Between this and the Farrell thread it's become clear that many members on this board cannot distinguish between things that are hard to measure and things that don't exist. There were a litany of stories about Middlebrooks being "distracted" by all of his ancillary duties or not recognizing the "urgency" of the position, e.g.
Gammons:
Granted, Middlebrooks has had numerous physical issues from his back to his calf to his current broken finger. But it troubles the people who run the team that when he was diagnosed as needing contacts in spring training, tried them, said he could pick up slider spins for the first time then ditched them because they weren’t comfortable, it was taken as a lack of urgency to establish himself.
or
refusing to play winter ball:
“He’s made a decision that he’s going to focus on other things this winter. He feels he can address what he needs to address without playing winter ball. That’s a decision that he’s made,” said Cherington...“We’re going to present information and what we feel like might be helpful, but ultimately offseasons belong to players, and they need to do what they think is in their best interests,” added Cherington.
Middlebrooks was also injured for much of his time in Boston. I don't know how to partition his failure to stick as a major league baseball player to his injuries, his fundamental lack of skill, or his lack of dedication. Like any professional sport, baseball is a profession that requires absurd athletic ability as well as intense focus and training. Each player contributes varying degrees of each. Half of the ESPN broadcast on Sunday night was dedicated to discussing how much time Papi puts into studying video of opposing pitchers. Article after article has been written about Roger Clemens' or Schilling's notecards. Athletes don't spring fully formed ready to play at the highest level. This sport takes an incredible amount of preparation, both physical and mental.
It's absurd to reject out of hand the idea that some athletes might be more internally driven than others. Or that some athletes might perform better under pressure. Or worse. Or that some managers aren't the right fit for one team. Those are all examples of phenomena that really do actually impact the outcomes of baseball games. The problem is we can't really measure them except indirectly. There is
evidence that the "contract year" phenomenon is real - NBA athletes perform better the year before a big contract, and they perform even worse than average the year after getting the contract. Is that a decline in physical skills or a decline in motivation?
Travis Shaw doesn't strike me as the kind of guy who's going to get comfortable. His story points more to the kind of guy who has struggled all his career to be taken seriously and is going to make the most of his opportunity. Why do I think that? I don't know. The way he carries himself on the field. The articles written about how he thinks about the game. The articles written about how he's already trying to make adjustments to how pitchers approach him.
Can we please stop being lazy about any aspect of the game that isn't directly measurable? "Where's your proof" shuts down the conversation out of hand. There's no proof. There's lines of evidence.
