00:00:01
Welcome. Welcome to Wharton Moneyball.
00:00:04
Welcome to a full hour of sports
00:00:06
analytics here on the Wharton Podcast
00:00:08
Network. This is Cade Massey
00:00:10
hosting with the whole crew. I think
00:00:12
it's been a while since we've had
00:00:13
everybody in here. Eric Bradlow is here.
00:00:14
Adi Wyner is here. Shane Jensen is here.
00:00:16
Those three responsible adults are on
00:00:18
campus being professors. I am
00:00:21
in a long way from
00:00:23
uh campus, but trying to be a
00:00:25
responsible adult. Some combination of
00:00:27
us are here
00:00:29
almost every week of the year, 48, 49,
00:00:31
times a year. We've been doing it for
00:00:33
more than 12 years now. Just passed the
00:00:35
12-year anniversary at the top of March.
00:00:37
We are recording on a Tuesday afternoon
00:00:39
as we typically do. The show will go up
00:00:42
in the wee hours of Wednesday. We're
00:00:44
going to follow our usual format this
00:00:47
week. We're going to start with the
00:00:48
guest in the first half hour and open it
00:00:51
up, open lines, open topics
00:00:53
in the second half hour. Good time of
00:00:55
year, lots of things going on. Glad to
00:00:57
have the whole crew back. We are going
00:00:59
to turn it over to Adi Wyner to
00:01:01
introduce our guest and to lead the
00:01:02
interview with that guest.
00:01:04
Our guest being a long time friend of
00:01:06
our friend Adi Wyner. Adi.
00:01:09
Happy to introduce uh Professor David
00:01:11
Henkin. Um David and I go back almost 40
00:01:14
years now. It's hard to believe that
00:01:16
I've done anything in my life for almost
00:01:17
40 years, let alone known a human being
00:01:19
starting as an adult. We were both at
00:01:21
undergrads at Yale together. Um and then
00:01:23
we were also um
00:01:26
I guess technically colleagues at at
00:01:27
Berkeley. You were You were just
00:01:28
starting as a professor when I was uh
00:01:30
finishing my post-doc at at Cal, but you
00:01:32
stayed at Cal ever since as a professor
00:01:35
of American history. He's the author of
00:01:37
several books. I've read one of them. Um
00:01:39
these are terrific books, but they have
00:01:40
nothing to do with sports. You can go
00:01:41
get them on your own time and look them
00:01:43
up. But most recently and most
00:01:44
interestingly to our group, David is the
00:01:46
author of a recently um
00:01:49
released book called Out of the
00:01:51
Ballpark, a book about baseball, which
00:01:54
is um
00:01:55
so obviously something that's near and
00:01:57
dear to all of our hearts, especially to
00:01:59
uh the New Yorkers. And David is a New
00:02:01
Yorker by by by birth, but he is
00:02:03
actually a St. Louis Cardinals fan. I
00:02:05
knew that about you, but I had actually
00:02:06
no knowledge that you were how big a
00:02:08
baseball fan you were. So, welcome to
00:02:10
our show, Professor David Henkin. It's
00:02:11
great to have you.
00:02:12
It's lovely to be here. Um and for what
00:02:15
it's worth, I was actually not I was
00:02:17
born in France, which might have
00:02:19
disposed me to root for a former former
00:02:22
French to city instead of instead of the
00:02:24
Yankees. That is a tidbit I did not know
00:02:27
about you. So, there you go. Something
00:02:28
that you learn. I'm going to actually
00:02:29
before we actually begin the interview,
00:02:31
I'm going to read a the my most favorite
00:02:33
quote about baseball um
00:02:36
that and because David's an author and
00:02:38
he's a historian and he's a intellectual
00:02:40
and he brings a a
00:02:42
a view to baseball that's not what we
00:02:44
typically bring. And so, I'm going to
00:02:46
start with this quote. Um baseball
00:02:48
breaks your heart.
00:02:49
It's designed to break your heart. The
00:02:51
game begins in the spring when
00:02:53
everything else begins again and it
00:02:54
blossoms in the summer, filling the
00:02:56
afternoons and evenings. And then as
00:02:58
soon as the chill rains come, it stops
00:03:00
and leaves you to face the fall all
00:03:01
alone. You can count on it. Rely on it
00:03:04
to buffer the passage of time to keep
00:03:05
the memory of sunshine and high skies
00:03:07
alive. And just to end the days are all
00:03:10
twilight when you need it most, it
00:03:12
stops.
00:03:13
Does anyone know who wrote that quote?
00:03:15
I know I'm sure that David does, but
00:03:17
anyone else?
00:03:19
David, do you do you know who wrote
00:03:20
that?
00:03:21
It has echoes of Bart Giamatti, but
00:03:24
>> That is Bart Giamatti and and I brought
00:03:26
it in because it's the best baseball
00:03:27
quote I've ever read. It captures I
00:03:29
think everything that you one needs to
00:03:30
know about the connection between
00:03:31
baseball and I think in America's
00:03:33
pastime.
00:03:34
Um and of course, we were both at Yale
00:03:36
at the same time when when Giamatti was
00:03:37
our president. Um I think he left right
00:03:39
around the same time you did and and I
00:03:41
was stuck with Benno Schmidt for the for
00:03:43
the last couple years. You missed those
00:03:44
those seasons. Anyway, so David, you're
00:03:46
an author of this great book which I did
00:03:49
read and I'm going to start by just
00:03:50
asking you a question about it. Um, one
00:03:52
of the things that you talk about is
00:03:53
that baseball isn't about one thing.
00:03:56
What were you thinking when you were
00:03:57
pushing back against the tradition of
00:03:59
baseball as a, you know, a bunch of
00:04:01
a story about teams, players,
00:04:02
accomplishments, but as maybe is it a
00:04:05
grand metaphor for America? Is it
00:04:06
something else? Um, so tell me about how
00:04:09
you came to write this book and what and
00:04:10
and what's
00:04:11
what is your take on the origin?
00:04:13
>> I came to write the book because
00:04:16
Oxford University Press asked me if I
00:04:18
would do their very short introduction
00:04:20
to baseball and it's not something that
00:04:22
I had had had published on before that I
00:04:25
do teach about baseball sometimes in the
00:04:26
context of of
00:04:28
of larger developments and I started to
00:04:30
thinking about, well, you know,
00:04:32
what is my take on baseball and I
00:04:34
thought about all the things people have
00:04:35
said about it including the quotation
00:04:37
that you just read Audi
00:04:39
and the contrarian
00:04:41
you know, or the maybe the skeptic or at
00:04:44
least the splitter in me. I'm I'm often
00:04:46
interested in in differences within
00:04:48
things that appear to to to be to be the
00:04:50
same came to mind. So,
00:04:52
so many of the things that people say
00:04:55
about baseball as as as a whole
00:04:58
draw my draw my suspicion.
00:05:01
First of all, that has to do with the
00:05:02
unique character of the United States
00:05:05
in part because I'm not sure what there
00:05:07
is a unique character to the
00:05:09
the United States.
00:05:10
But also because and I point this out in
00:05:12
the book, a lot of the things that
00:05:13
people say about baseball actually
00:05:14
contradict one another. I mean, it
00:05:16
doesn't mean that one of them couldn't
00:05:17
be true, but but I've heard people say
00:05:19
that baseball is about punctuality
00:05:22
and
00:05:23
and precision and I've also heard many
00:05:25
more people say that it's about the
00:05:26
opposite, it's about living off the
00:05:28
clock, it's about leisure.
00:05:31
Lots of claims about baseball are
00:05:34
connected to
00:05:36
pastoral settings and connected to the
00:05:38
natural rhythms of an agrarian society.
00:05:42
>> I will cornfield kind of like Exactly.
00:05:44
Yeah, and and and that's sort of
00:05:47
you know, that that flies in the in in
00:05:49
the face not only of all the other
00:05:51
cliches about baseball being city kids
00:05:53
on the Lower East Side playing
00:05:55
stickball, but also flies in the face of
00:05:56
the actual history of the game as an
00:05:58
urban as urban sport.
00:06:01
I've heard people claim that it that
00:06:02
baseball is American because it's about
00:06:05
individualism and
00:06:07
you know, one better at a time and
00:06:08
everyone for themselves. And I've also
00:06:10
heard people say that it's
00:06:12
about America because it's about
00:06:13
teamwork. So people disagree about what
00:06:15
America is, they disagree about what
00:06:17
baseball is, and they also ignore the
00:06:19
fact that at this point in history
00:06:21
baseball really is a multinational
00:06:23
sport. It's not global in this in the
00:06:25
way that soccer is, but of course but
00:06:27
it is the it's the national team sport
00:06:29
of Japan.
00:06:31
It's at least as popular in the
00:06:33
Spanish-speaking Caribbean as it is in
00:06:35
in North America.
00:06:37
You know, and and
00:06:38
uh
00:06:39
the World Series gets higher TV ratings
00:06:42
in Japan than it does in the US. And
00:06:45
we've a lot of us probably watched the
00:06:47
recent World Baseball Classic and have
00:06:49
been impressed not about the players but
00:06:52
by more by the the fan cultures that
00:06:54
have grown up outside the United States.
00:06:56
So rather than look for the one thing
00:06:58
that baseball is, I've tried in this
00:07:00
book to think about many different
00:07:02
things that baseball has been in in
00:07:04
different settings over time.
00:07:06
So that's one thing that I sort of
00:07:07
wanted to push back on. The other thing
00:07:08
I think I wanted to push back on is the
00:07:10
idea that baseball is fundamentally
00:07:11
different. Which is another one of those
00:07:13
contradictory cliches. People always say
00:07:15
that baseball is completely different
00:07:16
from what it used to be, which would
00:07:18
make it much harder to claim that
00:07:19
baseball is about one thing or it's
00:07:21
about the essence of timeless American
00:07:23
national character.
00:07:25
So they're actually going the other
00:07:26
direction which I I'm you know, baseball
00:07:28
obviously changes in many ways because
00:07:30
society changes, but but baseball um
00:07:33
uh uh
00:07:34
I think a lot of what makes baseball
00:07:36
interesting as a spectator sport has
00:07:38
actually persisted. And the and the
00:07:40
things that baseball fans and
00:07:42
commentators and players and and owners
00:07:44
have wrestled with over time have
00:07:46
largely been the same sorts of struggles
00:07:48
and same sorts of sorts of themes. So,
00:07:50
those are some of the things I was
00:07:51
looking to do in in in this book. Yeah.
00:07:54
So, I have I have a bunch of follow-ups,
00:07:55
but I'll go to Shane.
00:07:57
Well, one I just cuz you talked about
00:07:58
the fan experience and one thing that
00:07:59
kind of really caught my attention
00:08:01
reading your book is you talked about
00:08:03
basically fan the
00:08:05
I think your quote is the persistent and
00:08:07
widespread practice of individual fans
00:08:09
scoring by hand, which has no parallel
00:08:12
among spectator sports.
00:08:14
And I you know, it maybe kind of really
00:08:16
like I you know, I I thought I started
00:08:18
thinking about that. No, this I started
00:08:19
thinking, oh, there must be some other
00:08:20
sport that does hand kind of scoring
00:08:22
this way and it and I I I couldn't come
00:08:24
up with anything and I I I maybe could
00:08:26
expand a little bit more about that. To
00:08:28
me, it got me thinking that
00:08:30
maybe baseball in this particular
00:08:31
respect is this really nice it's it's
00:08:34
it's complicated enough that it's not a
00:08:36
trivial or tedious exercise to kind of
00:08:39
score by hand, but it's not so
00:08:41
complicated like that you can't kind of
00:08:43
score it by hand in sort of a simple
00:08:45
sheet format. Can you maybe talk about a
00:08:47
little bit more about that? Sure. I
00:08:49
remember when I was reading the proofs
00:08:50
for this book and that was one of those
00:08:51
lines I was like, uh, someone's going to
00:08:53
like tell me that in fact
00:08:56
in
00:08:57
in Pakistan, people score cricket
00:08:59
exactly with the with the same
00:09:01
uh, but but but I left it in there cuz I
00:09:03
I
00:09:04
I I didn't know that it wasn't true. Um,
00:09:06
and it it it does So, so, uh,
00:09:09
I think that the practice of scoring a
00:09:11
game captures a couple different things.
00:09:13
It first of all, it it focuses on the
00:09:15
fan as a crucial producer of the thing
00:09:18
that is that is baseball as a spectator
00:09:21
sport. And that's not unique to
00:09:22
baseball, but I think baseball was
00:09:23
really at the vanguard A lot of the
00:09:25
things I point out in this book, um, are
00:09:27
things about baseball that are at this
00:09:29
point true of many other spectator
00:09:31
sports, but appeared first and most
00:09:33
prominently in baseball. So, that's one
00:09:34
thing. But the other thing is the
00:09:35
scoring. The they producing a record
00:09:39
record that's ideally redundant with the
00:09:41
public one, right? I mean it was it's
00:09:43
not like if if I I don't sit in in the
00:09:46
stands at you know at at Wrigley Field
00:09:48
and produce an an an actual record.
00:09:49
There isn't going to be one. So it
00:09:50
serves no practical purpose. It inserts
00:09:53
me into the game because scoring
00:09:57
is such a huge and by scoring I don't
00:09:59
mean scoring runs. I mean the act of
00:10:01
recording
00:10:03
the statistical achievement of the game
00:10:05
is such a big part of the game. It's how
00:10:06
you mark that you were there. There are
00:10:08
people who will score a game
00:10:11
that they're not attending. But the fact
00:10:13
that that's a that's a somewhat
00:10:15
I think it's a
00:10:17
It's rare. It's a little perverse.
00:10:19
It's even maybe a little bit
00:10:21
I mean it's it's it's it's it's a little
00:10:23
bit deceptive. I mean because you're
00:10:25
claiming a relationship that again that
00:10:27
you didn't have.
00:10:28
So
00:10:29
in the same way that people like to
00:10:31
catch a foul ball as a as a kind of a
00:10:33
a trophy or a token of their
00:10:36
participation. The scorecard itself is a
00:10:38
trophy or token of participation cuz you
00:10:40
were there doing a crucial thing. The
00:10:43
crucial thing of course wasn't throwing
00:10:45
a ball or hitting a ball or pitching a
00:10:47
ball or catching a ball.
00:10:49
It was instead participating in the
00:10:51
practice of keeping tabs. And notice how
00:10:54
many of the tabs that we keep are not
00:10:57
simply about whether a run was scored or
00:10:59
a base was attained but also who should
00:11:01
get credit for that because we're we
00:11:03
need to
00:11:04
record whether whether there was an
00:11:05
error or whether it was a hit or whether
00:11:07
it was a pass ball or a wild pitch.
00:11:09
So we're participating in the discourse
00:11:12
of assigning credit or blame for things
00:11:15
that don't actually affect the outcome
00:11:17
of of the game. I mean the play does but
00:11:20
whether you call it a wild pitch or a
00:11:22
pass ball
00:11:24
has no bearing on on the on the outcome
00:11:26
of the of the game. But we care very
00:11:27
much that someone record it. And if
00:11:29
we're at the game, we want to be
00:11:31
participating in the in the in the
00:11:33
practice of of
00:11:35
of of registering that judgment. So,
00:11:38
David, I'm going to just follow up with
00:11:39
that. Something that you did touch a
00:11:41
little bit on the book, but I think it's
00:11:42
something that for all of us who grew up
00:11:43
with baseball as a child
00:11:45
really feel. I didn't learn to hit the
00:11:47
ball or throw the ball from my parents,
00:11:50
from my father. My dad taught me how to
00:11:52
score it.
00:11:53
And when I first went to a baseball
00:11:54
game, he he sat down and we bought the
00:11:56
scorecard at Yankee Stadium, which was
00:11:58
not the yearbook. The scorecard was
00:11:59
cheap.
00:12:01
And we And he taught me how to fill it
00:12:02
out. And we did that together. And
00:12:04
today, every time I go to a baseball
00:12:06
game, I'm sitting next to him. And that
00:12:08
is something that I think in in many
00:12:10
ways attracts people to baseball cuz you
00:12:12
cuz of that connection,
00:12:14
particularly in non-athletic families,
00:12:17
right? So, we have that connection. But
00:12:20
But just And I think that I think in
00:12:22
some ways keeping score really is is is
00:12:25
a unique thing. Although
00:12:27
Dean Oliver, who essentially learned He
00:12:29
did that for basketball.
00:12:31
But he invented the the act of of doing
00:12:33
that for basketball. And now it's done
00:12:35
automatically, but but he realized there
00:12:37
was a giant hole in assigning credit in
00:12:39
a basketball that didn't exist. And he
00:12:41
essentially created that phenomenon. And
00:12:42
And we argued recently he should be the
00:12:44
first analyst to go to the Basketball
00:12:46
Hall of Fame, a non-player, because he
00:12:48
did that. But you mentioned
00:12:50
one thing that you think that is is also
00:12:52
unique about baseball.
00:12:54
For those of you who haven't read the
00:12:55
book, baseball, unique to any sport, has
00:12:58
the crack of a bat.
00:13:00
The sound of that crack of the bat is is
00:13:04
it's a it's an oral sound that I don't
00:13:05
think any sport kind of has that that um
00:13:09
that Well, hold on. Okay, let's let's
00:13:11
quick round robin on a on let's just do
00:13:13
quick quick quick quick quick. Fellas,
00:13:14
quick. Other noises in other sports,
00:13:17
Shane. Doink.
00:13:21
Two different doinks. One doink is a
00:13:22
field goal miss off the goal But what
00:13:24
about what about a post in hockey? What
00:13:26
about a post
00:13:27
>> thinking the field goal or the double
00:13:28
doink even. Yes. The double doink even.
00:13:30
Very famous in Philadelphia, the double
00:13:31
doink.
00:13:32
What about the swish or the clip of a
00:13:35
net on a real clean basketball shot? So,
00:13:38
I'm not saying there's I'm not saying
00:13:39
you've got a distinct sound, but there
00:13:40
are a few other aural experiences.
00:13:42
>> One's easier to hear around the world
00:13:44
than the other though, for sure.
00:13:45
I mean, I'll let David answer the
00:13:47
the sound of crack of the bat also
00:13:48
hugely differentiated, right? So, Hank
00:13:51
Aaron's crack of the bat was allegedly
00:13:53
something to behold and it it changes by
00:13:56
the the type of the batter or the the
00:13:57
contact, etc. etc. So, you learn a lot
00:13:59
from the crack.
00:14:00
>> It's it's also different in amateur
00:14:01
amateur versus pro. Amateurs ding ding.
00:14:04
The aluminum bat is not the same. The
00:14:06
aluminum bat is not the same. So, I
00:14:07
mean, you know, the crack of the bat is
00:14:09
is loud. I I
00:14:10
To to me, the interesting question is uh
00:14:13
how these sounds register
00:14:15
um on the radio because
00:14:18
uh
00:14:19
a lot of baseball's popularity grew with
00:14:21
the radio. Uh people listened to boxing
00:14:23
matches on on on the radio, too. So, it
00:14:25
wasn't And people listened to horse
00:14:27
races on on on the radio. But, this
00:14:28
baseball was really the the first team
00:14:30
sport that was popular in in in in
00:14:32
radio. And uh the crack of the bat, both
00:14:35
the real one and and and the simulated
00:14:38
one. There's there's As you've seen the
00:14:39
film Bull Durham, you know, when when
00:14:41
the when the team goes on the road uh
00:14:43
and then the broadcaster like bangs a
00:14:46
like a bat in the in the studio instead.
00:14:48
So, I I I think those became sort of
00:14:50
hallmarks uh
00:14:51
and the roar of the crowd. When you
00:14:53
listen to football or basketball, the
00:14:54
roar of of of the crowd is helpful. Um
00:14:58
but the the the doink, I I I don't think
00:15:00
it's really audible. The doink in hockey
00:15:02
also is is is and the swish are not
00:15:04
audible. The The crack of the bat often
00:15:06
still is au- audible when you listen to
00:15:08
baseball. People do listen to baseball
00:15:10
quite
00:15:11
quite a quite a bit. Baseball, I think,
00:15:13
is a is a somewhat more radio-friendly
00:15:16
sport than than uh than some of the
00:15:18
others that that that we're talking
00:15:19
about. So, the crack of the bat is a
00:15:21
striking thing at the ballpark, but I'm
00:15:23
especially interested in the in the
00:15:25
crack of the bat and the roar of the
00:15:26
crowd in terms of of how baseball was
00:15:29
experienced during many decades where
00:15:31
most fans were actually listening rather
00:15:33
than I I think also David to build on
00:15:35
what you just said, the thing about
00:15:36
baseball that makes the radio valuable
00:15:39
is it's one pitcher one batter. I
00:15:41
understand there fielders and
00:15:42
everything, but like you can picture
00:15:45
what just happened and you can attribute
00:15:47
credit or blame to what just happened.
00:15:50
Much harder to do in other sports.
00:15:53
Yeah, that's true. I I find for example
00:15:55
hockey extremely difficult to listen to
00:15:58
on the radio because I want to see where
00:15:59
everyone is at all times. Um
00:16:02
Yeah, so no I I totally agree with that
00:16:04
Eric. Well good so that's good to segue.
00:16:06
I mean I'll just we talk about all the
00:16:07
differences. When I try to teach
00:16:08
baseball to people who are who are
00:16:10
coming in from abroad or never been to a
00:16:11
game, I try to explain that it's
00:16:13
fundamentally a team sport played by an
00:16:15
individual um situations almost like an
00:16:18
Olympic sport. Like we can we can judge
00:16:20
the quality of a performance clearly
00:16:22
individually um in a way that you can't
00:16:25
so clearly do in any other sport. Um so
00:16:27
it has that both of those things mixed
00:16:28
together. And that kind of leads to the
00:16:30
to the the chapter I guess we can focus
00:16:32
on. This is a chapter you have called
00:16:33
accounting which really is closest to
00:16:35
our hearts. It's a it's not actually
00:16:37
called statistics. You You chose
00:16:38
deliberately to call it accounting which
00:16:40
I think makes sense given our
00:16:41
conversation about scoring. It's not
00:16:43
just about statistics. It's also about
00:16:45
how the statistics come to be. Um So my
00:16:48
question is and and you make a point
00:16:50
about this and it's I think it's
00:16:50
something we've talked about on our show
00:16:52
to some degree um which is that uh
00:16:56
we like to think of the baseball's
00:16:58
obsession with statistics, particularly
00:17:00
advanced statistics, as something that's
00:17:02
somewhat new to the say the Moneyball
00:17:04
era. One of the things you point out is
00:17:06
it's not new. It's in fact some of the
00:17:08
major findings that we like to attribute
00:17:10
to Moneyball that the idea of a base
00:17:12
percentage mattering, um hitting home
00:17:14
runs and and things like that and
00:17:16
batting average and being such a
00:17:17
particularly good metric. Those are know
00:17:19
have been known for a very long time.
00:17:21
So, why don't you can tell us about
00:17:22
evolution of statistics, um how
00:17:24
Moneyball really isn't new, and and just
00:17:26
uh give us some thoughts on that on that
00:17:28
area. Yes, I mean I mean uh there are
00:17:30
some news I should say cuz I'm I'm still
00:17:32
I'm about to say what you said I I say
00:17:34
that cuz I'll I'll I'll the the
00:17:35
disclaimer to be clear. Uh there are a
00:17:37
lot of interesting things that are new
00:17:39
about the way in which baseball is is
00:17:42
discussed, played, um and accounted for
00:17:44
uh in the so-called Moneyball era. But,
00:17:48
one that's clearly not new is an
00:17:49
obsession with statistical accuracy and
00:17:51
a great faith that numbers, and
00:17:54
especially large numbers, um
00:17:56
uh can play an explanatory role in
00:17:59
appreciation of the game. I mean that's
00:18:01
essentially what what Moneyball is
00:18:05
is about. I would say that goes back at
00:18:07
the very least to to to know to the
00:18:09
middle of 19th century and Henry
00:18:11
Chadwick, who was a sort of a
00:18:14
British-born
00:18:16
um
00:18:16
immigrant American uh journalist who
00:18:19
played a large role in creating things
00:18:22
like the box score and championing the
00:18:24
batting average uh and talking about
00:18:27
earned runs. Um and he had many he had
00:18:29
many things on his agenda, but one of
00:18:30
them is is the Moneyball
00:18:33
project, which is uh great faith that
00:18:35
large large numbers can explain
00:18:38
meaningful things about game. Now,
00:18:40
what's what's there a couple things that
00:18:42
that that that are different. One is
00:18:44
that uh um
00:18:48
in-game strategy uh pays much more
00:18:50
attention to the insights of those large
00:18:52
numbers than they used to. I think the
00:18:54
misconception is that we've gotten
00:18:56
better at counting.
00:18:58
Um and we've gotten faster at counting,
00:19:00
obviously. But, I'm not sure we've
00:19:01
gotten better at counting uh or more
00:19:04
meticulous in our record-keeping
00:19:06
uh as as a little larger culture. It's
00:19:08
just that um
00:19:11
in-game strategy
00:19:12
been somewhat resistant to the insights
00:19:15
of those. So, for example, Philip Roth's
00:19:17
1973
00:19:19
novel, The Great Great American Novel,
00:19:21
features like a 7-year-old kid who has
00:19:24
run the numbers as you're supposed to do
00:19:26
when you're a 7-year-old kid. Like
00:19:27
whether your father is scoring or
00:19:29
whatever.
00:19:30
He runs the numbers and he says, "No,
00:19:31
our best hitter should actually be in
00:19:33
the first or second spot in the lineup,
00:19:35
not in the fourth."
00:19:36
Uh bunting does not make sense. And he
00:19:38
he said all all all all the all the all
00:19:40
the click all the you know all all the
00:19:41
clichés of the post-Bill James era. Um
00:19:45
and you know and and and he's resisted
00:19:49
in in in in the book. But but you know
00:19:51
Philip Roth didn't make that up. These
00:19:54
these were insights that a number of
00:19:56
including the professors of of of
00:19:57
statistics like like like yourselves and
00:19:59
people in the in the military um
00:20:02
had written about and published articles
00:20:04
in in in scholarly journals. So, one
00:20:06
difference is yes, it's it's it's much
00:20:08
better reflected in the way that the
00:20:10
managers manage and and even the way
00:20:12
players play.
00:20:13
Uh
00:20:14
There also is I think an interesting to
00:20:17
me difference in the way that these
00:20:20
insights are deployed by fans, which is
00:20:23
there are a number of statistics now
00:20:24
that are interesting to me because
00:20:27
they're actually not about the
00:20:28
traditional goal of assigning credit or
00:20:31
blame for the outcome of a game. So,
00:20:33
what Chadwick wanted to do, this was
00:20:34
like the classic model, is the game is
00:20:36
complicated.
00:20:38
Um a hit doesn't necessarily
00:20:40
uh lead to a run. Many things have to go
00:20:42
wrong or right to produce an outcome.
00:20:43
But let's figure out whom we can praise
00:20:46
or blame for their contribution to what
00:20:49
actually happened. But now we have all
00:20:50
these statistics that are much more
00:20:52
interesting, especially to to teams,
00:20:55
that are are trying to project and and
00:20:57
assess the value of a player that are
00:20:59
not about what happened. They're about
00:21:02
what
00:21:03
like screening out the noise. So, for
00:21:04
example, fielding-independent pitching.
00:21:07
Right?
00:21:08
So, that's a that's a or uh or Babbitt,
00:21:11
the batting average of balls balls in
00:21:13
play.
00:21:14
These are statistics that are designed
00:21:15
to screen out the role that an
00:21:18
individual contribution made to the
00:21:19
outcome. Uh because the outcome is sort
00:21:22
of noise, right? Uh
00:21:24
the outcome might tell us something
00:21:26
that's interesting to fans or to bettors
00:21:27
or whatever, but but we want to know
00:21:29
whether this player is likely to be able
00:21:30
to do something good in the future,
00:21:32
which we want to know in order to decide
00:21:34
how to evaluate and assess this
00:21:36
this player as as as as a commodity, we
00:21:39
want to know the things that he had
00:21:40
control over. We want to pay a lot of
00:21:42
attention to to think like a pitcher's
00:21:45
uh walk and strikeout rate. We want to
00:21:46
pay a lot of attention to isolated power
00:21:49
stat stats or even, you know, the exit
00:21:51
velocity of a foul ball.
00:21:53
Um uh we want to know sprint speed. We
00:21:55
we we we we want to focus a lot on
00:21:57
things that may or may not have
00:21:59
contributed, and in order to isolate
00:22:01
those things, we will often want to
00:22:03
disregard things like whether the ball
00:22:05
was a hit or not. So that is new, right?
00:22:08
Before I before I go to Eric, I just
00:22:09
want to a comment. I mean, in some
00:22:10
levels
00:22:11
historically, we were all historians.
00:22:14
Statistics were helping us be
00:22:15
historians. Like like you I mean not
00:22:16
like you, but yeah, same idea. We always
00:22:18
talked about what happened, and the
00:22:20
assumption was the best predictor of the
00:22:22
of the of the future is the past. And we
00:22:24
now we're becoming actual statisticians.
00:22:26
I mean, cuz what we realize is the past
00:22:28
is a mixture of innate talent plus
00:22:31
noise. And these statistics are there to
00:22:33
screen out that noise, and we can get a
00:22:35
better estimator. I can use statistical
00:22:37
language to do that. And that's what
00:22:39
it's great to listen to you say this,
00:22:40
cuz what you're realizing is that the
00:22:42
fans have become statisticians.
00:22:44
Right? Yeah, and they've also become
00:22:45
more like general managers.
00:22:47
>> Mhm. Right?
00:22:47
>> Yeah. Um in other words, they've got a
00:22:49
little bit less uh Fans famously have
00:22:51
liked to to play the usurp the role of
00:22:54
umpire, but also they've liked to usurp
00:22:56
the role of official scorer, and they've
00:22:57
also of course like to usurp the role of
00:22:59
manager, right? W- Why do we bring in
00:23:02
this relief pitcher in that situation?
00:23:04
Why do Why do Why do we let Pedro stay
00:23:06
in the game kind of thing?
00:23:08
Um
00:23:09
Appreciate that, T Car.
00:23:12
Yeah.
00:23:13
Thank you very much.
00:23:15
You know,
00:23:17
now when when when when when we let fans
00:23:19
We listen to fans speak, you can see
00:23:21
them identifying with the general
00:23:23
manager. And for
00:23:24
And for that purpose, they want to talk
00:23:26
about whether someone is likely to be
00:23:28
good in the future not whether they've
00:23:30
been good in in in the past. And that's
00:23:32
part of the reason why they're drawn
00:23:34
They're drawn to that kind of
00:23:36
vocabulary. So, that that's that's
00:23:38
that's my take on what is and what isn't
00:23:39
new about about Moneyball's dizzy. Now,
00:23:42
what is really new about about the
00:23:44
larger culture of watching baseball
00:23:47
and is technologically new is video
00:23:49
capture. I mean, these are things we
00:23:50
couldn't
00:23:51
we couldn't talk We couldn't talk it We
00:23:53
could talk about how fast a pitch was
00:23:55
based on a radar gun, but we we couldn't
00:23:56
talk about spin rate. We couldn't talk
00:23:58
about hit probability or catch
00:24:00
probability.
00:24:02
And And the ability to to literally
00:24:05
visualize bodies, balls, and bats in
00:24:07
motion has changed so much not only
00:24:09
about the way we talk about sports but
00:24:10
even about the way the players play the
00:24:13
way they train, the way they think about
00:24:15
their own
00:24:16
their own their own their own mechanics,
00:24:18
the way they think about their own
00:24:19
talent, the way they think about their
00:24:20
own um uh uh capacity to develop and
00:24:23
improve the way they sort of
00:24:24
self-project their their own their own
00:24:27
development. So, I think there are
00:24:28
technological things that are really
00:24:30
new. I think mostly I'm struck by the
00:24:32
ones having to do with video capture not
00:24:34
the ones having to do with conversation.
00:24:35
All right, so we're going to go to Eric,
00:24:36
then Cade, then Shane. So, Eric. Hey
00:24:38
David, I just want to ask you, um let's
00:24:40
think of all the major sports. I would
00:24:42
make the argument, but I'd love to hear
00:24:44
from your historical and thought
00:24:46
perspective based on your book.
00:24:48
Let's imagine you can only consume the
00:24:51
game.
00:24:52
So, you can watch the baseball game. You
00:24:55
you watch the football game. You can
00:24:56
watch the basketball game, you can watch
00:24:58
the hockey game, whether in person or on
00:25:00
TV, but I don't allow you to talk about
00:25:03
the game.
00:25:05
I would argue that baseball would suffer
00:25:07
the most. Maybe because it's become
00:25:09
ingrained in us to talk about the game.
00:25:12
Maybe it's become ingrained in us to
00:25:15
compare the history of the game. Like,
00:25:17
"Wow, that's something I've never seen
00:25:19
before in the history of the game." So,
00:25:21
to me, would you agree with the premise
00:25:24
that the narrative around baseball is
00:25:27
just as important as the game itself?
00:25:31
Yes, I agree with absolutely everything
00:25:33
that that you said. You did lump
00:25:35
together two things that are interesting
00:25:37
to me to separate, which is
00:25:39
being live at the game and watching it.
00:25:42
In part because both of those actually
00:25:44
can involve talking about the game. But
00:25:47
the game broadcast, whether on radio or
00:25:49
TV, are very much about talking about
00:25:52
about the game.
00:25:54
And so, um
00:25:55
yeah, so
00:25:56
what you say is true. I think what you
00:25:58
say would be even more striking if you
00:26:00
if you in the hypothetical you weren't
00:26:02
allowed to to watch it on. I I happen to
00:26:04
think that the sport that is most
00:26:05
improved by live attendance is hockey.
00:26:09
Um by by
00:26:11
by by a long shot.
00:26:12
Um I think basketball is very very
00:26:15
legible
00:26:16
on on on television much as it is live.
00:26:20
Baseball is somewhat less legible in
00:26:23
both cases and does require a lot more
00:26:25
more talking.
00:26:26
Hockey is barely legible uh
00:26:29
TV and oddly it becomes more legible
00:26:31
when you actually you appreciate things
00:26:33
about it. I was also referring David to
00:26:36
the fact that
00:26:37
if Audie and I are at the game, part of
00:26:40
the consumption utility is not the
00:26:42
announcer, it's us talking to each other
00:26:44
much more so than at other sporting
00:26:46
events. Not that we wouldn't talk to
00:26:48
each other. And maybe it's because of
00:26:50
the cadence of baseball. Maybe it's
00:26:51
because of the history of baseball. It's
00:26:53
just that we're not going to miss
00:26:55
anything in that 15 seconds where the
00:26:57
pitcher So, we got plenty of time to
00:26:58
talk. And we do.
00:27:00
Yeah, I I I agree though. I mean, people
00:27:02
have made some similar arguments about
00:27:04
football.
00:27:05
Uh you know,
00:27:06
it
00:27:06
it George Will's famous comment that
00:27:08
football is this
00:27:09
uh a classic American sport because it's
00:27:12
spectacular bursts of violence uh
00:27:15
punctuated by committee meetings. Uh so,
00:27:17
that
00:27:18
the committee meeting in football is
00:27:20
also an opportunity for fans to talk
00:27:22
about, you know, what what what the play
00:27:24
ought to be. So, I'm not sure if it's
00:27:26
unique to baseball's cadence, but
00:27:28
baseball's cadence contributes to it for
00:27:30
sure. Yeah.
00:27:32
Cadence.
00:27:33
David, uh I enjoy I read a few chapters
00:27:35
and enjoyed them immensely and I learned
00:27:38
a lot. And some things I
00:27:40
wouldn't have expected to know, like the
00:27:41
Chadwick history and scorekeeping and
00:27:43
his philosophy and all that is
00:27:45
phenomenal and fascinating.
00:27:47
But I feel like I should have known the
00:27:49
Curt Flood story. I did I didn't know
00:27:51
the Curt Flood story. This This was the
00:27:53
beginning of free agency, I gather,
00:27:55
probably across all sports, but this is
00:27:57
the
00:27:58
according to David, the St. Louis
00:27:59
Cardinals outfielder who got traded to
00:28:01
the Philadelphia Phillies. Here comes
00:28:02
Philly's rolling this thing.
00:28:04
And sued MLB cuz he didn't want to go.
00:28:07
And uh lost it went all the way to
00:28:08
Supreme Court, loses.
00:28:10
But becomes kind of a hero and it it
00:28:12
prods the union movement, etc. etc.
00:28:15
Anyway, this is a long way of saying I
00:28:17
learned some things that I think I
00:28:18
should have known and learned some
00:28:19
things that I would never have expected
00:28:20
myself to know, but found fascinating.
00:28:22
I want to ask you, I think history does
00:28:24
provide
00:28:25
a great deal of
00:28:27
signal in what's going to happen in the
00:28:29
future and we're
00:28:30
obviously should be paying attention to
00:28:32
history for that reason.
00:28:34
The chapter on capital and labor, union
00:28:36
negotiations and how how much difference
00:28:38
Marvin Miller made when he came in and
00:28:40
ran the players association and how that
00:28:43
you make this great point, you know,
00:28:45
Shohei makes this huge salary now.
00:28:47
That's due to what a great player he is,
00:28:48
but it's also generations of union
00:28:51
bargaining that got him there. This is
00:28:53
all a set up to ask, given your read of
00:28:56
history, what should we anticipate about
00:28:58
this next round of bargaining, which
00:29:00
feels like it's headed for a massive
00:29:02
stoppage? And we can say we can argue
00:29:04
Shane and I argued some of the show last
00:29:06
week about whether this would be good or
00:29:07
bad, but I'm just curious. What does
00:29:09
history tell us is likely to happen
00:29:11
union
00:29:13
owner negotiations next year?
00:29:16
I don't really have much much insight in
00:29:18
this. I'm just going to just a
00:29:19
disappointing answer. I mean, that the
00:29:20
structure of the problem remains the
00:29:22
same, which is, you know, the players
00:29:25
are the only ones that fans really want
00:29:27
to see. They don't want to see uh uh
00:29:29
replacements. The players are uniquely
00:29:31
talented, but nothing that they do has
00:29:35
value uh not just without opponents, but
00:29:38
without the structure of a league. Uh
00:29:40
the struc- I I have a chapter in here
00:29:41
about associations and leagues. I think
00:29:43
that the league is is one of like the
00:29:45
sort of mysterious and often underrated
00:29:47
features of modern spectator sports. The
00:29:49
league is what gives meaning to
00:29:51
competition between two changing
00:29:53
entities over time. And a lot of the
00:29:56
appetite that people have uh for
00:29:58
spectator sports has to do with the fact
00:30:00
that they see uh continuity. So, the
00:30:02
league has that power. Um
00:30:05
uh and then the players obviously have
00:30:07
have have have have the power that
00:30:09
talented um entertainers al- always do,
00:30:11
especially in competitive context. So, a
00:30:14
little different from like the movies or
00:30:15
a theater, where you know, you could
00:30:16
have an idea that someone is uniquely
00:30:19
talented at at singing or dancing or or
00:30:21
or or or at at telling jokes, but
00:30:24
because sports pit people against each
00:30:26
other, uh
00:30:27
the demand for the very best uh on the
00:30:30
part of fans is is a little bit more
00:30:31
non-negotiable. So, that's what the the
00:30:34
players have a lot of power. Now, the
00:30:35
tricky thing about the the current um uh
00:30:38
labor conflict in Major League Baseball
00:30:40
is that the the uh
00:30:43
the collective bargaining agreement is
00:30:45
in place has worked out very very well
00:30:47
for the players.
00:30:49
Not for minor leaguers, but for for
00:30:51
Major League players worked out very
00:30:52
well. It's worked out very well. It's
00:30:53
argued in this book in part because
00:30:55
Marvin Miller was very good at his job.
00:30:57
And once certain victories were in
00:31:00
place, they're very hard.
00:31:02
The threat to baseball for Major League
00:31:05
Baseball in this century is not never
00:31:06
been the strike. It's it's been the
00:31:08
lockout, right? It's it's it's it's
00:31:10
owners who are dissatisfied. So, I can't
00:31:13
predict what they're going to do. I
00:31:14
can't also predict,
00:31:16
um,
00:31:16
you know, how how the the the change in
00:31:19
leadership on the union side, which I
00:31:22
think probably is going to strengthen
00:31:23
the union's position,
00:31:26
is is is going to play out.
00:31:29
I can't predict how the recent flurry of
00:31:31
long-term contracts to very young
00:31:33
players.
00:31:34
I mean, I think just this morning that
00:31:36
the Mariners broke the record for the
00:31:39
the the largest contract to a guy who
00:31:42
has not had his Major League debut in
00:31:44
Colt Emerson. So, there are a lot of
00:31:46
things that are happening right now that
00:31:48
more knowledgeable people can weigh in
00:31:50
how how they think it's it's likely to
00:31:53
to
00:31:54
to affect the landscape, but the
00:31:55
structure of the problem is the same.
00:31:57
It's been the same, you know, for since
00:31:59
the mid-19th century.
00:32:01
And the power the particular power of
00:32:03
the MLB Players Association is what it
00:32:07
is, and that's what the owners are up
00:32:09
against. It's a strong union with a good
00:32:11
collective bargaining agreement in
00:32:13
place. The owners would like to disrupt
00:32:15
that to control their costs, but they
00:32:17
can't all get on the same page and
00:32:20
and and collude and and stop shelling
00:32:22
out these high contracts. So, so, you
00:32:25
know, I'm I'm I'm I guess I'm rooting
00:32:26
for the Players
00:32:28
Association, and I'm also,
00:32:31
slightly bullish on their prospects of
00:32:34
of either avoiding or or or or
00:32:37
weathering a work stoppage,
00:32:39
but that may just be the fan in me
00:32:41
talking rather than this story. Just so
00:32:43
you know, Kate, one of the most since as
00:32:44
you know and our listeners know I go to
00:32:46
Cooperstown every year for the induction
00:32:47
ceremony. I was there when Marvin
00:32:49
Miller, he was deceased but his family
00:32:51
spoke and so did many players on his
00:32:54
behalf about the impact he when he was
00:32:56
inducted into the Baseball Hall of Fame.
00:32:58
One of the more memorable and impactful
00:33:00
speeches about his impact of anybody in
00:33:04
the last last 50 years in baseball.
00:33:07
Let's tag him with what David said,
00:33:09
which is US Steel Workers Union
00:33:11
negotiators. So they he was a prominent
00:33:14
guy in industry, he stepped over to
00:33:15
baseball, brought a lot of expertise
00:33:17
over to baseball. I'm sorry to interrupt
00:33:18
you, David. No, no, I'm just saying that
00:33:19
that that that
00:33:21
Cooperstown has done a pretty good job
00:33:22
at canonizing both Miller and and Curt
00:33:25
Flood.
00:33:27
And if Flood's a more complicated story
00:33:29
because I mean, he lost the case, he
00:33:32
lost his career.
00:33:33
His life kind of unraveled.
00:33:36
It's not a happy story.
00:33:40
But he isn't he isn't he's now a saint,
00:33:42
right?
00:33:44
I mean, you know, if he didn't have the
00:33:46
same
00:33:47
he didn't have the same numbers as
00:33:48
Clemente, I bet some teams would retire
00:33:49
it, right?
00:33:51
It's funny because Bruce Meyer, who's
00:33:53
now the head of the players union, when
00:33:54
he was here at Penn he he told me that
00:33:56
Flood lost his suit. I didn't even know
00:33:57
that. I thought he had won but in your
00:33:59
book explained that he lost the suit but
00:34:01
I guess won the war essentially. Well,
00:34:04
yeah, he he his side won the war but I
00:34:06
don't know His side won the war but he
00:34:07
personally did not. Uh we only have a
00:34:09
couple minutes left. Shane, do you have
00:34:11
time you have a short question?
00:34:12
>> kind of quick one I guess. I I really
00:34:14
enjoyed the kind of description of some
00:34:16
of the experimentation in the 19th
00:34:17
century that went into the modern game
00:34:19
we see. And you had one line where you
00:34:21
talked about the current distance
00:34:24
between the pitcher and hitter. And you
00:34:26
say say which some mythologists cite as
00:34:29
the key to to game's perfection. And I I
00:34:32
that line by the way. But But can you
00:34:34
maybe talk a little bit more about cuz I
00:34:36
never really thought I mean obviously
00:34:37
distant you know, can can you talk a
00:34:39
little bit about what people mean when
00:34:41
they say baseball's perfect with that
00:34:43
with regards to that?
00:34:44
I mean the idea is that if you move the
00:34:46
the the the the rubber, you know, 4 in
00:34:50
or 6 I'd say 6 in that's the big number
00:34:52
at 6 in closer or to to the plate or or
00:34:55
or further, it would make all the
00:34:57
difference in the world. There even are
00:34:58
movies and and and and and novels that
00:35:01
that that
00:35:04
that take up that that that experiment.
00:35:06
>> is that kind of a
00:35:07
is that a thought experiment or did they
00:35:09
actually like in the 1880s like like is
00:35:11
it such a narrow band that if we did
00:35:13
move it 6 in it would just completely
00:35:15
throw it off?
00:35:16
>> was it was it was moved frequently in in
00:35:19
in in the 19th century and the mound was
00:35:21
raised
00:35:22
and and lowered famously after the 1968
00:35:25
season. So I mean
00:35:27
baseball's always tinkering
00:35:29
with with size of the base in in in in
00:35:33
in and always tinkering with the rules
00:35:36
to try to regulate the balance between
00:35:39
hitter and pitcher which at least for
00:35:41
let's say 130 140 years has been the
00:35:44
dominant focus of tension in a baseball
00:35:47
game. And that's the part that sort of
00:35:49
sort of resembles boxing or chess,
00:35:51
right? There there there there is there
00:35:53
is the showdown.
00:35:55
And and the idea that that there's
00:35:56
something magical built into the game
00:35:58
from the from the beginning that that
00:36:01
that maintained that balance I think is
00:36:03
wrong
00:36:04
and I mean the most obvious
00:36:06
evidence for that is that is that
00:36:09
leagues are constantly trying to trying
00:36:11
to to figure out what to do to preserve
00:36:13
that balance. Yeah, I get I I I I I I I
00:36:15
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
00:36:16
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
00:36:17
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
00:36:17
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
00:36:18
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
00:36:19
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
00:36:20
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
00:36:21
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
00:36:21
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
00:36:22
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
00:36:23
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
00:36:24
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
00:36:25
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
00:36:26
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
00:36:26
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
00:36:27
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
00:36:28
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
00:36:29
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
00:36:31
if we somehow were able to make a minor
00:36:32
perturbation that got that close to say
00:36:34
0.5 or something like that, would that
00:36:37
be That would be a Maybe maybe it's
00:36:40
that, you know, you can't actually vary
00:36:42
it so continuously. There's a real
00:36:43
inflection point. You move it 12 like 12
00:36:46
in closer and it goes down to zero or
00:36:48
goes up to one. So, it could be that
00:36:49
there's just that a very narrow range
00:36:51
that can happen. I just kind of wonder
00:36:53
how much kind of perfection different
00:36:56
very ways of perfection we have to play
00:36:58
with in terms of that distance.
00:36:59
>> Well, I know attention we we tend to
00:37:00
focus a lot on on on the the the mound
00:37:04
to to plate relationship, but but uh
00:37:07
over time, you know, offense
00:37:09
offense has has risen or success rate of
00:37:11
batters has also risen and fallen
00:37:13
frequently. And
00:37:15
most commonly leagues turn to the to the
00:37:18
equipment, to the ball, or the bat
00:37:22
in an attempt to regulate that balance.
00:37:24
More recently they Major League Baseball
00:37:26
has done other things. I mean,
00:37:27
defensive positioning uh
00:37:30
the shift, that's a big one, right? That
00:37:33
That That That That That has a huge
00:37:35
impact or it ought to. I think we will
00:37:37
see
00:37:38
over over over a long period of time
00:37:40
what it amounts to. But that ought to
00:37:42
have a huge impact on batter success
00:37:44
rate. As to some of the other rule
00:37:46
changes that we've had, you know, I
00:37:48
don't expect the automatic
00:37:50
ball strike system to to have a big
00:37:53
effect on on regular in the balance
00:37:55
since since both sides have have I think
00:37:58
sort of fairly equal access to that to
00:38:02
that challenge. But But yeah, baseball's
00:38:03
always trying to do things to regulate
00:38:05
that balance. And then and mystifying
00:38:07
the the mound to plate relationship is
00:38:10
is I think not a good way to think about
00:38:11
it because yeah. We We've come to the to
00:38:14
the end of the interview. It's It was It
00:38:15
was spectacular, but I want to end it in
00:38:16
actually sort of an interesting way.
00:38:19
Each of you are going to ask a single
00:38:20
I'm going to ask a question of all of
00:38:21
you. You one word answer, yes or no.
00:38:23
ABS? Yes or no?
00:38:26
So, why don't we go around, Shane, yes
00:38:28
or no?
00:38:29
Yes. Yes. Cade?
00:38:31
Yes.
00:38:33
Eric?
00:38:34
Definitely yes.
00:38:36
And I'm a yes, and I'll I'll end with
00:38:37
with David, what's your yes or no?
00:38:39
>> Okay, let me just pivot the question.
00:38:40
The question is ABS in its current form.
00:38:43
Yeah, in its Well, in its current form,
00:38:45
yes or no. Yes.
00:38:47
Excellent. Um it cuz it's the biggest
00:38:49
change that we've had in baseball in in
00:38:51
in probably years, and it's and it's on
00:38:52
everybody's minds right now. We can
00:38:54
devote an entire show for that, but I
00:38:55
know we have to let you go, and we have
00:38:57
the second half of our show
00:38:58
uh to to come right after the break. But
00:39:00
thank you very much, It's nice to meet
00:39:02
all of you, and it's great Audie to see
00:39:04
you, and and happy holidays and happy
00:39:07
early baseball season to everyone who
00:39:08
celebrate. And uh may your Cardinals
00:39:10
Happy Summer Worker's Day. Yes, and may
00:39:12
may your Cardinals do very well, and uh
00:39:14
of course not at the expense of my
00:39:16
Yankees, but um but I hope at the
00:39:17
expense of the Dodgers. That's
00:39:19
definitely And then maybe maybe in the
00:39:21
in the more immediate term at the
00:39:22
expense of the Mets. At the expense of
00:39:24
the Mets, yes. That'd be fun. That
00:39:26
I figure that's something that should
00:39:27
please both the Philly fans and the
00:39:29
Yankee fans among us. All right, so
00:39:30
thank you David, and please uh stick
00:39:32
around and we'll join us we'll return
00:39:34
right after the break. Welcome back.
00:39:36
Welcome back to Wharton Moneyball.
00:39:38
Welcome to the second half of this
00:39:39
week's show. We had a long interview
00:39:41
actually first half, long interview with
00:39:42
David Hinken, former classmate of Audie
00:39:44
Weiners many lifetime ago essentially.
00:39:47
Cal professor, new book on the history
00:39:49
of baseball. He's a historian, proper
00:39:51
historian, writes proper historical
00:39:53
books, and wrote a proper historical
00:39:55
book about baseball. Very cool, you
00:39:56
learn something any chapter seems to me
00:40:00
uh
00:40:01
fun, interesting.
00:40:02
Fellas,
00:40:04
what about live sports? Um y'all are one
00:40:06
weekend to the Major League Baseball
00:40:08
season. If you missed Audie's reciting
00:40:11
Giamatti's quote about baseball,
00:40:14
probably worth going back and listening
00:40:16
to the top of the show. That was a money
00:40:18
quote, and this is a good time of year
00:40:20
to do it. Okay, one week into the
00:40:21
season. I think I'm about to get 10
00:40:23
minutes of all ABS all the time, but I
00:40:26
want to get reactions
00:40:28
to what's going on around baseball.
00:40:31
Well, I certainly can jump in, although
00:40:32
we can devote a little time to NCAA
00:40:35
March Madness. Um So, yeah, baseball's
00:40:38
been great. Um Dodgers, Yankees starting
00:40:41
off strong. Um but it's ABS all the
00:40:43
time. I was surprised in the first game
00:40:45
of the Yankees game, the first ABS
00:40:47
challenge didn't happen till late in the
00:40:48
game. Um they were and I I think they're
00:40:50
trying to work out what's the optimal
00:40:52
time to do it. Um and what the rules
00:40:54
are. So, there's going to be lots of
00:40:55
discussion about that. In fact, we
00:40:56
analysts should probably try to get in
00:40:58
on the game. Uh what are what are the
00:40:59
best ways to handle this? Clearly, the
00:41:01
catcher is calling it when it's way out.
00:41:04
When it's they're just when there's a
00:41:05
bad mistake, they're just they're just
00:41:06
tapping their heads immediately. Uh the
00:41:08
question is when the batter should be
00:41:09
doing it. I've seen lots of bad calls.
00:41:11
The batters are not protesting, and I've
00:41:13
seen good ones that the batters are are
00:41:15
protesting and getting and not They're
00:41:16
getting it wrong less. Getting uh
00:41:18
getting it wrong more often, the
00:41:20
batters. So, I've got I got I've got
00:41:21
I've got I've got I've got a few uh
00:41:23
statistical breakdowns if you want on
00:41:24
the first week. It's like So, so 54%
00:41:27
success rate on challenges overall.
00:41:30
When the catcher the catcher had the
00:41:32
have the highest rate of overturn. So,
00:41:34
they are they're successful 64% of the
00:41:36
time on challenges. Batters are
00:41:38
successful only 42% of the time
00:41:41
on challenges. Pitchers
00:41:44
are only successful 40% of the time, but
00:41:46
that's only happened like five times.
00:41:47
So, like the vast majority of challenges
00:41:49
have come either from the batter or the
00:41:50
catcher. And the catcher's saying The
00:41:52
catchers, not surprisingly, are better
00:41:54
at it. They've got the better view on
00:41:55
it. But, I would also expect these
00:41:58
numbers to get better over time, right?
00:42:00
Like players will learn, catchers will
00:42:02
learn. I would think that ideally
00:42:04
ideally the umpires would also learn
00:42:06
though, right, guys? Yeah, you know
00:42:08
what? Well, are they I kind of are they
00:42:09
past learning at this point?
00:42:11
>> Hold on a second. I mean, let's let's
00:42:12
just stand back. One of the things
00:42:13
that's I've watched a whole bunch of
00:42:14
these overturns get get overturned by a
00:42:16
hair's breadth, which I'm really curious
00:42:18
about cuz I know the accuracy of the
00:42:20
system is point what is 1/6 of an inch.
00:42:23
So, 0.135. That is not very much, right?
00:42:27
So, uh No, I said that wrong. 0.16
00:42:29
>> 0.166, yeah. So, that's not very much.
00:42:32
And in other words, I've seen them get
00:42:34
overturned calls, but I don't blame the
00:42:36
the umpires for those. We Our minds
00:42:39
recall the bad ones, right?
00:42:41
>> Well, yeah, that's really what the
00:42:42
system is for. I mean, if if you wanted
00:42:45
to kind of modify the system, place like
00:42:47
a 1/6-in barrier like
00:42:49
extra border around the around the like
00:42:52
strike zone, feel free. I watched CB
00:42:55
Bucknor miss like 20 calls in the Red
00:42:58
Sox game. There was only They ran out of
00:43:00
challenges in that one. There was eight
00:43:02
total challenges
00:43:03
>> How does the rule work? If you make a
00:43:04
challenge and it's successful,
00:43:06
>> limit of two wrong ones.
00:43:08
Two wrong, but you can have an unlimited
00:43:10
Yeah, so so so the Red Sox challenge had
00:43:12
eight total challenges and six
00:43:13
successful ones. But then there was like
00:43:15
another six they could have challenged
00:43:17
after that if they had, you know, I mean
00:43:19
again,
00:43:20
yeah. I mean, CB Bucknor should
00:43:23
I don't shame not having a job, but
00:43:24
anyway. Shane brought up something
00:43:26
interesting. So, let me let me follow
00:43:28
the logic of what you said, which I
00:43:29
happen to agree with. Let's pretend for
00:43:31
the moment that umpires get better. So,
00:43:34
umpires now prune off the really bad
00:43:36
calls. So, the only ones that are
00:43:38
challenged are now the close ones, which
00:43:40
means the success rate may not actually
00:43:42
go up Yeah. because the only ones
00:43:45
that'll be challenged are the knife-edge
00:43:47
ones that already talked about. So, you
00:43:49
could imagine the long-run equilibrium
00:43:52
is that things do not improve.
00:43:55
Yeah, and then like it could be just
00:43:56
kind of guesswork where where you know,
00:43:58
it's around 50% because we're like we're
00:44:00
all the only kind of challenged ones are
00:44:02
on the like very much the margins where
00:44:04
literally
00:44:04
>> that story does depend on the umpires
00:44:06
continuing to get better,
00:44:08
>> And I think it's an interesting
00:44:09
>> there are there are but Shane, hold on.
00:44:10
Shane, set aside like you know
00:44:12
um pillorying these guys and just ask
00:44:14
what's the limit of performance at this
00:44:17
task.
00:44:18
And and they are already doing quite
00:44:20
well. The The average of them is already
00:44:22
doing quite well. They've learned
00:44:24
Whatever they came up with you know,
00:44:26
stat
00:44:27
Statcast or whatever the name of the
00:44:28
system is a few years ago and they
00:44:30
started training on these things. You
00:44:31
can see the increase in the improvement
00:44:33
right away. I'm curious. What's the
00:44:35
limit of performance? I mean the
00:44:36
perfection is probably unachievable.
00:44:39
They're still human beings. And so
00:44:41
there's going to be some limit to what
00:44:42
they can do.
00:44:43
Also
00:44:44
>> Yeah, I know. What you also might find,
00:44:45
Shane, is you might find uh an
00:44:47
asymmetry. And what I mean by that is
00:44:50
well, you'll just like you'll get um
00:44:52
reads on players like don't pitch high
00:44:55
and outside to this player. This umpire
00:44:57
is more prone to errors in this zone
00:45:00
versus that zone. And those laws, as you
00:45:02
know, Shane, are out there already. But
00:45:03
now we'll have that measure. I mean,
00:45:05
this will be available. It's already
00:45:07
measured and already it's gotten so much
00:45:09
I mean so much better. I mean, I know we
00:45:11
Yeah, and we ought to and we ought to I
00:45:12
think they should replace the whole
00:45:13
thing with the system. No, no, but what
00:45:15
I mean what I meant, Kate, was just if
00:45:17
I'm a batter and I'm thinking about
00:45:19
challenging, I may be more likely to
00:45:21
challenge one low from this umpire than
00:45:23
high based on the data that I know.
00:45:26
That's a possibility. Yeah, but I will
00:45:28
point out, speaking of um Aaron Judge
00:45:31
had was a tremendous beneficiary. He was
00:45:33
uh he had a strike I'm not sure it was
00:45:34
strike three, but it was definitely a
00:45:36
strike uh and it was 2 in beneath his
00:45:39
knee. And anyone who's been watching
00:45:41
Judge for years knows that he has been
00:45:43
get he's been consistently
00:45:45
>> crushed by that pitch. But crushed by
00:45:46
that call. And he then hit a home run in
00:45:49
that at bat. We're expecting big things
00:45:50
from from that strike zone change.
00:45:52
Altuve
00:45:53
four hits yesterday uh two homers
00:45:55
>> Well, I I I I was hearing I was reading
00:45:57
I mean, he's right. So, he's going to be
00:45:59
a benefit from the the system because
00:46:00
the system is is now tied to height.
00:46:03
Now, I mean, the umpires have always
00:46:04
been that way, but the the ABS system is
00:46:06
tied to height and he's probably been
00:46:08
getting all kinds of bad calls for
00:46:10
years. So, hold on. Let's just say let's
00:46:12
let's let's emphasize this. We talked
00:46:14
about it a couple of weeks ago in
00:46:15
advance. We we called out those two guys
00:46:17
in particular because they're oddly
00:46:19
shaped in different directions as
00:46:21
probably getting disproportionate
00:46:23
benefit of the new system and you're
00:46:25
reporting that already in week one it
00:46:27
seems like that's happening. That's
00:46:28
interesting.
00:46:28
>> I I I I heard a rumor that a bunch of
00:46:30
players are are are kind of that have
00:46:32
have edited their their height. Like the
00:46:34
like players height players heights have
00:46:36
systematically gone down across Major
00:46:38
League Baseball because if they have a
00:46:41
lower height they can get the high
00:46:42
strike is no longer a high strike. But
00:46:44
interestingly judges judges concern was
00:46:46
the low strike because he had the
00:46:47
opposite problem. Are you expecting a
00:46:50
higher league batting average this year
00:46:52
because players do not have to now worry
00:46:55
as much about the ball outside the zone
00:46:58
being called a strike cuz they can
00:47:00
always challenge it. Therefore, I can be
00:47:01
a more selective hitter. I mean, you
00:47:03
could make an argument that this should
00:47:05
lead to higher batting average. No
00:47:06
matter what the effect size is going to
00:47:08
be. I don't know. I I I mean, we're
00:47:11
concentrating on the two hitters that
00:47:12
are benefiting from the system. There's
00:47:13
got to be other hitters that are are
00:47:15
neutral to it and the and the negatives
00:47:17
will will Yeah, I mean, I I mean the
00:47:19
part I I think like probably at their
00:47:22
level I would guess
00:47:24
you know, the one thing I think is is is
00:47:26
one of the positives of this is that you
00:47:28
know, even though you know, the height
00:47:29
thing is kind of weird and whatever.
00:47:30
It's it's a consistent strike zone the
00:47:32
entire game. It's the same strike zone
00:47:35
regardless of umpire. I don't know I
00:47:37
don't know if that kind of within game
00:47:39
consistency necessarily argues for the
00:47:41
hitters or the pitchers, but like in my
00:47:44
mind maybe I'm just too hitter focused.
00:47:45
Like if I'm a hitter, I feel like I
00:47:47
would be helped by that in game
00:47:48
consistency. I agree. The other thing is
00:47:51
that we've already established well, one
00:47:52
week's of stats one week of stats has
00:47:54
established that catchers are are better
00:47:57
at this than hitters. And so the
00:47:59
defensive team is better than the
00:48:00
offensive team. And so they're going to
00:48:02
asymmetrically benefit. So that that
00:48:04
pushes the opposite direction, Eric.
00:48:05
That says the catchers proficiency at
00:48:08
this is going to help the pitchers. And
00:48:10
so that would lean against What's
00:48:11
interesting is will there be a decision
00:48:13
made by many teams to not let
00:48:17
um the really because you remember you
00:48:19
cost your your team on the on the
00:48:20
defensive side if your offense makes a
00:48:21
mistake. So if you let your batters
00:48:24
screw up, which is they're doing at a
00:48:25
substantially higher rate than the
00:48:27
catchers, they cost their team a
00:48:29
challenge that a catcher on the other
00:48:30
side will not now have, right?
00:48:33
>> Right. So why would you be I mean you
00:48:34
could just say no hitters, you can't
00:48:37
But then they're definitely going to
00:48:39
>> ones. I mean you still want the hitter
00:48:41
to have the challenge for obvious ones,
00:48:42
but yeah, I I get that.
00:48:43
>> obvious, like really tough ones.
00:48:45
>> Maybe a culture will develop where the
00:48:47
cat you know, the hitter has to be very
00:48:49
sure if they're going to call
00:48:52
Okay, we have to have a incentive
00:48:53
alignment, have a fine jar. You know,
00:48:55
you put it wrong, you got to throw a 20
00:48:57
into the old bucket when you get back
00:48:59
into the locker room after the game.
00:49:01
Come on, you guys decision making. Isn't
00:49:02
there some incentive alignment? Wait,
00:49:04
come on.
00:49:04
>> I I don't know what the right incentive
00:49:06
is for a guy who makes $60 million a
00:49:08
year. This this Get creative
00:49:10
Get creative on that one. You know,
00:49:13
they're They're huge competitors, so
00:49:14
they want to win more than anything
00:49:15
else. So That's right. All right, let's
00:49:18
let's talk a little bit about um NCAA's.
00:49:21
Both the men and the women are into the
00:49:22
Final Fours. We'll see that this coming
00:49:24
weekend. Um we saw an all-timer of a
00:49:28
buzzer beater in the Yukon-Duke game, an
00:49:30
all-timer.
00:49:32
Um you know, we get those
00:49:34
every few years. We get buzzer beaters
00:49:36
all the time, but that was way up there.
00:49:38
Um any what reactions to the Final Four,
00:49:40
guys? I'm Here's one thing I'm meant to
00:49:42
do. I'm meant to This dead gummit, we
00:49:44
need to do this. We've talked in past
00:49:46
years about the total seeds of the Final
00:49:49
Four being kind of an interesting
00:49:51
sufficient statistic on how chalky a
00:49:54
tournament was. We've got a low total
00:49:56
this time around. I think it's two ones,
00:49:58
a two and a three, so it's not minimum,
00:50:00
but it's low. And I'd like to know where
00:50:02
that falls in the distribution since the
00:50:04
beginning of the 64-team tournament.
00:50:06
>> Wasn't it four ones last year? Last year
00:50:08
was low.
00:50:09
>> that distribution over time as well.
00:50:12
>> with the last two. Like, what's the
00:50:13
probability of two years in a row coming
00:50:15
in as extreme as these two are? And we
00:50:17
already know the thing has shifted, but
00:50:19
this is like a real clear way to see the
00:50:20
shift.
00:50:21
>> Mhm. Um and historically, we talk about
00:50:23
this with brackets, you know, you're too
00:50:24
inclined to pick
00:50:25
you know, you got you don't want too
00:50:28
chalky a final four, you don't want a
00:50:29
crazy final four, but they there's a
00:50:31
nice distribution, and we've seen two
00:50:33
years in a row of very tight low
00:50:35
distribution. Well, I'm going to uh
00:50:37
point out that I've already won one
00:50:39
bracket, a small family pool, with
00:50:41
Arizona. It doesn't matter, I mean, cuz
00:50:43
I'm
00:50:44
no matter what happens now, I win it.
00:50:45
And the other one was a bigger one, not
00:50:47
huge, with our with our undergraduates
00:50:49
in our seminar.
00:50:50
If Connecticut, I'm the only one who
00:50:51
picked Connecticut to win, cuz I figured
00:50:53
with a bigger pool, you got to have a
00:50:55
little bit of of non-chalk at the end
00:50:57
to have a chance.
00:50:59
Um and that is I mean, I've made so many
00:51:00
mistakes, so the only way I'll win this
00:51:02
is if my non-chalky uh guess goes
00:51:04
>> Keep on going.
00:51:06
And uh so it's interesting um how you
00:51:09
play those two things against each other
00:51:10
depending on the size of the pool that
00:51:12
you're in. Small pools, you want to go
00:51:14
chalk. Bigger pools, you got to take
00:51:16
gambles. Because I'm never going to beat
00:51:17
them if Arizona wins, there are too many
00:51:19
people who picked Arizona, too many
00:51:21
people picked Michigan, uh the Dukes are
00:51:23
all out, and they're just going to get
00:51:24
decided on that little noisy path to the
00:51:27
final four um that is almost almost
00:51:29
completely unpredictable. Yeah, what's
00:51:30
interesting, Audie, from the Yukon
00:51:32
perspective is, let's be honest, right
00:51:34
now, they're on the weaker side of that
00:51:37
draw. By every metric, Michigan and
00:51:39
Arizona are the two best teams left, and
00:51:42
they're playing each other. So, you
00:51:44
know, right now, if this is one of those
00:51:46
interesting calculations. I haven't
00:51:47
looked at the betting odds.
00:51:49
You could make an easy argument Yukon
00:51:52
should be favored to win the title here
00:51:54
because they've got a higher probability
00:51:57
to win this game despite the fact that
00:51:59
they're going to be an underdog in the
00:52:00
other game. They've got to be the
00:52:01
favorite at this point. Well, what are
00:52:04
the odds? We should get that. That's a
00:52:05
good I don't think they're even favored
00:52:06
over Illinois.
00:52:08
Right? Just straight up.
00:52:09
>> Yeah, they may not be. Illinois has been
00:52:10
on a good run.
00:52:11
>> the lowest odds because Illinois is
00:52:12
considered better. Oh, well, then okay.
00:52:14
Well, then they wouldn't be. Um but and
00:52:16
they're both underdogs against each
00:52:18
other. I mean, the So, Arizona and
00:52:20
Michigan have substantially higher odds
00:52:23
jointly than the other bracket, the
00:52:25
Illinois-Yukon. Substantially higher.
00:52:27
Almost three to one, I think. Uh in fact
00:52:30
>> let's take it let's take a quick note
00:52:31
just on on on tournaments and tournament
00:52:34
design and distribution of talent. In
00:52:36
the wi- on the women's side, we have a
00:52:38
minimum number of seeds in the Final
00:52:40
Four. We all four
00:52:41
>> four teams as last year. Is it the same
00:52:43
four? Okay, so it's South Carolina and
00:52:45
Yukon on one side, Texas-UCLA on the
00:52:47
other side. All of these teams were
00:52:49
number one seeds. And I don't I didn't I
00:52:51
don't remember the final score of all
00:52:54
the Elite Eight games, but I know a
00:52:55
couple of them were pushing 30-40 points
00:52:58
margin.
00:52:58
>> they were minimum might have been like
00:52:59
20. It's extraordinary. So,
00:53:02
it's interesting, isn't it, that in the
00:53:05
NIL era where we see so much leveling
00:53:07
out in some other sports, the women's
00:53:10
basketball, which has always had this
00:53:12
right tail that seems separate from the
00:53:14
rest of the distribution, doesn't seem
00:53:15
any smaller than it used to be. In fact,
00:53:17
it might be it might be even further
00:53:20
skewed. Is that possible? Wouldn't the
00:53:22
argument be that there's a, you know,
00:53:25
thinner distribution of talent in the
00:53:27
women's game, and therefore there's not
00:53:29
enough talent to support, you know,
00:53:31
eight, 10, 12, 15 great teams, while in
00:53:34
the men's game there is, and that's why,
00:53:37
you know, in some cases
00:53:38
>> Yeah. So, so yeah,
00:53:40
now now interact that with NIL. So, I
00:53:42
agree that's always been the case. Now,
00:53:44
interact that with NIL, what do you get?
00:53:46
The NIL gives us the power to
00:53:48
consolidate the men's sport to a ways
00:53:50
that would the women get just by the
00:53:53
uh um by by you know having the sport
00:53:56
now.
00:53:56
>> Interesting, right? So, that's
00:53:57
interesting. So, you're saying the men's
00:53:58
game starts looking more like
00:53:59
>> of consolidate the power on the power
00:54:01
and the the more diverse power that we
00:54:03
have in the perhaps in the men's sport
00:54:05
in general in a small a small number of
00:54:07
teams just like the women's naturally
00:54:09
does. Well, but okay,
00:54:11
we don't we argued in the last week or
00:54:13
two about we don't know whether that
00:54:15
right tail the far right tail of the
00:54:17
men's game is going to benefit. We know
00:54:18
that the mid-majors have been sucked up
00:54:20
into a deeper field of the majors, but
00:54:23
we don't know if the right tail
00:54:24
continues to suck from the deeper field.
00:54:26
But, here's the but what I'm saying is I
00:54:28
hadn't thought about this until this
00:54:28
conversation. Is it possible because of
00:54:31
the thinness of the talent in the
00:54:33
women's game
00:54:35
that NIL actually makes concentration
00:54:37
worse?
00:54:38
It was already concentrated, but it
00:54:40
could be that if you interact NIL with a
00:54:44
thin talent pool,
00:54:46
you get an even more skewed right tail.
00:54:49
It's it's entirely possible that we
00:54:51
could be
00:54:51
>> possible.
00:54:53
Um wow, okay. Well, that that is taking
00:54:56
place in Phoenix on Friday and Monday. I
00:55:00
was a No, no, Friday Sunday. Friday
00:55:01
Sunday the men's will play Saturday
00:55:03
Monday as they usually do do,
00:55:05
of course. All right, guys, why don't we
00:55:07
wrap it there? We've uh covered a little
00:55:10
bit of the spring sports. We've got next
00:55:12
time around we're going to be heading
00:55:14
into Masters week, I think. We've got
00:55:15
Masters, one of the most um one of the
00:55:18
premier spring sports, and we're warming
00:55:20
into basketball and hockey playoffs. So,
00:55:23
lots to cover coming up. Um I want to
00:55:26
note I don't know how explicit we've
00:55:28
been about this, but Audi has lined up
00:55:31
guests over the last few weeks and it's
00:55:32
been a heck of a run. Audi Wyner, major
00:55:34
props for programming help. I don't know
00:55:38
what I'm going to do with the next time
00:55:39
around cuz I I I went go whole hog this
00:55:41
time.
00:55:43
Well, well, I'm looking forward to what
00:55:45
you do.
00:55:46
All right, for the whole team here,
00:55:47
Audie Wyner, Shane Jensen, Eric Bradlow,
00:55:50
big thanks to Deion Simpkins making this
00:55:52
thing happen, to our whole team out
00:55:55
there, our producer Marissa Renda, the
00:55:58
big boss Dia Patel, D Patel. Thank you
00:56:00
guys for listening. Come back and join
00:56:02
us next time. Between now and then,
00:56:04
enjoy your sports.
