Notice: Trying to get property 'display_name' of non-object in /var/www/html/wp-content/plugins/wordpress-seo/src/generators/schema/article.php on line 52

My name is Ken Funck, and I live with my wife and two children in Madison, Wisconsin, a wonderful place I didn’t have the heart to leave after getting my English/Creative Writing degree from the University of Wisconsin. I’m a third-generation fan of the Chicago Cubs, but I’m not one of those Cubs fans; I keep score when I go to Wrigley, and I know who Mick Kelleher is. I’ve never written about baseball professionally, I don’t blog, and my journalism experience is limited to (a) selling story ideas to The Onion for $10 a pop in the summer of 1994; (b) editing my high school newspaper; (c) composing analytical pieces for my Strat league; and (d) writing reactionary letters to the editor of our local alternative newsweekly under the pseudonym Alvin P. Blatherson, Sr. (a serial comedy that I like to call “Blather, Rinse, Repeat”).

So, why do I think I have the chops to win the BP Idol contest? First of all, during the day I manage large-scale data warehouse applications for the State of Wisconsin, so I know which end of a statistical database is up. Secondly, I’m a long-time BP subscriber, so I have instant access to the sharpest, most insightful and entertaining baseball analysis in the business. And most importantly, I may be the only entrant who has actually already won a BP writing competition: Derek Jacques‘ 2008 Rock The Vote contest. That submission, a wordy treatise on a faux HoF candidacy metric called CHEERS, managed to win me an autographed copy of BP2K8. Derek was also kind enough to forward me a fan letter sent to the BP Inbox, a goosebump-raising experience I think you can all identify with. I’m more of a generalist than a specialist, so the concept of writing something clever and unique each week on a topic of your choosing is right in my wheelhouse-in Idol terms, I guess that means I’d be comfortable during both “Country Week” and “Pretend I Care About Quentin Tarantino’s Performance Tips Week.” My attached submission is pretty representative of my writing style, which I believe matches well with BP’s general tone-but that’s up to you to decide.

: Seeing Is Believing

When Gary Huckabay boldly declared that baseball analysis is dead, I suspect he hoped to never again see a chart like this:

Most Patient      P/PA  OBP  SLG  OPS   TGF
Nick Swisher      4.53 .332 .410  742  .638
Jack Cust         4.38 .375 .476  851  .618
Adam Dunn         4.32 .386 .513  899  .627
Jason Giambi      4.30 .373 .502  875  .641
Kosuke Fukudome   4.29 .359 .379  738  .630
Bobby Abreu       4.29 .371 .471  842  .644
Curtis Granderson 4.26 .365 .494  859  .638
Mark Reynolds     4.24 .320 .458  778  .619
Mike Cameron      4.24 .331 .477  808  .586
Fred Lewis        4.23 .351 .440  791  .606
Top 10 Avg.       4.31 .356 .462  818  .625

Least Patient        P/PA   OBP  SLG  OPS  TGF
Yuniesky Betancourt  3.15  .300 .392  692 .592
Bengie Molina        3.18  .322 .445  767 .625
Cristian Guzman      3.21  .345 .440  785 .616
Alexei Ramirez       3.27  .317 .475  792 .541
A.J. Pierzynski      3.34  .312 .416  728 .588
Robinson Cano        3.35  .305 .410  715 .548
Vladimir Guerrero    3.37  .365 .521  886 .580
Garret Anderson      3.43  .325 .433  758 .606
Carlos Gomez         3.44  .296 .360  656 .592
Corey Hart           3.47  .300 .459  759 .580
Bottom 10 Avg.       3.32  .319 .435  754 .587

Here we see the most and least patient hitters in the 2008 MLB season, as measured by pitches seen per plate appearance. There’s nothing groundbreaking here – the correlation between plate discipline and performance is well-established, so no one should be surprised that the Jobian approach exhibited by those in the left-hand column resulted in better rate stats than the Plastic Hacktastic Band on the right. Anyone with a browser, a spreadsheet and the dexterity required to hit Control-C could have assembled this chart, which was exactly Gary’s point: after years of slicing and dicing the same ingredients, analysts have teased all the flavor out of historical player performance data, leaving only a nasty gruel.

What’s needed to spice things up is data from outside the normal realm of performance, like that found in the final column of the chart above: TGF. TGF isn’t based on standard performance metrics, but it correlates quite nicely to batter performance – 8 of the top 9 TGF scores in our (admittedly small) sample belong to patient, productive hitters. And best of all, TGF fits neatly into one of the categories of analysis Gary excluded from his obituary: integration of scouting data with performance data. Because TGF is actually a statistical representation of that most hackneyed of scouting clichés: The Good Face.

For decades, many baseball scouts have claimed the mystical ability to identify certain characteristics desirable in a young player by merely studying their facial features. The sabermetrically inclined, especially those outside the industry, have been known to scoff at this claim as just another discredited belief to which “baseball men” cling in a vain attempt to protect their oracular role in an organization. Not only was it impossible to quantify The Good Face, scouts didn’t even seem able to agree on a standard definition, throwing around generic terms like “strength,” “virility,” “maturity,” “determination,” and “square-jawed confidence.” The most unintentionally revealing description comes, perhaps not surprisingly, from Al Campanis: “I never used to sign a boy unless I could look in his face and see what I wanted to see: drive, determination, maturity, whatever.” Huh? See what you wanted to see? Any description that ends with the word “whatever” is by definition both subjective and nebulous. Yet baseball men insisted that they could provide an accurate, objective measurement – but unlike stopwatches or radar guns (famously disdained by the old-timey), the only instrument that could measure The Good Face was available to just a select few: the eye of a veteran baseball scout.

The idea that a prospect’s future could be read on his face strikes many as arrogant, deterministic hogwash. And yet … most of us make similar judgments every day, often based on far less evidence or experience than baseball scouts have available to them. Who hasn’t shied away from the shifty-eyed used car salesman, or sought out the doctor with a caring face? Or drafted a guy in a fantasy baseball league because he “looks like a ballplayer?” The first time I saw Ryan Braun step up to the plate, I noticed something about his eyes – they seemed preternaturally focused, hyper-alert. He’d step one foot out of the box between pitches and take a deep breath, widening his eyes as he glanced around, and when he stepped back in his entire presence radiated … okay, I’ll say it. Determination. Square-jawed confidence. Whatever. When I first saw Ryan Braun, I saw The Good Face.

You can find The Good Face in the dictionary, too. It’s hiding there under an assumed name: “Physiognomy, the art of discovering temperament and character from outward appearance.” A subject of intense debate ever since the Greeks first started associating an individual’s traits with those of the animal they most closely resembled, Merriam-Webster cleverly sidesteps the “science or pseudo-science” argument by calling physiognomy an art. Scouts would probably agree with that assessment – art requires an artist (i.e., the scout), whereas science requires a testable, repeatable process. Physiognomy had long fallen into disrepute, likely due to its association with shakier or more insidious fields of study such as phrenology and eugenics. But recently physiognomy has been a popular, promising area of research and is likely to receive some votes for Comeback Discipline of the Year. So why not try and apply the same facial analysis techniques used to predict creditworthiness and business success to the problem of predicting player performance?

Happily, one recent study links an oft-desired athletic trait (aggressiveness) to a specific, measurable facial feature. The researchers are from Canada (where The Good Face looks like this), so the study naturally involves hockey and seems to indicate that players with higher facial width-to-height ratios tend to spend more time in the penalty box – the study’s proxy for aggressive behavior – than those with lower width-to-height ratios. So if we assume that “aggressiveness” is a desirable characteristic in a baseball player, akin to “strength,” “virility,” “determination,” and “whatever,” there would seem to be an easy way to provide an accurate, objective measurement of a player’s likelihood to possess that desirable characteristic: obtain the player’s facial measurements.

And that’s exactly what the TGF metric in the chart above represents: the facial width-to-height ratio for the 10 “most aggressive” and 10 “least aggressive” hitters in MLB. Obviously my calculation method for this isn’t optimal. Since I’m just some random guy and the Angels aren’t about to let me walk up to Vlad Guerrero and stick a ruler in his face, I had to rely on photographs of each player which I then cropped and measured to come up with the appropriate ratio. Rigor, schmigor – it’s good enough for a quick thumbnail sketch, sample size be damned.

The interesting thing about TGF in the chart above, beyond the fact that it actually seems as if it might correlate to pitches per plate appearance, is the fact that high TGF (which indicates greater aggression) coincides with seeing more pitches per at bat, not fewer. Players that put balls in play earlier in the count, and don’t walk much, are traditionally described as “aggressive” hitters. But TGF seems to be saying the opposite — aggressive hitters actually work deeper counts, relying on a more controlled aggression to wait for a pitch they can really attack. Perhaps this means players with lower TGF lack the “square-jawed confidence” to take a less hittable pitch for a strike because they’re worried they won’t see a more hittable pitch later. Perhaps they swing out of fear, not aggression. Or perhaps I’m just talking out of my … heinder, tuchas, whatever.

If the TGF metric does in fact correlate to better plate discipline, and thus greater production, maybe The Good Face actually does exist. Maybe TGF is one component of it, and maybe scouts have a finely-honed sense of proportion which registers just by looking at a kid. Or maybe not. But as for Ryan Braun, his TGF score is 0.696 – higher by far than anyone else in the chart. Sometimes you really should just believe what you see.

Thank you for reading

This is a free article. If you enjoyed it, consider subscribing to Baseball Prospectus. Subscriptions support ongoing public baseball research and analysis in an increasingly proprietary environment.

Subscribe now
You need to be logged in to comment. Login or Subscribe
Nice job! And the creativity is high enough to prove that I was right not to apply to this competition.

I live on Stevens St, by the way. Can I buy you a beer sometime? I don't know how we can contact each other, but maybe one of the BP editors would be so kind as to send you my email address.

Regardless, I hope to catch your stuff the next time you write into Isthmus.
Awesome article, and to think I just moved out of Madison...
Humor and sarcasm are natural traits that are acquired by those of us that that have had to endure many long winters here in the upper midwest. But I think you might actually be on to something here. I watched Ryan Braun hit that home run - what - a week ago? after the at-bat where the pitcher tried to remove his head, and it reminded me of Mike Singletary at his linebacker spot for the Bears before the snap. Eyes bulging out of their sockets.
And I think Mr. Campanis would only need one look at Manny and see the 'whatever' in him that would make him a legend.
For his next act, he'll correlate TGF with HBP ratios.
Oh and since I didn't say it directly, I loved this article.
Oh as an additional thought, I wonder if Bonds's TGF increased with his hat size... now wouldn't that be an interesting reason to use steroids?
I actually wrote a couple sentences about that (I checked, and it did) -- but it didn't really quite fit with the rest of the piece, so out they went.
I'd be interested in reading them. Win the competition and I'll be able to buzz you directly ;)
"Perhaps this means players with lower TGF lack the "square-jawed confidence" to take a less hittable pitch for a strike because they’re worried they won’t see a more hittable pitch later. Perhaps they swing out of fear, not aggression. Or perhaps I’m just talking out of my … heinder, tuchas, whatever."

I believe Robinson Cano has admitted that a large part of his problems in 2008 stemmed from his being afraid of batting with two strikes on him. Not that he's now a PATIENT hitter (P/PA increased to a whopping 3.55 so far this year).
I suspect that your article has increased by TGF ratio by placing a smile on my face. Fantastic work.
How 'bout this: a wider face suggests wider eye spacing, which in turn suggests better depth perception (ala a hammerhead shark). An "aggressive" face may actually be one that sees better, which would lend itself to being a more patient hitter, confident hitting deep in counts.

Regardless of what happens with BP, you otta blow this baby up and do it for real.
Nice. You had me wondering "What the frak is TGF?". Like looking into Putin's eyes.
I sure didn't see this article coming....good work! This was a fun read!
A fine piece, but one is left wondering where exactly Emilio Bonifacio fits. Is he aptly named? If so, is he going to one day hulk out and become Albert Pujols?
Another guy I looked at, another couple sentences hacked while tightening the piece. Suffice to say Mr. Good Face, at least in TGF terms, isn't.
Very creative article, and fun to read. Thanks.
"Happily, one recent study links an oft-desired athletic trait (aggressiveness) to a specific, measurable facial feature. The researchers are from Canada (where The Good Face looks like this), so the study naturally involves hockey and seems to indicate that players with higher facial width-to-height ratios tend to spend more time in the penalty box – the study’s proxy for aggressive behavior – than those with lower width-to-height ratios."

I imagine the inclusion of Tie "Pumpkin Head" Domi had the potential to skew the results. I wonder how/if they adjusted for this.
The Hanson Brothers had pretty high TGF, too.
Creative, nice style, good structure. The one thing that I'd suggest is that you complicate the notion of Pitches/AB a bit more, as indicated above with the Cano example. After all, as BP has observed in their books, sometimes patience is a feature of adapting to a productive swing that has significant holes in it.
Ehh. Not bad but, well, not entirely successful in being funny.
I'm adding my judging comment to each article:

Funck, Ken -- 7. You know, he almost had me. I'm sitting there wondering what TGF is and then the punch line ... in the middle. Ok, I see what he was going for, but once it gets there, it doesn't go anywhere else. It's a piece that Huckabay -- the obvious influence -- would have knocked out of the park. This guy? Double.
It was a bit karaoke -- it's very difficult to pull off a Gary Huckabay number, and frankly, you didn't. Sorry.

Seriously Will, thanks for posting these -- I suspect everyone (finalists, entrants, readers) have been dying to know what the judges think.
Amen, thanks Will!

I believe I ended up liking this article the most btw. Not only did I find it funny, but I also found it serious and analytical, so it'd fit either of my moods. I also liked how you tied external non-baseball sources into it.
No, it didn't make me laugh out loud, but it was so delightfully written that I enjoyed it more than the previous one I read by Jeff Euston who Will gave a "9". Obviously, we are all different and find different things interesting. Baseball has such a rich variety of ways it can be discussed.
exactly! thats the beauty of the contest ... this is just my opinion and it's the voters (and the quality of the work) that will decide the winner. i liked ken's article, didn't love it, but look forward to seeing what he and the rest do with the theme.

for me, getting a variety of styles was important, but not so much that it went to quota over quality.
Also it seems you're not just judging the article as it is, but the writer's potential as well...
Big fan, liked the angle... if nothing else it's food for thought as to the reason behind it. Proper combo of numbers, prose, and examining a new problem outside the realm of the numbers (the examination of scouting tradition).
Very fun to read!
I was expecting a joke, or a tired ol' "look at the stoopid scouts who don't like stats" thing, and instead, I got some actual analysis of a scout axiom. That surprised me, and I very much enjoyed it.
Fun stuff. Thanks.
I'm reading these in order and this one blows out the first two on the list by a wide margin. This is definitely a BP worthy piece. Good job!
Just wanted to take a second to thank everyone for their comments here -- the feedback has been extremely helpful to me while hacking away at the upcoming Week 1 entry -- and to let you know that I appreciate hearing what you have to say whether its good, bad or indifferent.
Am I the only one who thinks this is terrible? Yeah, I get the joke. The problem is that it's not very funny. It comes off as a tortured attempt by the author to advertise his own cleverness.
I enjoyed this article!