Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Ryder Hesjedal Wins Giro d'Italia

Buster Olney Gets Phenomenological on Salvador Perez

Buster Olney, the sage of the "as told to" and doubter of all things WAR, has stepped aside from relaunching the productive outs crusade to share a philosophical musing of great import:

KC Royals C Salvador Perez has a ton of presence, similar to what Sandy Alomar had. Seems like a natural leader.

Talking about Sal Perez's "presence" Olney raises tantalizing questions about presence itself and of course about absence. By understanding Perez's presence we can only consider the implications of his absence and how that binary infuses our understanding of desire. Royal opponents are defined by the lack of Perez, but so too is the viewer. Save, I suppose, Olney himself, who is at once deeply aware of Perez's being but also, we must assume, understanding of some deeper awareness of emptiness. An emptiness made visible in the shadow of Perez's light. In this regard, Olney emerges as a seer vatic.

Star-divide

Moreover, coming at the issue from Barthes via Benjamin, what do we make of the simulacra of Perez that dominate our actual experience of him? We are well aware of his presence somewhere, on the green fields of material existence, but our exposure to him is fundamentally mediated. He is, as it were, illuminated. Present, but absent all the same. In this way, we must credit Olney for illustrating a profound instance of differance. This paradigmatic instability is inscribed on Perez's body, unsettling Royal opponents.

Naturally, one would expect Olney to refer to Perez's aura, and in this case he certainly does. Though interesting, his aura is in this instance entirely a referent: it carries the associations of the real wholly and is not an aftereffect of what we experience as the viewer. Perez's aura, here at least, is limited to those interacting with him in the real. In this way, his essence is not finally that of an art object, but as an untranslatable chora of the real.

Ontologically then, Olney rejects monism because Perez is singular, luminously present, defined against pale imitations. Extended out, this vision of being, as defined and instantiated by Perez, becomes radiantly variegated, though also terrifying in its dimensions.

Comment 164 comments  |  17 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

WOW

I am going to spend the rest of the day trying to wrap my mind around this.

by meat525 on Jan 31, 2012 9:01 AM EST reply actions  

Um, bravo.

The name of that song played at KC Comets games in the '80's was Giorgio Moroder's "The Chase." Now you know.

by labbadabba on Jan 31, 2012 9:13 AM EST reply actions  

Mind

blown

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

by mitchfreakingmaier! on Jan 31, 2012 9:21 AM EST reply actions  

The pale blue ether drifts away and we are left with the darkness of starlight.

We should trade for Vance Worley.

by JKWard on Jan 31, 2012 9:34 AM EST via mobile reply actions  

So how far do you have to be from him to be drawn into his presence.

Is it just seeing him as on TV? Do you have to see him live? Does the presence extend beyond the ball park or is it confined to just the yahoos wearing the same uniform? Or maybe he just has a 12" shlong?

Doubting Thomas, the patron saint of sabermetrics

by Jeff Zimmerman on Jan 31, 2012 9:38 AM EST reply actions  

Can presence even be mediated?

Or can we only experience, via the TV image, the absence of presence?

by bas on Jan 31, 2012 10:35 AM EST up reply actions  

The real question: does Olney follow Lacan in purest form, or is he into the more derivitive lack authors like zizek?

Let's just trust the process.

by trusttheprocess on Jan 31, 2012 9:38 AM EST via mobile reply actions   1 recs

Pffffft

What is up with all this psychological mumbo-jumbo, I wanna talk about Beisball.

2010 = The beginning of a dynasty

by ChiefWildcat on Jan 31, 2012 9:39 AM EST reply actions   1 recs

This article has made me a man

Don't you ever play GM- Lee "Touch of Gray" Judge

by tiquanunderwear on Jan 31, 2012 9:42 AM EST reply actions   1 recs

Welcome tiquan

I think you’re gonna like it.

by Rufus R. Jones on Jan 31, 2012 9:47 AM EST up reply actions  

I wish my name in real life was tiquan

Don't you ever play GM- Lee "Touch of Gray" Judge

by tiquanunderwear on Jan 31, 2012 10:04 AM EST up reply actions   1 recs

I wish my last name in real life was Underwear.

Clusterfuknutz has never worked for me.

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

by setupunchtag on Feb 1, 2012 1:49 PM EST up reply actions  

There is a black kid at my school

The only thing I’ve heard him say all year is “man I got a big dick”

Don't you ever play GM- Lee "Touch of Gray" Judge

by tiquanunderwear on Feb 1, 2012 10:21 AM EST up reply actions  

There is a black kid at my school
The only thing I’ve heard him say all year is "man I got a big dick"

Do you have reason to question him? If you were in MO, it is the show-me state.

by Rufus R. Jones on Feb 2, 2012 1:56 PM EST up reply actions  

Rudy! Rudy! Ruuudy!

"I DARE you to make less sense."

by dejackso on Jan 31, 2012 10:01 AM EST up reply actions  

Yeah, it must have been 2 or 3 days since Olney talked to someone about a ten-year deal for Eric Hosmer

so biased

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

by Matt Klaassen on Jan 31, 2012 10:23 AM EST up reply actions   1 recs

Just for clarity sake

my original comment wasn’t remotely serious

This is my signature line. It is full of awesome and win.

by KC_Satchmo on Jan 31, 2012 10:31 AM EST up reply actions  

I would be happy to bask thusly if Olney had praised Perez’s hitting, fielding, pitch framing or something like that. I even would have preferred some talk of his game calling, rather than his “presence.”

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Jan 31, 2012 10:23 AM EST up reply actions  

quit looking at my GF

This is my signature line. It is full of awesome and win.

by KC_Satchmo on Jan 31, 2012 10:32 AM EST up reply actions   1 recs

quit paying attention to my GF's great personality

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

by SagehenMacGyver47 on Feb 1, 2012 1:00 PM EST up reply actions  

and boy can she cook

"Things could always be worse." - Buddy Bell

by buddyball on Feb 1, 2012 1:10 PM EST up reply actions  

And It Shows

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

by philofthenorth on Feb 1, 2012 3:05 PM EST up reply actions  

great little housekeeper

"Things could always be worse." - Buddy Bell

by buddyball on Feb 1, 2012 9:03 PM EST up reply actions  

I would much rather have a beer with Salvador Perez!

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Jan 31, 2012 2:12 PM EST up reply actions   1 recs

The thing is, we do often do this

I mean once you have the requisite qualifications (which Frenchy and Sal essentially have), it seems like offices generally try to hire people that they get along with or that have intangibles like drive or whatever.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Jan 31, 2012 2:12 PM EST up reply actions  

I guess, if you know before hiring someone that you get along with them or feel like you know their intangibles. But generally I don’t think that’s the case. Generally the person you hire is a relative stranger (perhaps referred by someone you know). Certainly how they come accross in an interview is important, but I don’t think people usually believe they are hiring based on intangibles. I think they usually think it is about the qualificaitons.

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Jan 31, 2012 2:29 PM EST up reply actions  

But you already know their qualifications if you bring them in for an interview

The job interview is essentially to gauge “intangibles”

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Jan 31, 2012 3:09 PM EST up reply actions  

I'm also not arguing this is a wise thing to do

I was reading a book recently that said something to the effect that HR directors are pretty much engaging in a crapshoot whenever they hire someone, that once you get to a certain set of qualifications, you could pick names out of a hat and do as well as firms do at hiring.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Jan 31, 2012 3:44 PM EST up reply actions  

But no one is going to hire someone based strictly off of a resume. You have to bring someone in and talk to them. Interviews are mandatory. But I really think the hiring decision is usually made off of the qualifications, unless many have the same qualifications (which is not uncommon). Then you have to have tie breakers. And these tie breakers aren’t necessarily all meaningless intangibles. In an interview, you can see if the person has good oral communications sills. That can certainly be job relevant.

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Jan 31, 2012 11:24 PM EST up reply actions  

Oh job interviews.

I have a friend who got a job at a big firm essentially because he was able to “shoot the shit” with the person interviewing him.

by hawkinscm87 on Jan 31, 2012 5:59 PM EST up reply actions  

While I'm not exactly a "professional,"

nearly every job I have ever gotten has been because I knew someone 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 Feb 1, 2012 12:46 AM EST up reply actions  

We can try

I’ve tried to pretend that Dayton Moore’s incompetence was actually competence, but that didn’t work out so well.

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Jan 31, 2012 10:37 AM EST up reply actions  

My rather narrow view of DM is that he is simply inconsistent

It’s probably an indication that he is simply mediocre at best as a GM but I choose to pretend it’s part of some growth cycle or learning curve or whatever that’s right on the brink of being becoming greatness.

This is my signature line. It is full of awesome and win.

by KC_Satchmo on Jan 31, 2012 10:43 AM EST up reply actions  

And nothing

at the same time

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Jan 31, 2012 12:23 PM EST up reply actions  

This was a tweet!

An off-hand comment. All of the other stuff in these comments is being filled in by people’s imaginations.

Perez has ‘presence’. i’m familiar with this characteristic. It’s not determinative but it’s not inconsequential.

I suppose Buster could limit his tweets to defensible arguments, but that’s a pretty high bar for such a disposable medium.

by billexgordler on Jan 31, 2012 11:26 PM EST up reply actions  

Perez has ‘presence’. i’m familiar with this characteristic. It’s not determinative but it’s not inconsequential.

It’s consequential? What in the world does it even mean? Talk about a vague, non-sports term. It’s like saying he has “spirit.” As it can mean anything, that must be consequential too!

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Jan 31, 2012 11:30 PM EST up reply actions  

OED Shorter

5. Demeanour, carriage, esp. when stately or impressive.

Too vague?

Buster’s not implying that Perez’s demeanor and carriage will make him a good baseball player. He’s simply saying that he is impressive. You don’t care. Fine. But that doesn’t mean that it’s imprecise or inconsequential.

by billexgordler on Feb 1, 2012 12:00 AM EST up reply actions   1 recs

Are you really asking if that is too vague to be meaningful?

That he’s very stately? That he has a great demeanour or carriage? It’s so vague and nebulous as to be laughable.

But that doesn’t mean that it’s imprecise

Are you kidding? It’s not imprecise? Wow, really?

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Feb 1, 2012 9:38 AM EST up reply actions  

I feel the same way about moustakas. He could end up being legitimately good but I’ll get annoyed by the narrative. I also see him being overrated as a real possibility. No walks, bad defense, lots of RBIs and leadership.

But, if we go from having the leadership of a terrible kendall to the leadership of an overrated but legitimately good moustakas, I’ll certainly taker that as an upgrade.

Let's just trust the process.

by trusttheprocess on Jan 31, 2012 10:21 AM EST via mobile up reply actions  

Do they talk about Moustakas's leadership and other intangibles a lot?

I’m not saying they don’t, but other than the “taught a little girl math at the Cheesecake Factory” story, I can’t remember anything.

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Jan 31, 2012 10:24 AM EST up reply actions  

it's come up from day one

his leadership, attitude, makeup, competitiveness, etc. Yup. Frankly, it’s one thing to talk about guys like Giavotella like that, but for a #2 pick who is supposed to be a superstar, I’d rather hear about, you know, him learning the strike zone or playing defense rather than “boy he’s just a great kid that everyone loves and user was awesome for that half-season in AA.”

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

by Matt Klaassen on Jan 31, 2012 10:30 AM EST up reply actions  

user=sure

or maybe it’s just a new nickname for Moose

Or maybe I meant “usher,” another prospect who really likes that artist.

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

by Matt Klaassen on Jan 31, 2012 10:31 AM EST up reply actions  

In all fairness

We’ve heard the narative about his work ethic applied to working on his D as well.

This is my signature line. It is full of awesome and win.

by KC_Satchmo on Jan 31, 2012 10:36 AM EST up reply actions  

right

and I’m glad. I’d just rather hear that he was actually good at defense.

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

by Matt Klaassen on Jan 31, 2012 10:42 AM EST up reply actions  

I doubt we'll be hearing that any time soon

On the bright side, we can always just compare his D to the atrocity that is to be Miggy Cabrera’s 3B D.

This is my signature line. It is full of awesome and win.

by KC_Satchmo on Jan 31, 2012 10:46 AM EST up reply actions  

He has a ton of presence at third base though

And Prince Fielder literally has a ton of presence at first base. (rimshot)

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Jan 31, 2012 10:46 AM EST up reply actions   1 recs

I'd Be Happy

With average defense if he comes close to fulfilling his promise at the plate.

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

by philofthenorth on Jan 31, 2012 1:04 PM EST up reply actions  

Not really worried about Moose

I’m skeptical of his “star potential,” but even if he’s just “passable” at third, I think he’ll hit enough to at least be around an average player. Given his profile (not many walks, good ability to make contact), even at his best he strikes me as the kind of guy who is going to be really streaky, which is neither good nor bad, really. But those kinds of guys tend to elate/frustrate in equal measure over the course of a season.

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

by Matt Klaassen on Jan 31, 2012 1:27 PM EST up reply actions  

Or His B-R

Comparable Moose Solters!
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/s/soltemo01.shtml

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

by philofthenorth on Jan 31, 2012 11:19 PM EST up reply actions  

heh

although I think there’s a noticeable gap between being “passable” at third and being “Hillenbrand.”

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

by Matt Klaassen on Feb 1, 2012 9:15 AM EST up reply actions  

we'd all rather hear that he was Albert Pujols

But he’s not. But that he has a great work ethic, attitude, and other ineffable stuff that provokes defensive derision here (not singling you out Matt) is a great supplement to his considerable skills. Work ethic matters, even for #2 picks.

by billexgordler on Jan 31, 2012 11:15 PM EST up reply actions  

But shouldn’t we be skeptical of the subjective opinions about ineffable qualities of a prospect? Not too get too deep into the language here, but “ineffable” means that something is too great to be described by words. So if it is beyond description, should we think it should be easily identified and measured (at least in comparison to others)? Yes, work ethic matters. But should we just assume that his work ethic has been accurately identified and measured, and honestly described, despite the huge inherent difficulty in identifying and measuring those intangibles?

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Jan 31, 2012 11:28 PM EST up reply actions  

...

Work ethic is not ineffable, neither is attitude. But objective descriptions of either quality generally make for Leviticus-grade boring copy. Presence, while it can be defined (see above), is ineffable, because it must be experienced.

But here we’re getting back to this hyper-doubt that I just can’t fathom. Work ethic and attitude are among the easiest characteristics for organizations (baseball or otherwise) to identify. I choose not to doubt them because I feel comfortable making those same assessments every day in my professional life.

by billexgordler on Feb 1, 2012 12:17 AM EST up reply actions  

Work ethic is not ineffable, neither is attitude

I was just following along with what you said: “he has a great work ethic, attitude, and other ineffable stuff .”

But objective descriptions of either quality generally make for Leviticus-grade boring copy.

And the subjective descriptions are pretty worthless. If you’re saying writers share this stuff because it’s more interesting and exciting reading, I’m sure that’s true. But I’m dealing with the actual value of those words and concepts, which is close to nill.
Work ethic and attitude are among the easiest characteristics for organizations (baseball or otherwise) to identify.

How easy they are to reliably identify is questionable (especially attitude), but certainly moreso than leadership, grit, heart, spirit, moxy and presence. And it is those intangibles which get the most attention from sports media, coaches, etc. What say you about the difficulty with identifying and measuring those ineffable qualities?

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Feb 1, 2012 9:44 AM EST up reply actions  

i dont think its that difficult to determine a guys work ethic...

when you’re around them all the time like the royals people are

Fire Everyone

by billybeingbilly on Feb 1, 2012 12:44 AM EST up reply actions  

I guess what gets me

is that we never hear anything comparable about Eric Hosmer’s worth ethic, or “want to” or leadership or anything. Obviously, I’m not around these guys at all and stuff like t hat, but since we (well, at least “I”) was talking about my own visceral response to this stuff, I am guessing that is not because Eric Hosmer does not work hard (losing track of all my negatives/positives) and stuff — I am sure he does, any pro athlete has to. I am guessing his work ethic is tremendous. But my feeling is that with Hosmer, beginning in 2010, there was so much other stuff to talk about that no one needed to bother to talk up his intangibles. That’s my experience in reading about most top prospects. So when one of the first things that gets brought up with Moustakas is his intangibles, it makes me wonder…

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

by Matt Klaassen on Feb 1, 2012 9:23 AM EST up reply actions   1 recs

Sort of like how

people only talk about a girl’s personality when they can’t find anything nice to say about her looks.

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

by cmkeller on Feb 1, 2012 12:58 PM EST up reply actions  

Blast

I didn’t realize that someone up-thread had used this analogy.

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

by cmkeller on Feb 1, 2012 1:01 PM EST up reply actions  

I've heard comments on the broadcasts that he's viewed as

the leader of this wave of young players. Not sure how much of that is related to anything in his personality and how much is related to him being a little bit older and farther along in the system. (Before Hos passed him)

This is my signature line. It is full of awesome and win.

by KC_Satchmo on Jan 31, 2012 10:34 AM EST up reply actions  

Remember that time he threw Jason Taylor (or whatever that guy's name was)

up against the locker? And a scout said “That’s how you build a team.”

Lots of stuff like that.

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

by Matt Klaassen on Jan 31, 2012 10:44 AM EST up reply actions  

Wait, was that real?

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Jan 31, 2012 10:46 AM EST up reply actions  

I think so.

If it’s not, I’ll have to go back to believing in Santa Claus.

by Dadunca on Jan 31, 2012 10:57 AM EST up reply actions  

I wish I could dig it up

I need to start keeping a log of quotes and links that come by way of anonymous scouts and rival club executives for times like this.

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

by Matt Klaassen on Jan 31, 2012 11:08 AM EST up reply actions  

another one

would be from the scout who in mid-2008 that the Royals would be better off with Greinke in the bullpen.

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

by Matt Klaassen on Jan 31, 2012 11:09 AM EST up reply actions  

Mid 2008?

He was kinda having a good season in 2008, no?

by NotAHippie on Feb 1, 2012 2:14 AM EST up reply actions  

yeah, that's what made it so funny

it would have sort of made sense in 2007, or even right at the beginning of 2008 ,but by mid-2008 it was really clear that he was going to be just fine as a starter, at least above-average, maybe the ace people had expected him to be.

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

by Matt Klaassen on Feb 1, 2012 9:18 AM EST up reply actions  

I def remember misty eyed tales of Moose standing up to older boys

giving the red ass about something….if that isn’t specific enough for you, I can’t help you.

by Nighthawk at the Diner on Feb 1, 2012 10:05 PM EST up reply actions  

Can't wait for him to stuff Getz into a locker

This is my signature line. It is full of awesome and win.

by KC_Satchmo on Jan 31, 2012 10:46 AM EST up reply actions  

Swirly Or GTFO!

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

by philofthenorth on Jan 31, 2012 1:09 PM EST up reply actions  

Atomic Wedgie

then hang him by his waistband on the hook next to his locker.

by Sweep_the_Leg on Jan 31, 2012 1:11 PM EST up reply actions  

Well then

It looks like we’re gonna need to find out how to say “Rewind Yourself” in Spanish.

It's all ball bearings these days!

by CentralChamps20?? on Jan 31, 2012 12:04 PM EST via mobile up reply actions  

Rebobínate

pronounced “rey-bow-BEAN-ah-tay.”

"That fucking fucker of a general swears too fucking much." --Unnamed soldier about Gen. George Patton, 1943

by Juancho on Jan 31, 2012 2:18 PM EST up reply actions  

And it's only going to get worse

Dayton publicly talks about building a family, not just a team. The media has already fed into it (just saw a segment on MLBN the other day about the Royals’ clubhouse culture). Many “baseball people”, in between the Crash Davis cliches, love to talk about chemistry and intangibles and their supposed importance.

For some reason, it’s boring to say the Royals are expected to improve and eventually win because they have committed to acquiring and developing young talent, and that talented players win more games than less talented or fading players. There just has to be more to it, and the Royals will be more than happy to play that up.

by thelaundry on Jan 31, 2012 10:23 AM EST up reply actions  

I wonder when Dayton’s commitment to build a family in the clubhouse started. And does he really believe that. Because it doesn’t seem like he was all that committed to it when he tried to trade for Milton Bradley or when he acquired Jose Guillen, Miguel Olivo or Roman Colon. Is the “family” stuff just some PR spin that Moore trowels out when he’s trying to publicly sell an acquisition like Jeff Francoeur? Or does he really believe that shit? And if he does, was he just ignorant of the cancerous nature of guys like Bradley and Guillen? Or were those mistakes back when he was a green GM and now he’s learned what really makes a player a good clubhouse guy?

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Jan 31, 2012 10:28 AM EST up reply actions  

I think he believes a guy like Francoeur

Casts a radiant glow that overshadows a few bad clubhouse apples. I think he knows very well a few mercenaries will be need to be added to the fruits of the Process, and those guys (maybe even some of the handpicked prospects) won’t be great guys. It’s clear he’s not been afraid to bring in a surly, even cancerous, player (Bradley is the prime example, even more so than Guillen).

How much of a motivation was Greinke’s grumbling/behavior in his being traded? It was said at the time it forced Dayton’s hand. I don’t think Dayton buys into the intangibles completely, but more than I’d like.

by thelaundry on Jan 31, 2012 10:39 AM EST up reply actions  

I agree

It’s better PR and a more fun conversation for him to have that Frenchy is a great guy than a story about how Paulino is kind of a douche.

This is my signature line. It is full of awesome and win.

by KC_Satchmo on Jan 31, 2012 10:44 AM EST up reply actions  

I have no problem with talented jerks

Clemens, even pre-cheating? A-hole. Supposedly Randy Johnson’s wife knew not to speak to him on the days he started.

Good guys make it easier for the media, but I don’t care about that. I would much rather read that a guy is scary and unpleasant to reporters AND his opponents.

by thelaundry on Jan 31, 2012 10:56 AM EST up reply actions  

For any team

I think it is important when it is convenient. When it is not convenient, it is not as important.

by Rufus R. Jones on Jan 31, 2012 12:34 PM EST up reply actions  

I think a player like Guillen

would change anyone’s mind as to what the culture should be in the clubhouse.

2010 = The beginning of a dynasty

by ChiefWildcat on Jan 31, 2012 11:03 AM EST up reply actions   1 recs

MLB 11 The Show

While simulating a few games the computer decided my 52-30 Royals needed to sign Guillen while Jesus was hurt.

I cut Guillen as soon as I saw what had happened, but by the end of the day, I had to start a who new season. It was tainted and I just felt dirty.

by MVP-Gordon on Jan 31, 2012 12:25 PM EST up reply actions   1 recs

Haven't we heard both tho?

There have been stories about how talented all these young guys are. Shouldn’t we expect a certain ammount of nonsense to be reported when news, even sports news, is now a 24 hour per day obsession?

This is my signature line. It is full of awesome and win.

by KC_Satchmo on Jan 31, 2012 10:39 AM EST up reply actions   1 recs

I wanna know about his

bat control and why can't he just get rid of the batting gloves

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

by mitchfreakingmaier! on Jan 31, 2012 11:13 AM EST up reply actions  

and what is the arm tat situation?

"Things could always be worse." - Buddy Bell

by buddyball on Jan 31, 2012 1:08 PM EST up reply actions  

Scott, that's the fun part

Anyone can just figure out statistics and know that a lousy FIP portends a poor pitching performance next year. Most fans figure that jocks are heroes and are imbued with supernatural powers. The fan focus is to figure which of the jocks are worth rooting for (good players with good attitudes) and which are not. Wanting to compete and be excellent and win is the whole point of sports, and we like to think that some athletes are better than others, not just at hitting or pitching or fielding, but also at winning.

I’ve always thought that us sports fans are just like women and their celebrity magazines. We can quote Miguel Cabrera’s WAR while they know how many times each Kardashian has been married.

"That fucking fucker of a general swears too fucking much." --Unnamed soldier about Gen. George Patton, 1943

by Juancho on Jan 31, 2012 2:15 PM EST up reply actions  

I guess I’m just not a fan of magical thinking.

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Jan 31, 2012 2:33 PM EST up reply actions  

Yeah, me neither

but I bet most fans think that way, especially football fans. “Big-time players make the big plays!!!!” over and over on every American football broadcast. No, good players are more likely to make good plays, and “goodness” is something that we can try to measure, but that’s not something you can tell Joe Morgan, greatest second baseman ever.

In Little League I used to flap my arm like Morgan did in order to make sure my elbow was up. That’s how good he was. Everyone knew him. Two consecutive MVPs. Four tools, fielding, running, hitting for average, and hitting for power. Once drove in like 125 runs (agreed, batting third for the Big Red Machine is a good way to get RBIs), which must be a record for guys under 5’ 8’’. Once stole like 60 bases, and hit like 27 HR the same year.

Morgan seems like a good guy, too. He’s contributed so much to his hometown community in Oakland that they named a street after him. He went back to college and got his degree to serve as an example for the kids.

It’s just a shame he’s such an awful announcer.

"That fucking fucker of a general swears too fucking much." --Unnamed soldier about Gen. George Patton, 1943

by Juancho on Jan 31, 2012 2:50 PM EST up reply actions  

the other problem is there's no middle ground in analysis

seemingly every player is either a choker who doesn’t know how to win or one of the greatest of all time

by Freneau on Jan 31, 2012 2:52 PM EST up reply actions  

Not sure I agree

Most jocks are heroized by announcers and the media. Hell, look at the way poor players like Getz and Kendall, and average players like Francoeur, are treated by the media. This may not be true on the East Coast, but it is everywhere else.

True, the few jocks who are not heroized are generally demonized, especially in American football, which is getting uncomfortably close to pro wrestling.

"That fucking fucker of a general swears too fucking much." --Unnamed soldier about Gen. George Patton, 1943

by Juancho on Jan 31, 2012 3:03 PM EST up reply actions  

Not a big fan of LeBron the Image (obviously he's a great player)

but I don’t think he was treated as a “saint” prior to leaving Cleveland.

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

by Matt Klaassen on Feb 1, 2012 9:19 AM EST up reply actions  

Maybe "saint" is too far.

But the media gave him everything he could have asked for prior to “the decision”. Sure there were questions about some of his performances but the fact that his decision was showcased like it was shows just how much of a hero ESPN wanted him to be.

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

by Warden11 on Feb 1, 2012 9:47 AM EST up reply actions  

Is the media narrative

Fortunately this has been watered down as the MSM is less and less important.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Jan 31, 2012 3:10 PM EST up reply actions  

The MSM controls access to the NFL

and has that locked down. That’s why football is the most hyped sport; it’s one of the few things they have left. They also control big-time college football. Most Royals games don’t get any more media attention than the two teams’ hometown radio and television announcers.

"That fucking fucker of a general swears too fucking much." --Unnamed soldier about Gen. George Patton, 1943

by Juancho on Jan 31, 2012 3:21 PM EST up reply actions  

I think some sports fans wouldn't be sports fans without all the human interest stuff.

There’s great stories and great experiences, which I think are different. They aren’t made up. But sportswriters have been framing the perception of players for a long time by doing this kind of thing. Just looking at a player who is a big dude and then making a ridiculous statement about leadership and Perezesence.

by hawkinscm87 on Jan 31, 2012 5:55 PM EST up reply actions  

um
Why can’t we let players just be players?

Because they’re not just players. They’re people. People with qualities like resilience, leadership, charisma, determination, etc. Which qualities can have significant effects on a player’s and team’s development and performance.

We’ve reached some Jamesian end game here, it seems like. Bill James was obsessed with proof and abhorred cant. This attitude spurred tremendous advances in the way we understand the game. But now we’re seeking proof for even the most benign commentary on a player’s personality. If a group of people reaches consensus that one of its members a leader this is evidence/proof that that person is a leader.

Maybe you don’t care who the team’s leaders are, or maybe you think that the team leaders should be determined by WAR rather than rough consensus. If you’re the former, then you’re a peculiar kind of post-Jamesian fan who’s conflated distance, neutrality and reason into a numb facsimile of fan-dom; if the latter then you’d just rather this article be written about Alex Gordon.

I for one choose not to be offended by reporting of this type. I think it provides a unique insight into what it’s like to play on the Royals.

by billexgordler on Jan 31, 2012 11:10 PM EST up reply actions   1 recs

Because they’re not just players. They’re people.

And the concept of “player” includes “person.”

People with qualities like resilience, leadership, charisma, determination, etc. Which qualities can have significant effects on a player’s and team’s development and performance.

And here’s the problem, those things are unknown and unknowable. Some people in and around the game pretend that they know the unknown and unknowable. How good is Player X’s leadership? Who the hell knows? A manager will know something about his player’s leadership. But there is much he doesn’t know. I’m sure a given player’s leadership affects some players positively. But it may also affect others negatively. And yet they (managers, GM’s, players, writers, broadcasters) pretend to have a clear idea of who is a good leader, or has grit, or fire, or charisma, etc. and how valuable that is.
I for one choose not to be offended by reporting of this type. I think it provides a unique insight into what it’s like to play on the Royals.

I think it provides the lamest kind of guesswork that shouldn’t be taken seriously. It is more than worthy of contempt and ridicule, especially when it goes beyond the standard intangibles (like leadership) to the even more undefinable and meaningless (presence).

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Jan 31, 2012 11:36 PM EST up reply actions  

classic response

leadership? what’s a leader? charisma? who’s she?

if you’re arguing that we don’t understand the effects of these characteristics, have at it. i’ve never argued otherwise and i won’t here. if you’re arguing that these are characteristics that humans can’t reliably recognize then i think you’re wrong.

these words exist because they mean something. i guess buster olney’s not enough of an authority on social interaction for you.

by billexgordler on Feb 1, 2012 12:32 AM EST up reply actions  

I have long had a Charisma Carpenter crush

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Feb 1, 2012 9:23 AM EST up reply actions  

she was on two Joss Whedon shows

nerds will be talking about her as if she is Meryl Streep for the next 100 years

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

by Matt Klaassen on Feb 1, 2012 9:24 AM EST up reply actions  

And she did a spread in Playboy

which only endears her more.

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 Feb 1, 2012 6:57 PM EST up reply actions  

if you’re arguing that we don’t understand the effects of these characteristics, have at it.

That’s a pretty big argument for you to just punt. If we don’t know how a given player’s leadership, charisma, etc. affect his teammates (when the value of these characteristics is that they supposedly help others and make the team better), then we have no idea what value, if any, those intangibles have.

these words exist because they mean something.

Yes, those words mean something. But I’m sure you will agree that some words are very, very vague with somewhat different meanings to different people. And vague, nebulous qualities are often difficult to indentify in a person. You are pretending that the questions “what is leadership?” and “who has is a leader?” are easy questions to answer. I think that’s ludicrous.

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Feb 1, 2012 9:49 AM EST up reply actions  

I'm just going to assume that you are excepting Hosmer from this complaint,

as his being the Messiah is both truth and provable.

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 Feb 1, 2012 12:43 AM EST up reply actions  

Phew.

I didn’t want to have to get into a protracted debate about this.

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 Feb 1, 2012 6:58 PM EST up reply actions  

:(

I did.

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Feb 1, 2012 9:36 PM EST up reply actions  

Almost flagged for lack of Husserl

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

by Matt Klaassen on Jan 31, 2012 10:32 AM EST reply actions   1 recs

seriously

I lurk often and rarely sign in, but this was awesome. I love faux-post-modern writing, and applied to baseball the result is excellent. You should write a book like this.

by Zackkkkkkkkkkkkkkk on Jan 31, 2012 1:29 PM EST reply actions  

Didn't a couple of physics guys pull off something like this

in a journal called “Social Text” a few years ago?

"That fucking fucker of a general swears too fucking much." --Unnamed soldier about Gen. George Patton, 1943

by Juancho on Jan 31, 2012 2:20 PM EST up reply actions  

I enjoyed it

However, I have your next challenge: doing a post on the intangibles of Chris Getz through the interpretive lens of the TimeCube.

http://www.timecube.com/

by bas on Jan 31, 2012 3:10 PM EST reply actions  

oohhhh

Had not been to that site in a while. There’s some pretty awful trash on it now. My bad.

by bas on Jan 31, 2012 3:15 PM EST up reply actions  

Blame the policy debate community

After they get their hooks into a site or meme, it’s all downhill.

by WaywardSaint on Jan 31, 2012 5:33 PM EST up reply actions  

This is why scouting, luck and player evaulation all come into play

There are some things that cannot be measured. I know we hate to admit it, but things like chemistry and leadership do and have always played a role in team sports. A guy can be a 4+ war player and piss everyone off on the team and the team sucks because no one wants to play with them (see Barry Bonds and Albert Belle). A baseball team needs some average players, some good players, and a couple of great players that come together off a team feed off one another and find ways to win. Using football as an example, it was interesting to see Tim Tebow take over for a guy who had better overall stats and seemingly better skills, but yet win more games. It was as if he willed the team to victory. Sometimes the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. I think the SF giants showed that a few years back

Proud Founding Memeber of the UPAMTN Fan Club.

by la flama blanca on Jan 31, 2012 4:10 PM EST reply actions  

I Saw Him

Listed as an important free agent for the Royals this season. It was on the crawl at the bottom of the screen on MLB Network.

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

by philofthenorth on Feb 2, 2012 5:59 PM EST up reply actions  

me too

I punched my screen

Don't you ever play GM- Lee "Touch of Gray" Judge

by tiquanunderwear on Feb 3, 2012 8:47 AM EST up reply actions  

Part 12 - Hosmer's beatification

Part 13 – Johnny’s moxie
Part 14 – Alex’s sticktoitiveness…

talk to me, Johnny...

by johnny4 on Feb 1, 2012 2:08 PM EST reply actions  

Part 15: Jonathan Broxton's beer gut

"That fucking fucker of a general swears too fucking much." --Unnamed soldier about Gen. George Patton, 1943

by Juancho on Feb 1, 2012 2:16 PM EST reply actions  

I don't think there is any doubt

the Royals have THE best catcher in the AL and maybe all of MLB

by maddirishman on Feb 1, 2012 4:48 PM EST reply actions  

Neither here nor there, but

I would really like to kick Sandra Bernhardt square in the face.

That is all.

"You're like that guy who wrote that thing about remembering stuff!!"

- Crow T. Robot

by Crooow on Feb 3, 2012 4:59 AM EST 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

Tumblr_lwfiy4qkgv1r204zxo1_500_small
RR Poetry Contest
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

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
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