I find explaining my opinions is sometimes a difficult task. I like people such as NYRoyal, from Royals Review, because he often (publicly) draws attention to this weakness of mine. But hey, it’s nothing personal — he emasculates many people(‘s opinions) every day. Even so, I notice he does it with class – a kind of classiness that comes from superior knowledge and savvy intellect. I picked his brain on a range of topics and will be posting a two part interview with him on this site. Part 1 starts now.
(questions in bold… answers in regular)
Q - Well, it’s not really a question, but I’m hoping you can give me a little paragraph about yourself and explain what you do during the day (or night), your history with the Royals, your role / involvement on Royals Review and SB Nation (are you an administrator?)… And a link if you want to plug your own blog or site. Would you like to explain how you developed Royals Confidence Index?
I’m a 38-year-old, married, freelance fundraising consultant for nonprofit organizations. I consult on a number of things, but since I have a law degree, I specialize in helping donors to include a charity in their will or setting up a charitable trust or annuity. Since I’m a freelancer, my schedule is largely my own. This allows me to mostly work when I want and, therefore I can devote a good deal of time to my baseball obsession and blogging. I’m a lifelong Royals fan. My first Royals memories involve some of the great Brett/McRae teams of the late 1970′s.
My love of baseball really turned into an obsession in the 1990′s. After I got out of law school, I finally had time to pay attention to things other than school, so I followed baseball very closely and started reading books and websites about the sport. One day I happened upon royalsreview.com. It became an outlet both for Royals discussion (I don’t get to talk to too many people about the Royals here in New York City) and for baseball writing in general. About a year ago the head honcho at Royals Review (Will MacDonald, aka “royalsreview”) invited me to become an Author and Moderator, which is SB Nation’s terminology for someone who can post articles directly to the front page and someone who can police content and members.
The Royals Confidence Index was something I created after seeing some simpler versions of that at various other sports team fan sites. I thought it would be fun and interesting to regularly take the temperature of the fanbase. People celebrate and people complain, but you never really know what the general sentiment is of the fans until you ask the questions. And I’m a number cruncher at heart, so it was a good fit for me.
Q – What’s: on your iPod? On your DVR? Next in your netflix queue? In your freezer?
My iPod is pretty light. I’m not as much of a music fan as most people. Right now I’m listening to Coldplay’s latest a lot. I tend to like non-intense stuff. I like to refer to it as “wuss rock.” My favorite is the Indigo Girls. For real.
I absolutely love DVR. I greatly prefer to watch shows when I want to watch them, rather than when they’re on. Currently I have last week’s episode of Lost (don’t tell me what happens!), an old WKRP in Cincinnati episode and some random shows that my wife likes.
Next in my Netflix cue is a documentary called “For the Bible Tells Me So.” I’m not a super high-brow movie fan, but I like to mix in some documentaries and independent films along with my mainstream popcorn movies. The disc I’m about to send back is 30 Rock: Season 1: Disc 3. I think that might be the best show on TV right now.
There isn’t anything very interesting in my freezer right now. Some chicken breasts, ground beef and ice cream. My wife does the fancy cooking. I make things like chili and spaghetti. She likes wagyu beef and truffles. I like enchiladas and chicken parmesan.
Q – How much time do you spend ‘blogging’ every week and how accustom are you to being called NYRoyal (as opposed to Scott)?
I probably spend way too much time blogging. As long as I’m not traveling, I spend some time on Royals Review everyday. And I don’t blog anywhere else, except for the occasional random comment. It’s often multiple hours in a day. I’m quite used to being called “NYRoyal” in this limited context. If someone said it to me in real life, I probably wouldn’t have any idea what they’re talking about.
Q – Your profile at SB Nation says you joined Royals Review on 3/28/08 and have made over 200 Posts and over 20,200 comments. Where do you get the energy to make 4 posts a week and 55 comments a day?
Actually, the 3/28/08 date was the date of Royals Review’s conversion from the old format to the current format, which required users to re-register. I joined Royals Review in early 2007. But that’s still a ton of posts and comments, even over a two year period. I guess my energy (as you so charitably put it) comes from my passion for baseball and for the Royals. I like football and basketball too, but I really have a love/passion/obsession with baseball. I read at least a handful of books on baseball every year, as well as visiting half a dozen baseball websites almost daily. And I really live and die with the Royals. So it is shockingly easy to go to that site almost everyday to write about and discuss baseball and the Royals.
Q – You say in your profile that you often disagree with people because you enjoy discussion more than agreement. Does this attitude carry over into your life outside the blog world? How do people react?
Yes, I probably prefer a good discussion or debate to simple agreement in the real world, as well as online. But my demeanor is certainly different when I’m talking to people face to face. In the real world, I’m more conciliatory and more willing to politely suffer through the inane and uninformed opinions of people. Online, I’m more willing to be confrontational and uncompromising. I think this is both good and bad. In general, I think having discussions and freely sharing different viewpoints is a good thing. It’s a good way to learn from each other and it’s also a good way to test our opinions and see if they hold up to a good debate. Over time the discussions I’ve had at Royals Review have taught me a lot and, over time, changed some of my opinions.
Q – When was the last time you were flat out wrong about something? When was the last time you admitted to being flat out wrong?
I’m flat out wrong often. Hopefully I’m right more often than I’m wrong, but who knows. Some of the bigger 2008 examples were Bannister and Guillen. I thought Bannister would regress by more than a little in 2008, but I thought he’d still be a good #3-quality starting pitcher. Clearly he wasn’t. I also liked the Guillen signing at the time. Now I recognize that it was and is a horrible contract for the Royals because Jose’s mix of fairly poor offense, awful defense and declining skills. I have stated many opinions about players for 2009. Many of them will prove to be wrong. I think I’m pretty good about owning up to my mistakes. I’ve certainly readily admitted my mistakes with regard to Banny and JoGui. We’re all going to make a lot of judgments and share a lot of opinions about how good players are and what will happen. And we’re all going to be wrong a lot of the time. We might as well recognize it and admit it.
Q – On Royals Review, you get into some pretty heated discussions with other bloggers (in the comments sections). Is there an attitude among some other bloggers that is a pet peeve of yours?
Hmmmm, pet peeves. I’m sure I have many. I wouldn’t say that I’m a “people person.” I’m easily annoyed and I’m not exactly proud of that, but there you go. My pet peeves on Royals fan sites include but are not limited to people who are always negative or always positive about the team, emotional overreactions, and those who reject stats or reject everything but old school, traditional stats. I think people should at least try to have an open mind and should try to discover the reality of their team. In my opinion, far too many fans tend to fall in one ditch or the other. There’s a lot of “they suck” and “playoffs here we come.”
Q – You always seem to use data to back up the points you make in your blog posts or comments. What role do you think statistics play in baseball and baseball blogs?
This is a big question. Statistics have always played a big role in baseball. They’ve been recording stats and discussing their significance since the inception of organized baseball in the 19th century. Stats have been used to help people understand the game more and evaluate talent since the beginning as well. Of course that’s not the only way to understand the game or evaluate talent, but it is one important method. Over the last 10-20 years, major league teams have increasingly looked to stats and newer advances in statistical analysis to evaluate talent and build their teams.
While many fans aren’t interested in newfangled stats and metrics, clearly the internet world of baseball writing and discussion is full of such talk. Sites such as baseballprospectus.com, fangraphs.com, hardballtimes.com and baseballthinkfactory.com provide great innovation in and discussion of baseball statistics and analysis. And the many blogs and fansites out there, in varying degrees, use these stats and this kind of analysis in their content. I think the vast majority of fans still hang their hat on batting average, RBI’s and ERA, but little by little, the word on newer, better stats is getting out. I think the real holdup is the mainstream sports media. Other than OBP, few sports broadcasters and analysts are willing to talk about anything but the most traditional stats. When all of the talking heads say that a certain pitcher is good because of his ERA or batting average, the masses follow.
Q – A random baseball fan says to you, “Since Jose Guillen had 20HR and 97RBI, he had a very good season.” How would you respond? Which stats do you think are more accurate at telling a player’s performance?
If some fan said that to me in person, I’d probably just smile, nod and then start talking to someone else. It can become a long and detailed discussion to explain to someone how and why traditional counting stats don’t tell you much and how other stats tell you much more, and then describing some of those stats and how they are derived. And, of course, most people don’t care to hear about it at all. That’s fine. But if I were so inclined, I’d explain a little about OBP and SLG and what was average for a corner OFer. I’d also talk about the value of defense. Then I’d tell the person how low Guillen’s OBP and SLG were and how poor his defense was. I’d also explain that sitting in the #4 spot of the batting order for an entire season with mediocre power will get you some decent HR and RBI numbers, but they certainly don’t mean the player had a good season.
Q – Who do you think are some of the most over-rated (from a counting stat perspective) players in baseball right now?
This is a tough one for a couple reasons. First, I’m sure I’ll miss some big ones because I’m going to just tell you off the top of my head instead of really looking into it. Second, it kind of depends on who is over-rating them. For instance, Derek Jeter is overrated by the mainstream media because he’s a winner with lots of rings and great leadership abilities. But lots of fans, and pretty much every sabermetric analyst realizes that he’s merely good and definitely not great. His hitting is very good for a shortstop, but his defense at that position is quite poor, which really hurts his value.
During the recent live ball era (mid-90′s to probably about 2006), bigtime hitters who were poor fielders were overrated and overvalued by everybody. This includes major league baseball teams, the mainstream sports media, most fans and the sabermetric community. In recent years, there’s been more of an emphasis on recognizing and measuring the effect of defense and the value a player has by the runs he prevents as well as the runs he creates. In past years, serious sluggers with awful defense like Burrell, Dunn and Abreu would have been overrated. But this offseason teams recognized that their poor defense really decreased the value of their very good hitting. But some big hitters are still overrated. Manny Ramirez has proven that he’s overrated with his new 2-year, $45 million contract. He’s likely to add about 4 wins to the Dodgers in 2009, which is worth about $16-18 million in this market. Instead, he’ll be getting over $22 million per year for two years, when he’s well into the decline phase of his career.
Q – What are some of your favorite advanced statistics?
As I implied above, OBP and SLG tell you more about a hitter’s performance than his batting average, HR’s and RBI’s. A great advanced metric for hitting is wOBA, which includes OBP and SLG and weights them appropriately (OBP is more important and on a different scale, so it needs greater weight), and it also includes SB’s and CS. And Wins Above Replacement (WAR) is a great total value stat, which takes into account hitting, base running and defense, adjusted for position.
For pitching, my favorite stats are FIP and tRA. Basically, the vast majority of pitchers have little effect over what happens to balls put in play. So the best way to evaluate a pitcher is by looking at his defense independent stats, like strikeouts, walks and HR’s. FIP and tRA both look at those outcomes (as well as some other batted ball data for tRA) in an attempt to isolate and describe the pitcher’s performance. Stats like ERA tell you something about the pitcher’s performance, but also his defense’s performance, and sometimes the performance of the pitcher(s) that came into the game after him. And then there is WAR for pitchers, which is the best total value stat for them as well. All of the above stats can be found at fangraphs.com, except for tRA which can be found at statcorner.com.
Q – When did you turn the corner from using counting stats to using more advanced stats?
For the most part it has been a gradual process. As late as the mid-90′s, I was still relying on batting average, ERA and the traditional statistics that all of us grew up on. But I started reading and learning about how flawed many of these stats are and that there are better alternatives. Every year I’d learn more and rely more on newer stats and metrics.
Around the time that “Moneyball” came out, I started reading and commenting on ESPN’s MLB message boards. That book, combined with what I began to learn about the state of the art in sabermetrics from various knowledgeable posters really turned me into a fully fledged (albeit amateur) sabermetrician. That booked helped me really internalize the idea that all of the traditional ideas about baseball should be challenged. Not that they are all wrong. In fact, most of them are right. But we should challenge everything to figure out what might be wrong about these orthodox notions. Does pitching really win championships? Are sac bunts in the 5th inning of a close game really a good idea? And then we can build upon that knowledge to figure out the best strategies and the best evaluative and analytical tools.
Q – Do you think these advanced stats take the fun out of baseball?
Every month or two, I run across some fan or journalist who talks about how all these stats are taking the fun out of the game. I don’t just disagree with this; I don’t get it at all. Stats (whether old school or newfangled) are just another way to learn and understand more about the game. If talking about a pitcher’s ERA doesn’t ruin the game, then why does talking about FIP?
In the end, the game is played on the field. Lots of detailed, advanced statistics tell you more about how well or poorly players have performed. And projections tell you something about what might be the most likely future performance. But these don’t determine the outcome of games. More information is a good thing. More analysis (for those interested in engaging in it) is a good thing. I don’t see why the existence of these stats and the fact that many people like to use them and talk about them would decrease anyone’s enjoyment of the game. And for those who feel that way, then they can just turn their backs on them and watch the games and follow the sport through the mainstream sports media. No harm done.
Q – As more and more newspapers go under, and as consequence, sports reporters lose their jobs, what role do you think sports blogs will play in the future, both near and distant?
That’s a good question. But while I blog (perhaps more accurately, I contribute to someone else’s blog), I’m not particularly interested in blog politics or culture. Throughout the blogosphere, you’ll often see random posts celebrating the death of “old media.” I really don’t feel like that. I like the “new media” of blogs and other websites. But I also like the old media of newspapers, radio and TV. They can deal with the same subject matter, but in different ways.
Let’s take the Royals as an example. Royals Review and other sites can discuss the Royals freely. We’ll say good things and bad things about the Royals, completely unrestrained. We can devote a lot of time and attention to all things Royal. But, we get all of our news about the Royals from old media because we have no access. Old media, the KC Star, KC radio and TV, all have access to the Royals. They learn what is going on firsthand because they are inside. They get to talk to Moore, Hillman, McClure and Seitzer. They get to talk to other front office staff and find out at least some of what is going on behind the scenes. But their reporting has to be pretty bland. They can’t be too hard hitting or critical for fear that they’ll lose access. So I think there is not only room for both, but a need for both old and new media. I would hate for the KC Star to go under. They are a good source of information on the Royals, if not a good source of critique or analysis.
Q – Is the characterization of bloggers as “mother’s basement” fair? (I assume neither of us live in our mom’s basement.)
I haven’t lived in my parents’ home since I was 18. The “mother’s basement” line is such an old, insipid cliche that it has almost lost all meaning. What does it even mean? That the person in question is not a knowledgeable professional discussing the subject in question? That he’s some loser idiot who isn’t really qualified to talk about such things?
First, I think it is good for all people to speak to all kinds of issues. This includes the most informed professionals and the least informed amateurs and everything in between. Second, people show how knowledgeable and intelligent they are in their writing. And if a person knows what he’s talking about and shows some intelligence and insight, then I’m interested in reading his thoughts on an issue. I don’t care if he’s a licensed, bonded professional or not.
There are many professional sports journalists who are hacks. Their knowledge is limited and their analysis is pathetic. And there are good ones too. There are also bloggers who write extremely well and have a lot of intelligence and a provide a great perspective and/or excellent analysis. And there are idiots too. There’s room for everyone. But to write off bloggers or fans or statheads as merely losers posting from their mother’s basement is particularly ill-informed condescension.
Q – What is the most demeaning thing anyone has ever said to you in the blog world? How did you respond?
The vast majority of my blogging has been done at Royals Review. And thankfully even the most heated debates rarely devolve into insults. Usually the worst that happens is that I get called an ass or something like that, which is often fair. I used to be a fairly frequent commenter under another name at a Chicago White Sox fan site, soxtalk.com. And when a non-fan gives frank and brutally honest assessments of a team, other commenters don’t hold anything back. So I was called every name in the book over there. My typical response was something to the effect that they apparently couldn’t accept reality and that they should direct their ire at Kenny Williams, not me. It was an unhealthy, mutually abusive relationship which I wisely ended.
Part two will be posted Sunday. Topics include GMDM, Alex Gordon and more.