Baseball Books

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.

Earl: Blue's overruled sale to the Reds turns up in passing (happened during the '77 meltdown).

I'd have to conclude after finishing the book that Finley was an even more volatile and erratic bully than Steinbrenner (but who did help bring a handful of innovations to the game, and also was the only owner who really understood what free agency was going to mean for the owners; his suggestion that every player be declared a free agent at the end of the season would have indeed kept power with the owners).

Kids in my neighborhood back in the early 80s were huge baseball geeks. We all had copies of "Who's Who in Baseball" or "Street and Smith" and during those early 80s years we played homerun derby or tennis ball (in the neighborhood) along with watching Cubs and Braves games all the time, since they were always on TV.

My neighbor Tobey his dad was a huge A's fan and had one of those huge early 80s satellite dishes (RIP Bo Diaz) and had it to specifically watch west coast baseball like the A's or sometimes Dodger or Giant feeds. His dad got hooked on them when younger with the 70s teams, so trading baseball cards and the like, Tobey was the A's guy and we knew everything about them in that era.

We eventually invented our own game we called 'dice baseball' that we played all the time keeping stats and what not. Later on we got into the Sports Illustrated Baseball Stat game (never Stratomat), but I remember during a blizzard in probably '84 playing out lots of games with Tobey and my buddy Barry. Two would play the game and the third not playing would be kinda like the play by play guy.

Don't know what it was about those games, but there would always be some oddball player that would hit like Babe Ruth out of nowhere. I know Bob Brenly was one when we played those games that hit way, way better than he ever did on the field.

earlnash! have you heard of deadball?? i have played a little with my kids and a slightly embarrassing amount with er, myself:

http://wmakers.net/deadball/

Bought Keith Law's book on Boxing Day, also The Last Innocents: The Collision of the Turbulent '60s and the Los Angeles Dodgers.

Law's book is good, although I did spend the first few chapters (on the old stats) thinking "Tell me something I don't know." And there's this condescension that runs through it, starting with the cover hype: "The story behind the old stats that are ruining the game..." Really? I'd agree that the save stat has had a negative impact, insofar as it negatively altered the way games are managed, but some player getting undue credit for his RBI count actually "ruins" the game? Or this sentence towards the end: "The battle is over, whether the losers realize it or not." There's a lot of that. Enough that you realize by "losers," he doesn't just mean the side that lost "the battle." He means losers. I guess I was really tuned out on the Jays for a few years--no recollection of his time with the team.

Jerald Podair's City of Dreams: Dodger Stadium and the Birth of Modern Los Angeles is a superb historical monograph based on extensive, original research and brilliantly written. Podair delineates clearly the connection between the decision to build Dodger Stadium and the intricate machinations and alliances of urban politics. This decision ultimately determined that Los Angeles would henceforth develop economically and culturally from a centralized downtown core radiating outward rather than a decentralized conglomeration of independent neighborhoods. The result was the creation of modern Los Angeles.

https://sabr.org/latest/jerald-podairs-city-dreams-wins-2018-sabr-seymour-medal

Almost finished The Last Innocents: The Collision of the Turbulent '60s and the Los Angeles Dodgers that I mentioned above. Very good account of the Roseboro/Marichal incident from '65. The conventional wisdom is that outside events--the Watts riots, political chaos in Marichal's Dominican Republic--were very much weighing on everyone, but the author says it was much more the simple fact of how much the Dodgers and Giants hated each other. Sad: the event dogged Roseboro (the hero) and Marichal (the villain) for the rest of their careers and beyond. But the players eventually made their peace--everyone said Marichal's actions were completely at odds with the kind of person he was--and Marichal ended up as an honorary pallbearer at Roseboro's funeral.

http://s.abcnews.com/images/Sports/espnapi_dm_150820_MLB_Dodgers_Giants_baseball_brawl_wmain.jpg

As good as the book is on capturing the team and the decade, it's kind of awkwardly old-fashioned on player evaluation. Example: the author, without explicitly saying so, seems to think Maury Wills should be in the HOF--which, unless you give him a thousand bonus points as an innovator, is a stretch, to say the least. Noticed something interesting when I looked up how Wills did in balloting, though. In 1978, both he and Mazeroski came onto the ballot; Wills drew around 30% support, Mazeroski 6%. Sure was some drastic re-evaluation around the corner.

a glance down the mvp list suggests that wills' mvp was one of two to go to a hitter with an OPS+ under 100 -- the other being marty marion during the war

(tbf, fangraphs gives wills a 103 wRC+ for 1962)

Trying to project yourself into the moment, I can sort of see why writers voted for Wills: he broke a record, he was the acknowledged team leader, he scored 130 runs, MVP voters loved middle infielders back then. Obviously he wasn't the MVP--Mays, Robinson, and Aaron all had epic years. About the best you can say looking at it today is that he may have been the best pick out of the second-tier candidates.

Wes Parker's story is fascinating--as is, as the book points out, his inclusion on this, the one name out of nine guaranteed to elicit puzzlement.

http://www.baseball-almanac.com/legendary/All_Time_Gold_Glove_Team.shtml

On to this now:

http://images.gr-assets.com/books/1348440741l/6211199.jpg

http://www.bhcpress.com/publishImages/Books_Morgenstein_A_Mound_Over_Hell~~element149.jpg

It’s 2098 and the last season of baseball -- forever. After the ravages of WWIII, the once all-American sport is now synonymous with terrorism and treason. Holograms run the bases for out-of-shape players and attendance averages fifteen spectators per game. The only ballpark left is Amazon, once known as Yankee Stadium.

America, nearly wiped out by radical Islam, has established a society based on love. Religion, social media, and the entertainment industry have been outlawed. All acts of patriotism are illegal, and the country is led by Grandma. Heading up the Family in her home base in the Bronx, she works tirelessly to build a lasting legacy for the future.

As baseball historian Puppy Nedick prepares for opening day, a chance encounter lands him face-to-face with former baseball greats. Determined not to go down without a fight, the players band together to revitalize the game for one last hurrah.

But not everyone wants peace. Will baseball become the catalyst for WWIV, or will it save America?

out on march 29!

prod. steve bannon

America, nearly wiped out by radical Islam, has established a society based on love.

I feel like if I repeated this sentence out loud 1000 times I would achieve some kind of enlightenment

but I can't because every time I even think of it I start giggling

Um you guys you can read the text of this in Google Books and it's everything you dreamed of and more

When baseball writers wander astray (Bill Reynolds, Red Sox book above, writing about Bill Lee):

"The article caught the outrageousness of Lee, everything from his fascination with the British rocker Warren Zevon..."

http://watchtowergeeks.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/jem-1.png

Great story from the Red Sox book (Bill Lee, who else?). In '75, in the midst of all the furor over busing--the book's almost as much about that as about baseball--Lee, a vocal supporter, got some death threats, and also a visit from the Winter Hill Gang, local mobsters who showed up at his house and threatened to kill him.

"We eventually ended up going out for pizza and getting drunk together, but it was scary there for a while."

Congratulations to Jim Leeke, Steve Steinberg, and Bill Young, who were selected as the winners of the 2018 SABR Baseball Research Awards, which honor outstanding research projects completed during the preceding calendar year that have significantly expanded our knowledge or understanding of baseball.

Leeke was honored for "From the Dugouts to the Trenches: Baseball During The Great War," published by University of Nebraska Press.

Steinberg was honored for "Urban Shocker: Silent Hero of Baseball's Golden Age," also by Nebraska.

Young was honored for "J.L. Wilkinson and the Kansas City Monarchs: Trailblazers in Black Baseball," published by McFarland & Company, Inc., Publishers.

https://sabr.org/latest/leeke-steinberg-young-win-2018-sabr-baseball-research-awards

Roger Angell is 98 (!) today. This is my favorite passage of his: pic.twitter.com/jRvjIcI3Tx

— Emma Baccellieri (@emmabaccellieri) September 19, 2018

podcast

https://baseballbythebook.libsyn.com/

Saw two today I really want to read:

http://dellioandwoods.files.wordpress.com/2018/09/split.jpg?w=450
http://dellioandwoods.files.wordpress.com/2018/09/1976.jpg?w=450

I don't remember the '76 season being as memorable as '75 or '77, but Epstein's '70s book was really good, so I'm sure he'll turn up lots I've forgotten or never knew. Stuff I do remember: Fidrych, the AL batting race, Sparky Anderson's condescension towards Munson after the World Series.

i feel like being a fan in the '70s would have made for some good times. i'm too young to remember anything from the '70s (43 yrs old here) beyond a faint awareness of peak '70s baseball guys Dave Kingman and Bill Buckner (i grew up near Chicago), I just remember that I started watching the Cubs in 1982 -- rookie year Sandberg, Leon Durham hitting what seemed like a million home runs (uh, 22), and as a kid my favorite player was Bump Wills because...his name was Bump. Also I very faintly remember people talking up a young OFer named Mel Hall...oops.

Hundred pages into Stars and Strikes, really enjoying it. The '70s are still (and I guess always will be) my favourite decade for baseball. Obviously, nostalgia is a big part of that, but I'd also agree with something James once wrote, that the decade was a perfect mix of a whole bunch of different approaches to the game. Lots of 40+ HR guys, topped by Foster's 52 in '77; Carew threatened .400 more than once, and there was an endless assortment of other speedy, high-average players like Garr and Templeton and Rivers (many of whom don't fare well using modern metrics, but they were fun and exciting at the time); historically flashy seasons by starters (Carlton, Blue, Guidry), and the beginnings of the modern closer (bad for the game from this vantage point, but Marshall and McGraw and Hrabosky and Gossage and Fingers were all memorable). That was the biggest thing--so many characters. Don't have the book beside me, but there's this little detour about John Montefusco ("The Count," 1975's ROY) getting a big raise the next year and hosting a party at the San Francisco Playboy Club that kind of sums up the decade for me. Again, not cool by today's standards. I know.

Wasn't aware of (or, more like, had forgotten) some of the backstage drama over Toronto getting a franchise. The two leagues were fighting over the city at one point; the AL had given them the team after the whole Giants thing fell through, at which point the NL decided they wanted both Toronto and Washington, so they tried to block it. Meanwhile, the Seitz-Messersmith-McNally case was working its way through the courts, and Marvin Miller complained that the owners were so fixated on the Toronto issue, it was hard to get them to the table for negotiations.

One other thing that made it a great decade: a bunch of memorable WS.

1970 - only 5 games, but legendary defense from Brooks Robinson
1971 - 7 games, Pirates come back from 3-1 deficit, Clemente
1972 - 7 games, first A's title
1973 - 7 games, wild A's win over the barely .500 Mets
1974 - 5 games; one of two lousy Series
1975 - 7 games, on the short list of greatest-ever
1976 - 4 games, the other lousy Series
1977 - 6 games, Bronx Zoo, Reggie's 3 in a row
1978 - 6 games, more of the same, Welch strikes out Reggie
1979 - 7 games, Pirates come back from 3-1 (again), We Are Family

Seven great ones for sure, maybe eight, depending upon how you rate the Brooks Robinson Show. Sad and embarrassed to say I didn't watch the '79 Series--pretentious first-year university student who had put baseball behind him.

I read "Big Hair ..." a few months ago and I'll probably buy this one as well. A lot of the stories in that book left me wanting a more detailed treatment.

So I'm heading to Houston in May and figure to include a baseball game or two, are there any must reads on Houston or Texas baseball?

Jim Bouton's I'm Glad You Didn't Take It Personally, which covers his '70 season with the Astros. (He's in Houston for part of Ball Four, too.) "It Makes a Fellow Proud to Be an Astro" is a basic text.

Now, the Astros are a team that likes to go out on the town,
We like to drink and fight and fuck till curfew comes around
Then it's time to make the trek,
We better be back to buddy's check,
It makes a fellow proud to be an Astro.

Now, Edwards is our catcher and he's really No. 1,
Dave Bristol said he drinks too much and calls some long home runs,
But we think John will be all right,
If we keep him in his room at night,
It makes a fellow proud to be an Astro.

Now, our pitching staff's composed of guys who think they're pretty cool,
With a case of Scotch, a greenie and an old beat-up whirlpool,
We'll make the other hitters laugh,
Then calmly break their bats in half,
It makes a fellow proud to be an Astro.

Now, Harry Walker is the one that manages this crew,
He doesn't like it when we drink and fight and smoke and screw,
But when we win our game each day,
Then what the fuck can Harry say?
It makes a fellow proud to be an Astro.

(Not a lot to do with George Springer, though, if that's more what you're looking for.)

Sounds ideal thanks! will let you know how I get on with it

Didn't know a thing about this till just now. Rob Neyer's a great writer.

http://i.harperapps.com/covers/9780062853615/x400.jpg

(It uses an Astros-A's playoff game from last year as a snapshot of "the myriad ways in which Major League Baseball has changed over the last few decades.")

that's one crazy guitar chord

that's one crazy guitar chord

you can say that again!

From the Dan Epstein 1976 book: when the Angels brought Tommy Davis out of retirement in June, he was working as a promo guy for Casablanca Records (just taking off with Destroyer and "Love to Love You Baby"). Dick Williams would catch him shaving and making phone calls between innings. (For some truly inscrutable MVP support, look at Davis's 10th place finish in '73. He was a DH who slugged under .400.)

Neyer is the guest on the latest EW podcast (2nd half)

https://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/effectively-wild-episode-1291-power-ball-to-the-people/

A couple more from Epstein (there's no end to them).

Long relief: Dick Tidrow relieves Ed Figueroa in the 7th inning of a 4-4 game vs. the Twins. He pitches 10.2 innings, gives up four hits and no runs.

Most highbrow promotion ever: Bill Veeck's "Ragtime Night," where they give away 10,000 copies of E.L. Doctorow's novel.

Two things I took away from the Epstein book:

1) How contentious player-manager relationships could be through the '70s. It was such a regular thing for players to badmouth their managers publically. Most of the managers were still old-school autocrats, and they'd often try to enforce dress codes and haircuts and whatever they felt like; on top of that, big money was starting to creep in, baseball was catching up to the contentiousness of the '60s, and managers fought (and resented) that. You hardly ever hear about player-manager friction anymore. (I don't think, anyway--am I wrong on that?) Managers had to adapt. I don't know who the last old-school-type manager was...Pinella?

2) That, in his own bumbling way--and based on personal vendetta--Kuhn might have accidentally made the right call on Charlie Finley's rebuked fire sale. (That's my opinion, not Epstein's.) Legally, Kuhn had no standing whatsoever--as Finley pointed out (to no avail), owners had been selling off players forever. But this was just as free agency was about to kick in. I wonder if it would have been too much shock to the system all at once. I can see where all the other owners, panicked over the loss of the reserve clause, might have followed Finley's lead and automatically tried to sell anybody and everybody playing out his contract (partly as a punitive measure). I don't know--but I can see where player movement for those first couple of years might have been so drastic that teams would have been unrecognizable from year to year. Everything would have sorted itself out soon enough, I suppose, but, to use that deathless phrase, I'm not sure if selling off Blue, Fingers, and Rudi would have been in the best interests of the game, at least in the short term.

Let's go with revoked fire sale instead.

Selig cancelled that loan from FOX to Frank McCourt that more or less forced his hand in selling the Dodgers (for $2B -- even when the bad guys lose, sometimes they still win). Legally it was questionable but the commissioner does have the power to do things in "the best interest of baseball". Finley didn't really need the money, but he liked treating his players as cattle, even more so than regular owners. Kuhn's decision can't be viewed in a vacuum, it was the culmination of more than a decade of the league having the deal with Finley's BS, despite the fact that the team was very successful on the field (the Dodgers made the playoffs a bunch of times under McCourt's ownership too). But I really don't think Kuhn cared about avoiding a "shock to the system", he just wanted to hurt Finley. Kuhn was way behind the times on every labour issue of his tenure, I can't credit him with the foresight of "easing" MLB into the free agency era.

Don't disagree at all about Kuhn's motives (I said as much in my first sentence)--he wanted to fuck over Finley, pure and simple. If it had been O'Malley or Yawkey or one of the old-guard owners making the sale, Kuhn wouldn't have intervened. I just think he did the right thing--or at least, at that moment in time, the best thing--for the wrong reasons. If that sale had gone through, I think it would have been a couple of years of bedlam.

Right, although I'm saying that even if the sales had been "bad for baseball" and led to a couple of years of bedlam (which I don't agree with), Kuhn would have made his move anyway because he never grasped what was good or bad for baseball in any context.

Started Jeff Katz's Split Season: 1981, the book I mentioned above. One of the big appeals of such books for me is taking note of major changes in the game. (Major changes from what seems like recent history--obviously such changes would be obvious if you read a book about Ted Williams or Cy Young.) Three for the few pages Katz spends on Len Barker's perfect game:

-- Barker was considered a hard thrower, sometimes erratically so; his fastball was clocked at 91 m.p.h.

-- Cleveland's PR guy had to get special permission from management to allow the Toronto Star's Alison Gordon into the clubhouse after the game.

-- The same PR guy arranged for the Today Show's Bryant Gumbel to speak to Barker the next morning (this had been the first perfect game since Catfish Hunter in 1968--it was national news). Barker cancelled because he wanted to sleep in. I'm trying to imagine a player today turning down a similar chance to (as I heard some YouTube analyst creepily say the other day) "leverage his brand."

A couple of show-biz anecdotes from the split-season book:

1) John Gavin, Janet Leigh's boyfriend in Psycho, was Reagan's Ambassador to Mexico (he accompanies Valenzuela when the latter gets invited to the White House).

2) Doug DeCinces was a cousin of Lisa Loring, who played Wednesday on The Addams Family. (I had no idea DeCinces was convicted of insider trading a few months ago...is he is prison right now?)