The Mike Gill Show (for December 5)...

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…

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 ...

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! ...

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…

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…

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?...

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