Mid-day talker: destiny, sacrifice flies and the fluidity of the present vs. future outcomes
Posted on June 2nd, 2009 – 12:02 PMBy Michael Rand
We’ve been ruminating for a while now (at least since May 21, specifically, but really much longer) about the notion of how present actions impact future outcomes. The specific case came from a RandBall Feud question that was posed thusly:
If the Twins had won that first game at Yankee Stadium (the one where they had a 4-2 lead in the ninth), how many games would they have won on this 7-game road trip that concludes this afternoon in Chicago?
Brandon replied: Do we have to keep pretending game-to-game motivation means anything? This makes me sad.
We replied: Brandon: It makes me sad that you don’t believe in the crushing weight of momentum. Yeah, blah blah, only as good as the next day’s starting pitcher.
Brandon replied: Rand: maybe you’re right. If Melky’s blooper would have held in the air another half-second longer to allow Gomez to catch it to end game 1, Perkins elbow would have healed and Liriano would have had more bite on his slider a week later. Sorry. Couldn’t resist.
Our point was both a baseball one — that momentum from one game can be a factor in future outcomes — and somewhat of a philosophical one: that everything we do right now impacts events in the future. Nothing is pre-destined (in our mind), and even the casual things we do (like what we choose to eat for dinner on a certain night) have an impact on our future realities, as minute as the difference might be sometimes. Therefore, a Twins victory that night absolutely could have impacted the mood of the next night’s starting pitcher and position players, etc., thus leading to different outcomes in future games.
Not to speak for Brandon, but the point we think he was making is also valid one: while realities might be different, the bigger forces at play (such as Liriano’s ineffectiveness or Perkins being injured) are larger mitigating factors that over-ride any subtle differences incurred from positive momentum.
The back-and-forth, though, reminded us of one of our greatest sports pet peeves. Say there’s a runner on second with nobody out, and the batter fails to advance the runner to third while making an out. When the next batter hits a modest fly ball, an announcer will inevitably say failing to advance the runner cost the team a run. Which is possibly true. But they so often say it with such absolute certainty, as if the exact sequence would have taken place had the runner been on third instead of on second. And that’s just not true. The pitcher would have approached the hitter differently. The hitter would have employed a different strategy. The entire game dynamic would have changed. While it’s true that not advancing the runner cost the team a chance to score a run on a different sacrifice fly, there is not some sort of space-time continuum that simply deviates for one hitter and then magically goes back on track for the fly ball hitter.
This happens in other sports, too, and we are always fascinated by the countless small things in every game that can completely change the dynamic. But baseball — at least in our opinion — has the most examples of these situations per game.
Your thoughts on RandBall vs. Brandon, pre-destiny, the fluidity of the present vs. the future and sacrifice flies in the comments.
43 Responses to "Mid-day talker: destiny, sacrifice flies and the fluidity of the present vs. future outcomes"
This brings to mind the stupidity of the “average with a _ and _ count” at the top of the screen for ESPN televised games. Yeah, because the only factor in the situation that matters is the [redacted] count…
ESPN is where statistics go to lose their meaning.
Predestination_69: @brandong U suk!!1! Go Rand!1!!!!
I think that a middle ground between Randball and Brandon is probably the easiest way to enjoy sporting events.
They could start a segment of Randball Crossfire, where I don’t really agree fully with either of them as they hold fort on their respective ends of the spectrum.
It’d be entertaining if only I could be guaranteed that someone’s head would eventually explode.
Dave,
I support that idea only if Randball were to wear a bowtie.
Re: Randball Crossfire
Rand needs to wear a bowtie during said segment.
MR: that was scary.
Brandon is just angry because he can’t quite spell rand ball with the letters in his name. Rand Nob is good too though Brandon.
So is it Stu who will go on the show and say “Stop it. You’re hurting people.”
Dave,
Yes it was scary.
My last comment was supposed to end in a question mark.
I’ll go so far as to say that no one who has ever played baseball at a reasonably high level would have answered your question differently than I. Bummer that you can’t carry the motivation of a game through to the next day, but it’s true.
Now, if we’re talking about scouting — as in “the Twins lost those six games in a row because the Yankees found that Mauer can’t hit an outside change and Morneau has a poor grasp of the strike zone, and those strategies were therein exploited” — I’m with you. If it’s a mental, ride the wave of momentum whichever way it carries you, I’m going to politely and lovingly call you crazy.
My opinion only relates to baseball though. Not sure if in other sports the previous loser presses and does worse (or perhaps focuses and plays better?) and the results of the prior game mentally affect their play … that’s not for me to say.
As for your pet peeve, I completely agree. Circumstances are everything in baseball, and claiming anything would have played out similarly in a different scenario is a big clue that person doesn’t have a clue what he/she is talking about.
Love this topic. Your move, Rand.
No one in that diagram is covering 1st? What if Gomez makes a diving catch and there’s a chance to double-up the runner?
I think Brandon’s take on this is the “right” way to see momentum, from a non-fan’s perspective. I also think that this is consistent with Brandon’s take on “clutch” stats, in that someone with the right mind-set does not let externals influence how they see the next pitch.
However, I’m on Rand’s side as to whether or not momentum matters, simply because I don’t believe that all players have the ability to maintain that non-clutch, non-momentum frame of mind. The good players probably do (part of what makes them good) but with 9 men on the field, it’s likely that someone … probably a Twins relief pitcher … is going to be affected.
So is it Stu who will go on the show and say “Stop it. You’re hurting people.”
I enjoyed that.
Mux - in your scenario, you’re saying Mijares or whomever would pitch better the game after a win than after a loss. I just think that’s a pretty giant leap of logic to claim that the “momentum” is entering his brain while he’s on the hill trying to make sure his mechanics are on and his release point is consistent and he doesn’t leave his slider up and this batter is supposed to hit inside pitches really well so if you’re going to go in you better go way in and be sure to look that runner back to second because he’s got a big lead and no walks here because Texeira is on deck yada yada yada.
My counterpoint is simple: no effing way.
Brandon FTW.
Rand = FAIL
Now what about Favre?
I’m much more in the Randball camp here, but perhaps not polar. I think there is something to be said for the effect of winning or losing on the next day’s outcome. I’m not sure, however, whether losing the first game in New York would positively or negatively effect the outcome of the next game. I’m just as sure that each player might react in a truly unique way.
Brandon, if you did indeed play ball at a “significant” level, you’re sure to understand that there are some players who simply over-think. In Bull Durham, a great quote: “This game is made for those not cursed with self awareness.” It’s true, if a player over-analyzes what he could/would have done in a situation that ultimately did not present itself, he can ultimately burn himself out mentally.
I’m not sure what the consequences of this line of thinking would be in the Twins series at Yankee Stadium, but I think they certainly are fluid.
This question is far to in depth for me. Can we go back to whether or not McHale should be back as the head coach?
NOOOOOOO!!!!!
I must be the LCD on these threads.
Also, Brandon on your 12:48 comment:
Some pitchers - especially young ones - find themselves in trouble when they try to be too fine, too perfect. If a Mijares is overly concerned that the fate of the team falls on his shoulders alone (perhaps as a result of a fly ball falling in or a K the previous inning w/ RISP) he could be pressing to much to let his talent take over.
I agree with Brandon, and I already subscribe to his newsletter.
Although I did love this:
I’ll go so far as to say that no one who has ever played baseball at a reasonably high level would have answered your question differently than I.
EAT THAT, LOSER WRITER GUY! PUT ON A HELMET, THEN COME TALK TO ME!
Well, I guess that Legion baseball in North Dakota does not count as a high level. No? OK, then. What Brandon said. Except for the parts where he’s wrong about momentum.
I answer Brandon in Haiku:
Over Confidence
Athleticism Endures
- Edward “Chuck” Knoblauch
Randball has apparently turned into ‘Lost.’
I definitely think momentum plays a role. Probably less so in baseball than, say, basketball (Kobe/LeBron/etc is on fire!) or football (some offense is on an unstoppable drive), but even then, those circumstances don’t translate to the next game so easily.
But, in Brandon’s reply to Mux’s comment, I don’t think we can just hang all that responsibility on Mijares’ pitching in that scenario, either. Maybe the win loosened some guys up, and the hitters drove in an extra run or two. Maybe that in turn makes Mijares slightly more comfortable, rather than tense and trying to pick his spots.
I realize this can lead to endless hypothesizing, but it seems important to consider momentum both for the athletes as individuals and also for the team as a whole. Therefore, if we’re going to analyze every little, tiny event, I’d lean a bit more towards Rand than Brandon.
Muxhut, no one is covering first in the diagram, because it’s showing where people should be on a sure double, possible triple. First is no longer an issue
I’ll go so far as to say that no one who has ever played baseball at a reasonably high level would have answered your question differently than I.
I play wiffleball badly…once a year…for charity. I think that makes me a viable contributor with my middle ground theory that I refuse to flesh out due to time-constraints and laziness.
@Wyatt –
You are assuming baseball is easy enough to allow mental energy to be spent on the previous game’s outcome. It’s not. It’s really, really difficult.
Again, you could just as easily make the argument that the team who lost is going to respond with more energy, focus, hustle, what have you. Both arguments are rife with what-ifs and aimless conjecture, and are thus illogical guesses with no proof to back them up.
@everyone –
I’m a dick for playing the Experience Card on this one. I’m embarrassed. My apologies. I’ll show myself out.
I find myself torn on this as well, but I lean towards Brandon in that these guys are professional players and should ALWAYS be on. They don’t get the luxury of only playing well when things are going right. I agree they can try too hard if nothing is going right and try to take the game on themselves (I’m looking at you Punto) One example for Brandon’s point, how often does a team score 15-20 runs and get shutout the next day. More often than the Twins most recent run of high scoring games.
Although in Randball’s defense I will harken back a few years to the Twins 3 straight Complete Game Shut-Outs, or was it 4?
I’ll qualify my Randball theory point with: it was against the Royals and I think they scored all of 2 runs on the Twins that year.
Mark H - I can only assume you are my eldest brother, accidentally misspelling your name. (I assume the same of Dave MN. And Stu.)
Thank you for that explanation. I had thought that the diagram was of a more generic “ball hit to left-center” nature. I apologize for my assumptivity.
I’m not suggesting that a player would be “expending mental energy” assessing yesterday’s game. Rather, a player’s approach includes a holistic collection of prior experiences.
Brandon, please don’t leave. I am enjoying your back-and-forth with Rand.
As Brandon said, there are much more important factors that affect the result of a baseball game. The result of a the previous game is a very, very small factor, but it is a factor. It’s probably rare, and it’s impossible to prove, but it’s hard to say it could never be the tipping point in the sum of factors that result in the game’s outcome.
So, wait a minute, the Smoke Monster is Bill James?
Times like these I enjoy being a girl. Just enjoy the [redacted] game and quit picking the [redacted] apart.
Yes, women are infamous for simply enjoying things and not picking them apart until they are soulless and dead inside.
But I see your point.
So maybe a team doesn’t have momentum from game to game but can a player have momentum? i.e. Mauer for the month of May?
Clarence FTW & COW.
Sorry AZGG.
CS for COW then Govenor?
*Governer
CS for COW then Govenor?
*Governer**
**still wrong
@Swamptown: You win this week
@everybody: You tried your best and you failed miserably. The moral of the story is “never try”.
Momentum does effect the outcome of baseball games. In-game momentum to a much greater extent…especially when a team is hitting (although this is more true for lower levels of play and less experienced teams). I’ve always been a believer in the notion that “hitting is contageous”…and yes that is up through the bigs…but is much more an inning to inning phenomenon in my experience (I played varsity and legion ball in the twin cities)
Momentum from game to game will have an effect more on the approach a team, as a whole, takes on each game. Winning brews confidence, and leads to overall success…from both a hitting and pitching perspective.
Brandon is correct in that changes in situation, from pitch to pitch, hitter to hitter, inning to inning will have a much greater effect on the outcome of the game than whether or not a team won last night.
There’s my $0.02. Feel free to tear it apart or bow at my feet.
Sorry AZGG.
Newbie, there’s no need to apologize. The Uterine-American Association is currently on their way to AZGG’s house to revoke her credentials.
***Governor
Better?
I will sleep like a baby knowing that there isn’t a misspelling on the Internets
