Crols Gomez Brian McCann

Ripping the unwritten rules a new one

50 Comments

Dirk Hayhurst does just that today over at Deadspin. He takes Tim Kurkjian’s recent article on the unwritten rules and, combined with his own professional baseball experience, explains why they’re simply incoherent.

The strongest observation: that there is no one set of unwritten rules. It’s all about what young players learn from veteran players on their team. And that every team has a slightly different variation on those rules. Some veterans are OK if you have flair and personality as long as you do your job. Others are stricter about decorum and behavior. There is no uniform standard. If there were, then no one would fight about these things. Everyone would know. But they do fight:

Some of those players will get traded to other teams where other leaders with different views have imprinted other rookies. Lockers rooms will face a an unwritten code schism. Sects will form. Doctrines will mutate. In many ways, unwritten rules are like religious views, with different values assigned to different doctrines, all of which must be taken on faith. And just like with many religions, believers will embrace things for which they have no clue of the origins, just because they’ve been told to believe them, and that there will be hell to pay if they don’t.

It all boils down, basically, to arbitrary values with said arbitrary values being justified by a seniority system in which veterans try to dominate young players out of fear or inertia or habit or tradition. The key is that there is no way to ever truly get a good explanation for why things must be a certain way. Or why things could be a certain way on one club but a totally different way on another. At its core it’s an irrational system even if the desire for generalized traditions and decorum is understandable.

I’ve met Dirk and talked with him a lot. I’ve read all his books and most of his articles. I think I get him pretty well. At least I get this much: guys like Hayhurst tend not do well with irrational rules and can’t help but call such irrationalities into question. There’s a grand tradition of that sort of thing in baseball. Unfortunately, those who partake in that tradition tend to get attacked on an ad hominem basis or have their criticisms fended off by appeals to authority. I’m sure some folks who don’t like what Dirk has to say here will dismiss it by talking about his writing career or the relative brevity of his major league career and say that those things disqualify him as a critic, QED.

If and when that happens it will only prove Dirk’s point, of course. For such appeals are, themselves, irrational and are designed to obfuscate the matter at hand and change the terms of the debate to one more favorable to the person on the defensive.

UPDATE:

Well then.

A-Rod to host a reality show featuring broke ex-athletes

NEW YORK, NY - AUGUST 12: Alex Rodriguez #13 of the New York Yankees answers question in a press conference after the game against the Tampa Bay Rays at Yankee Stadium on August 12, 2016 in New York City. (Photo by Drew Hallowell/Getty Images)
Getty Images
Leave a comment

Alex Rodriguez’s transition into retirement has featured a serious move into the business world. He has gone back to school, worked seriously on investments and has started his own corporation. Yes, he’s set for life after making more money than any baseball player in history, but even if his bank account wasn’t fat, you get the sense that he’d be OK given what we’ve seen of his work ethic and savvy in recent years.

He’s going to be getting another paycheck soon, though. For hosting a reality show featuring athletes who are not in as good a financial shape as A-Rod is:

Interesting. Hopefully, like so many other reality shows featuring the formerly rich and famous, this one is not exploitative. Not gonna hold my breath because that’s what that genre is all about, unfortunately, but here’s hoping A-Rod can help some folks with this.

Great Moments in Not Understanding The Rules

screen-shot-2017-01-17-at-10-02-33-am
6 Comments

Bill Livingston of the Cleveland Plain Dealer is a Hall of Fame voter. In the past he has voted for players who used PEDs, but he’s never been totally happy with it, seeing the whole PED mess as a dilemma for voters.

On the one hand he doesn’t like voting for users and doesn’t like harming those who were clean by shifting votes away from them, but on the other hand, he doesn’t want to pretend history didn’t happen and that baseball hasn’t been filled with cheaters forever. What to do?

This year he decided to abstain altogether. A fair and noble act if one is as conflicted as Livingston happens to be. Except . . . he didn’t actually abstain:

Major league baseball will confer bronzed immortality on a few players Wednesday when the results of the national baseball writers’ balloting for the Hall of Fame will be announced.

I had a 2017 ballot. I returned it signed, but blank, with an explanatory note.

A blank ballot, signed and submitted, is not an abstention. It’s counted as a vote for no one. Each “no” vote increases the denominator in the calculation of whether or not a candidate has received 75% of the vote and has gained induction. An abstention, however, would not. So, in effect, Livingston has voted against all of the players on the ballot, both PED-tainted and clean, even though it appears that that was not his intention.

This is the second time in three years a Cleveland writer has had . . . issues with his Hall of Fame ballot. In the 2014-15 voting period, Paul Hoynes simply lost his ballot. Now Livingston misunderstood how to abstain.

I worry quite often that Ohio is gonna mess up a major election. I guess I’m just worrying about the wrong election.