Say It Is So: Baseball’s Disgrace
nybooks.com
nybooks.com
I can't believe this didn't stand out sooner to analysts or if it just got glossed over. I still think hitting a round ball with a round bat is one of the hardest if not the hardest things to do in sports. And to not get a single swing and miss on a pitch that is around 70 - 80 MPH and breaking around half a foot is insane.
[0]: https://www.reddit.com/r/baseball/comments/f7w3yq/kershaw_th...
It's kinda funny to look back on, because I remember lots of people producing videos where they would supposedly point out what the Astros were picking up on, and it never seemed very clear to me no matter how much they slowed down the footage.
Another thing to note is that there's always fun baseball stats coming out. Kershaw getting no misses on his breaking balls would just be one of several interesting tidbits talked about the next day. It wouldn't really cause suspicion, as most people would just assume it indicates Kershaw was ineffective.
For example, in the the 2017 ALCS, Astros pitcher Lance McCullers finished off the feared Yankees lineup by throwing 24 straight curveballs. This is no suggestion that Lance McCullers cheated; it's just an example that there's always odd stuff to reflect upon the next day.
[0] https://www.newyorker.com/sports/sporting-scene/baseballs-st...
There are close to a million pitches thrown in each season. If someone flipped a coin for every pitch in the 2000s, they would probably get a string of 24 head and a string of 24 tails. Given the number of pitches that have been thrown, and the human tendency to stick with what's working, the only reason that there wouldn't be 24 of one pitch thrown in a row is that they'd deliberately change it up.
I had to dig into this for work, and doing statistics on runs is surprisingly interesting. Suppose you've got a sequence of $n$ events, each of which 'succeeds' with probability $p$. The expected length of the longest run is approximately $\log_{1/p}(n*(1-p) + 0.577 \ln(1/p) - 1/2$. For a fair coin with $p$ = 0.5, this reduces to log_2(n) - 2/3, which is about 19 for one million events. Amazingly, the variance only weakly depends on n, but is about 2 for p=0.5.
Thus, you're probably not going to see a 24 head run in 1M events. I'm excited I got to use this information, as the project I learned it for was a total bust.
More here: Shilling (1990, College Math. J.) https://www.csun.edu/~hcmth031/tlroh.pdf
The distinction is important because a sequence of ten heads seems 'rare' in isolation. However, it is not particularly unusual when you go looking for it as a subsequence of some bigger set of trials.
kershaw’s curveball is considered one of the best curveball’s in baseball.
To get zero swing and miss, is quite a special feat.
>Sports Illustrated’s Tom Verducci spoke with an Astros player who explained how they knew what was coming...
Somewhat related, but Bolsinger is now suing the Astros over this, arguing that that really nasty outing he had against them blew up his career. No idea how solid of a case this is, and I know less than nothing about "sports law", but it's an interesting inflection point in the fallout from all this.
https://www.si.com/mlb/2020/02/10/mike-bolsinger-lawsuit-ast...
I love this language, and it sticks out because it's in such stark contrast to anything a large organization would say today. It doesn't sugarcoat anything, it takes full responsibility, no double speak, no marketing euphemisms. And it says what they are going to do about it.
I think people somehow feel they are exposing themselves these days with that level of transparency, and maybe they are right. But I know that if I heard people speaking like this I would be drastically more likely to trust them and their brands. I would like to think it's still possible to communicate this way in the modern world.
Gone are the days of defensive brilliance and working players around the bases methodically with short hits, speed, and finesse. I won't miss baseball in the Olympics and I think it's rightfully falling to other much more interesting and engaging sports. The idea it is our "national pastime" is just laughable to me.
What's more, where I live, we had the Pawtucket PawSox try to extort Providence and RI for massive tax breaks and a premium parcel of downtown Providence land. Thankfully, Rhode Islanders called their bluff and let them move to Worcester. I'm glad my state acknowledged baseball is an incredibly slow-paced and yawn-inducing sport and we didn't want to pay through the nose for a stadium that hardly any of us would enjoy having.
But the actual game play is my least favorite part about baseball. I absolutely love the theory and statistics that goes into the front office decisions. It's this interesting mix of economics and game theory and negotiation theory. My favorite team is notoriously cash strapped (read: cheap) and I think it's fascinating watching the team wheel and deal to try to compete with teams that literally spend 2x-3x as much as they do
Growing up with baseball also plays a large part in deciding if you'll have any interest in it as an adult.
Two examples are golf and cricket. Both take days so the action clearly isn't important. If you go live, it is about the day out, having some beers with your mates, relaxing (tbf, golf has managed this far better than cricket which has had to move to shorter formats). Watching at home, it is the same thing. Relaxing, having a good time with your mates, whatever.
It is true, nothing is going to compare to seeing an "action sport" live: boxing, a huge soccer game...very little in life compares. But I think there is room for other stuff too: stats, stories, experiences, etc. (tbh, I think action sports are going to struggle against Esports too). I am a big soccer fan but rarely watch games, I just follow the story and the stats (and bet on games). Viewership has gone through the roof because the stories are just so compelling (and yes, the money too nowadays).
I hope that sport doesn't become "all action, all the time" though. Again, nothing compares to action but you can't watch that every day.
This has caused a renewed interest in baseball. It will probably increase attendance anywhere they Astros play, because people will want to come out and root for their local team to "beat the cheaters".
It'll be interesting to see how the attendance numbers this season play out.
Players would refuse to testify without immunity and without player testimony it would be incredibly difficult to find the details of the cheating scheme. It also isn't even clear if MLB has the legal authority to punish players for this type of rule violation. The player's union has stated that MLB does not have that authority and MLB did not wish to fight them on it with a potential labor dispute already pending over league finances when the current collective bargaining agreement expires soon.
>Until and unless Commissioner Manfred lifts his ludicrous immunity offer and deals severely with the incriminated participating players as well as their management by banishing them all from the game, he will have thrown baseball back to where it was in 1919.
I personally think offering immunity to get players to testify and then reversing course and using that testimony to punish those players would do much more harm to baseball than this scandal.
This could very well be true. As is, the MLB has created a precedent for cheating without ever having to face penalties.
MLB simply had no good options that would allow them to directly punish players.
Frankly I think it should be a crime to cheat—make the people have something to lose that hurts more than money.
Now look, I'm not anti baseball, I'm not here to yuck your yum or say something shouldn't exist because I don't value or appreciate it. But professional baseball not existing anymore sure seems like a problem solely for the people who care about baseball to figure out, not the federal government.
And yet, we still arrest for public urination.
I guess I don't see the big deal about sign stealing. I mean, in some sports, maybe stock car racing or something like that, this kind of thing would be totally encouraged. Squeaky clean compared to doping and what not.
However, cheating to win still takes something away from the game. But fundamentally, any sport is based on the principle of a level playing field... that everyone is playing by the same rules. This isn't a case where they stretched the rules, or went right up to the line -- they gained an undeniable advantage using tools that the other teams didn't have. When the batter know the pitch that's coming, you take the most competitive aspect of baseball away.
For my money, baseball teams should pursue simple encryption schemes where the sign thrown has to be decoded by the pitcher in his head, using as additional parameters the inning, batter, and a special private key agreed upon by the pitcher and catcher before each game.
It's using electronics to steal signs that is against the rules. It's because electronics basically allow you to "perfectly" steal signs, and one of the biggest things in baseball is that the batter doesn't know what the pitcher is about to throw.
Sibling comment https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22416698 said it much better than me.
I never had a problem with Lance Armstrong cheating because I assumed everyone else near the top of the pack was also cheating. If everyone cheats, it is absolutely still an earnest competition. Lots of other guys probably took just as many steroids as Barry Bonds did and didn't hit anywhere near as many home runs.
I also think that there need to be rules that are enforced, because there's no game without rules, but the rules are always inherently arbitrary, and I've never felt the urge to heap moral blame on the cheaters in addition to whatever punishment they get for breaking the rules... I guess I sort of unconsciously took the position that as long as no one is getting like, physically injured, bending the rules as far as they'll go (and breaking them sometimes) is just part of the game, and penalties are penalties.
It's hard for me to see much of a distinction between taking strategic fouls and violating the rules in other ways, weighing the likelihood of getting caught against the potential gain.
Despite all of this, I don't cheat when I play sports nor would I teach my kids to cheat, but when millions of dollars are on the line (maybe because there are millions of dollars on the line), it doesn't bother me that anyone would try to gain any possible advantage.
Why is the answer to everything "throw them in jail", at a huge cost to taxpayers?
There's way too much money chasing outcomes. Plenty of these players are vulnerable to different influence strategies.
Some folks at the same place helped me figure out what Venmo's social transaction messages are useful for: illegal gambling pools. I'd been wondering why those features exist or who'd want them, then saw it used for that purpose. Suddenly made sense.
Are you saying that someone out there is doing crowd sourced intelligence for increased win modeling, based on the messages people put in their venmo transactions?
Or that the default public nature of the ledger is such that people can see that the bookie (I think im using that right) is getting money from other counter parties and proves their ability to pay out in the future?
It'd be hard to crowd source for better odds on there, I'd think, since people disguise those kinds of transactions. Same as with drug purchases, which are also prohibited on Venmo so you can't mention them but are, obviously, some part of the activity on there, though unlike with betting pools Venmo's (previously, to me) weird social ledger thing isn't a killer feature for that.
Probably they could spot betting pools and put some rules in place to make it annoying enough to use the platform for that purpose that people would stop, though I don't know why they would. I'd guess illegal activity's far from a majority of their revenue, but I bet it's still significant. Probably certain transaction patterns get really common on either side of major sports events.
Not only in the US. If I'm not mistaken all the Premier League clubs outside the top 6 had betting companies as their main t-shirt logos last season, and we're talking about the most watched football league in the world (and definitely the one where the most money is involved). Things are pretty much the same wherever else you look in Europe. Betting has destroyed football (its corrupt officials helped in that, too, but that's a different story).
Football and betting is totally symbiotic. Betting is the reason the Premier League is the world's league. You can watch and bet on it everywhere. More money is bet on the EPL in Asia than in Europe. I think there is a problem with advertising but that isn't anything to do with the league (when the UK changed the rules on tobacco sponsorship it was a law, not a regulation of the league...and most of the issue isn't with shirt sponsorship).
I get that lots of people live somewhere where betting is illegal and there is a connection with organised crime. That just doesn't exist in reality.
race car drivers using fake, lighter roll cages, cyclists using EPO to make their blood so thick they might die in their sleep, baseball players using cocaine and steroids. this happens not just where there is big money but amateur ranks where nothing is on the line except winning.
If MLB could replace all of the players with robots that played a game simulated on a computer, designed to play out a storyline as a drama instead of a legitimate competition, and make more money doing it then they would in a heartbeat and not lose a wink of sleep over it.
I wonder if the signs employed by Major League teams are as simple as the ones dissected above?
Tying anything and everything to Trump is so tiresome and has nothing to do with the article, the Astros scandal, or the actions of commissioner landis/manfred.
Was deflate gate somehow a reflection on Obama?
1. We cheated and got caught. On one hand the penalties are pretty severe. Draft picks mean that in 5-8 years we may be awful again. AJ Hinch was a DAMN good manager and when the Mets hire him in a year I'm going to be sad. Jose Altuve - for whom there is no evidence that he cheated - is one of the best hitters of the last decade and may never make the HOF b/c of this. The penalties individually and collectively are not small. On the other hand, I agree that more punishment could have been handed out.
2. MLB has done a TERRIBLE job explaining that not only was immunity essential for getting the truth but also that punishing players would wind up in a YEARS-long dispute with the Player's Association. Fans and the sport alike get all pissy that there is no official record of steriod users...well immunity wasn't offered. Can't have it both ways.
3. MLB is also shooting itself in the foot not releasing the Red Sox report during the height of the Astros story. It is probable that the 2018 champs will ALSO be exposed as cheaters. ANd they had the MVP that year as well. I will smirk at least a little when the Astros hatred starts to abait in June just in time for the Red Sox to re-kindle the story.
3. I have friends that work in Baseball. Of course it's speculation but 3 of them independent of each other have told me that the 3 teams that cheat the most are Houston, LAD, and Arizona. ANd all 3 conversations ended with the punchline of how little the Diamondbacks have to show for their cheating.
4. The sanctimony in baseball is comical AND sad. No sport likes to eat it's young like baseball. The same reporters that used the 1998 home run race to their benefit now vote against steroid players getting into the HOF. Anything to protect your 2 inches in the Sunday edition, fellas. LOL
5. Being mindful of #1, anyone that thinks the cheating is limited to Houston, Boston or just a couple teams is sniffing glue. ALL teams and players creep as close to the line as possible. Are there players that refuse to participate? ABSOLUTELY. Are there teams that play every game on the up and up? No way. There is simply too much at stake and the transfer of players and execs and coaches between teams means that the knowledge of skirting the rules isn't limited to Houston.
5b. You want examples? The team that closes the dome to induce more short fly balls. The team that lets the grass grow longer to make grounders in the infield slow down. The team that overwaters the dirt in the base-paths to slow runners. on and on and on.
6. MLB allowing ANY current-game film in the clubhouse is so stupid as to defy words. So a batter can walk into the clubhouse and review the at-bat he completed 30 seconds ago to look at pitch sequences and locations.....that's okay? Absolutely STUPID. Suggested result: eliminate replay on anything but scoring plays. Remove replay in the clubhouse and prohibit players from leaving the dugout except for bio-breaks with an MLB escort.
7. Finally, if anything ever drives me away from baseball it will be this: the "inside" baseball talk. Reporters and players and former players that patronize fans with things like "you wouldn't understand..." or "there is a game within the game..." A sport that allows/supports putting a fastball in a guy's ribs if he preens after a home run. A sport that says SOME version of sign stealing is fine BUT other versions are not.
However, on another side. I’m tired of all this crap and dumb rules. Steroids? Use ‘em if you got ‘em. Why police it? I say Let the players decide. But I understand why that’s a unpopular opinion too.
Signs? Really? We literally have one guy on the field announcing to another guy what the next play is going to be and the opposing team is supposed to ignore it. How about let’s figure out a better way to communicate. There’s always going to be people that want to exploit such low hanging fruit. Especially with modern technology. The stupidest thing the Astros did was the banging in the dugout. If they had some silent obfuscated signal they would have never been caught (again, not defending the cheating but this is like a bank robber using a unicycle as a get away vehicle).
AND THAT IN ITSELF IS LUDICROUS.
What other sport allows the field of play to be modified to fit one style of play or player? Can you imagine a basketball team raising the rims 2 feet so that Giannis couldn't dunk AND IT BEING ALLOWED? Or a football team growing the grass to 8" so that a team with fast wide receivers would be slowed?
To me, baseball's rich (sarcasm) history of allowing random-sized fields and wall heights and open or closed roofs and watered or unwatered infields means that the more Circus-like elements of the sport are allowable. I too like some of this "gamesmanship". But I have a hard time understanding the difference of the allowed gamesmanship (stealing signs from second) and the disallowed and disgraceful gamesmanship (using ALLOWED in-clubhouse video to determine pitch sequences).
I’ve basically stopped watching all pro sports, I was an athlete in school, and for a long time and avid sports fan, but no more.
The rule changes in the NBA, caused me to drop the sport, the PED scandal of MLB caused me to drop MLB, and the rule changes to football are making it feel a whole lot like The NBA.
I didn’t watch a single NFL game last season, and I only DVRed the NFL playoff games, and only skipped through one game, deleting the rest.
Even college sports have lost their appeal. Only one sport left and that’s boxing, but the pay per view rates have caused me to stop buying those events.
I think pro spots have peaked and will continue to decline.
That sign-stealing is part of the game, it isn't against the rules, and that most players who are complaining are in a gray area of hypocrisy, because they're mad they weren't in the loop on the tactic. My friends further believe that the Astros are being used as the patsies for all of MLB. The Astros will take the public blame for something most teams do or wish they thought of, and now all MLB will get on the same page about allowing or banning stealing like this.
These opinions are not my own, but I haven't seen the opinions or viewpoints of Astros defenders online - so here it is.