In an article written by anti-Marlin fan Rob Neyer, he is living, as usual, by stats to prove his point that power forever beats out speed. He does not account for intangibles, which Pierre and Castillo force upon the opposing teams via their defensive adjustments and the amount of time/energy those teams have to spend on not only keeping them off base, but keeping their damage (steals) limited. Pitch outs, pick offs. They all weigh in. Here is the article:

 

Item 1: In 2003, the Florida Marlins hit 157 home runs, and they gave up 128 home runs.

 

Item 2: The Marlins are the only postseason team with a losing record on the road. At home they went 53-28, fourth-best in the majors. But on the road, the Marlins were just 38-43. The Blue Jays had a better record, and so did the Royals, Mariners, Astros, Dodgers, and Diamondbacks.

 

 

Juan Pierre's speed can't compensate for the Marlins' lack of power.

 

Items 3(a) and 3(b): In their home games, the Marlins hit 72 home runs, and they gave up only 48 home runs. Also in their home games, the Marlins stole 70 bases and allowed only 39 steals.

 

So for whatever reason, in their home games the Marlins had big edges in both homers and steals. And knowing what you know (or should know) about homers and steals, which of those edges do you think played a bigger part in their 53 home victories?

 

Yes, that's a rhetorical question. And yes, I'm sorry to keep beating you, Dear Readers, over the head with this stuff. But it makes me crazy when people just invent these wild theories about what we're watching. I don't know why people do this. Maybe because it's more fun to write and talk about two completely different teams. Maybe because the Marlins' leadoff man did play particularly well in the National League Championship Series, and people have awfully short memories this time of year. Maybe because we all long for the days when the balls weren't flying over the fences with such great regularity, and a man's wheels alone could make him a big star (remember Vince Coleman?).

 

The first sentence of my last column was "Hey, when did Juan Pierre turn into the second coming of Rickey Henderson?"

 

Another rhetorical question. Nevertheless, a number of readers complained that nobody had actually compared Pierre to Rickey Henderson.

 

Somebody had, but that wasn't the point. My point was that when Henderson was at his best, he was often said to control baseball games all by himself. And for some reason, many have been attributing these same qualities to Juan Pierre.

 

Well, no. With rare exception, who wins a Marlins game doesn't depend on how many bunts Pierre beats out, or how many bases he steals. Early during Game 3 Tuesday night, someone asked me, "Hey Neyer, what are you going to say if the Marlins win 1-0 because Pierre went all the way to second on that blooper in the first?"

 

I would have said, 1) "Lucky hit, but nice running," and 2) "Wow, great pitching, Marlins!" It was funny, wasn't it, how the stories about Game 1 centered on Pierre's leadoff bunt single, and treated the Marlins' pitching -- which limited the Yankees' great lineup to just two runs -- as if it were just sort of ... there?

 

Pierre's speed got the Marlins a run in the first. Later in the game, he got nailed trying to steal second. Oh, and the Yankees beat the Marlins by five runs, thanks in large part to two home runs.

 

In the first three games of the World Series, the Yankees have five home runs, the Marlins zero. The Yankees have five doubles, the Marlins three.

 

Those are the numbers that have mattered, and will continue to matter. The Marlins are in the World Series because they've got five good starting pitchers, and because players like Mike Lowell and Derrek Lee spent most of the season hitting baseballs over fences.

 

Juan Pierre's an excellent baserunner, and every little bit helps. But if the starters don't do well and the sluggers don't hit some big flies, all of Pierre's antics on the bases won't make any more difference than the color of the Marlins' socks.

 

But his article misses on several points:

 

1) If you CANT hit homeruns, because the other team's pitching (Marlins) shuts down the hitting, then how does the opposing team win games? And he was crying that the Marlins pitching was not getting enough credit!!

 

2) Anyone can win with a lineup filled with 30+HR hitters. They just need good pitching to help them out. The Marlins, being somewhat economically handicapped, could not push their payroll towards the $100+MM to make that happen. They had to adapt a style of play suitable to their finances. If they could stack their lineup like the Red Sox or Yankees, they would. But is that such a no-brainer? Is he really pointing out anything of note here?

 

Speed won this world series. So did execution on the little aspects of the game. Bunts, sac flies played a significant role, if not more so, than the homeruns. The Yankees played waiting for that big homerun. They got it in only two games. They won, only 2 games.

leave Neyer alone, he is the ultimate stats-bonehead

Bad article, good points by you, Jonny.

Bad article, good points by you, Jonny.

you shouldnt really be talking about relying to much on stats

Bad article, good points by you, Jonny.

you shouldnt really be talking about relying to much on stats Did I talk about that AT ALL? :banghead

Perhaps Neyer should consider a new career as an accountant.

 

This is the perfect example of what's wrong with statheads, even our own on this board (though I love'em just like I love all of you after our wonderful summer together - if any team ever should be called "The Boys of Summer" these Marlins should) and that is their numbers adoration ignores, dedication, drive, teamwork and collective goals.

 

When Juan didn't do it, Luis did. When Pudge didn;t drive in that run, Conine or The Kid did, this was the most glorious example of teamwork I've seen in fifty years as a baseball fan.

 

Pity Neyer, he can't see the forest for the trees. The only thing he sees is the eraser at the end of his pencil.

I have one stat for Neyer that makes his article turn to dust...

The Marlins set a record for most home runs in one month by a team in September.

I have one stat for Neyer that makes his article turn to dust...

The Marlins set a record for most home runs in one month by a team in September.

 

gee you learn something new everyday. i never realized they set a record in sept. ptretty impressive for guys playing smallball lol

i heard some analyst say it.

First off, let me just say that I don't believe there is a bigger Juan Pierre fan then me. And if there is, I would like to meet them and shake their hand. So if I ever meet Rob Neyer, I will promptly punch him in the face for being an a-hole.

 

Second, as many here probably have noticed by now, I tend to be the baseball purist. I'll take pitching over hitting, ability over stats, speed over power. And I loved this World Series because despite a Wild Card winning it, it should have made every purist around America smile. The Marlins were outclubbed by the power happy Yanks. Didn't matter. The Yankees had men on base early and often. Didn't matter. Because OPS, Slugging Percentage, Homers, you know how much that mattered in this Series? Zero, Squat, Zilch. With Josh and Brad doing their Sandi Koufax-Don Drysdale 1-2 impersonations and Juanpy causing his usualy havoc all around the place (not to mention Alex Gonzalez finally joining the party), smallball won. Classic baseball reered its head in these playoffs, and it showed it is good. And you can't tell me this Series wasn't more entertaining than a Series that would have featured the Cards and the Red Sox would have been with a billion homers everywhere.

I have one stat for Neyer that makes his article turn to dust...

The Marlins set a record for most home runs in one month by a team in September.

damn... and thats without neyer's golden boy, mike lowell

One thing that pisses me off about the statheads is that they'd rather take a strikeout than put the ball in play. They are obsessed at what happens at the plate. Because more or less it's the only part of the game that is wrapped up completly in statistics. You can't do much at the plate that can't be shown in some data. Even pitches per plate appearance is in regular use! But once that ball gets out in the field... With all those weird nooks and cranies in every ballpark and every fielder's unique reads and foot work. They can't prove anything. The only stats that exist out there are hits, errors and home runs that clear the fence. Nothing else. The same with baserunning. Moving from first to third on a single is not listed in your newspaper's stat sheets. It's not even used by any sabremetrician. But is more often it is a key play in a game. They'd rather give credit to the guy at the plate for the RBI. Or even a hit that comes from the pressure of a man on third on an infield single or give a stolen base to the trail runner for a outfield hit with a man on second. Why? It was the speed of the lead runner that led to that!

 

Though I think Neyer does make a point. If a ball is hit for a home run there is little you can do to make it into an out. You can't get that run called back by getting the next three batters out. You can rarely force the hitter to miss a bag while rounding the bases. Bunts, sac flies, taking the extra base, two strike fouls and what not does not do the damage of a monster blast. And if we take our eyes off the stat sheets and think back to when we were on our high school team, or its equipment coach (myself included), or a media pundit that has seen the game then you'll know that with practice a bunt can be executed with more ease than a towering shot over the fence. Same, too, with smart and aggressive baserunning (yes, they can coexist) or just making contact with the ball than the long ball. Nothing against the long ball game. It can work. It has been shown to work. But it can be countered too. By streaks, by luck, by the opposition throwing splitters, by Pro Player's deep outfield fences (oh, how do I love thee!), by getting the batter to swing at bad pitches, etc. Baseball provides that not even the best teams manage to lose less than half as many as they win. Or that the best batters get a hit two-thirds of the time they put the ball into play (Or that they get to first base half the time.) To think that you can wait on that ball four or fat pitch over the plate is stupid. So, too, is thinking you can overcome a six-run lead in the late innings by giving outs away with sacrifice bunts and flies. Neither is exactly true all the time. Some teams are "too stupid" as Josh Beckett likes to say at times to get it done. And without dwelling on 30 years of box scores or bringing up a story from my years in the game, it's true most of the time. You've got to play use many game plans to win over the many pitchers, defenses, offenses, ballparks and umpires you'll see over a season. The small-ball. The long-ball. The fill in the blank-ball. But when it comes to the playoffs. In a short series, you've got to bring your top game plan and not be too tied to it if it's not working. Because you're playing against the best ball clubs in the world, and plus whoever wins the Central division ( ). And only a few slip-ups will cost you the series before you can say "twelve-time National League East champions." You're not going to blow these teams out or shut them down with ease. So, you've got to play for the one run that may make the difference. That's why Oakland is still waiting for that fat pitch with runners on first and second. Because they rarely switched from their game plan. And it's a shame. They are a great club, and Billy Beane has done a great job with his slim resources. They could dominate the league if they wanted.

 

And while we're at it. The only team stat that matters is the W. Team Slugging Percentage, ERA, or even pythagorean winning percentage mean nothing. They can hint at things. But they mean absolutly nothing against the win and loss record. A team can bat the mendoza line and be outscored a million to a few and still have baseball's best record.

I watched Al Leiter meltdown earlier this year when Juan Pierre bunted for a single, stole second and then taunted Al with a big lead off second base until Al simply could not throw a ball to the plate. The drama lasted a good five to 8 minutes. I don't know how you quantify what Pierre did to Leiter's head (and his ability to pitch effectively) through statistics.

I have one stat for Neyer that makes his article turn to dust...

The Marlins set a record for most home runs in one month by a team in September.

damn... and thats without neyer's golden boy, mike lowell That can't be right, unless I'm misunderstanding what you're saying. The Marlins hit 23 HRs as a team in September 2003. That was 13th in the league.

I have one stat for Neyer that makes his article turn to dust...

The Marlins set a record for most home runs in one month by a team in September.

damn... and thats without neyer's golden boy, mike lowell That can't be right, unless I'm misunderstanding what you're saying. The Marlins hit 23 HRs as a team in September 2003. That was 13th in the league. yea, i was battin my eyes for a second there...

I like stats. But the perfect stat to represent the impact of a player does not exist.

 

And with a leadoff man, especially an NL leadoff man, slug is much less relevent. If nothing else, Pierre and Castillo scored 199 runs between them. At least they should get some props from him for that.

I agree that he is underestimating the intangibles, but he makes several good points. Speed alone is not winning games, nor is pitching and defense alone. But the same can be said for any aspect of the game. It still takes a whole balanced team, playing well together to win it all. And that's what the Marlins had this season.

They got pitching when they needed it, and they got good defense when they needed it. They didn't get great defense in the world series, but steady. The speed was pretty much neutralized.

 

The Yankees defensed Pierre by bringing Soriano in to edge of the grass to take away the drag bunt. I haven't seen anyone do that ever before. It seemed to be very effective, and I would be surprised if NL teams didn't adopt it for next season.

I think most of JP's bunts-for-hits were on 3B side. So moving the 2B in would have no impact.

That's because most of the pitchers who faced were righthanders and fell off towards the first base side.

The game I think he is talking about was when LH Pettitte was pitching.