Reasoning from the General to the Specific
Q. Washburn can't be having a career year. Research shows that contract years don't exist.
A. Well, maybe he isn't having a career year. That's just my guess. :- ) I wouldn't bet anything on it that I was afraid to lose.
But this point about false deduction is worth taking a minute.
....................
If the numbers show that the herd of cows, averaged, don't prefer clover to alfalfa, and that just as many cows prefer alfalfa ... we conclude that it cannot be the case that Bessie over there prefers clover?
......................
Just because the MLB universe shows 1.0 ---- > 1.2 when a particular player crosses from AL to NL, let's not conclude that no player individually can do anything other than 1.0 to 1.2. One particular player might actually do better in the AL than in the NL.
..........................
1. Suppose somebody says "Hey, lots of people are moving from Washington to California. They hate Washington."
2. Then somebody studies the issue, and finds that the motion is the other way -- that the common assumption was backwards. Brilliant, sir Guinness!
3. BUT! Then I come along and say, "boy, my mom sure wants to move to California. She's quite the Ah-nold fan."
4. Then the researcher says, "Bah! People don't move from Washington to California; it goes the other way around!"
We have to be very careful about reasoning from the general to the specific. Population trends aren't laws of physics.
...................
Let's not commit the logical fallacy of believing that every generalized MLB trend must apply absolutely to each player individually. That is falling back into the trap of saber-tistic overconfidence and dogmatism.
The research on contract-year performance is SUGGESTIVE. We should keep it in mind, when we see a guy having a "contract year," that many times he just happens to be pitching in good circumstances, and the "contract year" is misleading in his case.
But we should also be alert to the fact that some individuals might still not conform to the generalized trend. This principle is extremely important in sabermetrics.
......................
Present company sincerely excepted!, sabermetrics is full of this kind of stuff. Hey, we found that -- on average -- it doesn't pay to bunt with a man on 1st and 1 out. Hence, having Michael Saunders bunt against Jon Lester last night was really moronic.
We're constantly ignoring 100 little variables, like maybe Saunders can't hit Lester with a paddle, or maybe he was hung over, or maybe the groundskeeper had the grass three inches long so you couldn't find the ball in it, or any of the infinite variables of life.
"It doesn't pay to bunt, 1B, 1 out" is an averaged generalization. The worse the batter/pitcher matchup, whether because of the batter's hangover or whatever, the less the generalization is true.
....................
Sabermetrics would step about four yards forward, if it would be aware that every event is different.
Again, present company excepted. ALL the guys on MC/DOV *do* try to avoid dogmatism and overconfidence. It's a process issue.
....................
True, it might NOT be the case that Washburn is pitching with extra "oomph" -- it might be the case that the cause of his renaissance was the winning -- or competing for his job after Silva got canned -- or whatever.
But wathing THIS ONE pitcher, I don't see an explanation for his radical improvement, other than snapping his pitches off a little better. Lookout Landing chopped Washburn's pitches six ways from Sunday, and saw little difference in the flight of the ball. I conclude (gingerly) that he's more deceptive -- that he's selling his offspeed better, and locating the ball a little better.
.......................
My GUESS is, that Washburn's motivations (whatever they are) are causing him to reach back. And my guess is that these motivations will not last him for three more years after this one.
That's other people's guess, too: that Washburn is a solid pitcher having his career year. Dombrowski said that.
Is the career year luck, or motivation, or what? I don't know, but suspect it's primarily motivation.
We'll see if that's on track.
Cheers,
Dr D