Cooperstown Central: Were roids and PEDs the only reason for baseball's power surge?

As Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens and a host of other likely, or in some cases vaguely alleged, users of steroids, human growth hormone and whatever else might fall under the aegis of "performance enhancing drugs" await another shot at Cooperstown, we might ask how much roiding really was worth.

How much of an influence were steroids, on the batting side? I say batting because "chicks and Bud Selig dig the long ball," and batters don't have rotator cuffs and Tommy John ligaments to blow out.

I'd say they're worth 35 percent of the power explosion. The Costa Rican baseballs after Rawlings moved its factor from Haiti? Maybe about 17.5 percent. Maple bats another 17.5 percent. Bandbox ballparks, like Philly, Cincy, Denver (the power surge started pre-humidor) and Houston, 15 percent? Umps squeezing the strike zone 15 percent? That puts us at 100 percent.

That said, maybe I need to recalibrate. Baseball Prospectus makes an argument that expansion from 26 to 30 teams bumped the performance of top batters (and pitchers, too). And, per my PEDs+ equivalent of OPS+ and ERA+, provides some specific calibration guesstimates:

Since 1950, there have been seven seasons in which 17 or more players finished with at least six WARP. All seven came within five years after an expansion, even though fewer than half of all seasons since 1950 fit that condition. Excluding strike-shortened seasons of 1981, 1994, and 1995, an average of 15.5 players have posted at least six WARP in the five years after expansion, compared to 11.0 players in all other seasons.

When comparing performances from different eras, we don’t just compare each player’s raw stats, because we understand that those numbers come from different environments. Good analysis instead uses context-neutral statistics, comparing performance to that of an average or replacement-level player. But when “average” or “replacement level” changes—as in the case of expansion eras—should we not also consider that factor?

To estimate the impact of expansion on stars’ statistics, we can compare the performance of the top players before and after expansion. In post-expansion seasons, the top 10 players in baseball have had an average WARP of 7.8; in all other years, their average is 7.4, a statistically significant difference. Using different cutoffs (eg., top five or top 20) yields similar estimates of about .4 wins per season.

Very interesting stuff.

I'm not holier than thou on the issue of steroids in baseball. My take is, how much did roiding, in my estimation, boost a particular suspect player's career. If I think I can reasonably factor that out, AND get some contrition, I will at least be open to voting a player into the Hall of Fame.

For example? Rafael Palmeiro is a "high borderline," still, with 350 HR, 450 2B, and a WAR around 55 or so. Raffy probably goes .360/.500/.860 on OBP/SLG/OPS. 1,500 runs and 1,700 RBIs. Of course, his oWAR might fall below 60. That's the hesitation point. Is Raffy a higher-grade Harold Baines without steroids? I wouldn't argue against that. But, he at least gets consideration. But, I lean no.

Mark McGwire? I estimate that he'd be down to 450 HRs, and would lose a ton of walks, and so lose OBP and lose massively on OPS and OPS+, reinforcing his one-dimensional nature, so a no. Knock his OBP down to .380, his slugging to .550 and then his OPS to .930. His runs fall to 1,100 and his RBIs to 1,300. About 450 HRs. NOT a HOF career. That's a high-grade Dave Kingman or not a lot better.

Other players? As far as prime suspects, and doing some "redacting"?

Sammy Sosa is not a steroid-subtracted HOFer. Gary Sheffield likely is not, either. On the pitching side? Andy Pettitte is not. What he is, if anything, is the current generation's slightly better ... wait for it ... Jack Morris. Actually, he's enough better than Black Jack that he has a halfway legit argument, World Series record aside, for being a HOFer. But I still lean no.

Anyway, if I had a vote? No guilt, no entry. Let's have confessions. Not just by the individuals. Bud Selig and Gene Orza and others from the union need to step to the plate, pun intended, and hit a clean one out of the park.

And, then, we can do something like with OPS+ and ERA+, and make our best guesstimates on how to "neutralize" for steroids.

In short, just as a website like Baseball-Reference makes sabermetric adjustments for different ballparks, different eras, and so forth, I would like more information so we can make a sabermetric adjustment for steroids and human growth hormone, and anything else that was in the "cream" and "clear" that Bonds got from  BALCO. No, it won't be a perfect adjustment, but, it would be some adjustment.

There's other reasons for the contrition. If Bonds, especially, fesses up to details, maybe we get improved testing. Maybe we get better ways of warning high school kids away from this.

I give Deadspin some help in killing Bill Simmons

Deadspin has a great post on all the sports issues, items and people it says need to die or be killed off this year.

I especially agree that, among other things, Bill Simmons has outlived his shelf life. When Joe Boston Sports Fan was saying the things he does, it was interesting. Now that he's an often vapid, often insufferable, first person commenter, and a name dropper du jour to boot, yeah, time to get rid of him.

True, per a friend, he recruited staff that made Grantland what it is today. OK? He can manage Bill Barnwell, Zach Lowe, et al, and shut up 50 percent more himself.

That said, I'm giving Deadspin some help — killing off all of these with a quick mashup.

Col Allen of the New York Post personally goes to a military surprise reunion, asks one too many questions of a Marine with PTSD, and gets his pencil neck snapped in 3 seconds. Sports Illustrated tries to take over the remains of the Post and goes bankrupt, but not before revealing that the NFL passer formula is a secret code for Roger Goodell knowing that chronic traumatic encephalopathy from too many concussions "causes" gayness. Every homophobe in the NFL sues the league and it goes bankrupt.

We let Barack Obama kill the First Amendment, so we can jail Simmons. Gus Johnson tries to imitate him and has a massive, fatal coronary from stress.

We get Dolan to believe Trick Shot Titus is a real player and sign him, which leads to, oh, say, Spike Lee kidnapping Dolan, driving him into the hood and having him beaten to death.

There, everything on Deadspin's 2014 death list is offed, except the highlight truthers.

And, admit it, you'd like to see a few of these. Dolan getting beaten to a pulp in the South Bronx probably gives some Knicks fans a willie.

Simmons incarcerated, especially if we made him listen to piped-in Skip Bayless and Jason Whitlock would be fun.

But, the NFL one would be the best.

We'd kill off a league that, per a quote by George Will:

Football combines the two worst things about America: it is violence punctuated by committee meetings.

And a more recent one:

In the NFL, especially, football is increasingly a spectacle, a game surrounded by manufactured frenzy, on the grass and in the increasingly unpleasant ambiance of the fans in the stands. Football on the field is a three-hour adrenaline-and-testosterone bath. For all its occasional elegance and beauty, it is basically violence for, among other purposes, inflicting intimidating pain.

Has boxed itself into a corner.

We'd see the NFL sued into oblivion, but not before the added hypocrisy of trying to legally shield itself behind its nonprofit status. We'd see a huge amount of homophobia exposed. And, we'd somehow de-emphasize this one sport, at least, down into the college and even the high school ranks, and just maybe, get some of our schools focusing a small bit more on education.

Can somebody please make this happen? Somebody start that rumor?

Oh, and force Simmons to listen to all the piped-in details while he's in prison? 

Get rid of the extra point? Or add a new "extra point"?

Get rid of the extra point? Or do something with it?

Pretty interesting piece here from NBC. Not sure which change I favor, but, in line with New England Patriot head coach Bill Belichick, I do favor some change. And, about any change would, per modern analytic football, make going for two more valuable yet. That said, per NBC's offerings, if you forced me to support one idea, I'd say put the extra-point conversion line at the 20. It makes an extra point somewhat less valuable, plus makes a blocked extra point a bit more likely to be returned by the other team for a point the other way.

That said, speaking of points, here's a change I'd like to see in the NFL, both coming from our friends up north.

Even with the smaller end zone, per Belichick's comment on special teams in general, allow the CFL's rouge point for punts the defense touches down in the end zone. Instead of coffin corner kicks, you'd want a boomer. And, would give coaches yet another strategy on fourth and 3 from the opponent 40. Now, instead of kicking a 57-yard field goal, going for it, or punting to try to down it inside the 10, punt to try to down it in the end zone.

Related to that, it would stimulate more quick kicks on some third and long plays.

That said, per CFL rouge rules, when the "single" is scored, the touchback comes to the 35, not the 20. If the NFL kept that part, too, it would force more of a gamble vs. coffin corner punts.

Unlike Canada, though, I wouldn't count it on missed field goals. And, because of the shorter U.S. field, I wouldn't count it on kickoffs. I might even tweak the CFL rule on touchbacks on punt rouges to put them at the 20 instead of the 35. It would still be an added twist to the U.S. game.

Speaking of, what about putting men in forward motion before the snap and allowing multiple shifts?

Could Matt Adams just be a glorified Brett Wallace, #Cardinals fans?

This Yahoo piece, about how Brett Wallace was part of the 2009 trade that brought Matt Holliday to St. Louis, got me thinking.

What if Matt Adams is a glorified Brett Wallace?

First, a glorified Brett Wallace is still better than the actual Brett Wallace, who never met his minor-league touting, but has met some minor-league concern levels, about fielding range, etc. In his 2012 cup of coffee and 2013 half season, Adams has shown he's at least a glorified Brett Wallace, and not a replacement-level Brett Wallace.

It's another way of saying this is the Prince Fielder concern: When will Adams' build potentially start causing problems?

Because, while he's definitely better than Wallace at the plate, Adams was league average in 2012, and by dWAR and fielding runs, a deficiency in 2013.

If Adams can keep a BA above .280, slugging at or above .500, and OPS+ at at least 125, and preferred 130 or better, he's at least a small plus. OPS+ of 135 or better is what will make him more than a small plus.

And, improving his splits against lefty pitchers will be key in 2014. I've already noted how Allen Craig can slide from right field to first against lefties, but in the longer term, the Cards would certainly like to have Adams pick up the slack.  He also needs to get more patient on drawing walks.

Again, "glorified Brett Wallace" is not bad. It's just not that good. The team hopes for more; we fans do, too. At the same time, we should temper expectations until Adams gets a full season under his belt.

A word to both #Obamiacs and #Hillaryites via Ted Rall

It's the start of the new year, and I'm being snarkier than ever from my skeptical left-liberal perspective.

That said, it's a lot easier with the help of Ted Rall, a master of snark.

Ted Rall's own caption: Hillary Clinton has titles, but few achievements, to her name.
Her campaign is built on hype. People are more into what she would symbolize if she won —
a first woman president — than what she would do. Sound familiar?

That said, a couple of points to note.

First, in 2008, when people asked if I didn't want to help make history,  or whatever, I told them I was voting for both the black and the woman, in the same person, before the Democratic primaries even ended. (I have no idea if Cynthia McKinney had or has something in the closet on her sexual preferences, and it's none of my damned business if she does.)

And, per a friend of mine, I have a new word: "Demdroids."

I define it as a lower digestive system ailment one gets on a no-fiber, all neoliberalism diet.

That said, if you don't recognize that you're being fed pablum with no sustenance in the first place, you don't realize that having a low-grade burning pain in the ass is not the way things are supposed to be. 

Or, you may believe that a diet with 2 percent fiber, and the resultant Demdroids, is enough less bad than the zero-fiber GOP alternative. In that case, don't blame GOP governors for people lacking insurance, don't trot out conspiracy theories about Obamacare's website getting disrupted by wingnuts with DDOS attacks or anything else.

Look at said cartoon above, again, especially the top right panel.

I had thought about having "Be less snarky" as one of my New Year's resolutions, but I realized I'd break that in a New York minute.

Rather, mentally, I'm thinking, "Be more acccurately snarky," or "Be snarky with more precision," is what I'm looking at. New Year's resolutions, or better, goals, are supposed to be SMART: Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Realistic, and Time-bound and, this fits all of them.

That said, looking ahead to 2016.

While Elizabeth Warren might actually do more good in the Senate, I suspect a lot more people will run the possibility of "demdroids" in 2016 unless someone like her enters the Democratic race. Hell, maybe Tammy Baldwin should run, as long as its not on a sexual identity special interest platform.

And, let's see one, just one, Kossack post this at the great orange Satan.

That reminds me of something else. Some of you may recall the whole Daily Kos kerfuffle,where Kossacks accused Rall of racism, and Rall eventually said he would draw Obama differently? What if he just doesn't draw him at all for three more years, while continuing to take potshots? Take that, Kossacks! 

Sadly, instead, he went back to "just" drawing Obama like before. But, there's hope!

Anyway, in one post, Rall bankshots both Obama and Clinton, while perhaps setting the tone until Jan. 20, 2017. And, for Kossacks who are also Hillaryistas, now you know — mess with Ted Rall at your own peril, or with any cybercartoonist who buys coloration by the pixel-barrel.

We have problems with education, but this book isn't the answer

The Smartest Kids in the World: And How They Got That Way by Amanda Ripley

My rating: 2 of 5 stars


Thin and anecdotal, with one big error of omission.

The major point, and a very relevant one?

Most western nations have a school year of at least 200 days, compared to the 180, or less, here in the U.S. Why this wasn't even mentioned, let alone made a point of discussion as to whether or not it affects U.S. school performance (I am sure it has at least some effect) I have no idea.

PISA? Per an OECD link about how PISA scores should best be understood in light of U.S. educational practices, PISA's not all she cracks it up to be. (There is value in PISA, but, to the degree there is value, for identifying ways to change, areas to change, and support for positive change rather than punitive action, Ripley's coverage is superficial here, too.)

The ding? "Alright" is not an English word. "All right" is. If you're going to write a book about education, please use standard English.

She does get some things right, like the need to nationalize standards and move away from the horse-and-buggy days of the locally autonomous school district, but she's far from the only person to point that out. She's also right about a "balance point" on the amount of standardized testing, and how to approach it, but again, she's not alone, and the treatment is fairly light.

Also, she promises more than she delivers.

Focusing on just three other nations that take PISA, three largely homogenous nations, and viewing them through the lenses of just three exchange students, is anecdotal, not rigorous. That's especially true in light of her getting hundreds of exchange students to respond to her request for information.

Finally, there's little prescriptiveness on "how to get there," in terms of either federal or state level public policy.

===

My review should indicate things I think we do need in terms of K-12 education. I'll list them and more:
1.  A 200-day school year;
2. National standards on education, with national standards of some sort on textbooks to achieve this and on standardized testing to measure it;
3. Getting away from local-control school boards and districts, along with top-heavy administrative costs this incurs, especially in rural areas;
4. Getting away from local property tax and all its inequities as a primary funder of schools;
5. Using federal education funding already in place as the stick to achieve 1-4;
6. Increasing federal education funding to further 1-4, and getting big business to buy into the necessary taxes for it and reasons why.




View all my reviews