Heart

[brettac1]

Except when they can't perform coherently because they don't give a crap about about anyone else the outcome isn't as efficient as it would if that same talented person had "heart."

 

But how would one demonstrate this? That is the question to ponder, isn't it? I'd like to believe that it exists and has a correlation to winning, but no one can prove it to me. Until they do, color me unimpressed.

[rwa12]

So you advocate team meetings to make sure everyone "gives a crap about anyone else"? Sing kumbaya, group hugs and flowers? Brettac already made the statement about Schilling being a jerk, and no one really caring. Do players have to like each other to succeed? This one I would love to see proven

[brettac1]

Look at the Oakland teams of the 1970's they won 3 World Series in a row, and many of them despised each other. Rollie Fingers and Blue Moon Odom got in a fist fight in the locker room, for cripes sakes. Does anyone honestly think that the great Yankees teams in the 90's got along with all the egos on the team?

[bjamesw22]

Please tell me how the recent "Dream Teams" continue to get steamrolled while having the most talent of any of the other teams BY FAR, even without the Shaq's and Kobe's.

 

They are all individualized jerks who have no idea what a team is and only play for themselves.

 

How did the Pistons win the NBA championships? There is no way they had the most talent.

 

Teams who primarily consist of individualized jerks lose in the end because the trainwreck happens when it matters most.

[brettac1]

These are completely different sports. When does a baseball player pass the ball to his teammates? Baseball and basketball are apples and oranges. Just like baseball and football are.

[bsglorydays]

There will probably never be a team that is full of heart. But, without "heart", there are players that would have never made it. Brady Clark could have given up a hundred times by now. David Eckstein was never going to be a good player, he was way too small and everyone could see it. Jim Abbott can't field his position, he only has one hand. You know what, Eckstein has had and Abbott had an excellent career.

 

"Heart" has far more impact on individuals than it has on teams, IMO. But, to think that it doesn't matter in a big league locker room if a player shows "heart" or not is a bit silly too.

[brettac1]

Maybe it wasn't their heart, but rather their talent, and some teams were smart enough to realize it, which I think was the case with Clark. He was an undervalued guy that got on base a bunch, much more than he was a guy with heart.

[bjamesw22]

When does a baseball player pass the ball to his teammates?

 

When he puts himself in scoring position.

When he gets the runner on first to second with less than 2 outs.

When he hustles and stretches a single into a double.

When he advances an extra base on a bobbled ball in the OF.

When he takes an extra base when a fielder is non-chalant with the ball and doesn't pay attention to the runner.

When he does the hidden ball trick and it works. (Had to give Lowell his props, it was genius)

When he dives for a fly ball instead of letting it drop in front of him without an attempt.

When he backs up the center fielder on a gapper he's diving after.

When he calls off players on a pop up to avoid a collision.

When he beats out a throw to first that he wouldn't have if he didn't sprint his all.

When he sprints around the bases when he hits a fly ball and no one is on or when there is 2 outs.

When he sprints to first on a PB ball 4.

When he hustles to the ball in the OF and get's it in so the runner can't advance.

When he sacrifices his body and knocks the ball down and keeps it in the infield on a hard hit infield grounder.

 

 

Should I go on? It's called "heart."

[DuWayne Steurer]

Being in the "stathead" crowd, I'll admit that "heart" or "grit" exist, yet in an unquantifiable state. I'll admit it readily.

 

What kills me, is day in and day out, people on here and other forums claiming as fact that "this team has no heart" or "there's no fight in this team"

 

Ain't a guy here (aside from the lucky few who work in the organization) who know how much effort is being given, or how much they "want to win". No one here knows what's in the mind of those guys, and shouldn't be claiming to know. "This team has no heart" is a blanket statement, and a ridiculous one at that.

 

So we lost to the Cardinals bench. This is freakin' baseball. 162 games. GOOD teams LOSE to BAD teams now and then. It happens. And we're not even a GOOD team, we're a *mediocre* team. It doesn't mean we "threw in the towel" or "didn't care", or (sigh) "have no heart". It means it was one of those days, that are BOUND to happen over a 162 game schedule.

 

I swear to god I've read on here that of our 118 games this year, about 80 of them were "must win" games, and that if they didn't win the "must win" game in question, then the team has (yeah, you guessed it) NO HEART!

 

I don't know how hard Bill Hall is trying. Or Damian Miller, or Chad Moeller. I'm not going to CLAIM to know. And I won't claim to know how important "heart" is in determining wins and losses, because nobody knows, let alone li'l ol' me.

[brettac1]

Should I go on? It's called "heart."

 

Looks to me like those are just normal events in a game that every player is involved in.

 

When he dives for a fly ball instead of letting it drop in front of him without an attempt.

 

Sometimes, this is called "stupid", especially if no one is behind you.

[Brian the Automator]

[ When he puts himself in scoring position.

When he gets the runner on first to second with less than 2 outs.

When he hustles and stretches a single into a double.

When he advances an extra base on a bobbled ball in the OF.

When he takes an extra base when a fielder is non-chalant with the ball and doesn't pay attention to the runner.

When he does the hidden ball trick and it works. (Had to give Lowell his props, it was genius)

When he dives for a fly ball instead of letting it drop in front of him without an attempt.

When he backs up the center fielder on a gapper he's diving after.

When he calls off players on a pop up to avoid a collision.

When he beats out a throw to first that he wouldn't have if he didn't sprint his all.

When he sprints around the bases when he hits a fly ball and no one is on or when there is 2 outs.

When he sprints to first on a PB ball 4.

When he hustles to the ball in the OF and get's it in so the runner can't advance.

When he sacrifices his body and knocks the ball down and keeps it in the infield on a hard hit infield grounder. ]

 

All of these things are great, but they don't hold a candle to talent. What do they get you, 2 wins a year?

 

I'm with most everyone else here. "Heart" exists, and some players have it. However, I think talent is FAR more important. Obviously, there are people who are clubhouse cancers, but i'll take an Edgar Renteria (who I would consider having "neutral heart") to a David Eckstein (who many consider having "maximum heart") hands down.

[bjamesw22]

Looks to me like those are just normal events in a game that every player is involved in.

 

That statement couldn't be farther from the truth. Not every player, or even close to every player has the heart to do these things day in and day out. If I had a dollar for every time I saw a play and shook my head saying, "how can a professional baseball player be so lazy" I'd be rich.

 

Sometimes, this is called "stupid", especially if no one is behind you.

 

Depends on the situation. What I'm talking about are the players who won't dive no matter what the situation was. Like how everyone would complain that Ben Grieve would let balls drop right in front of him without even trying.

[NlGHTWlNG]

Like how everyone would complain that Ben Grieve would let balls drop right in front of him without even trying.

 

Defensive skills are a talent. As Grieve(who is the man) showed us, players who don't have defensive skills sometimes cost a team some hits, however those defensive skills can be quantified. It wasn't heart that was preventing Grieve from playing good defense, it was his lack of speed and judgement.

[bjamesw22]

All of these things are great, but they don't hold a candle to talent. What do they get you, 2 wins a year?

 

How can you say how many wins it gets you?

 

Put it this way, talent levels equal, I'll take the team who has "heart" over the prima donas(?) every time. And I'd say that the difference between the two would be 10 games or more.

 

How much talent "heart" overcomes is another matter altogether. I don't think a team of all Bonds could be overcome by a team of all Ichiros for example.

[bjamesw22]

It wasn't heart that was preventing Grieve from playing good defense, it was his lack of speed and judgement.

 

You're going to honestly tell me that Grieve didn't have the talent to dive after any of those balls that dropped 3 feet in front of him while he was slowly jogging towards it? Come on now. Besides the point that he WAS horrible out there, his lack of heart definitely added to his suckiness.

[NlGHTWlNG]

The problem I have with "Heart" is that it is thrown around too frivolously. It's usually qualifing why a player, who isn't that talented, is allowed to play. Players like Vlad, Pujols, Cabrera, and Dunn aren't usually considered "hard workers", but are great players. Usually, the Brady Clarks, David Ecksteins, Doug Mientkiewiczs, Darin Erstads, Henry Blancos of the world, get labeled "hard workers" with a lot of "heart".

 

I do believe heart exists, I just don't think, as others have pointed out, that it plays that much of a role in Baseball. Most things in baseball can be quantified, and if a player takes plays off, stats will show us those things. Until someone can show how "heart" effects the game, I just can't see it being that important.

You're going to honestly tell me that Grieve didn't have the talent to dive after any of those balls that dropped 3 feet in front of him while he was slowly jogging towards it?

 

Yes, and he wasn't slowly jogging...he is slow.

[H0FFY]

What do they get you, 2 wins a year?

 

I would guess the number is higher, but if it were only two, I would love to be only 4 1/2 back today.

 

One thing that I did not read was that 'heart' makes you understand every moment of the game and TRAINING is important. You practice and play every moment to you highest ability MENTALLY so that when the tight situation comes alone you are MENTALLY fit for it.

 

I think the tone of this team is too up and down (dont laugh, I know the feeling). They lack heart in applying their skill every chance they get. Then when they get into a pressure situation, they can collapse from nerves.

 

I dont want to recap all the situations.

 

Actually, and they can crazily feed off one another - and they have had a couple of freaky comebacks.

 

But I would rather they apply heart (every moment is important) to each task they do and depend on their skill level. Heck, you can even then link heart (apply yourself always in every situation without panic) to confidence.

[NlGHTWlNG]

Actually, and they can crazily feed off one another - and they have had a couple of freaky comebacks.

 

From the way I look at it, those are the laws of averages at work, and not "heart". The "feast and famine" is just everything evening out for the team. We can't sustain the highs, or the lows. Just as the Nationals finally started losing games, because they couldn't sustain that type of winning, not because the lack "heart". They just weren't talented enough. The answer to the Brewer's question is simply acquiring more talent.

[bjamesw22]

and if a player takes plays off, stats will show us those things.

 

Really? How?

 

If a player doesn't get the extra base on a bobbled ball in the outfield, how is that shown?

 

If an OF doesn't hustle to the ball in the OF and get it in as fast as possible and the guy gets a double, how is that shown in the OF's stats?

 

If an OF doesn't go all out for a ball in the OF and it drops right in front of him without giving any effort to make a tough play, how is that shown in his stats?

 

If a player doesn't get the guy over to 2nd with less than two outs, how is that shown in his stats?

 

etc.

etc.

etc.

 

The fact is, laziness does NOT show up in stats.

[NlGHTWlNG]

If a player doesn't get the extra base on a bobbled ball in the outfield, how is that shown?

 

He gets a single instead of a double. SLG is lower.

 

If an OF doesn't hustle to the ball in the OF and get it in as fast as possible and the guy gets a double, how is that shown in the OF's stats?

 

His range factor would be lower.

If an OF doesn't go all out for a ball in the OF and it drops right in front of him without giving any effort to make a tough play, how is that shown in his stats?

 

Again, his range factor would be lower.

 

If a player doesn't get the guy over to 2nd with less than two outs, how is that shown in his stats?

 

I, personally, do not know of a stat that quantifies this situation, however I'm sure MLB does keep track of something like that. edit: actually wouldn't that just be the productive out stat?

 

The fact is, laziness does NOT show up in stats.

 

You're partially right, but that doesn't dispute the fact that it doesn't effect the game that much, if at all.

[ja002h]

Exactly why the US "Dream Team" got rocked. All individual performance, no team.

 

Not to get too far afield, but they lost because it was a horribly put together team, and LB refused to play LeBron, Wade, and Anthony just cuz they're youngsters.

 

And it's ludicrous to say that the first Dream Teams won because of heart.

[bjamesw22]

He gets a single instead of a double. SLG is lower.

 

No it wouldn't, it would have been a single with an error.

 

His range factor would be lower.

Again, his range factor would be lower.

 

I think most if not everyone here agrees that range factor is a horrible stat that has huge flaws.

 

I, personally, do not know of a stat that quantifies this situation, however I'm sure MLB does keep track of something like that. edit: actually wouldn't that just be the productive out stat?

 

Well then show me a productive out stat that is used.

 

You're partially right, but that doesn't dispute the fact that it doesn't effect the game that much, if at all.

 

Really? How can you determine what the impact one of these events has on a game? A guy getting to second instead of staying at first with two outs is a HUGE difference that can cost a ballgame. Or conversely, a player on your team hustling and getting to second instead of holding at first can win you a ballgame. "Heart" has a lot bigger importance than most people give it credit for, ONE of these instances can win or lose a ballgame. If you look at each of these as an individual event, no they don't seem significant. But when you don't know what could happen if they worked out positively for your team how can you determine that? And these things can only help you win, not hurt you. That's the kicker.

[pogokat]

you can't judge a person's heart by how they play..

 

maybe ben grieve let balls fall in front of hm because he sucked in the outfield

 

In atlanta, there are a lot of people who hate andruw jones because he is "lazy"...well who the heck are you to say that??? you don't know andruw, you don't know anything about him...all you know is what you've seen

 

that's obscene

 

Sure, heart probably plays in somewhere...but i think 99% of guys in the mlb are doing everything in their worldly power to stay major league ball players...to say that they don't have heart is ridiculous

 

and btw, the brewers lose games and are under .500 because the other teams have better ball players than them

[brettac1]

Well then show me a productive out stat that is used.

 

There was one, the link is in the "Productive Outs" thread, but ESPN quit tracking it when they realized that the teams that were at the top of productive outs were in the bottom of runs scored, and vice versa. It was basically a useless stat, that again had no correlation to winning.

[NlGHTWlNG]

Really? How can you determine what the impact one of these events has on a game?

 

I'm not going to keep debating this, because you have a point of view which isn't going to change. Manny Ramirez is widely considered lazy, but he is one of the best players in the last 20 years. He produces. All that should matter in baseball is if you can produce. Ty Cobb beat up a man with no arms, and yet he was still a great ballplayer. It's fine if you want to think that the game is more emotional, but that's your opinion, and I'll have mine.