Tuesday, August 24, 2010
One thing that drives me crazy is when announcers, writers and analysts bemoan a lack of "consistency." Usually, the player subject to such comments is actually quite consistent: consistently bad. In reality, though, this is a completely meaningless comment. Baseball is a game of binary outcomes. You either get on base, or you make an out. You either win, or you lose (and sometimes it rains). Are you asking for the player to do the same thing every at-bat? Or post the same aggregate outcome for each game? And how come consistency is never used with a negative connotation? So the next time you want to say a player needs to develop some "consistency," please instead use the English language correctly and explain that what you really want is to see positive outcomes on a regular basis. Of course, it doesn't sound as smart to say "Adam Jones needs to get some hits," does it?