.

The internship was started by Hank Aaron, so my first job interview for a full or part time job was with Hank Aaron in Atlanta. They offered me the baseball internship. Dayton Moore was my immediate supervisor at the time. He was the assistant to player development and scouting director. Derick Ladnier was the Farm Director. Dean Taylor was the assistant GM and John Schuerholz was the GM. Paul Snyder was the scouting director.

I did the internship for the summer. It was a lot of grunt work. I must have made a good impression on one or more of those guys. At the end of the internship, there was no full time position open with the Atlanta Braves front office. They presented me with the opportunity to go to their AAA farm club in Richmond. They had quite a bit of say on what could and could not happen at Richmond since they owned the club.  They created a position for me there to apply my business degree and stay connected to the game.

During my second season there, Dayton was in town seeing the club and said Kansas City has a job open for a scouting coordinator. I was interested and Dayton made a couple of calls. He [Dayton Moore] recommended me. Derrick Ladnier recommended me. Dean Taylor recommended me. That is how it worked out.

I got an entry level position as a scouting coordinator helping with the amateur side of things. I worked my way into getting more exposure to the major league side; getting more responsibilities.

Star-divide

Your personal profile on the Royals website makes it seem like you have many different jobs and titles. What exactly do you do for the Royals?

A lot of things. My job biography is pretty accurate. There are many things that I juggle. For example, we just went through budget season. A lot of my time and effort was spent preparing the entire budget for the baseball operations department with some of the other department heads. Also, I keep Dayton and Dean in the loop where we are with payroll ... in terms of current major league payroll, projections for the next 5 to six years. Rules and regulations. Roster moves. Trades. I manage our stats department which I am sure everyone wants to know about. I am a sounding board for Dayton whenever we are looking at a potential deal. Dayton will go to a lot of people to get their opinions.

I work very closely with our scouting coordinator in identifying players from other organizations that we would have interest in. I do a lot with depth charts. Organizational summaries. I can give Dayton a sheet that gives an organization in a nutshell. What does their payroll at the major league level look like? What does their prospects at the major league level look like? What does their depth chart at the major league level look like. What are they paying each player? Who is out of options? Who is a potential free agent? Who is a potential arb[itration] eligible? A lot of that information needs to come from different sources and I figured out a way put in a format that is easily legible and understandable.

Another thing , I do a lot of work with our major league coaches on the advance scouting information.  [I] sort of coordinate that and see that the major league coaches have what they need. A little bit of everything, but it always keeps me on my toes. It is always interesting.

How does your job change depending on the time of year? For example, when do you begin preparing for arbitration cases?

It is very cyclical, for example this time of year we have 7 arbitration eligible guys off the top my head. There is not much going on right now until you tend to those guy's contracts. Then you start negotiating contracts in earnest. The thing that takes most of my time is speaking to agents on their clients, whether it is major or minor league [clients]. Making sure Dayton is in the loop about what it would require for a certain player to sign and come to Kansas City. After that, making the final decision based on his input on what we are going to do with those players. During the winter, that takes up most of my time. I am on the phone a lot. It is my busiest time of the year.

Heading to Spring Training, we need to get the coaching staff up to speed on who we have coming in. We make sure we have the players we want heading into Spring Training. During Spring Training, I make sure I know what is going on with the team on a day to day basis. Who is playing well. Who is not playing well. What can we do with these players during certain time frames? Are they hurt? What are the financial ramications of a keeping certain players on?

When you get into season, for me it is a little more maintenance. There is a lot of things that come up. Fires I have to put out .. in terms of players, staff. I do have to travel with the team quite a bit; making sure Dayton knows what is going on with the team from my perspective.

As you get into the spring, you have the amateur draft. I help with the draft even though I am removed from that now. There are other people in our department that help with that.

Then as you get into the fall, you keep your eye towards who is going to be a free agent, the trade deadline, who's available and acquisition costs. The whole year I am constantly on the internet reading rumors, reading news that potentially affect our team, other teams in the division, with the new CBA and how it relates to the market place with players. What salaries are being tossed around? Who is signing for what and how it would affect a player on our club, a free agent or another player on another club we would have interest in acquiring. That is pretty much my cyclical year.

Two aspects of your job description I would like to go into more detail. What exactly do you have to do for: major league rules interpretation and compliance?

It is 'what can you do with a player'. When can you send him down? When can you bring him back? What are the procedures for dealing a player? Whether it is a 60, 15, 7 day concussion DL. Paternity leave. Family emergency rules. What has to be done with waivers? Basically knowing what is in the CBA and the Major League rules handbook.

What entails being the video coordinator for the players?

I oversee that department. We have a gentleman by the name of Mark Topping in charge. It basically runs itself. When I came here '99, we were still using VHS to video tape players and show them their at bats. As you can imagine, it was very time intensive. Just a pain to be quite honest. We implemented a digital system which everyone has now. I just oversee that department, making sure the video is getting to our players and staff as needed. It just runs itself. Mark is good at what he does and is on top of things.

Speaking of looking at video, a fellow writer, Connor Moylan, and I examined why some mainstream defensive stats show that Eric Hosmer was not a good defensive 1B. We looked a little further and found that he might be playing too close to 1B compared to other 1B. Did you the see the work and what is the Royals stance on the study?

I did, but I didn't read the entire post. It certainly makes us think a bit. Our defensive positioning is handled by Eddie Rodriguez. He is the infield coach on our major league staff. He gets detailed spray chart on each hitter versus right handers and left handers prior to each game. He places those guys defensively according to his charts and what he has seen. It is something we will probably have to ask Eddie about in terms of specifics. We did see it and made us think a little bit.

Are there any good publicly available defensive metrics? How does it compare to the Royals in house data?

Defensive metrics is the holy grail of statistics right now. We don't put a lot of emphasis in the defensive metrics. We are aware of them. We take them into consideration when talking about players. We will definitely lean more to the subjective when talking about defense, but know there will be a lot of ground made up with the Field FX system. Once we get and understand the data; create our own metrics, then we will be a lot closer to quantifying defense.

Do the Royals do much analysis when the eye test and the stats don't match up? If so, do you have an example from the past?

Sure and a good example for a long time was Alex Gordon. He had the tools to succeed. He wasn't having the results that everyone would have liked. Everyone from a scouting perspective was very optimistic that it would eventually come ... the results would be there and it would happen. It took a lot of time and effort from Alex and Kevin Seitzer.

Well, that is it for today.  The second half of the interview will be available Monday.

Comment 244 comments  |  18 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Good stuff!

I like the “what exactly is your job?” stuff. Behind-the-scenes logistics stuff fascinates me. Looking forward to part 2!

by Gross(est) on Nov 17, 2011 10:52 PM EST reply actions  

This Sheds A

Spotlight of info on what the organization considers to be statistics. Wong has his hands full, for sure, but it doesn’t sound like advanced metrics play much of a role yet. He is, however, aware of them, so that is a start.

I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.

by philofthenorth on Nov 17, 2011 10:55 PM EST reply actions  

I hope they take the Field f/x data seriously enough to bring in the best people to create their own metric, and then give that a lot of weight in their analysis.

Given that they “don’t put a lot of emphasis in the defensive metrics” now, I can’t say that I’m especially optimistic about that.

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Nov 18, 2011 9:00 AM EST up reply actions  

But that's the Holy Grail!

I'm waiting for my wave of talent to arrive.

by mitchfreakingmaier! on Nov 18, 2011 10:05 AM EST up reply actions  

To further extend the analogy

I think they are willing to drink out of something other than their cupped hands, but I think that’s about it.

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Nov 18, 2011 10:14 AM EST up reply actions  

The Holy Grail is a person

Don’t you guys read Dan Brown! Its all true! THE CONSPIRACY IS ALIVE!

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Nov 18, 2011 10:18 AM EST up reply actions  

I think my uncle's nephew is Jim Wong

if you know that joke

talk to me, Johnny...

by johnny4 on Nov 18, 2011 10:37 AM EST up reply actions  

So let me get this straight...

They have a nuclear supercollider under the stadium?

I'm waiting for my wave of talent to arrive.

by mitchfreakingmaier! on Nov 18, 2011 11:48 AM EST up reply actions  

In fairness to Jin Wong

He said that “WE don’t put a lot of emphasis in the defensive metrics.” I don’t think that’s his call. So we really don’t know how he feels about them or how much emphasis he thinks they should have in the team’s evaluation of defense. He’s going to speak with a unified voice from the Royals FO, as he should.

And I never suggested that he doesn’t understand advanced defensive metrics. I have no idea how much he knows about them, nor really what his opinion of them is.

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Nov 18, 2011 11:23 AM EST up reply actions  

that is because "advanced metrics" are vastly overrated

They are tools to use in assisting an already formulated opinion at best and dangerously misleading and virtually useless at worst.

by dooblay on Nov 18, 2011 12:18 PM EST up reply actions  

Haven't we been through this?

There are stacks and stacks of evidence—supported by the best statistical minds in the business, both professional and amateur—saying the exact opposite. What do you have to support your idea? If you are so much more enlightened, then why don’t you correct all of this with some sort of hard evidence?

Kila's slash for Apr 20 to May 4, 2011, right before he was sent down: .276 / .344 / .448

by SagehenMacGyver47 on Nov 18, 2011 12:37 PM EST up reply actions  

There are stacks and stacks of evidence—supported by the best statistical minds in the business, both professional and amateur—saying the exact opposite. What do you have to support your idea?

It just doesn’t feel right. Just like with evaluating a player’s defense, you’ve got to go with your gut here.

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Nov 18, 2011 12:46 PM EST up reply actions  

Gladly,

Hard Evidence:

Zack Grienke 2009 xFIP: 3.09
                         2011 xFIP 2.56

So, Zack was half a run better this season than his CY Young season. Sure

by dooblay on Nov 18, 2011 1:11 PM EST up reply actions  

But he was.

He struck out more guys while walking a nearly identical amount.
If he hadn’t had bad luck on his HR’s this year and good luck on his HR’s in 2009 then this years ERA would have been better.

"We don’t have guys with a long history of being effective in the seventh and eighth innings."
~Trey Hillman, master of understatements.

by RoyalPug on Nov 18, 2011 1:25 PM EST up reply actions  

For evaluating purely the question of which in-season performance was better

FIP should be used instead of xFIP.

Greinke FIP 2009: 2.33
Greinke FIP 2011: 2.98

Half of the arguments for why “statistics are bad” result from the arguer using them wrong.

by Gopherballs on Nov 18, 2011 1:34 PM EST up reply actions  

I know fWAR uses FIP, but why is it preferred over xFIP?

Fangraphs explains why they use DIPS as opposed to incorporating BIP, but I never really understood why they want to eliminate all of the external factors (luck and defensive ability) that come with balls in play but not eliminate the external factors (primarily luck) that come with HR rate.

by KSinDC on Nov 18, 2011 1:39 PM EST up reply actions  

I think it is a performance vs. talent issue

fWAR is a performance measure, based on the pitchers’s actual K’s, BB’s and HR allowed. But I could understand the argument that if HR’s above or below average are luck, then they should be normalized.

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Nov 18, 2011 1:44 PM EST up reply actions  

someone is responsible for the homerun, even if it was due to bad luck

just like they don’t normalize hitter WAR for high/low BABIP, they don’t normalize for HR luck.

I would like to see an xWAR that takes xFIP into account for pitchers and xBABIP for hitters.

Kila's slash for Apr 20 to May 4, 2011, right before he was sent down: .276 / .344 / .448

by SagehenMacGyver47 on Nov 18, 2011 1:48 PM EST up reply actions  

someone is responsible for the homerun, even if it was due to bad luck

The question is how much responsibility you should give to the pitcher. fWAR, by using FIP takes out much of the pitcher’s responsibility for hits and runs. It takes out BABIP luck, but it leaves in HR/FB luck. I can see that as a problem. I think there are pluses and minuses to using FIP or xFIP in calculating WAR.

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Nov 18, 2011 1:51 PM EST up reply actions  

yes, that's what I was saying about having a WAR and and xWAR side-by-side at Fangraphs

I’ve commented on it a few times over there, with no response (not that I expected one).

Kila's slash for Apr 20 to May 4, 2011, right before he was sent down: .276 / .344 / .448

by SagehenMacGyver47 on Nov 21, 2011 5:59 PM EST up reply actions  

If the opposing team's hitters hit a bunch of seeing-eye grounders

Fangraphs would not pick that up anywhere in its WAR calculations, right? It won’t be assessed to the pitcher because pitcher WAR uses DIPS and it won’y be assessed (much) against the fielders because those balls aren’t being fielded very much by anyone. In that respect, it seems like fangraphs WAR is meant to strip out luck altogether.

by KSinDC on Nov 18, 2011 1:54 PM EST up reply actions  

I shouldn't say *is meant to* strip out luck altogether

Substitute “has the effect of stripping out luck altogether”

by KSinDC on Nov 18, 2011 1:55 PM EST up reply actions  

yeah, they are separate questions of past performance versus talent

but they still give you both to compare. And thanks to park factors and what is known about HR/FB rate, there is much greater confidence in isolating the parts of giving up a home run that are within and without the pitcher’s control because defensive ability virtually has no impact (save for the dozen or so times each year outfielders legitimately “save” a HR). Isolating defensive is much harder to do.

by Gopherballs on Nov 18, 2011 1:52 PM EST up reply actions  

I didn't realize fangraphs FIP was adjusted for park factors

The glossary seems to suggest it’s using a league-wide constant rather than a park/batter handedness-specific one

by KSinDC on Nov 18, 2011 1:58 PM EST up reply actions  

It is park adjusted

- .-. ..- … – / – …. . / .—. .-. - .. . … …

by Jeff Zimmerman on Nov 18, 2011 2:02 PM EST up reply actions  

It found an article from Dave mentioning that

The glossary was posted Feb 15, 2010 and Dave’s article was posted October 1, 2010, so I guess they may have changed last year.

It looks like it’s not adjusted for handedness of the batter though, which seems like a big element in asymmetrical parks.

by KSinDC on Nov 18, 2011 2:11 PM EST up reply actions  

I could be wrong, but some of it probably has to do with performance versus predictive value.

I’d imagine xFIP has a bit more predictive value than FIP, but FIP more accurately gauges the performance. Again, this is more a guess than anything.

Sporadically musing on the Royals at both Royals Review and Royalscentricity, pop culture at Inconsiderate Prick, SVU at Munch My Benson and on Twitter at Old Man Duggan

by Old Man Duggan on Nov 18, 2011 10:56 PM EST up reply actions  

Here's a study that shows xFIP better on small samples, no difference on bigger studies

Also, for full time starters, it looks like ERA (adjusted for park factors) is as good a predictor as the advanced metrics, which surprised me:

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=12844

by KSinDC on Nov 18, 2011 11:44 PM EST up reply actions  

Yes, if you're looking at a lot of data

And, what it’s good at predicting is ERA. And I don’t know that predicting ERA is the best test for a pitching metric. Would you be interested in a hitting metric that best predicts batting average?

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Nov 19, 2011 12:17 AM EST up reply actions  

Yes, RA is certainly better. And you need a lot of data for it to become very predictive of itself.

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Nov 19, 2011 2:20 AM EST up reply actions  

Why wouldn't I be interested in a hitting metric that best predicts batting average

That would be pretty valuable information to have. Hell, if I could

Also, I should have been more clear that the study shows park-adjusted ERA is as good at predicting ERA for pitchers with at least 500 IP over the previous 3 years. It was oversimplifying to say “full time starters.”

by KSinDC on Nov 19, 2011 1:15 AM EST up reply actions  

Edit fail

strike the “Hell, if I could”

by KSinDC on Nov 19, 2011 1:15 AM EST up reply actions  

It's just that predicting batting average doesn't take you very far

It tells you something, but it doesn’t tell you much.

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Nov 19, 2011 2:21 AM EST up reply actions  

Quick question

You know these are pictching stats, right? We were talking about advanced defensive metrics. Or do you largely reject all advanced stats?

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Nov 18, 2011 1:38 PM EST up reply actions  

Gladly

Hard Evidence:

Jeff Francis 2011 fWAR 2.6
Hiroki Kuroda 2011 fWAR 2.4

Um , yeah sure, Francis was CLEARLY the better pitcher in 2011. WHY? Because fWAR says so.

by dooblay on Nov 18, 2011 1:14 PM EST up reply actions  

All that your premises prove is that the advanced statistics differ from your subjective assessment.

You conclude that the difference represents a failure of the advanced statistics (as opposed to a failure of your subjective assessment), but you only conclude that because you assume your subjective assessment is better than the advanced statistics. That assumption is essentially no different than your conclusion. Thus, you assumed the conclusion.

This is also called begging the question, but somany people misuse that phrase that it’s meaning has been damaged.

by KSinDC on Nov 18, 2011 1:30 PM EST up reply actions  

"No, YOU'RE the one being defensive."

Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.
Before getting tweaked, read up on regression.

by Matt Klaassen on Nov 18, 2011 1:35 PM EST up reply actions  

It means you've reached a conclusion

(That advanced statistics are dumb)
and are looking specifically for examples that fit that mindset and then using those examples to back up the original conclusion.
However in both cases you are missing important information that explains both. I already pointed out one flaw with your Greinke example but I’ll also try to explain the francis one

Essentially it boils down to a couple of things:
1. Francis was slightly unlucky while Kuroda was slightly lucky on guys getting hits.
2. You have to remember that Kuroda plays in the NL. He gets to face pitchers for 1/9 of his at bats. Francis had no such luxury.

Now I will say that fWAR is slightly off for pitchers(I think most people would agree) but it is close and there is a lot of thinking and math behind it.

"We don’t have guys with a long history of being effective in the seventh and eighth innings."
~Trey Hillman, master of understatements.

by RoyalPug on Nov 18, 2011 1:33 PM EST up reply actions  

That's an easy one

ERA / FIP / xFIP, ERA- / FIP- / xFIP-
raw:4.82 / 4.10 / 4.29, adjusted: 117 / 101 / 106

raw: 3.07 / 3.78 / 3.56, adjusted: 83 / 101 / 92

I figure the main problem is that Kuroda pitched in the NL. That goes a long way toward lowering a pitcher’s ERA and FIP. Once you adjust for league and park, their FIP’s were nearly identical – FIP- was 101. Now xFIP tells a slightly different story, that Francis was luckier with HRs in 2011.

Kila's slash for Apr 20 to May 4, 2011, right before he was sent down: .276 / .344 / .448

by SagehenMacGyver47 on Nov 18, 2011 1:38 PM EST up reply actions  

I think this has the burden of proof backwards.

And if there is evidence that advanced defensive metrics are better than the opinions of pro scouts — stacks and stacks of it, you say — you should be able to produce some.

by cwyers on Nov 18, 2011 3:39 PM EST up reply actions  

I wish I knew he was involved with free agents in that way

I would LOVE to know what the “Kansas City penalty” is to try and get a guy to play with the Royals.

by BlueEyes_Austin on Nov 17, 2011 10:55 PM EST reply actions  

Wow--great stuff

a peak behind the curtain…

by nwroyal on Nov 17, 2011 10:55 PM EST reply actions  

wow

shocked that he was even aware of the hosmer study

but very cool that they’re halfway paying attention to it

by ams5661 on Nov 17, 2011 10:59 PM EST reply actions  

This Site Is

Linked directly from the official Royals mlb.com site. I have to believe some people in the organization come here, even if they never post.

I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.

by philofthenorth on Nov 17, 2011 11:01 PM EST up reply actions  

Patience, Grasshopper

I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.

by philofthenorth on Nov 17, 2011 11:06 PM EST up reply actions  

Not to mention

the writings of Clam Simmons.

Chaim Mattis Keller New York City's # 1 Royals fan!

by cmkeller on Nov 17, 2011 11:24 PM EST up reply actions  

I think he was appeasing Jeff

I very much doubt he had any idea there was such an article. I mean, what else could he say?

by dooblay on Nov 18, 2011 12:24 PM EST up reply actions  

He could say he wasn't aware of the study

It’s not like he’s under any obligation to read this blog, nor do I think any of us expect that they do.

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Nov 18, 2011 12:47 PM EST up reply actions  

Wrong,

you were basically saying, “I wrote an article, did you read it?” He didnt want to hurt your feelings because you were kissing his ass.

Its like a girlfriend asking, “does my ass look fat?” ……uh, …no

Translation: : “Did you like my article?”…….Uh,…..sure.

you put him on the spot bro, whether he read it or not, he was going to be polite and say he did.

by dooblay on Nov 18, 2011 1:02 PM EST up reply actions  

You don't know anything.

He knows everything.

Glad I came, just wish I hadn't stayed so long.
Rock Chalk Talk

by Warden11 on Nov 18, 2011 1:04 PM EST up reply actions  

Incorrect

“….. a fellow writer, Connor Moylan, and I”

by dooblay on Nov 18, 2011 1:28 PM EST up reply actions  

Think whatever you want.

- .-. ..- … – / – …. . / .—. .-. - .. . … …

by Jeff Zimmerman on Nov 18, 2011 1:05 PM EST up reply actions  

EAT MOR POP TARTZ

I'm waiting for my wave of talent to arrive.

by mitchfreakingmaier! on Nov 18, 2011 2:56 PM EST up reply actions  

I would expect that it's very much part of Jin's job description

to keep up with sabermetric research. What Jeff did was good research, and it doesn’t surprise me that Jin was aware of it.

by Mike Fast on Nov 18, 2011 2:12 PM EST up reply actions  

Jin's answer to the question

I reread Jin’s answer to Jeff’s question. His response gives more detail then Jeff gave him. Jeff didn’t mention LHB vs RHB positioning.

by spamiam79 on Nov 18, 2011 2:42 PM EST via mobile up reply actions   1 recs

Exactly,

but he had to say yes bro.

I'm waiting for my wave of talent to arrive.

by mitchfreakingmaier! on Nov 18, 2011 2:56 PM EST up reply actions  

jin's a good guy

i know he and libby sort of casually, although i haven’t spoken to him in a few years…he did something very nice for me…i root for him to be successful.

Not everything that counts can be counted, and not everything that can be counted counts."

--Albert Einstein

by Home Run Tony Cogan on Nov 17, 2011 11:05 PM EST reply actions  

Great start can't wait

A nice pre thanksgiving surprise! Well done! Can’t wait for part two!

"Whether you think you can, or think you can't you're right!" Henry Ford

by kc1fan8569 on Nov 17, 2011 11:07 PM EST reply actions  

The Revolution Will

Be on smart phones.

I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.

by philofthenorth on Nov 17, 2011 11:08 PM EST reply actions  

Not gonna lie... I enjoyed this immensely

and Im not sure I can wait till Monday for Part 2.

Your 2010 Royals Review Fantasy Football Keeper League Champion
Since 2005: Royals win% = .4100, Chiefs win% = .4095

by averagegatsby on Nov 17, 2011 11:08 PM EST reply actions  

I hope

that means you’re going to call Jin yourself tomorrow night

by Loose Seal on Nov 18, 2011 12:06 AM EST via iPhone app up reply actions  

fantastic

I had very little of an idea on what Jin actually did and it sounds like he’s got his head in all parts of the org.

I really wonder how much thought will be put in that Hosmer study. I also wonder if Ed Rodriguez is a guy who would be willing to move hosmer over more b/c its what the stats say or if he is a guy who is too gritty and goes off his own perception.

Do these effectively hide my thunder?

by splitty on Nov 17, 2011 11:14 PM EST reply actions  

Rodriguez Can Easily

Be overruled by higher ups. He’s just a base coach.

I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.

by philofthenorth on Nov 17, 2011 11:17 PM EST up reply actions  

He's the guy who determines IFer positioning

Certainly Yost could overrule him, but is there any reason to think he would?

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Nov 18, 2011 9:03 AM EST up reply actions  

I Would Hope

He would see a glaring error and at least discuss it, but maybe he has his plate too full to pay attention to something like this. I don’t know.

I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.

by philofthenorth on Nov 18, 2011 9:21 AM EST up reply actions  

Yost?

I don’t know that there’s good reason to believe that Yost thinks there’s a glaring error.

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Nov 18, 2011 9:34 AM EST up reply actions  

My guess would be that Yost or Moore simply have to tell Rodriguez what they want,

and he’ll comply. As you say – do they want to change what he’s doing, that’s another question.

Kila's slash for Apr 20 to May 4, 2011, right before he was sent down: .276 / .344 / .448

by SagehenMacGyver47 on Nov 18, 2011 12:40 PM EST up reply actions  

That's impossible to know.

Over the phone, Jin and Jim would sound exactly the same.

by hawkinscm87 on Nov 18, 2011 8:00 PM EST up reply actions  

Great stuff.

Can’t wait for Monday’s installment, in part to see if a certain phrase made it in there.

Sporadically musing on the Royals at both Royals Review and Royalscentricity, pop culture at Inconsiderate Prick, SVU at Munch My Benson and on Twitter at Old Man Duggan

by Old Man Duggan on Nov 17, 2011 11:19 PM EST reply actions  

good stuff

university of mary washington produces the best and brightest

by BeauJackson on Nov 17, 2011 11:24 PM EST reply actions  

great stuff...

i think you handled that perfectly…and it is a very very good sign in my mind that he was even aware of the work you guys did regarding hosmer’s defense

Fire Everyone

by billybeingbilly on Nov 17, 2011 11:35 PM EST reply actions  

Why is it highly unlikely?

Because you’re pretty certain that the guy that runs/manages the Royals statistical analysis efforts doesn’t keep himself apprised of sabermetric research on the internet, including studies specifically about Royals players? I know that other organizaitons have availed themselves of such free research. Do you think that the Royals definitely close their eyes to this stuff?

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Nov 18, 2011 12:50 PM EST up reply actions  

No, the guy is a busy man

Its highly unlikely he wastes his time on this site. He is the real deal. He is a baseball professional. Y’all are just a bunch a frickin bloggers. there are certianly 500 other sources he would go to first before here.

by dooblay on Nov 18, 2011 1:05 PM EST up reply actions  

If he didn't care about the site, why would he interview with one of its writers?

He may read it every day, but he’s almost certainly heard of it. And like most professional in any industry about to be interviewed, he probably had someone look up Will’s writings to see what kind of info might be asked, he came across the article and took a look, if he hadn’t read it beforehand.

by Loose Seal on Nov 18, 2011 1:40 PM EST up reply actions  

Because it took hours to read that piece.

Your 2010 Royals Review Fantasy Football Keeper League Champion
Since 2005: Royals win% = .4100, Chiefs win% = .4095

by averagegatsby on Nov 18, 2011 2:07 PM EST up reply actions  

calling him a bully gives him too much credit

I’m thinking “canker blossom,” “10 pounds of catshit in a 5 pound bag,” “craven malmsey nosed flap dragon,” “hooplehead,” or “lil’ stinker” would be more appropriate labels.

by Nighthawk at the Diner on Nov 18, 2011 8:09 PM EST up reply actions   1 recs

I don't think you have the slightest clue about how the world works.

When people offer a free service, people use it. Moreover, when there is a gap in a certain area of information, (which seems rare these days) and that gap is filled by someone who makes it freely accessible, people use it. Why would you think there are a bunch of other sources on Hosmer’s positioning? That’s absurd. But even more absurd is your assumption that the Royals would ignore such research because of pride.

You’re wrong about Mr. Wong wasting his time on this site. He said he didn’t read the whole article, but he got the gist. He also doesn’t read the comments, because let’s face it, the comments are mainly for our own amusement. So no, he doesn’t waste time on things that are irrelevant to him. And even if he did ignore something like that article, a subordinate would surely look at it. Either way, that information finds its way into the organization as long as its well done, credible work.

This idea that there’s a bunch of other sources for this information seems to imply that there are organizations out there doing work for MLB teams and that they have delivered a full report on Hosmer’s positioning to the Royals. Just stupid.

by hawkinscm87 on Nov 18, 2011 8:07 PM EST up reply actions  

I really enjoyed this

I’m impressed at how straightforward he was. There’s very little in the way of platitudes or restating the obvious. He comes off as a guy who’s sincerely interested in talking to you, Jeff. I think that reflect well on you and certainly on him.

There are lots of interesting nuggets in here. It’s interesting what he says about defensive metrics not being very useful but also that they compile spray charts on each hitter vs. LHP and RHP for positioning purposes. Essentially, they trust the raw data more than the statistics based off of the data.

In compiling information about the other organizations, I wonder if he uses Cot’s. Seems like there’s no sense reinventing the wheel, but I always wonder how much the pros are looking at the same numbers we’re seeing.

I’d also love to know more about what his work focuses on during the season.

I’m really looking forward to part 2. He seems eager to talk about statistics. I hope for a lot of that so we can replace some of the rumors that circulate at RR about the Royals use of data with actual facts.

Great work getting the interview and well done conducting it.

by KSinDC on Nov 17, 2011 11:43 PM EST reply actions  

Are spray charts really all that reliable?

It would almost seem that they would depend on the pitcher as much as they might depend on the hitter.

Your 2010 Royals Review Fantasy Football Keeper League Champion
Since 2005: Royals win% = .4100, Chiefs win% = .4095

by averagegatsby on Nov 18, 2011 12:07 AM EST up reply actions  

Aren't spray charts the underlying data for defensive metrics?

If spray charts aren’t reliable, how could the metrics be at all useful?

by KSinDC on Nov 18, 2011 12:16 AM EST up reply actions  

It depends on the source

I would not be surprised if it was Hit FX data.

- .-. ..- … – / – …. . / .—. .-. - .. . … …

by Jeff Zimmerman on Nov 18, 2011 8:21 AM EST up reply actions  

It would be interesting to know what the best defensive minds would choose

Given a choice between UZR/DRS versus spray charts based on Hit F/X.

How many years of Hit F/X data would a team need before it could begin doing its own UZR work? And will teams have access to data from other parks? Otherwise, the data sample would be super heavily skewed to a team’s own players.

by KSinDC on Nov 18, 2011 1:25 PM EST up reply actions  

but only when signed off on by the "plus hands... and plus hands" guy

Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.
Before getting tweaked, read up on regression.

by Matt Klaassen on Nov 18, 2011 1:28 PM EST up reply actions   1 recs

I thought that was proprietary

Or is it just field F/X that MLB won’t release? Or am I completely off?

by KSinDC on Nov 18, 2011 1:31 PM EST up reply actions  

The hit fx data is sportvision's data. It is just from the Pitch FX camera's

The UZR data is from some guy that is paid to watch the game and mark where each ball was hit.

- .-. ..- … – / – …. . / .—. .-. - .. . … …

by Jeff Zimmerman on Nov 18, 2011 1:37 PM EST up reply actions  

well, it is the BIS data that is used by the publicly available UZR

and I believe the guy who watches the plays gets computer assistance in marking where each ball was hit.

by Gopherballs on Nov 18, 2011 1:45 PM EST up reply actions  

They're marked ON a computer, but the computer doesn't...

…have any input on how the stringer observes the trajectory of the batted ball.

by cwyers on Nov 18, 2011 3:41 PM EST up reply actions  

right, the computer is not tracking the path of the ball

But according to BIS, the stringer records the direction and distance of the ball by clicking the location of the ball on the screen — the guy is not looking at the screen and then writing down an estimate that the ball was 7 feet left of and 5 feet behind the base.

by Gopherballs on Nov 18, 2011 4:19 PM EST up reply actions  

well done

I miss your old avatar….I admire the bet, those odds suck tho…god damn futures scammers.

by Nighthawk at the Diner on Nov 18, 2011 8:10 PM EST up reply actions  

Hit F/X is and Field F/X will be proprietary

but MLB teams can pay for them, so their analysts could have access to it. UZR or a similar system that could incorprate the Hit F/X data for the batted ball information would be more accurate than just using the BIS data. In other words, as the data that goes into UZR or similar systems gets more accurate, the UZR results will be more accurate.

by Gopherballs on Nov 18, 2011 1:42 PM EST up reply actions  

Sorry for all the questions, but here are a few more

1) When a team buys UZR or something similar, do they get access to the underlying data and the algorithm running on it so that they could substitute in their own data? Is that feasible?

2) If there are systematic biases in the marked positions of balls on the BIS data (and I’ve read that there are, but I can’t find a link right now) wouldn’t it be diluting the quality of the hit F/X data to add them to a database built off of BIS data?

by KSinDC on Nov 18, 2011 1:48 PM EST up reply actions  

keep in mind UZR is a system/methodology

It needs fielding data from someplace. MGL initially used data from Stats, Inc., not BIS. He then got hired by the Cardinals, so he could not share what he used with them at the time (I think he later said he continued to use Stats, Inc. data but I am not sure about that). After his work with the Cardinals ended (and he might have consulted with other teams too), I think he did numbers for at least one year with data from both sources. At some point, Fangraphs came along and he agreed to allow Fangraphs to publish UZR results (using the BIS data). Once Field F/X is available, UZR could conceivably use it too, and I would expect that it would produce more accurate results because the underlying data would be more accurate.

With the background out of the way, (1) yes, I believe a team could hire MGL as a consultant and have him use Field F/X or other appropriate data to get UZR results.

(2) I do not know the extent of batted ball data captured by Hit F/X, but I am not sure that it provides fielding location data — I think it is just data (such as velocity) for the ball coming off the bat. One of the UZR factors is how hard the ball is hit. Right now, the folks at BIS just rate the speed of the batted ball generally — hard, medium, soft — they might have some radar gun data to make those calls but I know they just use the general classifications. Theoretically, UZR could use the batted ball speed from the Hit F/X data instead of the BIS general classifications. This would likely make the batted ball speed factor more reliable. Because Hit F/X does not appear to provide fielding data for the other factors that UZR uses, UZR would still need to use the BIS data (or Stats, Inc. data) for all of the other factors. Using the BIS data for the other UZR factors would not dilute the Hit F/X data.

And as a disclaimer, this is my general understanding of things that I read. MGL, Tom Tango, and company are the authorities, so defer to them and any discussion on the Book Blog.

by Gopherballs on Nov 18, 2011 2:18 PM EST up reply actions   1 recs

I think what I mean...

Is positioning a player purely on hitter spray charts a little overrated.

I guess in theory “advanced spray charts” could go as far as a hitter vs power pitchers, vs junk ballers etc… It just seems if you take every hitter’s spray chart and position your fielders purely on raw data can be very misleading.

Your 2010 Royals Review Fantasy Football Keeper League Champion
Since 2005: Royals win% = .4100, Chiefs win% = .4095

by averagegatsby on Nov 18, 2011 9:48 AM EST up reply actions  

I'm not following why spray charts would be unreliable

Wasn’t there a bunch of discussion here about an article on Tampa Bay’s aggressive use of shifts based on hitters’ tendencies? What else could that come from than spray charts?

by KSinDC on Nov 18, 2011 1:11 PM EST up reply actions  

Fair enough...

it was merely a question. It appears that my hypothesis is wrong.

Your 2010 Royals Review Fantasy Football Keeper League Champion
Since 2005: Royals win% = .4100, Chiefs win% = .4095

by averagegatsby on Nov 18, 2011 2:09 PM EST up reply actions  

And why do they rely on spray charts but not the defensive metrics created from some of that data?

Because spray charts have been used in baseball for years and advanced defensive metrics are relatively new. This is an old school, traditional front office that is just dipping its toes in the 21st century. I’m very impressed that they’ve upgraded from VHS to digital video in the last 5 years. I am neither rich nor especially technically savvy, nor a tech toy geek, and I made that transition in 1999.

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Nov 18, 2011 9:06 AM EST up reply actions  

And why do they rely on spray charts but not the defensive metrics created from some of that data?

Because they don’t think UZR and +/- are better than what they currently do?

He said they consider the metrics; they just don’t give them much weight. IMO, they shouldn’t. Because the metrics aren’t very good. We talk about batting average being fluky year-to-year, and UZR taking ~3x longer to stabilize than offensive statistics. Alexei Ramirez is considered one of the best defensive infielders in the game, but had one of the worst UZR’s in 2008. Jhonny Peralta is thought of as a poor defensive SS, but had one of the best UZR’s in 2011.

I understand that these stats are more reliable in very large samples, but how much practical use can a FO really get out of a stat that takes 3+ years to stabilize, at which point the defender’s skills may have significantly changed, and even with that large of a sample, the numbers have to be taken with a shovel of salt?

by kcdc1 on Nov 18, 2011 11:32 AM EST up reply actions   1 recs

That's a good case for using advanced defensive metrics wisely, but not a good case for "not putting much emphasis on them"

I don’t think anyone in the field seriously suggests that you should evaluate a player’s defense by looking at a single year’s data. So why is the fluctuation of the small sample size of one year’s data an argument against advanced defensive metrics like UZR?

I understand that these stats are more reliable in very large samples, but how much practical use can a FO really get out of a stat that takes 3+ years to stabilize, at which point the defender’s skills may have significantly changed, and even with that large of a sample, the numbers have to be taken with a shovel of salt?

First, you recognize the aging curve for defensive abilities and apply it appropriate (studies have been done which have determined this aging curve, which is different from hitting and pitching aging curves. Hell, the Royals stats department could do their own study and even improve upon existing work if they wanted to). Second, no one is suggesting that you use only advanced defensive metrics to evaluate defense. They should be used in concert with traditional scouting evaluation. And that information can help inform your use of 3 years of defensive data, including information that the player has improved or gotten worse.

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Nov 18, 2011 11:41 AM EST up reply actions  

Ok, sure

I can get behind using defensive metrics wisely. To me, that means looking at them, understanding what they mean, and having them in the discussion. But they shouldn’t be anywhere close to an MLB team’s primary tool for evaluating defense. I think the Royals have made the right call by “leaning more to the subjective” in evaluating defense, but I’d certainly want them to mine every bit of useful information that they can out of all sources. I think the current defensive metrics are a pretty shallow well when it comes to information that a FO could use in transactions, but that’s a matter of opinion.

by kcdc1 on Nov 18, 2011 12:37 PM EST up reply actions  

I think the current defensive metrics are a pretty shallow well when it comes to information that a FO could use in transactions, but that’s a matter of opinion.

Perhaps. But are the subjective opinions of scouts actually a deeper well? Lots of scouts loved Yuni’s defense, and his defense was genuinely poor. There’s often a disconnect between tools and performance. Sometimes a player has or appears to have great defensive tools, but it doesn’t lead to actually making the plays. People focus a lot on the limitations of advanced defensive metrics without at the same time recognizing this very significant limitations of scouting/scouting reports/tools-based evaluation.

I think if you have 3+ full years of MLB defensive data on a player, that data needs to be relied on at least as heavily as scouting reports.

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Nov 18, 2011 12:54 PM EST up reply actions  

Lots of scouts loved Yuni’s defense.

I just don’t believe this. I know the Royals people talked about it to the media, but fans watching on TV could see that Yuni lacked range and made boneheaded mistakes. He also had a gut and was a visibly slow runner. Maybe there were a few scouts saw him as a good defender when he was young and just stuck to that evaluation, but I can’t buy that they thought he was good the last few years.

by kcdc1 on Nov 18, 2011 2:32 PM EST up reply actions  

Why?

“I think if you have 3+ full years of MLB defensive data on a player, that data needs to be relied on at least as heavily as scouting reports.”

That’s just stupid. You’re giving 3-year old data the same weight as current data generated from scouting reports.

by BlueEyes_Austin on Nov 18, 2011 6:05 PM EST up reply actions  

Like with offense and pitching

analysts hired by teams know to weigh the most recent fielding data more heavily (like 5/4/3).

by Gopherballs on Nov 18, 2011 6:20 PM EST up reply actions  

I actually do wonder about this, but the other way

For statistics that stabilize faster (I’m mainly thinking hitting statistics), why not use a system that weights more recent data more heavily if that’s a good approach for projection systems.

by KSinDC on Nov 18, 2011 8:53 PM EST up reply actions  

I may have phrased this poorly

But I do wonder why projection systems use the same weighting systems for statistics that have widely varying sample sizes and data consistencies.

by KSinDC on Nov 18, 2011 9:07 PM EST up reply actions  

I'm not sure exactly what you mean

but 5-4-3 is just a general summary. More sophisticated projection system do weight and regress different components differently.

Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.
Before getting tweaked, read up on regression.

by Matt Klaassen on Nov 18, 2011 9:48 PM EST up reply actions  

I was thinking of something like using only one season's hitting data

And weighting the first April May with 3, June July with 4 and August September with 5.

I’m out of my depth statistically, but I’m just thinking about the relationship between one year of hitting statistics and three years of fielding statistics and thinking about treating them in parallel based on some sort of objective measure of their statistical quality as opposed to parallel treatment based on the time period (one season) over which the data was collected.

by KSinDC on Nov 18, 2011 11:49 PM EST up reply actions  

Most robust approach

Would be some kinda multilevel model approach where you model the effects of each of the years independently.

by BlueEyes_Austin on Nov 19, 2011 1:27 PM EST up reply actions  

not really

UZR starts to stabilize sooner, but the three-year mark is roughly when you no longer need to regress the numbers significantly. To account for the possible change in talent, you still should weight the more recent data more heavily.

by Gopherballs on Nov 18, 2011 8:56 PM EST up reply actions  

I don't know what "at least as heavily" means in this context

I’d be more interested to know how Scott would compare the degree to which you should rely upon fielding metrics compared to hitting metrics (in both cases, as compared to scouting reports).

by KSinDC on Nov 18, 2011 6:26 PM EST up reply actions  

not Scott

but the general consensus for stat reliability is: hitting > pitching > defense.

Hitting values are pretty uncontroversial and there are no real questions about the underlying data. The same goes for the underlying data for pitching, but given the difficulty to separate out defense, environment, and skill, the pitching values are not as precise as those for hitting. Defense values and data have limitations, so they are not as precise as pitching.

In all cases, however, you obviously still rely on scouting reports and hybrid data (like pitch f/x), just as all the MLB teams that use stats do.

by Gopherballs on Nov 18, 2011 6:47 PM EST up reply actions  

I was thinking largely in the context of Alex Gordon

He’d had a couple of league average years, a couple of crummy years but the scouts were still largely positive. Going forward, to what extent should we have expected him to be an average to below average (stats) and to what extent should we have expected him to be well above average?

Given that, how much less heavily do we weight fielding stats relative to fielding scouting reports?

by KSinDC on Nov 18, 2011 6:58 PM EST up reply actions  

The more respected projection systems (ZIPS, CHONE, etc.)

remained relatively positive on Gordon. Even during his struggles, his walk rate remained very good, his K rate remained stable, and his power dipped but remained solid. He also crushed the ball during his demotions to AAA.

How to weigh defensive stats and scouting reports really depends on the stats and scouting reports and how much they agree with each other. If scouting reports vary on a particular player but the defensive metrics generally agree, I would probably give the stats and scouting reports that agree with each other more weight than the other scouting reports. The reverse would be true too.

We really should ask the Rays what they do, but if they would not share it with Jonah Keri, I would guess they would not share it with us either.

Part of the problem is there is different information available to fans and teams. I would expect that the proprietary systems used by the Rays and other MLB teams are better than the stuff available for free on the internet, but I would expect the same of the scouting reports too. For prospects, we at least have Baseball America and similar outlets, but even then, the information provided about defense is usually just a couple of sentences that provide more of an overview than a full scale report on each aspect of a player’s defense. For major leaguers, there is not even that.

Given what is freely available, I find more value in the stats than random comments by fans of a particular player or team that so-and-so is teh awesome or suxx, but I do value the fan scouting report project and the occasional snippets from scouts distilled through the media. I would certainly value the information compiled from the professional scouting reports and cross-checked by an organization more than the freely available scouting information. But I still would want to compare them with the advanced defense stats (UZR and the proprietary systems) to see if there are disagreements and what is causing the disagreements (see the Hosmer positioning stuff). Beer and tacos, you know.

by Gopherballs on Nov 18, 2011 7:47 PM EST up reply actions  

The projections on Gordon remained quite positive every year

No they didn’t quite expect a massive breakout season, but I don’t think any good projection system is ever going to be so liberal as to make that kind of prediction.

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Nov 18, 2011 8:37 PM EST up reply actions  

Is there any good place to get old projections?

I have what I think are this year’s ZIPS projections in a spreadsheet and they show Gordon in about the 70th percentile for 3B and OF (They have him classified as 3B for some reason). That’s certainly better than I’d have guessed based on his overall major league performance to date.

I appreciate the information on the projections, but I guess it also shows that the analogy breaks down since the hitting projections are being supported by minor league data and we don’t have anything equivalent for fielding.

by KSinDC on Nov 18, 2011 9:04 PM EST up reply actions  

you can find older ZiPS spreadsheets through google searches

You can find older Marcels here, although those do not incorporate minor league stats.

Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.
Before getting tweaked, read up on regression.

by Matt Klaassen on Nov 18, 2011 9:50 PM EST up reply actions  

Gopherballs gave a more thorough answer, but since you asked for my opinion by name, I’ll chime in briefly. I would rely on hitting metrics much, much more than fielding metrics. For instance, if I’ve got 5+ full major league seasons of hitting data on a player, I think that would account for the vast majority of my evaluation. Scouting reports would be a pretty small part of the evaluation. For defense, with the same years of data, for me, the evaluation would be more like 60% stats and 40% scouting reports.

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Nov 18, 2011 8:42 PM EST up reply actions  

I greatly simplified the above. I think there are many variables that have to be considered in determining for a given player what weight you give to stats and scouting reports. I think the above is a very rough rule of thumb.

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Nov 18, 2011 9:09 PM EST up reply actions  

I took it that way

Just wanted a bit of flesh on the bones

by KSinDC on Nov 18, 2011 9:15 PM EST up reply actions  

When determining the true talent level of hitters and pitchers, statistical analysts almost always use 3+ years of data. Every projection system uses 3-4 years of data to project the next season. Is “that just stupid” too?

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Nov 18, 2011 8:35 PM EST up reply actions  

If you have an indicator that takes three years to stablize

That indicator is essentially worthless for making current decisions.

by BlueEyes_Austin on Nov 18, 2011 8:42 PM EST up reply actions  

I disagree

As does the entire sabermetric community. Maybe you see something they don’t. You should send Tom Tango an e-mail and tell him that every projection system (including his Marcel, which is essentially the basic element of every other system) is fundamentally flawed.

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Nov 18, 2011 8:45 PM EST up reply actions  

If you understood what I was writing

You’d understand why what you are writing makes no sense.

The issue isn’t over the value of multiple years of data in a projection. It is over the precision of the measuring device.

by BlueEyes_Austin on Nov 18, 2011 8:48 PM EST up reply actions  

So we shouldn't really be using stats at all, right?

Because there isn’t any stat where you can just look at one year’s data and be confident that this is the player’s true talent level.

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Nov 18, 2011 8:53 PM EST up reply actions  

Please call the Rays,

tell them they are losers, they always have been losers, and they always will be losers.

Kila's slash for Apr 20 to May 4, 2011, right before he was sent down: .276 / .344 / .448

by SagehenMacGyver47 on Nov 21, 2011 6:09 PM EST up reply actions  

I work in tech/media industry

you would be surprised how far behind some of hte biggest companies in the world still are. Not making an excuse for the Royals, just saying, it’s amazing how many huge companies even in media are still using tapes.

by I need more Esteban on Nov 18, 2011 12:05 PM EST up reply actions  

I was just gonig to say this

Transitioning from legacy systems is a little more complex than buying a new DVD from Best Buy.

by BlueEyes_Austin on Nov 18, 2011 6:04 PM EST up reply actions   1 recs

Scott, I can't really figure out why you're so negative on this

It doesn’t seem worth the effort to debate.

I am impressed that you moved your whole movie archive to hard drives in 1999. Buying all that storage capacity couldn’t have been cheap back then so you must be selling yourself a bit short on your interests.

by KSinDC on Nov 18, 2011 1:15 PM EST up reply actions  

I was just talking about doing from VHS to DVD. Apparently they were still using VHS five years ago.

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Nov 18, 2011 1:42 PM EST up reply actions  

Where are you getting the 5 years?

He said that they used VHS when he came on board in ’99 and then they switched over.

by Loose Seal on Nov 18, 2011 1:45 PM EST up reply actions  

Well then, compliment revoked

A few of my friends started a business doing all-digital video systems (for ad agencies, news stations, etc) and I was blown away at the prices, and that was in 2002.

by KSinDC on Nov 18, 2011 1:51 PM EST up reply actions  

Am I misreading this because I thought it was a great satirical comment

In that it was a clever way to point out that putting too much emphasis on something before its time has costs to it as well (i.e. not much benefit gained for finite resources better spent elsewhere)

by sterlingice on Nov 18, 2011 7:37 PM EST up reply actions  

My initital inclination was sarcasm, but I'm trying to stay away from it.

There may have been a bit of that which slipped in since your interpretation is pretty close to what I was going for before I rewrote it.

by KSinDC on Nov 18, 2011 8:40 PM EST up reply actions  

the bat whisperer

love how the article ends with Jin calling seitzer the “bat whisperer”

by mmiller9 on Nov 18, 2011 2:05 AM EST reply actions  

yeah, well Seitzer needs a bull-horn around Getz and Escobar.

If women only slept with nice guys...guys would only be nice. And they don't. And we're not.

by setupunchtag on Nov 18, 2011 10:11 AM EST up reply actions  

Great job

Very interesting. That took some work, first doing the interview and then transcribing it, which takes a hell of a long time.

One thing. You need a copy editor. I’ll do it for free if you’re interested; it wouldn’t take up much of my time.

"All the boys think she's a guy
She's got crazy Frenchy eyes."

by Juancho on Nov 18, 2011 3:21 AM EST reply actions  

I Have Two

VHS/DVD combo players. I have too many tapes of live events to give them up.

I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.

by philofthenorth on Nov 18, 2011 9:23 AM EST up reply actions  

I sold every one of my VHS tapes and my VHS player for $5 at a grage sale

Your 2010 Royals Review Fantasy Football Keeper League Champion
Since 2005: Royals win% = .4100, Chiefs win% = .4095

by averagegatsby on Nov 18, 2011 9:49 AM EST up reply actions  

Guess this explains the acquisition of a few of the guys over the last couple years.
We will definitely lean more to the subjective when talking about defense

Glad I came, just wish I hadn't stayed so long.
Rock Chalk Talk

by Warden11 on Nov 18, 2011 8:59 AM EST reply actions  

Great interview. Lots of interesting stuff.

Sounds like Wong has one of the coolest jobs in baseball.

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Nov 18, 2011 9:08 AM EST reply actions  

for sure....

lots of interesting stuff…lots of variety…analyzing baseball for a living…not a bad gig

Fire Everyone

by billybeingbilly on Nov 18, 2011 10:03 AM EST up reply actions  

It’s like he does a lot of the half-assed stuff that I and others do around here, but he does it in a professional way and gets a paycheck. Sounds like a hell of a job. I don’t mean to be crass, but I wonder how much he makes. I’ve heard that statistical analysts make something like 30-40K. But he’s “Director – Baseball Administration” so he has to be north of that, possibly considerably so. But I’ve also heard that FO jobs lower than the GM or Special Assistant to the GM don’t pay very well in general.

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Nov 18, 2011 10:07 AM EST up reply actions  

Could be right

I’d guess more like $65K but I really have no idea.

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Nov 18, 2011 10:15 AM EST up reply actions  

with a mutual option

"Things could always be worse." - Buddy Bell

by buddyball on Nov 18, 2011 11:31 AM EST up reply actions  

In this org

it’s understood.

I'm waiting for my wave of talent to arrive.

by mitchfreakingmaier! on Nov 18, 2011 11:50 AM EST up reply actions  

every thing I've ever read

is that statistical analysts/programmers in baseball make considerably less than they would make in the same jobs outside of sports, and work a lot more.

Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.
Before getting tweaked, read up on regression.

by Matt Klaassen on Nov 18, 2011 10:19 AM EST up reply actions  

ive read that as well....

and it makes sense due to the sheer number of people willing to do it…however, look at all the shit this guys does…ive gotta assume that he’s doing the work of at least two people…and it seems like he’s pretty spectacular at doing the arb stuff especially

Fire Everyone

by billybeingbilly on Nov 18, 2011 10:21 AM EST up reply actions  

that's how they do it

the interns get worked to death,too

Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.
Before getting tweaked, read up on regression.

by Matt Klaassen on Nov 18, 2011 10:23 AM EST up reply actions  

It's not like it wouldn't include perks too though.

How many golf shirts do you think this guy pays for? How many meals, gas, car, etc…I would think that Jin is doing pretty good for himself.

I'm waiting for my wave of talent to arrive.

by mitchfreakingmaier! on Nov 18, 2011 10:10 AM EST up reply actions  

My point exactly.

Plus it’s not like hanging out with major league players sucks. I have a friend who manages the clubhouse for the Durham Bulls and he makes half his income in tips alone. He also says that they get all of their merchandise like shirts, hats, food for free.

I'm waiting for my wave of talent to arrive.

by mitchfreakingmaier! on Nov 18, 2011 10:13 AM EST up reply actions  

And I think your $80k would be close.

I figured it was around $100K

I'm waiting for my wave of talent to arrive.

by mitchfreakingmaier! on Nov 18, 2011 10:14 AM EST up reply actions  

Well

That definitively ends any thoughts I had of changing employers.

by BlueEyes_Austin on Nov 18, 2011 6:07 PM EST up reply actions  

Fabulous!

Seriously good interview. Thanks Jeff for doing this.

by thehopper on Nov 18, 2011 9:55 AM EST reply actions  

Really fascinating stuff

I love knowing about the inner workings. Interesting he reads up on internet rumors (Jack Marsh has influence!)

Can’t say I’m not immensely jealous at his job.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Nov 18, 2011 10:05 AM EST reply actions  

My vote for next in the "Who is this person and what does he/she do?" series

Linda Smith – Manager Scouting Operations

One of the very few women in the Royals front office.

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Nov 18, 2011 10:05 AM EST reply actions  

I'm sorta shocked (and pleased) that there are any women in this organization with clout.

…and it would be very interesting to hear her story.

If women only slept with nice guys...guys would only be nice. And they don't. And we're not.

by setupunchtag on Nov 18, 2011 10:14 AM EST up reply actions  

yeah...my take away is that she does alot of the logistical stuff and probably the compiling of alot of the data...

and then she passes it along to whoever needs it.

she started with the royals in 72 in PR and marketing…i’d be really curious to know when she got into the baseball side of things….and where she was in relation to women in other organizations

Fire Everyone

by billybeingbilly on Nov 18, 2011 10:24 AM EST up reply actions  

I am hoping to have one with one of the trainers

Also, I would like to talk to one of the PR guys on the All Star plans.

Spoiler Alert – Jin didn’t talk much on the CBA, since it was not done yet, so I may call back and do a short interview on it. He would like to have some time to digest it all.

- .-. ..- … – / – …. . / .—. .-. - .. . … …

by Jeff Zimmerman on Nov 18, 2011 10:46 AM EST up reply actions  

I would think that at this point he either doesn’t know for sure what’s in it and/or isn’t supposed to discuss it until it is officially announced

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Nov 18, 2011 11:00 AM EST up reply actions  

He didn't know the exact details.

- .-. ..- … – / – …. . / .—. .-. - .. . … …

by Jeff Zimmerman on Nov 18, 2011 11:20 AM EST up reply actions  

so,

whats with the tease bullshit. If you have the other half of the article, why arent you posting it? Are you a control freak or something?

by dooblay on Nov 18, 2011 12:57 PM EST up reply actions  

because it sucks to transcribe 1800 f'ing words 5 to 10 words at a time.

I spent too many hours getting the above together.

- .-. ..- … – / – …. . / .—. .-. - .. . … …

by Jeff Zimmerman on Nov 18, 2011 1:00 PM EST up reply actions  

What's up your ass today?

or is it everyday?

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Nov 18, 2011 1:10 PM EST up reply actions  

i just get tired of all the fraternal

dick sucking on this site.

Puts me in a trolling mood.

by dooblay on Nov 18, 2011 1:20 PM EST up reply actions  

Not to worry

I will likely move on from here.

Good day Boys!

by dooblay on Nov 18, 2011 1:20 PM EST up reply actions  

The next time you're in such a mood, stay away

And then come back when you’re in a mood to be civil. There was no “fraternal dick sucking” going on here. We were having a decent discussion that you had to throw a bunch of crap in.

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Nov 18, 2011 1:45 PM EST up reply actions  

You need a voice to text program, sir

They kinda suck but editing is a lot easier than typing

by BlueEyes_Austin on Nov 18, 2011 6:09 PM EST up reply actions  

anybody read about the syracuse bball coach being accused of abuse now?

from what i’ve read, seems like he’s another casualty of the sandusky shitstorm to me

Fire Everyone

by billybeingbilly on Nov 18, 2011 10:38 AM EST reply actions  

It's just bizarre.

The fact that all of this is coming out. They actually had an episode of SVU about this stuff about 2 months ago. Dick Wolf has gone from ripped from the headlines to making them apparently.

I'm waiting for my wave of talent to arrive.

by mitchfreakingmaier! on Nov 18, 2011 11:52 AM EST up reply actions  

the accusations from all that ive read seem completely made up...

no corroboration of any kind…even people the alleged ‘victim’ said would corroborate wouldnt do it…if this guy is innocent, that really sucks…he’s still an accused child molester.

Fire Everyone

by billybeingbilly on Nov 18, 2011 11:55 AM EST up reply actions  

And at the very least

It sounds like the Syracuse administrators did exactly what they were supposed to do back when it was first reported.

by Sweep_the_Leg on Nov 18, 2011 12:00 PM EST up reply actions  

You hope for the kids sake that the stuff isn't true,

because it looks like the families went to the media and skipped the authorites. I’m basing this on what I heard on the CBS morning news so I could me miles off from what happened.

I'm waiting for my wave of talent to arrive.

by mitchfreakingmaier! on Nov 18, 2011 12:03 PM EST up reply actions  

I hate Syracuse

But it looks like they have handled this exactly the way they should have from the very beginning. They investigated it, and now they’re standing behind the results of their investigation and defending their assistant against the smears. It just reinforces how badly Penn State handled their (far worse) situation.

by KSinDC on Nov 18, 2011 1:21 PM EST up reply actions  

Agreed. Syracuse did what they were supposed to do,

which was tell the police and do their own investigation. This guy smells innocent. Hell, Rony Seikaly is backing him up.

"All the boys think she's a guy
She's got crazy Frenchy eyes."

by Juancho on Nov 18, 2011 1:41 PM EST up reply actions  

Yeah, Dan Lauria was the basketball coach.

That ep will surely make its way to Munch My Benson soon.

Sporadically musing on the Royals at both Royals Review and Royalscentricity, pop culture at Inconsiderate Prick, SVU at Munch My Benson and on Twitter at Old Man Duggan

by Old Man Duggan on Nov 18, 2011 11:30 PM EST up reply actions  

i think the new allegation against syracuse are mostly media driven

there is really very little information against the syracuse coach. unsubstantiated allegations by two ball boys. a prompt and relatively thorough and unbiased investigation finding that they couldn’t verify the allegations.

it’s just that the penn state scandal has child molestation on everyone’s minds and the media can sell the story right now.

Clearly, it’s an important issue, and it shouldn’t be swept under the rug, but the media’s actions, and any rushes to judgment, are unresponsible

by Loose Seal on Nov 18, 2011 12:39 PM EST up reply actions  

Excellent work

thank you for asking the “what do you actually do” question.

by Gopherballs on Nov 18, 2011 1:00 PM EST reply actions  

Thanks everyone for the compliments.

I will hopefully get the rest of the interview transcribed by Monday.

- .-. ..- … – / – …. . / .—. .-. - .. . … …

by Jeff Zimmerman on Nov 18, 2011 1:03 PM EST reply actions  

Great job.

Fraternal hyjinks aside.

I'm waiting for my wave of talent to arrive.

by mitchfreakingmaier! on Nov 18, 2011 3:02 PM EST up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the SB Nation blog about Kansas City Royals.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Royalsretro_small
Would Royals Review Make Better Decisions Than Dayton Moore?
Funny-tattoos-hey-look-they-found-a-royals-fan_small
Mitch On the Bench
Royalsretro_small
Happy Mother's Day From Royals Review

Recent FanPosts

Dignan_small
Friday Game 43 Open Thread
Funny-tattoos-hey-look-they-found-a-royals-fan_small
MORE Mitch on the Bench
Sexy-beast-original_small
OT Friday: The generic boilerplate template desert island gambit
Tumblr_lwfiy4qkgv1r204zxo1_500_small
RR Poetry Contest
Small
Extrapolating the First 43 Games over the Full Season
Small
Is Dave Eiland doing ... anything?
Small
Alcides Escobar's Bat
Download_small
Was Dayton Moore Right on Bruce Chen?
Chalmers2_small
2012 Royals vs 2012 Ex-Royals

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

Yahoo_full_count

Managers

Cimg0036_small Freneau

Editors

Dayton_small Jeff Zimmerman

Authors

Royalsretro_small RoyalsRetro

Headshot_small Old Man Duggan