Just because I was watching it this morning... in the Rick Ankiel Meltdown Inning in the 2000 NLDS, Greg Maddux drew a leadoff walk and then was wild-pitched around the bases.  

 

 

Bill, I think you are on the right track with the 70s Royals, although I doubt Wilson and Cowens ever were the backup CF at the same time.  But in the 1976 ALCS, after Otis got hurt on the first play of the Series, Cowens played CF the whole series, which is pretty good proof, I would think, that he was the backup CF at that time and, of course, Wilson certainly was the backup CF once he came on the scene.  BTW, I was only 7 in 1976 and forgot we played that whole Series w/0 Otis until I forced myself to watch the Chambliss HR once and thought, wow that RFer is short.  Of course, that is because the RF wasn't Cowens, it was Hal McRae, then I was like, what happened to Cowens, then I found him in CF in the box score and then I wondered where Otis was, and I didn't find him until the first AB for the Royals of the ALCS, when he apparently was thrown out trying to beat out a bunt, and I would guess, hurt himself in the process.  The rabbit holes we go down sometimes.

Using your formula from the 1980s, I calculated that on October 16 Gonzalez had a game score of 44 and Hill's score was 60.  MLB's box score shows the numbers as 37 and 60, respectively.  Did you change the formula, or is MLB just using something different?  (https://www.mlb.com/gameday/brewers-vs-dodgers/2018/10/16/563403?#game_state=final,lock_state=final,game_tab=box,game=563403)  

 

On the Red Sox OF defensive excellence... I noticed that both the starting right fielder (Betts) and starting leftfielder (Benintendi) serve as the backup centerfielder.  This *seems* like it would be a rare thing (say, starting 100+ games in RF or LF and starting 10+ games in CF)... my memories are best about the 1970's Pirates and 1980's and 1990's Red Sox, but I don't *think* any of those teams had any such OF.  Are there any other outfields like this that you can recall?

Bill, did you ever see a player walk and then score on 3 passed balls/wild pitches before?

Hey Bill,  

I was reading your mini-essay on umpires and thinking, this is great stuff. It reminds me of essays from old Abstracts. Then I read 337’s comment about enjoying old Hey Bills and -CLICK- it dawned on me that Best of Hey Bill would be a great book! I’d buy it, anyway. All you need is a good editor (I would volunteer for the job!) and it’s practically done already. Whaddya think?    

 

Bill tweeted "Since baseball exists only to be enjoyed and pro baseball is dependent for its existence on those who enjoy it, the fact that many people LIKE the old system of ace starters and starter accountability is very relevant to debates about our future."  

 

OK, I'm just one person, but I think it is more fun when teams try radical new strategies.  

 

Even before Bill James' Abstracts, I only sort of went along with Wins as being important in the way I went along with believing in Santa Claus when I was young. I pretended to believe in Santa because it might ruin this really fun Christmas thing if I didn't. I half heartedly credited pitcher's Wins as an important stat, because it was part of the language of baseball, but I always thought it unfair to pitchers on teams with a weak offense.  

 

Nonetheless, statistics and their history are a very important part of baseball and Wins have a long history. Would it be so bad, if they tweaked the Win rule a little - adapting to today's game?

Bill, thanks for the recent history on umpire/strike zone changes.  I just picked 20 years somewhat arbitrarily, not knowing/remembering everything that you laid out in your reply.  I am almost 50, and the only game I remember that was obscenely awful with ball/strike calls was Eric Gregg's 1997 Braves/Marlins NLCS game that you mentioned.  Obviously it was a serious problem throughout MLB for many years.  

 

I brought up the question because it has seemed to me (recently, anyway), that ball/strike calls by umps have gotten worse, and that the pitchers' skill at painting the edges of the strike zone has gotten better.  But then I think it might be because I'm now watching the game in HD with all of those graphics showing what is/isn't a strike, so my expectations of getting the call right or higher than they were in my younger days.  

 

So my new question is: if ball/strike accuracy is more or less the same, I suppose my expectations (and the TV audience's as well) has gotten higher?

Just a small correction: John McSherry's thing actually happened a little bit into the playing of the game.

Bill, I was reading what you said about the meaninglessness of data regarding particular hitters vs. particular pitchers, ie, whether a given hitter hits better or worse against a given pitcher.  Is this because of the small sample size in most of these cases?  Or is it because, conceptually, at any given level of skill, there is no reason to expect a hitter to do better or worse against a given pitcher?  

I recall that when the umpires delivered their ultimatum, Sandy Alderson said something which I remember to this day.   He said that it was "a threat to be ignored or an offer to be accepted."    Which baseball did...  accepted it, that is.  

 

I've used that on multiple occasions over the years.    It's a good idea to have a clear view of the leverage which you hold during a negotiation.   The umpires did not.

I just read (and enjoyed) the interview of your daughter Rachel.  

 

I was reminded of a story Isaac Asimov told in the second volume of his autobiography. His mother took some adult education courses in her senior years and her ESL (?) teacher approached her and asked if she was related to the famous writer. She said, "Yes, he's my son."  

 

"Ah," said the instructor, "No wonder you're such a good writer."  

 

She wasn't having any, however. She immediately corrected the teacher, "No," she said, "It's no wonder he's such a good writer."

Bill -- Maybe this is something you can't (or choose not to) comment on, but if you can, please explain to me the logic behind pulling Gio Gonzalez after two innings last night. I was, and remain, mystified, regardless of Woodruff's home run--didn't Milwaukee specifically get Gonzalez down the stretch in anticipation of making the playoffs? The Brewers got the win, yes, but they burned through seven pitchers in the process. It reminded me of something you once wrote about not changing pitchers for the sake of it, because eventually you're going to land on someone who doesn't have his stuff that day.

Based on improvements in velocity, movement, etc., is it harder for umps to call balls/strikes now than it was 20 years ago?  Have there been any studies to determine ball/strike accuracy by umpires in the long term?

This is kind of a meta-"Hey Bill" and lacks a question, but I’ll offer it anyway: "Hey Bill"s make damned good reading, years after they’re published. On airplane flights especially, I’ll often download two or three consecutive months, say April 2015 to June of 2015, and then read them in sequence once I’m out of wifi range. (Airports usually offer free wifi, and it usually doesn’t work, just like the inflight wifi, which also usually doesn’t work—why is that?) A three- or five-year-old "Hey Bill" is often fresh reading to me, though I had read it carefully when it first appeared, and I’m often astonished by even my own questions which I can’t remember asking, much less your answers. The themes that come up connect many of the questions and answers—it’s like following a conversation between very smart (occasionally very stupid) people. It amazes me how little I retain after only a few years have passed.