Lee Judge Makes Friends With Players, Joke of Himself as Writer

by Rufus R. Jones on Jul 17, 2011 4:00 PM EDT

Judging The Lee

Star writer Lee Judge gives his mid-season review of the Royals in the Sunday (7/17) edition. Lee grades the players using a chart purportedly developed some 35 years ago by SEC Coach Ron Polk. It's purpose is to "determine who is producing the most for his team over the course of a season." Lee says it is intended to measure "production and good baseball." After weighing the tremendous amount of valuable insight and information that Lee provides, I was only left pondering two questions: 1) So The Star really pays somone for this crap?, and 2) How do I get this job? Without picking apart the chart, which is not that difficult to do, or all that interesting, here are some key points that Lee makes:

Melky Cabrera leads the team in points on the chart, mainly due to his "versatility." Okay, at least we've got that straight. Melky is versatile. Good deal. He also apparently leads the Royals in something Lee calls "Outstanding Plays." Good deal. I can't believe I've never heard of this chart before. I think we're on to something.
Following Escobar, Frenchy is 3rd on the team with 427 total points. Yes, above Gordon, Butler, and Hosmer. We're told he "leads the team in 8+ pitch at-bats, which means he's not hacking all the time." Lee, I know sabermetrics have no place in your life as an astute baseball observer, but could you explain further the correlation between seeing 8 pitches in an at-bat and the frequency in which a batter swings? If we must ignore meaningful numbers, cannot we at least employ logic?
Chris Getz Out is ranked as the 5th most productive player on the team, just ahead of Billy Butler and Eric Hosmer. Lee states that "Getz should be the poster boy for Ron Polk's system: It was designed to reveal the worth of players like him." Hmmm. Seriously, Lee? THEN WHY IN THE HELL WOULD ANYBODY USE THE SYSTEM, UNLESS THEIR MAIN OBJECTIVE IS TO GET INVITED TO EVERY GETZ FAMILY BIRTHDAY PARTY OR BAR MITZVAH FOR THE NEXT 25 YEARS!?!? We are told that "Getz does not have to do anything great, as long as he does a lot of things well." Here are Lee's examples of things Lil' Getzy does well: takes extra bases (too bad he can't take first more), steals bases (too bad he can't steal first more), bunts (too bad the IF and OF is already playing him at Little K depth), moves runners (too bad he doesn't move them across home base more), plays solid defense (true, compared to our other 2B, Wilson Betemit), and doesn't make mental mistakes. I cannot ridicule the last point, I think Getz leads the league in MM% (Mental Mistake Percentage), as well as lowest overall number of LIJ (Lapses In Judgement).
Billy Butler's Strengths are listed as "Hitting." That is it, no further explanation or elaboration by Lee. Just the word Hitting. Then, for Limitations, is listed "Everything else." Well, Lee, some people and teams would just as soon have somebody that was as good at "hitting" as "all the little things" that Chris Getz supposedly provides. Obviously you are not one of them. Too bad Billy isn't as "versatile" as Melky, as 'good at the little things" as Lil' Getzy, or provide the "leadership or humor" that Frenchy does.
On Mitch Maier: "He is solid in every department and would be starting on a lot of other teams." Names of departments or teams was not provided by Lee. (There was not much room for details by this point in the page...only one sentence each for Mitch and Betemit. At least we had plenty of room on the page for the 5 player photos and a Lee Judge original cartoon.)
Lee also felt the need to sneak in a little jab at sabermetricians within the article. Note to Lee Judge: To almost all of us, baseball and the statistical analysis of it is a hobby. Most of us have productive jobs and professional lives as well. You draw cartoons for a living. And apparently not all that well, since your employer now makes you write about baseball, something you obviously know jack shit about. Hey, at least the Royals have a group of good guys, so that, for the first time in your life, you can feel some sort of social relevance. End Note.

In summary, Lee says that "...this is a better team than we've seen in awhile." Don't have a TV, Lee? Don't pay any attention to the Royals opponents? Cause basically every MLB team you have seen this year is better than this team.

that

Within the article, Lee fails to mention OBP or OPS even one time, so I'm guessing improving that isn't going to lead to any more runs. SLG % must be okay, too, since he only mentioned that once. At least those aren't an issue.

Tweet Comment 108 comments | 17 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Joe Posnanski to Lee Judge

I guess the Stars “Process” aint working so well. What a downgrade.

Pro-Dayton Moore = Blogger
Anti-Dayton Moore= Troll

by DaytonSucks on Jul 17, 2011 4:06 PM EDT reply actions

they still print newspapers?

Don't be lonesome for your heroes. Be your own hero.

by PhattStairs on Jul 17, 2011 5:21 PM EDT reply actions

Here is the link

http://www.kansascity.com/2011/07/16/3018430/judging-the-royals-midseason-review.html

by kansasjohn on Jul 17, 2011 5:45 PM EDT reply actions

This was dynamite

Also, I’ve always thought they should change the name from “Judging the Royals” to “Mock Trial with Lee J”. Then I might take it seriously.

by PopeSoria on Jul 17, 2011 5:58 PM EDT reply actions 4 recs

Lee also felt the need to sneak in a little jab at sabermetricians within the article.

I love when people do this while the entire time using BAD or severely limited statistics to try to prove their point and justify the players they like/dislike, such as RBIs and pitcher wins and whatever the hell this bizarre point system is Judge is using. I mean, I think it’s fine to irrationally like certain players – it’s our right as fans and a right I practice frequently – but don’t try to explain why they really are the best when really it’s just that you like them the best.

by Gross(est) on Jul 17, 2011 6:25 PM EDT reply actions

I like when old school guys

Make fun of stat guys by point out their own stats.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Jul 17, 2011 9:02 PM EDT up reply actions

I didn't hear too many people complaining about Guillen's 20 HR, 97 RBI season!

Unless I'm wrong...

by Top Ramen on Jul 17, 2011 11:04 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs

Yeah

Especially when the author is supposed to be a “professional journalist.”

by Rufus R. Jones on Jul 17, 2011 6:31 PM EDT reply actions

Professional Journalist Rick Sanchez of CNN got tased.

It is just like Lee Judge getting HBP (equally stupid, that is).

by kansasjohn on Jul 17, 2011 7:56 PM EDT up reply actions

Calling Sanchez a “professional journalist” is a gross insult to actual professional journalists.

TheLetter2: East Coast Boogaloo

by TheLetter2 on Jul 21, 2011 12:17 PM EDT up reply actions

I at least called him stupid.

I was trying to convey a bit of mockery.

by kansasjohn on Jul 21, 2011 12:42 PM EDT up reply actions

The Ratings Are Mostly Silly But Judge Explains The Standard

So the reader can judge for himself the value.

I think the Judge system is lame, but I always have thought that there was a place for someone to make real time assessments of plays that are important during the course of the game. For example, I think it is possible that a statistically weak second baseman could have a knack for making big plays at crucial times that would enhance his value (I’m not talking about Gretz – he seems to make mistakes that cost games).

I wonder is such a continual assessment would produce results significantly different than sabermetrics.

I think WAR is a good statistical comparison tool, but I have doubts if it really accomplishes what it purports to do, i.e., measure wins above replacement value. In baseball, wins are often caused by specific events on the field that are not reflected in WAR. For example, in that famous LCS Game 7 when the Cards beat the Mets. Beltran with a huge WAR lost the game and Molina with about a zero WAR won the game – big hit in the 9th inning and great pitching calls on the strikeout of Beltran.

by Kansas City Oracle on Jul 17, 2011 6:39 PM EDT reply actions

Which is exactly what WPA does.

It calculates how much each player contributes or detracts from their teams chances of winning on each and every play.
In fact fangraphs does live updates of it on their website as the games are played.

But the problem with WPA? It seems to have only minimal ability to tell how good a player actually is.

Also important note: WAR only tells you how good a player is, not necessarily how they will perform. its only statistics, and statistically even the best player will fail 60-70% of the time and the worst will succeed about 20%.
If we replayed that game 7, 1000 times, Beltran would emerge the hero far more often than Molina. But in this case Molina got to be the hero.
And thats why they play the games, and why WAR is useless in an in-game setting.

"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 Jul 17, 2011 6:54 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs

WPA is related to the same problems as RBI

Its a context stat masquerading as an individual one

by Freneau on Jul 17, 2011 8:15 PM EDT up reply actions

Don't Understand Well Enough to Assess

But at some level, doesn’t WPA at least tell you whether one guy is helping the team more often than another guy?

Do you think there is anything to my pont that a subjective identification of determinative plays in a game would have independent significance as a tool to compare players beyond what WAR, OPS+ or other valuable statistics accomplish?

by Kansas City Oracle on Jul 17, 2011 8:30 PM EDT up reply actions

yea, its ok as a story stat

but it doesn’t tell you much going forward

by Freneau on Jul 17, 2011 10:09 PM EDT up reply actions

Look at FanGraphs box scores.

If you notice WPA, you’ll notice the players who had a good game or had a clutch hit will have a good WPA. That tells you all you really need to know. Who contributed to that one win/loss the most.

by hawkinscm87 on Jul 18, 2011 1:24 AM EDT up reply actions

WPA only "masquerades" as an individual, context free stat

for people who look at someone’s rear end to determine their eye color and then complain that they’re wearing a costume.

Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.

by Matt Klaassen on Jul 18, 2011 2:03 PM EDT up reply actions

No, no, Will has a point here.

Let’s say you come into the bottom of the ninth, and you’re the third batter due up. You hit a home run.

Now, if you hit that home run with nobody out and two men on, your WPA for that event is going to be significantly higher than if the two guys in front of you make outs. And therein lies the masquerade. Yeah, it’s a lot better than RBI, but it’s still subject to what other people do.

My new blog: Those Other Guys. Critiques welcome.

by jonfmorse on Jul 18, 2011 10:22 PM EDT up reply actions

yes, that's all true

but criticizing or complaining about WPA for that is like complaining about a spoon because it won’t cut your steak.

Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.

by Matt Klaassen on Jul 19, 2011 12:29 AM EDT up reply actions

Don't you start speaking bad about spoons...I'll end you.

"I DARE you to make less sense."

by dejackso on Jul 19, 2011 12:48 AM EDT up reply actions

Spoons will cut steak, it just takes longer.

Go Royals!

by BabyBlues on Jul 19, 2011 7:24 PM EDT up reply actions

The same can be said about RBI or Wins

by kcdc1 on Jul 23, 2011 1:22 PM EDT up reply actions

It's all about how a stat is used

IBB is a fine stat for what it tells you (which isnt’ much). But if someone uses it to describe how good of a hitter a player is, then they’ve given the stat a meaning it doesn’t have. The same goes for RBI. Unfortunately some misunderstand WPA and think a high WPA means a player is a good hitter or pitcher. It doesn’t mean that at all. That’s not a fault of WPA (or RBI or pitcher Wins), as it isn’t that kind of metric.

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Jul 23, 2011 3:24 PM EDT up reply actions

here's the full quote about sabermetricians

“Getz should be the poster boy for Ron Polk’s system: It was designed to reveal the worth of players like him. Tell a sabermetrics guy that Getz is a better all-round ballplayer than Billy Butler and he’ll have an asthma attack and ask his mom to bring him a fresh box of Pop Tarts.”

Lee Judge is a clown, an asshole, and an idiot. Read what I wrote last year (where he justified Kendall and Betancourt leading the team in points):

http://www.royalsreview.com/2010/8/12/1619896/lee-judge-of-the-stars-judging-the

Nothing fires me up quite like Lee Judge attempting to be smart and trying to stick it to people that are obviously smarter than him.

Todd Haley's kids know more swear words than I do.

by kcisbetterthanstlateverything on Jul 17, 2011 7:03 PM EDT reply actions

Judge

I also think he is a lousy cartonist (he really cannot draw very well) and a far left winger politically. At year end when the Star devotes a page to the best of Judge, I normally don’t see anything I like. But, at least he likes baseball.

And, years ago I saw him at the Phoenix where he joined the jazz band and played his harmonica. He was very entertaining that night.

by Kansas City Oracle on Jul 17, 2011 7:13 PM EDT up reply actions

What on earth makes you think Judge is a left winger?

by KSinDC on Jul 17, 2011 7:46 PM EDT up reply actions

I thought he was slightly conservative to be honest

That probably means he’s moderate and likes ticking everyone off?

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Jul 17, 2011 8:13 PM EDT up reply actions

I actually seldom look at his cartoons anymore but my distinct

impression is that he is a far lefty. The times I have looked at the year end compilation of his “best” work, they have always been largely liberal.

And besides, do you think the Star would have any cartoonist other than a lefty?

by Kansas City Oracle on Jul 17, 2011 8:34 PM EDT up reply actions

This video of him allowing himself to get hit by a 91 mph pitch is good

And he comes across as pretty funny and likeable

http://dailycartoonist.com/index.php/2011/05/09/lee-judge-allows-himself-to-be-hit-by-91-mph-baseball/

by Kansas City Oracle on Jul 17, 2011 8:48 PM EDT up reply actions

admittedly very good

i took pleasure in seeing him hit…

Todd Haley's kids know more swear words than I do.

by kcisbetterthanstlateverything on Jul 17, 2011 9:20 PM EDT up reply actions

Maybe I'm confusing Lee with the other cartoons they run

They seem to alternate between Judge, Tom Toles (quite liberal) and another national cartoonist whose name escapes me who is obviously very conservative.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Jul 17, 2011 9:03 PM EDT up reply actions

I don't think the Star would employ a conservative custodian.

by hawkinscm87 on Jul 18, 2011 1:26 AM EDT up reply actions

I don't really want to get into this

and I don’t think I’ve read the Star’s opinion page in a decade (I just went to see who the opinion page editor was and it’s a woman who was reader’s representative when I lived there), but the only columnist / editorial board member that they seem to employ to write about national affairs is E. Thomas McClanahan.
Editorial Board:
http://voices.kansascity.com/editorial-board/
McClanahan columsn:
http://www.kansascity.com/opinion/e_thomas_mcclanahan/

by KSinDC on Jul 18, 2011 1:52 AM EDT up reply actions

I'm aware of him.

I’m fairly certain he’s the only conservative on the editorial board. My dad is pretty active on their opinion blog and from talking to him, I’m fairly familiar with the political views of their board and columnists. He’s truly the only conservative that writes opinion pieces for them. Barb Shelly, Yael Abouhalkah, and Diuguid are all obviously very left-wing. Diuguid is also very comfortable pointing out racism in the most ridiculous of circumstances where he is the only one even mentioning race.

by hawkinscm87 on Jul 18, 2011 2:02 AM EDT up reply actions

Fastest way to piss off a conservative

Is to even think about bringing up that racism still exists. Deep down, it’s what really pisses most of them off.

“Where’s the white women’s?” Not everybody laughed at that line.

by Rufus R. Jones on Jul 18, 2011 9:17 AM EDT up reply actions 2 recs

What Nonsence

You apparently think there is still a great deal of racism, so you stereotype another group.

Other than McLanahan, who is pretty far right, the rest of the Star staff is far left and they write about national affairs all the time. Duigood is the worst; he does see racism everywhere when he has a position where with a little bit of temperance, he could be a force for further improvement in race relations.

The paper’s official editorials are embarassing, not in their liberalism (they’re entitled to their opinions, just like everyone else), but because they read like they were written by the Democratic National Committee.

by Kansas City Oracle on Jul 18, 2011 9:32 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs

Interesting discussion but we should stop now

Will prefers that we avoid political debates because they can easily get too heated, and we have enough of that with arguing about how good marginal bench players are.

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Jul 18, 2011 10:27 AM EDT up reply actions

Fine with me

Let’s get back to Betemit and Avilles, with a Gretz kicker.

by Kansas City Oracle on Jul 18, 2011 11:08 AM EDT up reply actions

Uh...

No. He’s very liberal. Go through his cartoons.

by hawkinscm87 on Jul 18, 2011 1:25 AM EDT up reply actions

Just in the last week, he has published 4 anti republican and pro Obama/liberal cartoons

See this site if you want to check him out

http://www.thecomicstrips.com/search/results_edit.php

by Kansas City Oracle on Jul 17, 2011 8:53 PM EDT up reply actions

Weird

When I was in KC, I remember thinking he was a big Bush (the President, not the Gavin Rosdale band) fan, but these do seem to be all shots at the GOP.

by KSinDC on Jul 17, 2011 10:56 PM EDT up reply actions

I’m not sure why some people have confused this. Maybe you subconsciously think the Star isn’t completely in the bag for Democrats? Not sure.

by hawkinscm87 on Jul 18, 2011 1:28 AM EDT up reply actions

Why can a cartoonist get away with such things?

His cartoons make Obama look like he’s telling both sides of every story.

by hawkinscm87 on Jul 18, 2011 1:31 AM EDT up reply actions

Its funny

The political cartoonist and writer who watches every minute of every game to formulate a statistic is calling stat guys nerds. High irony.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Jul 17, 2011 8:12 PM EDT up reply actions 4 recs

Hey, if you're going to quote verbatim from a song . . .

. . . you should at least give Alanis Morissette credit. Don’t cha think?

by kansasjohn on Jul 17, 2011 8:33 PM EDT up reply actions

To take it a step further

Judge is the guy who appears to be a fanboy smitten with the idea of hanging out with the players, fooling around in the batting cage with Seitzer and drinking beers with Kendall, etc…yet he mocks the pop tart eaters of the world for attempting to gain a deeper understanding of the game with non-Polk analysis. That is the type of irony that is too thick for Alanis Morissette to ven contemplate, let alone work into the context of a 3 minute pop gem. I don’t need to eat pop tarts with baserunning coach Doug Sisson to understand that Getz stealing 3rd with 2 outs is a jagged little pill.

by Nighthawk at the Diner on Jul 20, 2011 7:54 AM EDT up reply actions 3 recs

What are you talking about? Alanis Morissette?

by kansasjohn on Jul 20, 2011 4:23 PM EDT up reply actions

Good point on WPA, But that applies only to hitting and pitching, right?

And it does not focus on the game determinative pitches and hits, does it? It credits every hit or out as a plus or minus toward wining the game, right? If so, it still is not really getting to what I am interested in. I feel like that if I watch a game closely, I can identify the plays and players who really made a difference in the game. It is to some extent what Judge is trying to do, although he is tied to an arbitrary and obsolete rating system that is not directly related to what plays win or lost a game.

I did not follow the details of today’s game, but I know that Thome won the game with his home run in a clutch situation and Paulido lost the game by serving up a fat pitch to Thome (was he squeezed on a call before the home run – to bad, but that’s baseball). Now, I guess they each got huge hits in WPA from that one play, so in that sense, WPA worked. There also may have been other game determinative (or at least very important plays), which would also be noted in my system but not in WPA. My system would be subjective in many respects, but if the rater is someone whom you have confidence in, you could trust the results over the course of a year.

by Kansas City Oracle on Jul 17, 2011 7:10 PM EDT reply actions

So was the guy that detemined the game Thome, or the umpire that gave

Thome four strikes? If the umpire had called stirke three, the Royals win the game, so the umpire actually determined who won the game, the players were not important. Umpires are in fact, the most important people on the field, because they determine the outcome of each at bat. For the players to even matter, the umpires have to get the vast majority of the calls correct.

Go Royals!

by BabyBlues on Jul 19, 2011 7:31 PM EDT up reply actions

Whatever value Lee provides with his player interviews

Is more than cancelled out by this idiocy he continues to put in the paper. I don’t agree at all with the person who said that Royals had the stupidest fans in baseball, but if the Star had that as their mission, they couldn’t do more to advance it than printing idiotic pieces like this.

Good writeup

by KSinDC on Jul 17, 2011 7:55 PM EDT reply actions

Yankees fans are likely the stupidest.

Years of winning has convinced them that virtually every fly ball hit by a Yankee in Yankee Stadium has a chance of going yard, causing the collective fans to practically have group orgasm.

by kansasjohn on Jul 17, 2011 8:00 PM EDT up reply actions

The idea of "Stupid" Fans

I would not use the work “stupid,” but I think Kansas City fans are relatively low in terms of their level of baseball knowledge. Much of it has to do with how long a city has had major league baseball and how good the local announcers are at educating the fans about baseball. Kansas City scores relatively low on both those factors. When you are at a game, you don’t get the sense that the fans are real knowledgable.

New York fans are very knowledgable, as you would expect with a long of history of multilpe teams and big local media. Boston also has very knowledgable fans, as does St. Louis.

Of course, all this is generalization and largely subjective. Also, the Royals for unknown reaons have a very knowledgable group of internet/sabremetrics fans.

by Kansas City Oracle on Jul 17, 2011 8:39 PM EDT up reply actions

You should spend every minute following different groups of baseball fans

Then invent a statistic that gives points to positive attributes those fans display, and take away points for negative attributes those fans display. And weigh those points completely arbitrarily.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Jul 17, 2011 9:05 PM EDT up reply actions

You should spend every minute following different groups of baseball fans

Then invent a statistic that gives points to positive attributes those fans display, and take away points for negative attributes those fans display. And weigh those points completely arbitrarily.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Jul 17, 2011 9:08 PM EDT up reply actions

I'm sure most Yankee fans are smart about baseball.

Maybe I should not conflate the “ooohing” and “aaahing” every time A-Rod hits a medium-depth fly-ball with lack of intelligence.

by kansasjohn on Jul 17, 2011 10:18 PM EDT up reply actions

YES Network routinely shows OBP during an at-bat.

This would go a long way in educating fans. “Hey, what’s OBP?” Just looking it up, or having Ryan explain it every once and a while (eh, let’s go with Frank explaining that one) would go a long way. Too bad FSKC shows whatever stats make the player look good. For Francoeur, they show SLG, HR, RBI, and SB quite a bit.

by hawkinscm87 on Jul 18, 2011 1:35 AM EDT up reply actions

I don't think you want a guy with a below 300 OBP educating fans about it

by Kansas City Oracle on Jul 18, 2011 9:35 AM EDT up reply actions

If we know anything...

We know that you don’t need to be a good baseball player to be able to explain parts of the game. I believe Frank recognizes the value of OBP and I think if he were managing, we would not be giving the other team so many outs. Just the other day against the Twins, he opined that early in a game, he would not bunt to move runners over. He would want his hitter to drive the ball. I think we can all respect that.

by hawkinscm87 on Jul 18, 2011 1:40 PM EDT up reply actions

BTW Rufus Jones

Did you read the article in the star today about local wrestling? It referenced a wrestler names Rufus Jones and you came to mind. Is that what your handle is in reference to?

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Jul 17, 2011 9:29 PM EDT reply actions

No didn't see it.

I’ll look it up though. Thanks. Yeah, that’s me.

by Rufus R. Jones on Jul 17, 2011 10:05 PM EDT reply actions

Judge's baseball analysis is probably lower than an average, moderately knowledgable fan

Judge knows just enough to be dangerous. He hears some good ol’ “real baseball men” talk about the importance of things like taking the extra base and being able to move a runner over and he convinces himself that those are the most important thigns, or at least that they are on the same level as, say, hitting a double. He’s a joke. If he’d stick to just interviews and other light, fluffy, meaningless writing, that would be fine. But when he tries to actually analyze how good various players are and how much they contribute to the Royals, he looks like a clown who really believes he has a deep understanding of the game, when even many of the basics elude him. He’s laughable.

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Jul 17, 2011 10:52 PM EDT reply actions

I've always thought most at this site were a little soft on him...

the sad part is that this kind of up is down, black is white nonsense is not confined to the sports pages…..conventional wisdom on economic issues, education, labor, etc…generally demonstrates the same kind of inane “logic.”

by Nighthawk at the Diner on Jul 18, 2011 12:19 AM EDT up reply actions

You didn't elaborate too much on him being dangerous.

But obviously, that means that a lot of casual fans open up their paper or go read the newest Royals column, and read this stuff. They probably don’t think about it too much. They may think “Man, I thought Getz was pretty bad, but this guy writes about baseball for the Star and he uses this intricate evaluation system.” So then they are a little persuaded.

This is why I get into arguments with people about why Butler is still very valuable despite the fact that he is “fat” and has “warning track power.”

by hawkinscm87 on Jul 18, 2011 1:38 AM EDT up reply actions

I particularly enjoyed his explanation (somewhere in the comments somewhere..)

about how a sac bunt was worth whatever it is worth compared to a double (more than a double? I don’t know the scale) b/c a double was “random” while a sac bunt was a carefully learned skill.

Pure dumb.

Killing time until time kills me

by EspeciallyK on Jul 18, 2011 12:01 AM EDT reply actions

A double is random

Wow.

You can't learn hitting a double in the gap. No amount of time and effort and talent can really help you there.

by hawkinscm87 on Jul 18, 2011 1:41 AM EDT up reply actions

a sac bunt was worth whatever it is worth compared to a double

And Polk seems wrong on that. I’ve discussed it with Lee and have suggested maybe 0.5 pts to try to make the system more accurate, but it is no more fatal than a system that has Billy Butler a better base runner than Frenchy and better defender than Hosmer.

by Jim Fetterolf on Jul 19, 2011 4:35 PM EDT up reply actions

Well, Billy isn’t the one getting thrown out at 3rd base once a week. And let’s remember that defensive statistics are to be taken lightly with small sample sizes, if at all. Everyone who uses defensive metrics will know that. Nice try.

by hawkinscm87 on Jul 19, 2011 4:48 PM EDT up reply actions

The whole system is just made up arbitrary values

Replacing one that’s so obviously wrong that even Judge can see it with a new arbitrary value is just doubling down on dumb.

The systems you criticize are based on methodical analysis, The system you defend is based on gut instincts. And you defend it because it confirms your gut instincts. It’s just an echo chamber. There’s no learning going on.

by KSinDC on Jul 19, 2011 6:25 PM EDT up reply actions 5 recs

What does Lee Judge have left to learn? He knew Ron Polk.

by hawkinscm87 on Jul 19, 2011 6:39 PM EDT up reply actions

An echo chamber with no pop-tarts

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

by SagehenMacGyver47 on Jul 20, 2011 12:59 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs

but it is no more fatal than a system that has Billy Butler a better base runner than Frenchy and better defender than Hosmer.

Yeah, it really is. UZR and WAR are much, much better than the laughable Polk-Judge system which assigns numerical values to events based on….nothing. He might as well use random numbers. You defend this goofy, baseless system? Aren’t you embarrassed? If not, why not? Do you prefer “gut” to actual thinking?

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Jul 19, 2011 11:23 PM EDT up reply actions

Its even worse than pure gut analysis

At least if you watch a guy every day, you can get a gut feeling about his play. This is scouting.

What Polk/Judge are doing is way worse because its taking something subjective and attempting to quantify it, which leads to ridiculous results like Chris Getz being more valuable than Billy Butler (or any pitcher?) The numbers mean absolutely nothing.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Jul 20, 2011 9:20 AM EDT up reply actions

Love this one:

Jim Fetterolf
Sounds like the Negative Nancys over at RR are having asthma attacks. They’re probably grieving anyway because the women’s soccer team lost and there wasn’t any figure skating on tv today.

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

by Jeff Zimmerman on Jul 18, 2011 9:09 AM EDT reply actions 3 recs

Come on, Jim

I can’t believe he didn’t mention that we wear dresses.

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Jul 18, 2011 9:22 AM EDT up reply actions 4 recs

This week's OT thread

Guess which RR contributor ran onto the field at the Braves game in a wedding dress this weekend

by KSinDC on Jul 18, 2011 12:32 PM EDT up reply actions

I Thought It

Was sunglasses and boxers.

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

by philofthenorth on Jul 18, 2011 1:10 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs

That's what I wear to work

At home, it’s all pretty sundresses.

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Jul 18, 2011 2:14 PM EDT up reply actions

don't feed it

Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.

by Matt Klaassen on Jul 18, 2011 2:05 PM EDT up reply actions

Judge's Rating System is Nonsense But

I read his notes on games and they include some interesting stuff, even if it is mostly old line baseball conventional wisdom. And the videos apparently are good. Can’t believe he spends so much time devoted to the Royals. It must be some kind of gratis thing he does for the Star because he loves baseball.

by Kansas City Oracle on Jul 18, 2011 9:38 AM EDT reply actions

I think its a way

Not to get laid off. They’re laying off people left and right. And a political cartoonist seems pretty expendable. “But hey, I can cover the Royals too…I have this point system. Its very scientific!” And voila – they can run more content in their already sparse sports page without having to pay another staffer.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Jul 18, 2011 9:49 AM EDT up reply actions

He already got laid off two years ago.

It’s a way to keep making money.

If I knew that he didn’t believe any of this crap and was doing this just to cover his mortgage, I’d have a lot more respect for him. However, all evidence points to him actually believing the nonsense he spouts.

I’m pretty sure that the players think that anything that identified Yuni as our best player last year and Getz as one of the best this year is a pretty stupid system. They may not be sabrematricians, but they’re not stupid.

by KSinDC on Jul 18, 2011 12:35 PM EDT up reply actions

So is he like a free lancer now?

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Jul 18, 2011 12:44 PM EDT up reply actions

I think so

His cartoons are sold by some syndication service, so I don’t think he’s been rehired by the Star. They’re obviously paying him something for the column-inches, and they’re giving him some additional resources to do videos and whatnot, but I don’t think he’s actually an employee there.

by KSinDC on Jul 18, 2011 1:05 PM EDT up reply actions

I just want to say THANK YOU ROYALS REVIEW...

if I was age 10-16 and was reading this Judge article in the early 90s I probably would have wholeheartedly thought it was a genuinely magnificent piece and talked about it with all my buddies for the rest of the year…I’ve come along way Royals Review…we have come a long way…so we can now make fun of this nonsense and only hope folks like JackMarsh and tiquanunderwear find this site early on

Don't be lonesome for your heroes. Be your own hero.

by PhattStairs on Jul 18, 2011 9:50 AM EDT reply actions

Is it too late for Jim Fetteroff?

Probably. :(

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Jul 18, 2011 10:31 AM EDT up reply actions

if Will can just save one person...then it was all worth it.

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

by SagehenMacGyver47 on Jul 18, 2011 1:35 PM EDT up reply actions

I'm pretty sure

Jim Fetterolf = Kansas City Oracle

2011 Royals Review NCAA Bracket Challenge Winner, by process of attrition

by sfeldkamp on Jul 18, 2011 3:30 PM EDT up reply actions

You're

pretty wrong. I post under my own name.

by Jim Fetterolf on Jul 19, 2011 4:37 PM EDT up reply actions

I think the judge piece is complete nonsense.

And I do feel like I learn a lot more here about our hometown team than anywhere else.

Anyway, back to the judge piece.

It’s completely absurd to me that he would even attempt to justify Chris Getz. He’s a meh fielder, a terrible hitter, and doesn’t really have much of that “clubhouse presence” that Judge/Dayton/Ned like. In other words, he sucks, and shouldn’t be on the team even if we weren’t supposedly competing.

I'm a 14 year old freshman in high school with a love for all things Royals and Packers.

by Jack Marsh on Jul 19, 2011 11:53 AM EDT up reply actions

Getz

could definitely be better and looks to be replaced by Giavotella, but is a useful all around player on the current team, which is what Polk tries to quantify.

by Jim Fetterolf on Jul 19, 2011 3:06 PM EDT up reply actions

Its a flawed assumption

That the things he quantifies has much of a relation to winning baseball games. I’m sure Chris Getz has some other hidden talents too – maybe he can chew gum and pat his belly at the same time – but it doesn’t have anything more to do with winning baseball than being able to bunt or busting double plays.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Jul 19, 2011 3:35 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs

So

how do quantify runs saved by an exceptional defensive play?

“it doesn’t have anything more to do with winning baseball than being able to bunt or busting double plays.”

Both of which are useful skills that show up in advanced metrics.

by Jim Fetterolf on Jul 19, 2011 4:39 PM EDT up reply actions

WAR values things unequally. Take base running. An individual player’s base running just does not affect the game as much as his hitting or fielding because the opportunities are fewer and there are fewer ways to fail at it/succeed at it. Same goes for bunting and busting double plays. You want your players to be able to do that for sure. Well, bunting sort of. When there’s 0 outs, runners on 2nd and 3rd, and down 1 on the road—then yes, you want your player to be able to bunt well. However, Ron Polk’s system gives equal credit to these plays as it does for something like a double, which: 1) avoids an out, 2) has a good chance of driving in a run, 3) puts another runner in scoring position, and 4) also creates situations where the defense can make an error.

Normally, this wouldn’t be a big issue. The infrequency of bunts and breaking up double plays lends itself to be valued appropriately by a cumulative point system. But we have a player here that almost never hits an extra base hit, let alone avoids making an out, and is very frequently asked to bunt. A system like this fails when you have a hitter who is terrible and is therefore asked to give the defense an out and at least move a runner, rather than try to help create a run, avoid an out, and get into scoring position.

This only addresses the particular argument of (double=sac bunt). Obviously, the system sucks in general as well.

by hawkinscm87 on Jul 19, 2011 4:56 PM EDT up reply actions 6 recs

That's the exact problem

how do quantify runs saved by an exceptional defensive play?

One man’s exceptional play is another man’s run of the mill play. Did it look good because the player was too slow to make the play easily? Got a bad read? Any number of things that can deceive the eye, even the eye of someone who watches baseball a lot. So the stats accept this, and try to focus on what can be controlled and filter out what can’t. They’re not perfect either, but at least they’re uniform and we know what we know and what we don’t know.

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

by SagehenMacGyver47 on Jul 20, 2011 1:08 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs

leads the team in points on the chart, mainly due to his "versatility.

He drives in runs, scores runs, hits for average, steals bases, has wOBA and WAR, has SLG, and plays a passable CF. Let’s see; hitting, power, speed, arm…looks like four of the five tools. Put him in left and he has all five. That looks like versatility to me.

by Jim Fetterolf on Jul 19, 2011 3:10 PM EDT reply actions

lol

by hawkinscm87 on Jul 19, 2011 3:18 PM EDT up reply actions

Everyone drives in runs, scores runs, and has wOBA, WAR, and SLG.

     Most of Melky’s value comes from his ability to hit for power (SLG if you must) and his ability to make contact. (Both of which helps his batting average). Batting average by itself means exactly nothing on how good a player is.
     He has a weak arm, and is below average in range in centerfield, and is very likely a below average centerfielder who has had some luck throwing out runners. Also, saying a player is versatile doesn’t really mean anything. Willie Bloomquist plays seven positions, so he is verisatile, but he is still just replacement level.
     Melky has been very good this year, but it is not because he is “versatile”.

Go Royals!

by BabyBlues on Jul 19, 2011 7:53 PM EDT up reply actions

I don't think Lee Judge ever really explained what he meant by versatile.

I still have no clue.

by hawkinscm87 on Jul 19, 2011 8:08 PM EDT up reply actions

Judge just likes to throw out adjectives. They don’t really relate to anything meaningful.

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Jul 19, 2011 11:26 PM EDT up reply actions

They all breathe, too.

by kansasjohn on Jul 19, 2011 11:17 PM EDT up reply actions

they all put on their pants some kind of one leg at a time

and bring it 110%

by Nighthawk at the Diner on Jul 20, 2011 7:58 AM EDT up reply actions 2 recs

I wish I could rec this more times.

by Gross(est) on Jul 20, 2011 10:14 PM EDT up reply actions

just checked out Judging the Royals for the first time

So hilarious. That point system….wow. I saw the “menatal mistake” penalty and just busted a gut. Don’t know why, but that was the funniest to me. It was all pretty funny though. And of course the system loves frenchy, Getz, Melky, etc. Good stuff.

So this Feterroff guy I see sometimes is one of Judge’s disciples? And they think you guys are all, like, basement nerdlingers who know nothing about baseball? I love this.

The only sad part is that The Star actually runs that drivel. That really is too bad. A once-great sports page being reduced to something so outdated and arbitrary is a shame. If everyone were just heading over there to laugh at Judge that would be one thing, but the shame of it is some people probably let that nonsense influence their thought. The more I think about that the less I like it.

Sometimes I wish I could hibernate and check baseball out again in like 50 years. I think that would be a much more enjoyable experience for me. Unless everything was exactly the same, which would be the worst kind of nightmare.

What the NFL labor dispute needs is a modern-day Robin Hood

by big matt on Jul 21, 2011 9:30 AM EDT reply actions 5 recs

...

Feterroff has mentioned here a few times that he and Judge are at least acquaintances/friends – something like that.

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

by SagehenMacGyver47 on Jul 21, 2011 3:11 PM EDT up reply actions

Judging the Royals is to baseball as Miley Cyrus is to music

I used to think bubble gum pop was the worst thing in the world. But I have come to realize they are just giving what the masses want. If someone wants meaningless, happy music to bounce their head to, let them listen to Britney Spears or Miley Cyrus. If someone wants shallow rock let them listen to Nickelback. But if they to say that music is high quality that is where I take issue.
If Judge wants to watch every pitch of every Royals game, awesome. If he wants to make a system that helps him track who he thinks did a great job, that is fine. If he wants to share the chart of his opinions in a blog, that’s his prerogative. If he wants to post his opinions as an advanced system on the KC Star website, starting to be not ok. Kinda like a music critic stating Nickelback’s lyrics are genius. But when Judge mocks those that use advanced stats to evaluate players, he has jumped the grey line. When he says his opinions are better than the research of others and facts backed by stats, then he becomes wrong.

by spamiam79 on Jul 21, 2011 8:59 PM EDT reply actions 6 recs