00:00:00
Welcome to Wharton Moneyball. Welcome to
00:00:02
a full hour of sports analytics here on
00:00:05
the Wharton podcast network. This is
00:00:08
Kade Massie hosting with my longtime
00:00:09
colleagues, friends, collaborators, co-
00:00:12
co-f faculty, Audi Winer, Eric Bradlo,
00:00:15
our fourth co-host, Shane Jensen is out
00:00:18
and about this week and next week. I
00:00:20
think Shane will be back. Shane's doing
00:00:21
some Shane things. Some combination of
00:00:24
us are here almost every week of the
00:00:26
year. talking 48 49 weeks of the year
00:00:29
and going on coming up on 11 and a half
00:00:33
years. Glad to be here. Always glad to
00:00:34
be here. We're recording on Tuesday
00:00:36
afternoon. The show will go up sometime
00:00:39
Wednesday and uh we're going to pursue
00:00:42
the usual format this week. We're going
00:00:44
to have a guest in half the show, go
00:00:45
open lines in the second half of the
00:00:47
show. Our guest this week, we are
00:00:49
delighted to welcome back to the show,
00:00:51
longtime friend of the show, an original
00:00:53
friend of the show, a foundational piece
00:00:55
of the show, Rick Peterson. Rick is, as
00:00:58
many of you guys know, been associated
00:01:00
with baseball his whole career. He was a
00:01:02
pitching coach in the big leagues for
00:01:03
many years. He is the author of a book
00:01:06
called Crunchtime. He is an expert on
00:01:09
high performance and especially high
00:01:10
performance under pressure. And we're
00:01:12
always delighted to get a chance to talk
00:01:14
to Rick Peterson. Rick, thanks for
00:01:15
making time for us. Welcome back.
00:01:18
>> Always a pleasure. Long time. Great
00:01:20
memories.
00:01:21
>> Absolutely. You did uh you were a
00:01:23
regular feature for the first few years
00:01:24
of the show. You kind of coached us into
00:01:27
uh this whole thing, which we appreciate
00:01:30
and um we're glad to have you back.
00:01:32
Listen, you you came to our attention
00:01:34
not least because uh you know, just the
00:01:37
fact that Billy Wagner giving his Hall
00:01:39
of Fame speech mentioned you and gave
00:01:40
you a shout out, that's a nice thing.
00:01:42
Eric was at the Hall of Fame induction.
00:01:45
and he makes an annual pilgrimage there
00:01:47
with some of his family. So, we thought
00:01:49
it'd be fun to talk with you about that
00:01:50
and find out what else you've been up
00:01:51
to. But, let's talk about Billy Wagner.
00:01:53
I'm going to turn it over to you and
00:01:54
Eric to talk about Billy Wagner and what
00:01:57
that meant to you to hear from that and
00:01:58
and your experience with
00:02:01
>> Well, I I have to say it it was it was
00:02:03
my first experience ever. And when Billy
00:02:06
went in, I gave him a call and we we
00:02:08
spoke for about half an hour or so, 45
00:02:10
minutes. And it was interesting because
00:02:12
the tears of rolling down our cheeks of
00:02:14
both of us was just amazing because you
00:02:17
realize like you're just filled with
00:02:19
entire incredible gratitude and how
00:02:22
fortunate we've been to have the careers
00:02:24
that we've had and and made a difference
00:02:26
in so many people's lives. But but and
00:02:29
then and then Billy invited me to his
00:02:31
private party for the Hall of Fame. And
00:02:34
that was the most incredibly special
00:02:35
moment uh one of the moments that I've
00:02:38
had in my career. And very seldom as a
00:02:41
coach do you ever actually get feedback
00:02:44
from the people that you coach and
00:02:47
objective feedback even even more
00:02:49
importantly. And Billy was very open
00:02:52
about so many moments that we had, you
00:02:54
know, during that time we were together
00:02:56
in New York and and really just talking
00:02:58
about the real special qualities that
00:03:01
Hall of Famers have. And I've been
00:03:03
fortunate to coach over seven Hall of
00:03:05
Famers actually. And and the common
00:03:08
thread with the Hall of Famers is just
00:03:11
they're all the same. And these people
00:03:13
are the most processoriented
00:03:15
people that I've ever met in my career.
00:03:18
and they and and and as as a teacher you
00:03:22
become a great student. There's no way
00:03:25
that you could teach anybody until you
00:03:27
become a student of that particular
00:03:29
person so that you understand, you know,
00:03:32
where they are, how they think, how they
00:03:33
feel, how they act, how they process
00:03:35
information. Because as I think, as we
00:03:38
all know, it was one of the openings, I
00:03:40
think, of our the show when I first came
00:03:43
on, a trip to the mound. And when you
00:03:46
make a trip to the mound, you basically
00:03:48
have about 30 45 seconds in order to get
00:03:50
this person's mind refocused. I mean,
00:03:53
you're not going out there because he
00:03:54
just struck out the first two guys on
00:03:55
six pitches and he's got nobody on base,
00:03:58
you know? You're going out there because
00:03:59
we're in trouble. It's crunch time. It's
00:04:01
crunch time at that moment. And to be
00:04:04
able to hear his feedback about how I
00:04:08
was able to send a message to him that
00:04:10
was that was very fruitful for him to be
00:04:12
able to turn around his thoughts and be
00:04:14
able to get back to execute one pitch at
00:04:17
a time to get out of that jam and and to
00:04:19
close out that save for a win. So, and
00:04:22
to once again, very seldom do you get
00:04:25
that kind of feedback and I think it's
00:04:27
like it's just so helpful and and so
00:04:29
productive um so that you can realize,
00:04:32
you know, how someone thinks and feels
00:04:34
and acts when when they're performing at
00:04:36
the at the very peak level of their
00:04:39
careers.
00:04:39
>> Rick, what do you what do you remember?
00:04:40
What's something you remember about
00:04:42
Billy Wagner as a player or coaching
00:04:44
Billy Wagner? What's something concrete
00:04:45
when you think about him as a player in
00:04:47
your time with him? What's something
00:04:48
that comes to mind?
00:04:49
What comes to mind more than anything
00:04:51
else is Billy. Billy was possessed. Abs
00:04:54
and and and that's a common thread with
00:04:56
all Hall of Famers that I've coached.
00:04:58
They are possessed to be best. Whatever
00:05:01
it takes to be best and what they want
00:05:03
to know is what's the process to help
00:05:04
them be best. And it was very
00:05:06
interesting because Billy always
00:05:08
struggled with his slider. It was
00:05:10
always, you know, trying to stay behind
00:05:12
it instead of getting around it. and and
00:05:14
and we would come up and in fact as
00:05:17
again as a student of the person you're
00:05:19
teaching I kept trying to help myself
00:05:22
understand how can I help him feel this
00:05:24
I mean right now they have rapsido you
00:05:26
know they have more technology than
00:05:28
they've ever had before they we didn't
00:05:29
have that back when I was coaching Billy
00:05:31
at that time you know had we had that
00:05:33
then you could really show them you know
00:05:35
through the technology but but back in
00:05:37
that day you know you were doing it
00:05:39
through through feel and helping him get
00:05:42
to understand because once you feel But
00:05:44
then you experience it and then you know
00:05:46
how to repeat it. And one of the one of
00:05:48
the things that we did and it was on
00:05:49
video we we had videotape of it on SNY
00:05:52
where they filmed a segment where
00:05:54
Billy's pitching uphill. So the rubber's
00:05:56
behind the mound. He's pitching uphill
00:05:59
and we had him throw his slider about 30
00:06:02
feet instead of throwing it 60 feet. You
00:06:04
know where you're getting out there with
00:06:06
extension. You know, we had him throw it
00:06:08
at 30 feet that you have to get behind
00:06:11
the ball to throw it down to stay behind
00:06:13
it. And here's Billy Wagner uphill with
00:06:16
his eyes closed throwing sliders at 30
00:06:18
feet. You know, any anybody that would
00:06:20
come and witness this would think like,
00:06:22
"What the hell are these people doing
00:06:24
here?" You know, don't they know that
00:06:25
the mound is backwards and they're only
00:06:27
thrown at halfway distance to the the
00:06:29
home plate? But that was the way that he
00:06:31
could feel it. Right. And and it was so
00:06:33
it was so fascinating that that every
00:06:36
single day we would go out there that he
00:06:39
was available for that night to pitch
00:06:41
that night to close out a game. It was
00:06:43
always about that process that night,
00:06:45
who he may face, who he may not face,
00:06:47
and so that the preparation was just off
00:06:49
the charts. So basically, by the time he
00:06:52
got in that game, he had already he had
00:06:54
already got those guys out in his own
00:06:55
mind. And now now it was their time to
00:06:58
get punished by Billy Wagner.
00:07:00
>> Yes, Rick, I got a few questions. So,
00:07:02
first Billy told an interesting thing.
00:07:05
>> I'm sure you know this. He's
00:07:06
right-handed.
00:07:08
>> He broke his arm as a young man
00:07:11
>> and then started throwing lefty. Can you
00:07:13
just give all of us first of all in your
00:07:15
entire career obviously with you know
00:07:18
>> all the teams you work with the Orioles
00:07:21
how hard how impossible is that to
00:07:24
believe? Let's start with that.
00:07:25
>> Impossible to believe. It's more than
00:07:28
impossible to believe. and and and it's
00:07:30
it's it's so impossible to believe
00:07:32
because I think in our DNA, you know,
00:07:35
the left side is our left and right side
00:07:36
of our brain, you know, help us balance
00:07:38
out like what we do things right and
00:07:40
left-handed. And I I've seen so many
00:07:43
guys be able, if I'm not mistaken, I
00:07:45
think the Grom can throw left-handed
00:07:47
very well. I mean, I I we've had I've
00:07:49
had pitchers that throw both right and
00:07:51
left-handed. Um, which is incredible.
00:07:54
They had a glove that they could switch
00:07:56
both ways. So if a left-hander came up,
00:07:58
he switched the glove over to face him
00:08:00
lefty. Um you know, but for Billy to go
00:08:03
that but but here here's the other big
00:08:05
factor. We would always do um physical
00:08:08
testing talking about data. So for
00:08:10
example, the data of how high you can
00:08:12
jump and how far you can jump. If I'm
00:08:15
not mistaken, I think around the average
00:08:16
of a professional athlete is about 27
00:08:18
inches vertical jump. Billy Billy jumped
00:08:21
like 32 34 inches off the charts. And
00:08:24
when we did the physical testing that
00:08:26
that year and and then and then also the
00:08:28
standing broad jump, how far you can
00:08:30
jump. So if you jump over 90 inches and
00:08:32
you jump into 100 100 over inches,
00:08:35
you're talking about high-end velocity.
00:08:37
I mean, so for young prospects that they
00:08:39
they start to say, well, he's only 86 in
00:08:42
high school. Well, how high does he jump
00:08:44
and how far does he jump is is a great
00:08:46
predictor of of how much velocity is
00:08:48
left in that DNA. And so when when Billy
00:08:51
came that year, when we got the physical
00:08:53
testing back, I asked him, "Give me the
00:08:55
list, but take off the names because I
00:08:57
just wanted to look at all the pictures.
00:08:59
>> This is great."
00:09:00
>> And I and I looked at Billy and I looked
00:09:02
at those numbers. I went, "That's got to
00:09:03
be that's Billy Wagner. That's 100 right
00:09:05
there." You know, that's 100 miles an
00:09:07
hour, you know. And so so you talk about
00:09:09
an athlete, an incredible athlete,
00:09:12
explosive athlete. I mean, that's why in
00:09:14
golf like Rory Maroy, you know, it's not
00:09:16
how it's not how big you are, it's how
00:09:18
fast you rotate. So, let me and how
00:09:20
fast.
00:09:20
>> Let me ask you a related question to
00:09:22
that.
00:09:24
>> I'm going to give you a a person's
00:09:26
stats, Rick, and you tell me whether
00:09:28
this person should retire.
00:09:31
7-2
00:09:32
with a 143 RA, 37 saves, and a whip of
00:09:37
0.87. How does that sound to you? Not
00:09:39
bad, right?
00:09:40
>> Sounds like
00:09:41
>> Wagner's last season. What the hell did
00:09:43
he No, could maybe you could provide
00:09:45
last night. Why did he retire?
00:09:47
>> I think the fire went out is really what
00:09:50
it comes down to. It wasn't about
00:09:52
performance and and and I think the
00:09:54
thing
00:09:54
>> actually it was his best season
00:09:55
statistically.
00:09:57
>> It was one of his best seasons
00:09:58
statistically, right? Without question.
00:10:00
Off the charts with Atlanta if I'm not
00:10:01
mistaken. Right.
00:10:02
>> Exactly.
00:10:03
>> And and I think more than anything else
00:10:05
when these athletes get to that point
00:10:07
that fire that fire is stoked like you
00:10:09
can't even imagine. like when Pedro
00:10:11
Martinez would pitch, you didn't even
00:10:13
want to get near him. It was like an
00:10:14
inferno. It was like Waco, Texas, right?
00:10:17
And and so when you look at those kind
00:10:19
of guys, once that fire goes out, the
00:10:22
performance level is going to be
00:10:24
affected without question. And I and I
00:10:26
think Billy, you know, with a young
00:10:28
family at that point and he wanted to
00:10:30
spend time with his kids, family became,
00:10:32
you know, a major priority after
00:10:34
traveling around because I not mistaken,
00:10:36
I think Billy started with Houston and
00:10:38
then went and then then I think he went
00:10:40
to Philly and then he came to New York,
00:10:42
he went to Boston and then I think
00:10:44
>> 100% correct.
00:10:45
>> Yeah. Then he finished up in Atlanta,
00:10:47
right? I mean, so when you're bouncing
00:10:48
around like that with a young family and
00:10:50
you're trying to raise kids and you're
00:10:51
in and out of school systems and, you
00:10:53
know, you want to keep the family
00:10:54
together, that's a big factor. But but I
00:10:57
think there's nothing better than
00:10:59
someone who finishes their career at at
00:11:03
a peak of their career as opposed to
00:11:05
there's nothing worse than seeing an
00:11:07
athlete a peak performance athlete that
00:11:10
who falls off and and they they their
00:11:12
fire keeps burning but their physical
00:11:15
talent has has gone.
00:11:17
>> And the last thing I'd love to get A's
00:11:18
thought on this too. Um why did it take
00:11:21
I mean I remember Billy Wagner well. You
00:11:25
couldn't hit off Billy Wagner. He was
00:11:27
the best closer or one of the best cloa
00:11:30
was the best closer. I'm biased. I'm a
00:11:31
Yankee guy, but statistically we all
00:11:33
agree Rivera was the best.
00:11:34
>> Well, I think we're biased cuz he was
00:11:36
the best.
00:11:37
>> Yeah, it's not biased. He was the best.
00:11:39
>> He was the best.
00:11:40
>> Billy Wagner, like why did he have to
00:11:42
wait 10 years to get into the Hall of
00:11:44
Fame? I mean, what the hell? Billy
00:11:46
Wagner's numbers didn't get better or
00:11:48
worse. 422 saves, a whip of one. I mean,
00:11:53
just in an RA of 2.3, just an incredible
00:11:57
career.
00:11:57
>> I think he struck out one-third of the
00:11:59
total batters faced, you know, that's
00:12:01
incredible. Close to 30 close to 30%.
00:12:06
>> I can try to give some answer to that
00:12:07
question before I answer ask my own, but
00:12:09
I think that has to do with the fact
00:12:10
that we have a hard time valuing
00:12:11
relievers. It just is a difficult
00:12:14
statistical thing to do. And because
00:12:17
they pitch in in total number of innings
00:12:19
so few, we tend to be very uh mixed
00:12:24
minds of how to value. So Rivera, of
00:12:26
course, we just we saw it, right? Um and
00:12:29
probably Wagner, too. But
00:12:31
>> you struck out, by the way, Rick, 1,200
00:12:33
batters in 900 innings.
00:12:36
>> It's amazing. But but but let me add to
00:12:38
your point, Audi. the people who vote
00:12:41
for the Hall of Fame never put a uniform
00:12:43
on that that that besides the the what
00:12:46
do I say the
00:12:47
>> veterans committee now or whatever they
00:12:48
call it now
00:12:49
>> right whatever they call it that thank
00:12:51
you for helping me um and the writers
00:12:54
that never put a uniform on they have no
00:12:56
idea what it's like to be in that dugout
00:12:59
in the ninth inning when you got all the
00:13:02
money on the table I mean I remember
00:13:04
like not too long ago I was in working
00:13:06
out and it and and Sandman came on you
00:13:09
the the song and someone goes, "Oh, I
00:13:12
love this song." They go, "Do you like
00:13:13
this, Rick?" I said, "Every time I hear
00:13:15
it, I get sick to my stomach. I want to
00:13:16
throw up." They go, "Why?" I said, "Cuz
00:13:19
we lost. Mariano just came into the
00:13:21
game." Right. Right. And and so because
00:13:24
writers don't know what that's like to
00:13:27
pitch in the ninth inning when you have
00:13:29
all the money on the table and you have
00:13:31
no idea what that does to the
00:13:33
moralization and the demoralization of a
00:13:35
team when you lose games in the last
00:13:38
inning after after you've battled for
00:13:40
two and a half to three hours and now
00:13:43
the last 15 pitches of the game. You
00:13:46
know that cost you the game. That is the
00:13:48
most miserable feeling for a team and
00:13:51
it's so difficult to bounce back and
00:13:52
writers don't understand the value of a
00:13:55
closer because they've never been in
00:13:57
that place to understand the emotion of
00:13:59
what it's like in that ninth inning. And
00:14:02
to have somebody like a Billy Wagner or
00:14:05
I I I think back on it. I also coached
00:14:07
uh uh Trevor Hoffman when he got his 600
00:14:10
saves. So my two Hall of Fame closures I
00:14:12
was able to coach as a you know as as a
00:14:15
you know as a professional. He would
00:14:16
talk about what a dream, right? Two of
00:14:18
the greatest closers of all time and and
00:14:20
Mo, you know, was the greatest of all
00:14:22
time without exception. But what that
00:14:24
does for and to have that guy on your
00:14:26
team, the value of that to know that
00:14:29
this is an eight inning game and and you
00:14:32
start managing the game in that way to
00:14:34
make sure that you have a lead to come
00:14:35
into the eighth inning. You know, you
00:14:37
may do some things creatively, you know,
00:14:39
to create an option for that guy to come
00:14:42
into the game. Can I ask a related
00:14:43
question, Rick, since I know you know
00:14:45
it's been years since we've talked to
00:14:46
you about biomechanics, but obviously
00:14:48
that was a lot of what you talked about.
00:14:50
>> Is there something different in the
00:14:53
required physic, let's call it
00:14:56
measurables or biomechanics of a
00:14:58
reliever than a starting pitcher?
00:15:01
>> No, not at all. You know, because the
00:15:03
bottom line is your arm has to be on
00:15:06
time at foot contact. And if you are,
00:15:09
you're going to have a better chance to
00:15:10
make quality pitches because because
00:15:12
you're on time.
00:15:14
>> So Rick, let me uh let me ask you a
00:15:15
couple questions related to a couple
00:15:17
things you said earlier.
00:15:18
>> First of all, you're talking about Billy
00:15:20
Wagner's kind of um genes or his DNA. So
00:15:23
predicting future talent. But let's
00:15:25
let's scroll back a little bit. It's
00:15:26
been a number of years since you've been
00:15:27
on our our show, right? Um and we've all
00:15:30
seen um pitchers throw harder and harder
00:15:33
and harder. So much so that the top end
00:15:36
is of course now 102 103 is appearing
00:15:39
fairly regularly when it was
00:15:40
ridiculously exceptional five years ago.
00:15:43
>> But scrolling it even back to high
00:15:45
school. I have I teach a high school
00:15:46
summer program and some of my students
00:15:48
were are our athletes. We have
00:15:50
16-year-old kids throwing 85 88 and
00:15:54
they're not getting much attention from
00:15:56
division one teams because it's become
00:15:57
so common. What how did this could you
00:16:00
have predicted this as being possible?
00:16:02
And and I imagine something has changed
00:16:06
in the in the training process, the
00:16:09
coaching process, if you will, to make
00:16:11
these extraordinary velocities so much
00:16:14
more common place cuz our DNA isn't any
00:16:16
different. That takes, you know, tens of
00:16:19
thousands of years to get to. Right.
00:16:21
Right.
00:16:21
>> So, what what do you what's your what's
00:16:22
your what's Can you explain us what's
00:16:25
what's it doing? Is it the training
00:16:26
programs or um is it typically your
00:16:29
start? Well, it's it's the training
00:16:30
programs and and they're and they're
00:16:32
training people to to move as fast as
00:16:34
they possibly can. And and the danger
00:16:36
with that, like you I call them uh
00:16:39
gorilla throws. Like you you'll see
00:16:41
people they take these running crow hop
00:16:43
throws and throw the ball as hard as
00:16:45
they possibly can like into a wall or
00:16:48
into a net or or a distance if you have
00:16:50
a partner throwing with that you're
00:16:52
throwing with. But but the bottom line
00:16:53
of that it's maximum effort and and
00:16:57
what's so critical that that in order to
00:17:00
stay healthy you it's a black or white
00:17:02
yes or no. There's no gray area here.
00:17:05
You you have to be on time at foot
00:17:08
contact. Your arm has to be in a certain
00:17:10
position at foot contact. You either are
00:17:13
or you're not. And if you're late at
00:17:15
foot contact, you're going to get
00:17:17
injured. So if you have pitchers
00:17:20
training at max effort, it's very
00:17:23
difficult to be at on time at max
00:17:25
effort. That's why you look at golf long
00:17:27
drive contests. Those guys can't play in
00:17:29
the on the tour. They can't put the ball
00:17:31
in play. In three minutes, they can put
00:17:33
one in play at 400 yards. But but to put
00:17:36
14 of them in play, you know, for 18
00:17:38
rounds, forget it. They they can't
00:17:40
because because max effort, it's
00:17:42
impossible to be on time, you know. So
00:17:44
what happens is when you're training
00:17:45
people at max effort levels and and I
00:17:48
think the same thing conversely with
00:17:51
what's happening offensively, it's all
00:17:53
about exit exit velocity off the bat.
00:17:56
And and so what's happening now, if you
00:17:58
want to get higher exit velocity off the
00:18:00
bat, you have to swing at a certain
00:18:02
plane. And in order to swing it at a
00:18:04
certain plane, you're going to swing and
00:18:06
miss an awful lot is what it comes down
00:18:08
to. But when you make contact, the
00:18:10
reward, you know, the riskreward is
00:18:12
going to be there. the reward's going to
00:18:13
be there, but the risk is a ton of
00:18:15
strikeouts, which you see strikeouts off
00:18:17
the charts in Major League Baseball.
00:18:18
>> Hold on, let me let me let me follow up
00:18:20
on that because I haven't heard that
00:18:21
before. And that's interesting to me.
00:18:22
You're saying that for maximum swing
00:18:25
velocity, they're trained to always be
00:18:27
on the same plane. And if you deviate
00:18:30
from that plane in order to reach
00:18:31
wherever the ball might be, you're going
00:18:33
to be coming off that maximum velocity
00:18:35
and probably out of the groove that
00:18:36
you're accustomed to. Is that right?
00:18:37
You're trying you're trying to hit the
00:18:39
same swing plane for maximum velocity.
00:18:40
Are you saying no?
00:18:41
>> Not necessar not necessarily same swing
00:18:43
plane, but a swing plane that's going to
00:18:45
lift the ball, put the ball in the air.
00:18:47
They don't want the ball, they don't
00:18:48
want the ball in the ground anymore. So
00:18:50
line drives, even though when you look
00:18:53
statistically analytically, a line drive
00:18:55
has the highest batting average than
00:18:57
than a ball hitting the air. A line
00:19:00
drive is still the best way to hit, but
00:19:02
but that's you're not hitting home runs
00:19:04
with line drives. You got you got to get
00:19:06
underneath the ball to lift it. and to
00:19:08
have that kind of swing plane. I mean,
00:19:10
that's why you see now back back when I
00:19:12
was a pitching coach, the fast ball down
00:19:14
and away had the highest philos or had
00:19:17
the highest value for a pitcher. I mean,
00:19:19
that was the one area and it still is
00:19:21
today. They just don't try to execute
00:19:23
pitches down and away as often as they
00:19:25
do. They want to elevate the ball
00:19:27
because because when you see swings and
00:19:28
misses in the big leagues, the bat the
00:19:31
bat is underneath the ball. the ball
00:19:34
goes over the bat, you know, and and in
00:19:37
that kind of swing plane, the way to the
00:19:39
way to combat that is throw breaking
00:19:41
balls down and fast balls up. So that so
00:19:44
nobody pitches east and west anymore.
00:19:47
They pitch north and south. I mean, that
00:19:49
that's where the value has has become
00:19:51
because they've changed the swing plane
00:19:53
for hitters. But then you see strikeouts
00:19:55
off the charts and especially with
00:19:57
high-end velocity and but what you're
00:19:59
saying the trade-off for that Audi the
00:20:02
high-end velocity is that you have less
00:20:04
innings because guys can't you can't
00:20:07
maintain that high-end velocity for
00:20:09
seven eight nine innings and that's why
00:20:11
innings pitched keeps going down.
00:20:13
Velocity goes up, innings pitches go
00:20:15
down.
00:20:16
>> But but injuries have not have not
00:20:18
diminished in any me way. They're
00:20:20
they're as higher as higher than ever.
00:20:22
>> Well, they're higher. They're higher
00:20:24
because because it's you're it's more
00:20:26
difficult to be on time. But but the
00:20:28
thing that is bene more beneficial is
00:20:31
that they're pitching less,
00:20:33
you know. So if they pitch more,
00:20:35
injuries would even go off the charts
00:20:37
even. So what what has struck me is it
00:20:40
seems that the balance that we're in the
00:20:41
holding pattern doesn't really make any
00:20:43
sense because you have pitcher starting
00:20:46
pitchers going five and four or more
00:20:48
relievers finishing a game
00:20:50
>> and almost every game one might blow up
00:20:53
because they don't have what it takes.
00:20:55
>> Um and my so the the question is if if I
00:20:58
told a starter that they needed to go
00:21:00
seven or eight
00:21:01
>> they might have to pull back
00:21:03
>> a percentage point or two to make it
00:21:05
>> would that be cost effective? I mean
00:21:08
value effective to a team would they how
00:21:10
much would a would that starter have to
00:21:11
give up in in in I guess earn run
00:21:15
average if you will to
00:21:16
>> wouldn't have wouldn't have to give up
00:21:18
anything actually would the earn run
00:21:20
average would go down if they learned
00:21:22
how to pitch pitching has not become as
00:21:25
lo we've lost the art of pitching and
00:21:27
we've got the grunt of pitching now and
00:21:29
and one of my one of my favorite stories
00:21:32
when Sandy Kofax came to spring training
00:21:34
with us when I was with the Mets he was
00:21:36
telling a story that Sandy Kofac the
00:21:39
beginning of his career was a hard
00:21:41
thrower that couldn't throw strikes and
00:21:43
couldn't pitch effectively and and this
00:21:45
particular game in spring training he
00:21:47
was scheduled to pitch five innings and
00:21:49
the person who was going to back him up
00:21:50
to pitch the last four missed the bus
00:21:53
and so he was he said hey look I can
00:21:56
pitch a couple extra innings you know
00:21:58
I'll pick up a couple of his innings so
00:22:00
Norm Sherry his roommate and catcher
00:22:01
said to him hey listen Sandy if you're
00:22:04
going to pitch a couple extra innings
00:22:05
it's still spring training just back off
00:22:07
a little bit. Back off and and pace
00:22:09
yourself. Sandy Kofax pitched a no
00:22:12
hitter that day, complete game no
00:22:13
hitter. And he said, "That's when Sandy
00:22:16
Kofax arrived when I understood I can
00:22:19
take the grunt out and and and and one
00:22:21
of the comments that he made in spring
00:22:23
training to our young pitchers. See how
00:22:26
easy see how easy you can throw hard."
00:22:30
What a great statement from a Hall of
00:22:31
Famer. And so you you hear all these
00:22:33
guys, Smoltz, Maddox, I mean, one of the
00:22:37
one of the great uh documentaries is one
00:22:39
of a kind. It's it's all about Greg
00:22:41
Maddox about it's about an hour and a
00:22:43
half long. And he talks about the art of
00:22:46
pitching. You know, he was never
00:22:48
focused. And and in my opinion, I think
00:22:50
that's what happens with golf. Golfers
00:22:52
when they start learn how to play, they
00:22:53
want to learn how to swing faster and
00:22:56
hit the ball further before they learn
00:22:58
how to hit the ball accurate.
00:23:00
they got it backwards. They would be
00:23:02
much better off learning how to hit it
00:23:04
hit it accurate and then add on to speed
00:23:07
and distance in my opinion. They're
00:23:09
coaching it backwards.
00:23:12
>> Well, what you're what you're saying is
00:23:13
is that it's very much counter what I
00:23:16
guess most of the teams are actually
00:23:18
behaving.
00:23:18
>> Of course, that's why a Greg you'll
00:23:20
never see a Greg Maddox to your point.
00:23:22
you'll never see a Greg Maddox, you
00:23:25
know, but was it, you know, or Tom,
00:23:26
>> you know, Audi and I had John Smoltz on
00:23:29
the show
00:23:30
>> and we asked him specifically,
00:23:33
>> would Greg Maddox even make the major
00:23:35
leagues and he said, "No way."
00:23:37
>> They wouldn't give him a shot at it.
00:23:38
>> I won 355,
00:23:40
>> right? they wouldn't they wouldn't give
00:23:41
him a shot at and and and and and what
00:23:44
what's so interesting, you know, when it
00:23:46
comes down to that is that the fact
00:23:48
that, you know, they've gone from, like
00:23:50
I've said before, like I just mentioned
00:23:52
earlier, the art of pitching is no
00:23:55
longer, you know, part of what's taught.
00:23:57
What's taught is is the grunt of
00:24:00
pitching. How hard you can throw it and
00:24:02
how hard you and and how how much depth
00:24:04
you can get on a breaking ball so that
00:24:06
you can pitch north and south.
00:24:08
Rick, I've always wanted to ask this
00:24:10
question. Let me just build on Audi's.
00:24:12
See the logical conclusion.
00:24:14
I'm going to say it in a technical way,
00:24:15
then a non-technical way. Like why can't
00:24:17
we be basian in the following sense? If
00:24:19
it looks like Rick Peterson has his
00:24:21
stuff that day, let's leave him in for
00:24:24
seven cuz we know there's inter
00:24:28
queename variation and withiname
00:24:31
variation. But if this looks like a one
00:24:33
of the good days for Rick Peterson,
00:24:35
let's leave him in longer. If it looks
00:24:37
like one of the worst days, we can pull
00:24:38
them out faster. But why wouldn't we
00:24:41
have the intention of having to say,
00:24:43
"Slow down the pitching a little bit. Go
00:24:45
seven. This is one of your good days."
00:24:47
Is that a bad strategy?
00:24:50
>> No, it's a great strategy, actually. I
00:24:52
mean, it wouldn't be I wouldn't phrase
00:24:54
it the way that you phrase it, and I
00:24:55
wouldn't teach I wouldn't teach it the
00:24:57
way that you're explaining it, but but
00:24:58
what we would teach I mean, I used to
00:25:00
call our pitchers, you've heard me say
00:25:01
it a zillion times on our shows,
00:25:03
professional glove hitters. you get paid
00:25:05
to hit the glove. Now, what's so amazing
00:25:08
to me when you watch a game, if you
00:25:10
watched the home run hitting contest
00:25:12
before the All-Star game, the catcher
00:25:14
would give the sign or not not the sign,
00:25:16
the pitcher who was pitching, the
00:25:18
catcher had the glove, waist high,
00:25:20
middle, middle for the home run hitting
00:25:22
contest. When you watch a game, the
00:25:25
catcher gives the sign and puts the
00:25:27
glove waist high, middle, middle. I'm
00:25:30
like, the same target for home run
00:25:32
hitting contest is what you're doing
00:25:34
during the game, you know, and and and
00:25:36
talking to people that are still in the
00:25:38
game today. They're not focused on
00:25:40
actually executing hitting the glove,
00:25:42
making pitches. I mean, I think the most
00:25:44
amazing thing, um, when you talk about
00:25:46
Greg Maddox again, he pitched he pitched
00:25:49
a 78 pitch shutout and afterwards the
00:25:52
writer said, "Greg, what's your, you
00:25:55
know, what's your analysis of today's
00:25:57
game?" He said 74 out of 78. And they
00:26:00
said, 'What? What does that mean? He
00:26:02
said, 'I hit the glove 74 out of 78
00:26:04
times. And it and it and it brings me
00:26:06
back again to golf because I've gotten
00:26:09
into golf a lot. You see, I have a
00:26:10
Pebble Beach hat on and I play what I
00:26:13
call Chi-Chi golf. And and it comes from
00:26:15
Chi-Chi Rodriguez. And they asked
00:26:17
Chi-Chi years ago in an interview. They
00:26:20
said, "Chi, how have you won been a
00:26:21
great championship golfer for all these
00:26:24
years and you really don't have a great
00:26:26
golf swing?" He said, "It's very simple.
00:26:28
I put the ball on the tea. I look at the
00:26:30
ball and I hit the ball where I where I
00:26:33
want to hit the ball. Then I get to the
00:26:35
ball. I look at the pin and I hit the
00:26:37
ball to the pin." And that's how
00:26:39
>> a lot it sounds a lot like either Yogi
00:26:41
Bear or Joe Deio.
00:26:42
>> Yeah. Exactly.
00:26:43
>> Story of hitting. I look at the ball. I
00:26:44
hit the ball.
00:26:45
>> I hit the ball. It's it's the same,
00:26:47
right? And that and that's how I play
00:26:49
golf. I don't have a lot of swing
00:26:50
thoughts, you know? I have target
00:26:52
thoughts. You know, where where do I
00:26:54
want to hit the ball? not how am I going
00:26:55
to hit it there, but where am I going to
00:26:57
hit it and I and I feel like I've gotten
00:26:59
good enough that, you know, I can hit
00:27:01
the ball where where I'd like to hit it
00:27:04
more often.
00:27:05
>> So, it's interesting. I mean, I don't
00:27:06
want to segue the conversation to golf
00:27:09
more than it already is, but I will um
00:27:12
uh teach a lesson that Mark Brody, who's
00:27:15
really the the chief, you know, the
00:27:17
sports golf analyst, he's kind of like
00:27:19
the Bill James of golf golf analytics,
00:27:22
um he came and spoke to our our students
00:27:24
this past summer.
00:27:25
>> Oh, wow.
00:27:25
>> And and he said he said it's interesting
00:27:28
because he actually asked the students a
00:27:30
question.
00:27:32
If you are have to hit the ball really
00:27:34
far at a loss of accuracy or not as far
00:27:38
with more accuracy, what is proven to be
00:27:40
the better strategy among professionals?
00:27:43
So, this you have to be careful with
00:27:44
this because it's not this is not your
00:27:46
average player. And it turns out um
00:27:48
farther with less accuracy tends to be a
00:27:50
better bet. Um it's what we call the
00:27:52
riskier move. And
00:27:54
>> unless you're in the majors and the
00:27:55
rough is this high.
00:27:56
>> Well, yeah. So this is uh and so it's
00:27:59
interesting because it it's it's it does
00:28:01
have a parallel in pitching in so far in
00:28:03
sense that the it's we've been pushing
00:28:06
enormous movement massive velocity
00:28:09
potentially I would argue and what
00:28:10
you're telling us at the at the expense
00:28:12
of control um and of course and much
00:28:15
more I think also the the expense of
00:28:17
innings pitched and I think it's the
00:28:18
innings pitched that has been the killer
00:28:20
and as as Eric and I as Yankee fans we
00:28:23
we can't take it. It's like they pull
00:28:24
the the starter after the fifth and then
00:28:26
you get four clowns get out there only
00:28:28
to get you get the team
00:28:30
>> even if and Audi my point is and I'd
00:28:31
love Rick's thought on this. Even if
00:28:32
they're not four clowns, one clown's
00:28:35
going to have a bad day.
00:28:36
>> Right. Right. Well, that's an
00:28:39
interesting we've been hearing that some
00:28:40
this year. It's it's you know, we learn
00:28:42
best from the things we pay the closest
00:28:44
attention to and so you guys are
00:28:45
learning from the Yankees. But that's a
00:28:46
neat little hypothesis and model. It's a
00:28:48
model waiting to happen. Oddie, you need
00:28:49
to get that one out there. Rick, we're
00:28:51
gonna have to let you go. We appreciate
00:28:53
you making time for us. Great to catch
00:28:55
up with you. Congrats on getting another
00:28:57
of your proteges into the Hall of Fame.
00:29:00
It's been a great summer for you.
00:29:02
>> Loved it. Great to see you guys again,
00:29:04
man.
00:29:04
>> Absolutely. Rick Peterson.
00:29:06
>> Good to take care.
00:29:06
>> All right. Come back and join us after
00:29:08
the break.
00:29:10
>> Welcome back. Welcome back to Wharton
00:29:13
Moneyball. Welcome to the second half of
00:29:15
this week's show. Just off the line with
00:29:19
Rick Peterson. Rick was a mainstay of
00:29:21
our show when we got off the ground 11
00:29:23
years ago. Haven't talked with him in a
00:29:25
little while. He got a big shout out at
00:29:28
the Hall of Fame ceremony this year. Fun
00:29:30
to get back in touch with him a little
00:29:31
bit. Let's Let's uh I'm I'm still here
00:29:33
Cade Massie with my colleagues, co-host
00:29:36
Eric Bradlo, Audi Winer. Shane is out.
00:29:38
Shane will be back. Probably not till
00:29:40
September, but he is going to be back.
00:29:42
Eric and any reflections on our catching
00:29:45
up with with Rick and then we'll talk a
00:29:48
little bit about MLB around the league.
00:29:50
>> Well, you know, as a non actual
00:29:54
professional baseball player or even a
00:29:56
former, you know, amateur level
00:29:58
professional baseball player, it's hard
00:29:59
to to make prescriptions. But one of the
00:30:02
things that he said was repeatedly is
00:30:04
that the athletes today are not taught
00:30:07
to become pitchers, but they're they're
00:30:11
um they're just learning how to throw
00:30:12
really hard. What was the word for it? A
00:30:14
grunt, I think he said. Uh and
00:30:17
>> art of pitching, the grunt of pitching
00:30:18
instead of the art. So they they they're
00:30:21
it's almost like max effort, enormous
00:30:23
philosophy, trained to have enormous
00:30:25
velocity, loss of movement, but less
00:30:29
less desire to hit the glove. Um in
00:30:32
fact, I can say a little bit about that
00:30:33
because I've actually studied control.
00:30:35
They tend to not the catcher doesn't
00:30:36
tend to set up um where he wants to
00:30:39
throw it because that that sign gets
00:30:41
stolen. And so and they've they've
00:30:43
learned not to show demonstrate where
00:30:45
the pitch is coming by having the
00:30:46
catcher um throw that out.
00:30:48
>> Interesting. Okay,
00:30:50
>> which is actually interesting. So, so it
00:30:51
often looks like they're setting up down
00:30:53
the middle, but there's actually no
00:30:54
intention to do that. They have this
00:30:56
pitchcom which allows them to
00:30:57
communicate with each other. So, they
00:30:58
know perfectly accurately where they're
00:31:00
expected to throw it. So, that's a
00:31:02
little twist, but I feel like there's
00:31:06
something a lot, you know, correct about
00:31:08
what Rick is saying. That's my instinct.
00:31:11
But still I there's so many super smart
00:31:13
people working in baseball and if this
00:31:15
is so obvious that they can pitch a
00:31:18
little bit a little bit less and go
00:31:20
seven
00:31:21
>> and or they could learn to someone would
00:31:23
be doing it and correct and yet it's
00:31:25
not. Now there obviously there's there's
00:31:27
a psychological component to this.
00:31:29
There's a lot of group think and a lot
00:31:30
of uh a lot of factors here that maybe
00:31:33
we can't possibly explain. So I'm not
00:31:35
willing to write it off but I am a
00:31:37
little suspicious as it of the story
00:31:39
being as simple as that. So let me by
00:31:41
the way a that's the same exact thing I
00:31:43
was going to say which is we study this
00:31:45
all the time which is if we assume that
00:31:48
firms are rational
00:31:50
>> and we see an effect size of this
00:31:52
magnitude that isn't like well there's
00:31:54
eightway interaction to figure this out
00:31:56
pitch a little slower go a little longer
00:31:59
I mean if that were purely true at its
00:32:02
face value
00:32:04
people would be doing it well so what
00:32:06
could what could be influencing that
00:32:08
okay number one But before before we go
00:32:11
longer, just for the record, I'm going
00:32:13
to enter into the record protesting the
00:32:15
assumption that firms are rational and
00:32:18
perfectly optimizing. All right, let me
00:32:19
just
00:32:20
>> I said if I said if
00:32:21
>> Okay, I'm just pro I'm just I'm just
00:32:23
noting.
00:32:24
>> All right. Um so what could stop firms
00:32:28
ball teams from doing that? One is um we
00:32:31
say that for pitchers
00:32:34
slow it down, gain more accuracy.
00:32:37
How strong is that relationship? We
00:32:40
don't know that that's true. Like we
00:32:43
know it's true maybe in aggregate, but
00:32:45
it may not be true for the pitchers that
00:32:47
can pitch really fast. That's one theory
00:32:49
that could be there. Okay. The second
00:32:52
could be that it's a selection problem
00:32:56
that the pitchers who can pitch really
00:32:58
fast are the ones in the majors. The
00:33:01
ones that can pitch slower with accuracy
00:33:02
aren't there. Mhm.
00:33:04
>> That's another argument that you could
00:33:05
make that would kind of invalidate this.
00:33:07
The third one could be the guy who
00:33:10
throws slower might get hit more often
00:33:13
while he's pitching, but still better
00:33:16
than the replacement, but the manager
00:33:17
won't give him the opportunity to pitch
00:33:20
that many innings. So, I could come up
00:33:22
with even if the firm were rational, I
00:33:25
can come up with whether you want to
00:33:26
call them economic or stories that would
00:33:30
prevent that from actually happening in
00:33:32
practice. And I think the three examples
00:33:34
I gave just off the top of my head, I'm
00:33:35
sure I could construct more.
00:33:38
>> Well, I I just want to know whether
00:33:40
fundamentally actually less than about
00:33:42
control, but but longevity. If if if uh
00:33:45
if Charl if Rodon doesn't throw as hard
00:33:48
as he can, maybe he can go seven or
00:33:49
eight innings
00:33:51
and and uh and my question is what's the
00:33:54
loss?
00:33:55
>> Well, we actually, by the way, you
00:33:56
remember Audi, we asked Rick this
00:33:57
question. It's got to be eight, 10,
00:33:58
nine, whatever, 10 years ago. Like how
00:34:01
do you measure
00:34:02
Like if you're going to draw a graph on
00:34:04
the x- axis is some measure of effort
00:34:07
and on the y ais is let's say ability to
00:34:10
continue or probability of injury. What
00:34:13
should be on the x-axis? Should it be
00:34:15
the number of pitches? Should it be the
00:34:18
maximum effort on you know and he
00:34:20
mentioned very clearly throwing a pitch
00:34:22
1023
00:34:24
is infinitely more effort than throwing
00:34:26
it 95 96 or vice versa.
00:34:29
>> Yes. So, uh, he taught us, this is
00:34:31
something that he taught us early in his
00:34:32
in the years he was the show, the, um,
00:34:35
that it's max effort that hurts your
00:34:37
arm.
00:34:37
>> Correct.
00:34:38
>> And that if you pull back a percentage
00:34:40
point or two or three or whatever that
00:34:41
number is, the effort on your ligaments,
00:34:44
your tendons, your muscles, your your is
00:34:47
just substantially less. We'd say the
00:34:49
elasticity of that is is is is large,
00:34:52
right? Um, but my follow-up question to
00:34:55
that is what is the corresponding loss
00:34:58
in value?
00:34:59
>> Yeah, that's the question. And that I
00:35:01
don't have the answer.
00:35:02
>> Also, let's also be clear,
00:35:04
>> we should also be um forwardlooking and
00:35:06
not myopic decision makers, which means
00:35:09
the person that also throttles back 3%
00:35:11
might actually be able, let's say it's a
00:35:13
starter, might actually be able to pitch
00:35:15
30 games and not get injured. That's
00:35:17
right. So, now there's also additional
00:35:19
value there. Well, let but let me just
00:35:21
add one complication in actually running
00:35:23
any of these experiments. And we talk
00:35:24
about the Maddoxes not getting a look.
00:35:26
And the truth is Maddox would be less
00:35:29
effective presumably these days just
00:35:32
because batters have become better and
00:35:36
they they've adapted well maybe Maddox
00:35:37
is a bad example because the main thing
00:35:39
that they've adapted to is speed. I mean
00:35:41
the guys the the guy you know Nolan not
00:35:44
Nolan Richards like J.R. Richard or
00:35:46
whoever with the the guys who were
00:35:47
throwing over 100 miles an hour in the
00:35:48
in the 80s
00:35:50
they're that's normal now and batters
00:35:52
have literally become acclimated to some
00:35:55
extent they've become acclimated they
00:35:56
have and that's that's hard to hard to
00:35:58
talk about but and so all these
00:36:00
trade-offs are are are hard to measure I
00:36:02
mean you talk about innings pitch though
00:36:04
so in the grid war paper I wrote and
00:36:06
published a couple years back um and we
00:36:09
ranked pitcher seasons by their by the
00:36:12
most value um contributed by a starting
00:36:15
pitcher and it's Sandy Kofax who leads
00:36:18
that kind of handily. Um and the reason
00:36:20
for that is 42 starts pitching eight
00:36:24
nine innings every time out and 17 or 19
00:36:28
shutouts. It is more value cumulatively
00:36:32
than say Pedro Martinez who have is the
00:36:35
best pitcher on a per start basis but
00:36:38
only went 27 starts across the season or
00:36:41
28 which is so so substantially fewer
00:36:44
that you just can't contribute that much
00:36:45
value. So I'm willing to let them be a
00:36:48
little bit less valuable on a per inning
00:36:50
basis as long as I get more innings out
00:36:52
of them. And I think that might be the
00:36:54
thing that is being missed today. So
00:36:56
that's this is a we need to take it to
00:36:57
one of our uh current baseball execs and
00:37:00
get some insight because the starting
00:37:01
place for this conversation is someplace
00:37:03
I want to come back to which is look you
00:37:05
know when the Dodgers have 50 people or
00:37:07
or whatever 40 50 people do running
00:37:10
analytics
00:37:11
>> they're looking at this kind of thing
00:37:12
and so it's a little hard to believe and
00:37:14
they've also got you know they can
00:37:15
experiment at the farm leagues and so um
00:37:18
it's a little hard to believe that it's
00:37:19
not at least near optimal but it's
00:37:21
interesting. All right, guys. Let's talk
00:37:23
a little bit um a little bit of baseball
00:37:26
around the league, but let me give you a
00:37:27
little update. I played softball this
00:37:30
weekend for the first time in forever,
00:37:32
just casually hit around, but I have I
00:37:33
want to report because we talk a lot
00:37:35
about age curves. So, I want to report
00:37:37
on age curves in softball by skill, by
00:37:43
baseball skill, and I'll give just an
00:37:45
observation. Here are the observations.
00:37:46
Hitting doesn't degrade that much. It's
00:37:49
really delightful to see the guys that I
00:37:52
played with still able to stroke the
00:37:54
ball quite nicely. Not not, you know,
00:37:56
you don't go out there for 10 years and
00:37:57
you still hit good balls. It's really
00:37:59
really kind of surprising and nice.
00:38:01
Throwing I would put kind of in the
00:38:03
middle and a lot of heterogeneity. Some
00:38:05
of my guys look good whipping it around.
00:38:07
Some of my guys maybe not as good. Me
00:38:09
definitely not as good. But the one that
00:38:11
really suffers
00:38:12
>> running,
00:38:13
>> the running really suffers is defensive
00:38:15
range. I mean, nobody's got any range.
00:38:19
It was hilarious. You'd hit a ball at
00:38:22
somebody in the outfield. I go, "There's
00:38:23
a nice fly ball for them to shall fall
00:38:25
like five feet away from them." Like,
00:38:27
"No, nobody could move. It's absolutely
00:38:30
astounding." Yeah, that's I've observed
00:38:33
that. I was the for quite a few years I
00:38:35
was captain of our sort of our local
00:38:37
synagogue uh team in our league and we
00:38:39
had about 12 16 teams and my secret
00:38:42
strategy was I put the youngest players
00:38:45
in the outfield regardless of what they
00:38:48
position they wanted or not because they
00:38:49
were the only ones who could reliably
00:38:51
get to a fly ball. Oh, it's obviously
00:38:53
odd. You see guys moving, you know, as
00:38:55
they get older. Like even think of the
00:38:57
even think of the Pete Roses. You know,
00:38:58
eventually a lot of people get moved to
00:39:00
first base or of course DH. And so it's
00:39:04
the hitting. I mean, this is kind of
00:39:05
known hitting doesn't go away as quickly
00:39:08
as things like running and range and
00:39:10
other stuff like
00:39:11
>> Well, I just extrapolated it deeper into
00:39:13
the uh data sample that we've had
00:39:15
before. And we
00:39:16
>> Yeah, we had John Carlo out in out in
00:39:18
the outfield for a few games. It was
00:39:19
like watching a softball. I still don't
00:39:21
know why he hasn't played for the last
00:39:22
five games given he was the player of
00:39:24
the week and batted 530 over the
00:39:26
previous I don't understand what I don't
00:39:28
understand what Boone is doing but
00:39:29
>> neither do I.
00:39:30
>> Okay. So other than the Yankees I mean
00:39:34
for example there was an article in the
00:39:35
athletic I think this morning about the
00:39:37
Brewers and there's a question about
00:39:40
whether you actually believe in it or
00:39:41
not. Clearly the top record in the
00:39:43
league. Um they they've been lucky and
00:39:46
batted balls in play. I think since
00:39:48
early in the season, they've had by far
00:39:50
the highest success rate on baddest
00:39:52
balled balls in play. That's that's
00:39:54
supposed to regress. Do do you think
00:39:56
there's anything to be said for like
00:39:57
this? You they're lauded for this team
00:40:00
concept, you know, they're running
00:40:01
baseball, they're running bases
00:40:03
correctly and they're hitting the cuto
00:40:04
off man, all this old school stuff. Is
00:40:06
that just storytelling or do you think
00:40:08
there's value to be had?
00:40:11
>> I think it's storytelling.
00:40:13
I think they're they're you know a lot
00:40:15
of value can be contributed by lots of
00:40:18
players doing better than expected.
00:40:20
There's one of the really nice
00:40:21
presentations our Moneyball Academy
00:40:23
students did this summer sort of broke
00:40:25
down the uh the San Francisco um Giants
00:40:30
epic 107 win season from a couple years
00:40:33
back where they were predicted to have
00:40:34
about 75. Remember that?
00:40:35
>> Yeah.
00:40:36
>> And and so what they did was sort of
00:40:37
they broke down each each each player.
00:40:40
Nobody had a ridiculous season. it just
00:40:43
but a whole mess of players enormously
00:40:46
outperformed what was expected. Now they
00:40:48
didn't try to answer why or whether that
00:40:50
continued. That was one of the
00:40:51
weaknesses. They didn't actually address
00:40:53
look at those players in the future. Um
00:40:55
and there wasn't any attempt or really
00:40:58
it's a hard problem of course to figure
00:41:00
out why. But I think if you looked at
00:41:02
the Brewers you'd see lots and lots of
00:41:04
players doing well. No collectively
00:41:08
hitting better and and let me ask. It's
00:41:10
not little things like probably have
00:41:12
looked at this. Let's let me condition
00:41:15
let's just take the nine starters for
00:41:16
the moment. I'm going to condition on
00:41:18
total war. Are you would you rather have
00:41:22
nine twos or three sixes and six zeros?
00:41:27
>> Do we know empirically if we look at the
00:41:29
distribution of war and its contribution
00:41:32
to winning percentage is there anything
00:41:34
about this is Kade's sort of the way I
00:41:37
interpreted K's question. Is there
00:41:39
better to have a uniform distribution?
00:41:41
Obviously, we'd rather have more total
00:41:42
than less total, but condition on the
00:41:44
total. Would you rather have a flatter
00:41:46
distribution or it concentrated with a
00:41:48
small people?
00:41:49
>> I think I I we can all try to answer
00:41:50
that in our heads. Maybe I know what I
00:41:52
would say. Um and uh and I even have a
00:41:55
reason why. But I will say that
00:41:57
mathematically, not mathematically, but
00:41:59
um the implementation of war treats them
00:42:01
as additive. So
00:42:03
>> that's I knew that
00:42:04
>> they they don't care, but that is a
00:42:06
weakness in war because they're not
00:42:08
additive. Um, and this is something that
00:42:10
goes back to some of the oldest work in
00:42:12
baseball research is that one of the
00:42:14
nice things about most people's baseball
00:42:16
is approximately linear and
00:42:18
approximately additive, but only
00:42:19
approximately. And where that fails is
00:42:23
that there's a multiplicative component
00:42:25
of baseball. And it has to do with the
00:42:27
fact that that
00:42:29
um getting runners on, it's a cumulative
00:42:31
process. Yeah. And so my instinct would
00:42:34
be if I had 20 more, I'd rather see it
00:42:36
divided out flat rather than accumulated
00:42:39
and but you don't typically have that
00:42:42
because
00:42:42
>> but carry it carry it one line further.
00:42:44
That's because you don't want those you
00:42:46
don't want those barend spots. You want
00:42:48
guys on bases available to be hit
00:42:49
around.
00:42:50
>> That's right. And that and that that
00:42:51
what that's what leads to it's the
00:42:53
interaction of player quality. One of
00:42:55
the classic problems in basketball and
00:42:58
hockey and soccer and football is
00:43:00
figuring out the right collection of
00:43:02
players that bring value in a symbiotic
00:43:05
way. Right. Nobody asks that question
00:43:07
with baseball.
00:43:08
>> Well, let me ask let me ask you a
00:43:09
version of that question that I had
00:43:10
never thought about until you gave the
00:43:12
example of your students, which let's be
00:43:14
clear, we're talking about high school
00:43:15
students project presentation on the
00:43:17
Giants from a few years ago.
00:43:19
>> You know, Eric, you'll know that we talk
00:43:20
about this. You feel this some in golf
00:43:22
and you wonder about it in golf. I'm not
00:43:23
sure if there's ever been a good
00:43:24
empirical study. Like, does a golf does
00:43:27
a golfer's playing partner's performance
00:43:29
affect his or her own performance? Is
00:43:31
there positive correlation in any way
00:43:32
with who you're playing with? Is has
00:43:34
anybody ever looked at that in baseball?
00:43:36
Like the Giants, everybody is above
00:43:38
expectation without knowing why. We
00:43:41
could posit a few possibilities. So, for
00:43:43
example, it could be coaching, it could
00:43:46
be clubhouse atmosphere, it could be
00:43:48
positive examples. It could be a lot of
00:43:50
things but just empirically does it
00:43:52
exist? Is there any is there any
00:43:55
correlation between player performance
00:43:57
that we've observed?
00:44:00
That's the simple question. Is there is
00:44:02
there is there within team a crossplayer
00:44:05
correlation of any kind or is any part
00:44:07
of their performance correlated
00:44:08
positive?
00:44:09
>> So that can only be psychological or
00:44:11
coaching or something not
00:44:13
>> quantified. And so, and
00:44:15
>> hold on, Eric. Just I mean, Eric Audie,
00:44:17
just because it's coaching doesn't mean
00:44:19
it's not quantifiable.
00:44:21
>> Well, it it's hard to measure. I don't
00:44:23
think anyone has I I've never seen
00:44:24
anyone attempt to measure it.
00:44:25
>> Well, could you not measure it? Could
00:44:27
did Did your buddy Did your student not
00:44:29
just show an example of a positively
00:44:31
correlated
00:44:33
uh above expectation performance by the
00:44:35
Giants players? No, but Audi, why would
00:44:38
the following true? My my intuition is a
00:44:40
little bit the opposite, but it could be
00:44:42
wrong, which is um if the people around
00:44:45
me perform better, let's call it
00:44:47
offensively for the moment. Then when I
00:44:49
get at bat, it'll be a higher leverage
00:44:53
situation for me and for the pitcher.
00:44:57
And therefore, people tend to bat better
00:44:59
in those situations. In other words,
00:45:01
there's men on base, they can't pitch
00:45:04
around me as much, etc. So why wouldn't
00:45:06
there be an a literal dependence?
00:45:09
>> Yeah, mechanical. You're talking about
00:45:10
mechanical correlation.
00:45:12
>> Yeah, mechanical. No psychological
00:45:14
anything else just, you know, look way
00:45:16
let's imagine that I was what's the
00:45:18
gdunkan experiment. Will Aaron Judge,
00:45:21
although he's doing great already, but
00:45:23
would Aaron Judge bat better if he came
00:45:25
up with bases loaded every single time?
00:45:29
Okay, but Eric, but to answer the
00:45:31
question that I'm trying to ask, you
00:45:32
would want to condition that stuff out
00:45:34
and we'd be good statistitians and would
00:45:35
somehow condition that out. And we're
00:45:37
basically looking for clubhouse effects,
00:45:40
whether it's from a coach or whether
00:45:41
it's because Derek Jeter is a god or
00:45:43
whatever, there's some kind of clubhouse
00:45:45
effect that the everybody's just kind of
00:45:47
up. I mean, has it is there
00:45:49
>> I didn't want to condition that out, but
00:45:51
okay, we can condition that out. Um,
00:45:53
>> yeah. No, Eric, you're right. there's
00:45:54
going to be a mechanical one and then so
00:45:56
that's a higher bar for there being some
00:45:58
psychological thing you have to
00:45:59
condition that out and find out whether
00:46:01
there's something on top of that and I'm
00:46:02
not saying there is I'm just saying
00:46:04
couldn't you look for that and isn't
00:46:07
that exactly what people say a clubhouse
00:46:09
a good clubhouse is or
00:46:11
>> you could look at residual performance
00:46:14
and see how much residuals are
00:46:17
correlated you could do it within
00:46:18
innings cross games within se you know
00:46:21
seasons you could do it m maybe maybe
00:46:23
This is a way to think about managers is
00:46:25
you know the ability to look at
00:46:28
cumulative or correlated residuals of
00:46:31
multiple players. The these are all
00:46:33
reasonable things you could do if you
00:46:34
had a baseline model of performance. You
00:46:36
could measure exceedences and see
00:46:38
whether correlated.
00:46:40
>> This is Rick gave us an example and it's
00:46:42
just an anecdote butcher's team thought
00:46:45
that there was correlated performance in
00:46:47
Peterson's pitching staff facing Ichiro.
00:46:50
Right. So that's that's the kind of
00:46:52
thing we're talking about just kind of
00:46:53
writ large and it's a little surprising
00:46:55
that it hasn't been it's you know if
00:46:57
it's there
00:46:59
by the way I want to give Audi credit
00:47:00
for like the one of his classic lines
00:47:02
about this stuff over our 11 years
00:47:04
together is we're not saying it's not
00:47:06
there it's just that if it is it's too
00:47:09
small to observe and I'm just asking
00:47:11
have we even tried to observe it that
00:47:13
>> I don't think we have but I'm going to
00:47:14
follow up with another another wonderful
00:47:16
mathematical result that I don't know
00:47:19
how transfers over too perfectly. But in
00:47:22
the theory of large deviation, so we
00:47:24
study in in probability the the behavior
00:47:26
of sums of random variables and we know
00:47:28
the central limit theorem and all kinds
00:47:30
of the law of large numbers tells us
00:47:33
about what's what's supposed to happen
00:47:34
on average. But what what some people
00:47:36
ask is what happens when there's an
00:47:38
especially large exceedence, something
00:47:40
that's extraordinarily rare. Um what do
00:47:42
you look for? What are the properties of
00:47:44
the random variables conditional on this
00:47:46
extraordinary exceedence? So one
00:47:47
possibility is that you've got a a bunch
00:47:50
of really really big values that that
00:47:52
that caused it. Another another
00:47:54
possibility which turns out to be the
00:47:56
truth is that you don't the large
00:47:58
exceedence is not driven by a bunch of
00:48:00
extreme outliers. It's driven by sort of
00:48:02
a tilt in the entire distribution. Um so
00:48:05
lots and lots of small performances lead
00:48:08
to that small better than average
00:48:10
performances lead to that exceedence.
00:48:12
And so if you transfer that to a say a
00:48:14
baseball or an athletic team, when you
00:48:17
get a team that is not is not expected
00:48:20
to do well, is doing extremely well uh
00:48:22
like the Brewers are like the Niners
00:48:23
did. Not the Niners, sorry. The Giants
00:48:25
did a few years back, what you should
00:48:27
expect to see is lots and lots of highly
00:48:30
above average performance.
00:48:31
>> I love it. I mean, you've given us that
00:48:33
before. This is one of the, you know,
00:48:34
things I've learned about probability
00:48:35
from talking to you for 11 years, which
00:48:37
is great. We need to be reminded of it.
00:48:39
But I think that sets up really well for
00:48:43
evaluating whether there is a clubhouse
00:48:46
effect or a coaching effect because that
00:48:47
I think that story what you just
00:48:49
described is exactly what teams would
00:48:51
say when they think they've got that
00:48:53
going on like a good clubhouse I've got
00:48:55
good coaches. Now the cynic or the
00:48:57
skeptic I should say would say no it
00:49:00
goes the other way. The winning teams
00:49:02
feel good. It's not that really good
00:49:04
teams win, but there ought to be some
00:49:07
way to look at whether that correlation
00:49:09
ex or where the correlations exist and
00:49:11
the size of the correlation and whether
00:49:12
it exceeds Eric's mechanical
00:49:14
correlations.
00:49:16
>> All right. Okay. Enough on the stats for
00:49:17
the moment, fellas. Any other themes
00:49:19
across the MLB right now before we
00:49:21
change?
00:49:22
>> Well, I think at some point we got to
00:49:24
address some of our early seasons
00:49:25
prediction predictions. Um, I think my
00:49:27
unfortunately for Yankee fans, my
00:49:29
forecast on Aaron Judge's final, uh,
00:49:31
batting average is looking pretty
00:49:33
accurate. Um, it's sliding down into the
00:49:36
330s now. I think I predicted around
00:49:38
somewhere around 320 to finish.
00:49:40
>> I think that would be possibly even
00:49:42
optimistic at this point.
00:49:44
>> And the other one is Colorado. Colorado
00:49:46
is not breaking any records for losses
00:49:48
this year.
00:49:48
>> No. Damn it.
00:49:51
And I think we had a pretty uh brisk
00:49:53
conversation about that and I was
00:49:55
arguing you cannot regression to the
00:49:57
mean is going to be the king as it is in
00:50:00
both examples.
00:50:01
>> They're not even particularly close
00:50:02
anymore.
00:50:03
>> No, they've got 35 wins already.
00:50:05
>> Yeah, they I mean I was just looking at
00:50:07
this. They have 36.
00:50:08
>> 36.
00:50:09
>> I mean could they go whatever three and
00:50:11
34? They could, but no matter fact
00:50:14
they've won four straight.
00:50:15
>> Yeah.
00:50:16
>> Um all right, guys. On the golf front,
00:50:19
Sheffer wins yet again. Eric, are you
00:50:22
more or less impressed when he wins the
00:50:24
second FedEx tournament? So, we're
00:50:26
talking about a tournament of only 50
00:50:28
players, but they are the best 50
00:50:29
players. Is it more or less impressive
00:50:31
to win that tournament? That's actually
00:50:33
a good statistical.
00:50:35
>> Um, I think of course what you need to
00:50:38
know is how many of those players are
00:50:39
playing in the 130 person tournament
00:50:41
anyway. So, we've got to beat those 50
00:50:43
and 80 more. And we know, you know, both
00:50:45
the comments you've made that Rufus has
00:50:47
studied. It's not like the 73rd ranked
00:50:50
golfer you've never heard of and that
00:50:52
person can't win. That person can
00:50:53
absolutely win.
00:50:55
>> This is a question we've never asked
00:50:56
before, Eric. Like what is take take say
00:50:58
say the fill size is 130 typically or
00:51:00
whatever the number is. What's if for
00:51:04
the average player or maybe a good
00:51:06
player, what's the break even point, the
00:51:09
top X players
00:51:12
versus a full field? What's your
00:51:14
intuition?
00:51:17
>> Right?
00:51:18
>> Because you know the top 10 players,
00:51:21
you probably have a better chance
00:51:22
against the top 10 players than you
00:51:24
would have full fulfilled. That's kind
00:51:25
of fun, isn't it? That is that even
00:51:27
true?
00:51:29
This is an interesting question because
00:51:31
this is what we're experimenting with.
00:51:32
They played 75 guys or 80 or whatever it
00:51:35
was two weeks ago. They played 50 this
00:51:37
past weekend.
00:51:38
>> 70 then 50 and then this week it's 30.
00:51:40
>> 30 this week. So is this is kind of like
00:51:43
how impressive are these wins? So this
00:51:45
let's go back to the original question.
00:51:46
How impressed are you with Sheffford
00:51:47
winning the second 50 person tourn?
00:51:49
>> Oh I think it's extraordinarily
00:51:51
impressive. I mean, he's beating all the
00:51:53
top golfers in the world and um I think
00:51:56
that's absolutely impressive. Um, you
00:52:01
know, I forget what it is. He's got 13
00:52:03
now or 12 or 13 straight tournaments.
00:52:05
He's been in the top eight. He's won
00:52:07
four of them. Um, this is like the
00:52:09
longest streak in like 50 years since
00:52:12
Tom Weissoff or something like that in
00:52:14
1973.
00:52:16
I mean, he's on a heater and
00:52:19
>> Okay, hold on hold. What did you just
00:52:20
say is best since Tom Weissoff? I
00:52:22
haven't heard his name in a while.
00:52:23
>> The best since Tom Weissoff in terms of
00:52:25
number of consecutive like top 10 in
00:52:28
tournaments.
00:52:28
>> Okay. Okay. Interesting.
00:52:30
>> I'm just saying he's not only making the
00:52:32
cut, he's in the top 10 of every
00:52:36
tournament he plays right now. And
00:52:38
that's it's like a 13 straight or some
00:52:40
number like that. So that's incredibly
00:52:43
incredibly impressive. And um you know
00:52:46
again
00:52:48
I remember a year and a half ago we were
00:52:50
saying man he doesn't have that many
00:52:51
majors for that many wins. He's got four
00:52:53
majors now. He's got 18 wins in the
00:52:56
since his first win three and a half
00:52:58
years ago at age 25. He now has 18 wins
00:53:02
in that period of time. I mean it's
00:53:04
incredible incredible the golf that he's
00:53:07
playing right now. And if he if he does
00:53:09
it for another three or four years, you
00:53:13
have to put him in the top echelon of
00:53:15
golfers ever because, you know, once you
00:53:17
get to the eight and above major wins,
00:53:20
by the way, then you're in the Gary
00:53:21
Player. You know, you're in the
00:53:24
>> Hold on. Let's I I'm I don't want to get
00:53:26
ahead of ourselves. I learned a lifetime
00:53:28
lesson with Tiger Woods, not get ahead
00:53:29
of myself on projecting. Let's not make
00:53:32
Let's Let's have that conversation when
00:53:33
we get closer, but I do want to ask a
00:53:34
different question about the the FedEx
00:53:36
Cup. Historically, they've struggled
00:53:39
with the right format. You know, guys
00:53:41
qualify for this, they earn certain
00:53:42
amount of points, and then they want to
00:53:44
somehow when they get down to these
00:53:45
final tournaments, reflect what they've
00:53:48
accumulated over the previous year. And
00:53:50
so, guys would start out with
00:53:51
advantages, you know?
00:53:52
>> Yeah, they got rid of that.
00:53:53
>> They got rid of all that. And and so I'm
00:53:55
curious your opinion on it because it is
00:53:57
a very different thing. But I'm having a
00:53:59
hard time not feeling like, well, this
00:54:01
this is so much better. This is so much
00:54:03
simpler. And really when it's not like
00:54:05
you play the NFL playoffs and if you
00:54:07
beat the wild card round, if you win the
00:54:09
wild card round by 35 points, you get an
00:54:11
advantage in the divisional round. I
00:54:13
mean, that's it doesn't happen anywhere.
00:54:15
>> Tell you how much I hated that previous
00:54:16
like the 30th person would start at even
00:54:20
and then the first person would start at
00:54:21
minus 10. That was literally what it
00:54:23
was. And I'm like, what a waste. What a
00:54:26
total waste. And now the top 30 people
00:54:29
in the FedEx standings all start in a
00:54:31
regular tournament at even par. And
00:54:33
let's see who wins the game.
00:54:35
>> You made the cut. You made the cut. It's
00:54:36
categorical. You move on.
00:54:38
>> That's it. You got the same chance as
00:54:40
anybody else to win this tournament.
00:54:42
>> But but but the the uh that's just the
00:54:44
tournament win. They still have this
00:54:46
separate points accumulation thing,
00:54:48
right?
00:54:49
>> They do, but but Scotty Sheffer's
00:54:50
already clinched that.
00:54:51
>> Okay. Okay.
00:54:52
>> No, he's number one by far. He's number
00:54:54
one by far. So I suppose as much
00:54:56
intrigue as we have is around the RDER
00:54:58
Cup and will it be after this next week
00:55:01
that the White Rider Cup qualification
00:55:03
>> next Wednesday is when um the six
00:55:06
automatic qualifiers are basically set
00:55:08
for both teams. Um but um Keegan Bradley
00:55:12
who is the US captain um next Wednesday
00:55:15
is when he announces the six captains
00:55:17
picks and of course the big thing there
00:55:19
is does he pick himself because he's
00:55:21
number 10 right now. Okay. And by the
00:55:23
way, he is in the final 30.
00:55:25
>> Yeah.
00:55:26
>> And let's imagine he wins this. Then he
00:55:29
have to pick himself. I mean, come on.
00:55:31
>> Well, I mean, where where give me the
00:55:34
overunder on his position in the top 12
00:55:38
and whether he'll pick himself. So, if
00:55:39
he's 12, maybe not. If he's seven, he
00:55:42
does. What about in between?
00:55:46
I think if he has a strong perform, he
00:55:49
he has a top 10 performance this week,
00:55:51
which would move him up because
00:55:52
obviously a bunch of the players playing
00:55:53
this week are Europeans, so they would I
00:55:55
think if he has a top 10 this week,
00:55:57
>> he picks himself for the RDER Cup. Okay.
00:56:00
>> Momentum. Momentum. We know momentum
00:56:01
matters in golf. Like
00:56:02
>> momentum, it will move him up. It would
00:56:04
move him up from It would both
00:56:06
>> both are going on. That's exactly right.
00:56:07
Okay. Yeah.
00:56:08
>> All right, guys. Near the end now, but
00:56:10
we got to talk football.
00:56:12
NFL just finished preseason week two. We
00:56:14
are three weeks away from two and a half
00:56:17
weeks away from kicking off the NFL. We
00:56:19
are a week and a half away from week one
00:56:22
in college football. But this weekend,
00:56:24
fellas, weekend, week zero, we are on
00:56:28
with
00:56:30
one of the rivalry games in college
00:56:32
football. Kansas State, Iowa State, and
00:56:35
Ireland kicking off noon Eastern time.
00:56:39
The season's off the ground. This is
00:56:41
actually um a fun game, a meaningful
00:56:43
game. They are both top 25 teams. Kansas
00:56:46
State is 17 or so and Iowa State is 22
00:56:50
or so. I think K State's favored by
00:56:52
about three. They're both considered
00:56:56
contenders in the Big 12. Of course,
00:56:57
half, probably half, at least six or
00:57:00
eight teams are considered contenders in
00:57:02
the Big 12, but they are two of the
00:57:03
favorites in the Big 12. So, it's a
00:57:04
meaningful game and we're off the
00:57:06
ground. Audi, we've just lost. Eric
00:57:08
Audi, are you excited about college
00:57:10
football? Hey, I know we've pulled you
00:57:11
into pro football.
00:57:14
What is your attitude towards college
00:57:15
football?
00:57:16
>> Okay, so this is an incredible
00:57:18
incredible moment for college football
00:57:20
because it is so much in transition with
00:57:23
the way it's professionalizing and at
00:57:26
that level I'm very interested in it. Um
00:57:29
I'm interested in predicting what's
00:57:30
going to happen, trying to understand
00:57:32
what it means to have all these all this
00:57:34
paid athletes, the NIL's the fantastic.
00:57:38
I love thinking about it because it it's
00:57:40
great data. Um, in fact, just listening
00:57:42
to you, I immediately had an question. I
00:57:44
wonder what the answer is. Is
00:57:46
conditional that you're not talking
00:57:47
about a top one or even top five teams.
00:57:50
What is the RMSSE in rank preseason on a
00:57:55
on these on a team like these? So, you
00:57:57
said 17 22. I mean, how well do we
00:58:00
really know that information? Could it
00:58:02
be a top five team or a top 50 team or
00:58:05
what's the uncertainty on? Let me let me
00:58:07
try to let me interpret RMSSE. You're
00:58:09
saying if if by the end of the season we
00:58:12
can take their rank to be their true
00:58:13
rank, which isn't true, but let's let's
00:58:15
just say that
00:58:17
>> you're asking what's the era in the
00:58:19
preseason ranking versus their final
00:58:21
ranking essentially.
00:58:23
>> And I I've known that in the past
00:58:25
precisely because I've because you
00:58:27
because we do modeling, Massie People,
00:58:28
we do modeling. And so you want to you
00:58:30
want to know that about yourself. if you
00:58:31
want to have some sense of um how much
00:58:33
these things travel over the course of a
00:58:35
season and and um I can't I don't recall
00:58:39
the exact number but it's what do you
00:58:42
start to say something?
00:58:43
>> Well, this is this is before there's
00:58:44
been any game so I'm actually asking
00:58:46
something. You sure it travels along as
00:58:48
as observations?
00:58:49
>> No, I mean no no I mean from week zero
00:58:51
to end of year how much does it travel?
00:58:54
And the the 90% confidence interval is
00:58:56
substantial. I mean, it it may be I
00:59:00
don't know if it's plus or minus it's
00:59:02
it's at least plus or minus 10, but I
00:59:04
think it's more than that. I don't think
00:59:06
it's plus or minus 20.
00:59:07
>> Okay, that's what I want because it's
00:59:09
plus or minus 20. That's a huge swing.
00:59:11
>> Yeah, that's too big. But it does 10
00:59:13
does 10 doesn't seem right. Well, 90%
00:59:15
confidence that maybe it's plus or minus
00:59:16
10. Maybe maybe it's in that range. But,
00:59:19
you know, this is kind of meaningless as
00:59:21
well, Audi, because you know, these
00:59:22
distributions in the middle, they're all
00:59:24
stacked up and everyone's real close to
00:59:26
each other and you could be 10 spots
00:59:27
away and only a point and a half off,
00:59:30
but at the top, they're more spread out.
00:59:31
>> Okay, so a better question is, well, how
00:59:33
likely is it that either of these two
00:59:34
teams are going to be in the playoffs?
00:59:39
>> The chance that one of these two, they
00:59:41
would have to win the Big 12 almost
00:59:42
certainly to be in the playoff. and the
00:59:44
chance that one of these I think it's a
00:59:46
16 team league,
00:59:49
you know, the the pre-season last place
00:59:52
team last year won the conference. And
00:59:55
so there's a lot of uncertainty,
00:59:56
famously uncertain in that conference.
00:59:59
One of the chance that one of these two
01:00:00
teams wins the Big 12, I'm going to say
01:00:04
about a quarter
01:00:06
>> that one of the that one of them will
01:00:07
win it. So about a quarter that and and
01:00:09
obviously the team that wins this game
01:00:11
will have a big step up on that versus
01:00:13
the other guy. Um, plus they both have
01:00:15
interesting quarterbacks, especially
01:00:17
KState's quarterback, dual threat guy.
01:00:19
Um, they're both really well coached
01:00:20
teams. Um, it's a good it's a good solid
01:00:23
opener. It really is a good solid
01:00:24
opener. I
01:00:25
>> So, that does make it interesting
01:00:26
because what you're said you're saying
01:00:27
is that the out the outcome of this will
01:00:29
actually be quite informative about
01:00:30
which of these two.
01:00:32
>> Yeah, that's that's that's a good way to
01:00:34
boil it down, Audi. This is a meaningful
01:00:36
game for the playoff. If you if that's
01:00:38
if that's if that's the criteria you
01:00:39
bring, it's a reasonable one. As a as a
01:00:41
as a as a very casual college football
01:00:44
fan, that's a meaningful that's a
01:00:45
reasonable question to ask and I would I
01:00:47
would bull it down.
01:00:48
>> And the other qu interesting thing as
01:00:49
you point out is the other reason why
01:00:50
you watch college football is you're
01:00:52
watching the future NFL stars, but not
01:00:55
knowing who they are yet. So, it's
01:00:57
fascinating to look at this data. It's
01:01:00
almost as if it's right. So, you talk
01:01:03
about these two interesting
01:01:04
quarterbacks. For all we know, in five
01:01:05
years, we're looking at a s potential
01:01:08
star. I mean,
01:01:09
>> well, let's put let's put it let's put a
01:01:10
finer point on it. Brock Pury is the
01:01:13
starting quarterback for the 49ers,
01:01:15
famously as the last guy drafted a few
01:01:17
years ago. Brock Perie played about 17
01:01:20
years as the Iowa State quarterback. And
01:01:22
nobody thought, everyone thought he was
01:01:24
a classic Iowa State quarterback. No one
01:01:25
thought he was an NFL quarterback. And
01:01:27
you might look at their current
01:01:29
quarterback in similar in a similar
01:01:30
lens, at least with that with that with
01:01:32
that history. it makes it more
01:01:34
interesting. The uh the KA quarterback's
01:01:36
a little bit different animal and very
01:01:38
fun to watch and who knows who who knows
01:01:42
we haven't seen his progress since last
01:01:43
year. We'll see how good of a
01:01:44
quarterback he is.
01:01:45
>> So, I'm going to follow up with another
01:01:46
question for you. Like you asked me why
01:01:48
I watch of college potentially are
01:01:50
interested in college football. I I'll
01:01:51
summarize that in three three reasons
01:01:54
why I think people are very interested
01:01:55
in college football. One because you
01:01:58
care about your college, right? So if
01:01:59
you ask me which colleges I would follow
01:02:02
would be Yale and Stanford respectively.
01:02:04
I actually care about I look at the the
01:02:07
sports pages to see how those two teams
01:02:09
do uh without that much I don't have too
01:02:12
much of a stake in it. Never really
01:02:13
watch too much but yeah so that's you
01:02:15
watch because you went you're wearing a
01:02:17
Texas that's your alma mater. You are
01:02:19
invested in that school and its
01:02:21
performance and therefore you watch. The
01:02:23
other reason why you watch is because
01:02:25
you you is these are in certain level
01:02:28
these are players who are going to be
01:02:29
stars in the future, right? So you're
01:02:31
you're watching young guys who are
01:02:33
developing and eventually going to be
01:02:34
terrific and you're and and that's
01:02:36
another reason. A third potential reason
01:02:38
why you're watching is because you
01:02:39
usually love the game college football.
01:02:41
You just like this version of of of
01:02:44
football, which I would to to respond to
01:02:47
that I would ask we don't typically see
01:02:49
that in other sports. We don't have that
01:02:52
enormous interest in the sport and you
01:02:56
know no one really watches minor league
01:02:57
baseball except you know just as a fun
01:03:00
outing. No one's following it. You don't
01:03:02
see I don't know what what's G-League
01:03:04
basketball
01:03:05
>> but you're going to but you do watch
01:03:07
college basketball and
01:03:09
>> you do right it's the same thing right
01:03:10
so it's so the question is um what is it
01:03:15
when someone says it's it's the game
01:03:16
what is it about the game
01:03:18
>> so first I'll try to be relatively quick
01:03:21
because God knows I could talk about
01:03:22
this for a long time there's very
01:03:24
>> I have I have a I got to get moving
01:03:25
myself
01:03:26
>> okay but my attempt one it's the
01:03:28
atmosphere and the passion around
01:03:30
college football is different from
01:03:31
college. There's a pageantry, to use
01:03:33
kind of a schlocky word, but there is a
01:03:35
pageantry about college football that
01:03:37
doesn't exist really for any of our
01:03:39
other sports. We're talking about
01:03:41
100,000 person stadiums and the color
01:03:43
and the marching bands and all that
01:03:45
stuff. And when you're when you've been
01:03:46
raised on it, it's just kind of in your
01:03:48
bones and so you're just kind of
01:03:50
reactive. So that's the biggest
01:03:51
differentiator. The game itself is a
01:03:54
little more jagged, a little more
01:03:56
volatile. the standard I was I bet if
01:03:58
you ran the numbers the standard
01:03:59
deviation on what happens each play is
01:04:03
very different in college than it is in
01:04:04
pro
01:04:05
>> and that adds some it adds it's
01:04:07
sloppiness but it adds excitement to it.
01:04:09
Um those are the two main things and
01:04:11
then you know the last thing I would say
01:04:13
is in recent times college football has
01:04:16
influenced professional football
01:04:17
dramatically. A lot of the innovation
01:04:19
has bubbled up. It hasn't come down. But
01:04:21
in in not all of it, of course, because
01:04:23
it's a very sophistic
01:04:25
and and and they're and they are
01:04:26
literally professionals that spend their
01:04:28
lives on it. But some of the big changes
01:04:30
in the game has bubbled up. I mean, just
01:04:32
the dynamic the dynamic nature of the
01:04:34
game, the dynamic nature of
01:04:35
quarterbacks, that's been kind of forced
01:04:37
on the NFL in some sense. So, those are
01:04:40
the those are the chief reasons. But, by
01:04:41
the way, Audi, you named two teams, Yale
01:04:44
and Stanford. Stan, there's only five
01:04:46
games, week zero games. Five week zero
01:04:48
games. Stanford's one of them.
01:04:49
Stanford's playing Hawaii. I think it's
01:04:52
even like prime time game Saturday
01:04:54
night. And this he's not going to be on
01:04:56
the field and you won't really feel his
01:04:57
presence, but Stanford's got an
01:04:59
interesting story. And Andrew Luck.
01:05:01
>> Yeah.
01:05:01
>> Former number one draft pick, Andrew
01:05:02
Luck is the GM out there. And unlike
01:05:06
most GM arrangements at the college
01:05:08
level, he's actually the co head coach
01:05:10
co reports to him and so it's this
01:05:12
unique situation and you know, he's kind
01:05:15
of a guy people pull for. He he his
01:05:17
career was shortened and it's kind of a
01:05:20
second career for him. So, we'll see how
01:05:21
it goes. His dad was a was a also a
01:05:24
quarterback. He even played a little
01:05:25
professional ball. Um but he was
01:05:27
famously one of the top ads in like the
01:05:30
90s, early 2000s. So, here comes his son
01:05:32
again. Um kind of a
01:05:33
>> So, is that the role athletic director?
01:05:35
I never heard of a GM for a football
01:05:36
team.
01:05:37
>> Well, hold on. Am I Yeah. Yeah, I think
01:05:40
he's GM, not at No, no, maybe I've
01:05:42
forgotten the title. Maybe I've
01:05:44
forgotten Andrew Lu's title out at
01:05:45
Stanford, but GM is that there's GMs all
01:05:48
over the place now, Audi. This is the
01:05:50
innovation personnel. There's not just
01:05:52
GMs, there's personnel departments,
01:05:53
there scouts. All that we've seen in
01:05:55
professional football has expanded into
01:05:57
college football now
01:05:58
>> as it should
01:05:59
>> as it has to. And so it's kind of a fun
01:06:02
time on the personnel front because the
01:06:05
job opportunities have doubled more than
01:06:07
>> although what I'm going to take away
01:06:08
most before we say goodbye is your
01:06:12
observation that you raised on it and
01:06:15
the pageantry of it and the excitement
01:06:17
of 100,000 people. It's something that I
01:06:20
would love to to experience. So we're
01:06:23
going to have to set that up at some
01:06:24
point.
01:06:24
>> Okay. Well, that's easy. There's two
01:06:26
there's two possibilities in my life.
01:06:27
One is Texas OU which is played at a
01:06:30
neutral site which is remarkable because
01:06:32
of its neutral sight. The other is um
01:06:34
Texas A&M that you know any a night game
01:06:37
at&m especially against Texas is as good
01:06:39
as anything. And Audi the best way to
01:06:41
think about what it's like the only
01:06:43
comparable experience I think would be a
01:06:46
a big soccer match especially an English
01:06:48
soccer match with that pageant tree.
01:06:51
That's the way to compare it. Okay, we
01:06:53
got to go. We got to get out of here
01:06:54
man. That's that uh that's week zero.
01:06:57
But we can't help ourselves. Here we go.
01:06:59
Here we go, man. All right. For Audi
01:07:01
Winer, who was here the whole time. Eric
01:07:04
Bradle almost the whole time. And Shane
01:07:05
Jensen, who didn't show up for a dad gum
01:07:07
minute, but we knew he wasn't going to.
01:07:08
In absentia, Shane, many thanks. Deion
01:07:10
Simpkins, thanks man. Deep Patel, many,
01:07:12
many thanks to you. Marissa, many thanks
01:07:14
to you as well. Our producer, thanks for
01:07:17
you guys for listening. Come back and
01:07:19
join us next time. Between now and then,
01:07:22
enjoy your sports.
01:07:24
[Music]
