Monday, February 14, 2005
Player Profile: Chase the Glove
Last season, with Polanco injured, the Phillies stuck the highly touted rookie Chase Utley in at second base. Utley played well enough that the Phillies decided to make him their second baseman of the future and attempt to cast Polanco loose, a strategy that backfired when the team offered him arbitration to secure draft picks from the team that would sign him (St. Louis) and he unexpectedly accepted. Despite Polanco’s return as a super utilityman infielder in 2005, the Chase Utley era is about to begin at second base.
How can Utley be expected to perform? How critical is he to the Phillies chances in the increasingly fierce NL East race? Our second player profile takes a look at the other guy the Phillies need to step things up a notch in 2005...
Fielding:
Let’s start with defense. Not an easy subject to measure due to the subjectiveness of determining defensive ability. E.g., A player committing an error might have actually made a great play to get to the ball in the first place, or a player might make few errors because he lacks the range to get to the ball in the first place. It’s a difficult topic to discuss because, unlike hitting and pitching, the outcomes of a play are open to speculation and opinion. (Go read Chapter Four of Moneyball.)
With that in mind I note that Placido Polanco had (has) a reputation throughout the baseball community for having some of the best hands in baseball. The consensus is that Utley is a significant defensive downgrade for the Phillies at second, a judgment I am willing to agree with, though with some reservations:
Here is what Utley and Polanco did on the field in 2004 as second basemen and in other positions (Utley logged some time at first base and Polanco at third):
2004 Fielding Stats (as Second Basemen):
Fielding % / Range Factor / Zone Rating / Innings Worked
Utley: .982 / 4.89 / .864 / 410.1 (28% of team innings)
Polanco: .995 / 5.42 / .816 / 944.0 (65% of team innings)
Team 2b: .992 / 5.23 / .832 / 1,462.2
Other 2004 Fielding Stats (Utley: 1b; Polanco: 3b):
Fielding % / Range Factor / Zone Rating / Innings Worked
Utley: 1.000 / 9.06 / .829 / 104.0 (7%)
Team 1b: .994 / 9.05 / .821 / 1,462.2
Polanco: 1.000 / 3.82 / .868 / 96.0 (6.5%)
Team 3b: .949 / 2.95 / .783 / 1,462.2
What the stats mean...
Zone Rating: Is a stat which measures a player’s defensive ability by measuring plays they should have made. Admittedly, this is a stat left open to subjective opinions.
Range Factor: (Putouts + Assists) * 9 / IP. Essentially measures how much a player is involved in defensive plays.
Fielding Percentage: (Putouts + Assists) / (Putouts + Assists + Errors). How often the player successfully handled the ball.
Zone Rating favors Utley, although the rest of the defense stats favor Polanco and Utley logged less than half of the innings at second that Polanco did so Utley’s numbers might be too small a sample. I think Polanco’s reputation for skill with his glove is well justified. He had logged the innings at second base to qualify, he would have led NL second basemen in fielding percentage and would have been second in range factor. His Zone Rating is actually quite poor (he would have been eighth of ten players), so his injuries clearly affected his ability to get to the ball.
Utley, in contrast, would have led NL 2B’s in ZR (again, lacking the innings to qualify), but would have fared much worse in fielding percentage (seventh of ten) and range factor (ninth of ten). Conclusion: Utley’s younger legs probably helped him get to more balls than Polanco, but Polanco is the smoother fielder. Is this something Utley can improve on in time? I think practice will make him more perfect, but I think the Phillies are getting a definate downgrade at the pivot.
Caveat: As many readers of A Citizen's Blog and other baseball blogs know, Dave Pinto of Baseball Musings recently published a mathematical analysis of players and teams using a computer program to calculate a stat called Probabalistic Model of Range (PMR). Dave's research highly rated Placido Polanco as one of the best second basemen in baseball, but (stunningly) fingered Chase Utley as the MLB's best defensive second baseman. If true, the Phillies are getting a better glove and a better bat at the pivot. Read the results and Dave' methodology here.
2004 Fielding Win Shares:
Utley: 2.0 / 3.9 Fielding Win Shares per 1,000 Innings
Polanco: 5.8 / 5.6 Fielding Win Shares per 1,000 Innings
So let’s assume I’m correct and Utley is a defensive downgrade for the Phillies. What effect does that have on the team? Considerable. As I said months ago in my Season Review, the Phillies need to staff their pitching staff with groundball pitchers. So far, the Phillies have (wisely) moved in that direction. Check out the starting pitching staff’s groundball / flyball ratios:
2005 Rotation:
Wolf: 0.81
Padilla: 1.16
Myers: 1.39
Lieber: 1.43
Lidle: 1.48 (as Phillie, 1.70 as Red)
The departed:
Milton: 0.57
Millwood: 1.12
(Here is a fun stat I got from the Bill James handbook: guess who had the MLB’s worst groundball / flyball ratio in 2004? Eric Milton. Little surprise he pitched poorly at Citizen’s and everywhere else. It makes you wonder what the Reds are thinking, bringing a flyball pitcher to Great American Ballpark in Cincy. What a fiasco that is going to be.)
So in letting Milton and Millwood leave and in replacing them with Lidle and Lieber, two groundball pitchers, the Phillies management have made a smart move: groundball pitchers don’t give up many home runs. Of course, that means that the Phillies infield will be seeing a lot of groundballs in 2005 and so the defensive downgrade at second might be a problem. The Phillies team infield ranked fifth of sixteen teams in 2004 in ZR, a decline over previous seasons when they ranked first (2002) and second (2003). The team infield also ranked fourth in fielding percentage in 2004, declines over their second place finishes in 2002 and 2003. I think we can safely say that the Phillies stellar infield play is largely a product of Polanco and Jimmy Rollins. A Rollins-Utley combo won’t be as productive as Polanco-Rollins, so this begs the question whether Utley will hurt the Phillies pitching and defense in 2005? The answer is probably yes.
But the Phillies are willing to take the chance because of Utley’s bat. Which brings us too …
Batting:
Utley has played just 137 total games in his young MLB career, so it’s hard to evaluate him based on how he’s done so far. Here are his stats from two seasons with the Phillies…
2003: .322 OBP / .373 SLG / 2 HR / 19 RC / 134 AB’s
2004: .308 OBP / .469 SLG / 13 HR / 37 RC / 267 AB’s
Career: .313 OBP / .436 SLG / 15 HR / 56 RC / 401 AB’s
Here are some of the stats I use to evaluate offensive players…
GPA (Gross Productive Average): (1.8 * .OBP + .SLG) / 4 = .GPA. Invented by The Hardball Times Aaron Gleeman, it measures a players production by weighing his ability to get on base and hit with power.
ISO (Isolated Power): .SLG - .BA = .ISO. Measures a player’s raw power by subtracting singles from their slugging percentage.
RC (Runs Created): Measures how many runs a player “creates” for his team. The formula used by Bill James is fairly complex: look at p. 397-398 of the Bill James Handbook.
OBP (On-Base Percentage): How often a player gets on base. (H + BB + HBP) / (Plate Appearances)
SLG (Slugging percentage): how much power a player has in his bat. (Total Bases / AB’s)
Initially I thought that Utley’s 31 appearances as a pinch hitter were responsible for his fairly average 2004 .256 GPA, but then I found out that he had a fantastic year as a PH:
As 1B: .143 GPA (46 AB’s)
As 2B: .265 GPA (190 AB’s)
As PH: .363 GPA (31 AB’s)
I have no idea what happened to him at first base … Anyway, the reason why so many Phillies bloggers are high on Chase is because he is the rare second baseman with power (he would have ranked seventh amongst NL 2B’s in slugging percentage in 2004 had he gotten enough AB’s to qualify) and he tore up pitching in the minors:
Scranton:
2002: .352 OBP / .461 SLG (464 AB)
2003: .390 OBP / .517 SLG (431 AB)
2004: .368 OBP / .512 SLG (123 AB)
If he can improve on his slugging percentage and draw walks with the consistency he did at Scranton, Utley could be a deadly bat in the lower-middle of the Phillies lineup. Most NL second basemen are light-hitting defensive specialists. Chase could be a future fixture at the All-Star game for the Phillies as the NL second baseman with good defense and sterling hitting.
Naturally, we’ll have to assume that with a full year of playing in the majors under his belt, Utley will be a terrific player. Bill James certainly thinks so:
2005 (proj.): .275 BA / .333 OBP / .478 SLG / 24 HR / 36 2B / 103 RBI / 90 Runs Created
Those are pretty good numbers. Better than Polanco’s ’05 projections in many respects:
.295 BA / .335 OBP / .427 SLG / 13 HR / 27 2B / 56 RBI / 76 Runs Created
Negligable difference in OBP, and Utley seems to have more power in his bat. I’d note that Polanco is adjudged a “high” risk for injury (part of the season why Utley played so much in 2003 and 2004), and that Utley is rated a “low” risk of injury.
Here are some more stats comparing the two:
Utley / Polanco
BA RISP: .275 / .270
BA BIP: .271 / .298
P / PA: 3.86 / 3.45
BWS: 5.9 / 11.1
BA RISP (Batting Average w/ Runners in Scoring Position)
BA BIP (Batting Average w/ Balls Put into Play)
P / PA (Pitchers per plate appearance)
BWS (Batting Win Shares)
BWS per 600 AB’s (2004):
Utley: 13.3
Polanco: 13.2
Even now Utley is probably an offensive upgrade on Polanco. If he improves on his batting in 2005, as we all expect he will, he’ll likely be a massive upgrade offensively for the Phillies. The question is can he improve on his ability to draw walks? And, can Utley improve his hitting against left-handed pitching?
2004:
v. Right: .281 BA / .507 SLG
v. Left: .196 BA / .283 SLG
This will be a big test for him in 2005, but I’m confident that Chase will improve at the plate and become a future All-Star selection for the Phillies.
Conclusions: I didn’t intend on my second player profile to be such a comparison piece, but Utley’s performance must be contrasted with Polanco because he was such a cog in the Phillies machine these last two years. Utley could add 12-15 runs to the Phillies already formitable offense right now. Would his presence on the field cost the team as many runs? It is difficult to say, but that is a definate possibility. The key for Chase will be to improve on his defense and evolve into the slugging second baseman we all expect him to be. I have high hopes for him, and I meant what I said about him becoming a perennial All-Star selection. Who are the great NL 2B’s? Jeff Kent? His career is sending. Todd Walker? Good bat, bad glove. Ray Durham and Mark Loretta are both 34 this year. Chase could be one of the top two or three NL 2B’s for years to come.
How can Utley be expected to perform? How critical is he to the Phillies chances in the increasingly fierce NL East race? Our second player profile takes a look at the other guy the Phillies need to step things up a notch in 2005...
Fielding:
Let’s start with defense. Not an easy subject to measure due to the subjectiveness of determining defensive ability. E.g., A player committing an error might have actually made a great play to get to the ball in the first place, or a player might make few errors because he lacks the range to get to the ball in the first place. It’s a difficult topic to discuss because, unlike hitting and pitching, the outcomes of a play are open to speculation and opinion. (Go read Chapter Four of Moneyball.)
With that in mind I note that Placido Polanco had (has) a reputation throughout the baseball community for having some of the best hands in baseball. The consensus is that Utley is a significant defensive downgrade for the Phillies at second, a judgment I am willing to agree with, though with some reservations:
Here is what Utley and Polanco did on the field in 2004 as second basemen and in other positions (Utley logged some time at first base and Polanco at third):
2004 Fielding Stats (as Second Basemen):
Fielding % / Range Factor / Zone Rating / Innings Worked
Utley: .982 / 4.89 / .864 / 410.1 (28% of team innings)
Polanco: .995 / 5.42 / .816 / 944.0 (65% of team innings)
Team 2b: .992 / 5.23 / .832 / 1,462.2
Other 2004 Fielding Stats (Utley: 1b; Polanco: 3b):
Fielding % / Range Factor / Zone Rating / Innings Worked
Utley: 1.000 / 9.06 / .829 / 104.0 (7%)
Team 1b: .994 / 9.05 / .821 / 1,462.2
Polanco: 1.000 / 3.82 / .868 / 96.0 (6.5%)
Team 3b: .949 / 2.95 / .783 / 1,462.2
What the stats mean...
Zone Rating: Is a stat which measures a player’s defensive ability by measuring plays they should have made. Admittedly, this is a stat left open to subjective opinions.
Range Factor: (Putouts + Assists) * 9 / IP. Essentially measures how much a player is involved in defensive plays.
Fielding Percentage: (Putouts + Assists) / (Putouts + Assists + Errors). How often the player successfully handled the ball.
Zone Rating favors Utley, although the rest of the defense stats favor Polanco and Utley logged less than half of the innings at second that Polanco did so Utley’s numbers might be too small a sample. I think Polanco’s reputation for skill with his glove is well justified. He had logged the innings at second base to qualify, he would have led NL second basemen in fielding percentage and would have been second in range factor. His Zone Rating is actually quite poor (he would have been eighth of ten players), so his injuries clearly affected his ability to get to the ball.
Utley, in contrast, would have led NL 2B’s in ZR (again, lacking the innings to qualify), but would have fared much worse in fielding percentage (seventh of ten) and range factor (ninth of ten). Conclusion: Utley’s younger legs probably helped him get to more balls than Polanco, but Polanco is the smoother fielder. Is this something Utley can improve on in time? I think practice will make him more perfect, but I think the Phillies are getting a definate downgrade at the pivot.
Caveat: As many readers of A Citizen's Blog and other baseball blogs know, Dave Pinto of Baseball Musings recently published a mathematical analysis of players and teams using a computer program to calculate a stat called Probabalistic Model of Range (PMR). Dave's research highly rated Placido Polanco as one of the best second basemen in baseball, but (stunningly) fingered Chase Utley as the MLB's best defensive second baseman. If true, the Phillies are getting a better glove and a better bat at the pivot. Read the results and Dave' methodology here.
2004 Fielding Win Shares:
Utley: 2.0 / 3.9 Fielding Win Shares per 1,000 Innings
Polanco: 5.8 / 5.6 Fielding Win Shares per 1,000 Innings
So let’s assume I’m correct and Utley is a defensive downgrade for the Phillies. What effect does that have on the team? Considerable. As I said months ago in my Season Review, the Phillies need to staff their pitching staff with groundball pitchers. So far, the Phillies have (wisely) moved in that direction. Check out the starting pitching staff’s groundball / flyball ratios:
2005 Rotation:
Wolf: 0.81
Padilla: 1.16
Myers: 1.39
Lieber: 1.43
Lidle: 1.48 (as Phillie, 1.70 as Red)
The departed:
Milton: 0.57
Millwood: 1.12
(Here is a fun stat I got from the Bill James handbook: guess who had the MLB’s worst groundball / flyball ratio in 2004? Eric Milton. Little surprise he pitched poorly at Citizen’s and everywhere else. It makes you wonder what the Reds are thinking, bringing a flyball pitcher to Great American Ballpark in Cincy. What a fiasco that is going to be.)
So in letting Milton and Millwood leave and in replacing them with Lidle and Lieber, two groundball pitchers, the Phillies management have made a smart move: groundball pitchers don’t give up many home runs. Of course, that means that the Phillies infield will be seeing a lot of groundballs in 2005 and so the defensive downgrade at second might be a problem. The Phillies team infield ranked fifth of sixteen teams in 2004 in ZR, a decline over previous seasons when they ranked first (2002) and second (2003). The team infield also ranked fourth in fielding percentage in 2004, declines over their second place finishes in 2002 and 2003. I think we can safely say that the Phillies stellar infield play is largely a product of Polanco and Jimmy Rollins. A Rollins-Utley combo won’t be as productive as Polanco-Rollins, so this begs the question whether Utley will hurt the Phillies pitching and defense in 2005? The answer is probably yes.
But the Phillies are willing to take the chance because of Utley’s bat. Which brings us too …
Batting:
Utley has played just 137 total games in his young MLB career, so it’s hard to evaluate him based on how he’s done so far. Here are his stats from two seasons with the Phillies…
2003: .322 OBP / .373 SLG / 2 HR / 19 RC / 134 AB’s
2004: .308 OBP / .469 SLG / 13 HR / 37 RC / 267 AB’s
Career: .313 OBP / .436 SLG / 15 HR / 56 RC / 401 AB’s
Here are some of the stats I use to evaluate offensive players…
GPA (Gross Productive Average): (1.8 * .OBP + .SLG) / 4 = .GPA. Invented by The Hardball Times Aaron Gleeman, it measures a players production by weighing his ability to get on base and hit with power.
ISO (Isolated Power): .SLG - .BA = .ISO. Measures a player’s raw power by subtracting singles from their slugging percentage.
RC (Runs Created): Measures how many runs a player “creates” for his team. The formula used by Bill James is fairly complex: look at p. 397-398 of the Bill James Handbook.
OBP (On-Base Percentage): How often a player gets on base. (H + BB + HBP) / (Plate Appearances)
SLG (Slugging percentage): how much power a player has in his bat. (Total Bases / AB’s)
Initially I thought that Utley’s 31 appearances as a pinch hitter were responsible for his fairly average 2004 .256 GPA, but then I found out that he had a fantastic year as a PH:
As 1B: .143 GPA (46 AB’s)
As 2B: .265 GPA (190 AB’s)
As PH: .363 GPA (31 AB’s)
I have no idea what happened to him at first base … Anyway, the reason why so many Phillies bloggers are high on Chase is because he is the rare second baseman with power (he would have ranked seventh amongst NL 2B’s in slugging percentage in 2004 had he gotten enough AB’s to qualify) and he tore up pitching in the minors:
Scranton:
2002: .352 OBP / .461 SLG (464 AB)
2003: .390 OBP / .517 SLG (431 AB)
2004: .368 OBP / .512 SLG (123 AB)
If he can improve on his slugging percentage and draw walks with the consistency he did at Scranton, Utley could be a deadly bat in the lower-middle of the Phillies lineup. Most NL second basemen are light-hitting defensive specialists. Chase could be a future fixture at the All-Star game for the Phillies as the NL second baseman with good defense and sterling hitting.
Naturally, we’ll have to assume that with a full year of playing in the majors under his belt, Utley will be a terrific player. Bill James certainly thinks so:
2005 (proj.): .275 BA / .333 OBP / .478 SLG / 24 HR / 36 2B / 103 RBI / 90 Runs Created
Those are pretty good numbers. Better than Polanco’s ’05 projections in many respects:
.295 BA / .335 OBP / .427 SLG / 13 HR / 27 2B / 56 RBI / 76 Runs Created
Negligable difference in OBP, and Utley seems to have more power in his bat. I’d note that Polanco is adjudged a “high” risk for injury (part of the season why Utley played so much in 2003 and 2004), and that Utley is rated a “low” risk of injury.
Here are some more stats comparing the two:
Utley / Polanco
BA RISP: .275 / .270
BA BIP: .271 / .298
P / PA: 3.86 / 3.45
BWS: 5.9 / 11.1
BA RISP (Batting Average w/ Runners in Scoring Position)
BA BIP (Batting Average w/ Balls Put into Play)
P / PA (Pitchers per plate appearance)
BWS (Batting Win Shares)
BWS per 600 AB’s (2004):
Utley: 13.3
Polanco: 13.2
Even now Utley is probably an offensive upgrade on Polanco. If he improves on his batting in 2005, as we all expect he will, he’ll likely be a massive upgrade offensively for the Phillies. The question is can he improve on his ability to draw walks? And, can Utley improve his hitting against left-handed pitching?
2004:
v. Right: .281 BA / .507 SLG
v. Left: .196 BA / .283 SLG
This will be a big test for him in 2005, but I’m confident that Chase will improve at the plate and become a future All-Star selection for the Phillies.
Conclusions: I didn’t intend on my second player profile to be such a comparison piece, but Utley’s performance must be contrasted with Polanco because he was such a cog in the Phillies machine these last two years. Utley could add 12-15 runs to the Phillies already formitable offense right now. Would his presence on the field cost the team as many runs? It is difficult to say, but that is a definate possibility. The key for Chase will be to improve on his defense and evolve into the slugging second baseman we all expect him to be. I have high hopes for him, and I meant what I said about him becoming a perennial All-Star selection. Who are the great NL 2B’s? Jeff Kent? His career is sending. Todd Walker? Good bat, bad glove. Ray Durham and Mark Loretta are both 34 this year. Chase could be one of the top two or three NL 2B’s for years to come.
Comments:
I am about to show you a way that you can generate thousands of keyword targeted links back to your web site starting today!
# posted by 
: Friday, October 28, 2005 3:29:00 AM
: Friday, October 28, 2005 3:29:00 AM
Blast Your Ad to 700,000,000+ Members on 400+ Networks
# posted by : Wednesday, November 02, 2005 1:48:00 AM
: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 1:48:00 AM
How to Get Famous -- In only 90 Days!
by Joe Vitale
"I am indebted to the press of the United States for
almost every dollar which I possess..." -- P.T. Barnum,
1891
Charlie Stratton was a little boy who would not grow. He
was destined to be less than three feet tall.
His parents accepted the fact that he would never become
a full sized adult. The neighbors felt sorry for the nice
family and their midget. But no one saw an opportunity for
greatness. No one saw the potential for fame and fortune.
No one, that is, until one man came along in 1842 with an
eye for hidden possibilities. That man was P.T. Barnum.
Barnum taught the child to sing and dance. He taught him
to express himself, to accept how he looked, to feel good
about who he was. He also taught the boy how to charm and
entertain crowds. And he named the young prodigy a name
that still lives today: General Tom Thumb.
Years later, after Tom was rich and world famous, his
Connecticut neighbors would shake their heads and smile.
"We always thought little Charlie was a nice boy but not
very special," many said, "but we never knew he would
become a celebrity until Barnum took him and Barnumized
him."
P.T. Barnum took many people who were talented but
unknown and made them rich and famous. While Jenny Lind
was known as the greatest Swedish soprano in all of
Europe, few had any idea who she was in America. Yet
Barnum hired her, managed her, promoted her, and Jenny
Lind became so famous that 30,000 people met her ship
when it docked in New York in the mid 1800s. Again,
Barnum had practiced the art of "Barnumizing" someone.
And to prove that his techniques worked, when Lind
decided to save money and manage her own concerts
without Barnum's help, her crowds grew smaller. Lind
didn't get media attention. And she returned to Europe
without fanfare. Yet it was the same Jenny Lind that
the crowds had gone wild to see under Barnum's art!
That art is not lost today, of course. Throughout 1997
I smiled whenever I saw an article on the singer Jewel.
Here you have a woman barely out of her teens, with
only one CD released at the time, making front page
headlines and cover stories on national magazines.
Last I heard she had been hired to write her
autobiography (!) and was paid more than a million
dollars for it. Yet Jewel is barely an adult! How is
this happening? Clearly, Jewel is being Barnumized.
And that's how anyone can become famous today. You
need someone skilled in the art of Barnumizing. There
should be a latent talent or trait that can be
publicized, of course, but even that can be gotten
around. Richard Branson, the tycoon founder of many
businesses, including Virgin Records and Virgin
Airlines, Barnumizes himself by creating balloon
flights around the world. Whether he actually succeeds
at the trip doesn't matter. His events bring himself
international publicity. And he is not promoting any
talent except maybe the bold desire to be famous.
I've been personally fascinated by publicity and
publicists since I began researching P.T. Barnum a
few years ago. Here's a taste of some of the people
I've discovered:
* Harry Reichenbach was an audacious silent movies
publicist who made people famous in the early 1900s.
In fact, his incredible creative ideas helped stop
World War I.
* Edward L. Bernays helped make such stars as the
singer Caruso famous. And he got American women to
smoke with a publicity event he helped orchestrate
in 1929.
* And publicists today continue to Barnumize people
like chicken soup authors Mark Victor Hanson and
Jack Canfield. One reason Deepak Chopra remains a
bestselling author is the publicist behind him:
Arielle Ford.
But let's forget actors and actresses, authors and
speakers, singers and celebrities for a moment. What
about the average person? What about you? Can you be
Barnumized? Can you be made famous?
Without hesitation, I say yes. The secret is in
hiring a publicist who knows how to find or create a
news worthy subject out of you or something you do.
There isn't any one way to fame that fits for all
people. Sometimes all you need is one wild event to
draw attention to everything else you do:
* Barnum once showed a preposterous "Fejee Mermaid."
The curious half-monkey-half fish increased his
ticket sales 33%.
* In our own century a circus once displayed a
"Unicorn." While everyone knows unicorns aren't
real, ticket sales increased 55%. Again, the one
publicity stunt drew crowds to see everything else
being offered.
But you don't have to be wild and crazy to get
attention. In an article I wrote titled "Hidden
Selling," I talk about the various people who are
getting rich and famous by sponsoring events that
serve a good cause. Bill Phillips, for example, is
selling people on the idea of getting fit. He gives
away his book, and a video, and holds yearly
contests. He donates his money to the Make-A-Wish
Foundation. All of this is making Bill
internationally famous. How does he make any money?
He sells nutritional supplements. Back this fact is
"hidden." What Bill is doing is getting fame, and
then using that fame to make money. Very, very
smart.
One of the easiest ways to begin to seek fame is to
write a book. You still have to promote the book, of
course, but as an author you have an excuse to get
publicity. That's what Evel Knievel wanted when he
called me. He wanted me to help him write his life
story. He knew that a book could bring him more
fame. (I turned him down.) Many other people know
this fact, too, from Donald Trump to J. Paul Getty
to Madonna, and that's why they write (or hire
someone to write) books for them.
By now you've heard the quote from Andy Warhol that
in the future everyone will be famous for 15 minutes.
My belief is that if you create fame for yourself
that sticks, that fame will be a credential you can
bank on for the rest of your life.
Take Evel Knievel. His publicity stunts Barnumized
him in the 1970s. Yet we still know his name today,
thirty years later. He wedged his name into public
awareness through his fame tactics. And he's still
cashing in on his name. In fact, his name is so
strong that it has helped launch the career of
another daredevil: Evel's own son, Robbie Knievel.
Most people know the name Tom Thumb today, as well.
Why? The fame Barnum created for his little friend
still lives. Fame can do that for you, too. It can
become a lasting advertisement for who you and what
you do. From then on, everything you touch will get
automatic attention. Tom Thumb used to sell toys
and other products. So did Evel Knievel. As a
result of their fame, these otherwise mediocre
products sold. The products weren't important, it
was the name associated with the products. The more
famous the name, the more easily the products sold.
That's why Pepsi hires the latest hot stars to
appear in their commercials. Their fame brings
favorable attention to Pepsi.
But what if you can't afford a publicist? Easy.
What you have to do is become your own publicist
and Barnumize yourself.
Let me explain:
A year or so ago I wrote a news release that helped
make Jeff DeLong---barely 28 years old---wealthy.
The headline read:
50 Ways to Leave Your Lover (or anyone else);
Unusual cards don't greet, say Hit The Streets
Paul Krupin of the ImediaFax news bureau sent it
out by fax and email. As a result, Jeff did twenty
radio interviews the day his release hit. The
Associated Press picked up the story at least twice
and spread the word to the media nationally. The
number of times the story was reprinted is
impossible to tally. But as a direct result, Jeff's
website sales blasted to $20,000 a week.
(A week!)
What made his news release so successful?
1. There was news here.
I didn't have to dig too hard to see that Jeff's
greeting cards were newsworthy in and of themselves.
(You send his c-ya cards out when you *end*
relationships.) Too many people send out news
releases without any news. They are thinly disguised
ads. Editors hate ads. They want NEWS.
2. We tied it to current news.
Valentine's Day was right around the corner. While
Jeff didn't want to tie his release to that event,
I knew that doing so would cause the media to grab
his release. It helped make his news relevant.
Whenever you can tie your product or service to
existing news, you up the odds in being used by the
media.
3. We distributed the release to select media.
Paul Krupin hand picked a list of media contacts.
What you send out has to match the interests of
those receiving it. Don't send artillery news to
an anti-gun newspaper.
You can get publicity for virtually any product or
service. The media is desperate for news. Provide it
and they'll advertise your business. But how do you
find the right news angle? There are at least three
ways: (1) Have news, (2) invent news, or (3) tie
your business to current news.
Jeff's release was an example of one and three. (His
cards were news, and we tied it to Valentine's Day,
which was current news.) Here's an example of number
two: Inventing news.
When Barry Michaels in Australia hired me to write a
release for his clothing store, I had to hunt to
find the news angle. I talked to him and learned that
because he was getting bogus orders online, he
started calling virtually *everyone* who contacted
him. This turned out to be a breakthrough. Customers
were in awe that a retailer in Australia would call
them. Not only did Barry stop the bogus orders, but
he increased his sales with this extra personal
service. So I wrote a news release with this
headline:
Retailer Finds Way to Turn Bogus Orders Into Profit;
Australia teaches the globe how to make money online
As a result, the Investors Business Daily called him.
Since that is a national publication, Barry's news
release will turn into *thousands* of dollars in free
publicity. Very nice.
Finally, let me tell you what I did a few months ago.
In mid-June I bought a mermaid. Yes, a mermaid. P.T.
Barnum had one and I figured it would be cool if I
did, too. It turned out to be a disappointment and I
felt like an idiot for getting it. But then I saw a
publicity opportunity. So I wrote a news release
(using method number two) that began with this
headline:
Barnum Expert Suckered Into Buying "Real" Mermaid;
Discovers curiosity as powerful marketing tool
The response stunned me. The editor of the American
Legal Association's newsletter asked if they could
run the story. Radio hosts wanted to interview me.
An A&E Biography TV show on Barnum plugged my book,
causing my book to sell out overnight. Ah, I love
this!
The point is, news angles are everywhere. Start to
think like a reporter, get creative, and plug you
or your business *within* your story. It's the key
secret to getting rich and famous today----within
only 90 days---and with or without a mermaid!
by Joe Vitale
"I am indebted to the press of the United States for
almost every dollar which I possess..." -- P.T. Barnum,
1891
Charlie Stratton was a little boy who would not grow. He
was destined to be less than three feet tall.
His parents accepted the fact that he would never become
a full sized adult. The neighbors felt sorry for the nice
family and their midget. But no one saw an opportunity for
greatness. No one saw the potential for fame and fortune.
No one, that is, until one man came along in 1842 with an
eye for hidden possibilities. That man was P.T. Barnum.
Barnum taught the child to sing and dance. He taught him
to express himself, to accept how he looked, to feel good
about who he was. He also taught the boy how to charm and
entertain crowds. And he named the young prodigy a name
that still lives today: General Tom Thumb.
Years later, after Tom was rich and world famous, his
Connecticut neighbors would shake their heads and smile.
"We always thought little Charlie was a nice boy but not
very special," many said, "but we never knew he would
become a celebrity until Barnum took him and Barnumized
him."
P.T. Barnum took many people who were talented but
unknown and made them rich and famous. While Jenny Lind
was known as the greatest Swedish soprano in all of
Europe, few had any idea who she was in America. Yet
Barnum hired her, managed her, promoted her, and Jenny
Lind became so famous that 30,000 people met her ship
when it docked in New York in the mid 1800s. Again,
Barnum had practiced the art of "Barnumizing" someone.
And to prove that his techniques worked, when Lind
decided to save money and manage her own concerts
without Barnum's help, her crowds grew smaller. Lind
didn't get media attention. And she returned to Europe
without fanfare. Yet it was the same Jenny Lind that
the crowds had gone wild to see under Barnum's art!
That art is not lost today, of course. Throughout 1997
I smiled whenever I saw an article on the singer Jewel.
Here you have a woman barely out of her teens, with
only one CD released at the time, making front page
headlines and cover stories on national magazines.
Last I heard she had been hired to write her
autobiography (!) and was paid more than a million
dollars for it. Yet Jewel is barely an adult! How is
this happening? Clearly, Jewel is being Barnumized.
And that's how anyone can become famous today. You
need someone skilled in the art of Barnumizing. There
should be a latent talent or trait that can be
publicized, of course, but even that can be gotten
around. Richard Branson, the tycoon founder of many
businesses, including Virgin Records and Virgin
Airlines, Barnumizes himself by creating balloon
flights around the world. Whether he actually succeeds
at the trip doesn't matter. His events bring himself
international publicity. And he is not promoting any
talent except maybe the bold desire to be famous.
I've been personally fascinated by publicity and
publicists since I began researching P.T. Barnum a
few years ago. Here's a taste of some of the people
I've discovered:
* Harry Reichenbach was an audacious silent movies
publicist who made people famous in the early 1900s.
In fact, his incredible creative ideas helped stop
World War I.
* Edward L. Bernays helped make such stars as the
singer Caruso famous. And he got American women to
smoke with a publicity event he helped orchestrate
in 1929.
* And publicists today continue to Barnumize people
like chicken soup authors Mark Victor Hanson and
Jack Canfield. One reason Deepak Chopra remains a
bestselling author is the publicist behind him:
Arielle Ford.
But let's forget actors and actresses, authors and
speakers, singers and celebrities for a moment. What
about the average person? What about you? Can you be
Barnumized? Can you be made famous?
Without hesitation, I say yes. The secret is in
hiring a publicist who knows how to find or create a
news worthy subject out of you or something you do.
There isn't any one way to fame that fits for all
people. Sometimes all you need is one wild event to
draw attention to everything else you do:
* Barnum once showed a preposterous "Fejee Mermaid."
The curious half-monkey-half fish increased his
ticket sales 33%.
* In our own century a circus once displayed a
"Unicorn." While everyone knows unicorns aren't
real, ticket sales increased 55%. Again, the one
publicity stunt drew crowds to see everything else
being offered.
But you don't have to be wild and crazy to get
attention. In an article I wrote titled "Hidden
Selling," I talk about the various people who are
getting rich and famous by sponsoring events that
serve a good cause. Bill Phillips, for example, is
selling people on the idea of getting fit. He gives
away his book, and a video, and holds yearly
contests. He donates his money to the Make-A-Wish
Foundation. All of this is making Bill
internationally famous. How does he make any money?
He sells nutritional supplements. Back this fact is
"hidden." What Bill is doing is getting fame, and
then using that fame to make money. Very, very
smart.
One of the easiest ways to begin to seek fame is to
write a book. You still have to promote the book, of
course, but as an author you have an excuse to get
publicity. That's what Evel Knievel wanted when he
called me. He wanted me to help him write his life
story. He knew that a book could bring him more
fame. (I turned him down.) Many other people know
this fact, too, from Donald Trump to J. Paul Getty
to Madonna, and that's why they write (or hire
someone to write) books for them.
By now you've heard the quote from Andy Warhol that
in the future everyone will be famous for 15 minutes.
My belief is that if you create fame for yourself
that sticks, that fame will be a credential you can
bank on for the rest of your life.
Take Evel Knievel. His publicity stunts Barnumized
him in the 1970s. Yet we still know his name today,
thirty years later. He wedged his name into public
awareness through his fame tactics. And he's still
cashing in on his name. In fact, his name is so
strong that it has helped launch the career of
another daredevil: Evel's own son, Robbie Knievel.
Most people know the name Tom Thumb today, as well.
Why? The fame Barnum created for his little friend
still lives. Fame can do that for you, too. It can
become a lasting advertisement for who you and what
you do. From then on, everything you touch will get
automatic attention. Tom Thumb used to sell toys
and other products. So did Evel Knievel. As a
result of their fame, these otherwise mediocre
products sold. The products weren't important, it
was the name associated with the products. The more
famous the name, the more easily the products sold.
That's why Pepsi hires the latest hot stars to
appear in their commercials. Their fame brings
favorable attention to Pepsi.
But what if you can't afford a publicist? Easy.
What you have to do is become your own publicist
and Barnumize yourself.
Let me explain:
A year or so ago I wrote a news release that helped
make Jeff DeLong---barely 28 years old---wealthy.
The headline read:
50 Ways to Leave Your Lover (or anyone else);
Unusual cards don't greet, say Hit The Streets
Paul Krupin of the ImediaFax news bureau sent it
out by fax and email. As a result, Jeff did twenty
radio interviews the day his release hit. The
Associated Press picked up the story at least twice
and spread the word to the media nationally. The
number of times the story was reprinted is
impossible to tally. But as a direct result, Jeff's
website sales blasted to $20,000 a week.
(A week!)
What made his news release so successful?
1. There was news here.
I didn't have to dig too hard to see that Jeff's
greeting cards were newsworthy in and of themselves.
(You send his c-ya cards out when you *end*
relationships.) Too many people send out news
releases without any news. They are thinly disguised
ads. Editors hate ads. They want NEWS.
2. We tied it to current news.
Valentine's Day was right around the corner. While
Jeff didn't want to tie his release to that event,
I knew that doing so would cause the media to grab
his release. It helped make his news relevant.
Whenever you can tie your product or service to
existing news, you up the odds in being used by the
media.
3. We distributed the release to select media.
Paul Krupin hand picked a list of media contacts.
What you send out has to match the interests of
those receiving it. Don't send artillery news to
an anti-gun newspaper.
You can get publicity for virtually any product or
service. The media is desperate for news. Provide it
and they'll advertise your business. But how do you
find the right news angle? There are at least three
ways: (1) Have news, (2) invent news, or (3) tie
your business to current news.
Jeff's release was an example of one and three. (His
cards were news, and we tied it to Valentine's Day,
which was current news.) Here's an example of number
two: Inventing news.
When Barry Michaels in Australia hired me to write a
release for his clothing store, I had to hunt to
find the news angle. I talked to him and learned that
because he was getting bogus orders online, he
started calling virtually *everyone* who contacted
him. This turned out to be a breakthrough. Customers
were in awe that a retailer in Australia would call
them. Not only did Barry stop the bogus orders, but
he increased his sales with this extra personal
service. So I wrote a news release with this
headline:
Retailer Finds Way to Turn Bogus Orders Into Profit;
Australia teaches the globe how to make money online
As a result, the Investors Business Daily called him.
Since that is a national publication, Barry's news
release will turn into *thousands* of dollars in free
publicity. Very nice.
Finally, let me tell you what I did a few months ago.
In mid-June I bought a mermaid. Yes, a mermaid. P.T.
Barnum had one and I figured it would be cool if I
did, too. It turned out to be a disappointment and I
felt like an idiot for getting it. But then I saw a
publicity opportunity. So I wrote a news release
(using method number two) that began with this
headline:
Barnum Expert Suckered Into Buying "Real" Mermaid;
Discovers curiosity as powerful marketing tool
The response stunned me. The editor of the American
Legal Association's newsletter asked if they could
run the story. Radio hosts wanted to interview me.
An A&E Biography TV show on Barnum plugged my book,
causing my book to sell out overnight. Ah, I love
this!
The point is, news angles are everywhere. Start to
think like a reporter, get creative, and plug you
or your business *within* your story. It's the key
secret to getting rich and famous today----within
only 90 days---and with or without a mermaid!
# posted by : Sunday, November 06, 2005 8:48:00 PM
: Sunday, November 06, 2005 8:48:00 PM
Hey, I just came across your blog about himalayan goji and wanted to say thanks because I have been working on my website himalayan goji which helps people in business for themselves.
# posted by : Tuesday, November 08, 2005 9:29:00 PM
: Tuesday, November 08, 2005 9:29:00 PM
Just go to Your inbox and Look for your Newsletter publication from the 3 Marketeers Club!
# posted by : Thursday, November 10, 2005 2:56:00 AM
: Thursday, November 10, 2005 2:56:00 AM
Good Marketing information.
Advanced Business Marketing
More business marketing information you can use.
Advanced Business Marketing
More business marketing information you can use.
# posted by : Thursday, November 10, 2005 5:15:00 PM
: Thursday, November 10, 2005 5:15:00 PM
Hi,
I just across sites and found that your Blogs are amazing.
Check out make money survey
I just across sites and found that your Blogs are amazing.
Check out make money survey
# posted by : Friday, November 11, 2005 4:14:00 AM
: Friday, November 11, 2005 4:14:00 AM
Great! … Keep-up the good work!
Something of interest to all:
home base internet business
Something of interest to all:
home base internet business
# posted by : Saturday, November 12, 2005 5:57:00 AM
: Saturday, November 12, 2005 5:57:00 AM
Your New 'INTERNET MALL OF THE WORLD!' making money from home is over ONE-MILLION-TIMES More Powerful Than Most Affiliate Programs! Read on and discover why this is your chance to have THE MOST POWERFUL ONLINE WEALTH-BUILDING PROFIT MACHINE in history!
# posted by : Saturday, January 28, 2006 9:07:00 AM
: Saturday, January 28, 2006 9:07:00 AM
Online advertising is necessary for your computer business to grow, an attention grabbing ad is very important to the success of your web site.
Link to this site: internet marketing search engine placement
http://www.internet-marketingzone.info
Link to this site: internet marketing search engine placement
http://www.internet-marketingzone.info
# posted by : Monday, February 06, 2006 4:48:00 PM
: Monday, February 06, 2006 4:48:00 PM
Good blog you got here. I've stumbled on a good one! Nice ideas, keep it up!
regards,
business health insurance ks small
regards,
business health insurance ks small
Hi there. You have a nice blog here. Just out blogging, thought I'd leave a comment.
regards,
ak business health insurance small
regards,
ak business health insurance small
Alright, nice blog! I've been out searching blogs and stumbled on yours, it's good. Keep the good blogging!
regards,
small business health insurance washington
regards,
small business health insurance washington
Personally I do not agree, but that is ok right :0).Need to finish my report on free help to quit smoking.Visit me if you want,free help to quit smoking.
# posted by : Friday, March 17, 2006 11:52:00 PM
: Friday, March 17, 2006 11:52:00 PM
Hi:)
Well done - We can hardly receive a comment on my web blog.. The only comments We have are ones that my brother created:) Hope U keep Urs great as much as it is now!! Cheers:)
Regards,
make money online
Well done - We can hardly receive a comment on my web blog.. The only comments We have are ones that my brother created:) Hope U keep Urs great as much as it is now!! Cheers:)
Regards,
make money online
# posted by : Sunday, April 02, 2006 9:03:00 AM
: Sunday, April 02, 2006 9:03:00 AM
Hi I like your blog, you can visit my web page if you like.base business home idea opportunityhttp://www.moneywebpage.combase business home idea opportunity
Post a Comment
# posted by : Thursday, May 04, 2006 4:15:00 AM
: Thursday, May 04, 2006 4:15:00 AM
