Breaking Balls

Cheaters?, Part II

by Derek Zumsteg

This probably happens to everyone. After I filed my column for Tuesday, I started to think I'd missed something, that there was one more thing I'd forgotten to look at. The next day, I had the same feeling, so when the column went up, I went back again and there it was, staring me in the face. I started this follow-up immediately, and considering the amount of e-mail I normally get I was stunned that I was able to dive into it a couple hours before a reader sent feedback that nailed the problem exactly:

I found your latest Breaking Balls ("Cheaters", in case it takes a week for you to get to this e-mail) quite interesting. But I also find your conclusion a little odd, especially considering the Red Sox splits at home with RISP. The reason for the drop-off is right in your article:

"Some teams have supposedly gone to always using more complicated signs usually reserved for runner-on-second situations when facing the Sox."

Since RISP usually means a runner on second, teams will switch to the more complex signs. Anyone stealing signs would be more likely to screw up and relay the wrong pitch, or be unable to relay any information at all, either way one would expect a decrease in the hitter's effectiveness. In fact, one could argue that Boston's poor performance in those situations is evidence that they rely heavily on stealing signs. Not that I blame them, it's not cheating after all.

--SL

If I had written a note to myself from today to myself earlier this week, I couldn't have made it any clearer. The flaw in my logic, implied in the article but never outright stated, was this: The Red Sox are a smart team, and if they decide to steal signs, they're going to be able to do it almost all the time.

Oh ho, not so fast. What if the Red Sox, like a particularly bad product manager, "pick the low-hanging fruit" instead of coming up with a complicated system where they have two, three college kids in the stadium decoding the system?

The rest of this article is restricted to Baseball Prospectus Subscribers.

Not a subscriber?

Click here for more information on Baseball Prospectus subscriptions or use the buttons to the right to subscribe and get access to the best baseball content on the web.

Already a subscriber? Click here and use the blue login bar to log in.

0 comments have been left for this article.

No Previous Article

<< Previous Column
Breaking Balls: Cheate... (09/23)

Next Column >>

Breaking Balls: T-Long... (10/10)

No Next Article

RECENTLY AT BASEBALL PROSPECTUS Checking the Numbers: Fielding Distrust Transaction Analysis Blog: Fill'er Up! Prospectus Today: Outfield and Catcher Free ... Prospectus Q&A: Casper Wells Prospectus Today: Starting Pitcher Free Agen... So You Need: Starting Pitching Future Shock: Tigers Top 11 Prospects	MORE FROM SEPTEMBER 24, 2003 Prospectus Triple Play: Baltimore Orioles, C... Prospectus Today: Scoreboard Watching Under The Knife: Here's How Baseball Gets Yo... Can Of Corn: Sharing the Credit
MORE BY DEREK ZUMSTEG 2003-10-16 - Breaking Balls: Ghosts of Pinstripes Past 2003-10-14 - Breaking Balls: Yer Outta Here! 2003-10-10 - Breaking Balls: T-Long Speaks Out 2003-09-24 - Breaking Balls: Cheaters?, Part II 2003-09-23 - Breaking Balls: Cheaters? 2003-09-18 - Breaking Balls: In Search of Better Announce... 2003-09-11 - Breaking Balls: Cotton Eye for the Casual Gu... More...	MORE BREAKING BALLS 2003-10-16 - Breaking Balls: Ghosts of Pinstripes Past 2003-10-14 - Breaking Balls: Yer Outta Here! 2003-10-10 - Breaking Balls: T-Long Speaks Out 2003-09-24 - Breaking Balls: Cheaters?, Part II 2003-09-23 - Breaking Balls: Cheaters? 2003-09-18 - Breaking Balls: In Search of Better Announce... 2003-09-11 - Breaking Balls: Cotton Eye for the Casual Gu... More...