Baseball Books

i read 'the art of fielding' chad harbach book, it is v good; is more a novel w/ baseball in it than a 'baseball novel' or w/e but its well done, maybe justifying its bidding war

Just joined a Facebook group devoted to Ball Four. For acolytes only, it would seem--as I scrolled through, spotted a post on the death of Greg Goosen's brother.

I've been reading a collection of Ring Lardner's baseball-themed short stories and they are really delightful. The You Know Me Al series and all the others.

Rob Neyer has something up on Ball Four:

http://www.foxsports.com/mlb/just-a-bit-outside/story/ball-four-jim-bouton-45th-anniversary-062215

i was just thinking about Steve Hovley the other day, baseball player who seemed to have figured out how to live:

Steve Hovley was dancing to a tune on the radio and somebody yelled, "Hove, dancing is just not your thing."
"Do you mind if I decide what my thing is?" Hovley said.
So I asked him what his thing was. "I like sensual things," he said. "Eating, sleeping. I like showers and I like flowers and I like riding my bike."
"You have a bike with you?"
"Certainly. I rent one. And I ride past a field of sheep on the way to the park every day and a field of alfalfa, and sometimes I get off my bike and lie down in it. A field of alfalfa is a great place to lie down and look up at the sky."
I sure wish Hovley would make the team.

One of my favourite guys in the book. Still alive--70. You've inspired me to sponsor his B-Ref page, with a quote from your excerpt. (Will probably take a day or two to get processed.)

Has anybody here read Jim Brosnan’s "The Long Season" or Jerry Kramer’s "Instant Replay", the two books mentioned by Neyer that predate Bouton's?

I read The Long Season a few years after I first read Ball Four. I vaguely remember that I understood why it was considered a precursor to Bouton, but that it wasn't nearly as funny--didn't try to be--and that as a critique of the game's inanities, it was fairly mild. Long time ago--maybe I'd like it better today.

I'm about halfway through Steven Travers' Tom Seaver book, The Last Icon. It's pretty good. I read John Devaney's Seaver book as a kid, so I'm familiar with the basic outline of his story, like the game in 1970 where he crossed up Grote, blew a lead in the 9th, and went into a tailspin.

Bizarre hype from Travers in describing that game:

"It was a terrible double whammy of defeat snatched from the jaws of victory; a sure 18-6 record on the road to 30 wins instead of now a 17-7 mark..." Earlier on the same page, he says that Seaver "stood an excellent chance of winning those additional 13 games." (All of this is predicated on Seaver's announced intention, before the season, to try to win 30.)

The game in question was the Mets' 118th that year. Hodges had switched back to a four-man rotation, meaning that Seaver would get 11 more starts the rest of the way. Now, if he doesn't lose that game, and then goes 11-0 to finish up--which of course is really easy to do--he ends up with 29 wins. So all he had to do was win 12 of his remaining 11 starts.

"Excellent chance," yes.

This Seaver book (almost finished) is something else. I've never read a baseball biography where the writer whines so much about how mistreated his subject was (particularly in regards to awards). Conceding that Seaver was one of those players (like Mays, Bonds, Pujols) who was shortchanged because of the shiny-object aspect of awards voting, this guy's positively vindictive at times, as in the ridicule he heaps on Randy Jones over the '76 Cy: "A soft-tossing southpaw from Brea, California, named Randy Jones of the San Diego Padres, a figure barely recalled by history who could also not carry Seaver's dirty jockstrap...Seaver was the best pitcher in the game before Jones arrived and was still the best pitcher in baseball five years later when Jones was 1-8, on his last legs."

Is this really necessary over an almost 40-year-old vote? Jones was 22-14, with a 2.74 ERA, and pitched 315 innings for a 73-win team that year. Seaver was the better pitcher that year, but I wouldn't call it lopsided or anything (5.5 - 4.8 for Seaver in WAR). He doesn't mention Jones in connection with the '75 vote, which Seaver won; Jones was 20-12, 2.24, for a a 71-win team. Randy Jones was damn good for those two years. With regards to '81, he actually says Fernando won a "politically correct vote, as much affirmative action for his role as a Mexican as it was for great pitching." (Surprised the publisher allowed "affirmative action" to stand.) That's another close call that could have defensibly gone either way. And for what it's worth, WAR gives it to Fernando 4.8 - 4.0.

Had the idea that I might write this guy (Steven Travers) via Facebook taking issue with his dismissals of Jones and Valenzuela. Probably not worth the effort: his wall is filled with hard-right links to Dinesh D'Souza, Trump, and lots of fringe hysteria. (The Fernando comment aside, I really didn't expect that.) Partly that makes me want to write even more, but I'll likely pass.

Found a 1993 Barnes & Noble reissue of Ball Four today for $10. Hardcover, perfect shape, with the plastic slipcase still on. When I opened it up, jackpot!

http://i1059.photobucket.com/albums/t427/sayhey1/cover_zpswmw9uhvv.jpg
http://i1059.photobucket.com/albums/t427/sayhey1/signature_zpsmb3qbjpt.jpg

Halfway in, I'm really enjoying Hustle: The Myth, Life, and Lies of Pete Rose by Michael Sokolove. Fascinating character, from this 80s baby's perspective.

http://www.si.com/mlb/2016/03/28/book-excerpt-the-arm-jeff-passan-tommy-john-surgery

Youth travel baseball has become at least a nine-figure industry, preying on parents’ insatiable desire to secure college scholarships and high-paying major league futures for their children. In 2015, Perfect Game held more than a dozen events for nine-and-under teams. The same year the U.S. Specialty Sports Association, a governing body for slo-pitch softball that worked its way into amateur baseball, ranked 30 four-and-under teams -- as in, preschoolers.

http://665880566.r.lightningbase-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/00000000-david-Duchovny-bucky-dent.jpg

At last received my preordered copy of Lindbergh and Miller's book about saber-running the Sonoma Stompers last year. I've only read the prologue, which is good.

http://theonlyruleisithastowork.com/

I'm thinking about buying this. Would love to hear more thoughts if you'd care to post any

it's fun; got halfway in about an afternoon of straight reading but I put it down bc work n such. very brisk read and am more interested in the expanded website offerings tbh

http://www.amazon.com/Class-Baseball-Everywhere-Lucas-Mann/dp/0307949753

this one is a good read^

i'm about 130 pp in The Only Rule, wd recommend.

I have learned

-players smoke weed and distrust tobacco smokers
-scouts refer to a prominent, sculpted behind as "baseball butt"

Feh is a hilarious character.

It's making the NYT bestseller list. Had a brief chat w/ Ben L last night, gave him a little grief for letting Sean Conroy throw 140 pitches.

RIP WP Kinsella

Kinsella's Iowa Baseball Confederacy is terrible, too...

― miloauckerman (miloauckerman), Thursday, June 17, 2004

can anyone confirm?

I saw Jim Bouton and his wife speak at the SABR convention today on a panel dedicated to him. He acquitted himself well and wittily, given the post-stroke hardships detailed here:

Bouton’s body was largely unaffected by the stroke. But his mind, the one whose pointed and poignant observations produced the classic memoir “Ball Four” in 1970, will never be the same. This weekend in New York, at the convention for the Society of American Baseball Research, Bouton went public about his brain disease: cerebral amyloid angiopathy, which is linked to dementia.

Bouton had a smaller stroke before his 2012 episode, which was treated immediately with blood thinner. That was “catastrophic,” said Dr. Alec Kloman, a neurologist at Berkshire Medical Center in Pittsfield, Mass., and led to a hemorrhage in the frontal lobe. The hemorrhage dissipated, but in the aftermath, Bouton’s language skills were essentially wiped out. He had to relearn how to read, write, speak and understand.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/01/sports/baseball/jim-bouton-brain-disease.html

Nice to hear that. Re: Iowa Baseball Confederacy, I read it long ago, I wouldn't say it's terrible, but it is completely fucking nuts.

Just started Posnanski's book on the '75 Reds. Great intro, where he goes through the everyday lineup player by player--even now, not sure if there's been a deeper starting eight since (starting with Morgan and Bench, where you almost certainly have the best post-war players at their positions). Eye-opening: Tony Perez's signing bonus in 1960 as an eighteen-year-old out of Cuba, $2.50. I know about inflation, but...

Gleaned from the above:

1) Before the '75 season, the Royals almost traded George Brett to the Reds straight up for Tony Perez. Brett was 21, a second-round pick, and had just finished third in ROY voting; Perez was 32 and coming off a mediocre season. According to Joe, the Royals backed out of the trade. Maybe even more than a lot of infamous trades that were made, this tells you a lot about the thinking then about established stars (put aside that Perez was somewhat overrated) vs. young players.

2) The night before the 1970 All-Star Game, Pete Rose had Ray Fosse over for dinner. Never knew that.

The Jays are nowhere, my favourite players are hurt or hurting, the past beckons.

Something about 1975 I have no recollection of: the attempt to make a big deal out of who would score baseball's one millionth run. Communications being what they were then, there ended up being some uncertainty, when it finally happened, about whether it was scored by Bob Watson or Dave Concepcion (early May). They credited it to Watson (years later, they retroactively switched to someone else entirely).

Tootsie Rolls had a big contest around the run, with money and prizes to both the player and fans who guessed correctly. Posnanski digs up a quote from the Tootsie Rolls VP:

"I was glad to hear (Watson)'s a clean-living athlete. We have to keep the image--good for kids, good for Tootsie Rolls. I know he's not blond and blue-eyed, but he's my kind of an All-American."

I'm sure Watson was thrilled with such a testimonial...Odd to see the Reds presented as the personification of All-Americanism in the book (no long hair, no mustaches) next to the Dodgers (scruffy third baseman, iconoclastic closer). Not that the Reds weren't, but by the '77 and '78 World Series, the Dodgers inherited that role when contrasted with the Martin-Jackson-Munson Yankees.

Well worth reading. The afterword, which is partly Joe explaining why he thinks the '75/76 Reds were the best team ever, but which is mostly him explaining why he wrote the book, is especially beautiful. It sums up why Posnanski and James and Rob Neyer and a few others are my favourite baseball writers: they can hold two thoughts in their mind at once, and since one of them they assume you already know, they're okay with still writing about the other one as fans.

Good backdrop for the Dodgers' season. The Reds were 18-19 when they bottomed out mid-May; they went 90-35 the rest of the way, .720 baseball. Looks like the Dodgers will blow past them: 11-12 late April, 68-20 since, .773. Man for man, I don't know--depends too on whether you'd only compare them 1975 vs. 2017, or whether you'd pull back a little bit.

About halfway through the Jaffe HOF book. Another improbable feud, one I didn't know about, joining Abbott and Costello, the Everly Brothers, Sam and Dave, and Joey and Johnny: Tinker and Evers argued over a cab in 1905 and didn't exchange another civil word for 30 years. And this from the pre-launch-angle universe:

"(Grich) experimented with his swing during the spring, emulating new teammate Rod Carew's wrist action so as to produce more topspin, and raising his hands. Via Sports Illustrated's Joe Jares, 'He stands deep in the batter's box and holds his hands near his right ear, which he feels has eliminated his old uppercut swing that produced far too many strikeouts and fly balls.'"

new: Visualizing Baseball

https://www.fangraphs.com/tht/a-new-classic-in-sabermetric-literature/

has anyone read this?

https://www.theparisreview.org/blog/2017/09/18/robert-coovers-dark-fantasy-baseball-novel/

yes. it is very good. but it gets so dark it becomes basically.. what's the word ABJECT, and was difficult for me to finish because of that.

I read it a million years ago but I remember liking it a lot.

I held off on this because it was a little bit pricey, but I bought it today with a gift certificate (stupid thing was, I was looking at the American price on the back instead of the Canadian, so I ended up ridiculously overpaying anyway.):

http://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51vMbuQ-0SL._SX331_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg

Rooted against them in '72 and '73, for them in '74. In '71, Vida Blue was probably the second player to ever really capture my imagination, after Bench. Vaguely recall my dad and his friend driving down to old Tiger Stadium to see him that summer. Checking his game logs, could have been his July start there. His line for three starts against the
(90-win) Tigers in '71: 24 IP, 6 H, 10 BB, 26 K, no earned runs.

Try again.

http://target.scene7.com/is/image/Target/52029217?wid=520&hei=520&fmt=pjpeg

i haven't read ned colletti's new book, but i've seen (surprisingly?) good things about it

I have only the dimmest memory of this, but the A's book has a fascinating chapter on Vida Blue's holdout in '72 (concurrent with the first-ever league-wide player's strike--cost them eight games). Finley was prepared to pay Blue $50,000, he and his quasi-agent (really an advertising man) wanted close to $100,000. Blue threatened to quit altogether, and took a ceremonial post with the Dura Steel Products Company rather than give in. It wasn't resolved until May 2, when Blue accepted the $50,000 with some extra money kicked in (some of it already owed to him) that Finley wouldn't admit to publicly. Most unlikely Blue defender: Nixon called him "the most underpaid player in baseball."

Hilarious how ill-equipped Finley was for the first set of arbitration hearings in 1974. Across the rest of the league, the owners won 25 or 33 cases--a combination, I'm guessing, of institutional bias and poor representation. Finley, though, lost five out of eight. The players would come armed with mountains of statistics (a few them were represented by Jerry Kapstein, the Scott Boras of his day; Reggie even had Marvin Miller arguing his case), Finley would pace the room and say things like "Mr. Reggie Jackson is a superstar...Gentleman, I ask you: what is a superstar?" When he was pitted against Ken Holtzman, he'd tell the arbitrator that Holtzman would be lost without Rollie Fingers; an hour later, arguing against Fingers in front of the same arbitrator, he'd say that Fingers only piled up saves because of Oakland's great starting pitchers. The suggestion is that Finley never recovered from the reality of arbitration, and just became (even) more and more erratic and resentful for the rest of the decade.

Do they have anything in there about Bowie Kuhn nullifying the trade of Vida Blue to the Reds?

Don't remember that...I'm up to the '74 Series; if it happened after that, it'll be in the book. (I remember the aborted trades to the Yankees and Red Sox in '75, but not the Reds.)

Disconnect. When Hunter left before the '76 season, the A's tried to replace him with a 20-year-old Mike Norris. After two brilliant April starts--a complete-game three-hitter against the White Sox, followed by one hit over seven innings against KC--he came up lame in his third start and was shut down for surgery.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/gl.fcgi?id=norrimi01&t=p&year=1975

I completely associate Norris with the Henderson-Martin A's of the early '80s. Had no idea he was around so early.

In that '74 Series (five games), the A's used five pitchers in total. The Dodgers used six. This year, the two teams combined to use 24 pitchers. (Obviously, two extreme cases of a general trend.)

http://www.baseball-reference.com/postseason/1974_WS.shtml

(That should say that Hunter left before the '75 season, not '76.)

70s baseball is the shiznit. I've thought about what some 70s version 'extended' modern playoffs where 4 teams from each league met in those seasons instead of just the 2 division leaders for each league would have been like.

Crazy thing about Mike Norris: wrapped up in 1983, then made a brief comeback in 1990(!!!)

His 1980 season was terrific but those 24 complete games probably destroyed his career.

Billy Martin completely f'ed those guys arms on that A's team in 80/81. They had the makings for a great rotation for long term and he just ran in them all into the ground.

it's crazy to think how much pitching has evolved since then. look at rick langford. his K/9 in 1980 was 3.17!! but back then he managed to go 19-12 and pitch 290 innings. wtf

in 1981, the strike-shortened season, Langford made only 24 starts but had 18(!) complete games!

I don't know if evolved as just as much as changed. I figure some guys have the durability to throw that crazy amount of innings and some do not. Even then, the whole complete game thing with that A's team was considered a bit unique. There was a Sports Illustrated cover and lead about that rotation.

earlnash otm, it's like someone paid Martin to destroy those guys.

One thing I noticed reading the book that hasn't changed--at least in terms of those '70s A's--was the quick hook during the post-season. If Holtzman or Blue or Odom (a little less so with Hunter) got into any kind of trouble early in the game--say a couple of runs and a couple of baserunners--there was no hesitation to send Knowles or Lindblad or someone else out there in the third inning. Holtzman had a running feud with Alvin Dark over this.

Sad in a "Campaigner," even-Richard-Nixon-has-got-soul way: when Finley died in 1996, only two ex-A's--Reggie and Hunter, the two guys he screwed over the worst (with the possible exception of Mike Andrews)--showed up at the funeral.