ShareThis

Player		Team	AVG	OBP	SLG	OPS	OPS+
#Erick	Aybar	LAA	0.298	0.311	0.397	0.708	94
Yadier	Molina	STL	0.296	0.354	0.400	0.754	99
Jason	Kendall	MIL	0.293	0.376	0.379	0.755	99
#Randy	Winn	SFG	0.287	0.326	0.364	0.690	82
*Adam	Kennedy	STL	0.287	0.342	0.337	0.679	81
Billy	Butler	KCR	0.286	0.351	0.368	0.719	97
Julio	Lugo	BOS	0.285	0.348	0.341	0.689	87
*Juan	Pierre	LAD	0.281	0.360	0.326	0.686	80
*Left-handed
#Switch-hitter
Minimum 100 plate appearances

ShareThis

Player			Team	AVG	OBP	SLG	OPS	OPS+
*Nick	Johnson		WSN	0.226	0.420	0.443	0.863	128
*Jack	Hannahan	OAK	0.244	0.402	0.372	0.774	123
#Carlos	Beltran		NYM	0.246	0.377	0.444	0.821	118
*Jason	Giambi		NYY	0.177	0.333	0.458	0.791	117
*Jim	Thome		CHW	0.214	0.353	0.429	0.782	112
*David	Ortiz		BOS	0.240	0.341	0.427	0.768	106
Evan	Longoria	TBR	0.223	0.324	0.415	0.739	105
Chris	Young		ARI	0.238	0.335	0.470	0.805	105
Mark	Ellis		OAK	0.242	0.328	0.379	0.707	101
Brandon	Inge		DET	0.227	0.340	0.386	0.726	100
*Left-handed
#Switch-hitter
Minimum 100 plate appearances

It’s interesting that a majority of the players can bat from the left side.

ShareThis

About the former, Buzz Bissinger is a jackass: this isn’t news. To take his commentary seriously is to think that Michael Moore and Bill O’Reilly have something interesting to say. (If I have insulted one of your intellectual heroes, I’m not sorry.) The real issue was Costas allowing Bissinger to behave that way on his show and not moderate the discussion. I don’t watch his show—I don’t have HBO for fear of stumbling across pornography—but if this is how he normally hosts discussions the show must be awful. Anyway, my point is that this was a set-up by Costas, and he deserves most of the blame for allowing Bissinger to behave like that. All Will Leitch could do was stare in awe at the spectacle like the rest of us. The proper response would have been to turn to Costas and say, “are you going to allow this?” If he then acknowledged that Bissinger’s commentary was worthwhile, he would have been justified in walking off the set.

As for Capital Punishment leaving the blogoshpere, I know how Chris feels.

I’ve done plenty of writing these last few years. Lord knows how many books I’ve essentially written. And finding new things to say is tough. (I’d say ‘interesting’ things, too, but that’d imply that half my posts were!)

It’s time to move on.

First, congrats to Chris on a great run. One of the things I like about blogs is that it is easy to get highly-specific commentary. I often get asked what blogs I read. Aside from a few big ones, I’m normally bouncing around to get local commentary. When the Nats make a trade, Capital Punishment would be one of my first stops.

Second, I get this same feeling every so often. Normally, it comes when I’ve got a lot of other distractions in my life. I have considered shutting down at times, but I can’t bring myself to do it. Right now, I’m having one of those slow times. But, I can’t walk away. I fear that the day I commit to stopping, something will happen that I will want to comment on. This is why I love blogging: you’re not required to say anything, but you always have an outlet say something that you want to be said. Some people run their blogs like regular publications, with commitments to post every day. I can’t do this, or if I did, then I would have to stop. It’s the lack of requirement or deadline that keeps it enjoyable. I know this might be frustrating to readers, but I just cannot worry about that. It’s like my father-in-law who refinishes furniture as a hobby. He won’t accept payment for valuable work, because the activity loses the fun.

Now, if someone paid me to do this regularly, I might not be so turned off by a schedule—I might actually feel the need to do a better job at proof-reading. But, right now, I’ll just ride out the slow times like I normally do. When inspiration strikes, I blog; otherwise, I’ve got plenty of other stuff I need to be doing. And thanks to those of you who stick around. Just because I don’t write all the time, doesn’t mean I don’t appreciate you.

ShareThis

Speculation has the starting parameters at five years and $60 million, but whatever it turns out to be, Boras said it is not weighing on Perez.

So, I decided to estimate Perez’s future worth. Assuming that 2007 represents his accurate level of talent for his age-25 season, from 2009–2013 Perez can be expected to generate $54.7 million in revenue.

Five years and $60 million? I don’t think so. Even with the ridiculous assumption that 2007 represents Perez’s true ability, he is still not worth that much. In 2005 and 2006, he was worth about $1.5 million and $2.5 million, respectively. Five years and $30 million is more like it.

Addendum: Thanks to Baseball Musings for the initial pointer.

ShareThis

The most basic question about stadiums, arenas, and sports franchises is the extent to which they contribute to the vitality of the local economy. Supporters of publicly financed stadiums argue that the benefits are substantial, while opponents say they are small and highly concentrated among the wealthiest citizens. To buttress their case, supporters mostly use economic impact studies that predict how the local economy will be affected by the stadium, while opponents compare the economy before and after the facility is constructed. Supporters tend to imply that redistribution of economic activity from the suburbs or outlying areas of a city to the downtown is desirable, while opponents generally oppose this sort of redistribution and focus instead on job and income creation.

The typical economic impact study gathers data on all aspects of spending related to a stadium, including the money spent to build it and the money spent by fans in connection with the stadium (including on tickets, at restaurants, and at hotels). The impact of this spending ripples outward into other areas of the economy through a multiplier. By linking spending to employment, the study then calculates how many jobs a stadium has created. It does not perform a cost-benefit analysis, which would address the opportunity costs of raising taxes to pay for a stadium and consider alternative uses of those funds.

Academic researchers have examined the prospective economic impact studies and found a variety of methodological errors in them, all of which raise doubts about the magnitude of the predicted spending and job increases. Other scholars use data from multiple years before and after stadium construction to measure the impact of the stadium. These ex post studies reject stadium subsidies as an effective tool for generating local economic development.

My own research, conducted with economist Brad Humphreys (who is now at the University of Alberta), has used perhaps the most extensive data, incorporating yearly observations on per capita personal income, employment, and wages in each of the metropolitan areas that was home to a professional football, basketball, or baseball team between 1969 and the late 1990s. Our analysis tried to determine the consequences of stadium construction and franchise relocations while controlling for other circumstances in the local economy. Scholars Robert Baade, Allen Sanderson, Victor Matheson, and others have taken slightly different approaches, but the results are fairly constant from one analysis to another. There is little evidence of large increases in income or employment associated with the introduction of professional sports or the construction of new stadiums. (Emphasis added)

ShareThis

But, there is also some very good news regarding Francoeur’s performance at the plate. His strikeouts are way down. Last year, he struck out in 18.5% of his plate appearances. In March and April of this season he struck out in only 7.5% of his plate appearances.

ShareThis

A six-story hotel on Financial Center Way, part of a large complex that will include a conference center, offices and restaurants, has received permission to begin construction.

Panorama Hospitality will be building the Hilton Garden Inn on the street near the Mall of Georgia, across Interstate 85 from where the new Gwinnett Braves AAA stadium will be constructed in time for opening day next spring.

But, before you get too excited that this is the product of development policy…

Previously, developers said they had not known about the stadium when they decided to put two six-story hotels on Financial Center Way’s 3100 block, but that they were excited by the additional source of guests.

Remember this when the numbers from the project are included in estimates of the Gwinnett Braves’ economic impact.

ShareThis

ShareThis

There is no denying that the percentage of Americans-Americans in baseball has declined over the past few years. A recent report The 2008 Racial and Gender Report Card: Major League Baseball by Richard Lapchick with Nikki Bowey and Ray Mathew has documented this trend over the past few years. The report is an excellent source of data on the recent racial trends in baseball.

The game has the lowest percentage (8.2) of African-Americans in the two decades that we have published the Report Card. That number is less than half what it was in 1997 on the 50th anniversary of Robinson’s debut with the Dodgers, when African-Americans made up 17 percent of the players, and less than the percentage of blacks in the general population of the U.S. (12.3 percent).

I understand that this is disappointing, but the overall trend of African-Americans and Latinos is positive. When we look at African-Americans and Latinos together, the percentage of non-whites rose from 1991 until 1997. And a large contingent of Latinos includes players who would have been considered black during MLB’s days of segregation.

In fact, the percentage of players who are white has dropped substantially since 1991.

According to the Report Card:

MLB has been remarkably consistent in terms of the percentage of white players. Between the 1997 and the 2007 seasons, 58-60 percent of the players have been white in each season.

Yes, but this is misleading. Look at what happened from 1991–1996. In 1991 68% of major-league players were white. The percentage of white players slowly decreased until 1997 when it reached 58%. (Aside: What the heck happened in 2004? It looks to be an outlier, and it is hard to tell because the 2003 data is not reported in the study. I am suspicious of a data-gathering problem, but it is also within the realm of random fluctuation.) It seems that both black and white players are being replaced by Latinos. Now, some of these Latinos are Americans, but many of them are immigrants who were groomed in training camps in their home countries. Teams have found it cheaper to rely less on the amateur draft and sign players whom they can identify before other teams. Because of the relative poverty to US and Canadian players, these players are a cheap substitute.

But, we really already knew this. I am still curious why African-American participation has declined in the past decade, while white participation has stayed the same. A discussion of potential explanations for the black-white racial gap in baseball follows.

Population Size
First, let’s look at the simplest explanation. Could it be that the population of baseball-age African-American men has decreased relative to white males? The graph below maps the percentage of U.S. males ages 25 to 34 for African-Americans and whites.

The white percentage is actually decreasing while the African-American percentage increasing. However, the change is small for both races. So, let’s cross this explanation off our list.

Brawn Drain
The most popular theory that I hear is that African-American athletes are choosing to play football and basketball over baseball. The popularity of these sports in the 1980s and 1990s—along with the success of a few notable black athletes—caused young African-Americans to choose these sports. But this theory has one big problem, according to the Racial Report Cards for the NFL and NBA, there hasn’t been much change in racial make-up since 1991. In the NBA, African-Americans have typically comprised 75% of the league. In the NFL, African-Americans have comprised 66% of the league.

The competing leagues lack MLB’s trend of declining African-American participation, which indicates that what is affecting baseball’s racial make-up is not affecting the NBA and NFL. More important is the fact that these sports do not appear to be substitutes for baseball. African-American athletes don’t appear to be abandoning baseball for the other major American sports leagues. Some athletes may choose other sports, but those who don’t play football and basketball, choose to do something other than play baseball.

Wealth
One difference between white and African-American communities is wealth. Could the difference in wealth affect the ability of these two groups to play baseball? It is possible that baseball requires more financial resources than other sports; thus, African-Americans, who are poorer than whites on average, are crowded out from playing baseball.

Looking at both the past—when current baseball players may have made an early decision to shun baseball—and present, there does not appear to be any obvious changes financial differences that might explain the fluctuation of the racial gap in baseball participation. Though African-Americans are less wealthy on average, the changes in wealth track the changes in whites closely over time.

Community Support
Another possible explanation is that playing baseball requires greater community involvement than other sports. Basketball involves a small number of participants, a hoop, and a ball. Community and school leagues are widespread. Organizing full-fledged football is a bit more complicated than basketball, but simple games of touch football are quick and easy to organize. The strong support in schools, with weekly games also serving as an important social gathering, may also contribute to the popularity of the sport.

While baseball can be played on a sandlot, it is not as easy to self-organize as basketball or football. Though I always loved baseball and played in organized leagues until I was 14, I don’t recall a single informal neighborhood game. The biggest obstacle is the need for an umpire. I played numerous pick-up basketball and football games despite never playing in an organized league. If a community lacks the resources to organize local youth leagues, as well as travel leagues for exceptional adolescents, then potential baseball players may not have the opportunity to play baseball. And because of a lack of early exposure, even athletes who wash out of basketball and football don’t have an interest in playing baseball.

What measures might we use to measure community support? The General Social Survey has a few questions about sports participation, but I could only find one that is captured over time: Membership in Sports Club. The graph below plots the responses by race over time.

The dotted and dashed curves represent quadratic fits of the data. Participation in sports clubs has been dropping for both races, with the biggest drop-off beginning in the late-1980s. This could explain the drop in baseball participation for both African-Americans and whites, but it doesn’t say much about the disparity between the groups. Anyway, I’m not even sure what a “sports club” really means, but it includes participation in all sports, not just baseball. I’m not sure that this survey information provides a good measure of community support, but it was the best that I could find.

Family Support
Similar to the need for community support, it is possible that family support is important for supporting a athletic activity. The demands for family participation may be greater in baseball than for other sports, because of higher costs of organization for baseball, relative to other sports. If there are changes in family structure that may hinder family support, then this could affect participation in baseball.

Below, I list two graphs of family characteristics by race. The first lists out-of-wedlock births by race; the second lists the percentage of 16-year-olds living with both parents. The marker labels indicate the average year at which youth in each cohort will make their major-league debut.

There is a noticeable difference in out-of-wedlock births for African-Americans beginning in 1965–1969, which includes players who will enter the majors in 1991. The out-of-wedlock birth rate is declining for both races, but there is a bigger drop-off for African-Americans. In terms of living with both parents at age 16, the decline doesn’t fit with the drop-off of African-Americans in the majors.

Differences in family structure might explain some of the difference in baseball participation, but this isn’t a very satisfying explanation all by itself. If I saw a similar divergence in sports club participation, then I might have some more confidence that family and community structure are the main problem—it still might be, I’m just not convinced, yet. Still, I think it highlights the potential importance of MLB’s RBI initiative (Reviving Baseball in Inner Cities), which promotes youth baseball for disadvantaged youth.

School Incentives
Baseball is supported at most middle and high schools, which ought to help make up for deficiencies in providing youth sports opportunities that are not supported outside of school. But I wonder: what incentives to coaches face? At most high schools, football is king, with basketball a close second. A coach who wants to keep his job will steer the best athletes to these sports. In addition, college recruiters have incentives for building strong relationships with high school coaches to encourage students to attend particular schools. In return, recruiters may offer favors to coaches—favors that MLB scouts cannot or will not offer in return.

This would explain the decline in baseball participation for African-Americans and whites, but I’m not sure it explains the disparity. It is possible that black youths are more likely to get a job than play baseball than whites, so that if when these sports fill up, whites go play baseball while African-Americans abandon athletics.

—

As a final note, I wonder why more African-American athletes chose to play football and basketball over baseball. With the minor leagues, the financial payoff is more certain and higher than the other sports, where you must work as an unpaid college athlete before earning a real paycheck. And if education is a concern, it shouldn’t be. MLB offers a scholarship program for any player who signs a minor league contract. You get a scholarship after your playing days are over. Why aren’t we seeing a movement of African-American talent towards the sport with the highest financial returns? I think this question is key to understanding the racial disparity in baseball.

There are just my thoughts on the issue. Nothing really jumps out at me as an obvious cause, nor do I think there is an easy solution. MLB’s current focus on providing support for youth leagues in the inner city is probably a good idea for promoting baseball to African-Americans.

ShareThis