The Progenitor of Severe Gluteal Discomfort

Moving day…

2008-02-15T13:27:00.000-08:00

Just a heads up, The Progenitor of Severe Gluteal Discomfort is relocating to Baseball Digest Daily. I’ll be moving as much of the archive as is feasible (I don't know if some of the charts will take in their content management system). The good folks are trusting me not to trash the joint (silly them) so it’ll still be me being me there. For those of you who were hoping for an improvement, well…

Sorry for taking so long to make it official but do you have any idea how many “Best Regards” I had to pack up and move?

I enjoy blogging, I enjoy the blogging efforts of guys like Dave Rouleau, Pete Toms, Jon Hale etc. The opportunity to blog with them strikes me as being still more enjoyable and I’ve been told fellow Tim Raines “Dweeb Team” member Neate Sager is due any minute now.

How can I resist?

Heck, BDD head honcho Joe Hamrahi set aside my own little corner (where I won’t be bothering the people actually trying to be productive) where I can get into my usual mischief.

So, if you’ve bookmarked this location--well shame on you. Since you’ve fallen so far as to do this I guess I can give you a new link to do likewise:

The Progenitor of Severe Gluteal Discomfort. I have expelled three rounds of synaptic flatulence there already and they’ve opened the doors, windows and bus ports to clear the air.

I look forward to seeing you at the new digs.

Best Regards

John

A rant...

2008-02-10T13:20:00.000-08:00

...and it is a doozy.

Every so often, I come across a phrase as it pertains to professional athletes and it is like nails on a chalkboard. This time it showed up in an International Herald Tribune column about Roger Clemens:

“Clemens has already been convicted in the court of public opinion by a public sick of overpaid sports heroes who cheat, and it doesn't help that every time he opens his mouth he looks like he is lying.” (bolding mine)

I want you to stop and think about something. When a free agent player leaves a team to go to another the media will, often at the former team’s instigation, decry the lack of loyalty demonstrated by the player.

It is sick.

The people and corporations that own professional sports franchises are often among the country’s wealthiest. These people, since 1990 have increased your tax burden/reduced your public services 22 times through stadium construction/renovation and infrastructure--even the ones that had a fair bit of private financing enjoyed substantial hidden subsidies ... this of itself in MLB alone has cost over $10 billion in tax dollars since 1990 (includes maintenance, amortization etc.).

They have tax breaks that boggle the mind and reduce the money available for things like education, healthcare, social services and the like. Then they lie to you about how they’re losing their shirt. I’m gonna show you how they calculate their “losses.” I will show you how easy it is to make a $50 million profit disappear:

Did you know you can buy a major league team for half price? When purchasing a team, the buyer can claim 50% of the purchase price as residing in player contracts and can amortize this over the first five years of team ownership. For example, when the Red Sox were purchased for $700 million, $350 million of that will be depreciated over five years. This means that they can make a book entry of $70 million a year in the loss column in years 1-5.

Obviously, no real money has been lost but the amortization is counted as a loss. Adding to the fun is the team’s ability to write off the out-of-pocket costs of replacing the players -- two bites out the same apple. To use a quick example: Suppose you bought your computer for your business. Would you like to be able both to write off the purchase price of the machinery and amortize it too?

That’s what teams routinely do.

Let’s now give the Red Sox the hypothetical $50 million profit and loose the accountants on it:


 $50 million profit
-$70 million depreciation
-------------------------
-$20 million

We can make this loss even bigger--the owner(s) draw a salary of course. Let’s pay the owner $2 million a year (don’t forget commissioner Bud Selig makes over $14 million a year so my estimate is probably far too low. Peter O Malley paid himself a $1 million salary as president of the Dodgers back in the mid-1980's)--his salary is considered an expense the same as the players’ salaries:


-$20 million
-$ 2 million (salary)
---------------------
-$22 million

We can lower this total still further several ways--one of Henry and Co.’s other holdings can “loan” money to the Red Sox at a high interest rate and the interest the Red Sox “pay” to Henry’s other companies counts as a loss. The Red Sox and NESN are owned by the same group. Therefore, how much do you suppose NESN pays the Red Sox for TV rights--especially when you consider that the money that flows from NESN to the Red Sox will be counted under revenues that are part of the determination of how much revenue sharing they’ll pay.

It’s in the Red Sox interest to be paid as little as possible by NESN since (1) it lowers their total revenues which lowers the amount of revenue sharing they’ll have to pay and (2) it lowers their profits (or increases the red ink) on the books which looks good when you need the region to build you a new ballpark or complain how greedy players are bankrupting them. Any team that is owned by a corporation that also broadcasts its games take advantage of this.

We’re not done yet.

We’ll use that $22 million total for our next trick. Suppose John Henry and Co. are in a 33% tax bracket. They can use that $22 million pre tax loss to reduce their total taxable income from other sources by $6.6 million (33% X $22 million). Here’s the bottom line--a team owner can be (using just a small number of the various tricks at their disposal) $58.6 million better off ($50 million profit plus $2 million salary plus $6.6 million tax break) and claim the team “lost” $22 million!

By the way--I’ve only scratched the surface of how they can hide profits.

When you consider that luxury/premium seating are often used by corporations teams know they can charge a lot more for them simply because these businesses can write it off as an expense. You are literally subsidizing not only the park itself but also the billionaires using it for entertaining.

Let’s use a recent example to narrow down the reason for this rant. Carl Pohlad is among the richest men in America. For over a decade he has received over $100 million (easily) in revenue sharing from the other clubs. He is getting a new stadium courtesy of the taxpayers in which he’ll reap a major revenue windfall since he won’t have to pay market rent (if anything) for using it.

On top of this, he’ll get yet another major influx of cash for this one reason--even though it was the taxpayers, the public, folks like you and I that paid for this ballpark; Carl Pohlad will be charging fans more to watch his team play in the park the fans paid for! Tickets will cost more, parking will cost more, concessions will cost more, souvenirs will cost more etc.

Due to the above, the value of the Twins will increase substantially--another major bonus and increase of capital gains.

However, a member of the Pohlad family said recently about Johan Santana: “There's loyalty and wanting to stay in Minnesota, and it varies from player to player.”

Now how, in this family’s opinion, should Johan Santana display loyalty?

Santana should express his loyalty by subsidizing a multi-billionaire by taking less than what his talent is worth. It’s NOT the folks that are billionaires who received massive revenue sharing payments, a mostly free stadium worth around a half-billion dollars who will be charging the fans higher prices that should show loyalty to the fanbase by paying Santana what another team is willing to pay. It’s the guy that waited for 12-13 years to get to this point, endured long bus rides in the minor leagues to get to this point, the guy who was paid less than $2 million for a Cy Young campaign and helped pitch his team to four post seasons that earned the owner a lot more than that through fans who flocked to watch him pitch.

He paid the price, he went from an unknown who grew up in modest surroundings, did the hard work clawed his way to the top with his blood sweat and tears and now his time has come to collect his reward and he was told that if he really loved the fans in Minnesota he should've subsidized the greedy multi-billionaire who has (or will soon) received close to a billion dollars of money (through revenue sharing, tax breaks and stadium subsidies) he never did anything to earn!!

That is so sick and so wrong. Think about it--why should a guy who grew up in Venezuela feel that loyalty means subsidizing one of the richest men in a foreign country? Does that make any kind of logical sense in any other context?

Johan Santana and other high salaried players aren’t the reason we’re paying more to follow the game we love. They get that salary because of the revenues the game generates. Team owners will charge the maximum they think they can for everything from peanuts to luxury suites. The Twins don’t have to pay Johan Santana his $20+ million a year--do you think the Pohlad family will take those savings and reduce ticket prices this year? Better still, do you think it means that it will cost the same to attend a game at the new park since they don’t have to pay Johan Santana’s contract?

No. Chance. In. HELL.

The cost will go up because teams think we’ll pay up--it’s that simple.

If you think that player salaries affect the price of attending a game then round up 20 friends and treat them to the NCAA Final Four this spring. You can afford it--it’ll be cheap, the players are freakin' amateurs! Heck, promise your posse that you’ll be attending it every year from now on--it’s dirt cheap the players don’t get paid!

What? Do you mean to tell me it will be too expensive?

Duh.

It’s too expensive because the NCAA, the sponsors, the colleges involved (or whoever sets prices) charges based on the maximum they think they can and still sell the maximum number of tickets. That goes for MLB prices including beer, hats, popcorn and pizza--they will charge the most they can without affecting sales negatively.

This is why I get all riled up when I read somebody complaining about “overpaid athletes.” When I see that all I can think is that some idiot feels that the Carl Pohlads, the Jeffrey Lorias, the Jerry Reinsdorfs of the sport should get more money that somebody else earned. Or that persons who have picked your pocket of tax dollars, gouged you at the box office, made you pay more to watch on T.V., gouged you at the concession stands shouldn’t show you loyalty by keeping your favourite player. Further, these people used every trick and turn available to increase the time it takes for a player to be able to sell his services on the open market.

When the time finally comes, the guy who spent the time developing their skills, endured a minor league apprenticeship, put his body on the line day in and day out year in and year out and it is finally the moment to collect the reward. To hear or read that at this moment the player should make a demonstration of loyalty by subsidizing the person who is among the country’s wealthiest, that did everything in their power to postpone this day, that gouged the fan and taxpayer alike makes me see red.

Never forget this--when a player does show this type of loyalty and accepts less the cost of games doesn’t go down, your cable bill or taxes aren't lessened. What happens is the fat cat sitting in the owner’s box has himself a nice little windfall at the player’s expense. He would cheerfully thumb his nose at your loyalties by simply letting your favourite player go elsewhere and gleefully reflect on how a little media manipulation and a gullible public means more free money. Best of all, when an opportunity to make a little more money comes along--the player’s loyalty will not be reciprocated. When the player’s skill erodes and a better option is available we’ll forget the loyalty he showed and clamour for the better option.

Overpaid players?

Hey, they may be all about the money but when all is said and done that’s all they can really come away from the game with--folks are only loyal to them when they get something in return. We often show a shocking lack of loyalty ourselves when a player no longer produces.

We. Want. Somebody. Else.

We’re loyal to laundry--not the men in the laundry. Let’s stop expecting them to show loyalty to us because in the end all it produces is more free money for some of the greediest people in the game.

Rant finished.

Best Regards

John

Don't tread on we...

2008-02-09T10:32:00.000-08:00

I was preparing a post decrying the ticket scheme the Blue Jays are undertaking where they are giving first crack to Tigers and Red Sox series to the fans in those markets. I had worked up what I felt were rational arguments why this was a bad idea both in the short and long term.

Then I had an epiphany--I am ticked and a rational argument isn’t really what is needed in this instance. Jays fans have been insulted--been given the double-fisted schoolyard salute from Godfrey and Co.

This is our team. Not only do we spend money, we spend something far more valuable--our emotional capital, our devotion, our loyalty. We’ve been cheering for our Jays through the Gord Ash era and through year 70 of J.P. Ricciardi’s five-year plan.

In that time, we’ve seen the Florida Marlins win two World Series, seen the freaking Los Angeles/California/Anaheim/LAA of A Angels become a force in the AL West after being a farce almost since their inception. We’ve seen the Cleveland Indians reassert themselves as a baseball power, blow it up, start over and again make it to the top.

We’ve seen the Phillies, who like the Jays, had a playoff drought since 1993 finally make it back to the post season. Colorado has made to October twice since 1993, the Diamondbacks who, it should be noted, were an expansion team five years after the Jays won their second World Series, have won their division four times (including the big prize in 2001).

The Twins--a candidate for extinction earlier in the decade--have copped four division crowns. The hapless Cubbies have been in three post seasons, the allegedly jinxed Boston Red Sox have become Evil Empire 2.0 with their second World Series win in the last four years and even the Chicago White Sox ended decades of post season futility winning their first pennant since the Go-Go Sox of 1959 and their first Fall Classic since Shoeless Joe Jackson roamed the outfield at old Comiskey Park.

Meanwhile, we’ve stood by cheering and hoping, listening to too many excuses about the Yankees and Red Sox payrolls and too little accountability of those who put together the Jays roster.

And they do this? The Tao of Stieb wrote:

“And as much as Godfrey and Kevin Elster's brother are going to come out in the next day or so and spin this and say how much they love the Blue Jays fans, they don't get it. They don't get the fact that this makes Blue Jays fans and Toronto look like second-class citizens. They don't understand that this makes us feel like we're not pretty enough for them, and they don't understand why we're getting so worked up about them catting around with that skank down the road.”

Nope, I’m not gonna editorialize about this. It’s not time for a reasoned, rational, calm logical approach--it’s time to get mad and get loud. I’m gonna leave this one to the pros--the guys who can put the words together to fully convey how insulting this is--it’s time to bust heads and I’m leaving this to the brass knuckles and blackjacks of the Blue Jays blogosphere--Drunk Jays Fans and Tao of Stieb:

Idiots Let Boston and Detroit Have First Crack at Jays Single Game Tickets
Questions And More Questions On Ticket Sales
For Love or Money
Paul Godfrey is a Kitten-Drowning Baby-Shaker
Opening the Gates to the Barbarians

Let 'em have it guys--both barrels. If they want to sell more tix, be a Katherine Hepburn about it and not a Paris Hilton. Put a playoff team on the field--remember how many tickets were sold from 1989-1993? Don't whore them out to fans cheering for teams trying to keep the Jays out of the post season. They're never going to sell out by selling out.

If you love the Jays show your support--we deserve better than this sort of blatant disrespect.

Best Regards

John

The Mike Gill Show: Whinin' and pitchin'...

2008-02-06T13:20:00.000-08:00

Yup, it is that time of the week again. Time to get ready for my weekly segment on ESPN 1450’s Mike Gill Show. Today we toss around the following...

Seems like everyone is talking about the Mets and Phillies. Are the Braves a real contender in the NL East?
Eric Bedard--why are the Orioles trying to get rid of him and are they getting enough?
The Twins have been dumping veterans left and right--is Joe Nathan next?
Rumours of Dave Wells coming back, is he worth a shot?
Something you’re looking forward to this spring.

Seems like everyone is talking about the Mets and Phillies. Are the Braves a real contender in the NL East?

Well…

I guess on general principle I will say yes. John Schuerholz is one of the best of the biz at what he does and we’ve gotta respect that. A lot has to go right since they downgraded at CF, SS, and John Smoltz is a year older. Having said that, let’s get crazy for a moment. Suppose Mike Hampton is healthy and effective (waits for laughter to die down)--that gives them a starting four of Smoltz, Tim Hudson, Tom Glavine and Hampton. That’s a nice rotation--in theory.

Further, suppose Rafael Soriano can close on a consistent basis--that takes care of the end of the bullpen. They have some nice young arms to sprinkle around the rest of the relief corps and maybe one of them can fill the No. 5 starters’ role.

With a break or six, there is possibly a solid pitching staff.

As to the offense, they have the always solid Chipper Jones. Ca Brian McCann, 2B Kelly Johnson, LF Matt Diaz will likely continue to improve. RF Jeff Francoeur--who is still just 24--is starting to work the strike zone a little better and has lots of room to grow. Mark Kotsay had some decent results with the Florida Marlins and San Diego Padres and may find the NL more to his liking.

I would put them as a potential dark horse. They do have some nice young talent ripening and maybe they might pull off a surprise. As I wrote earlier--never count out a John Schuerholz production.

Eric Bedard--why are the Orioles trying to get rid of him and are they getting enough?

A few reasons: one, he’ll be gone as a free agent (or die of old age) before the Orioles will be contending again so it makes sense to flip him for some talent that will be in Baltimore should that time come. Two, he has more value to the Orioles as a trading commodity for that reason plus he’s young, left-handed, has a live arm with terrific control and is two years away from free agency. There isn’t a team out there that wouldn’t want a piece of that. The Orioles are like the Toronto Maple Leafs--they don’t need a bit of retooling, they need to be completely blown up and start right from scratch.

An unstated reason might be that the Orioles have questions about the health of that magic left arm and would prefer a package of young talent rather than a guy undergoing ligament transplant surgery or some such thing. Don’t forget, the Orioles trainers/medical personnel are historically inept.

Are the Orioles getting enough? Who knows? I thought the Twins didn’t get enough for Johan Santana and nobody is entirely sure what the package for Bedard ultimately will be. Right now, it’s all guesswork. Remember all the rumoured players in the Santana sweepstakes? I don’t think anybody thought Santana could be had for that level of compensation. It’s too early to tell since we don’t know the exact price on Eric Bedard’s head.

The Twins have been dumping veterans left and right--is Joe Nathan next?

I think the Twins will hang on to him for the time being. Minnesota may surprise this year (especially if Francisco Liriano is back up to speed) and they don’t want to look like they’re in full rebuilding mode while trying to sell tickets. Assuming his usual performance, he’ll have far more value as a chit at the trade deadline(s) when clubs are desperately looking to shore up their pitching. He doesn’t have a no-trade clause so the Twins can get a nice little bidding war going in the days leading up to the deadline.

There’s no rush to deal him at the moment. They’re better off waiting until a contending team loses its closer or are having problems getting the ball to the stopper. He’ll be a very hot commodity at the July 31/August 31 deadlines if the Twins are out of the playoff hunt.

Rumours of David Wells coming back, is he worth a shot?

If he’s not blocking somebody and is willing to work cheap, I don’t see why not. He might do well as a situational lefty or a guy who relieves for one turn of the batting order. Boomer enjoys an amazing BB/9 of 1.88 in over 3400 IP and still has the nice curveball. I think he is done as a starter but might be worth a look-see out of the 'pen.

Something you’re looking forward to this spring.

Actually, here is something that doesn’t deal with the Phillies or Blue Jays. We mentioned this guy earlier--remember the year Twins lefty Francisco Liriano became injured? The man was the buzz of baseball. Electric arm, terrific command and poise--and he blew his arm out requiring Tommy John surgery. I can’t wait to see him on the mound again; if he’s anywhere near his old form he’ll step right into the void created by Johan Santana’s departure. Don’t forget--he’s still just 24 years old. I’m seriously stoked about seeing this kid again.

Oz…

We’ve had some bad weather in these parts. I fell on the ice and dreamt I was at David Samson’s family reunion. I wanted to get home and they sent me on my way. I came across Otis Nixon (I think it was he, it might have been a scarecrow) and seeing my more-incoherent-than-usual state volunteered to do the sign off for the decent chaps at Drunk Jays Fans.

Take ‘er away … errrrr Otis:

(To the tune of If I Only Had a Brain)

"He could blog away the hours
Just watchin’ the snowplowers
Suckin' as a bard
And his thoughts would be screwin'
While folks wonder what he's doin'
When he gives his best regards

He'll opine any news bit
Give David-Samson some [bleep]
For bein' such a pain
With the posts he'd be writin'
His blog it would be bitin'
Cuz he gives his best regards

Oh, he would analyze
How the Jays finish first
Think the Red Sox and Yanks will be much worse
Get some feedback, the bubble’s burst

This blog is far worse than nothin'
His thinking’ is all bluffin'
He really needs a brain
This blog would be much better
If someone else typed the letters
And got rid of best regards."

Well, I woke up in time to do the following...

Best Regards

John

David Samson...

2008-02-02T14:32:00.000-08:00

If you’ve subjected yourself to my ranting over the years, you may get the idea that David Samson isn’t one of my favourite people. I think that assessment is a little harsh; he’s definitely among my top six billion favourites.

Some people think I hate the Marlins because of it … not so. I hate what he did to Montreal and I feel badly for Fish fans and pray they enjoy a happier ending than we Expos fans had. I thought I would devote this post to the reasons why I don’t like David Samson.

Paris Hilton was bad enough, but the lurid David Samson/Joyce DeWitt video on the internet was worse.

Turns out, Dewitt has been active since "Three's Company." In fact, she has gotten involved in both politics and education. It turns out (judging by the locale of this shot) that Samson was looking at consummating more than one, er ... relationship.

Samson was wondering why his presentation hadn't gone well. He practiced long and hard in front of the bathroom mirror with the family pet as an audience. The feline gave Samson's performance mixed reviews.

Our intrepid hero was certain that he explained the business arrangement that was to be expected should the region finance a new ballpark. It had been a model in city after city since Bud Selig had been named acting interim commissioner-for-life after the ouster of Fay Vincent.

The thing is, he had gotten both Selig and Jeffrey Loria to help prepare the presentation. They had gone over the details for weeks to insure that South Florida understood that they wished for them to be a part of things willingly.

When it came time for Samson's part of the presentation, he made it a point to be persuasive, subtle, charming while all the while making sure that all parties understood where they stood.

Samson even went to the trouble of ensuring that he would stand tall during the session. Thanks to the Mitchell Report, he had a pretty good idea who he had to see beforehand to assure himself that he would do it with the proper 'altitude.'

One thing he would not divulge however, is that there were personal reasons behind pushing for a new stadium. The executive offices (especially the restrooms) at Dolphin Stadium weren't accommodating for those with special needs. It wasn't about competitiveness for the roster per se as much as it was physics.

Since funding would have to come out the budget earmarked for necessary services (especially education) it was thought best for the team to touch base with the key constituents--the children themselves. Samson felt confident about his chances considering that Ms. DeWitt, when not working at the legislature, worked as a substitute teacher.

Since she was teaching the class that day (Ms. Hidenbottom was out with cellulitis that day), Samson thought it would be a slam-dunk. As it turns out--he was wrong. As he screamed for mercy as the grade 1 students started pummelling him, all Ms. DeWitt could say was "I'm sorry, could you speak up? I'm not sure I understand Mr. 'Dung-of-a-horse."

I think we’ll finally get it right!

Man, it’s getting rougher to get the signoff done properly. Ah well, it should be a cinch this time since I’ve been hanging with an old pal from the 1970’s. Not a real friend but a musical one, I was a big fan of Jimmy Buffett back in the day and he thought he’d do an old fan a solid by handling things today.

I hope my comrades-at-blogs at Drunk Jays Fans appreciate this. It’s amazing how you get a mental picture of someone only to find out they look a lot different than you originally imagined. For instance, I thought Jimmy Buffett was taller but oh well. Yeah, today it’ll be done musically again but the good news is that I won’t have to sing as well. Now, without further ado, TPoSGD is proud to introduce … Jimmy Buffett!

(To the tune of ‘Margaritaville’)

Using up bandwidth
Wasting his damn breath
All of those postings filled up with crap
Tappin’ his keyboard
Chewin’ the mouse cord
He’s better off just takin’ a nap.

Wasting away writing his best regards
Searching for his bold 14 point font
Some people claim that it’s John Gibbons to blame
But we know it’s he they do taunt

We don’t know the reason
He blogged the off season
Nothing to show but a bunch of hate mail
All of them just cuss
Or pass on a virus
Or tell him how his logic has failed

Wasting away writing his best regards
Searching for his bold 14-point font
Some people claim that it’s John Gibbons to blame
Perhaps this blog, he shouldn’t have launched.

He blew out his hard drive
Been threatened with sharp knives
And deleted a ‘Best Regards John’
But there’s posts in his system
And most blogs will diss ‘em
And the lame-o sign off that folks wishes were gone

Wasting away writing his best regards
Searching for his bold 14-point font
Some people claim that it’s John Gibbons to blame
But we know it’s blogspot’s damn fault
Yes and some people claim the internet is to blame
And we know its all Al Gore’s fault

What the …? That didn’t sound like you. You don’t have a high pitched whiny voice (looks at Buffett’s neck), did you have a sunburn, your neck is peeling. Here, let me get that for you (grabs, tears, off comes latex mask) AHA!! I thought Jimmy Buffett was taller!

This time I’ll finish the job!

CRUNCH

Sorry ‘bout that folks--we’ll try again next time (grumble).

Best Regards

John

Cool Ball…

2008-01-31T07:46:00.000-08:00

I have to admit, Cool Ball’s rant about THT had more legs than I thought it would. I was the one who came across it and passed it along to the rest of the staff. It may surprise a lot of folks that no one at THT was particularly offended by it. We've gotten ripped worse in our e-mail feedback (Whaddya mean nobody else has gotten blasted yet?)

We are baseball fans first and foremost and none of us has the time or energy to take ourselves overly seriously. Do not forget--Cool Ball is a blog. What THT consists of is a bunch of bloggers who decided to come together and form a larger, collective blog/site using our diversity to discuss and analyze the game we love from as many angles and facets as possible.

To paraphrase Pogo--he has seen the enemy and it is he.

The thing the caught my attention was the implication that we are a bunch of stat nerds and nothing could be farther from the truth. I, for one, reek at math and only the happy circumstance of being born male allow me to count past 20.

I guess that counts as having “TI-83's for dicks” although I’ve never attempted (or thought of) using it for anything beyond simple addition (including additions to my family).

THT is far from a statistical monolith--we’re a diverse bunch and don’t have a THT ‘mindset’ or dominant philosophy. It’s not uncommon for us to disagree with what someone else has written. However, we view that diversity as strength. Our slogan is simply “Baseball. Insight. Daily.” and there’s everything from history (Steve Treder), the business of baseball (Brian Borawski) and whatever the heck it is that I'm supposed to be doing--getting practice for the editing staff I guess.

The only thing about the post that I took issue with were the insults directed at Chris Jaffe and Sal Baxamusa (and by extension--the rest of our stat experts). This person doesn't know these people and I find it distasteful that he draws conclusions about folks of whom he has never met or interacted. He goes from Person does X (writes about stats) which means he is Y (has these characteristics).

This sort of prejudgment is where prejudice gets its very ugly name. Prejudice is drawing conclusions about the qualities somebody has based on one’s own preconceived notions. We’re familiar with the stereotypes foisted upon various groups based on ethnic, religious or economic backgrounds. If this person wishes for his point of view to be taken seriously and his criticisms evaluated he’d be better off limiting himself to dealing with specific complaints and realizing that a few pop culture references does not equal credibility--it just means they know how to use Google.

Sal and Chris are both decent people (despite their tendency to squeal during our sacred initiation rituals--don’t ask) and, while they’re more than capable of defending themselves, I don’t enjoy reading some random nitwit blasting my friends simply because he has issues with a web site--we should be better than that.

Regardless, I’ll be checking back to see what else he has to say. I hope he can be more specific in his critiques because we do welcome constructive feedback. If he does so, his blog will be an asset in cyberspace; if he’s just doing it to show off how ‘hip’ he is (or his mad Googling skillz) and is simply being an attention whore then chances are good the novelty of randomly flinging around feces and see what it hits will get old fairly fast.

At any rate ‘tingler’, welcome to the blogosphere and I hope “Cool Ball” will become a must-read for baseball fans. I'm adding a link to your site here at TPoSGD to show there are no hard feelings on our part.

How low can I go?

First, I would like to apologize to Drunk Jays Fans but I was desperate. It’s getting harder and harder to find folks who wish to handle my post's signoff. Well, somebody did step up but sadly, it was my old nemesis, Florida Marlins executive David Samson. He demanded (1) that I help with it and (2) I build a new stadium for his team. After some negotiation, we settled on a compromise. I would help with the sign off and in
(<---) exchange, I would post his picture on my blog.

O.K. David, do I have this straight--you’re going to sing it and when you point at me I’m supposed to chime in with what is written on this sheet of paper … right?

All right, (sigh) let’s get this over with…

(To the tune of “Gaston” from Disney’s “Beauty and the Beast”)

“Gosh it so thrills me to see you, Brattain
As your blog does down to the dumps
No one will read what you post, John Brattain
Best Regards makes you a chump.
No blogger at blogspot is despised much as you
It is noooobody’s favourite site
There’s no one reading what is written by you
And it's noooot verrrry hard to see whyyyy…

No one's lame as Brattain
Inflicts pain like Brattain
No one's posts are incredibly strange as Brattain's
For there's no guy 'round here half as verbose
Folks say that your mind is quite gone!
You can ask any Jon, Dust or Pete Rose
And they'll ask you just what the heck that you’rrre ooooon.

No one's been like Brattain
A pinhead like Brattain
No one's got a lamer sign off than Brattain…”

As a blogger, yes, I am irritating!

“My he is fried, that Brattain!
Give five "sign offs!" Give twelve "get losts!"
Brattain. Is. The. Worst
And the rest paaay the coooost.

No one gabs like Brattain
Loves to blab like Brattain
When it comes to blogs nobody’s bites like Brattain's!
For there's no one as squirrelly and yawny.”

As you see I've got bandwidth to spare…

“Not a bit of him's witty or funny…”

That's right! And ev'ry last post of mine--nobody cares.

“No blog hits for Brattain
No visits for Brattain
In a blogging post he’s a half-wit that Brattain…”

I'm especially gooood at pontificaaaating! YAAAWN!

“Still no hits for Brattain!”

When starting the blog, I wrote four dozen posts
Ev'ry morning to help it get large
And now that it's grown
I write five dozen posts
So it’s roughly the siiiiize of a barrrrrge!

“No one writes like Brattain
Makes posts trite like Brattain
Then goes blogging without being bright like Brattain…”

I use regards in any and all blog postings!

“My, he is friiiiied, Braaaaattaiiiiin!”

Are we done? No? What else is there? There’s still more?

(sigh)

Fine … go ahead.

“No one sucks like Brattain
Gets no yucks like Brattain
Likes inspiring folks to say “Oh [bleep]” like Brattain
Going offline weee’lllll soon be celebraaaating…

So now goooood-bye … Braaaattaiiiin!”

Geez …what a moron. What’s worse is that he forgot what he was supposed to do to begin with; so for the second post in a row I’ve got to handle it myself. At least when it was Jiminy Cricket I could stomp the little son of…

(light bulb goes on--brings up mental picture of Jiminy and Samson side by side and notes similarities in stature)

*CRUNCH*

(shrug)

Best Regards

John

The Mike Gill Show: Santanism...

2008-01-30T10:37:00.000-08:00

Once again, it’s time to prep for my weekly segment on ESPN 1450’s Mike Gill Show. Today, to absolutely nobody’s surprise, the Johan Santana-to-the-Mets deal looms large. Therefore, today we will discuss :

Santana-to-Mets: are the Metropolitans the favourite in the NL East, or for that matter the NL … period?
Does this give the Mets the best starting staff in the National League?
How did the Twins do in the deal?
What are your thoughts on Pedro Feliz coming to the City of Brotherly Love?
Tell us something you are looking forward to for this spring.

Santana-to-Mets: are the Metropolitans the favourite in the NL East, or for that matter the NL … period?

I would say it makes them favourites--on paper. As we know, the game isn’t played on paper but on the field. One thing we know about baseball is that we never know what will happen in baseball. A lot can happen over the course of 162 games. Don’t forget, the Phillies added a defacto solid No. 2 starter in the Brad Lidge deal moving Brett Myers back into the rotation. Pedro Feliz will solidify the infield defense and offer pop at the bottom the order and Geoff Jenkins--who should hit well at CitiBank--moves Shane Victorino to CF. I’d still give the Mets the edge in the East but I’m not willing to concede the division title just yet.

As to the rest of the NL--remember, the Diamondbacks added Danny Haren the Padres could catch lightning in a bottle with the low cost additions of Mark Prior, Randy Wolf and Jim Edmonds (he could be a bargain in he recaptures his health and some of his earlier form). The Dodgers added Andruw Jones and RHP Hiroki Kuroda. The NL West will be tough again in 2008.

Further, the Cubs added the much hyped Kosuke Fukudome and Jon Lieber has enjoyed terrific success at Wrigley Field (3.62 ERA, 1.54 BB/9 and 384 K in 474.2IP). The Brewers picked up Mike Cameron and retooled their bullpen with the additions of Eric Gagne and David Riske.

The Mets will have to work for the pennant.

Does this give the Mets the best starting staff in the National League?

No. With the addition of Haren, I think that designation goes to the Snakes. The Cubs should be solid 1-5 … not spectacular but should have five above league average starters with the addition of Lieber. The Padres rotation could surprise if Prior and Wolf contribute. Right now, the Mets have Santana, a question mark in Pedro Martinez and three young arms to round out the rotation in John Maine, Oliver Perez and Mike Pelfrey. It could be very good--it could be a nightmare.

How did the Twins do in the deal?

Lousy. I’m guessing that Santana decided to go to the Mets and told the Twins that he’d veto a deal to the Yankees or Red Sox. Both clubs offered better packages (including Philip Hughes) and the Twinkies didn’t even land the Mets best prospect (Fernando Martinez). I guess it’s karmic payback for the Nolan Ryan/Tom Seaver/Scott Kazmir trades. Once again, it demonstrates the idiocy of no-trade clauses. It really erodes a club’s leverage especially if they have a mega talent they wish to deal. Chances are, only a few teams can afford the required contract extension and those teams feel little obligation to really ante up since they know the club holding the player has to deal him.

What are your thoughts on Pedro Feliz coming to the City of Brotherly Love?

As I mentioned earlier, he’ll add a slick glove and might hit 30 HR in Citizens Bank Park (edit: thanks Mike!). He’s got a glove seeking laser in his right arm which will ‘help’ Ryan Howard’s defense since all he’ll have to do is stick his glove out and keep his foot on the bag when the ball is hit to Feliz.

Tell us something you are looking forward to for this spring.

I’m looking forward to see who claim two rotation slots: Who will step up and be the Phillies No. 3 starter and the Blue Jays No. 5 starter. As to the Phillies, I’m not talking about how the rotation will be set up come opening day--I’m talking about who will be the third best starting pitcher on the Phillies staff after Cole Hamels and Brett Myers. I’m discussing the pitcher who Charlie Manuel would put be behind them should they shorten their rotation come the post season (why not be optimistic?).

As to the Blue Jays, they’ve got Casey Janssen, Jesse Litsch, Gustavo Chacin or even a Josh Banks or Brian Wolfe that may surprise and fill the role. I’m rooting for Casey Janssen--he was superb as a starter in the minors and is better suited to the role. His status will be decided less by how he pitches as it will on how relievers Brandon League, Davis Romero and Jason Frasor look in the spring. If all struggle, then John Gibbons will insist of having his security blanket in Janssen handle most eighth inning duties.

“I do not think that word means what you think it means…”

I really hope my compatriots at Drunk Jays Fans appreciate this. I’m forced to use myself to handle the signoff since I didn’t have time to get anyone after my system got dinged by ransom ware.

What transpired is this: my blog got hijacked by TVT (AKA "The Vizzini Trojan" … inconceivable!) and it took some doing to get it back. When I tried to extract it I got a pop-up box stating: “If you wish it deleted, by all means, keep trying.”

I typed: “Let me explain …”

Another pop-up box from TVT read: “There's nothing to explain. You're trying to take back what I have rightfully hijacked.”

I replied: "Perhaps an arrangement can be reached?"

TVT: “There will be no arrangement, and you're deleting your blog.”

Well if there can be no arrangement, then we are at an impasse.

TVT: “I'm afraid so. I can't compete with you with verbosity, and you're no match for my brains.”

You're that smart?

TVT: “Let me put it this way: have you ever heard of James, Neyer, Sheehan?”

Yes.

TVT: “Morons.”

Really ... in that case, I challenge you to a battle of wits.

TVT: “For the blog?” (Yes) “To the death?” (Yes) “I accept.”

Good. Then write the post. Read this, but do not type.

TVT: “I see nothing.”

What you do not see is called Best Regards. It is vapid, tasteless, dissolves instantly in bandwidth, and is among the more boring signatures known to man.

TVT: “Hmm.”

(I type my regards into the each post and move them around by CTRL+X and CTRL+V)

All right. Where are the Best Regards? The battle of wits has begun. It ends when you decide and we both post, and find out who keeps the blog...and who dies of boredom.

TVT: “But it's so simple. All I have to do is divine from what I know of you: are you the sort of blogger who would put the Best Regards into his own post or his enemy's? Now, a clever man would put the Best Regards into his own post, because he would know that only a great fool would reach for what he was given. I am not a great fool, so I can clearly not choose the post in front of you. But you must have known I was not a great fool, you would have counted on it, so I can clearly not choose the post in front of me.”

You've made your decision then?

TVT: “Not remotely. Because Best Regards comes from TPoSGD, as everyone knows, and TPoSGD is entirely peopled with dullards and lackwits, and TPoSGDers are used to having people not find them interesting, as you are not interesting to me, so I can clearly not choose the post in front of you.”

Truly, you have a dizzying intellect.

TVT: “WAIT TILL I GET GOING! Where was I?”

TPoSGD.

TVT: “Yes, TPoSGD. And you must have suspected I would have known the sign off’s origin, so I can clearly not choose the post in front of me.”

You're just stalling now.

TVT: “You'd like to think that, wouldn't you? You've beaten my word limit, which means you're exceptionally verbose, so you could've put the Best Regards in your own post, trusting on your gabbiness to save you, so I can clearly not choose the post in front of you. But, you've also busted my server, which means you must have blogged, and in blogging you must have learned that bloggers are nerdy, so you would have put the Best Regards as far from yourself as possible, so I can clearly not choose the post in front of me.”

You're trying to trick me into giving away something. It won't work.

TVT: “IT HAS WORKED! YOU'VE GIVEN EVERYTHING AWAY! I KNOW WHERE THE BEST REGARDS ARE!”

Then make your choice.

TVT: “I will, and I choose-- What in the world? Did I disconnect?”

What? Where? You’re still logged in.

TVT: “Well, I- I could have sworn I disconnected. No matter.”

What's so funny?

TVT: “I'll tell you in a minute. First, let's post. Me from my keyboard, and you from yours.”

(We type.)

You guessed wrong.

TVT: “You only think I guessed wrong! That's what's so funny! I switched keyboards when your back was turned! Ha ha! You fool! You fell victim to one of the classic blunders! The most famous is never get involved in a geek war on blogspot, but only slightly less well-known is this: never go in against a Trojan when a blog is on the line!! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!! Ha ha ha... (thud)”

...and I finally got my blog back.

Epilogue: Both posts had Best Regards. I spent the last few years on the web reading my old articles building up an immunity to boredom.

(Yes, you just lost two minutes of your life reading that. My sincerest apologies.)

Best Regards

John

Skunks...

2008-01-27T11:20:00.000-08:00

I was thinking (it happens) about skunks. When you stop and think about it, calling somebody a skunk is still a wonderfully descriptive insult. After all, everybody knows what a skunk smells like--nobody ever mistakes a skunk for something else or vice versa.

Further, if you’ve spent anytime in the countryside and happen to be a canine aficionado chances are your fine furry companion(s) has decided to engage a skunk or two mano a mano. I was once walking my two dogs (both golden retrievers at the time) and noticed the smell of skunk but it wasn’t a strong smell at that point.

They ran away quite suddenly. A (low watt) light bulb went off and I took to pursuit. The smell suddenly got very powerful and sure enough, my pooches had fought the skunk and the skunk won. Their eyes were watery, they kept pawing at their noses and rubbing their faces on the ground and I set about the grim task of getting Ren and Stimpy home to have them de-scented.

Not five minutes later another skunk starting crossing the road about 30 yards away. Despite their unpleasant initial encounter, Beavis and Butthead were ready for a rematch. The final score:

Skunks 2
Dumb dogs 0

I learned a lot about skunks (as well as the average intellect of golden retrievers) that day. If you touch anything that a skunk has touched, you too will join the sacred order of unwilling stinkers. You simply cannot interact with a skunk and not come away … well, worse for the experience.

It got me thinking (twice in one day!) that MLB has their fair share of skunks. Guys who not only reek, but also can spread their stench around wherever they go. Like four-legged skunks, the two-legged variety leaves an unmistakable ‘scent’ in their wake that is unlike nothing else. For the most part, if they touch something, it’s going to stink as well.

To be a skunk, one has to be completely dishonourable. Sometimes an individual who, in the course of doing their job in an honourable fashion, might come away smelling badly on occasion. This person is not a skunk. To use an example--Don Fehr is not a skunk. He’s done some things that weren’t admirable, but he’s viewed as an honourable, honest guy who seldom acts in a duplicitous fashion. Yes, occasionally he has left a stench in his wake but that’s due to his style and not the substance of the man himself.

A skunk is a person whose very substance causes us to hold our noses.

Further, just because somebody is inept--it doesn’t mean he is a skunk. Don’t mistake mediocrity (in MLB terms) for being a skunk. Dave Littlefield is inept, not a skunk. Tom Hicks is inept, but not a skunk. Ed Wade is inept, but he too is not a skunk. To be a true skunk, one must deliberately choose to become one. There are no accidental or inadvertent skunks. If somebody makes a conscious choice to be a certain way--then he is a skunk.

Which brings me to today’s snark: Who are some of the biggest skunks in MLB?

Bud Selig The man has achieved a great many things. I even detailed his accomplishments in last week’s MSN Canada column. Nevertheless, the man has raped the taxpayers to the tune of close to $10 billion since he became commissioner. When you wonder where some of your tax dollars are going when you hear about cuts to healthcare, education etc., well part of it is from Bud Selig’s blackmailing your region for ballpark boondoggles. The total rises above $10 billion when you learn about some of the other goodies his cartel enjoys and exploits to the nth degree. He is the guy who attempted contraction, who allowed the steroid era to flourish for profit. He is the guy that the other skunks in MLB want to have lead them for the foreseeable future.

Carl Pohlad Many people strive to be rich. I am not among them. Oh, I like money well enough however; I’d hate to be in the same circles as the likes of Carl Pohlad. This octogenarian septic tank is one of the wealthiest men in America. His hand is always extended in search of handouts be it from revenue sharing or corporate welfare. He offered up his team for contraction. He tried to move the Twins anywhere the handouts were more generous. Even though he is the primary financial beneficiary of the Twins new ballpark, he said, “[Public money] is where it should come from.” He wants Johan Santana to take less so he can keep more and questions Santana’s loyalty for not being willing to subsidize one of America’s wealthiest men. It’ll be easy to tell when Pohlad’s been dead for a week--his smell will improve.

Scott Boras I prefer that the players get their fair share of baseball’s revenues. As we’ve detailed (and will yet detail) it’s better than seeing the skunks of Selig’s cartel get it. However, this man is so fundamentally dishonest in his approach that sometimes his players end up picking up some of his stench. Boras uses many high-minded phrases that are frankly his recipe for deception. An example is this: "Any discussions as to contract terms (are) between the teams and ourselves. It's clear for all of us that we're at that point now where we've got to do a lot of work with the teams involved, and we're going to keep the information and dialogues with the clubs private and confidential as we go forward."

This ‘private and confidential dialogue’ allows Boras to say “That’s an interesting offer, but I have to let you know that there’s a team with a package on the table that is right up there with yours that I’ve been speaking with recently.” Of course, the team with the similar package is the one he owns. If pressed on knowing the identity of the bidding club Boras simply states that all dialogue is, of course, ‘private and confidential.’

If a club has the highest bid but you want more, you tell them that. You just say that his client would prefer to play elsewhere so if the team wants him--they have to dig a little deeper. Finally, Alex Rodriguez has been bathing in P.R. tomato juice to get the skunk smell off of him.

Jeffrey Loria and David Samson

I can’t say it better than this: Two cities, two major league franchises, two wastelands courtesy of the two asses required to spell “assassin.” This is the scorched earth policy employed by these two skunks--the 'rule or ruin' Mongol Hordes of corporate welfare.

Got wood?

Since I’ve been going buggy of late, I thought it might be good to have someone, shall we say … insectoid related to handle the sign off. I tried Adam Ant--nope, The Tick declined as did The Human Fly, Atom Ant, and Spiderman (technically he’s an arachnid--which is also the word peanut in French if memory serves--but I was getting desperate). I didn’t even try any of the not-yet-deceased Beatles though Yoko Ono shrilly volunteered. I had to explain that I was looking for bugs--not vermin.

Sadly, the best I could come up with was Jiminy Cricket. You remember Jiminy--right? He’s the guy that kept telling Pinocchio to let his conscience be his guide, to always tell the truth (even when the Blue Fairy asks if the dress she's wearing makes her butt look fat and she turns him into a spastic colon for his honesty) but neglected to mention that mashing up Viagra tablets and using it as acne cream will have side effects.

Therefore, having little recourse, I have reluctantly allowed the bug to do the sign off and have acquiesced to his request to sing--and not write or say it. I hope that the decent chaps at Drunk Jays Fans are living up to their name--it’ll make this much less painful. O.K. O.K. a teensy weensy little tiny bit (anybody else havin' a Freudian moment right now?) less painful.

(To the tune of: “When You Wish Upon A Star”)

"When you give your best regards,
Makes folks want to hit the bar,
Anything that’s on your blog will make them spew.

If your regards, at the end, causes hate mail to be sent.
Since you gave your best regards as retards do.

Like a dolt in cyberspace, words pile up to cause headaches
When you give your be…"*CRUNCH*

(checks bottom of shoe)

I’ve waited a long time to do that. When your kids are 5 and 3 years old and they play that movie 33 times in a row--it changes a guy y'know?

Best Regards

John

Dis dat and d’udder t'ing…

2008-01-26T13:36:00.000-08:00

Rod Barajas? Bill Baer of Crashburn Alley (be sure to check out his take on The Ryan Howard Situation) assesses the Jays inking Barajas thusly:

“Hah! You got Barajas! His unremarkable tenure in Philly aside, he was part of the reason why our catching corps was even close to league-average offensively. But I'm expecting more out of our Ruiz/Coste tandem in '08.”

I think that qualifies as an endorsement of sorts. The good news is that he had a career high in OBP in 2007 at .352; the bad news is that (1) it brings his career OBP up to a lofty .288 and (2) guys who bat in the No. 8 hole in a NL lineup are walked quite frequently. Barajas has enjoyed one other season of a .300 plus OBP but I think it’s still safe to expect that he’ll be a bit of an upgrade on Sal Fasano.

Why?

What he lacks in on base skills he makes up for somewhat in power. Barajas hit 47 HR over 1112 AB over three seasons with the Texas Rangers. It wasn’t a fluke of the home park either as he clubbed 26 of them on the road. He’s solid defensively with a decent arm but stolen bases against the Blue Jays are more due to the pitching staff. Benji Molina threw out over 30% of potential base thieves the year before and after his tenure in Canada where he fell below 20% in that regard.

I like it a lot better than Jason Phillips and Sal Fasano at any rate (or so I keep telling myself ... serenity now). Heck, hopefully Robinzon Diaz will make the Fasano/Barajas point moot.

I’m giving J.P. Ricciardi (a half) thumbs up in addressing the Jays depth problem. I can’t see the Jays giving over 1300 AB to players hitting around replacement level or worse. I didn’t mind seeing Adam Lind as part of that because if you’re going to stick that level of talent into the lineup, do it with those who will get something good from it--such as major league experience for a promising prospect.

Once again, I find myself becoming cautiously optimistic about the upcoming season. I’ll have more to say about that in the coming months on THT, MSN and here.

No way Jose…

I do not know if Magglio Ordonez did or did not use anabolic steroids or human growth hormone. Jose Canseco’s second book “Vindicated” means very little. Yes, he was correct more often than not in his original book but his attempted blackmail of Ordonez is low--even by Canseco’s tawdry standards. Canseco is stooping to David Samson-level low. It is one thing to try to vindicate slights you felt you received while in the game, quite another to try to extort someone in MLB while doing so.

Sadly, Ordonez’s refusing to sue this skunk of a human being will cause some to wonder if he is afraid of what might come out over the course of investigating the matter. His first co-author/ghostwriter/guy-to-spell-the-big-words for him opted out of this book project since Canseco will be tabbing Alex Rodriguez but lacking any hard evidence regarding that particular claim. I liked the line in Jon Heyman's article on the subject: "One former associate of Canseco's insisted he's not that smart, saying of him, 'He's a moron of the highest order. If he could have majored in moronics, he would have gone to college'.''

Heh.

Folks should appreciate that Jose Canseco’s efforts led to more stringent testing in MLB. (I don’t like any situation where somebody has to choose between using potentially toxic black market drugs manufactured under less-than-sterile conditions and giving up their dream.) Nevertheless, he’s undermining all the positive things he did with this male bovine biological by-product.

Catching up (again)…

I haven’t posted my last few THT and MSN columns of late. Here is what you missed (lucky you):

Striped Delight: more whining about the Hall of Fame vote by the BBWAA with a focus on the lack of love among the 1980’s Tigers--especially Alan Trammell and Lou Whitaker.
Grumpy Old Men: again, more whining about the HOF vote. I compare the careers of Jim Rice and Albert Belle. I will be re-visiting this next Friday at THT.
The Pujols Awards: week 2: The second instalment of the new THT reader-interactive feature honouring the heroes and zeros of a given week. Among the honourees are Pat Gillick, J.P. Ricciardi, John Gibbons, Elijah Dukes and others.
The Pujols Awards: week 3: Nominations are starting to come in--I haven’t closed the ‘polls’ for this Wednesday’s edition so if you want to nominate someone for an “Albert” or a “Luis” drop me a line. This edition saw both the U.S. Government and Roger Clemens take some blasts from readers.
Myth-busting: Here I discuss why Bud Selig was given yet another contract extension. Believe it or not, Bud earns far more than most players in MLB. As I mention in the piece, maybe it is time for a salary cap on major league executives.
If you’re wondering about yesterday’s THT column (or lack thereof) it got tangled up in the machinery and was a no-go on the site. However, the post just below this one is what it was supposed to be--a comparison between Bobby Doerr and Joe Gordon based on one article in a series of them by Ben Feldman of The Bleacher Report that dealt with The Best 11 Second Basemen of All Time.

Family Values...

Since we’re goin’ all retro today the good folks at “Déjà View” requested an opportunity to do a classic sign off on behalf of my good friends at Drunk Jays Fans. I guess they (DV not DJF) know that I’m a big fan of the original Addams Family (with John Astin and Carolyn Jones) since they told me there would be an Addams Family theme to the festivities.

So, here we go …

Da Da Da Dum (snap snap)
Da Da Da Dum (snap snap)
Da Da Da Dum
Da Da Da Dum
Da Da Da Dum (snap snap)

He’s geeky and he’s hokey,
Far too verbose--not okay.
Knows dick-all 'bout the Blue Jays.
But he’ll give his best regards.

His blog’s a mausoleum.
His posts--nobody reads 'em.
It makes him want to screa-um.
But he’ll give his best regards.

Da Da Da Dum (snap snap) … weak
Da Da Da Dum (snap snap) … geek
Da Da Da Dum
Da Da Da Dum
Da Da Da Dum (snap snap) … he reeks

So take your mouse and backspace.
Thank God he’s not on MySpace.
His whole blog is in bad taste.
But. He’ll. Give. His. Best. Regards. (snap snap)

Errr … did Dustin send you?

Best Regards

John

In defense of Joe Gordon...

2008-01-26T03:41:00.000-08:00

(With thanks to Joe Distelheim for tidying it up.)

Ben Feldman of The Bleacher Report wrote an excellent article entitled The Best 11 Second Basemen of All Time last week (it's part of a series he's doing dealing with "The Best" at each—be sure to click the link here and check them all out—I highly recommend it).

Since I obviously did not write a column to tell you that, it’s safe to assume there are points of disagreement. Ben wrote:

“When looking at these players, what is most striking is how similar in value they all were. Unfortunately, I have to cut Joe Gordon first. With players grouped this tightly, I can't quite give him full credit for the unknown production of the war years.”

The two issues I have are:

1. If Bobby Doerr ranks eighth, then I cannot see the justification of Gordon missing the cut.

2. Using WARP (Wins Above Replacement Player). I have never liked using “replacement level” as a baseline for assessment. It’s based on an assumed criterion ("this is replacement level production"). I find league average preferable since it is a more tangible baseline and compares major leaguers to major leaguers rather than "the best Triple-A player available."

League average is easy to determine. There are some variations in calculating replacement level.

For myself, I cannot see how you can place Bobby Doerr and Joe Gordon side by side and say that Doerr was a better second baseman. They were contemporary players who allow us to examine their careers side by side. I will concede that Doerr was the better defender, but, according to eyewitness accounts, Gordon too was excellent defensively.

Robert Creamer (excerpted from Baseball In 1941) wrote, "It seems incredible to me now ... that the Yankees would consider mucking about with their great second baseman. I cannot fathom why McCarthy ever considered moving a fielder as good as Gordon out of a position as vitally important as second base."

It was often written back then that Gordon was “peerless” defensively at second. I think it’s safe to say that Gordon could flash some serious leather.

Let’s do a comparison based on both traditional and sabermetric measures. We'll use black type to indicate when Doerr was better that Gordon in a given category in each season when both played (hence 1944-45 aren't used):

From 1938-50:

                Joe Gordon (5707 AB)                 
  BA  OBP  SLG Runs 2B 3B  HR RBI OPS+ RCAA   BR    
.268 .357 .466  83  24  7  25  97 108   -1   2.8  
.284 .370 .506  92  32  5  28 111 123   28  18.5  
.281 .340 .511 112  32 10  30 103 121   15  16.0 
.276 .358 .466 104  26  7  24  87 117   13  13.7 
.322 .409 .491  88  29  4  18 103 155   43  41.0 
.249 .365 .413  82  28  5  17  69 126   21  21.0 
                    Did not play                 
                    Did not play                                   
.210 .308 .338  35  15  0  11  47  79  -15 -10.3 
.272 .346 .496  89  27  6  29  93 135   27  23.7 
.280 .371 .507  96  21  4  32 124 134   30  24.7 
.251 .355 .407  74  18  3  20  84 103    1   1.7 
.236 .340 .429  59  12  1  19  57  98   -1  -1.8 
.268 .357 .466 914 264 52 253 975 120  161 151.1

Now, let's see how many times Doerr bettered him:

                  Bobby Doerr (6544 AB)
  BA  OBP  SLG  Runs 2B 3B  HR  RBI OPS+ RCAA  BR
.289 .363 .397   70  26  7   5   80  86  -17 -11.4
.318 .365 .448   75  28  2  12   73 103  -12   1.6 
.291 .353 .497   87  37 10  22  105 114    9  10.5
.282 .339 .450   74  28  4  16   93 105    2   2.0
.290 .369 .455   71  35  5  15  102 128   21  20.7
.270 .339 .412   78  32  3  16   75 117   10  12.4
.325 .399 .528   95  30 10  15   81 165   51  39.2
                     Did not play
.271 .346 .453   95  34  9  18  116 116    0  11.8
.258 .329 .426   79  23 10  17   95 103  -11  -0.4
.285 .386 .505   94  23  6  27  111 131   31  22.8
.309 .393 .497   91  30  9  18  109 128   16  21.1 
.294 .367 .519  103  29 11  27  120 116   -1  10.5
.289 .362 .465 1012 355 86 208 1160 113   99 141.0

Of the 121 black ink opportunities, Doerr garnered 52--11 from 1946 when Gordon was shaking off two years of rust. Doerr captured 16 of the available 33 black ink in BA/OBP/SLG. Despite the differences in hitting environments, Doerr led in slugging only three times, one of which was 1946. During the years when both were active and Gordon was playing half his games in Yankee Stadium (1938-43, 1946), Doerr hit 104 homers while Gordon homered 153 times (despite having almost 250 fewer at-bats than Doerr).

In the adjusted stats section, Doerr could generate black ink in only 10 of 33 categories. In the seasons between 1938-48 when both were active, Gordon posted superior numbers in 23 of the 27 categories … three of the four times Doerr finished higher occurred in 1946.

Now Doerr is a legit Hall of Famer, but was helped immeasurably as a hitter by Fenway Park. When examining the above numbers (especially power), understand that being a right-handed hitter in Yankee Stadium/Municipal Stadium was a great deal different from being a right-handed hitter in Fenway Park. A right-handed hitter in Gordon's day was aiming at a target whimsically referred to as "Death Valley," where the dimensions were 402 feet to left center, 457 to deep left center, and 461 to straightaway center.

On the other hand, Doerr had the Green Monster to shoot at, the same wall that is making Jim Rice a popular Cooperstown candidate. The aggregate park factor for Gordon's career was 98 (ranging from 96-101); Doerr's was 104 (ranging from 99-110). In short, Gordon was shooting at the most difficult part of "The House That Ruth Built" during his time in pinstripes whereas Doerr had a career full of at bats aiming at the Monster.

A few years ago I wrote a comparison among Gordon, Doerr and contemporary second sackers using an Olympic format (I originally wrote it in an Olympic year). Put another way, in each year I noted when either player finished first (gold), second (silver) and third (bronze) in five events: OPS, OPS+, Offensive Winning Percentage (OWP), Runs Created against Position (RCAP) and Runs Created Per 27 outs (RC/27). Since Gordon played in 11 seasons and there were five categories, that made 55 “events” in my dweebish Olympiad.

Then I broke it down using four comparisons—Gordon vs. the AL, Doerr vs. the AL; Gordon vs. MLB and Doerr vs. MLB (again, I used only other second basemen).

Here were the results (I'll spare you the cheesy charts):

Joe Gordon vs. all major league second basemen: Over the course of Gordon’s career, out of 55 possible categories (11 years x five statistical evaluations), Gordon has 15 first place entries, including sweeps in 1941 and 1942 (he won the AL MVP in 1942). He had 17 second place finishes and four third place finishes. So, in 55 dweebish Olympic events, Gordon copped 15 gold medals, 17 silver, four bronze, for a total of 36 medals out of a possible 55 "events." So, how did Bobby Doerr do in this round?

Bobby Doerr vs. all major league second basemen: Bobby Doerr, in a possible 55 "events" won a total of 26 medals (six gold, 13 silver, seven bronze). Now let us narrow our focus and put Gordon and Doerr head-to-head by tossing the National Leaguers out of the equation …

Joe Gordon vs. all AL second basemen: Therefore, competing strictly against his AL counterparts, Gordon (out of 55 "events") copped 21 gold, 14 silver, and four bronze--for a total of 39. He almost swept the year before he went into the service (four gold, one silver), and in 1947 (four gold, one silver). His struggles in 1946 could be easily dismissed as simple rustiness. How did Doerr fare?

Bobby Doerr vs. all AL second basemen: Doerr finished with 10 gold medals, 22 silver, 10 bronze--for a total of 42. Interestingly, over the course of Gordon's career (excluding 1944 and 1945 when he was in the service), the only year in which Doerr was a superior offensive player was 1948.

During the time Doerr and Gordon were active, contemporaneous accounts viewed Gordon as superior. He was selected to The Sporting News all star team six out of a possible seven times, finished in the top 10 in MVP voting five times to Doerr’s two (top 10 finishes). Gordon was an All-Star in nine of his 11 seasons, Doerr nine of his 14 seasons.

What a great many people didn't know was that Joe Gordon, for decades, was the greatest home run-hitting second baseman in baseball history. Despite playing half of his games in good pitchers' parks, Gordon enjoyed the greatest home run percentage (6,000 plate appearance qualifier) of any second baseman of any era (4.43). He is fifth all time in total homers from the position (with just 5,707 AB) behind Rogers Hornsby (8,173 AB), Ryne Sandberg (8,385 AB), Joe Morgan (9,277 AB) and Jeff Kent (8,058 AB). Nevertheless, nobody popped them out more frequently than Joe Gordon.

Doerr may have played longer, but I don't think he played better than Joe Gordon. Gordon's teams went to six World Series, winning five. Doerr's copped a single flag, but fell in the Fall Classic. It's a minor point, but it does count.

If I had to pick a second baseman and my choices were Gordon and Doerr, I'd take Gordon.

Totally radical compadre...

I realize that I’m a fair bit older than the guys at Drunk Jays Fans. I thought it would be nice to give them a real taste of the 1980’s (dons mullet wig, pushes up sleeves on sports jacket and removes socks and puts shoes back on … checks mirror to insure that there’s enough scruff on the ol’ visage).

Perfect … Geez, I look like an idiot. [space reserved for wisecracks--once again, please be creative]

Now, let’s get totally retro gnarly dudes and dudettes and without further ado, to handle the sign off I have pop duo Milli Vanilli. Take ‘er away guys…

D'oh!!! (smacks palm to forehead)

(sigh)

I'd forgotten about that. That's the worst thing about middle age--your memory starts to go. At least Britney had a tape recorder; these idiots didn't even do that. Oh well...

Best Regards

John

The Mike Gill Show: Dinner at Arby's (as in arbitration)...

2008-01-23T11:50:00.000-08:00

It’s (checks calendar) Wednesday and that means ... tomorrow’s Thursday.

No--that’s not it. I mean it is but it’s not what it’s about at least not…

Ahhhh screw it, I have the program for today’s ESPN 1450’s Mike Gill Show segment. Today we discuss:

Ryan Howard wants $10 million and the Phillies are offering $7 million ... who wins if it goes to arbitration?
Should the Phillies offer him a long-term deal and lock him up or take their chances when he is eligible for free agency in 2011 risking making him feel unhappy and unappreciated?
Does Ryan Howard deserve Albert Pujols/A-Rod money, something less or something in-between?
What is something you’re looking forward to as we approach spring training? (This will be a weekly question.)

Ryan Howard wants $10 million and the Phillies are offering $7 million ... who wins if it goes to arbitration?

Let’s see, he has a RotY award, an MVP, hit 105 HR the last two seasons and has a career line of .291/.397/.610. When you consider the mediocre talent that have been signing contracts that average $10 million a year--I can’t see an arbitrator saying that he’s worth only $7 million. Technically, a player can only compare himself to players of like tenure but there have always been exceptions made (Doug Drabek, Bruce Sutter, Fernando Valenzuela etc.) for players that have “star power.”

Should the Phillies offer him a long-term deal and lock him up or take their chances when he is eligible for free agency in 2011 risking making him feel unhappy and unappreciated?

If this kid is going to be part of the future, then lock him up now. Buy up his arbitration and a couple of his free agent years. When that contract is over he’ll be in his early 30’s and the team will have a better idea about how he’ll age.

Guarantee themselves that they will have this guy for his peak years. It’ll be cheaper than waiting for free agency judging by how revenues are growing. A team doesn’t have to pay free agent wages when offering a long-term deal at this point in his career. He trades some money for security and being set financially for life while the team will pay a little more now--by the time the contract is done (assuming no catastrophic injuries) they’ll have saved some money.

Howard, Chase Utley, Jimmy Rollins, Cole Hamels and to a lesser extent--Brett Myers are the core that a club builds around. Making sure all of them are under contract for the next few years almost guarantees that a franchise is in a position to contend for the foreseeable future.

Does Ryan Howard deserve Albert Pujols/A-Rod money, something less or something in-between?

Here is where the Phillies have to be careful. Don’t forget, they have got Jimmy Rollins and Chase Utley sewn up so the Phillies cannot blow the doors off when locking up Howard. If they do, the team may put themselves in a position where there are unhappy players that they may have to renegotiate with to keep content. If Howard has filed for $10 million--then chances are he’ll be willing to take a bit less than that in exchange for long-term security.

Albert Pujols could fall over dead tomorrow and the Hall of Fame might make him eligible simply because he’s been historically great. Alex Rodriguez is heir to the home run crown. Both offer their club’s more than a booming bat. Howard is more limited--he can knock the crap out of the ball but he’s got little value defensively and none on the bases. Howard cannot realistically expect the levels of compensation that guys who are already (or close to being) Hall of Famers.

What is something you’re looking forward to as we approach spring training?

This is the year of second basemen. The Phillies have Utley, the Jays, Aaron Hill (I refer to Hill as ‘Utley-lite’), I’m expecting huge years out of both of them and hopefully an MVP will be coming Mr. Utley’s way in 2008. The Jays have this kid named Travis Snider who absolutely beats the snot out of the ball. He was all of 19 last year and hit 35 doubles, 7 triples, 16 HR and slugged .525 in 457 AB. In 2006, at the age of 18 he slugged .567 with 11 HR in less than 200 AB. I’ve seen some clips of him on YouTube and I’m hoping they bring him to Spring Training just to get a look at him. His hitting reminds me a lot of Ryan Howard (including the strikeouts) but he’s a corner OF (although I doubt he’ll be playing there by the time he reaches Toronto). If he comes to camp, I hope I’ll get to see him play some spring training games.

Let’s try this again shall we…?

Well, I’ve still got Frank Grimes laying on my floor with his tongue stuck in the CD drive. I’ve been told that I cannot move him until the coroner confirms he's deceased and next of kin are contacted. It would be a lot less disgusting if my dogs wouldn’t insist on rolling in him.

Ew.

However, the show must go on and the fine earthlings over at Drunk Jays Fans need to know that my post is over. Against my better judgement (which is pretty much how I’ve lived my life to this point in time) I will again be employing an animated guest to handle festivities.

Any guesses on who it is and why he’s volunteered to do the signoff?

“Well you’re really asking two questions there. The first one takes me back to 1934. Admiral Burn had just reached the pole, only hours ahead of the Three Stooges ... and I guess he won the argument, but I walked away with the turnips. The following morning I resigned my commission with the coastguard. The next thing I knew there was civil war in Spain and, that’s everything which happened in my life right up to the time you asked me to do this…”

And I appreciate your coming here toda…

“Now, my story begins in 19-dikkity-2. We had to say dikkity ‘cause the Kaiser had stolen our word twenty. I chased that rascal to get it back, but gave up after dikkity-six miles …”

Thanks, but we…

“ … three wars back we called Sauerkraut "liberty cabbage" and we called liberty cabbage "super slaw" and back then a suitcase was known as a "Swedish lunch box." Of course, nobody knew that but me. Anyway, long story short... is a phrase whose origins are complicated and rambling, kinda like…”

Um…

“… where you write posts that don't go anywhere. Like the time I caught the ferry over to Shelbyville. I needed a new heel for my shoe. So, I decided to go to Morganville, which is what they called Shelbyville in those days. So I tied an onion to my belt, which was the style at the time. Now, to take the ferry cost a nickel, and in those days nickels had pictures of bumblebees on them. 'Give me five bees for a quarter', you'd say. Now, where were we? Oh, yeah...the important thing was that I had an onion on my belt, which was the style at the time. They didn't have white onions because of the war; the only thing you could get was those big yel…”

But…

“… AHHHHHHH DEATH!!”

Sorry, that’s just Frank Gri…

“… then after World War Two, it got kinda quiet, 'till Superman challenged FDR to a race around the world. FDR beat him by a furlong, or so the comic books would have you believe. The truth lies somewhere in betweeeezzzzzZZZZZZZ"

(whispering) BestRegardsJohnbye!

Pat Hentgen…

2008-01-21T16:34:00.000-08:00

There is an interesting post over at Drunk Jays Fans about choosing your favourite player. Over the years, I have had several favourite Jays. One guy I fell in love with at the get-go was Pat Hentgen and Bergkamp’s post at DJF quickly caused me to recall him.

When I first saw him pitch in the big leagues on a semi-regular basis back in 1992 I knew he’d be good (and yes, I have multiple witnesses regarding my very rare successful prognostication). As a kid, Hentgen idolized Jack Morris and if imitation is the sincerest form of flattery then Morris should be very flattered.

They had differing styles but had one thing in common--they wanted the ball and they went into the game with the thought that the bullpen was getting the night off whether they liked it or not. I have two very distinct Hentgen memories that cropped up after a moment’s reflection. The first one was the year of the strike. The Jays were defending back-to-back World Series championships.

The Jays opened the season strong, so optimism was running high.

Back in the 1990’s, one pitcher had some serious ‘ownage’ on the Jays--Kevin Appier. Despite a .500 record against Toronto, he posted a career ERA of 2.84 in 171.1 IP. When the Kansas City Royals (who felt they were contenders after signing David Cone after the 1992 season) came in for a series in early May. Appier was to pitch the opener and would face 19-game winner (in 1993) Hentgen.

Both were at the top of their game--going into the bottom of the fourth, the only guy to reach base was Jose Lind who had gotten a dribbler up the middle after Hentgen struck out five of the first seven outs he recorded. Devon White opened the bottom of the fourth with a single and quickly stole second. Roberto Alomar grounded out to the right side of the infield and White was on third. A two out infield single by Joe Carter got Devo home.

Both hurlers continued to put up zeros on the scoreboard. Base runners were few and far between. In the eighth Hentgen struck out the side for the second time matching Appier‘s feat of doing likewise. With the Jays hanging onto a one run lead and Duane Ward out with what would be pretty much a career-ending injury; manager Cito Gaston decided to let Hentgen finish what he started.

He got both Brian McRae and Wally Joyner to quickly pop up to the infield. Mike MacFarlane battled Hentgen before getting him to swing through strike three. Hentgen turned around and yelled in triumph to his teammates. The box score said it all:


Kansas City Royals         IP     H   R  ER   BB  SO  HR   
K Appier, L (2-3)           8     3   1   1    1  10   0        
Totals                      8     3   1   1    1  10   0   
              
Toronto Blue Jays          IP     H   R  ER   BB  SO  HR       
P Hentgen, W (4-2)          9     2   0   0    2  14   0        
Totals                      9     2   0   0    2  14   0

The other memory was Hentgen’s run to the Cy Young from July 6, -Aug 28, 1996. Hentgen won 10 of 11 starts and the only real blemish on that stretch was on August 7, when Cito Gaston needed to rest his beleaguered bullpen and let Hentgen go the distance at Fenway Park giving up eight earned runs. He went the distance in his very next start at home against Boston but this time gave up a single run.

Despite the Fenway debacle, Hentgen posted 2.24 ERA over the 11 starts and tossed seven complete games including five in a row beginning with the bombing in Boston. Going into the July 6 start Hentgen was 7-6, 4.14 ERA and was on nobody’s Cy Young radar. By the end of August he was 17-7, 3.33 ERA and very much in the hunt, a hunt that would conclude successfully.

Jack Morris would’ve been proud.

Let‘s try again…

The nice thing about deceased cartoon characters is that they can be reanimated. So, after resurrecting Frank Grimes, I have asked him to handle today’s sign off for the good folks at Drunk Jays Fans.

Well?

Is there something wrong Mr. Grimes? You don’t look wel…

“Oh, I, I can't stand it any longer. This whole blogosphere is insane. Insane, I tell you! Daahh! Aaah! I can be lazy too! Look at me, I am a worthless blogger, just like John Brattain! Give me a Pulitzer! Ooh, I write like a moron, but nobody minds! I'm peeing on the CPU. Give me a job at ESPN! Now I'm returning to typing without washing my hands. But it doesn't matter, because I'm John Brattain! I don't need to blog intelligently, 'cause someone else will do it for me. Best Regards! Best Regards! Best Regards! Best Regards! Oh, hi, Mr. Studeman. I'm the worst writer in the world. Time to go home to my office and blog incessantly. What's this? "CD Drive?" Well, I can stick my tongue in it because I'm John Bra…”

Um errrrrr … should I call 911?

Gotta go.

Best Regards

John

Making the blood boil...

2008-01-20T06:34:00.000-08:00

You have got to be kidding me. If this isn’t Bud Selig’s favourite writer then as God is my witness, I don’t know who is--check this out…

“Steroids and other performance enhancing drugs were used for one reason: Money. The better the numbers the players could post, the more money they could demand. The longer a career could be extended, the more cash went into the bank account.

Money, and only money, created the steroid era.

That means the decision to use or not is entirely a decision made by players, nobody else. MLB and owners may have buried their collective heads in the sand for as long as possible because they were making money off the steroid home run bombs, but only the players could decide to use or not use ... The players have taken to acting more like the Mafia then responsible citizens. They worry more about being called a "rat" by the miscreants who took the drugs then they worry about doing the right thing and caring about the game.”

Where do I start?

On the one hand, he says that MLB looked the other way because of profits, lavished large contracts on juicing players but says that players are entirely at fault for this? Has he considered that if owners refused to offer large contracts to steroid users it would have created a massive disincentive to use?

What he (I won’t name the writer to spare him the embarrassment) appears to be saying that when owners pay roiders ungodly amounts of money that it’s up to the players to say no. In any business, it’s management’s responsibility to set the parameters of employment. Even before drug testing came about, there was a ‘probable cause’ provision in the collective bargaining agreement where a team could--if it chose--make a case that an employee appeared to be abusing drugs and have him tested.

None did so.

If they took that step, they could offer contracts that reflected their disdain for performance-enhancing drug users.

None did so.

The New York Yankees agreed to strike every reference to steroids in Jason Giambi’s $120 million contract when it was being offered. They could have said to his agent Arn Tellem, “That request makes me suspicious that your client uses PED … the deal is off.”

They didn’t.

“The players have taken to acting more like the Mafia then responsible citizens. They worry more about being called a ‘rat’ by the miscreants who took the drugs then they worry about doing the right thing and caring about the game.”

Riiight, through all this ownership did nothing, the media said nothing, agents likewise and young men with little life experience are expected to be the ones responsible for ‘caring about the game.’ Ownership was taking a course of self-interest to protect profits. Agents took a course of self-interest to protect their level of commissions. The union executive took a course of self-interest to protect the salary bar. The media took a course of self-interest to protect access (so they could continue to earn money covering baseball) but when the players follow their example--they’re acting like the mafia?

Pathetic.

The truly sad thing about this piece is the fact that, of the five groups mentioned, it’s the players that are the youngest (hence, least experienced and least savvy) of the lot but this guy thinks they’re the ones responsible for this mess.

To give you an idea of who is truly purulent in all this…

The public funding of stadiums in MLB has cost taxpayers probably close to $10 billion since 1990 when you factor in maintenance, amortization, interest on bond issues etc. That translates into a lot less money for schools, healthcare, infrastructure and essential services (police, fire dept., various services for women and children). Often teams, while threatening their regions claim that the area has to demonstrate that it wants MLB to be part of their community. Further, they receive tangible economic benefits for shelling out the money.

Item 1: During the contraction fiasco in the early part of the decade, the Minnesota Supreme Court ruled that the Twins' lease required that the team play there in 2002 (therefore no contraction). It was here that Selig presented his brief, in which he said: “The Minnesota Twins are a private business; they are not owned by the people of Minnesota ... they are not a 'community asset' but a business …”

Yet…

On March 18, 2004 Governor Tim Pawlenty floated a proposal to have state and local governments pay for two-thirds of a new stadium for the Twins. Multi-billionaire Carl Pohlad said it wasn't enough: "[Public money] is where it should come from." (Read: from folks that aren't multi-billionaires like me) …

Item 2: From the Seattle Times: "The financial issue is simple, and the city's analysts agree, there will be no net economic loss if the Sonics leave Seattle. Entertainment dollars not spent on the Sonics will be spent on Seattle's many other sports and entertainment options. Seattleites will not reduce their entertainment budget simply because the Sonics leave…"

Any idea who said that? An economist? An anti-stadium lobby? Nope, the Sonics themselves. The team wants to leave Seattle, the city wishes to retain the club. The Sonics stated that a publicly financed new arena would be an economic plus for the region. Due to that, it should be the public that ponied up the cost of their current arena. Now that the Supersuckers want to graze in greener corporate welfare pastures they’re all but admitting that public financed sports venues are just one big boondoggle for the region building them.

There you have it. Bud Selig and his billionaire cartel have picked your pockets of untold billions of tax dollars and you get diddly-squat--no economic benefit, and the region has absolutely NO claim on your beloved team. It has always been about making the rich richer at the expense of those not rich.

These people are SLIME and the writer for USA Today wants to blame player avarice for the steroid era? I think he should be a proctopsychiatrist because he has one of the worst cases of inverse rectal-cranial syndrome that I have seen in a long, long time.

We have a very special guest star for today’s closing ceremonies…

In tribute to the good people of Drunk Jays Fans, I have enlisted the aid of the world renowned children’s author Dr. Suess to help with today’s sign-off. He has asked me to assist and I am honoured to do so. Here we go…

Dr. Suess: “I am Sam, John you are, will you give your best regards?”

I will not do it, Sam-you-are. I will not give my best regards.

Dr. Suess: “Would you do it here or there?”

I will not do it here or there. I will not do it anywhere. I will not give my best regards. I will not do it Sam-you-are.

Dr. Suess: “Would you do it in your house? Would you do it with your mouse?”

I will not do it in my house I will not do it with my mouse. I will not do it here or there, I will not do it anywhere. I will not give my best regards. I will not do it Sam-you-are.

Dr. Suess: “Would you do it for Danny Cox would you do it for Jimmie Foxx?”

Not for D. Cox. Not for J. Foxx. Not in my house. Not with my mouse. I will not do it here or there. I will not do it anywhere. I will not give my best regards. I will not do it Sam-you-are.

Dr. Suess: “Would you? Could you? For Chuck Carr? Do it do it here they are!

I would not, could not, for Chuck Carr.

Dr. Suess: "You do it. You will see. You may do it for Bill Lee.”

I would not, could not for Bill Lee. Nor for Chuck Carr, you let me be. Not for D. Cox. Not for J. Foxx. Not in my house. Not with my mouse. I will not do it here or there. I will not do it anywhere. I will not give my best regards. I will not do it Sam-you-are.

Dr. Suess: “John Sain! John Sain! John Sain! John Sain! Could you, would you, for Johnny Sain?”

Not for John Sain! Not for Bill Lee! Not for Chuck Carr! Sam! Let me be! I would not could not for Danny Cox. I could not would not for Jimmie Foxx. Not in my house. Not with my mouse. I will not do it here or there. I will not do it anywhere. I will not give my best regards. I will not do it Sam-you-are.

Dr. Suess: “Say! Alvin Dark. Alvin Dark. For Alvin Dark. Would you, could you, for Alvin Dark?”

I would not, could not, for Al Dark.

Dr. Suess: “Would you, could you, for Ferris Fain?”

I would not, could not, for Ferris Fain! Not for Al Dark or Johnny Sain. Not for Chuck Carr. Not for Bill Lee. I will not do it, Sam, you see. Not in my house. Not for Dan Cox. Not with my mouse. Not with J. Foxx. I will not do it here or there. I will not do it anywhere!

Dr. Suess: “You do not give best regards?”

I will not do it Sam-You-Are.

Dr. Suess: “Could you, would you, for Dick Groat?”

I would not, could not, for Dick Groat!

Dr. Suess: “Would you, could you, for Jim Coates?”

I could not, would not, for Jim Coates. I will not, will not, for Dick Groat. I will not do it for John Sain. I will not do it for Ferris Fain. Not for Al Dark! Not for Bill Lee! Not Chuck Carr! You let me be! I will not do it for Danny Cox, I will not do it for Jimmie Foxx. I will not do it in my house. I will not do it with my mouse. I will not do it here or there. I will not do it anywhere! I will not give my best regards, I will not do it Sam-You-Are.

Dr. Suess: “You will not do it, so you say. Do it! Do it! And you may. Do it and you may, I say! Try them and you may, I say.”

Sam! If you will let me be, I will do it. You will see.

Say! I will give my best regards. I will, I will Sam-You-Are. I will do it for Dick Groat, I will do it for Jim Coates, and I will do it for Johnny Sain, and I will do it for Ferris Fain, for Alvin Dark, and for Bill Lee, I will do it, type it you see!

I will do it for Danny Cox, I will do it for Jimmie Foxx, I will do it in my house, I will do it with my mouse, I will do it here and there, I will do it ANYWHERE! I will give my best regards, I will, I will Sam-You-Are!

Therefore...

Best Regards

John

DH = Doubtlessly Historic...

2008-01-19T12:01:00.000-08:00

As you will recall, last Monday we discussed Looking ahead to future BBWAA snafus.... There I wrote:

“The class of 2010 will have two slam-dunks and two with decent cases--I’m predicting all four fall short. They are Roberto Alomar, Barry Larkin, Fred McGriff and Edgar Martinez (we’ll deal with the Crime Dog and Edgrr at a later date). Alomar and Larkin should be no-brainers--both were superb defensive middle infielders with terrific bats.”

Admittedly, I was selling Edgar Martinez a little short in that my personal assessment is much higher. I do think the BBWAA will swing and miss on Edgrr but I feel he has a rock solid case for induction into the Hall of Fame.

To begin with, the greatest first, second and third baseman, shortstop, left, right and centerfielder, the greatest pitcher and catcher are all in the Hall-of-Fame. So doesn’t it stand to reason that the greatest DH should be there as well? It may be tempting to ask whether this applies to setup men, LOOGY’s, pinch hitters etc. but it should be remembered that a DH sometimes plays every game of the season--the same cannot be said of the aforementioned role players.

How does he stack up against his peers? First, let’s look at his totals strictly as a DH (at least 6000 PA).


Stat Tot Rank
AVG .313   1
OBP .428   1
SLG .537   1
XBH  627   1
R    877   1
H   1593   4
2B   370   2 
HR   251   2
RBI 1006   2
BB   995   1
RCAA 519   1
RCAP 422   1
TOB 2653   1
TB  2728   2

I think we can safely say he was best in the business. Now let’s see how his hitting stacks up historically (min 8500 PA):


Stat Tot  Rank
AVG .313   30
OBP .428   12
SLG .537   22
XBH  839   72
R   1219   ++
H   2247   ++
2B   514  T35 
HR   309   ++
RBI 1261   ++
BB  1283   38
RCAA 647   34
BR*  565.9 26
OPS+ 147  T41
TOB 3619   71
TB  3718   ++

*Adjusted Batting Runs
++Not in top 100

Now let’s see how he stacks up in his own era; we’ll define it as being since the season was extended to 162 games in 1961 until 2006--two years after his retirement.


Stat Tot  Rank
AVG .313    4
OBP .428    3
SLG .537   11
XBH  839   44
R   1219   62
H   2247   71
2B   514   17 
HR   309   84
RBI 1261   66
BB  1283   22
RCAA 647   10
BR*  565.9 12
OPS+ 147  T14
TOB 3619   32
TB  3718   62

*Adjusted Batting Runs
++Not in top 100

Due to his relatively short career his counting numbers don’t jump out at you, but his level of production has him among the elite. The thing is though, his particular set of counting numbers are actually very solid. One of the worst ways to argue about HOFers is using the “He’s in the group” where you set a number of standards where our candidate resides among some of the game’s greats. However, when you examine the group you see that the one you’ve included is a distant last in most of the categories.

Nevertheless, I’m going to do just that here. I’m not claiming that he’s in this group, but it will demonstrate the high level Martinez played at because it does take a special talent to be in this group--even if they’re away off from the rest.

Here’s the ‘group’--players with careers of at least 2000 hits, 500 doubles, 300 HR, 1000 runs/RBI/BB and batted better than .300/.400/.500 lifetime. The following are those who qualify: Babe Ruth, Ted Williams, Lou Gehrig, Rogers Hornsby, Stan Musial, Mel Ott and Edgar Martinez.

What makes Martinez’s career special is he had to be able to hit for average, for power, have a keen batting eye and sustaining it for a significant period of time to join the group. That’s why only seven players have accomplished the feat in major league history, it takes a tremendous hitter to accomplish it.

Some forgettable (in a HOF sense) players have high batting averages (Riggs Stephenson .336), OBP (Ferris Fain .424), SLG (Albert Belle .564), tons of hits (Harold Baines 2866), HR totals (Jose Canseco 462), doubles (Al Oliver with 529), RBI (Baines again 1628), walks (Eddie Yost 1614 BB), runs scored (Tom Brown 1521), but to excel in all the aforementioned categories is reserved for the truly great.

My point?

Edgar Martinez’s strength lay in his level of offensive production however, if you look at his counting stats as a set rather than in separate groups, it becomes obvious that there really isn’t anything wrong with those numbers.

The elephant in the room is Martinez’s time at DH. While he’s the greatest among that group, many feel that DH’s require an incredibly high standard to be considered for Cooperstown. Let’s address this: I’m going to resort to the “lowest common denominator” argument. We’ve already established that Martinez is a Hall-of-Fame hitter, but what about his lack of time in the field? Well, going to the opposite extreme, we need look no further than Bill Mazeroski; a Hall-of-Fame defender? There’s little doubt about that. What about his hitting?

Yes, he had over 2000 hits but that’s it. Did you know he never had a single season where he was league average or better? Not once. Every year, a league average hitter at second base would’ve been a better asset in the lineup than Maz. Yes, second base is a key defensive position, but how did Mazeroski fare against his contemporary second sackers? Over the course of his career, an average 2B created 834 runs. Maz created only 821 runs. In short, not only was he an offensive liability, he was an offensive liability for a second baseman!

Bad example? Fair enough--how about Ozzie Smith? All-time great glove, decent offensive player; what about defensive disasters such as Harmon Killebrew? Had he played today he’d likely be a DH--were that the case, is he no longer Hall-worthy? It’s good to remember that Killer isn’t in the Hall because he played in the field, it’s in spite of his defensive deficiencies.

I feel that Edgar Martinez’s career is deserving of a plaque in spite of his defensive deficiencies--in this case, his time at DH. Either way, he strikes me as worthy--the greatest DH in history or a player whose hitting was so amazing that he could be elected even though he spent most of his career as a designated hitter.

There's been a change...

I wanted to give the gang at Drunk Jays Fans a proper sig at the end of this but something came up.

The bubblegum pop-stars' guild (the Association of Immorally Retarded Ho’s Eagerly Awaiting Dough Songstresses) have requested that after the Hillary Duff fiasco back on January 16th (Miss Duff is worried that--and I quote--"it'll be a day that will live when I'm phlegmy"), that I allow another of their membership an opportunity to handle the sign-off. Reluctantly I have agreed and Britney Spears will be along shortly to do the honours.

There’s a knock on the door--that must be her now.

(gets up to answer door)

Um … hi guys.

(Geez, it’s the freakin’ Minnesota Vikings with a 20 gallon barrel.)

There’s seems to be some mistake gentlemen, I was led to believe Britney Spe… oh, she is here? So, did she hire you guys for security or something?

…

You’re. Her. Date.

I see… (shakes head).

(I don’t know and I don’t want to know.)

There she is now--holy flurping snit! I don’t believe this (rubs eyes) … I can’t believe this--honest to God folks, I’m not lying to you and I swear I’m telling the truth (rubs eyes). Britney Spears is fully clothed!

Whoa, somebody must have opened the seventh seal--the apocalypse is nigh. However, it will have to wait until we're done here.

Guys, that barrel looks awfully heavy, why don’t you set it down over… wow, I didn’t know Haagen Dazs sold Heavenly Hash in 20 gallon barrels. Well, there is a lot of you so I can see why… what? she doesn’t share?

(sigh)

Let’s just get this over with so you can get back to … whatever it is you're planning for tonight. Ready Ms. Spears? O.K. go…

(Are my ears clogged? I don’t hear anything.)

Uhh … Brit, a little louder please I don’t think that did it.

(quickly digs out ear with pinky) Nope, still nothing. Did you guys hear anything? Does she have laryngitis? She’s trying to say something but … what’s this? A tape recorder … O.K. what’s this for? Count backwards from three and hit play? Errrr … alright.

3 … 2 … 1 … (hits play button)

[britney’s voice] Best Regards

John [/britney’s voice]

xcdfzs qdfx mdsjk jlkuoi ,nmjkh \zAEW

(Sorry, I was banging my head on the keyboard.)

Tilting at windmills in my mind...

2008-01-18T15:42:00.000-08:00

O.K. gits and shiggles time.

For those of you determined to inflict my writing on yourself you’re doubtlessly aware than I have chewed up considerable bandwidth (Best Regards DJF … Best Regards and expect an offer you can't refuse further on) on this year’s Hall of Fame vote, Jim Rice, Tim Raines etc. etc. ad infinitum ad nauseum. During my sojourn through the wilderness that passes for my normal semi-conscious state, I tripped over an epiphany.

Most people have epiphanies … not me, unless I trip over it for it bashes me over the head I tend to ignore them and carry on my semi-somnambulant way.

Anyway, after I picked myself up and dusted myself off I realized that after re-examining Montreal Expos’ history as it pertains to Raines I had spent considerable time thinking about his outfield mate--Andre Dawson. Yes, Dawson had a terrible career OBP but after sitting back and looking at his entire body of work, I realized it was just one blemish on a tremendous résumé. I found a kindred spirit for Dawson in the Hall of Fame in Richie Ashburn (who I felt was a long overdue induction). Ashburn had a below league average slugging percentage but since he batted leadoff it wasn’t a major issue. Like ‘Hawk’, it was one blemish on a remarkable career.

I believe OBP an important measurement, but Dawson viewed his job to get the OBP guys home--not be one himself.

Therefore, let’s compare Andre Dawson and Jim Rice.


Player  AB   AVG  OBP  SLG Runs Hits  2B 3B  HR  RBI  RP  RCaa BR* OPS+
Rice   8225 .298 .352 .502 1249 2452 373 79 382 1451 2318 270 294.7 128
Dawson 9927 .279 .323 .482 1373 2774 503 98 438 1591 2526 216 216.4 119
*Batting Runs

Dawson played a lot longer than Rice, which allowed for erosion into his percentages and stats like Rcaa and Batting Runs that can go into the negative. Of course a longer career also translates into better counting stats. Of note, both players’ major league careers began at age 21. Since Rice was done at 36, let’s see where Dawson was at that age:


Player  AB   AVG  OBP  SLG Runs Hits  2B 3B  HR  RBI  RP  RCaa BR* OPS+
Rice   8225 .298 .352 .502 1249 2452 373 79 382 1451 2318 270 294.7 128
Dawson 8348 .282 .327 .489 1199 2354 417 92 377 1335 2157 245 239.2 123
*Batting Runs

That tightens things up a bit. Overall, Rice has a slight edge although Dawson--despite worse power-hitting environments--had 50 more extra base hits.

Of course, there are other issues to be dealt with. Rice played left field, Dawson manned center and right field. Rice was unremarkable in left, Dawson’s defense was renowned and won Gold Gloves at both positions--eight in all. How did they fare against their positional peers? At age 36, Rice’s RCAP (runs created above position) was 155 while Dawson weighed in at 191. By the time Dawson retired in had fallen to 140.

We have to bear in mind however that Dawson has a huge edge defensively (at more crucial positions), in base running (314 SB, 74% success rate to 58 SB, 63%) and despite 1702 more AB, grounded into 98 fewer double plays. On top of this, Rice was aided massively by his home park batting .277/.330/.459 away from Fenway while Dawson was often hurt by his home park ("Hawk” batted .278/.316/.483 on the road). Interestingly Dawson had more AB away yet slugged slightly higher while his BA/OBP suffered somewhat away from home.

Throwing everything together, it’s hard to come away with the conclusion that Rice (despite being a better pure hitter) was a superior player to Dawson. It’s the reason that “Hawk” was ‘awarded’ 340 win shares (300-350 generally considered HOF territory) to Rice’s 282. Once Rice left the batters box, he was no longer an asset to his team while Dawson was a threat both on the base paths as well as in the field.

Suffice it to say, Andre Dawson should be the first to get a plaque in Cooperstown.

Limited time offer from Ronco*…

Are you a Drunk Jays Fan?

How many times has this happened to you? You have a post, and you're trying to find an exciting new way to end it for your blog. You could type it, edit the best, the regards or both and end the post as you would any other. But why bother, now that you can use Ronco's amazing new blogging tool, the Best-Regards-o-Matic '08. Yes, bloggers, the days of troublesome editing, cutting and pasting are over, because Best-Regards-o-Matic '08 is the tool that lets you end the post with no tag waste, and without highlighting, cutting or pasting.

Here's how it works: Make a post, go to the end, and drop the sign off - that's the whole sign off - into the Best-Regards-o-Matic '08. Now, adjust the control dial so that the post is ended just the way you like it.

Best Regards

John

Yes, it's that simple!

We've got posts here, fast and easy and ready to end, mmm-mmm! Best-Regards-o-Matic '08 comes with ten interchangeable keyboard keys, a nine-month guarantee, and a booklet: 1,001 Ways to end posts. Best-Regards-o-Matic '08 works great on blogs, forums, usenet, and other internet sites.

Best-Regards-o-Matic '08 - it's clean, simple, and after five or ten posts, it gets to be quite a rush! Best-Regards-o-Matic '08 - you'll never have to cut, paste or sign off again!

*NTR

He Raines With Other Kings of the Diamond...

2008-01-17T13:16:00.000-08:00

It’s hard to believe actually.

I simply cannot fathom the BBWAA’s voting habits in recent years. Generally they do a good job in assessing true Hall of Fame talent--most of the worst selections originated with the Veterans Committee and not the writers. I had the good fortune to witness the careers of the men that were under consideration for baseball’s highest honor in 2007-08. This allows for both objective and subjective data to be analyzed as well as having contemporary accounts of their careers available for perusal.

Most folks into sabermetrics understand what Cooperstown numbers look like; some players may look like HOFers using modern measures but not necessarily with traditional metrics--an example of this being Bobby Grich. It works the other way as well--Jack Morris’s totals look far more impressive using mainstream numbers but not so good when filtered through sabermetric matrixes.

Quite frankly, I have no idea what to say when the voters miss guys who look like Hall of Famers regardless of the statistical measurement used.

To begin with (before we get to the meat of today’s topic); let’s have a look at two teammates: The one on top is an eight time Gold glove winning right fielder--the other and unremarkable defensive left fielder:


 AVG  OBP  SLG Runs Hits   2B  3B   HR  RBI  RP* OPS+ RCAA BR** GIDP
.272 .370 .470 1470 2446  483  73  385 1384 2469 127  378 362.4  227
.298 .352 .502 1249 2452  373  79  382 1451 2318 128  270 294.7  315
*Runs Produced (runs + RBI - HR)
**Batting Runs

One is on the cusp of Hall of Fame induction, the other fell off the ballot in his third year of eligibility when he failed to garner the necessary five percent. As we see above, it doesn’t matter which metric you use it’s easy to tell who was the better player. For whatever reason, Jim Rice may well be elected next year while Dwight Evans has to wait for the Veterans Committee.

Which brings us to today's rant.

Here are a trio of first ballot Hall of Fame corner outfielders (and members of the 3000 hit club) that played between 1955-2001. Again, we’ll use a mix of traditional and sabermetric measures:


  AB  XBH TOB* OPS+ RCAA BR**   SB  SB% RP***
 9288 763 3955 132  504 437.6  319  71  2386
10332 776 3833 109  223 107.4  938  75  2361
 9454 846 3656 130  409 355.4   83  64  2481
*Times On Base
**Batting Runs
***Runs Produced (runs + RBI - HR)

Any guesses as to the trio? Again, they’re all first ballot HOFers with 3000 or more hits.

Let’s add another player to the mix, another corner outfielder pretty much within the same time period mentioned at the outset. We’ll list him at the top …


  AB  XBH TOB* OPS+ RCAA BR**   SB  SB% RP***
 8872 713 3977 123  516 332.8  808  84  2381
 9288 763 3955 132  504 437.6  319  71  2386
10332 776 3833 109  223 107.4  938  75  2361
 9454 846 3656 130  409 355.4   83  64  2481
*Times On Base
**Batting Runs
***Runs Produced (runs + RBI - HR)

He doesn’t really stick out much--does he? While he’s last in extra base hits, third in runs produced and batting runs don’t forget that he’s dead last in at bats--by over 400 AB. Despite that, he’s first in reaching base, first in runs created above average (RCAA), and second best in stolen bases but tops in success rate. The simple fact is, he’s not ‘in the group’ in the sense that’s he’s at the bottom of it (and a good distance from the rest)--he’s right smack in the middle of them. No apologies are required for his entry in ‘the club.’

Let’s make still another addition to the group--once again, a corner outfielder (same time period) and we’ll add him in at the top as well:


  AB  XBH TOB* OPS+ RCAA BR**   SB  SB% RP***
 8225 834 3186 128  270 294.7   58  34  2318
 8872 713 3977 123  516 332.8  808  84  2381
 9288 763 3955 132  504 437.6  319  71  2386
10332 776 3833 109  223 107.4  938  75  2361
 9454 846 3656 130  409 355.4   83  64  2481
*Times On Base
**Batting Runs
***Runs Produced (runs + RBI - HR)

He’s in the mix as well. His extra base hits are second in the group despite the lowest number of at bats. He’s dead last by a good margin in reaching base, a distant fourth in RCAA, and a notable distance out of third in batting runs. Defensively he’s probably dead last and close to that as a base runner. Now we’ll add one final wrinkle:


  AB  XBH TOB* OPS+ RCAA BR**   SB  SB% RP*** GIDP 
 8225 834 3186 128  270 294.7   58  63  2318  315
 8872 713 3977 123  516 332.8  808  84  2381  142
 9288 763 3955 132  504 437.6  319  71  2386  260
10332 776 3833 109  223 107.4  938  75  2361  114
 9454 846 3656 130  409 355.4   83  64  2481  275
*Times On Base
**Batting Runs
***Runs Produced (runs + RBI - HR)

Oooo … despite having the fewest at bats of the group, he grounded into 40 more double plays than the rest. He’s one of the two worst in the grouping. So, now let’s see who our contestants are:


Player            AB  XBH TOB* OPS+ RCAA BR**   SB  SB% RP*** GIDP 
Jim Rice         8225 834 3186 128  270 294.7   58  63  2318  315
Tim Raines       8872 713 3977 123  516 332.8  808  84  2381  142
Tony Gwynn       9288 763 3955 132  504 437.6  319  71  2386  260
Lou Brock       10332 776 3833 109  223 107.4  938  75  2361  114
Roberto Clemente 9454 846 3656 130  409 355.4   83  64  2481  275
*Times On Base
**Batting Runs
***Runs Produced (runs + RBI - HR)

Three first ballot Hall of Famers, three members of the 3000 hit club, a probable Hall of Famer in 2009 and Tim Raines--who didn’t even get 25% of the vote.

It doesn’t matter whether you use traditional or sabermetric statistics, Tim Raines deserves closer scrutiny by those entrusted with the vote. He is overqualified for the honor.

Best Re…

WARNING…

A public service announcement for the good citizens of Drunk Jays Fans…

“Best-Regards is available by prescription only and is not for everyone. If you take high dosages of Labatts, often used for chest pain (from watching quality starts get wasted before you are) do not take Best-Regards. Such combinations could cause a sudden, unsafe rise in urges to go to the Rogers Centre to get felines intoxicated for potential pugilistic purposes. Don't drink alcohol in excess (no more than one two-four per hour) with Best-Regards. This combination may increase your chances of getting dizzy and insisting on productive outs. Best-Regards does not protect a man or his soon-to-be-pummelled random feline’s favourite team from nine game losing streaks.

The most common side effects with Best-Regards are rambling and an urge to blog excessively. Worn keyboards or overheating CPU’s were also reported, sometimes with delayed onset. Most men weren't bothered by the side effects enough to stop taking Best-Regards. As with any prescription BR tablet, in the rare event of an urge to bunt lasting more than 4 innings (smallballitis), seek immediate disconnection to avoid Run Expectancy lectures. Discuss your team affiliation and fandom, including any NL clubs, with your doctor to ensure Best-Regards is right for you and that you are healthy enough to watch the Blue Jays. If problems persist, consult with Mike Wilner on the FAN 590.”

Now we return you to our regularly scheduled Best Regards already in progress.

…gards

John

The Mike Gill Show: Lots of hot air....

2008-01-16T12:53:00.000-08:00

It’s Wednesday and we all know that means!

Oh … I thought you knew so you could tell me. Well thank you very much for making me look stupid (this space reserved for wisecracks--please be creative). Ah well, since we’re here let’s look at the agenda for this week’s segment on ESPN 1450’s Mike Gill Show:

What did we learn from yesterday’s hearings--if anything.
Miguel Tejada was traded this offseason with all this going on--did the Astros get a lemon?
Let’s discuss a couple of players: Kyle Lohse is it common for players to back off their stance on deals at this stage? He wanted four years but now it’s being reported that he might accept a three-year deal to go back to the Phillies.
If you are the Phillies, do you sign Loshe to a three-year deal or a guy like Livan Hernandez, Josh Fogg or Jon Lieber to a one-year pact?
Octavio Dotel, Armando Benitez, Jeremy Affeldt etc.--can they still help a bullpen for a club like the Phillies?

What did we learn from yesterday’s hearings--if anything?

We learned that politicians really enjoy grandstanding and don’t do their homework. I mean, c’mon--‘The Blackhawk Scandal’? Bill Wirtz is dead--the scandal is over. Leaving that aside, there were some things we gleaned from the proceedings. To begin with, Don Fehr demonstrated that he’s lost touch with the MLBPA. His statement, "Did we or did I appreciate the depth of the problem? The answer is, no" is a pretty clear admission that his finger was off the pulse of the union.

One unnamed (naturally) former player said

"What I believe happened, is the union was totally blindsided by this. They operate with such arrogance that they think they're always right. So they figured Mitchell was just a boob for Bud who wouldn't come up with anything, especially if none of the players cooperated. Nothing to worry about. But when the feds gave Mitchell [Kirk] Radomski and [Brian] McNamee, the game changed. The union never saw it coming."

This sort of thing happens when an organization communes with itself exclusively and never looks for feedback from the outside. Their biases and misconceptions become gospel truth since nobody tells them otherwise and when the ground shifts under them, they’re caught unawares.

We also learned pretty conclusively that MLB cannot handle a drug testing/awareness program. John Tierney smoked that out rather nicely by insisting on the number of Therapeutic Use Exemptions (TUEs) handed out by MLB for Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD) drugs such as Ritalin and Adderall. In the first year amphetamines were banned TUE’s jumped from jumped from 28 in 2006 to 103 in 2007. It stretches credulity to think a group of world-class athletes have an ADD incidence that is eight times greater than the general adult population.

Getting back to Don Fehr for a moment, I thought he played one point rather well by pointing out the inconsistency of cracking down on baseball players for using substances allegedly controlled by the Dietary Supplement Act and freely advertised and available to the general public.

While he made a good point regarding his constituency being opposed strict testing in the past only because of their distrust of baseball management to administer testing fairly--it left another point unstated. That point being the MLBPA could have instituted its own guidelines and testing to ensure the players had a safe, fair working environment but simply chose not to do so.

Of course, there was some good old-fashioned dramatic hyperbole. This time Betty McCollum of Minnesota uttered a dilly: “Every fan who bought a ticket to see games for the past 20 years has been witness to a fraud — an industry promoted as honest that is in fact rooted in cheating for profit.” She called MLB an industry “filled with lawbreakers and co-conspirators who ignore the problem or actively fuel the problem.”

She could have been talking about any industry in the world at any point in time. I have some news for Ms. McCollum--this has been the case in MLB for more than 120 and not 20 years. In scanning the media looking for comments on this and I came across a great line by Mike Imrem (yes, the same guy I blasted here). Imrem wrote: “So, please, explain to me why it's all right to punish players for cheating but not fire Selig and Fehr for permitting them to.”

Well said Mike.

You can read the whole column here, it’s entitled Simply no accountability.

Miguel Tejada was traded this offseason with all this going on--did the Astros get a lemon?

Not really, one thing we learned from the Mitchell Report is that steroid use was fairly regularly discussed when trades were being mulled. Tejada should hit well at “The Juice Box” however between losing his brother in a traffic accident and being investigated for perjury by Congress one could forgive him if he’s distracted for a while.

While we’re discussing Tejada--this may help Rafael Palmeiro’s Hall of Fame chances since Tejada clearly was using steroids when he injected Raffy. It’s possible that Palmeiro did receive a tainted shot. I’m not holding my breath however--he was tabbed as a juicer in Canseco’s book and he’s been proven right more often than not.

Let’s discuss a couple of players: Kyle Lohse is it common for players to back off their stance on deals at this stage? He wanted four years but now it’s being reported that he might accept a three-year deal to go back to the Phillies.

Sure it is--agents can paint beautiful pictures of the heaps of wealth awaiting their clients (remember Scott Boras’s $350 million just to get into the A-Rod sweepstakes?) but the simple fact of the matter is, long term deals with pitchers are generally a bad idea due to the risks involved. It’s one thing to take a risk with a Johan Santana type arm--quite another for a guy that’s only tossed 200 innings in a season once and has a career ERA that’s below league average. For guys like Lohse it’s a good idea to shoot high since you might find a pigeon but it’s good to remain pragmatic since nobody wants to make a long-term commitment to a league average starter who hasn’t tossed 200 IP in any of his last four seasons.

If you are the Phillies, do you sign Loshe to a three-year deal or a guy like Livan Hernandez, Josh Fogg or Jon Lieber to a one-year pact?

I think it depends on what you’re looking for. Cost certainty is nice and having a league average-ish starter that’s under 30 years old locked in for three years has an appeal. However, if you’re looking to plug a hole with the flexibility to upgrade should a better option arise, then a one-year pact with a low cost veteran starter might fit the bill better. Another consideration is what type of pitcher are you looking for? If a team is looking for a guy who can eat a lot of innings at the end of the rotation then Hernandez is your guy. He’s pitched at least 200 innings every season since 1998 (save for 1999 where he fell a third of an inning short). He’s the very definition of league average.

A guy like Lieber is somebody you gamble on--he’s in his upper 30’s and coming off surgery and looking to re-establish his market value. He has appeal to a dark horse team--a mid-to-low revenue club that has some decent talent that might contend if everything falls into place. If Lieber is healthy and effective, he could be a difference maker. If not, we’ll he’s not a long-term strain on the payroll. A guy like Fogg is best used if you’re simply looking for depth--a sixth starter/long reliever. He’s useful if a team has a potent offense, but a killer on a pitching-defense oriented team.

I think the Phillies would do well with either Lohse or Hernandez--if Hernandez is willing to take a one-year deal then I open the vault and get both--one for a World Series run in 2008, the other as an investment with a potential upside.

Octavio Dotel, Armando Benitez, Jeremy Affeldt etc.--can they still help a bullpen for a club like the Phillies?

Relievers are the most unpredictable commodity in baseball. For instance, who would have thought that the opening day starter, a washed up closer and somebody released from a contending club would be the core of a bullpen that would play a huge part in an unlikely run for the post season? Well, that’s what the Phillies had last year.

When you’re scouring the market looking for useful relievers, you want guys who can induce ground balls and have a putaway pitch. In the case of Dotel and Benitez--both have proven they cannot close on a contending team. While both have good strikeout rates, they also get far more fly ball than ground ball outs making them a bad fit in CitiBank Park. Affeldt is a terrific ground ball pitcher but doesn’t strike out many and has a scary BB/9 of 4.2.

Of the three, I’d probably pick Affeldt but only as a situational lefty. I suppose either Dotel and Benitez could help since 81 games are played on the road. I wouldn’t trust them in big spots at CitiBank.

Will this remove wrinkles from dusty parkas?

For the entertainment of my fellow Jays fans at Drunk Jays Fans--I have brought in Hillary Duff to handle tonight’s closing ceremonies. You go girl!

(giggle)

Um … Hillary--the sign off?

(titter)

Is there a problem?

"Do you like my sweater? I got it on sale at Suzy Shier."

That’s nice, but…

"Did you know I’m a celebity?"

Not according to the tabloids.

"Wha?"

Don’t you mean celebrity?

(giggle) "I think Justin Timberlake is soooooooo hot."

Uh, I’m not really quali…

"Do you think N‘Sync will get back together?"

(taps foot impatiently) Can we stay focuse…

"Have you met Derek Jeter? He’s soooooooooooooo dreamy." (giggle)

What does that have to do…

"I saw him on T.V. last night--do you know where he works?"

Where. He. Works.? Are you seriou….

(giggle titter)

(sigh) Look, this just isn’t working, I think I’ll handle…

"Did you know I've done 63 different made-for-TV movies with a Cinderella-type storyline for the Disney Chan…"

Best Re…

"Who do you think is hotter, Justin Timberlake or Derek…"

Please. Go. Away.

(giggle)

Please. Go. Away.

(giggle titter)

O.K. no more Mister Nice Blogger (brandishes crucifix) BEGONE!!!

"What’s with the guy on the 't'?"

(rummages around desk … finds a mallet and stake--don’t ask) BEGONE!!!

(giggle) "What’s with the hammer and the pointy stick?"

(light bulb goes on, reaches for his wallet and extracts library card) BEGONE!!!

(Screeches and runs away)

Finally.

Well, that was a total bust. Sorry guys, just a normal run-of-the-mill sign off tonight.

Best Regards

John

(Now if you’ll excuse me, I’m going to stick my library card on my front door for safety’s sake … sheeeesh!)

Looking ahead to future BBWAA snafus....

2008-01-14T15:30:00.000-08:00

Suffice it to say, the last few BBWAA Hall of Fame votes have been profoundly disappointing. As somebody privileged to witness the magnificent careers of Alan Trammell, Lou Whitaker and Tim Raines, only to see them so hideously underrated while putting Jim Rice on the cusp of immortality boggles my alleged mind.

Anyway, there is a thread on Baseball Think Factory discussing upcoming HOF votes and the new candidates on the ballot. There was a point in time where I felt the trio would be shoo-ins for Cooperstown. Well … I’ve learned to take nothing for granted when it comes to the BBWAA in recent years.

With that in mind, here are my picks as the next swings and misses respecting future votes--players who had Hall of Fame careers but likely will go the way of Trammell, Whitaker and Raines when their names reach the ballot. I’ll attempt to guess the reasons the BBWAA will give a thumbs down.

The class of 2010 will have two slam-dunks and two with decent cases--I’m predicting all four fall short. They are Roberto Alomar, Barry Larkin, Fred McGriff and Edgar Martinez (we’ll deal with the Crime Dog and Edgrr at a later date). Alomar and Larkin should be no-brainers--both were superb defensive middle infielders with terrific bats.

Alomar often drew comparisons to Joe Morgan; he was a 12-time All Star, ten time Gold Glover, was a career .300/.371/.443 hitter, topped 1500 runs, 1100 RBI, 2700 hits, 500 doubles, 200 HR, and stole 474 bases at an 80% success rate. Alomar is seventh in baseball history in reaching base among second sackers. In 11 post-season series, he hit .313/.381/.448 (.347/.407/.449 in the World Series) and stole 20 of 22 bases. Alomar’s home run off Dennis Eckersley in game four of the 1992 ALCS was the moment the “Blow Jays” went from chokers to champions.

Of course, the spitting incident, the fact he didn’t reach 3000 hits, that his best years were spent in ‘smaller markets’ (like Tim Raines) and his career hit the skids when he finally came to New York. Alomar rolled into Flushing a .306/.376/.455 hitter and batted .262/.331/.367 until he retired. The perception will be he wasn’t strong enough mentally to play in the glare of the Big Apple.

Like Alomar, Barry Larkin was a 12-time All Star. Unlike him, he did win an MVP, enjoyed a 30-30 season and would’ve won many more Gold Gloves except they were being handed reflexively to Ozzie Smith even as Larkin was surpassing him as a fielder. His timing is bad too--he was winding down his career as Alex Rodriguez, Derek Jeter, Nomar Garciaparra and Miguel Tejada were redefining expectations regarding the position’s offensive contributions. What should never be forgotten is that Larkin copped nine Silver Sluggers between 1988-1999.

What will affect Larkin’s vote totals is that he toiled his entire career in Cincinnati, was frequently injured, and never reached 200 HR or 1000 RBI. Alomar and Larkin will suffer the same fate as Trammell and Whitaker.

In 2011, Jeff Bagwell will be on the ballot for the first time. He made the mistake of being a first baseman not that didn't hit 500 HR. Just as Fred McGriff’s 493 will make voters look elsewhere, Bags 449 will have them sniffing in disdain. Other points against him are that he neglected to hit .300 lifetime, never reached 3000 hits, and his lack of exposure in Houston all will be held against him. His lone Gold Glove and quartet of All Star nods will also diminish him in the eyes of the voters.

However, Bagwell is overqualified for the Hall. He reached the rare triple-triple (a season with at least 100 runs/100 RBI/100 BB) six times with five straight years from 1996-2000. Despite playing first base, he was a two-time member of the 30-30 club. Among first basemen, he is one of three that topped 1500 runs and 1500 RBI in their careers--the other two being Lou Gehrig and Jimmie Foxx. Only Gehrig and Bagwell ever topped 1500 runs/RBI and 1400 BB. Bagwell is also third in modern MLB history (at the position) in RCAA with 680.

Once again I feel the urge to pay tribute to the fine bloggers at Drunk Jays Fans. For today, I have hired not one--but two guest stars to handle the closing ceremonies. Doing the honours tonight are Ricky and Lucy Ricardo. Take it away!

Brest Egads

John

"Roooocy!! You’ve got some ‘splainin’ to do!! What’s weeth that? Are you flirting weeth that drunk hombre in zee dusty parka? You promised to only bang my bongos and not blow some uzzer caballeros trombone! Well, what you have to say for yourself Rucy??"

WAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHH!!!!!

Uh … sorry about that. I guess we should have gone with a rehearsal or two rather than winging it. Oh well, now if you’ll excuse me I‘ve got to rebury them before the cemetery staff notices they’re gone.

Serenity now…

2008-01-13T13:55:00.000-08:00

After blog surfing on the Scott Rolen/Troy Glaus trade, I came across some thoughts that do not leave me with that greasy, heavy feeling in my intestines. Some plusses from the deal include that it makes 'high-for-a-Blue Jay shortstop OBP' David Eckstein a better defender since Rolen covers more real estate. Of course I’m a big Johnny Mac fan and hope that he does enough in the spring to make John Gibbons think long and hard about who will start at short.

Another big bugaboo of the ‘07 Jays was their heavy right handed lineup. Their lack of enough lefty hitting mashers haunted the Jays throughout last season. While Rolen does bat righty, he has very respectable splits and is a career .284/.361/.504 against right-handed pitching. Since the Jays will be going with a rotation where as many as three of the starters are entering their sophomore seasons on the starting staff, improving an already top shelf defensive team is a definite plus.

As long as Rolen can deliver around his career norms in OBP it should be O.K. Vernon Wells should rebound with a healthy shoulder. Alex Rios and Aaron Hill should continue to improve (expect a Chase Utley-lite performance out of Hill this season). Frank Thomas intends to spend some time before spring training with hitting guru Walt Hriniak who has always worked well with ‘The Big Hurt’, and Lyle Overbay should be back to his almost Olerud-like norms. There should be enough pop and OBP for a better than league average offense. If Reed Johnson can coax an on base mark of .350 or so, there should be more than sufficient base runners for the middle of the lineup to drive home.

Of course, the offense looked pretty good going into last season too.

The Pujols Award

We’re still accepting nominations for Wednesday’s “Pujols Awards”--if you feel somebody deserves an ‘Albert’ or a ‘Luis’ drop me a line. You can credit your blog with the nomination and I’ll post the link to it. I can guarantee that close to a dozen people will be reading the article (editors included, offer not valid in all states, check your webmaster for details).

Big Mac Attacking

O.K. can we have a little honesty on the part of the media. If you don’t want to vote for Mark McGwire due to steroids or his “I’m not here to talk about the past” performance, can you please grow a pair and say so. The media tucked their tails between their collective legs when it came to discussing juicing in MLB; is it too much to ask that you reach around and extract said tail now that you don't have to face Big Mac? These faux reasons for not voting for McGwire (here's an example of this phenomenon) are beyond pathetic.

In modern baseball history (since the advent of the AL) McGwire is, among first basemen with at least 7500 PA, first in home runs, third in SLG and OPS+, tied for fourth in RCAA, is fifth in OBP and RCAP. To suggest his numbers aren’t Hall-worthy even if they were accomplished absent PED is beyond ridiculous. As I’ve said before, I’m loath to rip on fellow scribes but it is getting ridiculous. To suggest that a player who is top five in so many categories among his positional peers in modern history didn’t have a Hall of Fame career is inverse rectal-cranial disorder at its worst.

The following are top five (first on one category, top five otherwise) at their positions using the same criteria: Mickey Mantle (CF), Mel Ott (RF), Ted Williams (LF), Charlie Gehringer (2B--he’s not top five in HR but is closest using this particular parameter), Yogi Berra (catcher) … starting to get the idea? Absent steroids, McGwire’s numbers are easily first ballot worthy.

It is time…

Once again, in tribute to the fine folks at Drunk Jays Fans I have hired a guest to handle today's sign off. Checking in is Chris Berman* to do the honours. Take it away Chris:

"Since I’m wrapping up today’s post the good folk at TPoSGD are saving the…

Best for last so give my Regards to Broadway and while it doubt it’s possible…

Johnny be good!

BOO YAH"

Thank you Chris, remember don’t settle for cheap imitation regards, come to TPoSGD where you are guaranteed only the very best in quality regards. Any retransmission or rebroadcast of today’s regards is strictly prohibited without the express written consent of John Brattain, blogspot and TPoSGD.

*Not the real Chris Berman (obviously)

Well, time for my specialty …

2008-01-12T14:56:00.000-08:00

Oh, where to start today--since this is a Blue Jays blog (or so the voices inside my head inform me) I am mulling the story that the Jays are acquiring Scott Rolen for Troy Glaus. My first reaction is to flinch. I realize that he has been dealing with shoulder injuries but I cannot help but wonder if it’s time to stick a fork in him.

Vernon Wells played with a bum shoulder last season and posted an OPS+ of 85 while Rolen weighed in at 89; however Wells put up his numbers against teams like the Yankees and Red Sox while Rolen worked in a division where 85 wins was tops.

Bottom line, it’ll likely improve the defense but defense wasn’t the problem in 2007. If J.P. Ricciardi wants to deal with the Cards, couldn’t he at least try to land Pujols? I mean, the odds on a deal like that are about the same as the Leafs winning the Stanley Cup this year so, um…

Never mind.

When it Raines…

I’d like to thank the following for promoting Tim Raines - Hall of Fame, 2008: Bob Elliot of the Toronto Sun, Rob Neyer of ESPN and King Kaufman of Salon--we’ve got to get the word out on Raines. It looks like we still have some work to do.

Suffice it to say I had a lot to write about (Don’t I always?) regarding the vote both at MSN Canada (Baseball Hall of Fame voting: Tim Raines was robbed) and The Hardball Times. Since I’m still bellyaching about Raines, let’s take a quick look at the following:


Player           TOB* OPS+ RCAA RCAP  SB SB% RP**
Tim Raines       3977 123   516 392  808  84 2381
Tony Gwynn       3955 132   504 402  319  71 2386
Lou Brock        3833 109   223  56  938  75 2361
Roberto Clemente 3656 130   409 247   83  64 2481
*Times On Base
**Runs Produced

Here is a smattering of stats both traditional and sabermetric. All of these players spent significant time as corner outfielders. Three of these players are in the Hall of Fame--except Raines. Three of these players are members of the 3000 hit club--except Raines. Despite being last in at bats among the grouping (by 416 AB behind third place Gwynn) Raines is tops among the four in times on base, RCAA, stolen base percentage, second in stolen bases and RCAP and third Runs Produced (by five runs).

Suffice it say Raines is not the worst of the quartet. Three of them are first ballot Hall of Famers. Raines didn’t get 25% of the vote.

Uh huh.

Catching up…

I haven’t posted my THT columns for the last few weeks. Here is what you missed (lucky you):

Buck Weaver Lives: many players have ‘guilty knowledge’ regarding the steroid scandal. They have been asked to come forward with what they knew and refused to do so--how should we view these modern day Weavers in light of the Hall of Fame?
Exorcising the ghosts of 2007…: A post mortem on the 2007 debates regarding the Jays’ offensive philosophy. Believe it or not, I generally support the sabermetric approach. However, I’m not dogmatic about it, there are exceptions to every rule and I felt the 2007 Jays were that rare exception insofar as bunting would have improved the Jays’ offense. Bottom line--nobody changed the other’s mind but it was a fun and educational debate.
The Pujols Awards: week one: The first instalment of a new THT reader-interactive feature where we honour the heroes and zeros of a given week. Since it’s early in 2008, we’ve included some notable from the 2007 season.

Finally…

I would like to dedicate the following to the good folks at Drunk Jays Fans. I will do the following stunt with only one hand (the other currently being occupied with my golden retriever, and no, that’s not a euphemism for something else--get your minds out of the gutter).

Wait for it…

It’s coming…

This is the genuine article…

(Don’t try this on your own blog kids--I’m a professional)

Countdown: 10 … 9 … 8 … (cracks knuckles against cheek) 7 … 6 … 5 … (twists neck until satisfying pop is heard) 4 … 3 … (deep breath, close eyes and finds center, slowly exhales) 2 … 1 …

Best Regards

John ©

(bows)

Thank yuh, thank yuh very much.

Worst. Series. Ever.

2008-01-10T17:28:00.000-08:00

While I found the Jays’ offense incredibly obnoxious last year, it was by no means the most frustrated I have been as a Jays fan. After watching Toronto get completely PWN3D by Rickey Henderson and the Oakland A’s in the 1989 ALCS, I was praying for a shot at redemption. I went into the 1990 season with high hopes and expectations.

The Jays jockeyed for top spot in the AL East with the Red Sox through most of the year. As the summer wore on, Toronto would get so close to the top and every so often be tied atop the standings only to quickly fall back into second place. It seemed whenever the Jays needed a big win, they just couldn’t get it.

In mid August, the Jays embarked on a nine game road trip that would take them to Chicago, Minnesota and New York. At the time, they were two games back and when they returned home faced the Red Sox in an obviously crucial four game series. The road trip started well as the Jays took two of three at Comiskey, swept at the Metrodome and went to the Bronx tied with the Red Sox for top spot.

After George Bell singled in a run in the first inning of the opener at Yankee Stadium, the Bombers threw up a four-spot against Todd Stottlemyre. The Jays scored in the second, third and fourth innings and enjoyed a brief 5-4 lead until Jim Leyritz singled home Kevin Maas to knot the game at five.

A one-out Tony Fernandez triple was stranded in the seventh, and in the bottom of the 11th, two errors brought the game home for the Yankees. No biggie though, the Yankees had lefty Chuck Cary (4-8, 4.24 ERA) and Andy Hawkins (3-10, 5.52 ERA) starting the next two games. Then the bats when stone cold.

The Jays scored just two runs off both Cary and Andy Hawkins (both in the fifth inning) and the Yankees swept. The Jays road trip went from terrific to meh and the Blue Birds limped home two games out of first. On the bright side, Dave Stieb was slated to open the series and he came through tossing seven solid innings giving up two runs. He came out to start the eighth and Ellis Burks singled. Cito Gaston came out and decided to ice the game bringing out Tom Henke.

The “Terminator’s” first pitch to Mike Greenwell left the field was quickly as it reached him and it was all tied at three. Henke settled down striking out four of the next six outs he recorded.

With one out in the bottom of the ninth, Mookie Wilson singled and was picked off first by Joe Hesketh. However, Mark Marshall, who was playing first, bungled the catch and Wilson made it to third. An intentional walk to clutch hitting Tony Fernandez brought up Kelly Gruber with runners on the corners and one out. Jeff Gray replaced Hesketh and Gruber tapped one lightly to third and Wilson scampered home and the Jays received karmic payback for the loss to the Yankees in game one of that previous series.

The Jays were one game back of Boston.

Then the bats died completely wasting three magnificent starts by Jimmy Key (7 IP/0 ER), David Wells (8 IP/1 ER), and Todd Stottlemyre (8 IP/1 ER). In game two of the series, Key and Dana Kiecker (4-6, 4.53 ERA)--who hadn’t recorded an out in his previous start against Baltimore, threw up goose eggs for eight innings. The Jays had man on third, one out, in the first inning only to have George Bell and Kelly Gruber strike out. The Jays would only get one other runner to third and that was the result of Tony Fernandez hitting into a double play with men on first and second.

After a three-up, three down eighth inning by Duane Ward, Ellis Burks, Mike Greenwell, Mike Marshall, and Tom Brunansky all singled and the Red Sox were up 2-0. Jeff Gray was brought in to pitch the ninth and sandwiched a Pat Borders groundout with strikeouts to John Olerud and pinch hitter (for Manny Lee) Rance Mulliniks and the series was tied.

The Jays now had to face Roger Clemens (18-5, 2.04 ERA)--who was enjoying a magnificent season--on Saturday. Boomer Wells was up the challenge and both tossed up goose eggs until the top of the seventh when Dewey Evans opened the frame with a home run. Meanwhile, the Jays never got anybody as far as third with less than two out.

With Clemens still pitching in the bottom of the ninth, Gruber reached on an error by Wade Boggs. One out later, Fred McGriff boomed a double but Gruber held up at third. John Olerud was intentionally walked to load the bases with one out. The Jays had their first really good scoring opportunity of the afternoon. Catcher Greg Myers lifted a lazy fly ball to right field and Gruber stayed put. This time Manny Lee (who had an unlikely ability to hit off Clemens) hit for himself but whiffed on a 1-2 pitch and Clemens had the shutout.

The Jays went into Sunday hoping to salvage a split.

Todd Stottlemyre faced Greg Harris (10-5, 3.33 ERA) in the finale of the series. Once again, both starters threw up zero after zero on the scoreboard. Other than the second inning, Toronto went three up/three down against Harris. After seven innings, it was still 0-0; Stottlemyre opened the top of the eighth with a walk to Brunansky, and a wild pitch got him to second. Stottlemyre bore down and struck out Luis Rivera but Jody Reed singled Brunansky home.

Down by a run, Greg Myers beat out a grounder deep into the hole between third and short and Kenny Williams pinch ran for him. Junior Felix struck out without advancing Williams. With Manny Lee up, Williams swiped second base. He tapped a ball to the mound and Williams was caught in a rundown. Lee reached second before Williams was tagged out. Rance Mulliniks pinch hit for Glenallen Hill and drew a walk. With runners on first and second, Red Sox skipper Joe Morgan brought in Jeff Gray who got Wilson to fly out to right to end the threat. The Jays got a two-out walk from Fred McGriff, but John Olerud swung at a 1-2 pitch ending the game.

The Jays were shut out for the third straight time by the Red Sox. Over those three games, the Jays garnered 12 hits and nine walks. They were 0-for-26 with RISP.

As I wrote earlier--Worst. Series. Ever.

Epilogue…

The Jays lost their next two to Milwaukee getting only four runs. They won the finale of that series and it was the beginning of a run where the Jays won 16 of their next 22. A win against the Brewers opening a series in Milwaukee on September 24 gave them a 1.5 game lead over Boston. However, they lost the next two and lost the first two of a three game set in Fenway Park and the Red Sox were back on top to stay.

Best Regards

John

The Mike Gill Show: The Hall of Fame edition…

2008-01-09T07:56:00.000-08:00

We know the drill. Today, on ESPN 1450’s Mike Gill Show we shall discuss the following topics:

Roger Clemens vs. Brian MacNamee--who do you believe?
What did you think regarding their phone conversation and Clemens on ‘60 Minutes’?
The Hall of Fame vote: Is this the worst class and ballot ever?
Will Clemens make the Hall--will McGwire get in?

Roger Clemens vs. Brian MacNamee--who do you believe? -- What did you think regarding their phone conversation and Clemens on ‘60 Minutes’?

I think we really cannot deal with the one question without involving the other. To begin with, the phone conversation sounded scripted somewhat. At the very least, it struck me as the type of veiled discussions we hear when they know a third party might be listening in. One would assume that if they felt they were having a private conversation they wouldn’t be dancing around the subject as much as they were. It reminded me of Jason Giambi’s apology after his Grand Jury testimony went public.

Some of the blanks and bleeps were suspiciously long. Even Andrew Dice Clay at his nastiest couldn’t cobble together enough profanity for pauses and edits like that. Quite frankly, neither party is truly credible. MacNamee’s past hardly inspires trust. However, investigators in all this seem less than believable either. Agent Jeff Novitsky has had it in for baseball players for quite some time--especially Barry Bonds.

Now, according to Clemens’ suit against his former trainer McNamee told Rusty Hardin's (Clemens' lawyer) investigators about how both a federal prosecutor and federal agent told MacNamee that he already had two strikes against him (owning and dealing anabolic steroids) and a third (lying to a federal agent) could land him in the hoosegow. After informing the trainer of this, the feds then asked “So what about Clemens?”

The agent, according to MacNamee, said that since he worked so closely with Clemens, he should know that the pitcher was taking steroids. A document was then proffered to McNamee with the statement, ‘We know about (sic) more about you than you know about yourself ... You're going to jail’ and followed that remark with 'Let's go back to when you first met Clemens in '98.'

That sounds like the feds had the verdict in and were now making the case and influencing witnesses. If this is true, it helps Clemens. It would be par for the course for Novitsky. It almost sounds like they want another big fish and are zeroing in on “the Rocket.”

Of course, Roger blew a lot of his believability by going from ‘Brian MacNamee never injected me with anything’ to ‘Brian MacNamee injected me but not with steroids.’

As to “60 Minutes,” it was a good show but didn’t really strike me as substantive. Mike Wallace struck me as a guy who was giving a friend a platform to tell his side of a story rather than digging for the truth--but that’s just me. As of right now, I’m on the fence regarding Clemens guilt or innocence. We need more information one way or the other to come up with a verdict at this point.

The Hall of Fame vote: Is this the worst class and ballot ever?

Goose Gossage was a good pick. The rest of the ballots defied credulity. It looks like Jim Rice will go in next year--however he’s far from the most qualified candidate. I’m of the opinion that Rice wasn’t even the best outfielder on his own team. Dwight “Dewey” Evans was every bit as good an offensive player as Rice and miles apart defensively. Andre Dawson is better than Rice, Tim Raines is better than Rice, Dale Murphy is at least as good as he is and perhaps better. Alan Trammell is probably among the top five best shortstops in AL history.

There is no reason Rice should go in before Trammell, Murphy, Dawson and Raines. Dewey Evans has to wait for the veteran’s committee. I think Bert Blyleven deserves induction and he may join the class of ‘09. Jack Morris is an interesting question; I think he’s better than the sabermetric group says he is, but nowhere near as good as the traditional stats crowd opines. He wouldn’t be the worst pitcher in the Hall of Fame but that’s hardly an argument in his favour either.

I would have no problem seeing Tommy John go in. He had a tremendous career and I think his being a ‘pioneer’ of sorts pushes him over the top. I’m sad to see Dave Concepcion go off the ballot. Unfortunately, shortstops like Cal Ripken, Alex Rodriguez, and Derek Jeter make his totals look anemic but at the time, he was among the best in the business at short. I’m not heartbroken over Mark McGwire’s exclusion. I’d prefer to get a better handle on the steroid era before passing judgement. Make no mistake, all the Mitchell Report did was confirm the era--not define it.

A final thought on the vote: I would strip the privilege from any BBWAA member that submitted a blank ballot. It’s their job to vote--not make personal or political statements. There were many players on the ballot with no taint of steroids for whom they could have voted. It is penalizing innocent players and that’s just plain wrong.

Further, I loath the hypocrisy of it all; if the media didn’t know steroids were prevalent then they lack the proper cognitive skills to vote intelligently. I’m an infrequent member of ‘the beat’ and I knew what was going on. I even wrote about it 7-8 years ago. If a part time hack like me could tell--then anybody could. The BBWAA is acting like Bud Selig in trying to paint themselves as protectors of the game and punisher of ‘the steroid cheats.’ They lacked the backbone to say anything at the time and now they decide to stand up and be counted?

Please.

To me, it’s like badmouthing the school bully after he moves 1000 miles away. Here’s an idea, let’s make the BBWAA of the steroid era ineligible for the Frick Award. Too harsh? O.K. how about making BBWAA members submitting blank ballots due to steroids ineligible--at least it’s consistent.

Will Clemens make the Hall--will McGwire get in?

I think so, unless more conclusive evidence surfaces regarding Clemens, he should be a shoo-in. After all, he has the benefit of being fiery, an intense competitor with a burning desire to win at all costs--a true warrior. Of course, Barry Bonds is the same way but folks say that made him the south end of a northbound horse.

I wonder why there’s such a discrepancy in perception?

I’m guessing the more we learn about this era, the better McGwire will look. Even if the BBWAA goes thumbs-down, I’m pretty sure some incarnation of the Veterans Committee will get him in.

Best Regards

John

BBWAAAAAAAAARRRRGH...

2008-01-08T16:06:00.000-08:00

I’m up for some fun. Actually, I’m in a pretty foul mood so I’m going to be ridiculing people smarter than me. To begin with, the BBWAA got one right--I saw Rich “Goose” Gossage’s career and felt I was witnessing historically great relief pitching.

However, I realize that many BBWAA members aren’t the most sabermetric-savvy folks in the world. The thing is, even using conventional stats I can’t help but scratch and shake my head at some of the votes handed out. Probably the biggest is Jim Rice apparently being on the threshold of the Hall of Fame.

No, I’m not going to bash or diminish Rice’s career. He was, for a time, a tremendous player. What I will do is use Rice’s vote tally to show some glaring inconsistencies in how the BBWAA evaluates players for immortality. For instance, we know that Rice wasn’t a young Barry Bonds in left field as regards defense. He did a fine job playing the Green Monster but they don’t hand out fielding awards for taming the monster.

While we can debate ad infinitum ad nauseum about the validity of Gold Glove selections however if a player garners, say--five Gold Gloves we can assume that the recipient is a reasonably capable defender.

What about eight? Are eight Gold Gloves indicative of a good fielder? By all accounts, I think it is safe to saw Dwight Evans was a solid defender.

My point?


Player  AVG  OBP  SLG Runs Hits   2B  3B  HR   RBI
Evans  .272 .370 .470 1470 2446  483  73  385 1384
Rice   .298 .352 .502 1249 2452  373  79  382 1451

and...


Player    AVG  OBP  SLG RCAA 
Evans    .272 .370 .470 378  
Lg. AVG  .262 .327 .393  -  
Pos. AVG .264 .332 .424 103

and...


Player    AVG  OBP  SLG RCAA 
Rice     .298 .352 .502 270  
Lg. AVG  .263 .328 .395  -  
Pos. AVG .271 .338 .419 103

Even if you limit yourself to the traditional measures, it’s not hard to discern that Dewey was as good, if not better than Rice. Therefore, Rice would need a solid 90 run, 90 RBI, 30 HR season to match his 2469 Runs Produced in the same number of at bats.

Evans was far superior to his right field peers than was Rice to his fellow left fielders.

Now when you toss in Dewey’s far superior defense at a more important defensive position it isn’t a stretch to state that Rice wasn’t even the best outfielder on his own team. Evans isn’t even on the ballot and Rice is almost in Cooperstown.

Let’s look at another contemporary of Rice. This one is a Gold Glove calibre shortstop who is third in AL history at his position in extra base hits/total bases, fourth in hits/doubles/reaching base, fifth in HR/RBI, sixth in runs, seventh in total bases. He was a six-time All Star in the era of Cal Ripken, and grounded into half as many double plays as Jim Rice in about the same number of at bats.


Player    AVG  OBP  SLG  Runs  Hits  2B  3B  HR  RBI  RP* GIDP
Trammell .285 .352 .415  1231  2365 412  55 185 1003 2049  156
Rice     .298 .352 .502  1249  2452 373  79 382 1451 2318  315

A historically great AL shortstop vs. a left fielder that wasn’t even the best outfielder on his own team? Alan Trammell cannot even get 20% of the vote. While Rice’s traditional stats are better, it seems illogical that the spread between a probable HOF outfielder and a Gold Glove shortstop getting less than 100 votes (and were contemporary players) is that narrow.

Of course, probably the most aggravating thing about the vote (you knew this was coming):


Player  AVG  OBP  SLG Runs Hits  2B  3B   HR  RBI  RP   SB  CS GIDP
Raines .294 .385 .425 1571 2605 430 117  170  980 2381 808 146  142
Rice   .298 .352 .502 1249 2452 373  79  382 1451 2318  58  34  315

O.K now--we’re still using BBWAA stats and looking at players that were contemporaries. One played in a terrific hitter’s park, the other a good pitcher’s park, and...

A quick and dirty way to make the point is to use ‘eyeball runs’ (runs produced Runs + RBI - HR).

Raines beat Rice in runs produced 2381 to 2318 (granted, Raines had about a season’s worth more at bats--however, longevity does count when assessing HOFers).
While giving Rice a slight edge in this category (runs produced), let‘s factor in that Raines stole 750 more bases than Rice with a far, far superior stolen base percentage (84 to 63%).
Despite having a season’s worth of extra at bats Raines grounded into 173 fewer double plays than Rice.
Raines was considered a well-above average defensive left fielder while Rice’s glove never drew any rave reviews.
Raines is probably the greatest leadoff hitter in National League history.
Rice is nowhere near the best middle-of-the-order hitter in American League history.
Raines is 40th in baseball history in reaching base.
Rice is 141st in baseball history in reaching base.
Among 20th century outfielders, Raines is 14th in reaching base--Rice is 91st.

With all this in mind, I find it difficult to take the BBWAA seriously in assessing Hall of Famers.

Best Regards

John

Of equines, eulogies and epilogues…

2008-01-07T06:57:00.000-08:00

Final thoughts on the 2007 Blue Jays: the thing is; everybody knows that defense is an important part of the game. It’s the reason they don’t put Gregg Myers in centerfield or Frank Thomas at short. Part of running an offense is to try to create errors by the opposing team’s defense. It’s how you get the proverbial ‘extra outs.’

To let it be known through words or actions that they can count on their opponents to simply get on base and wait for the extra base hit is like (in football) inviting the opposing defense into the huddle. It’s pretty much letting the other team know how to defend at all times.

I guess ‘sac bunt’ might be the wrong term to use since ideally bunting for a hit would be the preferred outcome. It might be better stated that the occasional attempt at bunting for a hit where, at the very least, it ends up with man on third (or second and third) with one out.

For example, suppose you have a Ryan Braun type at third base/Prince Fielder at first or an aging pitcher. Why not occasionally exploit that by making them expend some extra effort by taking them out of their ‘comfort zone’? Why not make them work a little harder for the out? I cannot fathom why, in every other team sport, it’s a bad idea to telegraph your intentions to the opposing defense but not in baseball.

Since outs are so precious, why not try to get ‘extra’ ones by pressuring the defense and trying to create errors? As Mike Emeigh noted at BTF:

From 1985-1990, Coleman's six full seasons with the Cardinals, there were a total of 180 balks called while the Cardinals were batting, an average of 30 per season. The other 25 teams averaged 15.4 called balks a season. Of the 180 balks, 64 came with Coleman on base (22 in 1986).

That’s a lot of free bases (and runs scored) simply by making the other team jittery. It’s part of the human element of the game that doesn’t show up on Run Expectancy. It’s not a simple matter of ‘to give up outs or not to give up outs--that is the question’ it’s about creating an environment of uncertainty for the other team. To allow the opposing team peace-of-mind knowing that with two men on/nobody out they can set themselves up for the double play without needing to concern themselves with getting in motion to nab the lead runner at third.

To state the obvious--the replacement-level hitters employed by the Jays in 2007 needed all the help they could get. By having them drop the occasional bunt would have created uncertainty that might have led to errors or, if they suspected a bunt was coming, allow an otherwise double-play ground ball get through the holes generated when the infielders were in motion.

Oh well, 2007 is gone and hopefully the bottom of the Blue Jays lineup will be closer to league average than replacement level. It’s time to lay the club aside and bury the badly bruised deceased equine.

Besides, I have a column to finish.

Best Regards

John

About Fellini as a technical filmmaker…

2008-01-06T14:34:00.000-08:00

(Hey, it’s as good a title as any.)

So … I have two things jockeying for position around my one brain cell.

The Hall of Fame--whom I think will get in, whom I think should be given the nod and my debut column regarding baseball’s ‘Heroes and Zeros’ for the week. After batting around ideas with THT’s staff, we finally settled on a name (with a big assist from Joe Dimino). It will be called “The Pujols Awards” with the winners getting ‘Alberts’ and the losers ‘Luis.’ (Luis's? Luises?)

For the record, Luis Pujols was a backup catcher for the Astros, Royals and Rangers from 1977-85. He had a batting line of .193/.240/.260 that translates into an OPS+ of 44. In 850 career AB, he hit six home runs (and oddly enough six triples) and grounded into 26 double plays.

I am glad this particular Pujols is over 50 years old lest J.P. Ricciardi gives him an NRI to spring training. On the bright side, he was more productive in his career than Jason Smith, Ray Olmedo and Sal Fasano were for the Jays last year.

At any rate, we are going to give him a shot at THT immortality.

I think the first few editions will likely be handing out awards for 2007 since not much has transpired thus far in the new year. I have one nomination that I will use since he did distinguish himself last season. Potential candidates for the ‘Alberts’ include Alex Rodriguez for his MVP season and finally taking control of his career from Scott Boras. David Ortiz for yet another superlative year in both the regular season and playoffs certainly qualifies, as does Jimmy Rollins for sticking to his prediction regarding the Phillies and having a tremendous season.

Other notables are Frank Thomas for volunteering to speak with George Mitchell because he feels strongly about steroids in the game, Joba Chamberlain for just being freakin’ awesome, Curtis Granderson for his 20/20/20/20 season, David Wright for not collapsing as the Mets crumbled, Greg Maddux for winning Gold Glove No. 17 and looking for win No. 350 in ‘08. I might toss in Rockies’ skipper Clint Hurdle as team rep. for one of the greatest playoff pushes ever. Going into September 16, the Rox were in fourth place, 6.5 games out of first in the NL West and 22 games and 21 wins later were National League champions.

I haven’t decided whether to bestow 3-5 Alberts (and Luis) yet. I’m hoping to let this feature define itself.

There are so many candidates for ‘Luis’ I scarcely know where to begin. Bud Selig (for any number of reasons), Don Fehr, Gene Orza, Scott Boras, Roger Clemens, Jeffrey Loria, David Samson, Hank Steinbrenner, Jim Leyritz, the Veterans Committee, Elijah Dukes, Shea Hillenbrand, Bill Conlin, Stephen A. Smith, Barry Bonds, Pope Paul, Malcom X, British politician’s sex, JFK, blown away, what else do I have to say? We didn’t start Stottlemyre… (boooo--I deserve a Luis for that one).

I’m sure come edition two of “The Pujols Award” we’ll be able to award something to the BBWAA. I predict they’ll vote to induct Goose Gossage (good), Jim Rice (not so good), and miss Tim Raines (overqualified), Alan Trammell (ditto), Bert Blyleven (a solid pick thanks to the education provided by Rich Lederer), and Andre Dawson (ditto ... the solid pick part). I’m cool with Mark McGwire not making it--I still think more time is required to get a better grasp of how prevalent steroid use was in the game and how it skewered the numbers.

McGwire’s case is built primarily on power and on base ability. Since McGwire’s OBP was influenced to a large extent by his power and that extra muscle getting him there, he’s a perfect test case for the juiced player era. If he would’ve had a career with his HR totals hovering around 500 absent the juice, then I’m inclined to say no. If he’d still be a fair distance past 500 and it turns out he did it on a reasonably level playing field--then I’d say he belongs.

There's still no news on the MSN Canada front. I'm getting seriously worried that something nasty happened to Scott or a member of his family. If you're inclined in that way, be sure to say a few words for him to your deity of choice. He's a good family man--there's not enough of those around anymore sad to say.

You're Joshing me...

Josh Towers signed with the, the ... Colorado Rockies?

Seriously?

Uh … let’s hope he remembers to wear his cup at all times. I’d hate to think that his south-of-the-border tower could end up Manzanilloed. The thin air does unusual things to balls of all stripes whether stitched or about to be. Back in 1997 Josias Manzanillo got feeling a little testy (or is it the other way around?) after Manny Ramirez launched a rocket up the middle that hit his cup--had he been wearing one.

The game report listed it as "M Ramirez Fielder's Choice P; Thome out at Hm/P-C." I guess the fielder had to choose which ball to pick up and which one to return to its rightful owner.

His career neutral won-loss record was 13-15; his career neutered one-loss record was just that.

Roasted nuts, barbecued wiener, the sick gags came early and often for the erstwhile soprano--the reliever in desperate need of relief. I even penned a poem in honour of the event. Detectives believe alcohol was a factor:

The Ballad of Josias

This is a truly sad story, that I'm about to relate,
About a moment in life, my lowest moment I'd rate.
The pitching coach beseeched me, "Make sure your pitches aren't up"
I forgot that kindly advice--and also my cup.

If it were only Mark Lemke, or a hitter that's pesty,
But I had to let Manny line one off of my testes.
Why couldn't the ball have hit on my uniform tunic,
Instead of nailing a spot that nearly made me a eunuch?

I dreamt that in baseball I'd win cups of both gold and pewter,
Now I'll be known as the pitcher, the one that got neutered.
The pitching coach oft told me: "Your pitches have to be mixed"
I ignored that timely advice and nearly got myself fixed.

When I got myself hurt, my skipper berated:
"Had you listened to me you'd not be castrated.
Don’t tell me I don't have a legitimate beef;
since there is just no way I can provide you relief."

One thing I've learned, that made my mind keener,
That you can love hot dogs, but not barbecued weiners.
For the rest of my life, I will hear the same gag,
That whenever I pitch, I'll have the game in the bag.

I'll consider myself smarter and pitch for the Hall,
I cannot walk batters with two strikes and one ball.
Though out of the frying pan, I'm still in the fire,
I am being treated by -- Doc. Oscar Meyer.

Ernest Lawrence Thayer I am most assuredly not. Send the hate mail to the usual location.

Best Regards

John

More randumb thoughts…

2008-01-05T14:19:00.000-08:00

I’ll open with some thoughts about Thursday’s points. To begin with, I’d like to expand on some things discussed with Crashburn Alley’s always erudite Bill Baer both here and at Ball-Hype. Bill is my unofficial mentor to Phillies phandom (and helpful guide filling gaps in my various sabermetric deficiencies) since I’m a recent convert. Suffice it to say, I value his opinion and want to re-post some of the points under consideration.

On TPoSGD:

He: Did I just have a fun time reading about why I'm wrong?

To defend Sabermetrics, though, I don't think they aim to establish a certain formula for success, it's simply a byproduct. Sabermetrics are just more advanced ways of discerning value in a player, and noticing the qualities of the most valuable players (note: not Most Valuable Players, tee hee) gives us an indicator on what may be the most successful way to build a ball club.

And Billy Beane's A's were built not around using numbers to get the best players; rather, they were built with the restriction of a low budget and the idea of finding value in areas other teams tended to ignore, such as on-base percentage. That's why you see the A's of the early 2000's stocked with OBP's between .350 and .400 -- all above league average.

You're too right when you say that there are events that go unnoticed in the box scores. But two items about that:

1) Sabermetrics don't claim to take into account all factors of a baseball game. Simply, they just use what is logged either in the official box scores or in the accumulated data from a host of sources.

2) The items that don't get logged in statistical tables are few and far between, especially with the advent of the Pitch F/X system.

Me: There’s no need to defend sabermetrics. You’re not wrong. I’m a big believer in it myself. For the most part, I agree with most of its precepts. It’s increased understanding of the game. I’m hugely grateful for the new frontiers of research it is traversing. My only real issue with it is that baseball in not entirely quantifiable. You acknowledge this yourself—a lot of sabermetricians do not. To me, it’s not unlike the classic gag ‘Who are you going to believe—me or your own lying eyes?’

I know what I saw over 162 games—for people who didn’t have the same point of reference telling me that you should always let guys like Sal Fasano, Jason Phillips, Hector Luna etc. swing away in any and all situations doesn’t ring true. I noticed a problem in May and folks were telling me early, often and repeatedly that the Jays are handling things correctly only to see in June-end of season that approach costing the Jays runs and games.

When the Jays finished with one of the lowest scoring teams in the AL and being told that it was still the correct approach … well you can see where I might have a problem with that. As I wrote throughout last season, the philosophy utilized by the Jays was based on a certain set of circumstances: a batting order of a healthy and productive Reed Johnson, Lyle Overbay, Vernon Wells, Troy Glaus, Frank Thomas, Alex Rios, Aaron Hill, Gregg Zaun and Royce Clayton (heh). They had the personnel at the beginning of the season for that. When the roster and expectations changed due to injuries and slumps Toronto never stopped to reassess things. Even though they no longer had the pieces in place, they continued as if they had. It would be like the 1985 Cardinals getting injuries to Willie McGee, Vince Coleman, Andy Van Slyke, and Ozzie Smith and being replaced with Matt Stairs type fill-ins and still playing the speed game.

As I wrote, baseball is probably the game with the most variables to it. There is no one matrix of any kind that can capture all of them.

Mathematics is the ultimate truth: 2+2 will always equal four. However, to paraphrase Jimmy Dugan (with a slight alteration) “There is no ultimate truth in baseball.” It’s the classic square peg in a round hole conundrum.

As I said, I’m a big believer in sabermetrics but when you’re using the perfect, flawless system that is the study of mathematics in assessing a uniquely human endeavour in all its flaws and quirks there is going to be a lot leakage around its boundaries.

You can see here why I like as many data points as possible. As I mentioned, I’m not a traditional stats guy. I do understand and appreciate the study of sabermetrics. Like many, I grew up reading Bill James’ abstracts in the 1980’s and while I do not fully comprehend all of it (due to insufficient math skills) I do understand what James was (and is) trying to do.

Bill James’ work back then (and today) wasn’t about studying statistics as much as trying to glean as much extra data about the game and quantifying it in an understandable fashion. James was looking at numbers through the prism of the game--not looking at the game through the lens of statistics.

Put another way, he was letting baseball define the numbers--not allow the numbers to define the game.

For example, all a run means is that a base runner crossed home plate. An RBI means that the batter made contact (or reached base) and in doing so, allowed a base runner to cross home plate.

As we all know, the games is much more complicated than that. There are three other bases where significant activity takes place and these impact on runs scoring. It’s the same defensively, while it all boils down to catching and throwing--a lot of different things can occur while this is going on and these are things of which James was trying to assign appropriate value.

James (and others) view themselves as not just teachers--but students of the game. Unfortunately, some of James’ disciples actions demonstrate that they view themselves only as teachers--setting the ignorant masses straight on matters pertaining to baseball. The thing is, numbers tell us more what has happened rather than what will happen.

As Yoda once said: “Always in motion the future is.”

While the numbers do have a degree of predictive value, the accuracy of these predictions is based on the amount of variables introduced into the situation under consideration since it occurred on earlier occasions. This is why sample size is so important. The more times a given situation occurs, the more examples become available for study (including the inevitable variables that can potentially come into play) and the more predictive value it will possess.

On Ball-Hype, Bill dropped another well thought out post:

John, let me throw some numbers at you using BaseballProspectus.com's Run Expectancy Matrix.

Runners on first and second, no outs: 1.51044 runs are likely to result based on every exact situation in 2007.

Runners on second and third, one out: 1.44328 runs are likely to result...

It is technically a bad idea to give up an out here, but if you break it down a bit, it becomes clearer.

Runner on first, no outs: .92599 runs.
Runner on second, one out: .72842 runs.

Runner on second, no outs: 1.18953 runs.
Runner on third, one out: .98694 runs.

However, this doesn't take into account who is batting. There is little difference between expected run production bunting versus not bunting.

When you have Sal Fasano batting, though, the odds of him getting a productive non-out hit are lower than the odds of making a non-productive out. Thus, bunting is probably the correct situation here.

So, when you say that Sabermetric philosophy states that bunting is the wrong idea here, it is with the caveat that it is not taking into consideration many factors, including who is batting, who is hitting behind the proposed bunter, who is pitching, who may be pitching, etc.

If there is some mathematical formula that can accurately show when intentional out-making is beneficial, I'm sure sabermetricians will adapt and include that.

Even as a big-time promoter of Sabermetrics, I pretty much agreed with everything you wrote. And I put on a pot of water to boil for Ramen noodles, and I was so into reading this article, that I nearly forgot about it and that outcome wouldn't have been so pleasant.

Now you know why I respect Baer’s opinion--he knows far more about sabermetrics than a poseur like myself yet comprehends that there are still frontiers to be explored. I do respect and understand the importance of Run Expectancy. As Bill notes, there are variables that have to be considered. Not too many teams have had the misfortune of trying to contend in the DH league with a great many games where the bottom of the lineup is replacement-level or lower.

It is what was lost on many last summer--your traditional Run Expectancy studies were not conducted assuming a potentially contending American League club (read: with a DH available) with three batters with aggregate on base and slugging averages south of .300 batting 7-8-9.

I was of the opinion that Run Expectancy was of little usage in getting a grasp on the Blue Jays 2007 season due to the variables involved. I could see by watching the games what was not working and trying to find something that might work. The Jays had three outmakers; outs only produce runs when there is a runner at third and less than two out and the out is the result of (certain types of) contact or a passed ball third strike. That being the case, the optimum scenario for the Jays was--when the bottom of the lineup was due up-- to make sure that man on third (or second and third) with less than two out was their best bet to get run production out of them. All of the fireworks of ‘07 surrounded trying to find the best way to reduce the damage the bottom of the lineup was inflicting on run scoring.

Sadly, many trotted out Run Expectancy as the miracle cure not realizing that it is based on what has happened--and not necessarily what will happen. Had they pointed to a study breaking down man on second (or first and second) nobody out with three .229/.280/.295 batters due up that demonstrated swinging away maximizes scoring with a sufficient sample size to have a degree of predictive value--that would be one thing. If I insisted they have such a thing--they would have rightly told me that hasn’t been enough examples of this to have such information handy.

This is precisely why I felt a reassessment in offensive philosophy by the Blue Jays in 2007 was warranted--and that the answer didn't lay in Run Expectancy in this particular instance.

Hawk up a HOFer…

As I mentioned during last week’s segment on ESPN 1450’s Mike Gill Show I recently came around on Andre Dawson’s Hall of Fame worthiness. During my work with “the Dweeb Team” (BTW … Mr. Tango re-did the front page--check it out) I spent a lot of time looking back at those old Expos teams.

It brought back so many memories of him that I took another hard look at his career. For me, the No. 1 barrier I had regarding Dawson was his sub-par OBP. I guess I felt a bit of a hypocrite for minimizing Raines not reaching 3000 hits since he was looking to get on base by any means possible. He was a leadoff man doing his job--that job being getting on base and not worrying about how it looked on his stats.

Well, Dawson understood his job as a middle-of-the-order hitters as being driving in runs. Everybody looked at Dawson to hit, to drive in runs--not to wait out walks. I find it hard to fault Dawson’s OBP since it wasn’t viewed as a serious part of a run producer’s responsibilities.

Raines was supposed to get on base--that meant he walked on 1330 occasions and reached base 3977 times. It would have been selfish or Raines to have a mindset where he concentrated on hitting .300 and reaching 3000 hits even if it meant his career OBP ended up at .355 instead of .385. Dawson scored 1373 runs, drove in 1591, with 2774 hits--over 1000 of them for extra bases. He produced 2526 ‘eyeball runs’ while launching 438 HR, so it can be said he was an excellent run producer--he did his job.

The final point came about when I happened onto Richie Ashburn's page of Baseball-Reference. Fellow aficionados of Sean Forman’s magnum opus know how you can start clicking comparable players of somebody whose numbers you decided to look up. That’s what I was doing (heck, I can't even remember who I initially was looking up) when I came to Ashburn’s page. I felt he was overlooked for Cooperstown for a long time and was glad when he made it. Anyway, I never really looked hard at his career SLG before and it dawned on me it was below league average.

However, he was a leadoff batter so SLG wasn’t too important to his job description. Ashburn was a gifted fielder, a career .308 hitter, reached base 3815 times (.396 OBP in 9736 PA), and scored 1322 runs. He had enough plusses to outweigh that one minus. Well, like Ashburn, Dawson was a gifted fielder winning Gold Gloves in center and right field, topped 300 stolen bases, had five seasons of 25 HR/25 SB, with all those runs, RBI and extra base hits. So many positives and only one negative--it was then I felt that I had been too hard on Dawson.

I still feel Raines was the better player, but I’ve moved “Hawk” from my borderline HOFer (I tend to put borderline guys on my “nay” list) to HOF status. Should Raines make it on Tuesday, expect some noises about Dawson in future (assuming he falls short this year).

Best Regards

John

Homeward bound…

2008-01-03T16:56:00.000-08:00

Well, after about a week on the road that included an unsuccessful trip to Cooperstown to do research (they informed me the library would be open but neglected to mention that the archives room would not) I’ll be returning to the boonies of Eastern Ontario.

As to the Hall of Fame—the last three times I have been down there the research area has been locked. This was my fear about this trip and a phone call reassured me all would be well but nope—the reason for the trip would be off limits after all.

Here’s the thing, you can call the Hall and ask for research but it takes close to a year before they get the materials to you; if you decide to do it yourself they lock it down for the same reason gas prices take a jump. In other words they do it, but don’t expect a satisfactory reason for doing so. In this case, it was closed for the holidays but would re-open on New Years Eve.

Huh?

New. Years. Eve.? Are they serious with that?

Look, either digitize the information in there and charging a fee for access or keep it open during regular hours. They needed two employees to work the cash register in the library and cannot spare one to make sure the archives room isn’t overrun by the Mongol Hordes.

I doubt they have a real problem with rogue thugs who get their jollies overturning filing cabinets. Yeah, I’m pretty ticked about this. It takes a lot of work to arrange things to get down there and there’s absolutely no guarantee that you’ll get what you come for. If they’re so paranoid about things getting damaged, ask for a deposit; if they’re worried about theft simply check the possessions of the persons using the room after they leave—make it a condition of using the area.

At the very least, make copies of the data and donate those to a local library or research center. Money is tight and I spent a fair bit to make the trip and it went for naught. Bottom line, if I decide to try again I will stop by the souvenir ship and purchase a bat before proceeding to the third floor. If it’s locked again, I’m not responsible for what happens. Deduct the costs of my actions from the money I’ve wasted going down there the last three times and we’ll call it square.

(shakes head)

I would like to say the following to the Hall of Fame in Cooperstown N.Y.—thanks for nothing. If I get around to writing a book I’ll make sure they get a full mention in the acknowledgements section that states that it would have been finished much earlier except I needed to use the Hall of Fame.

(deep breath)

(exhales slowly)

Moving on…

I’ve decided to open the New Year by getting folks riled up on me by discussing my views on the sac bunt as it pertained to the 2007 Blue Jays on THT tomorrow. Yup, I’m still quite unrepentant about creating an unstable fecal-based weather system last summer. While I appreciate the study of sabermetrics and am grateful for more accurate ways to measure pitching and hitting, there is no way I’m changing my mind about the human element of the game.

The thing with baseball is this: it’s been often stated that it’s a game where something can happen on the field that has never occurred before. As Joaquin Andujar once memorably stated “youneverknow.” I cannot imagine that any mathematical matrix can account for all the variables that occur on the field—yet alone one that comes up with a hard-and-fast formula for success.

There are a lot of ways for baseball games to be won and lost. To state that any one approach is the Holy Grail for baseball success simply tells me that they have not been watching baseball long enough. Pennants have been won with power, with pitching and with speed … you name it. The “Hitless Wonder” Chicago White Sox, the Bash Brothers Oakland A’s, the 1985 St. Louis Cardinals, the 1927 and 1961 Yankees, the Miracle Mets of 1969, the 83-79 1972 team, the 1998 New York Yankees all demonstrate that games and seasons can be won and lost with all manner of philosophies. There is no one uber-approach that exceeds all others.

It depends on whatever team scores more runs than another team the most often by whatever talent happens to be on hand at the time.

To me, that’s the No. 1 difference I had with those wholeheartedly embracing the sabermetric approach is that they feel it applies to teams of all stripes. If you do it that way, you are guaranteed maximum production from your lineup, rotation and bullpen.

I happen to disagree.

To me, a game, a series, a season are things always in flux. The team with optimum talent (no substitute for that) to adapt to the ebbs and flows of these things will succeed. They find ways to push whatever runs are required when the hitting runs cold. Likewise, they manage to keep other teams from scoring more runs than they whenever the pitching or fielding is inconsistent.

They’re flexible, they adapt and they win. A rigid, dogmatic approach is neither flexible nor adaptable and a team with an inflexible approach only succeeds as long as the variables are kept to a minimum. Billy Beane alluded to this with his famous “My [bleep] doesn’t work in the playoffs.” In other words, that particular approach could be overcome by a team with approximate talent that was able adjust to the A’s approach.

Further, as I’ve said ad infinitum ad nauseum too many things occur in a game that are simply not found in the numbers. There are no stats kept for double plays not made, throwing to the wrong base, missing the cutoff man, not advancing an extra base when the opportunity arises, or passed balls and wild pitches corralled by the catcher. The only place these things show up are in wins and losses.

No, I don’t think I know everything about baseball nor do I cite myself as an authority. Quite the opposite—I think I have a lot to learn. Sadly, certain advocates of sabermetrics feel that they do hold the Holy Grail, that they have mastered the secrets of winning baseball games. Those who disagree will be ridiculed for not embracing the new orthodoxy.

The only absolute truth in baseball is this: the team with the most runs after all outs have been used is the one that wins. It’s not like figure skating or gymnastics where points are awarded for style or artistic merit. The only thing that matters is that one more run than the other team—and a run is a run regardless of how it is generated whether it is a ball clearing the fence or a runner crossing home with a suicide squeeze.

They all count.

It’s up to each team to use the talent on hand to find a way to get that one more run than the other team. If they do it 57-60% of the time, chances are they'll play October games--how ever they accomplished that can be considered a winning approach.

Best Regards

John

The Mike Gill Show: A new year--the same old crew...

2008-01-01T15:56:00.000-08:00

Well, it may be a brand new year but it’s the same old mischief for Mr. Gill and myself. Our first segment this year on ESPN 1450’s Mike Gill Show will deal with the following topics:

What are your thoughts on the new Jose Canseco book and what did you think of the information in the old one? Is it time to stop reporting this and try to move on or is this a good thing?
If you were Mike Wallace asking questions to Roger Clemens--what would you ask ?
Here are five Hall of Fame candidates: Andre Dawson, Chuck Knoblauch, David Justice, Alan Trammell, Shawon Dunston and Dale Murphy—do you think any will make it?

What are your thoughts on the new Jose Canseco book and what did you think of the information in the old one? Is it time to stop reporting this and try to move on or is this a good thing?

Well, Canseco’s points have been borne out more often than not. I’d say he has a lot of credibility on this particular topic. He knows there are a lot of people who would love to sue him so I can’t see him being careless when making allegations. We know he has made noises regarding Alex Rodriguez several times and I wonder what corroborating evidence he has should he mention A-Rod.

Part of me wants to move on in all this but there are too many political points to be scored yet on both the government and Bud Selig’s part. While trying to get a handle on the issue is a major headache and probably futile--it would be nice to see strong disincentives for using steroids in MLB in place. Until the MLBPA takes unilateral steps and puts strong sanctions in place for their membership, this will go on and on. Right now, it seems that the government is dragging the union into this. Until the MLBPA becomes proactive rather than enabling it is an uphill climb.

If you were Mike Wallace asking questions to Roger Clemens--what would you ask?

Chances are good that Wallace will ask any good questions I might come up with. I guess I’d ask Clemens what motivation Brian MacNamee would have to lie? He’ll suffer both privately and financially due to his testimony and there were even stronger disincentives for lying about it. Why would a man deliberately damage his reputation and finances knowing full well that doing so would also get him a reservation for the Greg Anderson suite? Let’s assume Roger Clemens is telling the truth—now to lie about this to not only destroys his reputation and hurts him in the pocket book, but also lands him in prison. It seems like MacNamee was looking at two choices—giving up his reputation or his liberty.

Personally, the testimony given by MacNamee has become a ‘he said/he said’ with no way for either to prove or disprove the allegations. Until something more concrete surfaces than the word of one trainer, I’m going to hold back on judging Clemens. One person’s testimony absent other evidence isn’t much. Sure, it is naïve on my part but I wouldn’t wish to be judged in that manner so why do it to somebody else.

Like I’ve written about Sammy Sosa, I think Clemens has used, but I wouldn’t base any judgements (like the Hall of Fame) on my suspicions. Time generally reveals the truth and we have to be patient. I’m a long way from ‘guilty beyond a reasonable doubt’ for either one. Since I personally cannot level a guilty verdict based on the evidence at hand, I have to assume they’re clean. Brian MacNamee’s word isn’t truth—it’s an unsubstantiated allegation at this point.

Here are five Hall of Fame candidates: Andre Dawson, Chuck Knoblauch, David Justice, Alan Trammell, Shawon Dunston and Dale Murphy—do you think any will make it?

I don’t think any will make it. Here are my takes as to their worthiness:

Andre Dawson: For a long time I thought he doesn’t belong—that OBP is scary low. I saw his career and felt he never came through in big situations—the numbers state otherwise. For a bona fide Gold Glove fielder at a key defensive position with so many plusses on his résumé (1000 extra base hits, 2774 hits, a career SLG average 87 points higher than league average over 21 seasons, five 20-20 years) it seems a little odd to hold his lack of walks against so many positives. Nobody held Richie Ashburn’s below league average SLG (.382) against him. All the other positives outweighed that one negative—well the same goes for Dawson. It’s a recent epiphany on my part.

Chuck Knoblauch: I thought he was well on his way to being an elite leadoff hitter. Between his defensive yips and being linked to PED use he isn’t on anybody’s radar.

David Justice: Hall of the Very Good; he was a fine ballplayer but nowhere near close to the Cooperstown territory.

Alan Trammell: Hugely overqualified for the Hall of Fame. I’m a Blue Jays fan and I thought he got jobbed in 1987 in MVP voting (George Bell). Here’s a THT snippet about this:

I'm among the many who feel very strongly that the 1987 MVP should've gone to Alan Trammell. It was like the BBWAA was giving Toronto a consolation prize. What other possible explanation could there be? Over the two weeks leading up to the Jays' meltdown, both George Bell (.382/.407/.655; nine runs, four HR, 13 RBI) and Trammell (.491/.548/.782; 10 runs, three HR, nine RBI) are playing like MVPs. Both are red hot, but the Tigers’ shortstop is playing like a god both offensively and defensively.

Finally the fateful seven games; Trammell cools a bit, which is hardly surprising since that pace is hardly sustainable, but still is .333/.419/.519; four runs, one HR, three RBI and is four-for-four in stolen bases (over the final three weeks). Meanwhile, Bell totally loses it (.111/.250/.111; one run, one HR, four RBI) right along with the rest of the offense.

The Tigers complete their miracle finish and the "Blow Jays" have reverted to form and they give the MVP to Bell?

Wha????

A slick defensive shortstop posts an OPS+ of 155 on a division winner while an unremarkable defensive left fielder with an 146 OPS+ who, it should be noted, helped pull off one of the great choke jobs in the game's history is named most valuable player?

I realize they didn't have OPS+ back then, but Trammell's a 20-20 multiple Gold Glove winning shortstop who was caught stealing twice all season and batted .343/.402/.551 with 200 hits and more than 100 runs scored and 100 RBI. He doesn't win over an average defender at a power position batting .308/.352/.605 playing half his games at old Exhibition Stadium, which at the time was probably the best hitting park in the circuit?

Bell had a great year, true enough, but to this day this was one of the most boneheaded MVP votes I have ever seen. All because he led the league in RBI. After that final week, it never dawned on me that Trammell wouldn't win. One of many dark thoughts in the aftermath of the Jays' collapse was "there goes Bell's MVP." After all, Trammell got it done all year including when the AL East flag was on the line.

He’ll likely, as did Lou Whitaker, get screwed out of his rightful place at the Hall. He was the total package: he could hit, hit with power, draw a walk, steal bases, and field beautifully—what more does anyone want? This (along with Whitaker) is one of the BBWAA’s biggest blunders.

Shawon Dunston: No chance, no hope. Enjoyed an 18 year career and left it all on the field—I think he’s content with that.

Dale Murphy: I’m turning this post into a THT clip show, but it sure beats re-writing it. Here’s what I wrote this after the last HOF vote:

Probably the best pure head-scratchers are the vote totals for Jim Rice and Dale Murphy. Both had similar careers in that they enjoyed terrific peaks before falling off a cliff. Rice had a Runs Created Above Average from 1977-86 of 264, while Murphy had an RCAA of 283 from 1979-87. Rice won an MVP; Murphy won back-to-back MVPs. Rice hit 382 home runs in 8,225 at-bats while Murphy banged 398 in 7,960 at-bats. Rice went to one more All-Star Game than Murphy, yet he won two more Silver Sluggers than Rice. Also Murphy had a quintet of Gold Gloves while Rice’s defensive abilities were unremarkable.

Rice is sixth all-time in grounding into double plays while Murphy is 60th. Murphy was a better base runner while Rice had more RBIs and 100-RBI seasons. Finally Rice’s career OPS+ of 128 is better than Murphy’s 121, but that has to be weighed against Murphy’s better defense at a more demanding defensive position.

Bottom line, you could argue until you were blue in the face on who was the better player, yet Rice received 346 votes (63.5%) while Murphy garnered just 50 (9.2%). Am I missing something? Is it the RBIs (1,451 to 1,266)? The batting average (.298 to .265)? It sure ain’t because of their relations with the media.

Personally, I’d put him in before Jim Rice based on both objective and subjective evidence. I think Murphy doesn’t quite make it but he wouldn’t embarrass the Hall of Fame either.

Best Regards

John

Amped up…

2007-12-29T14:02:00.000-08:00

I guess one of the biggest reasons I’m not a ‘punish with extreme prejudice’ those who have used steroids by expunging, asterisking or altering their stats is that the record book has been tainted by illegal drugs for quite some time now.

A quick caveat: there is a large difference between what amphetamines will do for an athlete’s performance as opposed to anabolic steroids. Regardless, both have had an impact on baseball’s ledgers. Steroids allow a player to exceed his normal output by increasing his ability to perform. While debate rages regarding amphetamines’ effect on performance there is no debate that they do have one undeniable function—they get a player into the lineup when they otherwise may have been unable to play.

For example, since 1950 (an arbitrary cutoff but adequate enough to make the point) there are 11 players no higher than 150 hits north of 3000. There are 10 batters no higher than 50 HR beyond the 500-level. Finally, there are six pitchers 25 wins (but no higher) above 300 wins—all since 1950.

It takes about a season’s worth of at bats to garner 150 hits and a season-and-a-half for 50 HR (and 25 wins). Don’t forget, we’re talking elite talent here. Stiffs do not get close to these milestones. The thing is, players that are in this neighbourhood have careers in the 20-season range.

Over the course of 20 years of 154-162 game seasons--how many times do you think players required ‘a little help’ to get into the lineup? Let’s focus on position players for a moment. Suppose they ‘need a boost’ 35 times a year because of travel, partying, illness etc.—how many games does that translate into over a 20 season career? Even a conservative estimate as this translates into 700 games that might otherwise have not been played or played at a sub-optimal level.

Seven hundred games are well over four ‘iron man’ seasons (played in every game) assuming a 162 game schedule. A pitcher amped up five times per season would translate into 100 starts in a 20-year career.

How many extra hits, home runs, or wins could be attributed to the restorative effects of amphetamines that allowed players to get into games or play them at close to their rested level? There is more than enough to put a significant dent in the 3000 hit club, the 500 HR club, and the 300 win club—generally considered to be Cooperstown territory.

I think it’s safe to assume that absent amphetamines both the record book and the Hall of Fame would look quite a bit different than it does today. So, for those that wish to make a notation in the records that these milestones were due to anabolic steroids then it’s only fair to do likewise for players linked with amphetamines. Their effect is not as dramatic as those created by steroids, but it is there—a few hits here, a couple of wins there, and a handful of home runs smattered throughout add up over a career in the two decades range.

Off the top of my head…

For the poor souls who regularly read my stream-of-consciousness meanderings know I have devoted a lot of bandwidth dissecting the issue of steroids in baseball. The thing is, athletes keep getting larger and larger (especially in the NFL) and most folks don’t even bat an eye.

Athletes are regarded to a degree as heroes, a level above the everyday person. For those wishing to discount that claim think back to your high school days. How many pep rallies and kudos by their peers did the scholastic achievers ever receive? Who were “A”-list, the cool kids--the jocks or the brains?

‘nuff said.

If you look at the evolution of comic book superheroes from the 1940’s until today you notice they progressively become bigger, more muscular and far more ripped. In the last 2-3 decades they no longer look human. They are literally anatomical impossibilities in that no frame could handle the stress of that many muscles upon them.

A lot of us have grown up with that as our perception of what physical ‘heroes’ are supposed to look like. By the time we reach young adulthood we become so accustomed to looking at physical freaks that the 300 lb linemen with legs for arms and tree trunks for legs do not shock us. We do not question their appearance, heck—they’re not even as buff as Captain America, Batman or the Green Lantern.

We’ve become desensitized to the appearance of freakish muscles on those who can perform physical feats that we cannot. It explains the disconnect we have between our criticism of those who use steroids and our continued financial support to the sports we follow and the athletes who play on our team.

It’s one thing to be critical of steroid users when sitting in a bar, quite another when we’re at the park watching those very muscles helping our team win games. For the most part, a lot of our vitriol regarding steroid users stems from the cues we receive from the media. Here’s a clip from a THT column discussing this phenomena as it applies to that hottest of hot buttons—Barry Bonds:

Here’s why they hoot and hiss. They read things about Bonds that state:

“…the only thing that seems to bring him joy is his contempt for the vast majority of humans. He greets the world with a sneer ... Yet no great player has been more consistently unpleasant than Barry Bonds, and not only with professional snoops, but teammates, too.” -- (Don't put too much stock in Bonds' tactful concern)

“He smiled and laughed, exuding all the charm of a mobster posing for pictures with kids. This was Barry Bonds' good side, the one we supposedly never see. But the man who would be (home run) king has stopped snarling at the world ... He's laughing all right--at Bud Selig, Hank Aaron, the feds, the fans, you and me.”--(Nobody can stop Barry Bonds)

“It's why most people who know Bonds wouldn't spit on him even if he was on fire ... Nobody questions his talent. It's his failure as a human being that is at issue.”--(Bonds in the showcase game? It just doesn't add up)

These are comments that have little to with Bonds' PED usage. We’ve read columns for 15 years now about what an unpleasant sort Barry Bonds is, and now are folks saying that if he never used steroids the public would now be embracing him and his assault on history?

At any rate, if history is any indicator, this era will go down as other era have—one where he have to adjust the totals to account for the circumstances of the time.

Best Regards

John

The Mike Gill Show: a 2007 retrospective...

2007-12-28T13:39:00.000-08:00

After spending some time visiting the Baseball Hall of Fame (of which I will be blasting in the near future) it became necessary to move my ESPN 1450’s Mike Gill Show segment to today at 6:05 PM. Mike has asked that we discuss the following…

Baseball's top stories of 2007

The Mitchell Report
Barry Bonds breaks Hank Aaron’s HR record
Red Sox win their second World Series in last four years
Rockies win 21 of 22 to make playoffs
Mets blow the NL East

Just a little dialogue about why each made 2007 a great or memorable baseball season.

The Mitchell Report

This was the most overrated story of the 2007 season. It ended up creating more questions than it had answered. First, WNBC put out a bogus list of the players named in the report causing suspicion as to whether it had been altered in the three days prior to its going public. Second, both Larry Starr and Jose Canseco—two people with a tremendous amount of knowledge about steroids in the game—went either unquestioned or underreported. In both cases, they knew the degree of management culpability adding to the perception that Mitchell wasn’t exactly neutral in his investigation.

Further, Mitchell should have involved the MLBPA in the investigation from the get-go or at the very last keeping them in the loop rather than attempting to create an adversarial environment. Of course, this made it that much easier to paint the MLBPA as the problem rather than a partner in getting to the bottom of the steroids mess. Obviously Don Fehr and Gene Orza were too much in love with their own libertarian ideologies than helping insure that the players had a workplace that didn’t require their members to ingest potentially toxic substances to obtain or retain a job in the big leagues.

Fehr and Orza truly had their heads either in the sand, or were suffering from inverse cranial/rectal inversion syndrome by—for all intents and purposes--advising the players to not speak to Mitchell not realizing that they would end up having to speak quite a bit after the fact to the media.

It really didn’t tell us a lot that we didn’t already know; rather it simply confirmed what we had suspected for quite some time. It did demonstrate that Fehr and Orza have damaged the union in a very big way. Their ideology was more important to them than creating a safe, fair working environment for their constituents. They have also inadvertently aided Bud Selig to paint himself as the man who got baseball out of the steroid era and the MLBPA as the ones primarily responsible for it. A lot of players’ reputations have been largely destroyed and they can thank Fehr and Orza for this. If Bud Selig has been laying traps to make sure the public feels he is wearing the white hat and Fehr/Orza the black (hats), the union sprang every last one of them. The Mitchell Report laid bare the total impotence of what was once the most powerful union in the world and highlighted the need for new leadership.

Barry Bonds breaks Hank Aaron’s HR record

Generally such a milestone is to be greeted with celebration and it was for the most part—in San Francisco. Bonds, Selig and the media made sure that it would be as joyless as humanly possible. We can debate for years (and probably will) how many ‘juiced’ home runs Bonds hit however the new home run king aided and abetted by the media made sure it would be a resounding anticlimax.

Whether it was waiting for the Grand Jury indictment, BALCO, steroids, Hank Aaron’s reluctance to follow the chase both parties made sure there was maximum distraction approaching 756. I found the media’s response to Aaron to be callous. To expect an elderly man to travel around the country answering the same bloody questions at each and every stop just to make the press’s job easier was inexcusable. For a group that was concerned with Aaron’s legacy, they didn’t seem to care much for Aaron, the human being. After everything he’s gone through in his life, you think folks would respect the man’s right to enjoy a quiet relaxing retirement. Instead we read tons of drivel dissecting “The Hammer’s” mindset in all this.

Bud Selig didn’t help much either. He sat by and allowed the steroid era to continue because it was good for business. He made a laughable appearance at HR No. 755 with an impressive public demonstration of pocket pool and was absent for 756. He made his bed and he should have laid in it like a man. Bonds lifelong obsession of making sure everybody around him realize that he’s one of baseball’s greatest players and they (press and peers) alike are not--made him hard to embrace. I think the overwhelming feeling when it was over was profound relief.

Red Sox win second World Series in last four years

Despite the uncertain nature of the game and the seemingly miraculous efforts of the Rockies, the Fall Classic seemed more of a coronation than anything else. Yes, there were some hopeful prognostications based more on optimism than fact, but deep down I think most expected an AL smackdown.

It confirmed that the Red Sox are just another big market team. The Patriots may go undefeated this year, the Red Sox are only less wealthy than the Yankees and Boston will never again be viewed as the underdog. Having said that, it added to the Hall of Fame cases of Manny Ramirez (already there), Curt Schilling (probably was there already, but convinced some of the remaining skeptics), David Ortiz, (not there yet but getting closer). Further, it cemented Josh Beckett’s reputation of being a big game pitcher and demonstrated that World Series MVP Mike Lowell was probably the greatest contract dump in history. Despite the warm and fuzzies of the aforementioned, the AL now views the Red Sox as the Evil Empire II.

Rockies win 21 of 22 to make playoffs

This was the icing on the cake of a wonderful climax to the National League season. All three divisions and the wild card were up for grabs in the last week of the season—as was the NL MVP. Eight teams were in the hunt and nobody had a clue. Three weeks before the season ended, Colorado wasn’t even on anybody’s radar screen. After this run they swept their way to the World Series downing two division champions without breaking much of a sweat.

It was good for baseball and overdue for the fans in Denver. A wonderful reminder that in the world of baseball, it is truly as Joaquin Andujar once opined, “youneverknow.”

Mets blow the NL East

They say what goes around comes around and that in the great cosmic balance everything eventually evens out. In 1964 it was the Phillies that snatched defeat from the jaws of victory. In 2007 it was the Phillies being the miracle team. While it’s easy to lump the Mets in with the 1951 Dodgers, the ’64 Phillies, the 1987 Blue Jays etc. I don’t think it does the story (or the Phillies) justice.

The collapse was simply the flipping of two talented, but flawed teams. In the early going the Mets succeeded despite iffy pitching both in the rotation and the bullpen. Late in the season, it was the Phillies doing likewise. It just so happened that the Phils were standing when the music stopped. It was Chase Utley/Jimmy Rollins vs. David Wright/Jose Reyes, Billy Wagner vs. Brett Myers, Oliver Perez vs. Cole Hamels and Carlos Beltran vs. Aaron Rowand.

Further, it was about three relievers named Brett Myers, J.C. Romero and Tom Gordon. This trio told Charlie Manuel they were available every day and posted a 1.05 ERA in 45 appearances over the season’s final three weeks averaging over 8 K/9 IP and less than 2 BB/9 IP. It was about a confident shortstop who predicted that the Phillies were the team to beat and never wavered while setting NL records for runs scored and total bases by a shortstop while enjoying a 30/30 season and topping 20 doubles, triples, HR, and stolen bases while providing Gold Glove defense.

A Mets collapse or a Phillies team that refused to stay on the canvas and scored a KO in the 15th round? I’ll remember 2007 as the latter.

I'm gonna take off eh …

2007-12-25T15:58:00.000-08:00

Well, I’m going be in absentia for a few days to travel to upstate New York so this blog will be quiet for a few days (waits for cheers to die down).

(still waiting)

(still waiting)

(still waiting)

(still waiting)

(still waiting)

WILL YOU KNOCK IT OFF ALREADY!!

Geez, I haven’t heard such a sustained amount of cheering since my vasectomy. Even Charles Darwin did a nifty bit of self-exhumation to join the applause. Considering that the word resurrection literally means 'a standing up' I guess that qualifies as a standing ovation.

Speaking of which (how often do you hear that preface in this particular context? You'd think nobody's ever seen a zombie biologist cheer a human quasi-neutering ... you really should get out more folks), I would like to congratulate former MLBtalk compatriot and current writer for FOX Sports Dayn Perry on the safe arrival of his new son.

The poor slob will never know what hit ‘im. The timing of the birth is ironic considering that the name of the Lord was probably invoked repeatedly both at conception and delivery. Dayn, I hope your wife never implied your parents never married, that your mother was a female canine, or that you harbour an Oedipus Complex.

If she did--that’s par for the course; even during childbirth. ;-)

By the way--who got the epidural, you or she?

At any rate big guy; enjoy the ride; it’s fun being a dad … for twelve years, eleven months, 29 days, 23 hours, 59 minutes and 59 seconds--then things get tricky.

Anyway …

I still have no idea when my next MSN column will be up. I haven’t heard from my boss in over a week so I don’t know what his or my status is at the moment. I just hope the Mitchell Report isn’t old news too soon. I am paid regardless if my column isn’t posted during the news cycle but it’s frustrating nevertheless. To sit down and slog through the entire report, taking notes and making observations before putting together a couple of columns in a timely matter only to learn my hard work just vanished into the ether without even knowing the behind the scenes circumstances is disheartening.

I’ve had three or four columns that never saw the light of day. It’s not that they were rejected, it’s because the sports department at MSN is a one-man show and if something happens to that man then my article is regally consummated.

(sigh)

I used to be associate editor at MLBtalk--I wonder if I can convince him (or have him convince his boss) to give me the keys to post my work myself. It would lighten his workload and give MSN Canada’s baseball section regular weekly commentary. I think I can be trusted not to cause them undue headaches. I have almost a decade’s experience at this and I think they can count on me not to embarrass them.

At any rate, I hope everything is O.K. with Scott--I’m not upset at him. He’s doing his level best but whatever business model or organizational structure they have with the sports department--it isn’t working. The winter meetings are very, very old news but there’s my commentary on it gathering dust and hoping somebody may click it by accident.

Best Regards

John

DUUUUHHHHHHHH …

2007-12-23T15:35:00.000-08:00

A quick note (pauses for his reader to regain consciousness--rummages around for smelling salts wondering how he can attach it to an e-mail)…

I am loath to rip a fellow scribe--it hasn’t stopped me in the past mind you, it’s just that I’m loath to do it. Anyway, Mike Imrem of the Chicago Daily Herald has earned a hearty referral to a practitioner in the field of psychiaproctology to treat his severe case of inverse, cranial-rectum syndrome for his column Time to tear down Wrigley.

Listen up sunshine; you don’t tear down one-of-a-kind historical structures. Wrigley Field was originally built for the Chicago Whales of the Federal League. It is a unique artifact of that era in baseball history. His statement:

The place is a tenement not worth saving. Despite all the compromises made the past few years, with more planned, Wrigley doesn't generate the revenues a major-market facility should.

Riiiight. I seem to remember that they’re scalping their own tickets at astonishing prices. I’m sure they could do that as people from around the country to see the latest retro HOK cookie cutter. In 2001, Wrigley Field was sixth in the NL in gate receipts alone despite seating about 40,000. (We'll touch on more up-to-date points shortly.) Take a page from the Boston Red Sox and see how you can turn a classic into a revenue-generating beast.

What’s your solution? Have the area take close to a billion dollars out of schools, healthcare, and infrastructure so we can have Camden Yards version 16.0? None of the HOK parks of the last 15 years is a national tourist attraction--Fenway and Wrigley are precisely that. Ask Peter Angelos about how many tourists he attracts to watch his team finish fourth in their division. The Cubs draw even when the club is poor. Over the last four seasons they have had two winning seasons and two losing seasons and were fourth in the NL in attendance three times and fourth once.

Of course, when the team isn’t a draw, the park still brings in fans. The novelty of a new ballpark would wear off very quickly (just ask the teams that have one)--Wrigley remains novel and becomes even more so each year. The Cubs are worth only less than the Mets and Dodgers in the NL and only those two clubs create more revenue. Every National League club with a new stadium is below them.

What does that tell you?

Mike, if you want to replace Wrigley Field are you liquidating your assets to buy stock in Enron and World.com? You may as well be--it’s about as wise a move as the one you’re suggesting.

Best Regards

John

Winding down …

2007-12-23T11:30:00.000-08:00

There is not a lot to cover off at the moment. Fortunately, my specialty is talking a lot without saying much.

Heh.

I have done two columns for MSN Canada about the Mitchell Report that are currently AWOL. I have no idea when they will be running. My boss has been out of contact since the middle of the week. When this happens, it means something has seriously gone wrong for him on the home front.

I hope it isn’t the case.

My first THT column dealing with TMR entitled “Idiology” can be read here with another slant taken on it that will run December 28. It has inspired a total of seven columns and blog posts combined and parts of five other posts here at TPoSGD. It’s the gift that just keeps on giving eh?

Speaking of THT, starting in the New Year, I will be doing a second weekly feature at The Hardball Times. The tentative title will be either “This Week’s Heroes and Zeroes” or “Heroes and Zeroes for the week of …” It will be a compilation of props and snark regarding people in baseball (including the media) where we will recognize the best and worst of a given week. I’m hoping to come up a catchier title where I name the award after an outstanding baseball personality (think Albert Pujols) and an equally destructive sort (think David Samson).

Back in the days of FASTBALL.com a poster on the Blue Jays forum did a weekly feature about various weekly goof ups. It was entitled “The Huckleberries” after a snake bitten Blue Jays southpaw named Huck Flener who would be injured in the oddest fashions.

I’m aiming for something like that.

It will be a reader-interactive feature where I will ask the readers for their candidates/submissions (which will be properly credited of course) so ~~I don’t have to do the actual legwork~~ I can have a lot of options to choose from. Some weeks nobody will distinguish themselves for better or worse and it will be strictly a ‘heroes’ or ‘zeroes’ piece. If you have any ideas for a column name or anybody you wish to nominate drop me a line.

I’m going to be headed to Cooperstown next Wednesday hopefully to sequester myself into their library to gather research materials for some projects I hope to start. I’m mulling writing a book and am looking for a subject that I can devote 300 pages to covering. I love the Hall of Fame but whenever I go there, they have the library locked for whatever reason. Should that be the case I guess I’ll just take in the exhibits with my brother and nephews and pout about my poor fortune.

Of course, I’m tentatively scheduled to have my segment on ESPN 1450’s Mike Gill Show Friday 6:05 PM if we’re back from upstate New York by then. I’ll be in London Ontario for that and I really should let Mike know about the change of locale for next week.

Getting back to coverage of the Mitchell Report, I know you’re sick and tired of reading articles about it--the thing is ... there’s not much else for columnists to cover at the moment. Folks in MLB are, like most people, getting ready for the Christianized festival of Saturnalia (the rebirth of the unconquered sun) and New Years celebrations and aren’t getting into a lot of mischief at the moment. Quite frankly, we’re reaching--need proof? Check out these storylines :

We’re trying, but reaching here folks; the Mitchell Report was a godsend to us ink-stained/bandwidth devouring wretches. This is supposed to be a Blue Jays blog (eventually, I guess) but they’ve been so quiet that the Toronto Star’s Richard Griffin was covering the trials and tribulations of John McDonald’s mishandling by J.P. Ricciardi. Of course, if Ricciardi were to find a cure for cancer tomorrow Griffin (Canada’s answer to Bill Plaschke) would criticize him for not doing it sooner. He would then line up interviews with people who have lost family to the disease to demonstrate the human cost of Ricciardi’s tardiness.

Writers and vendettas are a poor mix--everybody comes out smelling like a just opened exhumed casket that was buried under an old outhouse now used for disposing of rotten eggs that was placed on top of an old well that was abandoned because the water had a high concentration of sulphur.

If something happens in the next few days (even if it is a column going live) I’ll let you know. Stay safe over the holidays and if you drink--don’t drive.

Best Regards

John

Paradox by the ballpark lights …

2007-12-21T08:53:00.000-08:00

If somebody from another planet were to spend any time observing human nature, chances are he would come away thinking that human beings are a living, breathing, contradiction. One of the first lessons we learn regarding the social aspect of life is that reporting the misdeeds of others is taboo.

When we’re a kid, we’re told ‘Don’t be a tattle-tale.’ As we get older, we refer to people do engage in such activity as ‘rats’, ‘snitches’, ‘sell-outs’ and worse. If a friend is pursuing a self-destructive course, we may speak with them, but we will never turn them in so they have little recourse but to confront their demons. Generally, we will--while trying to help the person--slowly, painfully watch the person self-destruct.

By the time we reach adulthood this lesson has been drummed into our collective skulls. If our silence will protect a friend or family member while allowing somebody we don’t know (or like) to take the fall for their sins--then so be it. Rare is the person who will risk ostracism to come forward with the truth.

It’s understood within the framework of professional sports that what happens in the clubhouse stays in the clubhouse. If a teammate is jeopardizing his health, his marriage, breaking the law or something else--it stays in-house. We look at the whole Mitchell Report and the fallout from it and other revelations; Jose Canseco, Jason Grimsley, Brian McNamee, Kirk Radomski and others are (or soon will be) persona non grata in the sport.

Why?

They spilt the beans--a social no-no. In today’s society they’re called ‘whistle-blowers’ and all too often they aren’t rewarded and often penalized. Despite coming forward with the truth, they’re viewed as untrustworthy. They become social lepers for becoming among the lowest forms of humanity--the stool pigeon.

It makes me think about the saga of Buck Weaver of the 1919 Chicago White Sox. He was permanently banned from the game, not for participating in the fix, but rather he didn’t blow the whistle regarding what he knew. Some may feel that it served him right and should have stood up and said something.

However, what do we hear the most growing up, ‘stand up and say something’ or something to the effect of ‘don’t be a snitch’? What did we hear from our peers in elementary school, high school, in the workplace etc? What we hear time and again is not to rat out to ‘the man,’ that entity being the authority placed in its position with the mandate to level sanctions against the type of behaviour that we, or somebody we know may be engaging in.

The thing is, when some scandal or other erupts, we hear the same refrain repeatedly: ‘How could something like this happen?’ ‘Why did it go on so long?’ ‘Why didn’t somebody speak up??’

The answer is simple--those are the rules we grew up with; we don’t report what happened, we never intend to, and we don’t wish to become outcasts by blowing the whistle. This is precisely how things like steroids in MLB happen--everybody is following the rules society has taught them. It really is a no-win situation for people ‘in the loop.’ They have one of two choices--be part of a cover up or be a snitch. One generally results in official reprimand, the other peer (reprimand). If we receive penalty from 'the man’ our peer group will generally stand by us--if we’re damned by our peers, then ‘the man’ casts us aside when we are no longer useful to them.

Nobody wants us at that point. Our utility to the authorities is gone as is our standing among our social network--and we’re left to contemplate the repercussions of our decision with no one to commiserate with us.

Not much of a reward is it?

This is why I have trouble with levelling penalties with extreme prejudice regarding the steroid scandal. For every Swede Risberg and Chick Gandil--there’s a Buck Weaver. For every user there is somebody who is aware of that and is scrupulously following the rules he has been taught by his peers his entire life. The conditioning to keep our mouths shut—don’t ask and don’t tell. If it’s violated in some small way when we’re kids we’re buried in vitriol, and smacked upside the head as a reminder of the importance of not being a rat. Come adulthood it becomes almost instinctive.

If people wish to bar the doors to the dirty steroid users then it’s only right and fair that past precedent regarding such matters be followed. The Buck Weavers of the steroid era are lumped in with the rest. As we learned in the Mitchell Report--everybody knew. Juicing was “widespread” according to Mitchell--that being the case there are a lot of Buck Weavers out there. We saw Buck Weaver before the Senate committee a few years back. We’ve read about Buck Weaver in Mitchell’s Report. He’s one of the eight, one of the 85, one of them--a member of the Black Syringes.

As I’ve written before, major league baseball screwed up royally--a world-class fustercluck if there ever was one. We will never know the entire story because the Buck Weavers are still out there living by the code they have been taught since infancy.

If baseball really wants to handle this situation correctly, here is what should happen. Open a Grand Jury and involve the commissioner’s office and the MLBPA. Amnesty with a contractual promise that no penalties now or ever for everyone who testifies truthfully--player and executive alike both inside and outside of the game. If it comes out that somebody allegedly lied, there is a hearing where that person can defend themselves and cross-examine his accusers. If it is proven that the accusation is correct--that person is at the mercy of the commissioner’s office and any law enforcement agencies involved.

This way it will be much easier to take steps that this doesn’t happen again. In my personal opinion, segregation is a far bigger scandal and did more damage to the game than performance-enhancing drugs. We learned from the saga of Jackie Robinson that a lot of players liked to keep things segregated. If we can leave that scandal and move on, we can do likewise with this one. Both had a major impact on the record book and statistics. Just as we know that Babe Ruth hit 714 home runs in a segregated game, Hank Aaron hit 755 in a game rife with amphetamines--we know that Bonds hit 762 in a steroid-fueled game.

Those numbers are what they are--a product of their time.

Best Regards

John

A Neate-O addition to the “Dweeb Team” …

2007-12-20T16:33:00.000-08:00

I guess it’s an official addition at any rate since Neate Sager has been helping in the background since we started TIM RAINES - HALL OF FAME, 2008. Due to some e-mail difficulties between Tom and me, it took a little longer to get Neate into the machine. For those of you unfamiliar with his work, here’s a brief bio …

Neate Sager is a copy editor and sports columnist for the Ottawa Sun. He can also be read at Out of Left Field, which is undergoing some tweaking but obsesses mostly over the Blue Jays, Toronto Raptors, football and Canadian university sports. Neate's work was selected as Notable Sports Writing of 2004 in The Best American Sports Writing 2005, making the Simcoe (Ont.) Reformer the smallest Canadian daily newspaper ever to be acknowledged in the annual collection. He has also written for Deadspin, Quill & Quire and sportsnet.ca and makes occasional appearances on Offsides, Kingston, Ont., campus radio CFRC 101.9 FM's 4-5 p.m. Friday afternoon sports roundtable (www.cfrc.ca). He divides his time between Ottawa, Toronto and Kingston.

The funny thing is, I’ve been following Neate around for quite some time without realizing it as we’ve both logged time in Ottawa, tobacco country (Delhi and Simcoe) and the 1000 Islands (Gananoque and Kingston). Well, it’s hard not to see fate arranging things for us to work together on Tim Raines HOF candidacy. At least we hope it’s fate and not the furies at work or we’re both quite frankly screwed.

While Neate has been referenced on the site, he’s done an original piece on Raines that can be read here. As I mentioned to Neate earlier today, its up to we hosers (eh?) in the Canadian media to carry the torch for the best leadoff hitter in NL history.

So, welcome aboard Mr. Sager--oh yeah, it’s your turn to buy the beer.

A good question …

In a different post, the always insightful Jonathan Hale from The Jays Nest and his own blog The Mockingbird (and a fellow hoser who has contributed to The Hardball Times eh?) asked an interesting question. It is one that I hadn’t really thought much about (which is odd for such an opinionated soul such as myself):

“Ok, trick(y) question...if you would vote for Clemens, what about Rose? Does he still get the shaft because the rule he broke wasn't tacitly allowed? The moral quagmire deepens...”

I think Rose should bunt …

Kidding!

Well, gambling in any form has always been the game’s biggest no-no since the Black Sox. There are posted rules in every major league player area about gambling but not for steroids. However, I don’t think that’s his question. The thing is, I’ve always been a big believer in second chances--provided of course there has been a change in behaviour.

Had Pete Rose gone into then commissioner Bart Giamatti’s office and said, “Mr. Commissioner, I have a problem--a big one. I need help. It’s so bad that I have done the following …” and then fully disclosed his transgressions and sought treatment; chances are, he would have been suspended for a time (which is only right and proper) and later brought back into baseball in some limited capacity and been eligible for the Hall of Fame.

If he’s ineligible, I wouldn’t vote for him (apart from the obvious logistics). I would vote (at this point) for him to go on the ballot and take his chances with the BBWAA. I wouldn’t vote for him for the Hall myself. However, if he actually did see the light and demonstrated over a number of years that he has beaten his problem, is no longer embarrassing baseball and himself, and was reinstated. I probably would vote yes.

His credentials are overwhelming.

Despite what I’ve written, I don’t like steroids in the game. I don’t like the fact that only Caucasians could play in MLB before 1947. I don’t like amphetamines and Astroturf either. I will still pick the best of those eras for the Hall of Fame. As to steroids specifically, all I ask is for consistency--it was an era where everybody knew … including the media. Don’t let the self-serving, sanctimonious braying fool you--they knew. Heck, I wrote the following for TOTK.com in July 2001:

“I've had friends who juiced, and after a while you begin to be able to distinguish who's doing it and who isn't. Granted, there are exceptions (some people suffer from body acne post-adolescence, and male pattern baldness early in life simply due to nature and it isn't a positive indication of steroid use). I've been in a few major league clubhouses (although I try to avoid "the beat" as often as possible) and at the risk of sounding like I'm propagating National Enquirer style innuendo--well, you can see that it's more prevalent than MLB officialdom would let on. I've used creatine at various points and can tell you that it doesn't give "the massive gains" that some of their alleged proponents claim.

It's juice.”

I wasn’t even a regular in the clubhouse--I have seen enough guys on steroids in my life to have a pretty good idea what a guy roiding looks like. I saw what I saw and wrote what I had seen without qualification.

Again--the media knew.

Anyway, I have no problem barring players from the Hall of Fame as long as everybody else involved is barred as well; owners, G.M.s managers, coaches, writers--the whole works. If Buck Weaver’s banishment provides a precedent, then even non-juicing players that knew are out as well. I don’t like the idea of having a few high profile players take the fall for an entire era while everybody else skates. As Larry Starr said (and I cited earlier):

“I don't totally blame the players, they didn't abuse the system. They used the system.”

Either everybody who was part of the system is eligible or not. We cannot pick and choose who suffers for the sins of the steroid era.

Best Regards

John

The Mike Gill Show: Rocket Science…

2007-12-19T12:52:00.000-08:00

As per usual I have gotten the skinny for my segment on ESPN 1450’s Mike Gill Show. There’s probably no surprise regarding a couple of the subjects:

Is Roger Clemens any different from Barry Bonds?
If you had a HOF vote: would you vote for Clemens?
Is it better to admit guilt, or do these guys look foolish for the way they have come out (Andy Pettitte, Fernando Vina, Brian Roberts etc.)
The Phillies are looking at Geoff Jenkins, Mike Cameron and Bobby Kielty--whom do you like?

Is Roger Clemens any different than Barry Bonds?

No, I don’t see a difference. One cannot discount the race issue when looking at how these names are being handled by the media. Having said that, it’s not as simple and cut and dried as that. It does illustrate a common media perception regarding race however; an intense white athlete is viewed as fiery, a competitor and driven to win. An equally intense black athlete is often labelled as a malcontent, a troublemaker and a first class butthole.

Personally, I do see some differences in their abrasive personalities. Clemens strikes me as antagonistic while Bonds tries to remind people of his superiority. It’s one thing to deal with a pain in the gluteal region, quite another to deal with someone who actively tries to make you feel inferior. Further, one is being tried for perjury the other is not.

If you had a HOF vote: would you vote for Clemens?

Yes, I don’t buy the ‘evil, cheating, dishonourable, defiled player’ schtick the media regularly feeds us. I think former major league trainer, Larry Starr, summed it all up best, “I don't totally blame the players, they didn't abuse the system. They used the system.” The fact is, it was the system, tacitly set up by both union and management. We can discuss all day the questions regarding Fay Vincent’s memo, the commissioner’s right to set major league policy etc. it doesn’t change what was understood by the parties … juice your brains out.

Getting back to Starr’s comments, "The commissioner's office, Bud Selig and that group, and the players association, Don Fehr and that group, they sit there and say, 'Well, now that we know that this happened we're going to do something about it.'

"I have notes from the Winter Meetings where the owners group and the players association sat in meetings with the team physicians and team trainers. I was there. And team physicians stood up and said, 'Look, we need to do something about this. We've got a problem here if we don't do something about it.' That was in 1988."

They knew, they did nothing, nobody stood up and blew the whistle. Nobody invoked the ‘probable cause’ provisions in the collective bargaining agreement’s drug policy. It was like greenies back when Jim Bouton wrote “Ball Four”; amphetamines were a controlled substance, illegal without a prescription but everybody knew about it, nobody objected, and nobody threw up a stop sign.

Here’s the thing, while steroids enhance performance in a way greenies cannot, I’d like you to consider the following: greenies allow players to be in the lineup when they otherwise might not be able to; so we look at guys like Robin Yount (3142 hits), Tony Gwynn (3141 hits), Dave Winfield (3110 hits), Craig Biggio (3060 hits), Rickey Henderson (3055 hits), Rod Carew (3053 hits), Lou Brock (3023 hits), Rafael Palmeiro (3020 hits), Wade Boggs (3010 hits), Al Kaline (3007 hits), Roberto Clemente (3000 hits). Did greenies allow them to get into the necessary games to reach 3000 hits? Does that affect their Hall of Fame worthiness?

Before you answer ‘of course not’ consider, there was a time when players like Alan Trammel, Lou Whitaker and Tim Raines were viewed as future Hall of Famers. Trammel and Whitaker are on the outside and Raines may have trouble getting 25% of the votes.

What happened?

They never reached the magical 3000 hit plateau. Raines walked 1330 times, had he been less patient, was more aggressive and sacrificed a higher OBP for the sake of extra hits there would be no question about his deservedness. Since he opted for substance over style, he is penalized for it. We have no guarantee that guys like Yount, Winfield, Brock, Boggs and Kaline would have made it. Craig Biggio embarrassed himself in his struggle to reach 3000 hits. He was a lock (in my opinion) at the end of 2006 however if you don’t get to 3000 then all bets are off.

Do we off guys who needed amps to get to 3000 hits? No, that was the system as it existed then. I see no reason to change the rules in mid-stride. The way I see it, everybody wants to punish the players for a system created by those seeking to exploit those talents for lucre. It’s time to admit everybody screwed up and move on. We had an era fuelled by performance-enhancing drugs, like any era (deadball era, pre-1947, Astroturf/amps, juice), you pick the best of the bunch for the Hall of Fame.

It seems to me that it’s not unlike paying junior a dollar for every cookie he swipes from the cookie jar then telling him that he’s not getting Christmas because he stole cookies. The media is being awfully obnoxious besides, they knew, heck I knew and wrote about it for TOTK.com seven years ago. I find their indignation not unlike somebody who finds religion while standing on the gallows.

Is it better to admit guilt, or do these guys look foolish for the way they have come out (Andy Pettitte, Fernando Vina, Brian Roberts etc.)

Sports fans like to forgive. They take comfort when heroes are revealed to be human. To see the greats stumble helps reassure us that just because we’re ordinary there is potential greatness in all of us. However, it has to come with full disclosure. A half-truth or admitting to what everybody already knows convinces no one and makes the situation worse. Talk to us in our language--we’ll understand. For example, I think Mark McGwire juiced primarily because he was having so many physical problems.

Imagine if McGwire went before the committee and said the following:

To play in the big leagues is every kid’s dream. It was mine, the first time I put on a major league jersey and walked onto the field for the first time I thought I had gone to heaven. It was everything I thought it would be and more. However, when you’re a kid, you never imagine that your own body might betray those dreams. When that happens, it becomes a nightmare--one from which you cannot wake up. I had that nightmare, time and again, my body broke down; every time I limped off the field and on to the disabled list, all I could think about was that I’d never walk back on. I saw doctors, I saw specialists, I did the work--nothing helped. It was all slipping away. It felt like that nightmare you have when you’re in trouble and you scream for help but nobody hears you--or you try to yell and nothing comes out.

Eventually I did come across something that did help. It made me stronger, it got me back on the field and the kid in me was back. Right now, I am ashamed to state, that the ‘thing’ was anabolic steroids. Please understand, I didn’t take it cheat, to set records or to make more money. I took them because they let me live the dream again. As you get older, your priorities change. Other things become important, like being a good father and a good person. The passage of time allows us to realize the mistakes we did when we were younger. Taking steroids is one of those mistakes--it sent the wrong message and I know some kids are using these things because I did and I have to live with that. I am here today to try in some small way to undo the damage my actions caused. I hope my actions from this time forward will demonstrate just how sorry I am.

Do you think anybody would’ve vilified McGwire? We all have dreams as kids, we all do stupid things when we’re young--we’ve been there, we all have regrets. I think most would have understood where he was coming from. The half-baked things that pass for mea culpas don’t ring true for us. Maybe they are telling the truth--however, they carefully couched words makes us suspicious. We’ve told half-truths, elasticized the facts so we don’t look so bad--it’s one thing to see our flaws in another, quite another to see our own B.S. being sold to us as a bill of goods.

The Phillies are looking at Geoff Jenkins, Mike Cameron and Bobby Kielty--whom do you like?

I’d opt for Mike Cameron despite being older than Jenkins is. He enjoys a wider skill set and may return to his 30 HR level in CitiBank Park. I wouldn’t go beyond a two year with a team option for third for him.

Stuff …

I’ve done two more columns on the Mitchell Report (wheeee!); one for THT that will run Friday and a follow up to the first one on MSN that I hope will go live soon. Anyway, speaking of HOF eligibility, the names Pete Rose and Joe Jackson have been invoked quite a bit recently. The debates about Jackson continue in some quarters but it’s important we separate myth from fact. One thing used by Jackson’s detractors to prove he was in on the fix is the seven triples hit to left field during the 1919 World Series.

That’s only half-right--the Reds hit seven triples but only one to left field. Here’s the breakdown of the Reds septuplet of three-baggers in the Fall Classic that year:

Game 1:

Bot. 4th--D. Ruether ... Triple (Deep LF-CF); Neale Scores; Wingo Scores
Bot. 7th--J. Daubert ...Triple (Deep RF)
Bot. 8th--D. Ruether ... Triple to CF (Deep CF); Neale Scores

Game 2:

Bot. 4th--L Kopf ... Triple to LF; Groh Scores; Duncan Scores

Game 5:

Top 6th--E Roush ...Triple to CF (Deep CF); Rath Scores; Groh Scores

Game 6:

Bot. 4th--G Neale ...Triple to RF (Deep RF)

Game 8:

Top 5th--L Kopf ... Triple (Deep CF-RF)

Have some fun with that. Finally, I’d like to link to a wonderful column written for THT by Lisa Gray (our Jacquie Robinson--first female writer for THT) entitled Times change, some attitudes don’t. If you don’t think she understands her subject matter, just consider--she’s an African American living in the Deep South and she never finished high school.

Of course, when you read her column it’s hard not to laugh at folks like Bill Conlin or Stephen A. Smith who feels their education entitles them to a platform. Lisa is exhibit A for ‘it’s what you know is more important than where you learned it.’ She may not have a journalism degree but she does have a writer’s pedigree.

Best Regards

John

An actual Jays post! Wotta concept …

2007-12-16T09:56:00.000-08:00

During the dropping of the ‘injections in the A’-bomb and ensuing fallout the Toronto Blue Jays made a couple of moves. The Jays declined to offer Josh Towers arbitration making him a free agent. Speaking of free agents, Toronto added an “X-factor” in inking a one-year deal with shortstop David Eckstein ostensibly relegating John McDonald to a backup role.

I am giving J.P. a .500 average on these transactions. Thumbs up on acquiring Eckstein and a thumbs down on toppling Towers; to begin with, between Eckstein and J-Mac the Jays have the shortstop position well looked after. We cannot automatically assume that Eckstein has the job won outright. Last season folks thought the same thing about Royce Clayton--he would be the starter and McDonald the caddy.

Of course, it didn’t work out that way.

McDonald said he would spend the off-season working on forearm strength to aid in his hitting. His winter regimen last year where he strengthened his legs to be more durable worked wonders. Jays fans were treated to the best defense seen at the position since Tony Fernandez. I wouldn’t be at all surprised to see his hitting better than it was last year. Further, with the signing of Eckstein, you can bet a competitor like McDonald is going to ramp up his off-season efforts to another level.

He’ll do the work and give it everything he has, so I wouldn’t be surprised to see him make the decision of who will start opening day a bit more difficult.

Eckstein is the anti-McDonald; he’s not as slick a defender as the Prime Minister of Defense but he possesses legitimate on base skills (.360 since 2005), solid contact (only 107 whiffs since ‘05), and a touch of larceny on the base paths but is nowhere near McDonald’s league with the leather. If Eckstein can’t handle AL pitching and his OBP suffers, then Johnny Mac will do to the former Cardinal shortstop that he did to yet another former Cardinal shortstop and play pretty much everyday.

I’m not terribly concerned about McDonald’s playing time because he will get plenty of work since Eckstein will see time at third when Glaus’s inevitable injury woes resurface. If Eckstein plays up to career norms (.351 OBP) then McDonald will likely see plenty of late inning duty when the Jays are nursing a lead.

As to Josh Towers, I can’t see how offering arbitration would kill the Jays financially. Over the last two seasons, he is 7-20, 6.50 ERA so I really cannot see him getting a huge raise from his 2007 salary of $2.9 million; in fact, the Jays may well been able to win an arbitration case with the maximum pay cut allowable (20%). Is $2.32 million too onerous a price to see if the guy can be useful? I guess some of it is simply about freeing up a roster spot. Towers has impeccable control and is improving in throwing ground balls but as I’ve discussed numerous times, gets totally annihilated pitching from the stretch.

This is a guy Brian Sabean should be all over. In that ballpark, Towers could possibly give the Giants 200 innings of league average work for peanuts. He could also do well in the NL Central. Regardless, I wish Josh well and will follow his fortunes in 2008.

No, I’m not done with the Mitchell Report yet …

Folks are now pointing to Roger Clemens' late career totals as proof that it was obvious to even the most oblivious lobotomized supermodel smoking a joint that he was a juicer. Well, check this out …

From ages 40-44 seasons:


Pitcher        GS   IP     ERA    K     K/9
Roger Clemens 134  849.2  2.99   863   9.14
Nolan Ryan    156 1053.0  3.16  1234  10.55

Clemens has the better ERA+ but Ryan blows him away in durability, strikeouts and SO/9 IP. It kind of gives you new respect for the Ryan Express’s post-40 career doesn’t it? Yes, not many pitchers have thrown as well as Clemens after passing 40 but ‘The Rocket’s’ totals don’t exactly scream “juicer!” Ryan was still a strikeout machine despite having already logged 4114.1 career innings with 2268 BB and 4277 K. That’s a staggering number of pitches thrown before passing the big 4-0 and he still increased his K/9 from 9.36 to 10.55 from his pre-40 year old phase of his career.

Had Ryan done that in this environment, we might well be casting a suspicious eye in his direction.

I think something we learned from all of this is that player entourages are a really, really bad idea. While it might be nice to be surrounded by your posse as well as assorted sycophants and ‘yes-men,’ it does not benefit MLB, the players themselves or the people in their entourages. It’s time to confine the clubhouse to players and coaches/manager and licensed, legitimate team personnel and let the various hangers-on get lives of their own. Players would do these people a favour by encouraging them to make something more of themselves than pathetic life forms who live to indulge the whims of a star athlete.

Further, it is time for these young men to stand on their own two feet and not rely on defacto nursemaids. Surely, players can learn to get their own coffee or pick up their dry cleaning (or arrange to have it delivered). It wouldn’t hurt them not to have automatic affirmation on whatever thoughts/ideas spring into their mind regarding a course of action. For a change, think things through on their own or seek objective advice from people with actual experience in life or the game of baseball.

This is one way where old-time baseball was superior. The clubhouse was a sanctum sanctorum for those who played the game--it’s time to return to these actual good ol’ days. There’s plenty of time to hang with their ‘peeps’ outside the stadium. A player’s entourage should never see any part of the park that fans cannot access. If they want to enter the facility, they need to have a ticket.

Best Regards

John

Humanizing the Mitchell Report …

2007-12-15T14:34:00.000-08:00

When you read the report, it’s hard not to come to the following conclusion: anabolic steroids will not turn a stiff into a star. The names mentioned in Mitchell’s tome are very similar to the names we already know about. There are some fringe guys, journeymen, occasional all stars, genuine superstars and of course potential Hall of Famers.

What struck me were Mitchell’s notations that the problem was both widespread but only a minority of players actually used. I do feel that since you can count the suppliers mentioned in the report on one hand without bothering your thumb, that many users have simply went undetected up to this point in time. I think 50% of players being involved in some fashion seems like a reasonable figure.

However, there are some suppositions we’re reading about in the media that really don’t do the evidence (such as it is) justice. It seems that folks are of the opinion that the players outed were all hard-core long-term steroid users. It is good to keep in mind that a number of players simply experimented with the drugs and decided for whatever reason not to continue usage.

This would have been a valuable data point for investigation, who were regular juicers, who were off-and-on and who simply tried it and thought ‘This isn’t for me.’

We have to remember that a major league player generally hits his decline phase in his early 30’s. This is not an advanced age. We are talking about young men who still have a lot to learn about life. They feel they are invincible, bulletproof and generally are not averse to taking risks. These young men are in a highly competitive macho environment where the darker side of natural selection often takes place. They are not just in competition with those wearing different colour uniforms, they are competing with each other for roster spots, playing time etc. Just because the man one locker over wears an identical uniform to you doesn’t mean he won’t try to take something that you desire.

It is a highly competitive environment right from the time they sign their first contract until they receive their final pink slip. Nice guys truly finish last in such a situation. Adding to this is that while you are competitors, you’re also comrades--part of a fraternity. If the guy across from you is using something illicit, you cannot blow the whistle and violate the code of the clubhouse to level the playing field. A decision has to be made--join the ‘arms race’ or be left behind … there is no third option in their purview.

Bearing all this in mind, I find it hard to develop a sense of outrage over somebody whose usage was brief or intermitted. I was 23 and remember how things were. A player hopes to impress at spring training or perhaps getting called up but is being slowed by a nagging injury that is damnably slow in responding and watching a window of opportunity closing. At that particular moment, he feels his whole world, all his dreams are slipping out of his grasp, and desperation is starting to set in.

He takes the plunge.

The malady is now gone and what’s more, the ball is jumping off the bat or really popping the catcher’s mitt. He hears the coach talking that he's turned the corner and his future is a lot brighter.

Whoa … that stuff is amazing!

His friends and family are bragging about him, his teammates are looking up to him, his ears are filling with cheers and finally he sees his first major league pay check.

Oh. My. God! Look at all those zeroes!

Now it’s time to get off that stuff, but, but … what if his game suffers? How can he phone his family and friends and tell them that he has been sent down? Does he really want to lose those extra zeroes on the pay check? Can he sustain this level without it? He's living the dream and made the big leagues, the local papers are saying he's added a spark to the club--his teammates, family, the fans … they’re counting on him. He can’t let them down … he just can’t. He saw the look in his kid brother’s eye when he saw him wearing a big league uniform for the first time--he’s looking up to him. Little bro' told all his friends at school about seeing his brother play on T.V. and said he was his hero.

He thinks: "What do I do? What do I do?"

Is this an evil person? A cheat? A fraud? Or is it somebody that got in over his head, made a bad choice in a moment of desperation.

That’s reality to a lot of these young men. How many are out there? How many were mentioned in the Mitchell Report? This isn’t some surly superstar with a sense of entitlement--this is a local boy who made good. I’m not writing this to condone what they did--merely to understand it. We’re not dealing with embodiments of evil but a system that failed. A system that put pressure on young men to make tough choices without the wisdom and experience that only years can bring. Yes, some deserve derision--they decided to cheat, they did it for the money but many did it because dreams die hard and painfully and are mourned for a long time. Let’s face it, to see those dreams die at such young age is always a terrible thing to witness but that’s the reality of professional sports.

That is why we should blame Bud Selig, Don Fehr, Bob Dupuy, Gene Orza and many others. It is their responsibility to set the parameters in which the dream is pursued and the parameters they set are what has led us to this point in time.

Let’s hope the lesson has been learned.

Best Regards

John

Mitchell musings ...

2007-12-14T16:08:00.000-08:00

I am sure you’re all burned out reading commentary and post mortems on the Mitchell Report. I did read the whole thing from Genesis to Revelation and while it had some useful recommendations, it struck me as more geared toward satisfying the public and Congress rather than anything meaningful. Selig’s comments in the aftermath confirmed this feeling; I get the sense he is still trying to re-write history in his favour.

He wants to be known as the commissioner who ended the steroid era and not the one who allowed it to happen. Most of my brain dump was done on MSN Canada and should be up soon. I did have one epiphany that I didn’t have before that I touched on my yet to be published article that I hadn’t really thought much about before--the black market.

One of the things about obtaining anabolic steroids is that they have to be purchased in that manner. There are no quality controls with black market drugs and all too often, this is how players received these substances. These chemicals are produced in unsanitary and unhygienic conditions and God only knows what else is in them. This is why places like BALCO and Kirk Radomski were so appealing--at least the players knew that the drugs wouldn’t be contaminated.

To me, this is where the MLBPA failed miserably. They never perceived that ownership was O.K. with the players using these substances because it helped them recover from injury faster and it improved performance among superstar talent. It was making them large amounts of money. The union allowed a multi-tiered uneven playing field between users and non-users and those who could afford substances that were more sophisticated and those that were not. Those on the cusp of the big leagues who didn’t have multi-million dollar guaranteed contracts to fund high-grade anabolics were forced to turn to dangerous black market steroids to win or retain a big league job.

Think about it; these young players needed to be protected from the MLBPA as much as ownership. It was the MLBPA that fought tooth-and-nail to keep an environment where young people had to decide between black market drugs and their dreams. The union hasn’t been reticent about their disdain about the Mitchell Report but guess what? They could have commissioned their own study and implement changes themselves to keep the playing field even and safe.

The union is an organization that fights hard against a business that tries to maximize profits at all costs--even if it is done in an unethical fashion. Sadly, the MLBPA is an association that attempts to maximize salaries at all costs--even if it means obligating young men to take hazardous black market anabolic steroids if they wish to join.

Don Fehr and Gene Orza’s single-minded devotion to the salary bar created a hazardous working environment for its constituents. I am skeptical about the Mitchell Report myself, but they have lost the moral high ground because they showed a slavish devotion to lucre. They have to accept equal blame with ownership for this mess. They cannot complain about the Mitchell Report for the simple reason that they could have done something themselves but neglected to do so. They were quite content to continue with a situation where young men had to take dangerous health risks since it helped the quest to push up the salary bar.

How is that any less exploitive than ownership that had pitchers throw both ends of a doubleheader or had stadiums without padding on outfield walls because it improved the bottom line? Before Messersmith/McNally, the superstars were protected by ownership while lesser players were deemed expendable and replaceable. Now superstar salaries are protected by the MLBPA while lesser players are no less expendable and replaceable. Repeatedly, the union tried to allow elite talent to whatever was needed to secure contracts that pushed up the salary bar even if it meant that the rank-and-file had to subject themselves to terrible health risks.

The bottom line is this: George Mitchell’s report is a self-serving exercise designed to pressure the union and burnish Bud Selig’s image. However, regardless of motives behind it, it was an attempt to do something about MLB’s steroid problem. It was one more thing than the MLBPA did--the union chose to do nothing about improving the working conditions of their constituents.

Right now, Bud Selig, Bob Dupuy, Don Fehr and Gene Orza have one thing in common. Their eyes are so blinded by dollar signs that nobody is truly looking out for the players’ best interests.

Cleaning fish…

For those of you that missed it, my latest gutting and filleting of Jeffrey Loria and David ‘he could be taller if took Viagra’ Samson is up at The Hardball Times. If Bud Selig is interested in acting in the ‘best interests of baseball’ why hasn’t he awarded these two a franchise in Atlantis?

Best Regards

John

The Mike Gill Show: The day before the bomb drops edition…

2007-12-12T08:30:00.000-08:00

I received the docket for today’s segment on ESPN 1450’s Mike Gill Show. Today’s topics include :

The Mitchell Report: What do you expect, 60-80 names? Do you expect major names or more or less second and third tier players?
Does baseball really want this report out?
Gagne to the Brewers ... smart move or bad move?
Rowand put his house up for sale--does that really mean he is moving?
When will the FA signings pick up?

The Mitchell Report: What do you expect, 60-80 names? Do you expect major names or more or less second and third tier players?

I have heard numbers ranging from 60 to over 100 could be mentioned. If you look at the names already linked to steroids in one form or another, it’s a pretty good cross-section of the sport. I think the report will be likewise. According to the Steroid Era site the number is already at 64 players. Obviously the Mitchell Report will have others we have not heard about as of yet. While some on the site are still somewhat speculative, I think that there will be things in the report confirming those suspicions.

There have been a few leaks regarding the investigation itself. Some state that it’s too harsh, others claim it will be vague, and still others question the methodology used by George Mitchell. If some reports are to be believed, it appears than Mitchell did little more than request various interviewees to make their best guess on who they thought may be juicing. We’re going to have to wait and see how credible will be the report. Will it be weighty and well-sourced or will it be little more than the Blue-Ribbon economic report of a few years ago that was little more than ownership propaganda and public relations than anything truly substantive.

Does baseball really want this report out?

I think most team owners do since it could throw a wrench into the remainder of the offseason marketplace and depress salaries somewhat. In addition, the marketplace has spoken and it appears that steroid usage hasn’t hurt baseball’s revenues (quite the opposite in fact) so there will be little or no economic fallout from the report. If it slows the market down it could even be a plus for the bottom line.

I think G.M.s are the most nervous since they’re expected to have their thumb on the pulse of the roster. They’re the ones entrusted to put the team together and could potentially look bad if they gave a large contract to a juicer over the last 2-3 seasons. We see guys like Torii Hunter, Carlos Lee, Barry Zito, Vernon Wells etc. receive long-term deals in excess of $16 million per year; if their names crop up in the report, then the G.M.s signing them may be dealing with very large albatross contracts.

Eric Gagne to the Brewers--is this a good or bad move?

It’s a good move. The Brewers lost their closer Francisco Cordero to the Reds and Scott Linebrink to the White Sox so they needed to plug those holes. They’ve picked up Salomon Torres who may or may not retire as well as the always-reliable David Riske. There’s little risk to the Brewers since it’s a one-year deal at the going rate. I’m fairly certain Gagne’s pratfall in Boston was an aberration. He wasn’t as good as he performed in Texas nor as bad as he pitched in Boston--he’s somewhere in between. The NL Central is the perfect place for Gagne to build up his value for free agency after 2008.

The question is this: How will Ned Yost manage his new bullpen in 2008? Did he learn anything from his missteps of last season? I co-authored (ghost wrote may be more accurate) a post-mortem of the Brewers 2007 collapse with a fellow who prefers to be called ‘Harvey’s Wallbangers’ that analyzed Yost’s bullpen management (or lack of same).

Aaron Rowand put his house up for sale--does that really mean he is moving?

I wouldn’t think so; if Rowand was set on leaving Philadelphia, he would have placed his house on the market long before now. It doesn’t mean he’s not moving either--the question is where his new house is located. If it’s a ways away from ‘The City of Brotherly Love’ then there’s some cause for concern. It could be a simple matter of realizing he’s about to get a very healthy raise from $4,350,000 to somewhere between $14-18 million per year. Now he’s getting ready to find accommodations that reflect his (soon-to-be) new income bracket.

Of course, I also said Andruw Jones wouldn’t sign until February so be mindful of the source. I’m not called “Nostradumbass” for nothing you know.

Edit: Geez, can I miss them or what? Aaron Rowand signs a five-year deal with the San Francisco Giants. No dollar amounts are known at this time. I'm guessing they paid a premium since they are still a ways from contention.

Then again ... I have been wrong before. Nostradumbass indeed.

When will the free agent signings pick up?

Very soon, midnight (Eastern Time) tonight is the deadline for non-tendering unsigned players. That will put a lot of players into the marketplace enabling clubs know what is available for upgrading the roster. To use one example: If the Blue Jays don’t offer Reed Johnson a contract he would be a tempting (and cheaper) alternative than signing Rowand for six years at (a minimum of) $14 million per year. If healthy, Johnson would fare very well in the NL. He’s a solid defensive outfielder with good on base skills, a touch of power and a smart base runner. Johnson could hit 20 HR with an OBP north of .360 in Philadelphia.

Best Regards

John

Suspended animation causes stream-of-consciousness …

2007-12-11T15:07:00.000-08:00

It feels like the calm before the storm.

I’m speaking of the upcoming Mitchell Report; it makes writing columns a bit more complicated in that it will overshadow pretty much everything else in the news for a time. I already stated that my THT column this week would be on the Marlins and I do not want to go back on that. Besides, I’m sure somebody on staff will do a bang up job on dissecting it.

It will be the topic of my weekly column on MSN Canada though. I asked my boss to move my deadline so I can put in an article shortly after the entire (feces + kinetic energy x impact + oscillating fan) equation becomes reality. Unlike THT, I’m the only baseball columnist at the moment there so I guess I should be the one to cover it. Speaking of which, my column on J.P. Ricciardi at the winter meetings is now live. You could say I was whining in the article and I am not sure you’d be wrong.

By the way, I was in a cranky mood when I wrote the Marlins column so be prepared for some serious stomping-into-a-gooey-icky mess approach to it. I mentioned in a post a few days back that this isn’t about the Marlins per se but rather the living proof that ‘two heads are better than one isn’t always the case’ truism at the top of the chain of command. I have never been reticent in my admiration of Larry Beinfest and I will reiterate that on Friday AM.

I am extremely ticked that the art dealer and the embodiment of the hazards of nepotism had Beinfest be the front man for explaining how the Cabrera/Willis trade was related to stadium issues. For Orioles fans sick and tired of the Peter Angelos and sons approach to baseball mediocrity just remember, it could’ve been far worse. It was Jeffrey Loria who was bidding against Angelos for ownership of the Birds.

Considering my lifelong hatred for the Orioles, imagine if David Samson was part of that front office.

By the way O’s fans, don’t be offended by my dislike of your team. Quite frankly, I have no idea how it developed, it has been there for as long as I can remember. My only guess is that my dad is a Yankees fan and the Orioles were a dominant team in the late 1960’s when I started watching baseball on our old black and white television. When you consider this occurred during the fall of the Yankees empire, it might have played a part.

In addition, of course the little matter of Ken Singleton was hardly endearing--1973 (Singleton’s entry into “The 300 Club” AKA ‘The Triple-Triple’) helped make me feel slightly less bad about the trade that cost the Expos Rusty Staub and a lot worse about losing both he Mike Torrez in the trade that netted les Expos a lame Dave McNally plus Rich Coggins and Bil Kirkpatrick.

For what it’s worth, I don’t hate all things Orioles. Memorial Stadium was a nice ballpark and I love what Camden Yards did for stadium architecture (although private financing would be nicer in these cases). Boog Powell was a guy I enjoyed watching and I had a lot of his baseball cards. I could never hate Brooks Robinson either--the man was all class and then some.

There are other pro-Birdy things besides--the McNally half of Messersmith/McNally; you’ve gotta love Rube Waddell and El Presidente Dennis Martinez not to mention Frank Robinson, Singleton, Harold Baines and at one time--Rafael Palmeiro (I leave a candle burning in the window hoping that somehow he did accidentally receive steroids--I’m not holding my breath however). Of course the pugnacious and ribald Earl Weaver will always be memorable--especially his mano a manos with umpire Ron Luciano.

Speaking of Raffy, I can’t help but wonder if any other favourite might be linked in the Mitchell Report.

What was this post supposed to be about again? Oh right … like the time I caught the ferry over to Shelbyville. I needed a new heel for my shoe, so, I decided to go to Morganville, which is what they called Shelbyville in those days. So I tied an onion to my belt, which was the style at the time. Now, to take the ferry cost a nickel, and in those days, nickels had pictures of bumblebees on 'em. 'Give me five bees for a quarter,' you’d say.

Now where were we? Oh yeah -- the important thing was that I had an onion on my belt, which was the style at the time. They didn’t have white onions because of the war. The only thing you could get was those big yellow ones. Therefore consult a physician before beginning any exercise program. Some side effect may include vomiting, diarrhea, swelling of the tongue, dizziness, blindness, impotence, prostate acne, loss of cognitive function, bladder control, Paris Hilton joining the Spice Girls as "Promiscuous Spice" volcanic activity, seismic tremors, plagues of locusts, the opening the fifth through seventh seals of Revelation and a matter/antimatter reactions which will cause the universe to implode in a cataclysmic 'big crunch.'

If you experience any of these symptoms be sure to contact your health care provider. Take on an empty stomach and do not attempt to operate heavy machinery. If you catch fire, stop drop and roll, if you choose to run, look both ways before you cross the street. If you ignore the warnings and you end up with two broken legs, don't come running to me.

My name is Indigo Montoya, you killed my father, prepare to die. Luke, I'm your father. Remember who you are, you are my son and the one true king. Life is like a box of chocolates. Offer not valid in all states, check with your dealer for details. Refund where applicable. Remember, only you can prevent forest fires. Any retransmission or rebroadcast of this game is strictly prohibited without the express written consent of Major League Baseball, the commissioner’s office and the Toronto Blue Jays.

Well, it makes about as much sense as anything else I’ve written in this post thus far.

Well, to comment on something relevant, I would like to say that I thought the BBWAA’s exclusion of Rob Neyer and Keith Law says more about the organization than Neyer and Law. Both are superior baseball writers who are far more competent than many within the association. They are poorer for their decision. I have no aspirations or expectations of being asked to join so I have no real dog in this fight. I think a body of work deserves far more weight than number of times one is at the ballpark. As national baseball writers they have different beats and responsibilities than those who cover one team.

If the BBWAA wishes to remain relevant, then they must strive to be current and the world wide web is the present and the future and far kinder to the environment. If the BBWAA wishes to be relevant in the new millennium then they should starting living there.

Best Regards

John

Raines of Terror...

2007-12-10T16:12:00.000-08:00

One of my favourite memories of Tim Raines are when he was completely locked in his zone. He would go on month long tears where it was easy to feel sorry for the opposing battery. Before I headed to Baseball-Reference, I first tried to remember some clues that would help me locate them. My instincts told me that Raines tended to start and finish the season on fire.

Sure enough, when I went through the game logs it was generally the case. At any rate, using BB-Ref and my own memory I cobbled together ten of his hottest runs. This isn’t a comprehensive list but most of these line up pretty well with what I remember--not so much the exact stats but more how he would totally dominate the opposition. While Raines was at his best with the Expos, he did have four terrific hot streaks … well, two hot streaks and a couple of spurts, most notably in early 1993 and late 1996.

While endpoints have little usage as an analytical tool, they do have the utility of examining hot and cold streaks. Anyway, I did keep myself to a couple of basic ground rules: one, only one streak per season would be counted and two, the streaks had to be at least 25 games in length. I bent the rules a bit to document Raines’ final two spurts since they have a couple of memories included with them.

First, the 10 ‘Raines of Terror’…


Date                        GP    BA   OBP   SLG   R HR  RBI  SB  CS
Apr 15, 1981-May 17, 1981   30  .366  .470  .500  22  2   10  32   3
Apr  3, 1984-May  7, 1984   28  .336  .432  .477  22  3   16   8   0
Aug 17, 1985-Oct  5, 1985   42  .383  .484  .617  34  5   18  24   3
Apr 24, 1986-May 24, 1986   27  .389  .484  .593  28  2    6  13   1
May 24, 1987-Jun 27, 1987   30  .407  .478  .602  32  4   22  13   0
Apr 23, 1989-May 31, 1989   32  .328  .438  .586  28  4   22  11   3
May 10, 1991-Jun 14, 1991   34  .364  .461  .504  24  1   16  17   2
Aug 24, 1992-Oct  1, 1992   31  .336  .403  .540  23  5   17   7   0
Apr  6, 1993-Jun 12, 1993   22  .338  .453  .649  19  7   14   2   3 
Sep  4, 1996-Sep 29, 1996   22  .316  .433  .633  22  7   16   3   1

What I remember … (with BB-Ref to jog my memory of course)

Date GP BA OBP SLG R HR RBI SB CS
Apr 15, 1981-May 17, 1981 30 .366 .470 .500 22 2 10 32 3

April 21, Phillies vs. Expos … Raines led off the game with an infield hit and promptly stole second, then third. In the sixth, he singles driving in a pair and again swipes second and third. He successfully did it off two different pitchers; Dick Ruthven in the first and this time Sparky Lyle was the victim. While he was stranded in the first, he came around to score that time. Raines went 4-for-5 with two doubles, runs scored and RBI and was 4-for-4 in swiping bases including third base twice. The Phillies were PWN3D by the “Rock.”

Date GP BA OBP SLG R HR RBI SB CS
Apr 3, 1984-May 7, 1984 28 .336 .432 .477 22 3 16 8 0

April 6, the Expos are in Atlanta and Raines is in CF and batting third. Who was in left and batting leadoff then? None other than Pete Rose; Raines is more than up to the task this day slugging a double and home run scoring a run and driving in three others. He is 4-for-5 this day as well.

Date GP BA OBP SLG R HR RBI SB CS
Aug 17, 1985-Oct 5, 1985 42 .383 .484 .617 34 5 18 24 3

The Expos are in Busch Stadium for their final series of the year in St. Louis from September 20-22. The Cardinals are leading the division by a couple of games over the Mets. The Expos are out of it but are in an excellent position to play spoiler. It was not to be as the Cardinals swept. Regardless, don’t blame Raines who reached in 10 of his 15 plate appearances and was a perfect 5-for-5 in stealing bases.

Date GP BA OBP SLG R HR RBI SB CS
Apr 24, 1986-May 24, 1986 27 .389 .484 .593 28 2 6 13 1

Tim Raines had a 17 game hitting streak with seven doubles, two triples a HR, drew 13 walks and wasn’t caught stealing in nine tries. His batting line was a tidy .414/.506/.614 and not surprisingly, the Expos won 13 of those 17 contests.

Date GP BA OBP SLG R HR RBI SB CS
May 24, 1987-Jun 27, 1987 30 .407 .478 .602 32 4 22 13 0

There really wasn’t one thing about this stretch that stood out. He opened the season on fire and the only thing I really remember was feeling that Raines was enjoying an MVP season and it was a shame it would not happen. I do recall being happy that when all was said and done Raines returned to the Expos. When he declined arbitration, I was certain he was a goner.

Date GP BA OBP SLG R HR RBI SB CS
Apr 23, 1989-May 31, 1989 32 .328 .438 .586 28 4 22 11 3

Raines had an uncharacteristically slow start in ‘89; he hadn’t hit a home run, he wasn’t running but he was still getting on base frequently. I eyeballed BB-Ref and noticed that he walked 15 times over his first 18 games and had an OBP of .382. I thought it was lower before I checked. Anyway, game 19 is when he really started to heat up going 3-for-6 against the Cardinals. I didn’t see that particular game but remember reading the box score and noticed that had he went yard, he would’ve hit for the cycle. It was the start of a ten-game hitting streak and while Raines was tearing the cover off the ball, he was still drawing his walks.

One inning of one game stands out: The Expos were 20-17 in mid-May, the Padres 18-21 and San Diego came into Stade Olympique for a three game set. I was hoping for an Expos sweep since the Jays were staggering and finally had canned Jimy Williams and Cito Gaston had taken his place. The Expos dropped the first two and I was hoping they could salvage a game and not fall back to .500 … unfortunately, they were facing Bruce Hurst. Les Expos scored in the first and were up 1-0; Raines lead off the third with a walk and Otis Nixon comes up. “Rock” promptly swipes second and Hurst wild pitches him to third--this is the start of a rally. Hurst whiffs Nixon, but no problem the “Big Cat” Andres Galarraga is up next. They battle but Hurst ends up with another ‘K.’ Next up: Hubie Brooks, next down: Hubie Brooks, Hurst struck out the side. Raines would walk three times and never scored and the Padres would erase a 3-0 lead and swept the Expos back to .500.

Grrrr.

Date GP BA OBP SLG R HR RBI SB CS
May 10, 1991-Jun 14, 1991 34 .364 .461 .504 24 1 16 17 2

Tim Raines, American Leaguer?

It was pretty unnerving to see Raines wearing White Sox let me tell you. What I recall most about this is the game before he started his tear. David Wells was on the hill and threw his knee-buckling hook at will. Raines led off the game with a fly out. Boomer struck him out swinging the next two times up and Duane Ward did likewise in the ninth. Welcome to Toronto “Rock.” I was thrilled with Wells’ awesome start and was surprised Gaston didn’t let him pitch the ninth. The big lefty had given up three hits and a walk and struck out the side in the eighth around a Frank Thomas walk and an infield hit by Ozzie Guillen.

Date GP BA OBP SLG R HR RBI SB CS
Aug 24, 1992-Oct 1, 1992 31 .336 .403 .540 23 5 17 7 0

I remember feeling relieved. I thought Raines was about done. From mid-June 1991 through late August 1992, he looked like a speed merchant and not much else. I checked the numbers and they were gruesome: .268/.358/.344 with 68 steals. The OBP while O.K. wasn’t Raines’ quality however, his knack for pilfering bases was still there. He wasn’t quite as prolific as he was in Montreal but picked his spots well and succeeded almost 90% of the time. As you can see from the numbers, he finished strong. The Jays were making their run to their first World Series title and wasn’t paying much attention to the White Sox. Toronto and Chicago played six games in late August and early September. Raines hit well at New Comiskey but not so well in Toronto--they split the six games.

Date GP BA OBP SLG R HR RBI SB CS
Apr 6, 1993-Jun 12, 1993 22 .338 .453 .649 19 7 14 2 3

Raines tore a thumb ligament and was out six weeks. You’d never know it since the 22 game hot streak was before and right after the injury. While I was paying more attention to the Jays that year I remember a series in early June, (I can’t remember which one I attended which is odd, but I suspect it was the opener). It was like watching the Rock of old (except he didn‘t attempt any steals). He scored seven runs, homered twice, doubled and walked four times over the three games. It made for a tidy batting line of .600/.714/.1.300. Thanks for the flashback Tim.

Of course, he wasn’t done … not by a long shot. He was a beast in the LCS versus Toronto, batting .444/.483/.556. Had the White Sox won he may have copped MVP honours (Wilson Alvarez and Frank Thomas also had terrific series although the Jays kept away from Thomas walking him 10 times).

Date GP BA OBP SLG R HR RBI SB CS
Sep 4, 1996-Sep 29, 1996 22 .316 .433 .633 22 7 16 3 1

This time a hamstring injury brought “The Rock” down. However, by September Raines was letting the Yankees know he was ready to contribute in October with a torrid September that included seven HR. Of course, I remember in mid-September Jimmy Key shutting down his old mates with two hits and no walks over 8 IP and Tim Raines pair of three runs jacks off Paul Quantrill. It was a final …

PWN3D!

… against Toronto. Ah well.

Thanks for the memories Rock--I hope to have yet one more in Cooperstown!

Regarding Raines...

TIM RAINES - HALL OF FAME, 2008 (The "Dweeb Team's" Flagship)
Tim Raines: Worthy Hall-of-Famer (MSN Canada)
Cooperstown Needs a Piece of "The Rock" (Hardball Times)
Is 'The Hawk' or 'The Rock' the lock?... (TPoSGD)
Rock Solid Doing the Tango ... (TPoSGD)

Best Regards

John

Even Charles Darwin hates Barry Bonds …

2007-12-08T10:29:00.000-08:00

I have a question: How is wine, women and song any different from sex drugs and rock and roll?

Without getting into a theological debate, I am going to use a few Bible verses solely to prove a single point … human nature remains wonderfully constant throughout the passage of time. Here is a favourite--find women tough to understand? Join the club--first a little background:

During wheat harvest, Reuben went out into the fields and found some mandrake plants, which he brought to his mother Leah. Rachel said to Leah, "Please give me some of your son's mandrakes." But she said to her, "Wasn't it enough that you took away my husband? Will you take my son's mandrakes too?"

"Very well," Rachel said, "he can sleep with you tonight in return for your son's mandrakes."

Well, ol’ Jacob was coming home after a hard days work, the account continues: So when Jacob came in from the fields that evening, Leah went out to meet him …

... and she drops the following line on her hubby:

"You must sleep with me … I have hired you with my son's mandrakes."

Huh? Whaa … hired who? WHAT MANDRAKES??? would undoubtedly pop into Jacob’s head at this point. Of course, did he really want to know the details behind that statement? Dare he even ask? Nope, all he had to do was shut his mouth and perform his husbandly duties--which he did …

"So he slept with her that night."--Genesis 30

Wise man ol’ Jacob.

Of course, we guys are wonderfully consistent when it comes to sex. In fact, when Jacob was a young man, he agreed to work seven years for his future father-in-law as a bride price for Rachel. Seven years are finally up and Jacob goes in to see her daddy:

"Give me my wife. My time is completed, and I want to lie with her."--Genesis 29:21

Hey, the poor guy waited seven long years--can you blame him for being so direct?

Heh.

Speaking of connubial relations, think your wife is guilty of making dramatic statements? Hey, it has been like that since forever. Check these lines out from stressed out spouses:

"Give me children, or I'll die!"--Genesis 30:1

“If Jacob takes a wife from among the women of this land, from Hittite women like these, my life will not be worth living.”--Genesis 27:46

"You hate me! You don't really love me.”--Judges 14:16

“How can you say, 'I love you,' when you won't confide in me?”--Judges 16:15

Sound familiar guys? Here’s another age-old classic human foible: listening to your posse rather older, wiser folk’s advice …

Rehoboam went to Shechem, for all the Israelites had gone there to make him king. When Jeroboam son of Nebat heard this (he was still in Egypt, where he had fled from King Solomon), he returned from Egypt. So they sent for Jeroboam, and he and the whole assembly of Israel went to Rehoboam and said to him: "Your father put a heavy yoke on us, but now lighten the harsh labor and the heavy yoke he put on us, and we will serve you."

Rehoboam answered, "Go away for three days and then come back to me." So the people went away. Then King Rehoboam consulted the elders who had served his father Solomon during his lifetime. "How would you advise me to answer these people?" he asked.

They replied, "If today you will be a servant to these people and serve them and give them a favorable answer, they will always be your servants." But Rehoboam rejected the advice the elders gave him and consulted the young men who had grown up with him and were serving him. He asked them, "What is your advice? How should we answer these people who say to me, 'Lighten the yoke your father put on us'?"

The young men who had grown up with him replied, "Tell these people who have said to you, 'Your father put a heavy yoke on us, but make our yoke lighter'-tell them, 'My little finger is thicker than my father's waist. My father laid on you a heavy yoke; I will make it even heavier. My father scourged you with whips; I will scourge you with scorpions.' "--1 Kings 12

Dude triggered a revolt--nice going dum-dum.

Things are no different today, every generation of teenagers feel they can make the same mistakes of the previous generation yet avoid the consequences (“It won‘t happen to me!”) . Folks are on their deathbed regretting they spent their life in the pursuit of wealth only to discover it didn’t bring them happiness. They wish to pass along this wisdom to their children and grandchildren who are too busy figuring out what they’ll do with their share of the inheritance thinking the dough will make them happy.

And I hated life, because the work that has been done under the sun was calamitous from my standpoint, for everything was vanity and a striving after wind. And I, even I, hated all my hard work at which I was working hard under the sun, that I would leave behind for the man who would come to be after me. And who is there knowing whether he will prove to be wise or foolish? Yet he will take control over all my hard work at which I worked hard and at which I showed wisdom under the sun.--Ecclesiastes 2

Ah well.

Which brings us to Barry Bonds’ current situation; I like to say about such things ‘that muffled, thudding noise you hear is Darwin turning over in his grave.’ Bonds’ story is a familiar one--a man brought down by hubris. It never fails, no matter how many celebrities crash and burn due to their own arrogance or stupidity, nobody seems to learn from other’s mistakes. Bonds felt he was bullet-proof, invincible since so many interests were protecting him.

What he failed to realize it that invincibility is temporary, it lasts only as long as the person has value to those protecting him. Once the value is gone, so is the protection. Time and again, the next person down the pipe thinks that inevitability will escape them, that they are somehow immune to what happens to everyone in a position of prominence. They burn bridges on the way up never imagining that one day they’ll have to return the same way they came. When that day arrives, they discover that those people are still there, they have long memories and now it’s time for some payback.

This whole saga isn’t about anabolic steroids, or perjury, or baseball’s integrity. It is about a prominent man who behaved like a total butthole towards those he considered beneath him. Due to his stratospheric athletic ability, folks looked the other way, ate his feces and called it pralines and cream because he made people money. Now Barry Bonds holds the all-time home record and if he plays again it will be as a DH. His ability to make others coin is largely diminished. He’ll be too old to play soon and he has zero value as a celebrity pitchman due to his cantankerous personality.

Since he can’t make folks money--why protect the guy? The media is out using keyboards and modems in place of torches and pitchforks, ink and paper instead of tar and feathers eager to see the guy burn and suddenly Bonds discovers just how vulnerable he has become.

However, in time, the lessons learned from the saga of Barry Bonds will be forgotten. There will be other stars on the scene who will behave as Bonds did never thinking the ride will end and we’ll be doing this all over again. Will we ever learn?

Do you hear that muffled, thudding noise now?

Best Regards

John

Nostradumbass strikes again! …

2007-12-06T16:11:00.000-08:00

Nice guess on Andruw Jones yesterday eh?

Ah well, I’ve told Mike Gill on numerous occasions that he ask me to prognosticate at his own risk. There’s not much to say about the Jones’ signing; the Dodgers made a good deal--if he reverts to form, they have a bargain, if not, they’re not tied into a long obligation.

I guess Johan Santana ain’t a member of the Red Sox either--two for two!

Trust me, call me up, ask for stock tips, do the exact opposite, and cut me a five percent commission--we’ll both be rich.

Moving on …

I really should update my personal archives; my MSN column dealing with Raines’ Hall of Fame candidacy is up. My boss Scott entitled it Tim Raines: Worthy Hall-of-Famer--he gets full marks for directness. I shouldn’t tease him like that; the guy is unbelievably overworked and his family has been dealing with some serious medical issues. Do me a favour, put in a good word to your deity of choice for him. I’m often amazed how good people just can’t catch a break.

Once again--hang in there guy; 2008 is almost here. I appreciate your hard work in keeping me presentable. If you like, I can put you in touch with the editing staff at THT or Dave Studeman and you can compare notes. My next MSN column will consist of me whining about J.P. Ricciardi’s absence at the winter meetings.

Oh, he was there? My bad.

Speaking of previews, tomorrow I’ll be ranting further about the Veterans Committee’s failure to elect Marvin Miller. Typical cronyism, kiss up to the folks who were so busy making the game worse for money than the guy who actually accomplished something worthwhile. If Willie Sutton knocked over a bank using a baseball bat as a weapon, you could expect to see him on the ballot in 2009.

I was going to write a nasty, vitriolic piece about Marlins: Stadium woes led to trade. Adding to the hilarity was this tidbit: Marlins trade Rule 5 Draft pick for cash. I’ll save the major broadsides for next week’s THT column--it’s probably what I’m best known for; well, that and suggesting replacement-level hitters should bunt occasionally with men and nobody out to stay out of the double play. I would like to go on the record about this one point: I’ve read in cyberspace that I hate the Florida Marlins.

Not true, not by a longshot. I’ve enjoyed watch the talent that the Marlins have produced. The 2003 team was a joy to watch. Larry Beinfest may well be near the top among major league G.M.s. I have never been shy in expressing my admiration for his fine work. What I hate is Marlins ownership … I saw them actively destroy any last hope for Montreal Expos fans. I know how they operate, they are worse than Bud Selig and Scott Boras combined and compounded. They should never, ever be allowed to own another major league franchise. They are right down there with William Cox, Charles Comiskey, and Arnold Johnson as being among the worst owners the game has had the misfortune of foisting upon a city.

A phrase I like to toss around here applies well to both: “fiscal succubi.” They wait until they think you are oblivious and they swoop in and screw you out of every last penny. Then they will return and try it again and again since they can never be satiated. You cannot be in contact with them and not feel defiled somehow.

If you don’t believe I’m sympathetic to the Marlins plight, surf over to Fish Chunks where I occasionally commiserate with them over their ownership situation. Here is a team that has won two World Series seven years apart but has dealt with the fans and region in such incredible bad faith that they still stay away. Their next decent owner will be their first. They have had one long collection of welfare queens who demand to have their pockets filled with ill-gotten gold. Don’t forget, while John Henry is well liked in Boston he said he couldn’t afford to find private financing to make good on his promise to build a stadium himself in South Florida. A few years later, he miraculously was able to cobble together $700 million to buy the Red Sox.

Rest assured Marlins fans--I would love to see a responsible owner come in and build up the market. You are not bad fans--you are people who have too much self-respect to remain in an abusive relationship. I hope one day you get treated with the respect you deserve. I never took the ripping you gave me a few years back personally after I wrote Blackmail Black Knights and Black Humor and Dumb And Dumber in the spring of 2005. I felt the same way you did back then during Jeffrey Loria’s early tenure with the Expos when we dreamt of Labatt Park and a new era of Montreal baseball.

I’ve rambled enough for tonight. I may or may not deal with the steroid suspensions handed out to Jose Guillen and Jay Gibbons tomorrow, but one wag at Baseball Think Factory was livid over the Gibbons decision. He felt it wasn’t long enough--he was an Orioles fan of course, I guess it’s pretty easy to develop a sense of gallows humour after dealing with Angelos and Sons who may soon be rubbing shoulders with Loria and Samsonuvabeeyatch in baseball ignominy.

Best Regards

John

Educated gas...

2007-12-05T14:44:00.000-08:00

Well, I guess we all know about the latest broadside to the blogosphere. This time it’s Stephen A. Smith:

..."And when you look at the internet business, what’s dangerous about it is that people who are clearly unqualified get to disseminate their piece to the masses. I respect the journalism industry, and the fact of the matter is ...someone with no training should not be allowed to have any kind of format whatsoever to disseminate to the masses to the level which they can. They are not trained. Not experts. More important are the level of ethics and integrity that comes along with the quote-unqoute profession hasn’t been firmly established and entrenched in the minds of those who’ve been given that license...”

Personally, I think we are being played a bit here. Smith saw all the publicity Bill Conlin’s remarks generated and now Smith wants to use his platform to puff out his chest and look down at the ‛amha·’a′rets’ of the blogosphere. Here’s the thing, major league baseball is more than box scores and gathering vapid clichés from those within the game.

One thing that has been said time and again about the media is how little they understand about the issues facing the sport. Does Smith understand the game’s economics more than Doug Pappas (R.I.P.) or Maury Brown? Does he comprehend stadium financing and its effects on the game better than Neil deMause? Can he claim to be better at statistical analysis than Bill James or Pete Palmer? Is his knowledge of the history of the game deeper than Steve Treder’s? How would he stack up against Lee Sinins in a discussion of baseball and the law?

These are important issues within the sport--what credentials does Smith have that qualifies him to have a platform to disseminate his opinions on these subjects? Being a journalist doesn’t mean you know a common rodent’s sphincter about economics, law, statistical analysis, collective bargaining, or history. One thing we have learned about professional journalists over the years is that they’re utterly clueless about many of these things.

Just ask Marvin Miller.

Yet they’re still entitled to a platform to expound on their opinions on these subjects? Based on what? As we discussed during the Conlin episode journalists used their platform to inform us that:

Free agency would end the game of baseball.
That indentured servants making anywhere from $6000-$10,000 a year were pampered, spoiled, ungrateful malcontents that should be willing to play for free for the privilege of playing in the major leagues.
Publicly financed stadiums are a huge boon to a local economy.
That baseball doesn’t suffer with a problem regarding performance-enhancing drugs.
Many teams were on the verge of bankruptcy.
The commissioner of baseball is neutral respecting the labour management issues of the game.
People of African-American descent couldn’t succeed in the big leagues.
The Florida Marlins, Minnesota Twins, Oakland A’s can’t assemble competitive teams without a publicly financed revenue-generating ballpark.
Eight credentialed, educated journalists covering baseball thought the career of a player who was (at the time) first all time in home runs, RBI, total bases and extra-base hits, second all-time in hits, third in runs and intentional walks, with two batting titles, three Gold Gloves, league MVP, batted .305 in just under 3,300 games, was a 20-time All Star and hit .362/.405/.710 in the post season (.364/.417/.600 in World Series) didn’t have a Hall of Fame career.

This is a small sampling; here is a personal favourite, it’s a line from the strike of 1972: “The fan goes from steak to hamburger while the ballplayer rides a golden gravy train.”

Um, I’m pretty sure the players weren’t taking food out of anybody’s mouth. The average salary (not the aggregate, but the average) was a little over $22,000 a year. However, this was an insight from a journalist.

I can’t get overly upset over Smith’s remarks. He fails to distinguish the difference between knowledge and having an education. Even though his education probably didn’t touch on the issues within the game, he feels that his diploma entitles him to a platform to inform the public about things of which he knows little.

Meanwhile, people who do understand these things should be denied a voice because they haven’t received an education regarding a subject that has nothing to do with issues affecting MLB. Smith's stance is like a architect pushing aside an experienced mid-wife to deliver a baby pointing to his degree as proof that he should be the one assisting in the birth.

Stephen A. Smith truly embodies the idiom that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

Best Regards

John

Post Script:

Two posts below this one you will see “Goin’ all Grandpa Simpson …” dealing with the fight to save Fenway Park. One of our biggest hurdles was dealing with journalists who refused to do the necessary legwork and simply parroted what the Red Sox front office said regarding the necessity a new park.

I received tons of hate-mail from Red Sox fans who were using various columns that stated that a new Fenway would be, not only a boon to the economy, but it wouldn’t divert a single penny from necessary services. I can’t help but wonder when they learned ‘pimping millionaire interests’ while studying to be a journalist.

Personally, I would put integrity over education as the criteria of who should disseminate information to the masses. Too many journalists have sold out to retain their access. I can understand their justification for doing so, but it puts them in a poor position to lecture others about who deserves a platform and who does not.

The Mike Gill Show (for December 5)...

2007-12-05T13:36:00.000-08:00

So, I just got the topics du jour for this week’s segment of ESPN 1450’s Mike Gill Show. Under consideration are:

Whose package is better for Johan Santana: The Yankees or the Red Sox?
What are your thoughts on the Marlins - Tigers deal? Where does this place the Tigers in the AL?
Is Eric Bedard worth it?
Alex Rios to San Francisco--Why do the Jays want to deal him?
Aaron Rowand and Andruw Jones ... when will they sign?

Heh … I am lousy at analyzing trades. We’re doing a roundtable discussion at THT about the winter meetings and my efforts will be meager. However, I do have some great brains to pick so I’ll give the gist about what my colleagues are saying--but not too much that it spoils the surprise for our readers.

Whose package is better for Johan Santana: The Yankees or the Red Sox?

One thing I do know, the best package is the one with Phil Hughes in it. I’ve seen various offers from both the Red Sox and Yankees and unless the Bronx Bombers drop back in it will come down to choosing between Jon Lester, Coco Crisp, Jed Lowrie and a choice between Justin Masterson and Michael Bowden and a package of Jacob Ellsbury, Lowrie and either Masterson or Bowden.

Peter Gammons is reporting that a five-for-one deal is all but finalized--Santana for Lester, Crisp, Lowrie, Masterson and Ryan Kalish. It makes the question moot.

Thoughts:

Lester: Live armed southpaw who needs to cut his walks. He still has lots of time to mature.
Lowrie: Switch-hitting SS, good batting eye with a bit of pop.
Masterson: RHP, good control but not overwhelming raw stuff. Possibly an end-of-the-rotation starter.
Kalish: Speedy 19 year old kid with a terrific batting eye and could develop some pop. CF of the future, and definite leadoff possibilities.
Crisp: Gold Glove, underachieving bat. Never developed as they thought. Will probably be allowed to walk away for draft picks.

What are your thoughts on the Marlins - Tigers deal? Where does this place the Tigers in the AL?

It gives them a ferocious lineup and Willis may improve in Comerica. He had a terrible defense behind him the last two years. If he can keep the ball in the park, he’ll be a plus in the rotation. Further, he may see pinch-hitting/running duty (.286/.348/.508; 3 triples, 2 HR in 2007). The wild card may come out of the AL Central again. Dave Dombrowski is loading up for a run to the World Series.

Is Erik Bedard worth it?

He’s Johan Santana-lite. Gillick should be all over this like zits on Nicole Ritchie.

Alex Rios to San Francisco--Why do the Jays want to deal him?

The Jays have a glut of outfielders: Vernon Wells, Matt Stairs, possibly Reed Johnson and Adam Lind. Ricciardi wishes to open a spot for Lind while the others keep left field open for Travis Snider. You can never have too much pitching (Matt Cain or Tim Lincecum) and Ricciardi is preparing for A.J. Burnett’s opt out at the end of ‘07. He’s also sniffing around Bedard for a Canadian connection. Ricciardi feels no real urgency and can wait for the Giants (or Orioles) to accept. Worst-case scenario: he has a terrific right fielder for 2007.

Aaron Rowand and Andruw Jones ... when will they sign?

I’m guessing he will sign sometime in February. Boras will wait until the better free agents are snapped up and get a couple of teams bidding for Jones. Chances are he can get the White Sox, Royals, Cubs, Brewers, Padres, Giants, Dodgers possibly the Rangers or Phillies (if Rowand signs elsewhere) in on it--all could use an upgrade in CF.

Best Regards

John

Goin’ all Grandpa Simpson…

2007-12-04T15:26:00.000-08:00

As our “Dweeb Team” (Tango, Keri, Burley and I) continue our quest for drumming up support for Tim Raines Hall of Fame candidacy it reminded me of a previous quest of which I was privileged to be a part. It wasn’t that long ago when Fenway Park appeared to be headed for a date with the wrecking ball. This was before John Harrington had sold the Red Sox to the current owners (John Henry and Co.).

Anyway, those who have spent any time with me (poor souls) know I love baseball history--especially old ballparks. I took many a pilgrimage to the corner of Michigan and Trumbull and devoted much column space to blasting the political machinations leading to the inevitable destruction of Tiger Stadium.

I was fortunate enough to come across some kindred spirits in recent years; people who lobbied to save Old Comiskey Park, as well as the good folks of the Tiger Stadium Fan Club. At the time, I was working for MLBtalk as a columnist and associate editor that enjoyed a wide readership. I had always been interested in the business aspects of the game, as you’ll note should you ever inflict spending time going through my archives on yourselves.

This interest led me to Neil deMause’s excellent Field of Schemes mailing list.

The members of the list were folks wizened in the ways of the business and politics of sports. I received a tremendous education from the various ones who posted there. It was around this period of time when Fenway Park was in the crosshairs of corporate welfare gremlins of major league baseball.

Even though I am not a Red Sox fan nor have any interest in becoming one, I knew three things: (1) Fenway Park was a baseball shrine and an irreplaceable piece of baseball history (2) the Boston Red Sox were among the most profitable franchises in baseball and (3) a new Fenway Park would suck close to a billion dollars in tax revenues from a region that could not spare it.

Bottom line, it didn’t matter from which angle you examined the issue, it looked positively purulent.

At any rate, this was the buzz of the list. Old Comiskey was no more, Tiger Stadium was vacant and the vultures were circling and now Bud Selig, John Harrington, the American League, and a good chunk of Boston’s politicos and media had formed a torches and pitchforked mob to put a noose around the old ballyard.

Here’s a sampling of what was being said:

"In a move that could pare 30,000 children from the state's special-education rolls, the Legislature will abolish the controversial 25-year-old guarantee of a special-needs student's right to the ``maximum feasible'' education, lawmakers said yesterday.

The overhaul of special education - the first successful effort in a decade of attempts - could potentially save $157 million a year as the state shifts to the federal standard of a ``free and appropriate public education.''"

State Sen. Mark Montigny, chairman of the budget-crafting Senate Ways and Means Committee, bristled at the charge. He said Senate negotiators risked other budget initiatives if they failed to compromise on special education.

``Please don't think this is a happy day with this change,'' said Montigny (D-New Bedford). ``We just think it's in the interest of every taxpayer of the commonwealth to get a good budget.''

-- Tuesday July 18th 2000 Boston Herald

“A federal court order about housing retarded adults in Massachusetts should prove more problematic for the Red Sox, but it won't. The disabled had a moral imperative on their side; the retarded have a legal mandate. Alas, neither has a well-financed public-relations strategy.

The Sox have been pushing to win at least $240 million in public funds before the legislative session ends July 31, but on Friday US District Court Judge Douglas Woodlock established a far more pressing priority. The Commonwealth has 90 days to provide housing or support services to 2,600 mentally retarded adults who have been denied assistance for years in violation of the federal Medicaid Act.

Governor Paul Cellucci has not responded to Woodlock's decision - he has not commented at all on the class-action suit since it was filed 16 months ago on behalf of families left languishing for years on a waiting list for services by the state Department of Mental Retardation. But evasion and avoidance will no longer pass for public policy, Woodlock made clear in a stinging rebuke to state officials who have illegally required aging parents to bear the care of their retarded children, some for as long as 50 years.

Federal law requires that those eligible for Medicaid receive services within a reasonable period of time, a period the law defines as 90 days. Neil McKittrick, the attorney with Hill & Barlow who prevailed in the class-action suit against the state, said 75 percent to 85 percent of the 2,600 retarded adults will require residential placements at an annual cost of between $60,000 and $80,000 each; others can continue to be cared for at home but will need less expensive support services. McKittrick estimated the total bill at $100 million, half of it to be reimbursed by the federal government.

Look for the state to respond to the judge's order by Aug. 15 with the claim that it does not have the financial resources to obey the law.

-- July 19, 2000 Boston Globe

We see how difficult it would be to find the necessary revenues for a new park.

"The Red Sox are extremely concerned about the proposed burden recently announced finance plans place on our fans - already bearing much of the cost for a new ballpark through seat deposits and the highest ticket prices in the league ... a new ballpark will generate very significant economic benefits for all of Massachusetts. And Red Sox fans should not bear the whole burden.'' (John Harrington)

-- Boston Herald, Tuesday, July 25, 2000

''It is not a case of Us vs. Schools ... the question is, `Do you want Major League Baseball in your community?''' (John Harrington)

-- Boston Globe May 25, 2000

Try this as a point-counterpoint:

Point:"There is no state taxpayer money to purchase land or engage in any creative land-swap or leaseback scheme."

-- Speaker Finneran before the U.S. Senate

Counterpoint: "If the Red Sox are denied this money, no Boston or Massachusetts school will be one teeny-weeny bit better a year from now than it is today. There is no quid pro quo, period ... let's get something straight. When you hear our elected officials pontificate about ''protecting the taxpayers' money,'' and other election day phrases, you are free to laugh when you know how much money they waste in this state each year, and how they will do anything to protect their patronage power. Any of us could blue-pencil their budget and find enough money to build a new ballpark, a new Symphony Hall, and 10 new schools."

-- Bob Ryan (Boston Globe May 25, 2000)

And...

"But he conceded fans would also be paying more to see games in a new ballpark. Although Red Sox tickets are already the most expensive in the league, Harrington acknowledged the team expects to impose higher prices in the new ballpark. He stressed, however, the price hikes would be less than the increases in recent years.

''It's very difficult to find partners who would be willing to invest significant money in a deal when they know they will not get a reasonable return on their investment,'' Harrington said. He also shrugged off the idea of offering the public ''wallpaper stock,'' saying it would be unfair to deceive fans who would buy the stock into thinking their holdings would increase in value." -- Boston Globe - June 18, 2000

Let's analyze the above: "It's very difficult to find partners who would be willing to invest significant money in a deal when they know they will not get a reasonable return on their investment." So they want the taxpayers to be their partners to invest significant money in a deal, that is by their own admission, "they know they will not get a reasonable return on their investment."

It’s easy to see why it was easy to be ticked at the whole situation.

Anyway, I wanted to be a part of educating the public regarding this male-bovine mass of feces. I was touched that the folks involved allowed me to be a part of trying to save the old park as well as keeping the corporate welfare succubi at bay.

Erika Tarlin of ‘Save Fenway Park’ was a blessing. Obviously, living in the boonies of Canada wasn’t really conducive to having my thumb on the pulse of goings on in the state of Massachusetts. Erika filled the void beautifully. Every day I had cornucopia new well-substantiated and sourced news and updates. Neil deMause educated me on the ins and outs of stadium subsidies, the folks from the Tiger Stadium Fan Club shared their experiences of dealing with politicians dealing in pork-barrel politics. I had a state budget leaked to me that demonstrated the damage funding a new Fenway Park would be to the region.

They provided me with a wonderful paper trail to sniff out the lies being planted in the media.

Ultimately, Fenway is still among us. I have no idea how much our effort contributed to stalling and eventually having the deal come to nothing. However, I was part of a group trying to educate the public about what would have been a billion dollar taxpayer boondoggle. It’s one of my favourite memories from my time in this profession. They didn’t have to include me in all of that, I was still a comparative unknown.

It was an invaluable experience, I learned so much about the inner workings of these issues and how the media is manipulated by special interests.

So, to Erika Tarlin, Neil deMause, Frank Rashid, Phil Bess, Doug Pappas (R.I.P.) and so many others--thanks for everything.

I hope our effort on Tim Raines will end up with another happy ending.

Best Regards

John

This wouldn’t happen if Bowie Kuhn were alive ...

2007-12-03T12:35:00.000-08:00

Before I get into my snarkfest about the Veterans Committee’s vote released today, I have some Tim Raines links to pass along to you. One blog on my list of regular haunts (semi-regular since he deals with other sports than baseball and hockey) is Neate Sager’s excellent Out of Left Field. He’s commented extensively on Tim Raines’ HOF qualifications. The first, from the beginning of the year is GETTING SERIOUS FOR A MOMENT: RAINES' HALL OF FAME CASE SOLID AS A ROCK and a more recent one is entitled SOLID AS A ROCK BUT ITS COMPLEX. If you love Tim Raines, be sure to take a look.

Now then…

Walter O Malley and Bowie Kuhn voted in while Marvin Miller garners just 25% support?

There are so many different versions about the Dodgers flight west. Nowadays it is fashionable to blame parks and highway czar Robert Moses for driving O Malley out, however Bill Veeck stated repeatedly that he deliberately made demands that made it impossible for Moses to agree to O Malley’s conditions. According to Veeck, O Malley had his sights set on Los Angeles even before the Brooklyn Dodgers won their first (and only) World Series.

To make sure that it would look like he had no choice but go to Los Angeles O Malley in effect told Moses to build him a stadium on a certain tract of land in Brooklyn and for all intents and purposes give it to him. He convinced Horace Stoneham to come along because the Giants were legitimately in financial distress and was beloved by other NL owners. He needed Stoneham (1) it would make the shift west an easier sell because it would be financially onerous on other teams to travel to the coast for just one series and (2) the NL wouldn’t turn down Stoneham because of his legitimate problems.

O Malley had been getting his ducks in a row for years to make L.A. happen. He later royally screwed the AL’s expansion west in the early 1960s. Then commissioner Ford Frick stated loud, long and repeatedly that New York and Los Angeles were “open cities,” meaning that a National League team could expand into New York without the Yankees being able to block it and the American League could expand into Los Angeles and the Dodgers too would be unable to do likewise.

However, Frick was said to be a “National League commissioner,” which meant that if Frick had to make a decision where he had to choose between AL and NL interests, well the AL would be just about out of luck.

Of course, the “open city” concept was fair to both leagues. The National League voted to expand into New York and the Mets were born. The Yankees said nary a peep -- after all, Frick had said New York was an “open city.” The American League voted to expand into Los Angeles and suddenly Walter O'Malley started to squawk. O'Malley wanted to be the one to choose the ownership group, to choose where they would play (Wrigley Field, which seated a little over 20,000), and to dictate their television rights. In addition, when O'Malley’s new park was finished at Chavez Ravine, the new team would have to sign an outrageous lease to play there until the Angels could build a park of their own. Finally, he wanted indemnities to the tune of $350,000 (this is the early 1960’s remember).

Well the Yankees got zip for allowing the Mets into their market, and the Dodgers got pretty much everything O'Malley asked for. Frick did his pal O'Malley a favor by making New York an "open city" for the National League but not doing the same thing for the American League in Los Angeles.

So, we’re letting a guy who obliterated a beloved institution (the Brooklyn Dodgers) and screwed the Angels and the AL (after the junior circuit held up its end of the bargain as respects New York) into the Hall of Fame?

Speaking of which …

During Bowie Kuhn’s commissionership is was common knowledge that O Malley was pulling Kuhn’s strings. If this was the case, doesn’t it stand to reason that the boneheaded way management dealt with the fledgling MLBPA is as much O Malley’s fault as Kuhn’s? Even Marvin Miller referred to O Malley as ‘baseball’s real czar’ Kuhn was his ‘messenger boy.’

Had the MLBPA been crushed and O Malley’s power base maintained (later through son Peter) how much further would MLB have fallen behind other professional sports? Miller was a force for change, O Malley and Kuhn, the oppressive, lurching status quo.

You cannot recount the various failures of Bowie Kuhn without keeping in mind who was giving him his marching orders. I’m not here to say that Kuhn and O Malley were not deserving of the honour but rather that Miller did far more for the game. It’s like having third basemen Troy Glaus, Scott Rolen and Alex Rodriguez on the ballot and voting in Glaus and Rolen while leaving A-Rod out.

A final thought; the title of this post is “This wouldn’t happen if Bowie Kuhn were alive …” that’s the thing, Kuhn died recently and that gives him a sympathy vote that has helped a lot of deceased individuals finally receive baseball’s highest honour.

It’s stupid, honour people while they’re still alive to enjoy it. Here’s something that always strikes me as hilarious. Here is a link for a company called “Fortress Personal Mausoleums”. One selling point is ‘it’s never too late for a Fortress.’ The ad goes on to demonstrate a family exhuming a seven year old grave to place the remains in ‘a Fortress’. O.K. now, let’s think about this a moment; grandma has been in the ground for years oblivious to the fact that she’s six feet under. Her loving family thinks her adipoceral remains would be much happier above ground where she can continue to saponify in a nice dry ‘Fortress Personal Mausoleum.’

Do you think ol’ grandma gives a rip one way or the other? This is tossing at least several grand away when dear old granny has not uttered a single peep complaining about the current location of her corporeal remains. When she shuffled off her mortal coil, thousands upon thousands of dollars were used to buy a casket, headstone, burial vault, plot, embalming services and usage of a funeral home and hearse.

The ingrate never bothered to say thank you either. Seven years hence, they decide that her final resting place is inadequate so it’s time for a resurrection of sorts to give her a new resting place--much nicer than the old one. Did she say thanks? Nope--the self-absorbed soap (grand) mummy was too busy ignoring this activity choosing to stay completely, utterly, and totally dead--completely oblivious to it all.

Meanwhile kids are going to bed hungry--if they have a home at all and various children’s services are being cut back. That money could be used to aid the living instead of looking after somebody who clearly is beyond all help. Heck, if you've got that much money to spend, give it to charity, sponsor a scholarship in grandma's name--anything so long as it benefits the living.

Well, sadly, the Hall of Fame is like that. When candidates are alive and well they wait year, after year, after friggin’ year hoping their accomplishments will be one day recognized. Kick the ol’ bucket and it’s plaque time for ol’ Bowie and Walt while Marvin Miller has to try to stay alive another two years if he hopes to experience the honour.

The dead can wait--the living cannot. The voters just gave O Malley and Kuhn the equivalent of a ‘Fortress Personal Mausoleum’ something they really don’t need and will never know that they have. Meanwhile the ones who can appreciate the honour have to die before folks realize their legacy.

Once again, the Hall of Fame has proven to be a colossal joke.

Postscript: The MLBPA executive director Don Fehr's comment on the vote:

“It was very disappointing to learn this morning that, once again, Marvin Miller was not elected to the Hall of Fame. Over the entire scope of the last half of the Twentieth Century no other individual had as much influence on the game of baseball as did Marvin Miller. Under his leadership, the Major League Baseball Players Association became an effective and forceful representative of the Players, and the Players, acting together, were able to successfully obtain appropriate working conditions. That the MLBPA remains an effective representative of the Players today, more than a quarter century after Marvin retired, is a testament to the enduring quality of the organization he and the Players created.

“Because he was the Players' voice, and represented them vigorously, Marvin Miller was the owners' adversary. This time around, a majority of those voting were owner representatives, and results of the vote demonstrate the effect that had. In the last vote, Marvin received 63% of the votes, this time he got 25%. By contrast, Bowie Kuhn received 17% of the votes last time, but got 83% this time.

“The failure to elect Marvin Miller is an unfortunate and regrettable decision. Without question, the Hall of Fame is poorer for it.”

Amen.

Best Regards

John

IT LIVES! IT LIVES! ...

2007-12-03T09:04:00.000-08:00

Tom Tango (AKA “Tangotiger”) is proud to announce the launch of Tim Raines - Hall of Fame, 2008. He has assembled a ‘Dweeb Team’ of writers (and still-mourning Montreal Expos fans) to help him with the project. Besides himself, ESPN’s Jonah Keri, and Hardball Times staffers Craig Burley and yours truly round out the current lineup. It is our opinion that aside from Rickey Henderson, Tim Raines was the finest leadoff hitter to grace MLB. The site will deal with his accomplishments, highlights, his Hall of Fame credentials and analysis of his career.

The purpose of the site is to remind the BBWAA of what a tremendous player Tim Raines was--especially during his oft overlooked tenure with the Montreal Expos. We hope to drum up as much support as possible and welcome anyone who wishes to contribute to the cause.

While Nos Amours are no more, the memories will always linger and be cherished. From Le Grande Orange Rusty Staub to the magnificent Vladmir Guerrero with stints by the likes of Pedro Martinez, Larry Walker, Andre Dawson, John Wetteland, Dennis Martinez, Steve Rogers, Ken Singleton, Moises Alou, Gary Carter, Larry Parrish, Warren Cromartie, Ellis Valentine and many others in between thrilled Canadian baseball fans for over three decades.

We hope that one of the Montreal Expos finest players will take his rightful place in baseball’s Hall of Fame in Cooperstown New York. This site is dedicated to making it happen.

Best Regards

John

Bluster…

2007-12-03T08:08:00.000-08:00

Right now I’m stuck at home due to the weather. We’ve had snow, freezing rain, and high winds plus it’s stinking cold with more on the way.

Canada eh?

Frankly, I’m surprised with the weather considering all the hot air emanating from the good folks in MLB. Here are some Chinook type blasts of recent days (daze?):

"I've felt we had a deal with them twice."--Angels owner Arte Moreno ripping the Florida Marlins for not finishing a deal for third baseman Miguel Cabrera.

"We'll see how it goes, but this is not an act. It's not a bluff. It's just reality, because as much as I want Santana, and you can make that clear -- for his sake, to know that I do want him -- but the fact is that I'm not going to play the game. We've made them the best offer. And at this point, it's not going to get any better. So they can decide. At this point, it's up to them. I don't think they want to lose us in this thing, obviously. Nobody wants to lose the Yankees in a negotiation."--Hank Steinbrenner on the Johan Santana trade negotiations

"We need to get things straightened out, and not wait around for them to run back to Boston and back to us, and then back to Boston, I'm not going to do that."--see above

While Yankees' deadline may not mean much, I'm thinking Santana's little backhand (stating he will veto any deal after the season is underway) will sting a bit. Mr. Santana is playing some bare-knuckle hardball with the Twinkies to force their hand, taking away the leverage they might have to simply tell other teams they're more than happy to kick back and wait until the trade deadline. If I'm the unholy trinity (Yankees/Red Sox/Mets), I know that threat now isn't worth the carbon-dioxide exhaled making the statement.

A source inside Johan Santana’s laundry has implied that Santana will veto any trade not to the Yankees or Red Sox coupled with a minimum six year extension (shouldn’t he be seeing a doctor or something about those type of side effects? He ain’t Scott Boras y’know). Since the lefty turned down a four year/$80 million offer from the Twins, it’s pretty obvious that he’s looking above the $20 million per neighbourhood.

To me, saying you’ll nix a trade to anybody but the Evil Empires (episode I and II) and insisting on a six-plus year contract north of $20 million per strikes me as a mite redundant.

Another source, seen frequently in Santana's bathroom mirror, has also stipulated that he will also axe a trade deadline deal. Here Santana is pulling a Ken Griffey Jr. (remember him?) trying to force the Twins to trade him post haste while tying Minnesota’s front office hands. He has dramatically increased the two-headed financial hydra’s leverage by structuring a scenario where it is now or never. It lessens the need for both clubs to include their crown jewels in any trade package knowing that the Twins’ choices consist of accepting the players offered or taking the draft picks after Santana becomes a free agent.

The only thing the Twins can hope for is that one of the two bidders will include a jewel simply to keep the other club from getting him. The Yankees have set Monday as the deadline for a Santana deal which means that the drop dead date will be today, December 10, December 17, December 24, December 31, January 7 … but it will be on a Monday; ol’ Hank wouldn’t lie to you.

Of course, both clubs have viable fallbacks with the loser becoming front-runners in the Danny Haren/Erik Bedard sweepstakes. Further, the Crimson Hose have opened a dialogue with the Milwaukee Brewers regarding Ben Sheets. It would be in poor taste to write that Boston will ‘Sheet’ themselves if the pinstriped empire land Santana so I won’t go there.

What?

Meanwhile, with all this activity going on in Nashville, keep your eye open for J.P. Ricciardi as he will doubtlessly be enjoying a good scratch including the difficult to reach places in the meantime. Once that task is accomplished to his satisfaction he can be expected to yawn, stretch, use the loo and see if he can download any Shania Twain tunes into his laptop while waiting for the next Royce Clayton to fall into his lap. Should such a deal not materialize he will spend any remaining time playing rock-paper-scissors by himself until the meetings wrap up. He’ll return to Toronto saying that while nothing he planned had materialized, it doesn’t mean that there won’t be a deal between now and opening day. Even if that doesn’t happen, he likes the Jays chances in 2008 regardless.

Getting back to Arte Moreno’s remark about the Marlins seemingly reneging on a couple of deals for Miguel Cabrera, I can’t help but wonder if there’s any validity to it. It doesn’t strike me as something GM Larry Beinfest would do but it sure smells like the work of Jeffrey Loria and/or David Samson (either that more my big black Lab just broke wind again). The alleged packages sounded reasonable enough so I wonder what’s holding it up?

I like the idea of the future Cabba the Hutt protecting Vladdy Guerrero in the Angels lineup. It offers a certain symmetry--two clubs with an all-world talent (the Expos and Marlins), run by idiots and urinating of the fan base in an attempt to drive a franchise into oblivion trying to secure hundreds of millions of dollars not belonging to them. In both cases, both end up in a nice market where they can’t do a lot of damage to the Blue Jays and Phillies.

This smells like the work of the craptastic duo (or my Lab just detonated another digestive chemical weapon) at any rate.

The Raine(s) Men…

Tom Tango’s work continues on Tim Raines - Hall of Fame, 2008. So far, our “Dweeb Team” has the following members (from the sites “About the Authors” page):

The Hardball Times' John Brattain can also be read at Sympatico/MSN Sports where more likely than not, he'll be complaining about the Toronto Blue Jays. John's work has also been featured at HardballTimes.com, About.com, MLBtalk, ESPN Insider, Yankees.com, Replacement Level Yankee Weblog, TOTK.com, Bootleg Sports, Baseball Prospectus, The Baseball Analysts and The Baseball Journals. You can hear him every Wednesday at 4:40 PM EST on ESPN 1450's The Mike Gill Show. He also is a frequent guest on The Jed Donahue Show on WTKT-AM 1460.

Craig Burley is a full-time attorney and spare-time baseball researcher, blogger and writer who has been a staff writer for Baseball Think Factory, the Hardball Times, and Batter's Box Interactive Magazine. He was a longtime Expos fan and is currently writing a book comparing the cultures of baseball and cricket.

Jonah Keri is a writer for ESPN.com and a contributor to multiple other publications, including Investor's Business Daily, the New York Times, the New York Sun, YESNetwork.com and Salon.com. He's also the editor and co-author of "Baseball Between the Numbers: Why Everything You Know About the Game Is Wrong". You can reach him at jonahkeri@gmail.com.

Tom M. Tango (aka Tangotiger), co-author of The Book—Playing The Percentages In Baseball, runs the Tango on Baseball website, where one will find a large number of research pieces devoted to sabermetrics. His inspirations have been Pete Palmer and Bill James, and is thankful for the generosity of Retrosheet and Baseball1 in providing data to the public. He works as a consultant for major league teams in hockey, and has worked as one in baseball. Born and raised in Canada, he now resides in New Jersey with his family.

If you’d like to join the effort, drop us a line. Many hands make Tim Raines a Hall of Famer (we hope). I have still got a Raines column in the hopper at MSN Canada--I’ll post the link when it goes live--hopefully soon.

Best Regards

John

Wallflowers…

2007-12-02T13:12:00.000-08:00

The winter meetings are soon and as the off-season continues, we keep hearing rumours regarding the futures of Johan Santana and Miguel Cabrera. For the most part Blue Jays fans have to content themselves with the possibility that one of them will end up on the two AL East behemoths. Since the Yankees re-signed Alex Rodriguez and the Red Sox Mike Lowell, it appears that the Marlins devourer of pitchers and Krispy Kremes won’t be a concern for the Blue Jays pitching staff.

Thank Providence for small mercies.

Of course, depending on what time of day it is, either one of New York’s finest or the Boston Red Sox have the inside track of landing Johan Santana.

Personally, I’m not really lamenting the Jays non-participation in these derbies. As mentioned last Wednesday, this is the least efficient method of talent acquisition. After all, a trade costs players; free agency costs money--a trade and sign costs both. Generally, a deal of this nature is made with superstar talent from an alleged small revenue team. Clubs like that prefer high ceiling talent that are major league ready with plenty of service time before arbitration and free agency. Therefore, once you cough up the talent, you’re dealing with a player who expects market wages.

In the case of Johan Santana, folks have been tossing around figures like $20 million a year and nobody blinks. The Red Sox and Yankees are likely having to deal one, or perhaps two talented youngsters; one of whom will be a pitcher, then needing to cough up around $100 million to hold on to him.

Obviously, this is something I would prefer the Jays to avoid doing. Johan Santana is an elite talent on a Hall of Fame trajectory. Since April 2002 he is 90-41, 2.90 ERA with a league ERA of about 4.50; Santana whiffs a hitter an inning with a stingy BB/9 of 2.5. On top of all this he is a lefty who is not yet 30 and has a pair of Cy Young awards; consider that Randy Johnson since the year he turned that age is 234-102, 2.97 ERA with five Cy Youngs.

Suffice it to say, the possibilities are breathtaking.

If he’s Randy Johnson--then it will be an incredible trade for the team acquiring him. However, another elite southpaw--Sandy Koufax--was out of baseball at 31. That scenario would make a Santana deal an equally incredible blunder. I prefer the Jays not to make that gamble. I would have no trouble if the Jays landed him as a free agent, but I would hate to cough up a Travis Snider and Dustin McGowan only to commit free agent wages on top of it all.

Switching gears…

Speaking of trades, as a Phillies fan I’m glad Omar Minaya is on our side--or so it would seem. I have heard all the spin as to why the Lastings Milledge trade was defensible. I heard similar sentiments expressed when the Mets dealt Scott Kazmir for Victor Zambrano. In both cases, it appears that these players were dealt because somebody in the organization didn’t like them. I heard that Al Leiter was not fond of Kazmir for whatever reason and since he had the ear of the GM (Jim Duquette)--he was gone. Now it appears that Willie Randolph didn’t care for Milledge due to his dislike of the outfielder’s Hip Hop persona.

The thing is, guys with the ability of Kazmir and Milledge are scarce commodities; aging pitchers and big league managers less so. If there was no market for Milledge for whatever reason, you do not deal him simply to deal him. If you really want to be rid of him, you have to do so in an intelligent fashion. This is where you showcase him; you play him every day and put him in situations where he can succeed. You display his amazing talents for both leagues to see and increase his value in the trade market.

One of two things occurs--you discover his ability is so compelling that you hang on to him and help him grow up. Lastings Milledge is 22; chances are he’ll be a different person at 25 and again at 30. You simply cannot let go of that level of talent because some grumpy older guy decides he doesn’t like the whippersnapper’s attitude. Let’s not forget that we were the same at that age--full of ourselves, enjoying tweaking the old guard and generally being young.

Probably the worst part of this deal is that the Mets had such a talented, cheap outfielder and are in desperate need of pitching and all they get is a corner outfielder and backup catcher. I feel bad for Mets fans. First, it was Tom Seaver, then Scott Kazmir, now Lastings Milledge--all of whom were dealt for personal and not professional reasons. In each case, it was some middle-aged or older person who forgot what is what was like to be young and lost all sense of patience with people not unlike younger versions of themselves.

Every Phillies fan should send something from the Hip Hop culture whether music, clothes or bling to the most talented players on the Mets roster. Before long, they’ll have 25 Al Leiter clones on the roster getting their teeth kicked in by every team in the NL.

However, they’ll be nice, clean cut, polite doormats--a treat for the local Seniors Ladies’ Auxiliary who will be there faithfully to cheer on the Mets to their 50th win sometime in mid-September.

Best Regards

John

Is 'The Hawk' or 'The Rock' the lock?...

2007-12-01T11:00:00.000-08:00

One of the more popular pastimes in the Blue Jays blogosphere is bashing Toronto Star columnist Richard Griffin. Admittedly, he is not one of my favourite writers. When reading his material, I generally get the impression that he starts with a visceral opinion then searches out factoids that support it rather than looking at the data and drawing conclusions.

But I digress … right off the bat no less!

Regardless, if you’re hoping for a Griffin rip-job you’ll be disappointed. He wrote a column earlier about Tim Raines needing to wait for Andre Dawson’s induction into the Hall of Fame before he is elected. I don’t agree with his opinion and ‘why’ will be the topic of today’s brain dump.

Griffin argues that since Dawson was Raines’ ‘big brother’ figure during their mutual tenure with les Expos, then little bro’ should have to wait his turn. Again, Griffin is letting emotion be the primary factor in his line of reasoning. While I love both players, I think that Raines is more deserving of the honour than “Hawk.”

Aside from their hitting contributions, Dawson was a superb ball-hawk who copped eight Gold Gloves as a centerfielder. He excelled at the more important defensive position than the left fielder Raines. On the other hand, while Dawson did top 300 stolen bases in his career--he was successful in just 74% of his attempts. Raines is not only second in modern NL history in that category; his 84% success rate leaves Dawson in the dirt.

Both have hardware--Dawson has an MVP, Raines a pair of World Series rings. Neither has an outstanding post-season résumé; Dawson hit .186/.238/.237 in 59 AB while in 126 AB “Rock” batted .270/.340/.349. Dawson was an 8-time All Star; Raines made it seven times.

A quick look at their career batting numbers and their four best consecutive seasons:

Andre Dawson
Career 4 best (1980-83)
BA OBP SLG BA OBP SLG
Dawson .279 .323 .482 .302 .350 .518
LG avg. .264 .331 .393 .265 .330 .386

Tim Raines
Career 4 best (1984-87)
BA OBP SLG BA OBP SLG
Raines .294 .385 .425 .323 .409 .477
LG avg. .264 .333 .400 .263 .331 .395

As to career, Raines has the better OPS+ (123 to 119) however part of that has to be discounted by the fact that Dawson gets a bump for playing a key defensive position at a very high level. However, using Runs Created (RC) Raines was 516 RC above average for his career while Dawson was 300 runs lower (216) despite having 1000 more AB. Using Lee Sinins Runs Created Against Position (to be used with a grain of salt) Raines created 392 more runs than his positional peers while Dawson just 140. There are equally vast spreads in these when you examine their four best consecutive years. In both cases, Raines buries Dawson. RC, RCAA and RCAP are all counting stats and Raines had a higher total despite less than close to two full seasons worth of AB than “Hawk.”

Of course, both were different animals offensively; Dawson was the middle-of-the-order hitter while Raines batted leadoff. Dawson has more HR and RBI while Raines is superior in runs scored and bases on balls. Since the BBWAA tends to look at more conventional measures, let’s examine it on that particular basis.

Let’s deal with what I like to call ‘eyeball runs’ (my pseudonym for a better known measure) An ‘eyeball run’ is something that appears on the scoreboard--if you make contact and a runner crosses the plate (except in the case of a double play)--that’s an ‘eyeball run’ … likewise if you’re the player to cross home plate. Although it’s more tangible, it’s also more crude simply because it doesn’t credit a player who gets a key hit that advances a runner two bases yet doesn’t come around until the next batter. The next guy up can make an out and get the RBI even though that contribution wasn’t as valuable as the player who got the hit that allowed the base runner to get to third.

Just so you know.

‘Eyeball runs’ are easily measured by an old saw--their identical twin: runs produced (Runs+RBI - HR). Dawson had 145 more ‘eyeball runs’ than Raines (2526 to 2381). Oh, it’s not that easy folks; you see runs come at a cost. In a 9-3 game won by the visiting team, both clubs paid 27 outs for their runs. The winning team got nine runs for their 27 outs, the loser--just three. Therefore, we have to look at how many outs each player ‘spent’ to ‘buy’ their ‘eyeball runs.’

Andre Dawson paid 7,261 outs for his 2526 runs produced. Raines paid 6,670 outs for his 2381 ‘eyeball runs.’ The Hawk paid 2.87 outs for each run he produced while Raines purchased his for 2.80 outs. That may not seem like much but it is significant. Consider that Raines had 1055 fewer career at bats than Dawson did, yet Hawk only produced 145 more ‘eyeball runs.’ For Raines to match Dawson’s career spendthrift attitude toward generating runs he would need to play two seasons like 1987 in playing time terms. In that year he had 530 AB in 139 games. In each of those years he would need (rounding off) 73 runs produced. “Rock” averaged seven HR per season so we’ll use that for our imaginary years.

Where does that leave it?

Raines would need two seasons with 50 runs, 7 HR 30 RBI in 530-ish AB. How bad is that? In 2007, 40-year old shortstop Omar Vizquel received 513 AB, scored 54 runs, drive in 51 and hit four home runs. Vizquel had 101 ‘eyeball runs’ last season and our hypothetical seasons would have to be significantly worse than ‘the Vizards’ .246/.305/.316 contributions.

Bottom line, the difference between Raines and Dawson’s careers from this point-of-view is two seasons of sub-2007 Vizquel level production. The difference between 2.87 and 2.80 outs per run produced can add up in a hurry.

It doesn’t matter whether you use traditional or sabermetric measures, the bottom line is Tim Raines had a superior career to Andre Dawson. “The Hawk” is a borderline candidate, which puts Raines over the border and into the Hall of Fame.

Best Regards

John

The Mitchell Report will be an Oedipus-complexing fraud…

2007-11-29T14:14:00.000-08:00

It figures, it just bloody well figures. Initially I was going to write a happy little post about the Twins-Devil Rays blockbuster. The Tampa Bay Devil Rays are starting to scare me. They are sick with young high-ceiling talent and now they’re starting to accumulate some pitching. However, I’ll let my old THT cohort do the heavy lifting on this subject. Aaron Gleeman does a nice job dissecting the deal. Be sure to wander over and check it out.

While I’m going linking stuff I’d like to point you to Maury Brown’s Biz of Baseball where he tipped me off about what is to come. Expect it before Christmas--probably some time in the next three weeks. Maury’s article is the pragmatically named Could MLB Get a Pass on the Mitchell Report? and he sums it up best here:

Based on reports, the Mitchell investigation will offer up a forward looking set of recommendations, and not address how the PED culture in baseball was allowed to permeate. In other words, baseball may be given a free pass for matters in the past and present, with only the named players as ones being held accountable.

If this is indeed the case, then many, this author included, will be ready to paint the entire report as a sham.

Bingo.

Here’s the thing: anabolic steroids were very good for the business of baseball. Fans flocked to the ballpark to watch epic home run hitting, they bought cable and internet packages etc. It also allowed star attractions to recover more quickly from injury for a time. Bud Selig and baseball management in general looked the other way.

Like any employer, they want maximum production out of their workforce and PED gave them precisely that. In other industries, employee safety is often compromised because creating a safe environment costs money. It is much more profitable to ignore the well-being of their workers. Therefore, management could not care less if players were ruining their health. If it meant health problems down the road for these athletes--who cares? They won’t be producing revenue at that point anyway.

After AP writer Steve Wilstein received a major backlash for reporting Mark McGwire’s androstenedione usage the media did likewise and simply pretended steroid/hGH abuse wasn't there. Besides, why ruin the exciting story of milestones falling just to report the truth?

The MLBPA was not about to allow testing because publicly they were concerned about players right of privacy. On the other hand, they privately wished to protect the salary bar at all costs even if most players wanted an even playing field.

Players with eye-popping numbers received equally eye-popping deals. Those contracts pushed the salary bar up, up and up to new, never before seen heights!

It didn’t matter that their constituents did not wish to feel obligated to put such substances into their body just to get or retain a big league job. While management eagerly sacrificed player health for money, the union did likewise--to protect their cherished salary bar. In a mind-boggling bit of devotion to monster contracts, a poll conducted by USA Today revealed that 17% of the players were against independent steroid testing, while 79% were in favor while 44% stated that they felt pressure to juice to keep their jobs.

Well, that’s interesting; it would be the perfect time to touch base with their constituents to see how strong the feeling was--right? Wrong, shortly thereafter, MLBPA executive director Don Fehr told the senate not to consider unsubstantiated newspaper reports as fact.

Ultimately, it took congressional pressure to get both sides to act upon the problem.

It appears Mitchell will ignore all this; he will simply make some recommendations to ensure this never happens again. As a bonus, he’ll out some players who will bear the brunt of the public’s wrath and probably take a financial hit with their next either contract or loss of endorsements.

Bottom line? It took years of research and millions of dollar to find a few scapegoats for baseball’s steroid era. It almost sounds like something a politician would do--doesn’t it?

What a minute…

Best Regards

John

The Mike Gill Show...

2007-11-28T13:31:00.000-08:00

I thought it would be fun to inflict on you poor folks my preparation for my weekly appearance on ESPN 1450’s Mike Gill Show (no, I don't think you've suffered enough). I just got the topics for discussion. Today, they are:

Johan Santana ... will he be traded to (1) the Yankees or (2) the Mets?
Mark Prior ... Does he have anything left? Is it worth taking a shot on him?
Mike Hampton is hurt again. Can the Braves count on him? Some say the Braves are now the team to beat in the NL East. Thoughts?
What did Torii Hunter’s deal do for guys like Aaron Rowand and Andruw Jones? Does the Hunter contract price the Phillies out of the Rowand market?
Is there any team you think has done well this off-season--so far or not so good?

Well, I cannot see the Twins simply taking the draft picks for Santana--not when they can get some ready major league level talent in return. Both clubs have some nice young talent and need starting pitching. Both will be opening new ballparks soon and having Santana as the jewel of their rotation would be a coup. The trouble is, to land a talent like Santana requires the worst method of player acquisition. When you try to sign a free agent--it costs money. If you wish to make a trade--it costs players. When you’re trying to land a superstar on the verge of free agency from a ‘small revenue team’, first, you have to cough up the young talent they crave; then you have to ante up on an extension so you don’t lose him the following year.

Since Santana will be looking at $20 million per, the Yankees become the favourite. The question is, will they be willing to relinquish the talent the Twins are eyeing: Joba Chamberlain, Philip Hughes and Ian Kennedy? NY Sun writer Tim Marchman feels that they are expendable due to the uncertain nature of pitching prospects. However, is it reasonable to give up 2-3 cost-effective starting pitchers to pay $20 million a year plus the 40% luxury tax for somebody--however talented--that could blow out his rotator cuff at any given time?

Ditto the Mets; I’m sure the Twins would accept guys like Lasting Milledge, Philip Humber, John Maine etc. but is it wise to pay the awful cost for acquiring a player in this manner?

I’m guessing the Yankees will likely win the Santana derby. They usually seem to win these things it seems.

As to Prior--why not? It’s not going to cost much to sign him most likely because of the unknown quantity of his surgically repaired arm. Throw a few million his way; if he gets close to his old form--you've gotten a steal. If he doesn’t, it’s a pretty small ‘sunk cost.’ I’m surprised at the level of angst this question is generating in some circles.

As to the greatest booster of the post-Columbine Colorado educational system (Mike Hampton), well whoopdee-dingle-doo. I can’t help but wonder if an arm wrestling match between him and Carl Pavano might result in a double-header at the nearest funeral parlour. His career is dead, buried, saponified, fossilized and soon to be in a museum exhibit dealing with the aforementioned sunk costs.

The Braves the class of the AL East? They’ve got three good starters in Tim Hudson, Tom Glavine and John Smoltz (although Glavine and Smoltz could fall of a cliff at any moment and will the 300-game winner have anything left in September?). I don’t see much of a bullpen. Chipper Jones is a year older. Nobody knows who will play CF and they dealt away a pretty solid Edgar Renteria. The Mets and Phillies are still around and nobody knows whether Miguel Cabrera will move or not or where he may end up and who the Marlins might get in a trade. The Marlins’ GM (Larry Beinfest) is a genius and he might be able to get some pitching for the slugger.

Waaaay too early to tell. They’re not the best team in the NL East right now but there’s a lot of off-season to go yet.

As to Hunter/Jones/Rowand … Hunter got what I figured the market would give him--no shock there. I would expect both Rowand and Jones to get a bit less. The Phillies can easily afford Rowand. I think Scott Boras might be looking for a shocker contract for Andruw Jones simply to salve his off-season wounds. I’m guessing Boras will wait for Rowand to sign since that would leave him with the best CF option still on the market. Remember Magglio Ordonez? He was still on the market in February 2005 and suddenly BOOM--five years/$75 million from the Tigers. Expect a similar type scenario unfolding for Jones.

Has any team really had an incredible hot stove league? Not yet, Alex Rodriguez, Mike Lowell and Curt Schilling all stayed put. I have no idea what the Milwaukee Brewers are doing. They lost their closer Francisco Cordero to the Reds. They dealt their catcher Johnny Estrada for Guillermo Mota and signed Jason Kendall. Mind you, Kendall will be easier on the clubhouse’s ears. They lost Scott Linebrink to the White Sox (four years??).

Uh … yeah.

The Angels will have pretty good OF defense with the addition of Hunter but don’t expect pitchers to give Vlad Guerrero pitches to hit just because Hunter is behind him. The addition of Jon Garland will help; I guess they’re not doing too badly thus far. The Phillies are doing alright. They retained J.C. Romero’s ground ball talents and the trade for Brad Lidge also gives them a No. 2 starter by getting Brett Myers back into the rotation. Getting RHP Ryan Madson and RHP Scott Mathieson back will help as well (activated from the 60-day DL).

Stuff…

I’d like to post a link to Jonathan Hale’s Hardball Times column on A zone of their own. Jon writes both for the Jays Nest and The Mockingbird (where yours truly has found himself in Jon’s crosshairs a couple of times). No biggie however, he’s a fellow Jays fans and a handy guy to bounce thoughts off. He’s more sabermetric in his approach whereas I’m more middle-of-the-road. Regardless, its always top-notch feedback and his work is always very thoughtful and well presented. I hope it’s not his only contribution to THT. He may be the only baseball fan who despises April home openers … he can’t stand all that bunting. --Hi Jon! ;-)

To see more of Jon’s work just follow the links on the left side of the page.

I’ve got both Tim Raines HOF columns in the system (both MSN and THT) and Tom Tango continues his hard work on the flagship site for Tim Raines fans. Check his latest additions.

Best Regards

John

Of interest....

2007-11-27T17:01:00.000-08:00

A couple of things have popped up in my inbox that I thought deserve a mention. To start with, Maury Brown of the Biz of Baseball noted:

In the two-plus seasons since the cancellation of the '04-05 NHL season, the 30 league franchises have increased in value an average of 23%, while the league has gone from an operating loss of $96M to a profit of $96M, according to Ozanian & Badenhausen of FORBES. The average team is now worth $200M. The "surge in team values and profits is due to the salary cap" included in the new CBA, which lowered player costs from 66% of revenue to 54% since the '03-04 season. The "stronger Canadian dollar" is another reason. However, the CBA "has hurt the bottom line of some small-market franchises by establishing a minimum team payroll in addition to a salary cap." The Wild and Predators had payrolls of $24M during the '03-04 season and turned a profit, but both teams finished '06-07 "in the red because of their increased payrolls." The following presents Forbes NHL franchise valuations for '07 (FORBES, 11/26 issue).

This is probably the number one reason owners love salary caps. The ‘not overspending on players’ is the public reason, but in all three leagues clubs look for ways around the cap to upgrade their rosters. While certain teams are little more than welfare queens (and aren’t clubs that worry about going over a set limit) others are already rich, but they haven’t had their faces splashed across every paper in the western world with the World Series/Lombardi/Stanley Cup/Larry O Brien trophy in their clutches.

Everybody loves free money and salary caps are great for that. As we see above, once a league has full cost-control the value of almost each and every franchise increases. Soon the New York Yankees will be moving into a new stadium. While they are putting a lot of their own money into it, they can deduct those costs from their revenue sharing obligations. In short, they will get a huge revenue spike, a equally large increase in equity and other teams will see less Yankee revenue in their own coffers.

What will that mean for the Yankees’ payroll? It’s a thought that sends shivers down every team in MLB and take every wrinkle out of Scott Boras’s Dockers. As you know, player markets are set by the highest bid so if a player lands a landmark deal that becomes ‘the market.’ The Yankees will be paying about $27.5 million per year for Alex Rodriguez. They have the revenues to support such a deal. It also makes $27.5 million the approximate market for players of that ilk for teams that don’t enjoy the Yankees revenues.

Again, we see the potential for the Yankees to increase the costs of doing business for other clubs while distributing less revenue to them.

This is why MLB will be pressing for a hard cap before much longer. One, it increases equity, but it also improves cash flow since the Yankees can only drive up the market for players so far. What folks forget when looking back on the Collusion-era of the 1980’s is that it was directed as much at George Steinbrenner as it was the MLBPA. Unless Steinbrenner was on board it never would have worked since he was constantly setting new market levels for talent. With ‘The Boss’ under control, so was the salary structure.

In the same vein, a salary cap is also targeted as much at the Yankees as it is the players union. If the Bronx Bombers aren’t spending $200 million on players then there’s less reason for the Red Sox to spend $150 million or the Blue Jays to spend $90 million. Bud Selig knows the MLBPA has lost its center of consensus. He repeatedly tries to keep the union reeling whether it is through the steroid issue or something else. He knows that his best opportunity for a hard cap is coming soon. He twice has gotten a luxury tax that gets progressively more onerous. Most teams treat is as a cap--the Yankees don’t. They will pay an additional 40% for A-Rod’s next deal. They can afford it. Selig knows that the Yankees have the revenues to absorb such hits and realizes there is only one way to slow their spending--a hard cap.

In this year’s Hardball Times Annual be sure to check out “The Decline and Fall of the MLBPA”--it appears that Don Fehr and Gene Orza may have to capitulate on a cap since they lack the muscle to prevent it. They were pragmatic regarding the steroid issue realizing that re-opening a collective bargaining agreement twice would net them a better deal than having Congress do it for them. Expect a similar approach to a cap; a collectively bargained cap will have a higher ceiling than one imposed upon a broken union. They can look to the NHL and NBA to see what happens if they fight rather than negotiate.

Baer Market

For those of you following the whole Crashburn Alley vs. Bill Conlin episode, Philadelphia’s Daily Examiner interviewed Crashburn Alley's Bill Baer. There the blogger explains his busy week. Speaking of which, I expanded on why Jimmy Rollins wasn’t a terrible MVP pick on MSN Canada and my finally being able to give Alex Rodriguez some off the field props.

I was also privileged to offer up my thoughts on Barry Bonds for Maury Brown’s ‘Voices of the Game’ along with Brown, Fred Claire (Former VP and GM of the Dodgers), Ken Davidoff - (National baseball writer, Newsday), Jordan Korbritz (Staff member, Business of Sports Network. Former owner of the Daytona Cubs Baseball Club, and the Maine Guides Baseball Club), Tim Lemke (Sports business reporter for the Washington Times), Rob Neyer (Author and Senior baseball writer for ESPN), Roger Noll (Author and Sports Economist, Stanford University), Jayson Stark (Author and Senior baseball writer for ESPN), Paul Swangard (Director of the Warsaw Sports Marketing Center) and Andrew Zimbalist (Author, consultant, and Sports Economist, Smith College). I feel like one of those Sesame Street’s “one of these things is not like the other.”

Best Regards

John