FanGraphs Audio: Dave Cameron Analyzes a World of Baseball

Episode 313
Dave Cameron once again defies belief and analyzes — this week — an entire world’s worth of baseball. Discussed, in particular: baseball’s minimum salary and what it means for competitive balance. Also: how only 88 people attended the China-Cuba game in Fukuoka and what that means for the WBC.

Don’t hesitate to direct pod-related correspondence to @cistulli on Twitter.

You can subscribe to the podcast via iTunes or other feeder things.

Audio after the jump. (Approximately 33 min play time.)

Play



Print This Post



Carson Cistulli occasionally publishes spirited ejaculations at The New Enthusiast.


21 Responses to “FanGraphs Audio: Dave Cameron Analyzes a World of Baseball”

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
  1. Juvenal says:

    The bottom line is the draft should be illegal. The players union is not an effective or relevant party to represent future non-mmeber players’ interests and has consistently conspired with the owners and current players against future players.

    That said there are plenty of areas of the the US policy landscape with more serious injustices.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  2. Pseu says:

    “Dave Cameron Analyzes a World of Baseball and Alienates A Large Proportion of the Listnership by Going On About Politics” was, I suppose, too long to fit in the post’s “title” line?

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • tylersnotes says:

      if a large population of the listenership can hear varied and controversial baseball opinions on a regular basis but can’t handle even a modicum of political opinion that doesn’t support their established beliefs, then perhaps said listeners have alienated themselves.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Pseu says:

        Whether I agree with them or not, I’m here for baseballing discussery, not politics. Others come here for like reasons, I fancy. And anyone who disagrees with me is, basically, spitting bile on the graves of the framers. And founders. So, tylersnotes, why _do_ you hate America?

        Vote -1 Vote +1

        • tylersnotes says:

          America knows what it did, and I’ll be right here when it’s ready to apologize.

          Vote -1 Vote +1

        • m as in mancy says:

          Clearly, Tylersnotes has blood on his hands.

          Vote -1 Vote +1

        • Ewan Ross says:

          Is someone really complaining that Fangraphs Audio is straying off a baseball topic? This is a show that has 2 regular guests, and one of them essentially discusses NOTHING about baseball.

          I’m also totally tired of this internet phenomenon of demanding that shows they voluntarily watch/listen to, but pay nothing for demanding that the content is EXACTLY tailored to what they want. This is seen in people telling a baseball writer who dares to do Tweet something about football or politics or whatever to “stick to baseball” or “I follow you for baseball”. There are two simple solutions to this issue.

          A) either stop listening to this show//following the person on twitter, there are lots of options out there, there is probably something more closely to what you are looking for out there

          Or

          B) just deal with the small divergances off topic, if you find you’ve “wasted” 10 minutes is it really the end of the world?

          Lastly if this is just about you not liking hearing someone articulating opinions that disagree with yours, then whatever you are beyond help, and a website like Fangraphs that prides itself on objective analysis even when it disagrees with your initial premise probably isn’t for you.

          Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Robert says:

        keyword “beliefs”

        opposite of “facts and knowledge founded in logic and tangible evidence”

        Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Robert says:

      I have no idea why people are upset that when someone with so much statistical knowledge accurately breaks down the pros and cons of the current tax system.

      Why is it inherently political to cross swords with the supply-side Reaganomic theories that have been destroyed by decades of data?
      Why is it inherently liberal to state that the discretionary income of the top 40% is factually different than the $100 the bottom 40% might be able to save after a year of saving discretionary income?
      When did cultivating the middle class become a “liberal” value?
      When did helping the poor through incentive welfare and helping the elderly through medical assistance become a “liberal” value?

      Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Pseu says:

        See, this sh*t right here ^^^ is what I’m talking about. Thanks for opening the door, Cameron!!!!!!

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • that guy says:

        Because…nihilo sanctum estne? Is nothing sacred? If I want to learn more about tax policy, I’ll read Krugman or Mankiw. If I want listen to Car Talk, I don’t expect half the show to discuss sous vide pork tenderloin preparation. Frankly, the media landscape is saturated with political commentary right now. A professional and intelligent sabr baseball podcast needn’t be.

        Especially when you consider it’s the first week in March. If you can’t produce an interesting set of baseball topics to discuss now without political digressions…I don’t know what to tell you.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

    • that guy says:

      Thanks for the heads up, Pseu! I’ll be skipping this week. The only thing worse than regular political commentary these days is uninformed political commentary.

      Having said that…tylersnotes is exactly correct. It’s been shown that if you already agree with a political position, it’s easier to assimilate more info on that position–with the caveat that you assimilate material that fits with your preconceived notion of the issue. So, for instance, if you don’t believe in global warming, you seek out and find more info that proves your point and turn your shoulder to anything that contrasts with that belief.

      In this case, if you agree with the premise it’s appropriate for political commentary to be interjected in every facet of life–including a baseball podcast that has gone out of it’s way not to make political points in the past–then these sorts of digressions are not only acceptable, but it’s fine to narrowly disregard and lampoon those who disagree with you because you can’t see any validity to the premise that politics need not overlap with baseball.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

      • tylersnotes says:

        maybe it’s just me but i’m having a harder and harder time detecting the difference between trolling and not trolling. please do me a personal favor and restrict any attempts at satire to comments at notgraphs.

        If you are being sincere here and indeed deciding to not listen to an episode of a podcast you presumably otherwise enjoy (else why would you be here) simply because a proven nationalist cried politics in a comment thread referencing a not-very controversial issue discussed in said podcast and mostly related to the subject of baseball player compensation and rules, then I guess you won’t get to hear the super secret awesome podcast surprise at the end and that’s your loss.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Pseu says:

        Hey thatguy,

        I don’t know you all that well. (Beyond that one time we, well, you know.) But I think you’d enjoy the content of this podcast irregardful of Mr. Cameron’s unfortunate… indiscretion. If my little comment above were to dissuade you from this I would, literally, have blood on my soup bones.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

        • tylersnotes says:

          while i maintain that you are likely a nationalist who blacklists great authors and poets with Charles Lindberg for fun in your spare time, you’re alright.

          Vote -1 Vote +1

  3. jwise224 says:

    On a completely separate note, it will not be 90 in Phoenix when you arrive, Dave, more like high 70′s before some rain rolls in. Sheesh, it’s not always scorching hot here!

    Vote -1 Vote +1

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Current ye@r *